Uh Oh, "Capricorn One" is being remade....

dudalb

Penultimate Amazing
dudalb
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
64,380
Location
Sacramento
which means that in a year or so all the Moon Hoax crap will stage a major comeback.
I sorta enjoyed Capricorn One, but I do hold it against the film that is help to give a long life to the Moon Hoax crap.
 
dudalb said:
which means that in a year or so all the Moon Hoax crap will stage a major comeback.
I sorta enjoyed Capricorn One, but I do hold it against the film that is help to give a long life to the Moon Hoax crap.
Click to expand...
Oh I hate the moon hoax stuff, especially when Fox had that special back when they were still into the whole X-Files, and Sightings thing. Still the moon hoax CT was at least more pleasant to debunk than dealing with the troofers. I would welcome it these days.
 
I don't know why the "Moon hoaxers" use Capricorn One as an example since in that movie the conspiracy was revealed.
 
In the new version, O.J. kills everyone.

I was 14 when the original came out. I liked it a lot at the time, but I never bought into the moon hoax nonsense.

Steve S.
 
Alt+F4 said:
I don't know why the "Moon hoaxers" use Capricorn One as an example since in that movie the conspiracy was revealed.
Click to expand...

You are not exactly dealing with the most logical people here..........
For the record, almost everybody invovled with the film has stated time and time again they do not buy into the Moon Hoax nonsense, and were surprised when people took it so damn seriously.
 
I hope in the remake they get rid of a few of the more stupid plot points from the original. Remember what the bad guys did when the NASA control center guy gets wind of the conspiracy? They disappeared him! A woman is living in his apartment, complete with magazine subscriptions. No thought that he might have family that would know he existed. Why no just rub him out in a robbery gone wrong?
 
No stupid plot element can match actual claims made by Apollo hoax believers (HBs). For example, some claim that Teacher-In-Space Christa McAuliffe planned to talk about the stars she could see in space, but Apollo photos of the daylit lunar surface don't show stars, thus she would inadvertently reveal the conspiracy and had to be silenced.

I like to imagine the conversation at NASA HQ:

- "She's going to reveal that you can see stars from space! It'll blow the whole Apollo coverup... people will realize we filmed it on a soundstage and didn't put stars in the picture because we couldn't reproduce them."
- [Panicking]"We've got to sanction her... something subtle, that won't get undue attention!"
- "I know! We'll blow the Shuttle up in midair!"
- "Perfect! No one will notice!"

I Am Not Making This Up. Bill Kaysing was one of the "big name" HBs who actually made this claim.
 
I probably haven't seen the movie since I was 8, yet still remember the part where the guy (might have been Sam Waterston's character) is climbing the mountain while telling himself a joke, only to get to the top and see the gunmen waiting there for him.

"Well you see, there was this tree..." :D
 
Last edited:
Just yesterday, they showed "Conspiracy Moon Landing" on the National Geographic Channel here. Fairly good debunking of this nonsense, but tried way too hard to be fair, in my opinion. Like, showing the idiot with a RUBBER GLOVE in a homemade vacuum chamber, and never showing why that's nonsense. A freaking rubber glove? Oh, yeah, that's what all the fashionable astronauts were wearing!
These guys are as loony as the 9/11 morons, only stupider. Just one step below the JFK nutjobs and barely above the chemtrail crowd.
 
Last edited:
Alt+F4 said:
I don't know why the "Moon hoaxers" use Capricorn One as an example since in that movie the conspiracy was revealed.
Click to expand...

I think it has a lot to do with the difficulty many of them have telling the difference between a science fiction movie and a National Geographic documentary.:rolleyes:
 
I also haven't seen it since I was 8. I remember the staged Mars "landing". I remember some guy eating a snake in a desert. And I remember irritating my parents by giving them "spoilers" of what was going to happen when they watched the movie for themselves. That's about it.
 
JimBenArm said:
....but tried way too hard to be fair, in my opinion. Like, showing the idiot with a RUBBER GLOVE in a homemade vacuum chamber, and never showing why that's nonsense. A freaking rubber glove? Oh, yeah, that's what all the fashionable astronauts were wearing!
Click to expand...

I saw that show last year and thought the same thing. They made no attempt to debunk that guy's claim. I'd love to tell him, "That would be really compelling evidence,if they had worn rubber gloves on the moon."

IIRC, one of the hoaxer nuts was surrounded by a dozen cats. Why do wackos always have a bunch of cats?

Steve S.
 
I blame the Writer's strike.

Will OJ be in this one?

That's why the gubmint tried to frame him!
 
Last edited:
steve s said:
I saw that show last year and thought the same thing. They made no attempt to debunk that guy's claim. I'd love to tell him, "That would be really compelling evidence,if they had worn rubber gloves on the moon."
Click to expand...


Jay Windley, who appears in the program, has commented on the lack of rebuttals in this post and this post on BAUTforum. Again, for anyone unfamiliar, Jay is unquestionably the world's foremost authority on and debunker of moon-landing hoax conspiracy theories. Note that I've modified Jay's quoting style to show the attributions, for clarity.

JayUtah said:
Grendl said:
The thing is, it's not long enough for me! I'm a 2-hour kind of person and I wish this was really fleshed out with more explanations and rebuttals.
Click to expand...


Me too. . . .

I know that we shot a lot of stuff that didn't make it into the final program. They left out altogether the 70mm photography that we did. Luckily I was able to persuade the producers to send me the 70mm film. I'm having it professionally scanned and I'll post it on Clavius

Grendl said:
When Rene demonstrates his glove vacuum, there was no rebuttal about that.
Click to expand...


I didn't get to see anything of Rene's or Kaysing's interview before my segment was shot. In Kaysing's case it was because I was interviewed before he was; his interview was one or two days after our footage in the Mojave. . . .

Had they asked me about it, I would have given them an answer. They didn't ask.

Grendl said:
After showing the LM simulator crashing and Armstrong's ejection, the Hoaxsters claim since they couldn't do it on earth, they couldn't do it on the moon. There was no rebuttal to that.
Click to expand...


Again, had they asked, I would have had an answer..
Click to expand...


JayUtah said:
Well, as I said, I could easily have debunked both the leaf-blower demonstration and the glove box demonstration, but I wasn't told about them. I don't think that was intentionally evasive of the producers. I know that the producers are sympathetic to our cause. On the way back to Los Angeles we discussed which hoax authors would appear. They said that Bennett and Percy had declined to participate, that they had yet to interview Bill Kaysing, but that they had already interviewed Ralph Rene. They didn't give any details, but the emotional reactions of the crew indicated they thought he was quite the crackpot.
Click to expand...
 
steve s said:
IIRC, one of the hoaxer nuts was surrounded by a dozen cats. Why do wackos always have a bunch of cats?

Steve S.
Click to expand...


The correct question is, of course, "Why do cats always hang around wackos?"





It's mostly for the amusement. The wackos last longer than mice.
 
James Brolin clearly didn't get enough from that movie and had to endorse 9/11 nuttery as well.

It was probably something in that snake he ate...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom