So if the Moon landing
So if the Moon landing was a hoax… …why can telescopes see all the junk we left up there?
(Moon Landing)
Picture by: EWAdams Caption by: EWAdams via Advanced Lol Builder
You May Like:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous I made this myself | I’m not sure this is what Mom meant when she said Next »
» 377 comments
-
Recent Comments
Danbala on Let’s imagine the look o… dissimilitude on WOOPS dissimilitude on Let’s imagine the look o… Raptor007 on Get of your n10bettes on WOOPS AC on WOOPS mabsba on Let’s imagine the look o… shortright the ivani… on TRAIN ORIGAMI mabsba on TRAIN ORIGAMI I want to beat EWAda… on TRAIN ORIGAMI 
Cheezburger Network Blog
Because the telescopes are rigged. Duh! And this lol was so unfunny.
Funny is a concept sorely lacking around PK lately..
Hey I found a picture on the interwebs! Now alls I got to do it put a sentence on it. Any sentence. And suddenly its a lol!
LOL you’re full of wit.
you know, people are always telling me I am full of other things. Sounds like wit. But… you know… I try!
Bit? Mit? Pit? Kit? Fit? Writ? Snit? Quit? Lit?
Snit was pretty close!
My stomach can act as a pit on the right occassion!
Mmmm mexican tacos.
OMG I LOVE TACOS!!!
I made tacos for dinner last night! Awe. Some.
Ooooh, now I want tacos for dinner.
Everyone to Diss’ house for free tacos!
Woohoo! Free tacos!
If it’s free, it’s for me!
Woohoo! Free cucumbers!!
WHAT!?
*hides*
Are they organically grown?
what is this? Make Room for Ducklings>?
Yeah, when you’ve aligned yourself with a party, and that party suddenly has nothing productive to fawn over, yet you can’t criticize it since you’ve aligned with it, it makes it rather difficult to put any jokes on the front page without losing face. Sadness, PK could have been such a great site if they had been impartial, but alas, it went the way of the 24 hour news networks and took a side.
Butthurt partisan troll is butthurt….
They have a point though.
No, they don’t. These LOLs are voted on. The majority of people who vote on them seem to be a bit left-leaning. Max is right. Blarg is just consistently a butthurt partisan troll.
Ok fine
*slinks away*
Yeah you could always have just changed his comment to being “Sadness, PK could have been such a great site if they had been impartial, but alas, it went the way of the democratic process and started posting what was voted on by the public.”
Oh and add in there “PK could have been such a great site FOR ME” Obviously… this isn’t the site for him to find funny… yet he likes to come here again and again and let us know.
Except the vote is rigged- by ACORN!
Oh ACORN, you and your silly little prostitution rings. When will they ever learn?
You’re one of the worst trolls we’ve seen a while. And let me clear the air so you don’t think I’m making you feel important… You suck at trolling, you suck at inciting any type of flame war, you suck at being insulting, you utterly fail at whatever you attempt, and I am proud to be the one to finally let you know all this.
I’m with you on the trolls suck aspect of this. But I don’t think this is trolling. If so, it is the most obscure, troll-fail I’ve seen in a while. I think he was just trying to lawl at ACORN (as unfunny as the comment might have been).
Pulling ACORN into a thread that is no way related to it, IS trolling. Like I said, he’s TERRIBLE at this.
Hmm, you raise an interesting point.
C’mon, let’s get into character… (Pulp Fiction references are still ok, I assume?
)
Well he sure doesn’t suck at getting a rise out of you, gotta give him that.
Protip: Ignore the troll next time. It really is the best option
Protip: You don’t know this troll, he doesn’t go away, he just keeps coming back again and again. You see here, on these boards, the trolls never leave, they just come up with a new more annoying persona and just poke their heads back in.
ahh, well, learn something new everyday, I suppose. The quest for “regular” status continues.
*makes troll observation entry in journal*
Not you randman, sheesh!
What, as a troll? I would certainly hope I’m not considered a troll. I would sad many times and a half…
Yeah…
WRONG.
I find most political satire and humiliation funny. The problem is, this site seems to focus only on what the right does wrong and what the left does right; rarely if ever does it show the right doing something correct or the left making a mistake. I for one used the line “I’m just following in my President’s footsteps” every time I made up a word on the spot. If the people who picked the LOLs to be voted on were impartial, then we could get a nice plethora of images. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and the only time anything bad is said about the left on this site, it is by the users via the comments. I’m sure if Bush had lost 20 points in the polls within a matter of months, this site would have been all over that like sh*t on velcro; yet here we are, with his numbers hovering around 50, and not a single front pager has even hinted that his own party is turning on him. Oh well, what can you do (other than watch a site squander its potential).
tl;dr, I love making fun of both sides of the aisle, as I think the whole system is hopelessly screwed, and that anyone who follows a party before thinking deserves to have an afternoon of electroshock. But this site doesn’t seem to have as open of a mind as I do.
Understanding politics fail
The country is evenly divided into thirds. Hence, even at his most unpopular Bush never dropped below around 28% IRCC. In order for Obama to have “his own party is turning on him” his numbers would have to drop into the teens.
Your mind seems to be so open that things, like critical thinking, are dropping out. This site did not exist in the first years (or even administration) of Bush II, so you cannot make any meaningful comparisons as to different treatment for a new president.
I will point out this much – the Right seems to lack the ability to laugh at themselves. The most well-known Right-leaning political cartoonist is Michael Ramirez, winner of the Pulitzer. He was the editorial cartoonist for my paper for a long time so I was able to track his daily output. Time and time again, while he had no problem belittling the Democrats, he could not bring himself to make a single cartoon that showed Bush in a bad light.
On the other hand, most other cartoonists (especially those known to have Left-leanings) in my lifetime had no problem making fun of Carter and Clinton.
