40 Years on. Man on the moon. Truth or a Hoax ??

[paule11]

Originally Posted by flappist

I believe it happened as well. One of the things that was at that time impossible to fake was the source of the radio signals received on earth.

Lots of amateur radio enthusiasts listened to the down links directly via home made high gain directional antennas. The had to be pointed at the moon with is a different angle from all over the world (when it is visible). These are not just americans but almost every nationality so there is no chance of a government conspiracy.

Cant fake that of course it happened

[Bent8]

They didn't go there in '69.....but the Russians and Yanks (let's call them the Secret Govt's) did go there in the 50's using anti-gravity technology and Nazi scientists.

Believe it or not, the conspiracy that they didn't go there started at NASA!

Let me explain....by putting the conspiracy out there for a percentage of the population to buy it, they create mystery and this benefits NASA in that they don't have to reveal everything they found there!

There is a cover-up...only in this case, NASA controls both sides!

Think about it, do you honestly think the US/Russian governments would want you and me knowing what's really on the Moon?...I don't think so.

There are many strange anomalies about the moon also, it's the ONLY rock that doesn't have a gravitational spin in our entire galaxy...in other words, it's artificial.

Okay, who want's to see Buzz Aldrin's reaction to being asked to "swear on the bible", that they did infact go to the moon in 1969?...enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

[Scott]

I think we went there but I struggle with the photo above. How can the bloke in the reflection stand in the middle of a shaddow, without breaking it on the ground and not have any sign of it on him? Further, if he was taking the photo, why can't we see his glass visor?

Based on the image, the craft is to the right of Aldrin, why doesn't its shadow flow in the same direction?

[Teflon Turbo]

that is funny bent, i love it!


space ghost, he was awsome!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Bent8

They didn't go there in '69.....but the Russians and Yanks (let's call them the Secret Govt's) did go there in the 50's using anti-gravity technology and Nazi scientists.

Believe it or not, the conspiracy that they didn't go there started at NASA!

Let me explain....by putting the conspiracy out there for a percentage of the population to buy it, they create mystery and this benefits NASA in that they don't have to reveal everything they found there!

There is a cover-up...only in this case, NASA controls both sides!

Think about it, do you honestly think the US/Russian governments would want you and me knowing what's really on the Moon?...I don't think so.

There are many strange anomalies about the moon also, it's the ONLY rock that doesn't have a gravitational spin in our entire galaxy...in other words, it's artificial.

Okay, who want's to see Buzz Aldrin's reaction to being asked to "swear on the bible", that they did infact go to the moon in 1969?...enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

All I saw was a great man and hero thump a conspiracy theorist loony who was annoying him.

Did the punch hurt?

[yanknbank]

Steven Speilberg was once asked if the moon landings were faked and if the film industry had had a hand in the massive deception of the American public. His response was "Hollywood would've done it better!".

[aussiblue]

The reason they stopped going to the moon was Nixon scrapped the NASA moon program - I suspect it was because he was jealous that the long dead JF Kennedy was still getting the credit for it.

[Spanrz]

Just to add a tid bit for today, being the landing of the moon day, something else landed.

Piece of space debris hit Jupiter, causing another landing of it's own on the large planet.
Reckon it created a moon sized impact site.

And as always, an Aussie got the goods with his scope and camera (just like Australia helped with the moon landing pictures).

[1970galaxie]

We know they could never land on the moon.
The moon is made of cheese.

[Road_Warrior]

It's also 30 years ago this month (a couple of weeks back) that Skylab fell back to earth and peppered Esperance with space junk.

