Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

[Border Reiver]

I cant say about what is true or what not.

I read some messages from Kubrick, that he said he faked it, and we shall have a look at special things in the Apollo 12 mission. A lot of people had a look, and found amazing things. My question is : Is this a result of Kubricks sublingual messages ? I am afraid that it is.

Now I am interested in this topic.

Regards Hans

Just because I'm sure this is a language issue: sublingual means "under the tongue", I believe you mean "subliminal", or "below the level of conscious perception".

Second, if it was faked, the sheer number of people involved in the fakery (on the order of several thousand) would preclude it having remained a secret. Especially with people leaving clues that it was faked in other media.

 

[Dcdrac]

And I suppsoe Arthur C Clarke worked as a technical advisor on this mythical fake moon landing film Kubrick is supposed to have made?

 

[TjW]

We have "MOOR N 237" which is written on the lable. If you cut away the R, you get "MOON 237"

Of course, if you just try to pronounce it as is, you get "MORON".

 

[SpitfireIX]

After the rules of mathematic is :

(221457 + 252712) / 2 = 237084,5 = exactly 237 in thousand miles parts.

237000 is the middle between the maximum and minimum distance.

regards Hans

You can't just take the average of the minimum and maximum. The Moon's orbit is an (approximate) ellipse, with the Earth at one of the ellipse's foci. Further, the Moon is moving faster with respect to the Earth when it is closer to the Earth, because it has less potential energy (and thus more kinetic energy) with respect to the Earth in that situation, so it spends less time close to the Earth. See here.

 

[AtomicDog]

Douglas Trumbull was the special effects chief on 2001. How come the conspiracy theorists never zero in on him as the one responsible for the moon hoax?

Could it be because he's still around to defend himself?

 

[Dcdrac]

Douglas Trumbull was the special effects chief on 2001. How come the conspiracy theorists never zero in on him as the one responsible for the moon hoax?

Could it be because he's still around to defend himself?

And Silent Running is stiill a great film

 

[Loss Leader]

I was surprised to see what the people found out and checked the movie by myself. So I found two new hints, which are very interesting. The first was the key of room 237. In S. Kings book the room has a different number and Kubrick changed it into 237 (237.000 miles to the moon). A lot of hints have to do with mirrowing. I.e. the word "murder" is written by Danny as "redrum" on the door.
The label on the roomkey 237 is written : ROOM N. 237.
If you mirror ROOM you get "MOOR". Danny wrote the "R" in redrum wrong. So if we take the "R" in "MOOR" away and set the N on its place we get :

Moon 237 = Moon 237.000 miles

This is a hint where the journey goes to.

So, you went looking for a message and, in a two hour movie, you found a couple of seconds that, with a great deal of work, you were able to twist into something that had meaning to you.

Let me illustrate what I mean. I contend that God was speaking directly to me in the Bible.

My birthday is the third day of October 1970. The third book of the Bible is Leviticus. The 7th verse (which is 70 without the meaningless zero) of the 10th chapter is:

7 And ye shall not go out from the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: for the anointing oil of the LORD is upon you. And they did according to the word of Moses.​

Lord Leases = Loss Leader

This is a hidden message that can only be retrieved subconsciously, but it is plainly there in the text. Using my birthday as the code-breaking devise, I found that God has personally leased me his powers as Lord of the universe.
And, using those powers, I am able to proclaim:

Everything you're saying is complete nonsense.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

When do they found out that in case of Apollo 12 :

1.) Something is wrong in the set. Things changed position .
2.) Something is wrong in the mirrowings of the astronauts visors.
3.) There are too much pictures for that short time on the moon.

The two items in my signature, beneath the post text, are links to the lunar samples compendium and the lunar surface journal. I request that you visit those links for actual information about the moon landings and present the catalog number of photographs proving your #1 and #2 points.

Your #3 point is nonsense. In college I was employed for a year as a "party pix" photographer for fraternity and sorority parties. At one unpleasantly drunken event I shot 9 rolls of film in 45 minutes in order to complete the job and make my escape. That's 9 x 38 = 342 frames, shot with a manual focus/manual exposure Nikon. That's 7.6 frames per minute, or 7.8 seconds per frame. These were semi-formally posed pictures (we were paid by how many pairs of faces were in each image) and the total time includes rewinding and reloading the camera.

 

[JayUtah]

I read some messages from Kubrick, that he said he faked it...

No. You've read accusations and speculations against him. According to Stanley Kubrick's personal assistant Anthony Frewin, Kubrick was initially amused by the tall tales, but toward the end of his life become increasingly irritated especially when they started to involve his family. I assure you Kubrick had very little if any tolerance or patience for them.

As I said, I do not consider you an expert on Kubrick's life or work.

...and we shall have a look at special things in the Apollo 12 mission. A lot of people had a look, and found amazing things.

Are we leaving Kubrick behind now and focusing on the actual missions? If so, please state your case.

My question is : Is this a result of Kubricks sublingual messages ? I am afraid that it is.