You can say my critical thinking has failed all you want to, and it will only prove how much that’s true for you instead of me, what with your propensity to stereotype as much as you are. I for one can easily laugh or criticize conservatives, although I would never call myself a conservative or a liberal. I prefer to think before making my decision on an issue, rather than follow a party line. And I do understand the political situation, and politics in general. His party IS turning on him; why do you think Pelosi says what the hell she wants to, often in direct contradiction of things Obama has himself said? It’s because there’s a split between the two. Your claim of “in the teens” would imply that everyone outside his own party would have already voted him down, which would never be the case, as the only absolute in politics is that you never have absolutes. He could easily have some support from outside the party while still be losing support within the party. You can see this right now with the issue of troop numbers in Afghanistan. Democrats are voicing strong disagreement with just about anything that increases our involvement, whereas the GOP is in general quite supportive of said increases. But don’t worry, I’m not critically thinking about any of this, just spouting off the random talking points I get from Faux News and not looking any deeper into the articles I read from various news outlets, because that would ruin your stereotyping of me.
how did an un-political lol become partisan anything?
*blinks*
So where in your wall of text do you prove me wrong on the fact that the lols are voted on by the public… and if you don’t like them, then maybe this site isn’t for you?
I don’t contest the fact that they’re voted on by the public, but there’s a left leaning influence before LoLs make it to the vote page. When that’s all you can vote on, then that’s all that will make it to the front page. It’s amazing how we can both be right, isn’t it?
Well if we’re both right then perhaps you shouldn’t start off you reply with “WRONG” and add fuel to the fire.
WRONG!
AAAAhahahahahahah! I just lol’d so hard, my head hurts.
Soo funny!! XD
Since when is humor determined by partisan advantage?
Because liberals are funnier than conservatives. I mean, duh.
Yes, they’re voted on IF the editors at PK allow them to be posted. I’ve posted several right-leaning lols that never made it to the voting pages. I gave up some time ago.
I still make them, even though I know they won’t see the light of day. Now they’re for my own amusement (and anyone that also likes them.)
Oh, and I’ve also had some that I felt were plagiarized from my ideas, but that’s ok too. It should be noted that there is a band of time where you might see your lols on the voting page. I don’t know what it is, but I’ve seen plenty of mine appear there. So just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it didn’t make it.
By the way Eddie, you’re “failure to communicate” lol made me laugh out loud. I liked it so much that I felt the need to spell out Lol… as you can see.
Thanks, Max.. most of the ones I have are just ‘meh’, but there have been a couple I was quite proud of. One of my favs is Obama singing, “Row, row, row your debt..” while holding an oar.
Eddie can I see that LOL? I mean can you link it.
Just click on my name, you’ll see them..
Eddie silly Pscetti, we’re Cheez friends. If I had the time, I would sort through them but now I’m going to bed. I’ll sort later.
Oh wait, it’s the first one. I know the quote doesn’t come from them, but now I have GNR in my head. Thanks.
Cool Hand Luke spoke by Strother Martin.. (who by the way is the same voice on GNR’s song).
Right. But when I hear it, I always hear the song in my head.
Also, I lied about going to bed.
I’ll admit, it has the same effect on me and keep waiting for the whistling to start..
/golfclap
My sentiments exactly.
Perhaps the reason this site is frequented primarily by leftists is because so many on the right lack a decent sense of humor?
So… go and start the Fox News LOL — oh sorry, troll-conservatives don’t understand humor, that’s why they troll “liberal” sites, they’re trying to find humor in their lives. Too bad thay can’t figure it out.
I guess it’s a good thing I’m neither a troll, nor a conservative.
I simply point out the obvious bias of this site, and encourage it to be more partial to making fun of both sides of the aisle, as they both equally deserve to be ridiculed.
You’re confusing “living in a free country” (I think all the regulars here do that), with “having total freedom of speech on someone else’s property”, or did the fact that usernames Cheezburger and Tofuburger belong to the site owners escape you?
Just because they allow freedom of speech (within the law) on comments pages doesn’t mean they have to allow it on front page LOLs.
Who said anything about freedom of speech? They’re ALLOWED to do whatever the hell they want to. I just wish that this site was a political lol site, and not a prop up the left tear down the right lol site. Oh well, I guess that falls under the wishful thinking category.
Wait, what? I’m a right-leaning Republican and I can still make fun of my party.
You’re not a troll-conservative though Eddie!
Well, no, that’s true.. I guess I would considered a ModeraTroll?
Whatever you are, just leave off the troll part… Modera-regular? Conserva-regular? Either way it sounds like you’ve been taking your Metamucil…
The problem is, after the Reps landed their choice on Palin as VP, it was kind of hard to keep taking them seriously.
Also, the Rep party has been a big humor producer since Bush (and Palin made this a tradition apparently). It’s just easier for websites like PK when they can pick up joke instead of bothering imagining them.
Just one question for question: how do you link the moon conspiracy theory to politics?
Someone will find a way… trust me… and it’ll deal with socialism, death panels, or a kenyan warlord…
Wooo! Sign me up for the death panels!
Yet you still take me seriously after I got this whack-job Biden as my VP?
We take the president seriously, yes. You, well, you aren’t even interesting enough to come up with your own identity.
Who the hell are you?
Where’s Buzz Aldrin when you need him?
Or Buzz Lightyear, for that matter.
Also a moon landing I can get behind.
Did anyone ever notice that Woody once calls him Lightbeer. I’ll go for a Buzz Lightbeer. Wait make that just a Buzz Beer.
Drew Carey Show FTW!
I was wondering where I knew Buzz Beer from. LOL
Wasn’t Buzz Lightyear just on the international space station? I seem to recall hearing on the radio last week that the astronauts were preparing him for a return to the earth. I give serious points to the announcer for managing to say that with a serious tone of voice!
Yes he was.. spent 15 months there.
NASA wins humor cred with that!
Only complete dicks think the Moon landing was faked anyway. We need to stop even mentioning them so they shrivel up like the pathetic toadstools they really are, and so we can go on to actual amusing LOLs.
Unfortunately, we don’t have telescopes on Earth that have enough resolution and Hubble doesn’t have the right focal length. So while this LOL was true in intent, it was not true in fact. Why was this voted for?
so we all can haz laughs at fake moon landing believers…of course the landing was real..its the moon men invasion the following year that was fake!
I was hoping someone else would actually know this LOL is incorrect.
