MovieChat Forums > Opération lune (2002) Discussion > Look again, think.

Look again, think.

posted 17 years ago by wlmilo
10 replies | jump to latest

Yes there are some humorous things in here, some nonsense, but there is a whole lot of truth. You are supposed to develop discrimination. This is a very clever doc that covers it's own butt by allowing a "comic out" on the surface. Things are not black and white, and this is not a "fake" because some humorous items are inserted. The story of Kubrick and the nasa lens is true. The influence of "2001" and Hollywood on the space program is true, the need to make it show bizz to sell to the people is true. There is a mountain of evidence available that shows the Apollo project to be pure theater. Would a government pull a black op for a $135 billion budget rip off in the midst of losing the people's support at home, losing face internationally, and scoring a monster PR coup? You bet. Did and does the government lie? You bet. WWI, Crash of '29, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam, Iraq, JFK, RFK, MLK, OK city, 9/11, the official government reasons for these events are ALL BS, perpetrated on a gullible uninformed populace that does not READ. A "one of" event with a government explanation is suspect, there has not been a truthful one yet. If a real flight to the moon was made, proving it would be a cinch as every piece of film and video would check out and no laws of physics would have been broken. That is not the case. Practically NONE of the Nasa presented "evidence" holds up under scientific scrutiny. Then look at the faces and body language of the three astronauts on there "triumphant" return and first interview. Do you see ecstatic pilots back from the most staggeringly successful accomplishment in history? No, you see three nervous, worried and sad people fidgeting with their hands and carefully answering so as not to say incriminating things to simple but potentially revealing questions.
This documentary was not made so you can now dismiss the "hoax" question, it was made to make you think and discriminate. Do the research yourself if you are not satisfied with flimsy government "proof" of the supposedly most spectacular technical accomplishment ever attempted yet never duplicated in the subsequent FORTY years. Why? Our technological advancement has been unimaginable since that time.

[–] hitman912 17 years ago

"WWI, Crash of '29, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam, Iraq, JFK, RFK, MLK, OK city, 9/11, the official government reasons for these events are ALL BS"
so the sinking of the lusitania never occurred? supply and demand had nothing to do with the stock market and bank crashes? japan never bombed pearl harbor? communism wasnt trying to take over democracy in korea? ok vietnam and iraq are obviously BS, no argument there. and what about jfk and rfk and mlk? you dont think people hated them enough to kill them? and what about OK city? there's video of mcveigh near his vehicle before it blew up. and do you mean to tell me that i didnt see two planes fly into the towers? i know i didnt see any bombs or anything. stop being so silly.

[–] alveni 17 years ago

The influence of "2001" and Hollywood on the space program is true,

the need to make it show bizz to sell to the people is true.

There is a mountain of evidence available that shows the Apollo project to be pure theater.

------

wlmilo, can you please direct me to sources of this information?

[–] DoctorStrangelove 16 years ago

I suspect most of what you "read" is conspiracy nutjob websites.

That is not reading.

Last seen:
Amazing Grace - 9/10 - MUST SEE!

[–] lseybold-2 16 years ago

People should read www.clavius.org instead, and/or the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (although conspiracy theorists will probably just dismiss that because it's a NASA site.)

"I am a collage of unaccounted for brush strokes, and I am all random!"

[–] mradam-3 11 years ago

People should also read www.badastronomy.com/index.html.

[–] parhat 16 years ago

The plan was simple. Wernher von Braun spent over ten years collecting moon asteroids in Antarctica, a robotic ship was to land on the moon and send the signals back, a moon model was built in Arizona was to be filmed, there were NO signals from the moon when the claimed was filming. The rocket was to circle the earth, and then sent back. An analysis of all reverse speech, if you really bother to go to analyze it claimed they DID NOT go to the moon, despite my believing they did, I changed my mind after reviewing all the interviews. Interestingly a so called moon hoax landing where the light bulbs hit the head that was leaked, I analyzed the sound voice, and found they sound were the same and not fake. The idea of this movie was elegantly simple, tell the truth, and make it appear this movie was a "fake", so people will reject the whole moon hoax conspiracy. THis is important, otherwise Kissinger, Haig, and Rumsfeld wouldn't bother with this interview. IT was slick movie to convince people not to believe in any Moon Hoax theory. Basically just get a software from www.reversespeech.com and analyze all of the voice and it denies they landed on the moon. Its one really good reason why Niel Armstrong refused to talk about his landing on the moon. I mean, if you didn't land, would you have the nerve to smile and be proud of an achievement you never done? I would act the same way as did Neil Armstrong.

[–] flash-118 16 years ago

Reverse speech?
REVERSE SPEECH?
THAT'S your argument?
The same concept that let us know that Paul McCartney was dead?
The idea that, when we talk, we automatically and simultaneously form backwards messages that reveal our true thoughts??
Well, gee, thank god the English language has been so bi-directionally psychosymmetrical!
It comforts me to know that the hoax-believers and the reverse-speechers are the exact same kooks. It cuts the dismissal time for them in half.
For some serious debunking on all the half-witted 'hoax evidence', a very easy spot to start would be Wikipedia. Just search 'moon landing conspiracy', and for every piece of conspiracy evidence, you'll find an explanation of why these scientifically-challenged paranoiacs have their theories all wrong.
But be careful. It might make so much logical sense that you might think Wikipedia's in the pocket of NASA! Oh my god! EVERYONE'S LYING TO US (except the kooks).
Disclaimer: Those last few sentences about Wikipedia lying were meant as sarcasm (just so the kooks don't try to use them as 'evidence').

- Reverend Flash

P.S. I just played the above post backwards, and - holy schirra! - I just found out what happened to Jimmy Hoffa! Turns out he's been walking around dressed as Elvis Presley all this time!

"If we couldn't laugh, we would all go insane."
- Jimmy Buffett

[–] the_whitehawk 12 years ago

Do the research yourself if you are not satisfied with flimsy government "proof" of the supposedly most spectacular technical accomplishment ever attempted yet never duplicated in the subsequent FORTY years.

I guess you never heard about Apollo 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17.
Not in those books you read?

Like a bullet lodged in the spine, but too close to the brainstem to operate; we'll have to leave it there.

[–] ta2me92704 11 years ago

http://youtu.be/sGXTF6bs1IU

My ignore list is much too long for a sig line. Do not assume you are not on it.

[–] SteverB 7 years ago

I automatically reject a post telling me to "think" when the poster clearly hasn't done any of his own.

__________________________________________
"In your opinion?"
"Um, yes your honor, in my opinion."