Was Apollo 11 An Hoax?

[GonzoLays]

Did we land on the moon in 1969?

Vote!!

[Malcontent]

Did we land on the moon in 1969?

Vote!!

Ok Capricorn One.....This has been a story since the day it happened.. Im of the opinion it happened.

[yavoon]

I took this as a non-serious question. how bored can one get?

[GonzoLays]

I took this as a non-serious question. how bored can one get?

Take it as a serious quesiton. Do you believe we landed on the Moon? If so, why?

[yavoon]

Take it as a serious quesiton. Do you believe we landed on the Moon? If so, why?

does anyone here believe we didnt? that'd fascinate me.

[GonzoLays]

does anyone here believe we didnt? that'd fascinate me.


Tell us why you believe we did; that should set a lot of people straight on the matter.

[yavoon]

Tell us why you believe we did; that should set a lot of people straight on the matter.

who am I suppose to set straight?

in the broadest sense we have hundreds of hours of video, thousands of ppl many extremely psychologically believable, spent hundreds of millions of dollars and had all the requisite technological sophistication.

I was unaware ppl ever thought we didnt

[elsid13]

What makes folks that if we can harass the atom, create submarines that don't need to come up for air, that it to hard to strap three guys into air sealed capsule and light a rocket under their butts????

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Tell us why you believe we did; that should set a lot of people straight on the matter.

I didn't know that it was up to someone to re-prove something that's accepted as fact. Usually the side claiming something didn't happen has the responsibility of saying why.

[ludo21]

watch the video of the landing, it looked kind of fake to me. Thats if im thinking if the right video...........

[yavoon]

watch the video of the landing, it looked kind of fake to me. Thats if im thinking if the right video...........

??? from where are u gathering ur extensive knowledge of what it should have looked like?

this thread could be good.

[Northman]

Im not sure if we did or not but ive always believed we did. But, i have heard rumors it was staged and it does beg to question why we havent gone back to the moon since then.

[Bronx33]

I have inside info........yes it happened.

[yavoon]

Im not sure if we did or not but ive always believed we did. But, i have heard rumors it was staged and it does beg to question why we havent gone back to the moon since then.

we've only been to the marianas trench once too. and that in all likelihood is more fascinating than the moon.

[GonzoLays]

I didn't know that it was up to someone to re-prove something that's accepted as fact. Usually the side claiming something didn't happen has the responsibility of saying why.


Accepted as fact? By whom?

[ludo21]

??? from where are u gathering ur extensive knowledge of what it should have looked like?

this thread could be good.


From what i remember watching, as it was landing dust should have been blown around and a crater should have been made, but on the video i saw there was no crater. If your landing, there should have been one.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Accepted as fact? By whom?

Are you actually serious? There isn't a real debate about the moon landings. There is a small group of people who believe they were staged, compared to the vast majority of the world who believes the US landed on the moon.

If the US didn't land on the moon, where are your facts? This is going to be a weak thread if all your responses continue along the same line as they've already been.

[yavoon]

From what i remember watching, as it was landing dust should have been blown around and a crater should have been made, but on the video i saw there was no crater. If your landing, there should have been one.

there's no atmosphere on the moon the only way u could blow anything around is by direct contact with the exhaust from the landers engine, which is small because luckily there is also very little gravity on the moon.

u simply wont get the same thing that ur use to seeing in an environment w/ air patterns.

[GonzoLays]

Are you actually serious? There isn't a real debate about the moon landings. There is a small group of people who believe they were staged, compared to the vast majority of the world who believes the US landed on the moon.

If the US didn't land on the moon, where are your facts? This is going to be a weak thread if all your responses continue along the same line as they've already been.

But what evidence do you have of the Moon Landing? Highly questionable grainy video and still photography? Just because everybody believes something does not make it right. The World once thought the Earth was flat.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Ask Art Bell.

[yavoon]

But what evidence do you have of the Moon Landing? Highly questionable grainy video and still photography? Just because everybody believes something does not make it right. The World once thought the Earth was flat.

if thats all the evidence u think exists ur in trouble=[

[ludo21]

there's no atmosphere on the moon the only way u could blow anything around is by direct contact with the exhaust from the landers engine, which is small because luckily there is also very little gravity on the moon.

u simply wont get the same thing that ur use to seeing in an environment w/ air patterns.


or maybe i saw it the other way around. Either way, good argument. I wish i knew more, but i just watched a tv show once on it a while back. He had a ton of good points too.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Yes, and so did the British.








http://www.technolution.org/conspiracy/area51/las_vegas/james-bond-area-51-moon.jpg

[GonzoLays]

if thats all the evidence u think exists ur in trouble=[

What else am I missing?