Retard child of retard parents = Fluffy
Huh? You CAN see this w/ a telescope on Earth! How did you think Galileo see Jupiter and Saturn? Those are WAY farther than the moon. To be honest, I was at a museum two or three weeks ago and they had viewings of Jupiter with a telescope there and I could see the three moons too.
Jupiter and saturn are much bigger than a buggy and a plastic flag.
What?!? But….when I saw Jupiter through a telescope it was TINY! You LIE!
Did someone say pie?
I don’t think I’ve had juniper pie, doesn’t really sound that good to me.
but eddie – juniper is gin and gin is yummy so a juniper pie can’t be that bad, maybe toss in some key lime juice and a bit of sugar and whipped cream then chill thoroughly
No, she said lie, which means she meant cake.
Holy shit. I didn’t even notice the guy with “cakeisalie” name there. What a coincidence!
pie is way better than cake… hnds down… didn’t we win this argument on red vs. blue?
Yes, and sadly, I’ve never bothered to get my “Pie” t-shirt to commemorate such a victory.
Not bigger than Uranus…
Have you ever been to Uranus?
No, but the proctologist has.. claims it was difficult working around the head.. (j/k)
yes, it stinks.
Visibility relates to size *and distance*. You can’t see a water molecule through a light-based telescope, even when it’s right at the focal point, because it’s too small. In the same way, a relatively small object like a lunar lander base is too small to see from a light-based telescope on Earth.
he couldn’t see it very well…in fact it took ages for astronomers to even realize that saturn had rings.
You don’t understand optics and it’s apparent. It’s like this, no earth observatory has a large enough mirror to collect the light necessary to focus in on tiny objects such as those left on the moon. As was said above, Hubble can’t look at it either as it is made for long distance viewing. Sorry but the LOL is wrong. We cannot see anything we left up there. We can however focus very powerful green lasers at the retroreflectors we left on the moon at landing sites and receive reflected photons to ensure we did hit a landing site with it.
Which actually proves nothing either way about the landings; it is quite possible to design a self-deploying retro-reflector, and land and set up by remote control.
Yes, but could you see the junk on the moon? Because that’s the point of the statemente in the picture.
…the point Scythelord was trying to make is NO you CANNOT see them with an optical (light-based) telescope…
Yes, you can see the moon with a telescope, but you can’t see the things that were left there. Yes you can see Jupiter and Saturn, but how much surface detail can you actually see? At last count, Jupiter has 63 confirmed moons.
“and Hubble doesn’t have the right focal length.”
Not, I’m afraid not. The focal length has nothing to do with it. Hubble is simply too small to have the resolution needed to see the Apollo leftovers. It’s smaller than quite a few ground-based telescopes, after all. (It had to fit into the Shuttle, so it can’t be all that big.)
Tard stronomer, hubble was designed to see objects outside the solar system not take pictures of really small things much closer, like your two inch wiener
“two inch wiener?” Okay, who let their little brother use the computer?
I have a two inch wiener! I also have a 2 inch bun to put it in… Mini Grill out anyone!?
Ooh! *gets in line* I hope there is still tequila.
*shows charro the secret stash*
Tequila won’t be a problem..
*swoons* Excellent.
Welcome to the Cult.. only members get to see the secret tequila stash..
The Cult? I thought it was Pink Floyd. I’m so confused. *takes shot*
Definitions of cult:
followers of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices
fad: an interest followed with exaggerated zeal; “he always follows the latest fads”; “it was all the rage that season”
followers of an unorthodox or extremist religion or sect who often live outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
I feel like anything followed with exaggerated zeal can’t be that bad.
Definition of The Cult: The Cult are an English rock band, formed in 1983. They gained a dedicated following in Britain in the mid 1980s as a post-punk and gothic rock band with singles such as “She Sells Sanctuary”, before breaking mainstream in the United States in the late 1980s as a hard rock band…
technically speaking we, the plebs, have no evidence that the moon landing wasn’t a hoax because we don’t have such powerful telescopes and any pictures including the ones on google moon could be faked..
I mean there’s lots of trash in space so the trash on the moon could infact be from an old russian sputnik..
Yeah, unless you count the numerous high resolution photos, videos, audio recordings, the rock samples, instrument data, eyewitness accounts from astronauts as well as mission control crew members, the returned crew capsules…
You’re right. There really is no evidence.
I’d appreciate it if you’d actually read what I wrote before you commented. Their is no evidence acquired by the public only NASA and the Government. I suppose you aren’t aware what the cold war was about or what stalinist propaganda was. Have you been on the moon did you take the pictures? We are relying on the media that was very much so controlled by the government at that time.
I think that puts your “We landed on the moon” into [proof needed] right there.
It was 1969, we haven’t been back to the moon and out ice mining attempts involve shooting stuff at the moon…. When have we gone back, when are we going back.
Why would we go back? There’s nothing there but the junk we put there.
Cause its the MOON! What doesn’t kick ass about that?
moon colonization? storage space? real estate? holiday destination?
earth junkyard? the possibilities are endless
Exactly “We” didn’t.
They apparently did.
But the government has always lied to the public so why not about this?
I was going to say the same thing. Actually telescopes can’t see the junk that is there.
Though to be fair, new moon orbiters will get some better resolution pictures of the landing site.
But, the thing is that we don’t need to “see” that the stuff is there to detect it and prove it is there. We know it is there because we routinely bounce a laser of a mirror that Apollo 11 left there, the Laser Ranging Retroreflector.
So, while we cannot photograph the “junk,” we do still use, from earth, scientific equipment left there for just such a purpose.
We?
I’d say they.
I don’t personally use it.
If it had been faked, wouldn’t they have made the moon a lot more interesting looking? Plus, you young’uns don’t remember, but the special effects they had back then just wouldn’t have cut it well enough to fake it (remember, the FIRST Star Trek was cutting edge special effects at the time!).
Well, there was 2001:Space Odyssey.. that was pretty cutting edge and that was a year before the moon landing.
Also, Star Trek the series came out in 1966 and it was made for TV, so you know it didn’t have a high budget. And for its day, it was… well.. hehe… sort of believable? Anyway. Not saying that the landing is a fake, but I also think Hollywood can out do itself if the government wants it to.
