The First Men on the Moon

[kham]

Keeping simple, ya think maybe if it was fake, that other foreign intelligence service, think they were called the KGB, might have put the word out?? What with that whole cold war thing going on.

Oh, and the vehicles on the surface have been imaged by a score of spacecraft; including the FOOTPRINTS of the astronauts as well as the tracks from rovers. Hubble has insufficent resolution to image them. THATS why its not used. It's not meant to do that.

[kham]

Myn, your "just get there" idea was suggested before.... in 1961 or 2 I think. The response was not... favourable See "From the Earth to the Moon" for good depiction of various ideas going down in flames Its in the book as well. But the expression on the guy being pitched too is worth it

[Duncan Edwards]

You certainly have a lot of knowledge about the subject. Much more than I do obviously. I'm no scientist, and I don't read books. I don't really have the interest, so you are right, that I am going on a lot of shaky evidence by people who also have shaky credentials. Obviously some of my sources are not credible...

I really should let it go right there.

Did you go to the site I mentioned?

Yes. Does it not concern you that you have placed your faith in a few undocumented paragraphs from a guy who also has articles about dinosaurs still living? Aliens underground? Right next to ads about celebrity yachts and which singer has the best rack? You reject every history book and science text in favor or this drivel?

Perhaps you could debunk a few of the pictures on there...

It's called "Photoshop" and not very well done at that. Check the manipulations section of this board if you don't understand how it can be used to change an image.

... especially the one where there is a "reflection" of a stage light off one of the guy's helmets...

It's Pete Conrad and the reflection is a Surveyor spacecraft that landed on the moon two years previous.

.. And the "accidentally" erased footage of the whole thing? The Televised parts? I mean, you'd think a historic thing like that would be very well protected and preserved.

I have no idea what you are talking about here. All of the footage from the Apollo flights is archived and readily available all over Youtube and the NASA history server.

...And Armstrong never giving an interview? C'mon, that is ridiculous....

Yes, it is. It is also factually untrue as has been discussed.

Art Bell, even as we know his show was/is of the loony sort, interviewed one who supposedly walked on the moon and Art used to always bring this up. He asked him "Wow, what was it like when you on the moon?" And the guy's answer was something like, "gee...you know I really can't remember it." Art used to always say he was almost shocked by that remark. You can't remember walking on the moon? Hard to believe. If I was on the frickin' moon, I think I would remember what it felt like to be there.

Who? There were only twelve and you can't give me a name for this absolute evidence? I can not in my wildest dreams imagine an Apollo astronaut talking to Art Bell.

...That's not proof. No picture is proof. They could be faked. Easily faked.

Yet you keep pointing to other photos as "proof". Which is it?

What the conspiracy believers want is to see in real time see the rover, sitting there on the moon. THAT would be 100% proof, if a neutral group of astronomers, including skeptics, could look into a telescope and see it there. NASA says it's too small. So we say, "use Hubble", but they say then you have the opposite problem. They say the moon would look fuzzy because Hubble was built to see things far away. So I am supposed to believe there is no telescope in 2013 that can focus in enough to see the rover? A big car only 225,000 miles away? Sounds dubious. We can see Galaxies and Quasars and now planets in other solar systems. But sorry, no moon car. If they let a conspiracy person see the rover with their own eyes, THEN it would be proof. Flag and tracks are unnecesary. Just Rover.

No, there is no telescope that would allow you to see an object that small on the moon. It's simple physics regarding light gathering and magnification. I'd try explaining it but I don't think I'd be able to make myself understood.

I'd like to read a few of the moon-hoax books someday, but I hate reading. I know you hate hearing from someone who doesn't have the knowledge to really back up arguments...I just don't have enough interest.
I don't totally believe the conspiracy...we may have gone. But if I had to bet on it, I'd say we didn't.

You can't answer any of the questions I put forward and have no documentary proof for a single thing I refuted. I hope you never question people in the world like your doctor, your airline pilot, etc and simply deny that they know anything as well.