[yavoon]

What else am I missing?

the thousands of ppl and documents. not to mention the fact that we obviously have the ability to goto the moon unless u think all the satellites up there are fake.

I'm running low on answering though. I think its time u stepped up to the plate and stopped using question marks.

[Breck Bronc]

If we faked landing on the moon than why did we never fake landing on Mars, Neptune or even the damn Sun?

[ludo21]

the thousands of ppl and documents. not to mention the fact that we obviously have the ability to goto the moon unless u think all the satellites up there are fake.

I'm running low on answering though. I think its time u stepped up to the plate and stopped using question marks.


Its easier to question things tho! :wiggle:

[yavoon]

Its easier to question things tho! :wiggle:
is it?

=D

[clean]

Soon we'll have a holocaust denial thread. :pity:

[Florida_Bronco]

I'm sure that the same people that came up with this conspiracy theory are the same ones that believe it was not an airliner that struck the Pentagon on September 11th.

[ludo21]

Soon we'll have a holocaust denial thread. :pity:


lol, reminds me of family guy.

"But theres proof it happened" - Brian

"We were all on vacation!!!" - German dude Hilarious!

I LOVE that show!!

[minibronco]

On July 20, 1969, the human race accomplished its single greatest technological achievement of all time when a human first set foot on another celestial body.
Six hours after landing at 4:17 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (with less than 30 seconds of fuel remaining), Neil A. Armstrong took the “Small Step” into our greater future when he stepped off the Lunar Module, named “Eagle,” onto the surface of the Moon, from which he could look up and see Earth in the heavens as no one had done before him. He was shortly joined by “Buzz” Aldrin, and the two astronauts spent 21 hours on the lunar surface and returned 46 pounds of lunar rocks. After their historic walks on the Moon, they successfully docked with the Command Module “Columbia,” in which Michael Collins was patiently orbiting the cold but no longer lifeless Moon.

[hades]

Proof in 2 words

Moon rocks

[listopencil]

I have inside info........yes it happened.


I don't know if you are joking or not, but I do have inside info. My father was an aerospace machinist and worked for NASA since before it was called NASA. Trust me. It happened. I think some (stupid) people don't believe it because they judge their fellow men with a prejudice based on their own lack of ability. The idea of space travel is so complicated to them that they are sure that no one could possibly attain it. Whatever. I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove space travel.

[DarkHorse]

Nope, it happened at a time when America needed a morale boost and the Russians were going to beat us there. Personally I don't think anyone has landed on the moon - why have we not gone back? Seems like it's "just up the road" from us yet we're sending unmanned spacecraft out on 10 year journeys?

You mean to tell me that even with the advanced technology that we have now - there's nothing else we could possibly study on the moon that we weren't able to do back then?

Ha! I don't buy it for a second.

[SteveTensi13]

The Discovery channel did a show on this very subject. Some kook thought the whole thing was a conspiracy and had all these fancy experiments to prove the landing was a fake. Well the Discovery channel did their own research and was able to debunk the kooks claim of any conspiracy. All his claims of a cover-up were blown out of the water!

[TheDave]

count down to the van allen radiation belt conspiracies

5

4

3

2

1

[SteveTensi13]

count down to the van allen radiation belt conspiracies

5

4

3

2

1

Speaking of which. Did you know the Van-allan belt can be caught on fire by exploding a nuke in the atmosphere!

[DarkHorse]

It's amazing to me that we know pretty much nothing about the oceans on this planet - let alone have explored in depth other countries but.....

We are content to sit back and accept the fact that apparently we have already learned everything we could possibly need to know about an entire planet that is uninhabited, giving us freedom to roam the entire thing without worrying about 'invading' anyones space ------- and we did all of this using 1969 technology LOL

[TheDave]

Speaking of which. Did you know the Van-allan belt can be caught on fire by exploding a nuke in the atmosphere!

i hate when those electromagnetic fields go flammable

[TheDave]

It's amazing to me that we know pretty much nothing about the oceans on this planet - let alone have explored in depth other countries but.....