They should fake a moon landing nowadays, and include some Matrix style gunfights. Also, some of those weird Alien things from District 9. And maybe a weird doll, just for the hell of it. THAT’S A MOON LANDING I CAN BELIEVE IN!!
And the monster from Cloverfield! Oh, and ALF. I liked ALF.
He never met a cat he didn’t like.
with bbq sauce
Peanut butter with BBQ sauce? I dunno about all that…
astro-naughts battleing moon men with lazer swords and ray guns all matrix style.
with LOTS of explosions in the airless vaccume
By Micheal Bay
And space boobies.
In fact forget the fights, explosions, and airless vacuum.
…
So what do boobies do in an airless vacuum with reduced gravity? Are they even perkier?
the bounceing NEVER ends
We need to test this theory. NASA needs to get right on that!!!!
it will end the recession if we band togther to send bouncey naked girls into space!
I don’t want to go into space!!
no you stay with the bitter troll!
BT, sharing is caring!
But those bouncy girls would die if they were naked!
Oh, OK, we could have them on the space station. But only real boobies need apply, to have scientific observation of real bounciness!
I’ll stay in the moat then for you, bitter.
I hate to go all ethnic VG… but I must when I say
FO REALS!
Yes, we can’t get a scientific analysis on the effects of zero gravity or an airless vacuum on breasts unless they are natural breasts. Implants would skew the results, but we could possibly have a separate analysis by people who are into that.
I’m sure T-Rex could tell you.
HA!
And there need to be a couple really hot chicks in there somewhere too. That’s important. Go moon!
More like, astro-naughtys…
Nighties in zero-G. That’s a concept lots of folks could get behind!
Literally..
I’m currently writing the check to fund that research POST HASTE!
I think I might get behind it before bedtime. Bow-chicka-bow-wow!
Oooooooooooh, and there’s no way people could call it fake with all of that thrown in!!
3 hot topless chicks, fly to the moon in their rocket car, fight moonmen in zero G topless battles with swords and ray guns
the moon EXPLODES in fire and brimstone as the girls ride chucks of it back to earth
With gigantic dildos.
That’s actually what they’re riding.
and blackjack!
No no there’s better pizza out there than BlackJack.
is there a space pizza hutt?
Pizza slut?
Score.
Wait, wasn’t that done in Barbarella?
Dildos? Oh you didn’t reply to me..
Well, since Jane Fonda was in the movie, dildos would have been a major part of the production costs.
and LSD…and LSD laced dildos!
That’s what I need, is LSD in my twat.
Yeah, but Star Trek WAS the same era, and yes, 2001 was awesome, but even so, they just didn’t have the technology to fake something like that which would stand up to today’s technology (for checking OR recreating). Plus, Mythbusters busted the lame arguments of the ‘fake moon landing’ goobers some time back. I STILL say, that if they’d faked it, the moon wouldn’t have looked as boring – especially if Hollywood types were doing it.
I just found this spoof. I love 2001 Space Odyssey, one of my favs since childhood. But this video cracked me up and it’s sort of ‘on topic’
Hope the link works.
compared to the sfx these days it still is pretty cutting edge.. i mean the zero gravity scenes were and still are awe inspiring
“nice try HAL….”
They wouldn’t because they wouldn’t want private investors going there
The term Third World arose during the Cold War to define countries that remained non-aligned or neutral with either capitalism and NATO (which along with its allies represented the First World) or communism and the Soviet Union (which along with its allies represented the Second World). This definition provided a way of broadly categorizing the nations of the Earth into three groups based on social, political, and economic divisions. Although the term continues to be used colloquially to describe the poorest countries in the world, this usage is widely disparaged since the term no longer holds any verifiable meaning after the fall of the Soviet Union deprecated the terms First World and Second World. While there is no identical contemporary replacement, common alternatives include developing world and Global South.
Quite right. And we mustn’t make the mistakes we made with the developing countries when it comes to colonising the moon. We should respect the indigenous culture, and not go round saying blatantly moon-ist things like ‘hell there’s no atmosphere here’. And they’re not Moonies, they have their own name and language, which is not, of course, spoken, because there’s no atmosphere (oh dang…)
MOONIST!!! TOOOO SOOOOOOOON!!!!elebenty!!20&*
MOOOOOOON MUUUUUUUUURDEEEERRRRRR!!1!!!111elventy98ABCD!!!!
watch the mythbusters special . . . they do a good job investigating it!
Clearly there’s a few people here who need to watch it. And, yes, they did a great job!
Even the lunar satelites will only be able to see the shadows… If they get lucky.
moron, no telescope can see it since it’s not visible from earth. nor the lander nor the flag nor anything is visible from earth. know what you are talking about before blathering out in space….not even the very best telescopes are ABLE to zoom far enough in to identify anything on the moon.
in other words, the entire caption is completely incorrect. says more about the writer then IF we were ever up there or not….
and i am not afraid to say, i have serious doubts about the moon landing. HOWEVER, i am not saying that no man has set foot on the moon, or that any rocket went up there. i seriously doubt the video’s AND if aldrin & armstrong set foot there.
and you must be a tool to to mention special effects of star trek, since there were no special effects needed in a hollywood basement……I havent seen vulcans or klingons jumping around on the moon….
Try watching Star Trek on acid.. you’ll see all kinds of things you never thought existed!
I watched Star Trek on shrooms once. Then, I smoke some pot. It was REALLY interesting. I liked it.
And what’s amazing is, you don’t mind Capt. James T. Kirk’s dramatic pauses. It gives you a chance to take another hit!
Agreed.
They aren’t dramatic pauses. He’s actually speaking in meter, which he insisted on so he could use his hard core Shakespearean training. He’s alternating between Iambic and a different meter at that. Which is hilarious, if you consider Picard, in character was a thespian.
Have you ever hheeaarrdd BBiillll playingotherpartsin the same era?
He has exactly the same varying speed of delivery etc.
I think someone was hit with a moon rock as a child.
Show me on the doll where the moon touched you.