[XR Martin]

Funny how 35000 people worked directly and 350000 people indirectly on the Apollo program and not one of them ever said anything about it being fake. Also every major University got a piece of moon rock and no one ever claimed it was fake.
It was costing every US citizen atleast 50c per week to fund the program, or about 1% of the US economy. Thats the reason it cant be done now. They also cant do it now because of safety. Every mission was about a 50/50 chance of failing

Anyway enough of this crap, you can listen to the landing in real time here.

http://www.wechoosethemoon.org/#

[yanknbank]

It's also 30 years ago this month (a couple of weeks back) that Skylab fell back to earth and peppered Esperance with space junk

NASA recently paid the fine imposed upon it ($400) by the local council in WA for littering.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Funny how 35000 people worked directly and 350000 people indirectly on the Apollo program and not one of them ever said anything about it being fake. Also every major University got a piece of moon rock and no one ever claimed it was fake.
It was costing every US citizen atleast 50c per week to fund the program, or about 1% of the US economy. Thats the reason it cant be done now. They also cant do it now because of safety. Every mission was about a 50/50 chance of failing

Anyway enough of this crap, you can listen to the landing in real time here.

http://www.wechoosethemoon.org/#

This is the fact the makes the whole 'moon landing conspiracy theory' utterly bogus. It would involve more effort and difficulty to conjure up this myth then it would to atcually go. You can claim going to the moon was a waste of time and money, you can ever claim they just did it for the PR or so they could weaponise space. But don't dishonour the memory of those who died to get there, or insult those who worked so hard to make it happen. It makes me sick that people still think it was a hoax.

[metalmania]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

And they couldn't build a decent rocket to get them there.

Maybe you better do some research.Who was first in space? The Russians build the best rockets.Their rockets are used to carry most of the parts to build the current space station. The space shuttle's payload is f......l compared to what the Russian rocket misssions carry. They have always built better rockets.

On the subject of whether man went to the moon or not. Well i would have thought it should be quite easy to go there now, 40 years on and not as NASA have stated ( to send a man back to the moon by 2020). There in might lie the answer. Don't you think it would be a relatively easy to send a man to the moon now with all the technology we have compared to what was around the first time ? It should not take 10 years of planning!!!

[ILLaViTaR]

pffft Russia, they're Planes have the highest crash rate compared to almost anywhere.

I don't know enough on this topic to comment however, didn't the flag wave in the footage rapidly as though a gale was blowing it everywhere?
If it was fake I doubt the directors would miss that mistake.

[capriv8]

If a cow can jump over the moon surely humans can land on it

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

pffft Russia, they're Planes have the highest crash rate compared to almost anywhere.

I don't know enough on this topic to comment however, didn't the flag wave in the footage rapidly as though a gale was blowing it everywhere?
If it was fake I doubt the directors would miss that mistake.

From here http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#flag

Bad: When the astronauts are assembling the American flag, the flag waves. Kaysing says this must have been from an errant breeze on the set. A flag wouldn't wave in a vacuum.

Good: Of course a flag can wave in a vacuum. In the shot of the astronaut and the flag, the astronaut is rotating the pole on which the flag is mounted, trying to get it to stay up. The flag is mounted on one side on the pole, and along the top by another pole that sticks out to the side. In a vacuum or not, when you whip around the vertical pole, the flag will ``wave'', since it is attached at the top. The top will move first, then the cloth will follow along in a wave that moves down. This isn't air that is moving the flag, it's the cloth itself.

New stuff added March 1, 2001: Many HBs show a picture of an astronaut standing to one side of the flag, which still has a ripple in it (for example, see this famous image). The astronaut is not touching the flag, so how can it wave?

The answer is, it isn't waving. It looks like that because of the way the flag was deployed. The flag hangs from a horizontal rod which telescopes out from the vertical one. In Apollo 11, they couldn't get the rod to extend completely, so the flag didn't get stretched fully. It has a ripple in it, like a curtain that is not fully closed. In later flights, the astronauts didn't fully deploy it on purpose because they liked the way it looked. In other words, the flag looks like it is waving because the astronauts wanted it to look that way. Ironically, they did their job too well. It appears to have fooled a lot of people into thinking it waved.