We are content to sit back and accept the fact that apparently we have already learned everything we could possibly need to know about an entire planet that is uninhabited, giving us freedom to roam the entire thing without worrying about 'invading' anyones space ------- and we did all of this using 1969 technology LOL

actually it's not a planet... it's a satelite. A dead rock made up of the same material the earth is. There just isn't a whole lot to learn by being up there.

[SteveTensi13]

i hate when those electromagnetic fields go flammable

It's true, I saw it once in a movie starring Peter Laurie!

[yavoon]

count down to the van allen radiation belt conspiracies

5

4

3

2

1

I'm not up on my conspiracies

[yavoon]

It's amazing to me that we know pretty much nothing about the oceans on this planet - let alone have explored in depth other countries but.....

We are content to sit back and accept the fact that apparently we have already learned everything we could possibly need to know about an entire planet that is uninhabited, giving us freedom to roam the entire thing without worrying about 'invading' anyones space ------- and we did all of this using 1969 technology LOL

ppl dont like to spend money on going to the moon when there are malnourished ppl w/ coke habits in america.

[TheDave]

I'm not up on my conspiracies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations#Ionizing_radi ation_and_heat

[watermock]

Big Art Bell fan here...

I think we went, but I also think we put some propoganda on the top...

That rocket was real...you could see it...

Some stuff didn't make sense regarding events taped on the moon...angle of the lighting...how the flag acted funny...I think we did go there but did hollywood enhancements...

[watermock]

Back to little green men genetically engineering monkeys....

[Deacon Blue]

It makes me sick when I see people say those astronauts/civilians were killed as part of a government coverup.

I just hope their families never have to hear that crap.

And yes, we landed on the moon.

[SteveTensi13]

Kindda reminds me of that French kook who wrote that book saying the plane crashing into the pentagon was actually an american missile. When he was confronted about the fact a flight with its entire crew and passengers were in fact missing his response was, "Exactly, George Bush has a lot to explain!" Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees!

[watermock]

The Pentagon firing a cruise missle into itself to start a war makes perfect sense....

Let's kill 120 workers for good measure to make it look legit...

[watermock]

By the way, the Twin Towers were just a hologram...

[SteveTensi13]

Oh, and my favorite. It were the Jews who flew remote control airplanes into the WTC!

[SteveTensi13]

By the way where's LABF? I bet he could somehow tie in the Bush family in faking the moon landing!

[watermock]

Oh, and my favorite. It were the Jews who flew remote control airplanes into the WTC!

You didn't know that?

They also exterminated themselves during WW2....

[SteveTensi13]

You didn't know that?

They also exterminated themselves during WW2....

LOL Them Jews, a devious bunch aren't they?

[yavoon]

LOL Them Jews, a devious bunch aren't they?

u laugh now but thats a real conspiracy. Its part of an illuminati conspiracy, concerning the rothschild's control of the illuminati saying that they funded the war(on all sides) as a means to gain more control over the world and ultimately a select group of powerful jews condoned/supported the holocaust.

[Needa Pass Rush]

Sunset on Mars. I love this image.

http://static.flickr.com/40/94385653_b5a2d6b29d.jpg?v=0

[GonzoLays]

I don't know if you are joking or not, but I do have inside info. My father was an aerospace machinist and worked for NASA since before it was called NASA. Trust me. It happened. I think some (stupid) people don't believe it because they judge their fellow men with a prejudice based on their own lack of ability. The idea of space travel is so complicated to them that they are sure that no one could possibly attain it. Whatever. I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove space travel.

Just because your daddy slapped you on the ass when you where four and said, "yes, son, we went to the moon" does not give you "inside info." It just make you gulliable. What, do you have your own moon rock aswell?

[GonzoLays]

Sunset on Mars. I love this image.

http://static.flickr.com/40/94385653_b5a2d6b29d.jpg?v=0


I love this image too:

Where does NASA go to get the director of the Space Program, of course, HOLLYWOOD!

http://www.reformation.org/walt-disney-von-braun.jpg
Former Nazi Party member (1937) and DIRECTOR of NASA, Wernher von Braun. Who before joining NASA in 1958, was the Director of three movies at Disney: The first, ``Man in Space,'' aired on ABC on March 9, 1955. The second, ``Man and the Moon,'' aired the same year, and the final film, ``Mars and Beyond,'' was televised on Dec. 4, 1957.