Appropriately enough, on the buttocks.
it was on the dark side
There is no dark side of the moon really. As a matter of fact, it’s all dark.
you dont know the POWAH of the dark side…of the moon…its really powerful…really…yup..
That’s what Pink Floyd keeps telling us.
And they would never lie.. Ooooooh! A new religion! I shall now be a Floydist.. Come, join my church, we have groovy music.
And light shows!!
And no hidden agenda.. we’re just out there, baby!
The light shows are AWESOME. You don’t even have to be high to enjoy those!
And if you want to know what the tenets for Floydism is:
All that you touch
All that you see
All that you taste
All you feel
All that you love
All that you hate
All you distrust
All you save
All that you give
All that you deal
All that you buy
Beg, borrow or steal
All you create
All you destroy
All that you do
All that you say
All that you eat
And everyone you meet
All that you slight
And everyone you fight
All that is now
All that is gone
All that’s to come
and everything under the sun is in tune
but the sun is eclipsed by the moon
And the lawn belongs to meeeeeeeeee…
good, you can mow the lawn then-nods-
What? I thought Jane was doing it?
*steps out to the fridge in a bathrobe*
Jane? No sorry, we’ve been busy having se-…… *looks around for Charlie* sectional reviews on her lesson plan for the kids…. *coughs*
I’ll uh… get one of the minions on that mow job though…
It will be taken care of by us & them. But it will require time & money, as long as we remember to breathe while we are on the run from the great gig in the sky. And quite possibly brain damage. Now speak to me, Eddie, what color would you like the lawn painted? You can have any colour you like. Work might have to halted during the eclipse though.
Well, I’m Comfortably Numb now. I hear the ringing of the Division Bell, I wish I could go out Learning to Fly, I Wish you were here. Arnold Layne called, he said there’s Another Brick in the Wall.
I’ll take pink.. you may not know this, but it’s the colour of that shining crazy diamond.
By the way, welcome to the Cult of Floyd. Our numbers are huge, but unfortunately, we’re stuck out on the grass.
I’m in a moat!
It’s okay, Eddie. At least the paper holds our folded faces to the floor.
And cold… POWAHFULLY cold!
… and filled with cheesy goodness.
what would cheesus fondu?
he would fondu you!
Gouda ’nuff for me.
what about fondon’t for those that don’t like fondu?
We can’t see the equipment left behind — well, short of the LRO mission currently in orbit now — but if you aim a laser at the landing site, a couple of seconds later, you’ll get a very weak reflection. One of the instruments left behind is a mirror to bounce laser beams back to their point of origin on Earth. The idea was that you could precisely measure the position and velocity of the Moon by bouncing lasers off of it.
I don’t remember the equipment set-up costs, but they are far less than sending an LRO-class camera to the Moon. Maybe out of the average amateur’s budget, but something a number of pro observatories can do from Earth. (And more and more telescopes are getting lasers for a different reason — you can track how the atmosphere bends their light to make the telescope see finer details.)
Again, watch the Mythbusters episode. It very handily, and logically quashes the main arguments of the ‘no moon landing’ types.
Why wouldn’t they need the special effects again? That makes no sense whatsoever.
I mentioned the special effects of Star Trek for you young tools to try to get to the point that, while ya’ll have grown up with special effects up the ying yang, in the late 60’s, the technology just freaking wasn’t there yet to make it that realistic. The computers just didn’t have the juice.
I think the point was made above, but Stanley Kubrick had some pretty damn convincing space/moon scenes in 2001: Space Odyssey. However, I don’t believe that NASA faked the moon landing.
*sigh* How do EWAdams’ anti-LOLs keep ending up on the front page? Is this person secretly an admin?
Wouldn’t surprise me.
I find myself overwhelmed by the frequency of his non-lols, and underwhelmed by the funny in them…. and on the topic of the subject matter… I’m merely whelmed.
His popularity proves that people will vote “WIN” for something they agree with, whether it’s funny or not. I’ll wholeheartedly agree with the politics or the point of a picture, but if it’s not funny, then it gets a FAIL. This one is a fail.
Then you’re missing the point of the site. Large numbers of Rush-listening, Coulter-reading right-wing dimwits visit this site, and it is essential to point out to them, repeatedly, what total losers they are. Besides, with enough effort we might manage to change the minds of a few fence-sitters.
As for this, I thought it would be amusing, given that the moon-hoax morons tell outrageous lies to support their idiot theory, to tell a rather credible one in support of the truth. And the voters seem to agree.
If you want funny, go read that site with the cute cats.
or the celeb site-nodnodnod- has a great one with the harry potter villian guy looking pimping..go comment on that one
Dude, I love that one! That’s one’s great!
If you truly want to change people’s minds, I’d start by treating them with a little more respect than you’ve shown. Being called an idiot tends to turn most people off whatever it is you are trying to sell. FYI I am a lefty liberal already, i’m just saddened to see so much hate from either side.
I’m a moderate Repugnican (a name given by others I might add) and I don’t have a problem with those on the left (there are exceptions, but those people I just ignore.)
If you’re trying to make fence sitter’s switch sides, you could try not using the tactics that lost McCain the election. You don’t convince people by telling them all that’s wrong with one side, you convince them by showing them all the good that comes from your side.
Most of this site’s audience is left leaning already, lols like these obviously only bring out the crazy conservatrolls… who aren’t going to be convinced of anything other than what they want to think.
By bringing stuff like this up, over and over again, you just aggravate those of us who come here for the comments. The preachy, underhanded insult lols are tired, and boring, and you can almost predict the flow of comments from then on.
What we lack these days are the lols that inspire, and I’d like to see more of that happen.. if it’s possible.
Max, I couldn’t agree more.. I know I’m not a fence sitter, and what I believe in is deeply ingrained. In fact, I don’t think I have ever seene one post here by anyone saying, “Hot damn, I can’t believe I didn’t see it that way before! Thanks, I’m rushing out now to change my voter registration information!”
Yeah… those really good arguments usually get met with “Nice strawman asshat!”
or “Typical troll behavior!”