This explanation comes from NASA's wonderful spaceflight web page. For those of you who are conspiracy minded, of course, this doesn't help because it comes from a NASA site. But it does explain why the flag looks as it does, and you will be hard pressed to find a video of the flag waving. And if it was a mistake caused by a breeze on the set where they faked this whole thing, don't you think the director would have tried for a second take? With all the money going to the hoax, they could afford the film!

Note added March 28, 2001: One more thing. Several readers have pointed out that if the flag is blowing in a breeze, why don't we see dust blowing around too? Somehow, the HBs' argument gets weaker the more you think about it.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by metalmania

Maybe you better do some research.Who was first in space? The Russians build the best rockets.Their rockets are used to carry most of the parts to build the current space station. The space shuttle's payload is f......l compared to what the Russian rocket misssions carry. They have always built better rockets.

On the subject of whether man went to the moon or not. Well i would have thought it should be quite easy to go there now, 40 years on and not as NASA have stated ( to send a man back to the moon by 2020). There in might lie the answer. Don't you think it would be a relatively easy to send a man to the moon now with all the technology we have compared to what was around the first time ? It should not take 10 years of planning!!!

Sorry the Saturn V rocket is the most powerful rocket ever built and successfully launched http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_v

Technology has little to do with. Im not sure why people are obsessed by this fact? We'd also have trouble building the pyramids now which has little to do with technology.
Most of the 35000 Apollo program employees of Nasa are no longer with us, and little of the information was kept due to funding cuts in the 70s and 80s. Everything was stored on massive magnetic tapes (in comparison to the storage medium of today), which have long since been misplaced, erased, reused, degraded and discarded.
Basically Nasa has to start again, with way less percentage of funding.
If Obama put as much money into Nasa now as did Kennedy and Johnson did in the 60s we could get back there alot quicker.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by Teflon Turbo

i don't think it happend only because i watched a doco ages ago on a certain type of radiation between the moon and earth that is so powerful and as someone said earlier that it would have killed them in minutes.

the solution was (from memory) led walls 2 meters thick all round to keep em safe, but that was not practical in an environment where gravity exists, like the earth or moon. they would be able to take off.

I heard the same can be said for a manned mars voyage.

Here you go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_l...ing_experiment

Any theories how anyone with a laser can calculate the distance to the moon by reflecting its beam off an array that was installed by the crew of Apollo 11... if they never actually landed on the moon to install it?

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by GTP006

I think we went there but I struggle with the photo above. How can the bloke in the reflection stand in the middle of a shaddow, without breaking it on the ground and not have any sign of it on him? Further, if he was taking the photo, why can't we see his glass visor?

Based on the image, the craft is to the right of Aldrin, why doesn't its shadow flow in the same direction?

It probably hasn't aired on SBS but Mythbusters did a whole debunking the debunkers episode that answers questions like these.

[toxicxr6uterus]

Im not so sure if its true... i know we send unmanned machines to mars to collect rocks and gasses today, but how come no manned adventures "since 1969 apparently" have been completed to set foot on the moon once again in our day and age? 40 years ago was light years behind in terms of technology that we have today and they apparently sent man to the moon.. was this just a big set up to overcome the soviets and like always the yanks HAVE to be not 1 but 10,000 better than everyone else?

[Burnout]

Here's 40 photos from the Boston Globe's Big Picture Series:

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/200...apollo_11.html

[cs123]

A question to the people who believe it was fake.

What would it take to convince you it was real?

[Teflon Turbo]

bring the moon to earth for a forensic examination.

if it's in wiki it must be real (previous post).

surely americans have used up all their credibilty

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by toxicxr6uterus

Im not so sure if its true... i know we send unmanned machines to mars to collect rocks and gasses today, but how come no manned adventures "since 1969 apparently" have been completed to set foot on the moon once again in our day and age? 40 years ago was light years behind in terms of technology that we have today and they apparently sent man to the moon.. was this just a big set up to overcome the soviets and like always the yanks HAVE to be not 1 but 10,000 better than everyone else?