You see, when you need to go to space, you need to go to Hollywood first to get the talent you need for Space Travel. Everybody knows that, silly.

[Rock Chalk]

Im not sure if we did or not but ive always believed we did. But, i have heard rumors it was staged and it does beg to question why we havent gone back to the moon since then.
There are a few reasons why we haven't went back.

1) Cost was prohibitive and the general public had lost much of the initial interest.

2) We won the race there.

3) No water of any sustainable amount hence, no reason to return.

4) We learned more from our moon trips than anything else concerning space until Hubble came around.

As for if we went or not. We absolutely did. AND, here's why.

1) Non-believers say that the "flag" was "waving" on the surface of the moon that has a very miniscule atmosphere (the current myth is that the moon has NO atmosphere). The flag was not "waving" per se, but moving due to the astronaut planting it into the ground. It almost immediately stops moving the moment the astronaut removes his hand from it.

2) Non-believers say that "there are no stars in the background" and this shows the ignorance of the United States. There are reasons WHY there are no stars in the background and none of them include that it was done in stuide. The moon is a very reflective celestial body. Its white and grey surface reflects a lot of the sunlight. Why is this important? Any stargazer knows that light pollution dims out stars in cities and makes it look like there are only a few stars. Well, the daytime side of the moon is VERY bright due to reflections of the sun off the surface adn the sun itself. Further, the camera's used during the Apollo missions were NOT capable of picking up the dim light of stars.

3) Non-believers say that the distance was too far (200K miles or something) for us to travel. Again this goes back to ignorance of basic physics. The vast majority of the fuel used to get to the moon was used in the launch and escaping Earth's orbit. However, once out there only minimal fuel is needed to maintain speed and only for HALF the trip as the moon's gravity then takes over from Earth's gravity and no more fuel need be spent on the trip to the moon.

4) Non-believers say its a huge conspiracy. Fact: Conspiracies exist but no conspiracy has EVER been kept under wraps that involved more than 50 thousand people and that is a moderate estimation of how many were involved in the Apollo missions.

5) Non-believers say we did not have the technology to do it in 1969. Yet, we had a nuclear bomb in 1945 (24 years earlier), computers in the 50s, understanding of the necessary physics in the 1920s and the materials in the late 50s and early 60s so how did we NOT have the technology?

6) Neil Armstrong (the first guy to set foot on the moon) has answered this question with extreme malice to anyone who questions whether or not he risked his life on top of a huge rocket full of some of the most explosive material ever gathered by humans. Knowing Neil Armstrong's training and background, I tend to believe him over the ignorant masses.

[Kaylore]

We landed on the moon. Those who believe otherwise are ignorant twits.

[CBF1]

I know we did.

1) My father was QA manager for Rototest labs, they were the contractors that built the booster engines for the Saturn 5

2) I worked for NASA, If you had any idea what we have going on now, Moon technology is old compared to whats on the books now.

[Rock Chalk]

I know we did.

1) My father was QA manager for Rototest labs, they were the contractors that built the booster engines for the Saturn 5

2) I worked for NASA, If you had any idea what we have going on now, Moon technology is old compared to whats on the books now.
I used to work AT Nasa. Sub contracted. I wasnt in the space program or anything, I just replaced the phone and data lines for their network.

I agree, if anyone knew what NASA had now, they wouldnt question what NASA had then.

[watermock]

Well we sure fooled the russians

[BIM]

By the way where's LABF? I bet he could somehow tie in the Bush family in faking the moon landing!

Hilarious! That is too funny!!

[watermock]

http://www.tvacres.com/images/baracus_bosco6a.jpg

The A team went to the moon

[Rock Chalk]

I love this image too:

Where does NASA go to get the director of the Space Program, of course, HOLLYWOOD!

http://www.reformation.org/walt-disney-von-braun.jpg
Former Nazi Party member (1937) and DIRECTOR of NASA, Wernher von Braun. Who before joining NASA in 1958, was the Director of three movies at Disney: The first, ``Man in Space,'' aired on ABC on March 9, 1955. The second, ``Man and the Moon,'' aired the same year, and the final film, ``Mars and Beyond,'' was televised on Dec. 4, 1957.