Or my in my case “Excuse me but I must interject: ‘BALLS!’ that is all”
I don’t comment often, but when I do, I get the “your argument is stupid, but I’m too awesome to say why,” response. I want to debate, but nobody wants to debate properly. If I say something, someone using the conservatroll card isn’t going to start a very good debate in most cases. I mean, someone has to present conservative ideals on this site clearly, and very few are doing so. oh, and EWAdams, not all conservatives think Coulter and Rush are outstanding proteges of the conservative philosophy. I find them to be argumentative and flat out wrong on a great deal of things, and they rarely offer evidence for their arguments, long-winded as they are. They mostly just call themselves Republicans because they just hate Democrats, but know nothing of conservative ideals. This is common on either side of the political spectrum. If you want a good conservative thinker (but not a republican), look into Larry Elder. He and I are on common ground with the Republican party.
Your argument is stupid, and I am too awesome to say why.
Oh, charro, you always seem to make me lol.
Really? *blush* Why, thank you.
Oh shit, I mean, I AM AWESOME. Bow before me, conservatroll!!!! *froth froth*
Actually, I miss Barry Goldwater and William F. Buckley.
I can deal with fiscal conservatives — at least there are opportunities to find common ground, and room to negotiate. But with social conservatives there’s little chance (their notions of what’s intrinsically good are too different from mine), and with faith-based conservatives, no hope at all, because the line “God says it, so it must be true” ends all rational discussion.
Worst of all are stupid people of ANY political stripe. Combine stupidity with obstinacy and discussion is doomed.
Agreed. Fiscal conservatism has an inherent “wiggle room,” and improvement can be made without damaging something else. Extreme social conservatism, however, is very similar to extreme social liberalism. Neither allows common sense to guide a decision, both use faith and intimidation to sway people, and both lead to sanctioned oppression of one group or another. Honestly, I just wish there were more social REALISTS.
inspiratiaLols!
Indeed, even if the conversation is about boobs, it sure beats the hell out of “Obama is teh soshulist!” or “LOL Palin is dumb” arguments that frequent here…
Come to think of it.. I can’t think of many conversations that COULD beat about a good ole discussion about boobs…. Hmm.
beat out* Sorry… dont know where those extra abs came from…
They came right below the boobs, dude. That’s where the abs always are!
Do you like boobs alot?
Boobs alot, boobs alot..
I made this one just for you. I remember seeing something very similar before so it’s not too original, but it’s about boobs so what the hell, I like it.
link to inspiratioLol
I’m sorry… was there a caption in that lawl? I didn’t see one….
*Rando flatlines*
Don’t show that to Ty-gor, we’ll never hear the end of it!
Holy Merry Mother of Dog….
My response was more like Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..
I was thinking more like *PTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBTHBT!!!*
Yeah, ok, that’s what I was thinking too but was unable to verbalize it like you did!
is that a motorboat?
That’s how I want to die. Smothered to death by a giant pair of breasts.
I’ve had experience with “The Motorboat”.
And it IS oh so much fun isn’t it Charro?
I enjoy it. Though, the girl at work looked awfully shocked after…
You thought it’d be amusing. Where is the joke then? And if you think you’re gonna change minds with a caption on a picture on joke website, you’re seriously delusional. There have been funny LOLs on this site. These are called LOLs because they are designed to make you Laugh Out Loud. I don’t need LOLs to make me think about current events (or non current events in this case). Look, man, IMO your politics are normally dead on, but your sense of humor is shot to hell, dude. Make with the funneh, yo!
Here’s a suggestion.. whenever you see a caption by EW, fail it just out of general principles.
Uh, yeah, I do actually. Heh.
If you’re going to get butthurt over the fact that people didn’t care for your lol, don’t post them.
This captioner must feel like a bonehead. The only evidence of landing is a doctored photo of a fly by by another countries orbiter that seemed to show tracks. Of course you can’t see no freaking rocket craters from the lander but you can see trail of footprints? The Eagle must have just floated off when they pulled up the anchor. With 1969 technology they would have frozen to death in a matter of seconds outside any space vehicle. You know I would be less inclined to be a skeptic if they didn’t get greedy and start drive a moon buggy around. Come on!
I can’t believe people like this actually exist. This LOL has totally brought out the crazy folk!
What is this mythical “1969 technology” you speak of?
The only idiots who spout shit like this usually have a BA in English, yet are spouting off about advanced technology.
hey now, don’t go insulted English BAs. The crazy one’s usually drop to a liberal arts degree.
Yeah. The English BA’s I know either went on to PhDs, or got really practical jobs. ie, they have a clue or two.
and it’s the artist of the world that shape it and change it unlike the technoplebs that can’t think outside the box
that and we get all the really fun references in movies and books (woot Ozymandias!)
also i apologize for my terrible spelling and grammar the last post. I am horrified with myself.
The only idiots who spout shit like this usually don’t have BAs.
English BAs wouldn’t waste their time claiming the moon landing didn’t happen. They’d be claiming that the US government is still maintaining a covert base on the moon that the telescopes can’t see. Science fiction, doncha know.
Also, the holocaust never happened, and Christopher Columbus landed on Plymouth rock. Further to that, slavery wasn’t half bad and Buick makes the best cars. Additionally, aliens build the pyramids, Stonehenge and that weird crater hole in Germany.
I love the buick GSX. Just saying.
and dont forget about the native american’s being on OUR land when we arrived
Blasted Natives anyway.
That mystical PRE-1969 technology is still flying in the US military today. Google the KC-135. Average fleet life of those planes is ~50 years old, and they’re one of our most flown air frames.
ya, clearly the moon buggy is perfect evidance that it was all faked…that wheels spinning makeing lil car go forward technonlogy didnt ex-sist till 1994
Um, they might have frozen to death, if they weren’t wearing air tight suits – with heaters. Even in ‘69 they could’ve figured THAT one out.
That would have been one EPIC facepalm.
All 300 in the control room at one time.
Alright Buzz,……………. Buzz? Dam**t does anybody know how cold it is out there?
Heaters??
The surface of the moon during its daytime is so hot the space-suits were built with massive cooling systems to keep the astronauts alive.
