the U.S. never went to the moon

HA!! That is so old!!!

Anyway...I read it a long time ago..and really..I don't care if US went to the Moon or not...I don't really care about that. If they never did..so what. It was during the cold war so...sometimes you have to cheat to win (which I hope the US never did). But I do believe they went to the moon....maybe.
 
If they didn't go, why did the Russians not notice it? Wouldn't they have their equipment tuned into the skies?
 
I call shens.

We can reflect lasers off specific points on the moon and they'll bounce back. The article says those could easily have been placed there by robots. Wrong. Robot technology wasn't advanced enough then. We still have problems with Mars rovers today.
 
I wonder where all those rocks that everyone has been toying with for the past thirty five years came from?
Really, it gets to the point where it would seem easier to do it than to fake it as well as they supposedly did.
 
All it is is a bunch of idiots with nothing better to do then to make up crap like this.
 
For christ sakes....

We should get Apos in here.
 
Do people not have anything better to do with their lives than make websites debating the validity of a moon landing that occured 35 years ago?
 
Kommie said:
Do people not have anything better to do with their lives than make websites debating the validity of a moon landing that occured 35 years ago?
Click to expand...
You mean like post in the off-topic section of a Half-Life 2 fansite? ;)
 
Kommie said:
Do people not have anything better to do with their lives than make websites debating the validity of a moon landing that occured 35 years ago?
Click to expand...

You think to good of people.
 
AntiAnto said:
The secret is there is no moon.
Click to expand...
Yes there is....me and steve come the inner core of the moon.

Some would say that the Earth is our moon...but that would belittle the name of our moon which is the moon.
 
Any site that has something with ufo in their url is sure to contain nothing but bullshit. I see no exception here.
 
Ripped from a post I had on another thread...

All major arguments for why the moon landing was a hoax, and their subsequent counter-arguments:

Okay, let's start:

The Radiation Argument

Well are you denying that anybody went into space? Because based on that, nobody could have gone because there is no protection! We just had well made protection. I've heard the argument that going through the van Allen belt would be too much radiation. But this is also just stupid. There is not enough radiation there. Also, we passed through it too quickly. We were in and out fast enough. Also the metal ship would block it's share of the radiation.

Extreme Heat

"The moon's surface reaches + 250 f. Film would melt at that temperature." Yep, I lot of things would be very damaged at that temperature, including humans. Do you think it was + 250 f inside the guys suits? Isn't it possible that they had specially protected cameras just like they had specially protected people? It's very simple to create protection for a camera like that.

No Dust Kicked Up Under The LEM

On the moon there is no air push things around. You have to directly apply force to things to get them to move, and so the only dust to move around would be the dust directly touched by the exhaust or dust hit by other dust. Also since there is no air, it's really tough to create clouds, although you can do it. The dust wouldn't be held up on the thick air. It just sorta falls back down to the ground. If you watch the rover drive around, clouds don't form around the wheels and in the rover's path. The dust just falls back down to the ground. And as for the crater, the rockets certainly have the ability to create a crater but when it's landing, it's rockets aren't on 'FULL BLAST". They have to ease into the landing just like to ease into any landing.

No Stars In Photographs

Well, just to start off, you can see stars when you are on the moon. In fact you can see them all day long because there is no air or atmosphere and so the sky is dark enough to see them all the time. Well, they didn't show up in pictures because of the cameras themselves. To take a picture of your craft, your crew, or the lunar landscape you would have to set the shutter speed very fast because of the extremely bright surrounding. (And all of these pictures were taken when the sun was shining very bright) The stars just to faint to see with such a bright sun and a fast shutter speed. The picture was taken too quickly to see them.

Shadows All Wrong

Well "with a single light source" this would be true, but there is more than one light source. There are three. First there is the sunlight as mentioned above, and then there is the Earth. Think about how much light is reflected from the moon down to Earth. Well, Earth is much larger and reflects light much better also. It is about 100 times brighter than the moon. Those two easily fill in the shadows, but there is also the moon itself. The surface of the moon is brightly lit and would reflect plenty of light into the shadows.

The flapping flag:

Those believing in a NASA conspiracy claim that the film of the Apollo astronauts planting the American flag into the Moon's surface clearly shows the flag flapping as if in the wind. There is no wind on the Moon, so this flapping must be due to the breeze in the desert, or the air conditioning in the studio, where the hoax was filmed.