You see, when you need to go to space, you need to go to Hollywood first to get the talent you need for Space Travel. Everybody knows that, silly.
I sense sarcasm but for the morons that didnt/ Von Braun was the most intelligent rocket scientist of not only his day, but perhaps ever. Goddard might be pretty close to him but von Braun was a god damn genius on the level of Newton and Einstein. Before doing three movies, he developed the V2 German rockets capable of going into low earth orbit and travelling vast distances to target enemies of the Nazi regime.

[watermock]

http://www.reformation.org/walt-disney-von-braun.jpg

I'm going to disneyland!

[Rock Chalk]

Nope, it happened at a time when America needed a morale boost and the Russians were going to beat us there. Personally I don't think anyone has landed on the moon - why have we not gone back? Seems like it's "just up the road" from us yet we're sending unmanned spacecraft out on 10 year journeys?

You mean to tell me that even with the advanced technology that we have now - there's nothing else we could possibly study on the moon that we weren't able to do back then?

Ha! I don't buy it for a second.
Well, to each their own idiocy.

Why have we not gone back? What for? First, you have to have a reason. There is 1) No water. 2) No life. 3) Costs to get there are expensive as hell.

What we learned from the moon, and the missions we went there primarily for (nevermind the political reasons, we still had to do science there or it was just a publicity stunt) was the ORIGIN of the moon. Where it came from, how it got there, what its made out of. With the tons and tons of rocks they brought back, they found that the moon is made up of some of the oldest stuff in the solar system and that it has remarkably similar compounds as rocks found in Earth. The theory that stemmed from the Moon landings and rocks that were brought back was that a proto-earth (much smaller than now) was hit by another rogue planet in the early solar system roughly the size of Mars. The resulting cataclysmic explosion left a ring of debris around a shattered new planet that had some of the material collected from the planet that smashed into it. The remaining material condensed over millions of years to form what is now the Moon. Yes, Earth at one time, had rings like Saturn.

Sending an unmanned spacecraft on a 10 year journey is much much much easier than sending humans into space. You do not need oxygen, water or any life support. further, you do not have to build your ship to protect from microfractures as there is no need to keep the interior of it pressurized - which, by the way, adds to the complexity of the ship.

Sending an unmanned craft 10 years into space takes a lot less effort and technology than launching a few bodies into low earth orbit.

[ozomulsion]

I don't know if anybody posted this or not. This site will make you think a bit if you give it a chance.
http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

[missingnumber7]

Just because your daddy slapped you on the ass when you where four and said, "yes, son, we went to the moon" does not give you "inside info." It just make you gulliable. What, do you have your own moon rock aswell?
The next comment I'm expecting is Michael Moore is a legitimate film maker.

[bendog]

It was a plot by Clinton to sell technology to communists

[Hercules Rockefeller]

I sense sarcasm but for the morons that didnt/ Von Braun was the most intelligent rocket scientist of not only his day, but perhaps ever. Goddard might be pretty close to him but von Braun was a god damn genius on the level of Newton and Einstein. Before doing three movies, he developed the V2 German rockets capable of going into low earth orbit and travelling vast distances to target enemies of the Nazi regime.

Glad that I read to the bottom first, before I responded to that inane post about Von Braun.

[Deacon Blue]

Now I'm not sure when some of you ask," Why haven't we gone back?" if you mean in the present day or ever, but Apollo 11 is definately not the only time we've gone to the moon.

There was at least one other a few years after the first.

[orangeatheist]

If it's already been posted, sorry:

The Moon Hoax Debate (http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm)

Or, better yet from a link on the above site:

Clavis Moon Base - Debunking the Moon Hoax (http://www.clavius.org/)

[Merlin]

Well we sure fooled the russiansI swear, some of the threads in this forum make me question whether there is too little oxygen in Denver (although in all fairness, Denver is not the source of this conspiracy). As mock noted, the Russian KILLED their moon space program right after the Armstrong landed. Do you honestly think they would have done that if the landing was fake? Do you honestly think they did not have the technology to very the landing? Do you have ANY idea about the political price that was placed in landing at the moon first?

If you would like some corroborating evidence go read about the AVRO aeronautics program in Canada. At the time they produced the MOST advanced fighter jet of its time, but Canada in essence killed its aeronautics program to support NASA's venture (all the critical people from the AVRO program where shipped down to the States). Somehow I doubt a nation would kill its aeronautic industry just to help create a hoax.

PS There is a cure for all cancers, the pharmaceutical industry is keeping it under wraps.

PSS We have developed a machine that is able to maintain perpetual motion, but the energy barons have paid to keep that one hidden.