[Duncan Edwards]

No, I''ve always believed it was hoaxed. .....1) In 1969 we did not have the technology to do it. ...

Well, they didn't have today's technology.

But they had something that we collectively don't - - - Big - - Balls.

And there is probably the greatest truth of all. We have become so comfortable, so satiated, so risk averse, that like the ant and the grasshopper we are neglecting our future. The Greatest Generation emerged from the Depression and WWII without fear and feeling pretty unstoppable.

Since returning to the moon became a stated goal in 2004 the United States has spent billions to create little more than powerpoint presentations. Right now we are working on yet another iteration of a heavy lift launch vehicle that was mandated by the senate. Hence the official name of Space Launch System or SLS is often referred to as the "Senate Launch System" since it is nothing more than a jobs program. There are no planned missions and no money for payloads. It's another road to nowhere.

Hopefully a new generation of tech entrepreneurs like Musk and Bezos are going to get us off this rock rather than wait on the spinning wheels of government. I guess they have also bought into the idea that the Apollo landings were real.

[kham]

NASA is dead meat. And should be defunded. Their last policy statement alone was enough to get them all terminated in non -bizzaro world.

The only leaps forward in space technology in the next quarter century will be coming from the private sector. And they likely will be pretty startling , a lot like they were back when there actually was a space agency with a mission.

[QSMud]

The video linked by this article is pretty good:

http://gizmodo.com/5977205/why-the-moon ... tive-proof

[jadokast98]

The video linked by this article is pretty good:

http://gizmodo.com/5977205/why-the-moon ... tive-proof

Wow, that was truly awesome. "Moon-Landing Hoaxer s" get owned! Love it as much as a skater doing a scorpion! I probably would not buy the man a drink as there are other things are there that I may not agree with, but ... still the numbers alone are awesome.

Thank you for the link!

[bbjohn]

I have something to say about conspiracies: if history is any indication, they tend to fall apart as the number of people involved increases. For something like the moon landing to be a hoax, it would take too many people involved for everyone to stay quiet for all these years.

There are some people who will always believe the moon landing was a hoax, just as there are those who believe in other conspiracies. There are those who claim 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' is proof of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy, even though it has been repeatedly demonstrated it were a hoax. There are others who believe the Holocaust of World War II was a hoax, despite the mountain of documentary evidence and the testimony of those who survived it, witnessed it, and even those who carried it out.

Some people will believe what they want to believe. Their minds are already made up. Don't confuse them with facts.

Big Bad John

[bbjohn]

NASA is dead meat. And should be defunded. Their last policy statement alone was enough to get them all terminated in non -bizzaro world.

The only leaps forward in space technology in the next quarter century will be coming from the private sector. And they likely will be pretty startling , a lot like they were back when there actually was a space agency with a mission.

Amen, Kham. NASA has gone from being an organization with a mission to being just another government bureaucracy. The trouble is they no longer have a goal. They got to the moon, and they lost direction.

Now that the technology has become cheaper and more widely available, let's see what the private sector can do. I'll bet the results will be awesome, and as exciting as anything NASA did in its glory years.

Big Bad John

[jadokast98]

I have something to say about conspiracies: if history is any indication, they tend to fall apart as the number of people involved increases. For something like the moon landing to be a hoax, it would take too many people involved for everyone to stay quiet for all these years.

There are some people who will always believe the moon landing was a hoax, just as there are those who believe in other conspiracies. There are those who claim 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' is proof of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy, even though it has been repeatedly demonstrated it were a hoax. There are others who believe the Holocaust of World War II was a hoax, despite the mountain of documentary evidence and the testimony of those who survived it, witnessed it, and even those who carried it out.

Some people will believe what they want to believe. Their minds are already made up. Don't confuse them with facts.
Big Bad John

Just waiting for the 9-11 Truthers to get owned. They embarrass me. But I can't hold my breath; December7, 1941 has conspiracy theory believers too after all these years. UN-diagnosed schizophrenics, imho.