It was the space race.. Up until the point of putting man on the moon, the Soviets had been ahead in almost every achievement when it came to putting man in space. The American race leapfrogged the Soviets, probably prematurely but the gamble paid off. It was a whole, we're more techologically advanced than you are muscle flexing stunt.

You do realise there were 6 launched manned lunar landings up until 1972 and not just Apollo 11? Apollo 13 made famous by Hollywood failed to land but did orbit the moon. Each left instruments on the moon and several of which are still used today.

Each trek was plotted and followed by several countries - and beamed to the world by us - via Parkes. But the Soviets were the most interested, and believe you me, if the Americans never landed on the moon, the Soviets would be disputing it to this day.

Now, in order to fund such expensive projects, the government had to capture the imagination of the people - and they did, by proclaiming they were going to put man on the moon. The interest waned after repeated landings on the moon and it was eventually scrapped. The best answer I can give as to why we don't go today would be - why would you bother going today? NASA's focus on landing man on a celestial body is now focused on Mars. Something utterly impossible to do in the 1960's... and as much of a challenge today as it was in the 60's to put man on the moon.

It puzzles me how there are those that are adamant that we never landed on the moon and will use a photo as proof because of some shadow or a letter on a rock. Man has landed on the moon, several times.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by Teflon Turbo

bring the moon to earth for a forensic examination.

if it's in wiki it must be real (previous post).

surely americans have used up all their credibilty

Wiki is just easy to quote.

I can get you a link direct from NASA's site of the reflectors installed on the moon including their location so if you have a laser setup, you can bounce it off the moon yourself if you so wished.

So, instead of dodging the question - how were the laser arrays installed on the moon and operational on the Apollo 11 mission?

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by Burnedout

Here's 40 photos from the Boston Globe's Big Picture Series:

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/200...apollo_11.html

Those photos put a chill down my spine.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by toxicxr6uterus

Im not so sure if its true... i know we send unmanned machines to mars to collect rocks and gasses today, but how come no manned adventures "since 1969 apparently" have been completed to set foot on the moon once again in our day and age? 40 years ago was light years behind in terms of technology that we have today and they apparently sent man to the moon.. was this just a big set up to overcome the soviets and like always the yanks HAVE to be not 1 but 10,000 better than everyone else?

40 years ago we were also prepared to accept risks.

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by Rodp

It was the space race.. Up until the point of putting man on the moon, the Soviets had been ahead in almost every achievement when it came to putting man in space. The American race leapfrogged the Soviets, probably prematurely but the gamble paid off. It was a whole, we're more techologically advanced than you are muscle flexing stunt.

You do realise there were 6 launched manned lunar landings up until 1972 and not just Apollo 11? Apollo 13 made famous by Hollywood failed to land but did orbit the moon. Each left instruments on the moon and several of which are still used today.

Each trek was plotted and followed by several countries - and beamed to the world by us - via Parkes. But the Soviets were the most interested, and believe you me, if the Americans never landed on the moon, the Soviets would be disputing it to this day.
Now, in order to fund such expensive projects, the government had to capture the imagination of the people - and they did, by proclaiming they were going to put man on the moon. The interest waned after repeated landings on the moon and it was eventually scrapped. The best answer I can give as to why we don't go today would be - why would you bother going today? NASA's focus on landing man on a celestial body is now focused on Mars. Something utterly impossible to do in the 1960's... and as much of a challenge today as it was in the 60's to put man on the moon.

It puzzles me how there are those that are adamant that we never landed on the moon and will use a photo as proof because of some shadow or a letter on a rock. Man has landed on the moon, several times.

Well said......

[Jason[98.EL]]

Originally Posted by Burnedout

Here's 40 photos from the Boston Globe's Big Picture Series:

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/200...apollo_11.html

thanks for the link

its good to see that they are available for all to see

Jason