Well, indeed the flag (which is supported outwards by a pole across the top, attached at right angles to the top of the vertical pole) does flap, however this is not due to any wind. As the astronauts were planting the flag in the lunar ground, they did so with a twisting motion, thus causing the "pendulum" swinging motion of the flag. On the Earth, this motion is dampened by the air in the atmosphere. However, there is no atmosphere on the Moon, and as oppose to showing the flag flapping is indicative of a hoax, it actually serves to show that the flag was in fact planted on the Moon. Since there is not air to dampen the swinging of the flag fabric, the motion continues for far longer than on the Earth, thus giving the illusion of flapping in the wind.

The use of the cameras:

Many argue that the astronauts could not have operated the cameras with their cumbersome gloved hands. Not true - the cameras were designed to be operational with the large gloves of the spacesuits used. There is also an argument that the photos are too well framed to have been taken by the astronauts' chest-mounted cameras, with which it was not possible to look through a viewfinder. Again, this is not a good argument. The astronauts received a great deal of training in the use of the chest cameras, and were even instructed to take them home and practice using them in their everyday lives. It is far from unreasonable to say that they would have learned to frame pictures correctly.

Slowed down film:

If you speed up the film of the astronauts moonwalking (in the literal sense, rather than doing their Michael Jackson impersonations!) it, apparently, looks remarkably like they are jumping around in the normal gravity of Earth. Well, it does (kind of) look like that. However, the relationship does not work both ways. If you make a film of someone leaping around at normal speed on Earth in a similar spacesuit to that used in the Apollo missions, then slow it down, the film loses that particular weightless and "floaty" quality that is seen in the Moon landing films.

Reasons why we DID land on the Moon:

* Thousands of NASA scientists, technicians, and engineers worked on the Apollo program. If it was a hoax then the NASA bigwigs would have had to fool the very people working on getting men to the Moon, or else, all the thousands of Apollo workers would have to have been very good at keeping secrets for the last forty years.

* When a meteorite collides with the Moon or the Earth, tremendous heat is produced from the high energy collision. This heat is enough to melt some of the debris that is thrown out of the crater. In such situations, "Spherules" are produced. These are tiny globules of molten rock and sand that cool as they fall back to the ground. On Earth, spherules are far from spherical due to the gravity and atmosphere. However, on the Moon, niether of these factors are as significant, so spherules are almost perfectly round. The Apollo missions brought back hundreds of these spherules. Dating tests on these have shown that many are billions of years old, and therefore cannot be manmade and must be lunar in origin.

* The most striking evidence that men landed on the Moon is still up there. I'm not talking about the flags and other paraphernalia left up there by the astronauts, although if we were to return and find it, this would be conclusive evidence. What I'm referring to in this paragraph are the laser reflectors left on the Moon, which are still used today to measure the Earth's exact position in the Solar System. Lasers are beamed up to the locations of these reflectors and the time taken for the reflected beam to return is used to calculate the Earth's position.

* The Jodrell Bank radiotelescope's scientists snooped in on the astronauts' radio transmissions and monitored the actual landing of the "Eagle" lunar landing craft for their own interest. Their records still exist.

* If NASA really wanted to fake the Moon landings, they would not have been caught out by such trivial and obvious things that are cited as evidence by the conspiracy theorists.

* Plus, with all the effort taken to construct such an elaborate hoax, wouldn't it have been easier just to do it for real?

With every great expedition, exploration, and discovery, there has been doubters and disbelievers. People refused (and still refuse! - see Flat Earth Society) to believe the Earth was round, and the Earth moved around the Sun. This is no different, except that in modern times such things are refuted on the basis of some sinister conspiracy, derived from circumstantial or ill-informed evidence.

Face it - we landed on the Moon!
Click to expand...


http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=632748&lastnode_id=124

I am becoming increasingly furious about the Fox channels representation of science and their misrepresentation of truth. It was just stupid when they aired "Alien Autopsy" and it was only irritating when they showed "Lost Tombs". Last night they went over the edge and gave sustenance to every backwoods conspiracy theorist with a third grade education when they broadcast "CONSPIRACY THEORY: DID WE LAND ON THE MOON."