No, you're not "afraid" it is -- you're desperately pitching the notion that it must be, on no better authority than your say-so. Sorry, but not everything you imagine, "sublingually" or not, can be attributed to Kubrick. You have the burden to prove Kubrick intended whatever symbolic meaning you've contrived, if your argument is that these contrivances were meant to relate to his supposed role in faking the Moon landings.

Now I am interested in this topic.

What is the nature of your interest? You seem to be interested primarily in foisting your subjective musings as evidence.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

You have the burden to prove Kubrick intended whatever symbolic meaning you've contrived, if your argument is that these contrivances were meant to relate to his supposed role in faking the Moon landings.

And, Hans, I've presented an alternate interpretation of the symbology embedded in The Shining that is consistent with his larger body of work. Your interpretation is incompatible with all other literary and artistic analysis of Kubrick's work, nor does ir explain in any way the literal tons of internally and externally consistent material evidence for manned moon landings.

Your theory answers no questions but raises many others.

 

[carlitos]

These sublingual messages are not noticed by us, but they are noticed by our subconscious. If you get this Coke messages, you will drink a Coke. What happens after recieving the moon fake messages from shining ?

I have worked in advertising for most of my career. No one uses subliminal messages to sell anything.

Hi, Leader of the lost,

you like Lolita ?

I came to the 9/11 topic in Kubricks FMJ movie just by chance. We discussed it a longer time, and we also talk about the moon landing fake.
So I thought it was a good idea to check the moon topic, because I thought that if he faked the moon landing, the possibility that he also talk about the 9/11 topic could be true. Some member of this forum told me about "room 237" and so I came to "shining".
I was surprised to see what the people found out and checked the movie by myself. So I found two new hints, which are very interesting.
I call it sublingual messages, because they are lower than the linguistic mode of speaking with words - "messages without words".
The first was the key of room 237. In S. Kings book the room has a different number and Kubrick changed it into 237 (237.000 miles to the moon). A lot of hints have to do with mirrowing. I.e. the word "murder" is written by Danny as "redrum" on the door.
The label on the roomkey 237 is written : ROOM N. 237.
If you mirror ROOM you get "MOOR". Danny wrote the "R" in redrum wrong. So if we take the "R" in "MOOR" away and set the N on its place we get :

Moon 237 = Moon 237.000 miles

This is a hint where the journey goes to.

Regards Hans (I come back soon to Wendys pages)


..

Your messages without words are words. Deep.

 

[LaurelHS]

I have worked in advertising for most of my career. No one uses subliminal messages to sell anything.

It sounded to me like he was actually referring to product placement ("Coke messages") rather than subliminal messages. Product placement in movies and TV shows is very real, but I don't know how effective it is in getting people to buy things. I notice it, but that doesn't mean I'm actually going to buy the product (if it's a very expensive brand name, I probably can't afford it anyway!).

 

[JayUtah]

<SNIP>

<SNIP>

Edited by LashL: 

Edited to remove moderated content and response to same.

We have "MOOR N 237" which is written on the lable. If you cut away the R, you get "MOON 237"

That is very simple. But it is sadly out of the range of the most people.

Do not patronize your critics. You are admitting that you have to make contrivances in order to get your "coincidence" to hold, just as you have to do arithmetic to get your "237" to supposedly relate to the distance to the Moon in miles, which isn't even the real distance. The more gymnastics you have to do in order to make your "coincidences" happen, the less convincing they are. This is just numerology dressed up as film criticism.

So it fits to the Apollo 11 sweater of Danny...

Nope. Kubrick merely wanted a sweater with a hand-knit look. The costume designer had a friend knit it, and it just happened to be Apollo-themed because the knitter surmised it's something a kid from the mid-1970s would have liked. Kubrick had no hand in the subject matter of the sweater.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/m...at-room-237-theories.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

...and to the colours and forms in the carpet, where Danny is standing and playing and it fits to the carpet with 4 Saturn rockets hanging on the wall over the fire place and it fits to the message in the pages of "All work and no play.." and a lot more.

Pure contrivance.

Why?

First answer "if."

These sublingual messages are not noticed by us, but they are noticed by our subconscious.

Irrelevant. By that logic anything anywhere at any time can be a "subliminal message" for anything you want to imagine. These elaborate alleged correlations between subtle forms, colors, etc. are not how subliminal messaging works.

What happens after recieving the moon fake messages from shining ?

There are no "moon fake messages" in The Shining that were intended by Kubrick. You simply trust the word of wannabe film critics.

Is there a connection between the launch of the movie and the finding of following facts by the moon fake theorists ?

No. And we'll take your "facts" in order...

1.) Something is wrong in the set. Things changed position .

You give no specific examples. However, I have examined the Apollo photographic record exhaustively and am considered an expert on it. The examples that others have provided for alleging that something has moved are generally their misunderstanding of distance and parallax as it occurs in photography.

2.) Something is wrong in the mirrowings of the astronauts visors.

You give no specific examples. However, the few that others have offered are simply their misunderstanding of photography and their simplistic assumptions for what they think they should be seeing. "Something wrong" (i.e., something they cannot understand) gets translated immediately by conspiracy theorists into evidence of some affirmative hoax theory. That's just question-begging.