I don’t know about massive, they did wear them on their backs after all. But yes, you would be correct about the temperature. On the other hand, if they were on the other side of the moon they would definitely need heaters.
If it’s more than a battery-operated fan pinned to the visor of a base-ball cap, it’s a “massive” cooling system.
Air-tanks arent that big, most of the stuff on their back is a pump and regrigerator unit for the cooling system.
Ah, right! You know, in the original fakery of the moon landing they had them pulling the cooling system around on a cart, but NASA didn’t think that would believable.
“Uh, Houston, we’ve got a problem.”
“Go ahead, Apollo.”
“Houston, we’ve run out of AA batteries for the face fans. I don’t think we’re gonna be able to finish the rest of the scheduled moon walks.”
“Roger that, Apollo, come on home then.”
>.>
The caption is not only unfunny, but incorrect. The photos taken of the Apollo mission landing spots were done by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. No telescope is going to focus on something so tiny, so far away.
It would have also made sense to USE the photo taken a couple months ago of the 1969 landing site. This image fails on many levels.
lol moon hoaxers
no one here thinks this was taken with a telescope…if it was it would be a overhead if anything.
you fail
you also notice a space man rideing the lil space car?
we didnt leave him up on the moon for people with telescopes to look at….
bitter troll, your last comment inspired this.
I liked it!
Duh – all telescopes are actually made by the View-Master company. Sheesh.
View-Master…..i should of known, their evil reign of evil shall come to an evil end of evil
OMG, I had forgotten all about them! Snickering shall ensue!
Then you are not a true baby boomer.. how the hell can you forget View-Master?
I enjoyed the part of Hot Shots where he was viewing dossier photos through a view-master.
*snort* I forgot about that..
NOOOOoooOOooo
Dont give into the evil Masters of view!
In Soviet Russia, View Masters you..
I never claimed to be a true baby boomer. I don’t recall the 60’s…because I spent most of them in diapers–too young to get high!
Unfortunately for me, the parts I remember about the 60’s usually have me waking up in a cold sweat.
Ewww…awkward.
Reminds me of something my grandpa said once.
I asked him if he’d been to France. He said yes. I asked if it was nice. He said not while he was there.
I had totally blanked on the fact he fought in France during WWII. D’oh!!
Stop filling the “recent comments list” with dump!
Pot, meet Kettle…
You have pot?
I have top! Sorry, I’m dyslexic.
Top Ramen? Is that for after the pot?
You have to admit, that was a great answer, though!
I CanNot BeLIEVE such a blatantly WRONG caption would make it to the FRONT PAGE.
Everyone knows that telescopes don’t “see” anything. People see things through telescopes, but the scopes themselves have no capacity to “see.”
Sheesh.
Amateurs!!
HELLO????
the french church in 1453 declared these…telescopes…are clearly the work of the devil!!!
ARE YOU ALL ANTI-CHRISTAIN??
JESUS LOVES YOU!!!
stop the use of the devils eye!
But how else are we going to watch the giant space beetle rolling the sun across the sky?? Next you’ll be telling us the Earth didn’t come out of Vishnu’s bellybutton. Silly troll.
the earth is flat! FLAT i tell you…or else we would all fall off when it starts to slope. duh
Libby, you make a good point. But as a suggestion, remove your finger from the shift key, random upper case letters are annoying.
I love Libby from our conversation in the “Agreed?” Lol… but you’re right eddie… I spent most of my time reading her comment trying to figure out the connotations of the random capitalization…
I did however come up with this conclusion “Flaming rubber bananas”
Precisely Maxwell. It turns out “Flaming rubber bananas” is a very close interpretation of what was typed there.
It was meant purely for my own amusement. If anyone else was also amused, it was a random byproduct, though a happy one.
It reads aloud like something a really put upon teenager would say.
Eddie, I’ll try to be less random in my capitalizing in the future.
“I CanNot BeLIEVE such a blatantly WRONG caption would make it to the FRONT PAGE.”
Calm the hell down already. This is a comedy site, not a “How To” Science site.
(And yes, my argument isn’t help by the fact the caption isn’t funny, but still – get a grip already!)
Amusement WIN!
I think the photographer was the first person on the moon. How else are they getting those shots?
They gave the camera to the nearest Moon Man and asked if he could take a few shots.
rando… you KNOW that’s a lie. they gave it to the japanese tourist who was already there taking lots of photos. they asked for a picture of them posing with the flag showing peace signs but the suits made it too difficult to put up the peace sign. so they just got some candid shots.
Japanese tourists: “This isn’t Disneyland. WTF?”
FAIL. See the lunar rover right of shot; this could be no earlier than Apollo 15.
Apollo astronauts left mirrors on the moon. There are lazers at ground-based observatories that are used to measure the distance to the moon every night, reflecting off the mirrors.
“Picture by EWAdams”? Really?
Or does the picture credit only go to whoever uploads the picture, instead of the person/agency who actually TOOK it?
VERY good point.
Perhaps EWAdams has just been residing on the moon for the past 40 years.
He’s the guy on the moon rover there!
if he was rideing the moon car, then who was holding the camera?
MOON MEN I TELL YOU MOON MEN!!
Of course! F*CKING MOON MEN!
its the only explantion that makes sense really..
That would explain EW getting all pissy about his LOL up above.
Don’t know if this has been pointed out or not…I don’t want to go through all the comments…but ground-based telescopes, or even the Hubble Space Telescope, can not and have not imaged the Apollo landing sites. The recent images of the landing sites were from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, a satellite we put in orbit around the Moon.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/07/17/apollo-landing-sites-imaged-by-lro/
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than say we never landed on the moon and remove all doubt
Yes, the flag is still on the moon, but you can’t see it using a telescope. I found some statistics on the size of lunar equipment in a Press Kit for the Apollo 16 mission. The flag is 125 cm (4 feet) long, and you would need an optical wavelength telescope around 200 meters (~650 feet) in diameter to see it. The largest optical wavelength telescope that we have now is the Keck Telscope in Hawaii which is 10 meters in diameter. The Hubble Space Telescope is only 2.4 meters in diameter – much too small!