They interviewed several key "Authorities" and a few respected "Experts" to try and determine if a moon landing really occurred or whether it was some enormous cover-up by NASA. From the start the show was pure fantasy. I know that Fox airs these shows because they're entertaining, but people actually believe this, and this sort of misinformation not only makes America look ignorant among the international community but damages the potential of our children as they attempt to learn real science.

I didn't watch the whole show I only flipped to it during commercial breaks while I was watching CSI, but the few points I picked up on were ludicrous. Several of the "Experts" made assertions about why they thought the landing was staged and then a NASA spokesman was given about a quarter of the time the "Investigators" had to refute their claims and then the narrator vilified NASA for several minutes.

The following are the claims I heard:

1. The movie Capricorn One has many scenes that are nearly identical to the moon landing. That this movie could be so realistic and it's similarities to the alleged moon landing only cast doubt on the event.
2. The flag planted by Apollo astronauts appears to wave in the wind, a wind that can not exist on the moon because it has no atmosphere.
3. Many of the photographs taken by the astronauts clearly indicate multiple light sources. Since the astronauts took no flash equipment the only source of light is presumed to be the sun. The shadows cast by materials in the photos are not all parallel, additionally, several of the photographs display vivid details in shadow, which shouldn't be possible with only one light source
4. The photos taken of the LEM clearly indicate that there is no blast crater below the module where it landed. This should be impossible since it descended on active thrust.
5. When the ascension module lifted away from the remains of the LEM there is one short burst and then we see no active thrust from the main nozzle. it almost appears as if it were jerked up by a crane.
6. Several of the astronauts involved in the Apollo program died shortly after the programs end. A startling %15 of the Apollo astronauts died, surely this must be an attempt to cover up the conspiracy, after all what better way to cover up the truth, than to kill those who know it.

Unfortunately there are some major flaws in these claims:

1. Capricorn One was released in 1978, almost ten years after the first moon landing. It's a fictional film about a government conspiracy to cover up a Martian landing fiasco by staging the whole thing in the Arizona Dessert. The film tried as hard as possible to simulate the actual lunar landing, going so far as to repeat some of the same dialogue. But this is not proof of a conspiracy because the film was simulating the original. To suggest that the lunar landing was faked because Capricorn One is simulated is circular logic.
2. The flag planted on the moon does indeed wave, but only when the astronaut is planting it. Even though there is no atmosphere and no wind on the moon, the laws of physics were not suspended on the lunar surface. The Flag has mass and therefore inertia, so it waves when the astronaut twists the pole into the soil.
3. This multiple light source thing pissed me off the most. The narrator claimed that no flash equipment was taken to the moon and that the sun therefore was the only source of illumination. Apparently the narrator never stood in the light of a full moon. That's right folks, the Earth reflects light from the sun back onto the lunar surface. The only difference is that the Earth is quite a bit larger than the moon and casts more reflected light. Although the Earth does go through phases much like the moon, (depending on the Earth, moon, sun angle) the folks at NASA are pretty smart and I bet they scheduled these landing to coincide with the periods of greatest illumination.
4. There is no blast crater below the LEM, because the moon's gravitational pull is 1/6th that of the earths'. Unlike on the earth, the lander wouldn't have to descend on constant thrust, a few well placed and controlled thrusts would be all that was necessary to land softly. As an aside the thrust would also not be as incendiary as it would be in an atmosphere and would therefore not burn the surface.
5. The module didn't ascend on a constant tongue thrust flame. Like I said, 1/6th the gravity. It applies here as well. The thrust used to launch the ascension module was applied in one burst, and the rest of the fuel was reserved incase they needed to make any corrections once they got into orbit.
6. The narrator claimed that many of the astronauts expired unduly because of their knowledge of the conspiracy, he further claimed that an astonishing %15 of the Apollo astronauts died in the short years following the Apollo missions. Let me tell, %15 dead means %85 alive, that's a piss poor way to cover up a conspiracy. Furthermore, what of the thousands of support people and engineers that built maintained and designed the equipment and trained the personnel. The astronauts, for all of their training were really nothing more than very qualified pilots with a background in applied sciences. As an aside many of these astronauts were test pilots and thrill seekers. a %15 mortality rate among this type of person seems fairly reasonable.

In conclusion I'd like to say that the lunar landing was not faked and FOX caters to idiots. Thank you, and good night.