3.) There are too much pictures for that short time on the moon.

You do not specify what is the right amount and how you are able to know that. The arguments purporting that "too many" pictures were taken on the lunar surface wrongly presume the photography was distributed roughly evenly throughout the EVAs. This commits a numerical fallacy of averages, and does not reflect how the photographs were actually taken. Many of the photographs were taken in "clusters" of several exposures over the course of a minute or so, such as for panoramas. Then the cameras were left alone while the crew performed other work.

If you want serious answers you must provide actual examples. While we're at it, I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence of "Apollo 12" in the pages Jack typed. If you are going to do nothing but wave your hands vaguely at allusions of evidence, this will be a very brief debate.

Could it be, that the finding of these fails are a result of our triggered subconscious
after whatching Kubricks movie ? Is it that what he wanted ?

They are not fails. They are merely expressions of the ignorant assumptions of Apollo hoax theorists. I have studied these wacky theories for more than 10 years and have yet to see any that were even remotely rational.

They are not triggered by subconscious effects of watching The Shining. The practice of hoax theorism continues unaffected by whether the proponents have seen the film. No correlation means no causation.

There is no symbology in The Shining relating to fake Moon landings. This is purely a contrivance on the part of people who have no knowledge of Kubrick's work or life. Kubrick himself, and those who worked closely with him on this and other films, strongly deny that interpretation.

 

[JayUtah]

It sounded to me like he was actually referring to product placement ("Coke messages") rather than subliminal messages.

I disagree. He was talking about such things as the colors and patterns of the carpet, and of subconscious processing of these and other cues to arrive at some abstract notion of "fake." These would not be very overt placements. He's also suggesting that the brain somehow automatically does his anagram and arithmetic for the room key.

Product placement in movies and TV shows is very real, but I don't know how effective it is in getting people to buy things.

It seems to have been a big thing in the 1990s and 2000s but not so much anymore. The only vestige seems to be blurring or pixelating brand names shown in reality shows that conflict with the sponsor's brand. So if the show is sponsored by Coke and someone happens to be drinking a Pepsi, the sponsor agreement may require the producers to blur it. This indicates that sponsors at least believe it is somewhat effective.

 

[JayUtah]

Your interpretation is incompatible with all other literary and artistic analysis of Kubrick's work...

Not to mention incompatible with all the other tacked-on theories the Kubrick nuts attribute to The Shining, such as the Trail of Tears or the Holocaust. It seems every major world event or controversy, even long after Kubrick's death, is somehow woven into the fabric of all his movies in the form of disjoint Easter Eggs.

As I've said, it's just the Nostradamus Effect all over again.

...nor does ir explain in any way the literal tons of internally and externally consistent material evidence for manned moon landings.

That's the important point. No matter what leads you to suspect something, determining whether it actually happened is a matter of examining the evidence. Too many conspiracy theorists simply want to infer the conclusion. Hans has given us three brief sentences about the Apollo 12 missions, but has not provided any actual evidence.

It simply doesn't matter whether Kubrick's movie leads you to think he might have helped fake the Moon landings. If the missions were faked at all by anyone, there should be unique, telltale cues irrespective of the source of the original suspicion. Constantly alluding back to that source doesn't prove the hypothesis it generated. That's purely circular reasoning.

But this line of argument fails for even deeper reasons. Hans has given us a list of supposed allusions to Apollo and the Moon, but none for the concept of fakery. Merely alluding to something that happened doesn't prove your specific theory for how you say it happened or didn't happen. If I note that a character in the film obsessively folds and unfolds a dollar bill in some scene, that's not proof for some accusation I may have just made up about the filmmaker being a counterfeiter.

At the very best one may interpret all these random Easter Eggs in The Shining as references to the Apollo missions, but there is nothing about them that says "Kubrick is telling us the missions were fake." That's a stretch even beyond the stretch.

Your theory answers no questions but raises many others.

And hence is rejected as pure contrivance, and unparsimonious contrivance to boot.

 

[frenat]

It sounded to me like he was actually referring to product placement ("Coke messages") rather than subliminal messages. Product placement in movies and TV shows is very real, but I don't know how effective it is in getting people to buy things. I notice it, but that doesn't mean I'm actually going to buy the product (if it's a very expensive brand name, I probably can't afford it anyway!).

My wife and I laugh when we see product placement because it is often very obvious and awkward.

 

[Garrison]

Thanks to god, that you american guys are standing with both feet on the ground.

Hans

If you just looked at the details under each posters name you would realize how foolish that remark is...

 

[Hans]

If you just looked at the details under each posters name you would realize how foolish that remark is...

Well everyone I hope is aware that UK stands for the little known Amercian state of Utah-Kentucky

 

[TjW]

Or as the kids would have it: Yucky.

 

[Tanalia]

Well everyone I hope is aware that UK stands for the little known Amercian state of Utah-Kentucky

And that Canada place a few people have listed is just a suburb of New York.