Resolving the larger lunar rover (which has a length of 3.1 meters) would still require a telescope 75 meters in diameter.
Even barely resolving the lunar lander base, which is 9.5 meters across (including landing gear), would require a telescope about 25 meters across. And in reality you would want a couple (or a few) resolution elements across the object so that it’s possible to identify it. (Otherwise it’ll look like a one pixel detection, not an image, and I don’t think people would be convinced by a couple pixels!) In addition, with a ground based telescope, you have to deal with distortion by the atmosphere as well, so you’ll probably want something considerably larger than 25 meters if you want a good, believable, image of the lander. We don’t have anything that big built yet! So there’s really no way to image equipment left behind by the astronauts with current telescope technology.
Plus the moon-men would have taken the flag and burned it by now, in protest of the unlawful invasion of their home.
Uh, DUH, the Moon Men can’t burn anything. There’s no oxygen on the moon! Silly xy.
I actually asked an astrologer and he said that there isnt a telescope we can see the stuff.you’d think that there would be one but there are no pictures of the moon landing sites from earth. not to say that it didnt happen though
Mmmmm I would put more stock in your comment had you said “Astronomer”…
Also, your comment makes very little sense anyway. So I probably wouldn’t have.
(smirk) There was a guy studying astronomy at our University, and he was such as pretentious wazzock that *no-one* liked him. Not a single person.
So every other day, someone would ask him if he could do their horoscope. It was kind of amusing
Do you suppose one reason for his unlikeable attitude was that he was tired of being asked that every day?
Sure there are, the people at NASA know exactly where the astronauts landed. But as it’s mentioned previously, there isn’t equipment capable of viewing the remnants. I present to you, {http://www.google.com/moon/}
Wow, I can see my house.
Actually, they telescopes CAN’T see all the junk on the moon. The best they can do, is point a laser at a reflector!!
Having a reflector on the moon doesn’t in any way prove we went there, just look at all the crap on Mars, ain’t nobody trying to tell everyone we landed on Mars is there!
So what side of the fence are you actually on?
I wish we could, but we don’t have any telescopes with both the right power and focal length to see the decent stage of the LEM or any of the equipment. I REALLY hate when people use really bad arguments to support my side of an argument, because there’s so much better evidence that we went to the moon than the false statement that we can see the remains through a telescope.
that stuff can’t be seen from the earth – BECAUSE IT NEVER HAPPENED MWUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Exactly. We have been fooled all along. Earth does not even have a moon. It is a holographic projection. The freemasons edited a moon into all the old paintings, the NASA operates submarine tide generators and all dogs are genetically modified to howl with a 28 day cycle.
{http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU} – proof positive of a moon landing?
HAHAHA FIRST
Hot Sauce Committee, Pt. 1 is the eighth studio album by the Beastie Boys, and was planned for release on September 15, 2009.[1] Previously known by the title Tadlock’s Glasses, the current title was cited by Adam “MCA” Yauch.[2] “Too Many Rappers” was released as the album’s first single.
WHERE ARE THE FUNNYS? BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT HERE.
They may still be on vacation. Or the sad truth, they got down-sized and are looking for work in Canada. Many seem to have migrated over to ICHC, believe it or not.
Fortunately, the regular commenters have made up for it! You guize be funneh!
FAIL! Our telescopes CANNOT see the “junk” we left up there.
Hi, guys! I’m back!
Hey Cos.. WB
You can’t see the stuff with a telescope, but they did leave a reflector up there that you can bounce a laser off of. I read about this even before I saw it on Mythbusters.
That is true, but strictly speaking, this caption is a fail.
because only the moon landing during the cold war space race was faked, you cant go from space travel to travelling to the moon in a short period of time, america just couldnt come to terms with communist supremacy
What part of the caption implies we can see the stuff from earth?
The LRO has zoom lens, I assume, which is just a telescope attached to a camera.
Ergo, we CAN see the stuff with telescopes.
That’s right! In fact, ask my neighbor, she’s forever calling the cops on the guy across the street.
That’s cause I HATE that guy.
Exactly. The LRO is basically just a telescope in orbit around the moon. The caption doesn’t claim that the telescope must be on earth.
You CAN’T see the things they left, stupid.. Don’t assume.. You make an ass out of yourself while I sit and enjoy my coffee.. retard.
YO NEIL, I’M REALLY HAPPY FOR YOU. I’M GONNA LET YOU FINISH, BUT RUSSIA HAD ONE OF THE BEST SPACE PROGRAMS OF ALL THE TIME
WAHAHAHH! Win
…and telescopes CAN’T single out such small details… The poster of this lol has failed
It’s so true – that’s what I thought when I saw it the first time. Not even the Hubble can distinguish the objects left from the landings
The smallest object that the Hubble can see on the moon (assuming the BEST possible conditions) in the visible spectrum is 76.72 m across (wavelength = 400nm). The smallest object outside of the visible spectrum is 23m across (wavelength = 120nm). The landers left on the moon are 4m x 4.3 m.
In short, expecting the Hubble to see a lander on the moon is equivalent to expecting a person to see a penny from 1.35 miles away.
I don’t think you can see moon trash with a tele. Jesus that’s way out there. http://m.reddit.com/r/science/comments/95ku7/can_a_groundbased_telescope_take_pictures_of_the/
You can’t, dumbass.
As an atheist, I won’t believe it til I see it.
Wait, are you guys serious?
Don’t we have telescopes that can see to the edge of the
universe? Why not the moon? :-\
O.O We’re able to see the edge of the Universe?! Since when?!
You can’t see the shit with a telescope dumbasses
Why should we take the word of a double dumbass who can’t see the 200 previous comments saying the exact same thing they are?
Even if we could see all that shit up there, conspiracy theorists would have the refute at hand: landing shit on the Moon is easy, landing people and bringing them back is hard.
The real question is: if faking a Moon landing is so easy, why didn’t the Russians do it?
That is just it.l There is not one photo of the landing sites. Not even a doctored up photo like all the others! They never did land on the moon. And the Museums in Europe are all reporting that the so-called moon rocks that NASA gave them are all fake. Not moon rocks at all.