UPDATE: 11SEP02
On Monday, the 9th of September 2002, Bart Sibrel, the producer of this FOX show and the related and equally ignorant film, "A Funny Thing Happened On the Way To the Moon," attempted an ambush interview of Buzz Aldrin outside of a Beverly Hills hotel. Sibrel claimed, "I approached him and asked him again to swear on a Bible that he went to the moon, and told him he was a thief for taking money to give an interview for something he didn't do." Sibrel had on two previous occasions accosted Aldrin in public with similar tactics. Aldrin responded by punching Sibrel in the face. Sibrel, 37, got his ass handed to him by the 72 year old Aldrin. Sibrel, who claims that Aldrin fled after striking him, is seeking an assault charge against the former astronaut. In contradiction to Sibrel's claim, I saw news footage of the event that showed Aldrin standing calmly in front of the entrance to the hotel as people fluttered around him after the event.
Click to expand...

http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=953839&lastnode_id=632748
 
StardogChampion said:
Haha. The earth just has a huge skybox around it with a dynamic texture.
Click to expand...

Earth still uses skyboxes? I mean come on, get with the tiimes.
 
The earth just has a huge skybox around it with a dynamic texture.
Click to expand...

i dont know what's geekier, the fact that somebody said that, or that i acctually understood it.
 
Shens said:
The article says those could easily have been placed there by robots. Wrong. Robot technology wasn't advanced enough then. We still have problems with Mars rovers today.
Click to expand...

I didn't want to read the article, but Shens is right. There is no way on earth we could have gotten robots to place those mirrors there.
 
If someone came up to me and started talking to me about how no one was ever on the moon, I'd slap them like an aggresive wife slaps her cheating husband.
 
well, they could always prove the conspiracey theorist's for idiots, and go there again with more modern equipment, perhaps even find the flag that was planted.. id certainly like to see them goto the moon again.
 
clarky003 said:
well, they could always prove the conspiracey theorist's for idiots, and go there again with more modern equipment, perhaps even find the flag that was planted.. id certainly like to see them goto the moon again.
Click to expand...

The naysayers would just say that was fake too...

Remember neo, there is no moon.
 
Ritz said:
The naysayers would just say that was fake too...

Remember neo, there is no moon.
Click to expand...

...

Send the naysayers to the moon!
 
Ritz said:
Remember neo, there is no moon.
Click to expand...

My name is... Mr. Anderson. [jump up with you on my back, land on the ground and dodge the subway with a spectacular backflip where you can see the cable holding my back].
 
we don't go to the moon anymore because the aliens there kicked us off the moon.
 
Anyone who argues against the moonlanding should be shot in the kneecaps. It's as simple as that.

"OMG JFK WAS ASSASSINATED (LOLZ HE SAID ASS! ROFLCOPTER1!1) BY THA ALIENZ!!1"
 
How dare they belittle the moon like that.
 
If the US went to the moon, please answer me this one question which really bothers me:

Since the moon has no atmosphere, one should be able to see ALL the stars very clearly and brightly. So,

WHY ISN'T THE SKY FILLED WITH THOUSANDS OF STARS IN ANY OF THE PICS?
 
nick_t said:
If the US went to the moon, please answer me this one question which really bothers me:

Since the moon has no atmosphere, one should be able to see ALL the stars very clearly and brightly. So,

WHY ISN'T THE SKY FILLED WITH THOUSANDS OF STARS IN ANY OF THE PICS?
Click to expand...
Because of the shutter speed of the camera I believe.

We need apos in here...he can answer everything.
 
It's called common sense. The very faint stars are lost in the not so sensitive film against the very bright surface of the moon (no light is beign scattered by an atmosphere).

But honestly, do you really think NASA would forget to paste stars on the sky in their studio if it was faked? "Geez Ted, I knew we forgot something."

But lets turn it around shall we?

- How come we can still detect the equipment on the moon?

- How come the rocks taken from the moon really are not from Earth?

- How come radiochatter between NASA and the astronauts has been picked up?

- How come the Soviets didn't utter a word about fraude while they could track everything and the moonlanding was a huge blow to them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
To Those That Stand, Those That Fell
Replies
6
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
TechnoHippyChic
The Many Diversions of THC's Work Lunches
Replies
3
Views
2K
TechnoHippyChic
TechnoHippyChic
Chris D
Half-Life: Alyx announced
Replies
32
Views
26K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top