BTW, there is medication available to help treat paranoid schizophrenia.

[yavoon]

I swear, some of the threads in this forum make me question whether there is too little oxygen in Denver (although in all fairness, Denver is not the source of this conspiracy). As mock noted, the Russian KILLED their moon space program right after the Armstrong landed. Do you honestly think they would have done that if the landing was fake? Do you honestly think they did not have the technology to very the landing? Do you have ANY idea about the political price that was placed in landing at the moon first?

If you would like some corroborating evidence go read about the AVRO aeronautics program in Canada. At the time they produced the MOST advanced fighter jet of its time, but Canada in essence killed its aeronautics program to support NASA's venture (all the critical people from the AVRO program where shipped down to the States). Somehow I doubt a nation would kill its aeronautic industry just to help create a hoax.

PS There is a cure for all cancers, the pharmaceutical industry is keeping it under wraps.

PSS We have developed a machine that is able to maintain perpetual motion, but the energy barons have paid to keep that one hidden.

BTW, there is medication available to help treat paranoid schizophrenia.

PPS
Post Post Script
=DD

[orangeatheist]

Seriously:

Clavius Moon Base - Debunking the Moon Hoax (http://www.clavius.org/)

Site is great! Lots of pictures.

[Florida_Bronco]

While we're on the topic of government conspiracies...

Here is the "premier" video for the 9/11 Pentagon Hoax http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main

And then we come to this site that is almost certainly in direct response and does an EXCELLENT job debunking this hoax

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

[clean]

Myth: There is no way in hell the astronauts traveled 268,000 miles to Moon in 1969.

http://img65.exs.cx/img65/6153/karibyronmythbusters230wd.th.jpg (http://img65.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img65&image=karibyronmythbusters230wd.jpg) BUSTED! http://img65.exs.cx/img65/191/karibyronmythbusters197bs.th.jpg (http://img65.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img65&image=karibyronmythbusters197bs.jpg)

[Tombstone RJ]

Accepted as fact? By whom?

Um, NASA, the astronauts who went to the moon, the people who witnessed the Saturn rocket launches, the many thousands of people who helped build the platforms that went to the moon, the people who examined the samples brought back from the moon, the museums that have the moon rock samples, the naval personell who picked up the astronauts in the ocean after they came back from the moon, all the techicians and controllers and scientists and doctors and mathmaticians and engineers that sat in Houston monitoring the progress of each moon mission, etc., etc., etc.

[TexanBob]

But what evidence do you have of the Moon Landing? Highly questionable grainy video and still photography? Just because everybody believes something does not make it right. The World once thought the Earth was flat.

At whatever place you were educated, I would insist on a refund.

[BroncoBuff]

I voted "YES" ... but it's not the length of the trip that's always made me
suspicious. It's more the problem of the naked radiation that astronauts
would be exposed to beyond Earth's protective Van Allen Belt. It would be
something like sitting in a microwave oven for six days and expecting to be
okay when you get out.

(And I don't mean a cheap "Emerson" microwave, either. I'm talking one
of those high-end convenience store microwaves. You know, the ones
with the silver doors?)

[maven]

Did we land on the moon in 1969?

Vote!!

Good job Gonzo. You create a thread & don't have an opinion.

[maven]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations#Ionizing_radi ation_and_heat

Just on a side note, wikipedia sucks ****. What? You're going to learn Abraham Lincoln shot Lee Harvey Oswald using Charles Lindberg teeth.

[watermock]

Well, I'm no expert, but it's hard to really say about how much radiation they were exposed to.

You can take quite a bit of radiation and the ship would shield you and it wouldn't be for that long.

I think there was some fake stuff, but i also think we got there. I dunno. I say we landed.

[Connecticut Bronco Fan]

While we're on the topic of government conspiracies...

Here is the "premier" video for the 9/11 Pentagon Hoax http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main

And then we come to this site that is almost certainly in direct response and does an EXCELLENT job debunking this hoax

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

after watching that video it really makes you think, but the rebuddle does a great job in proving the video wrong

[watermock]

The Truth
There are numerous sites that promote the notion that the U.S. government is covering up the true cause of the Pentagon destruction on September 11, but the main one is from France at http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

In large headline, it asks the reader to "Hunt the Boeing," referring to the American Airlines Boeing 757 that plunged into the Pentagon.

The site is a part of speculation by conspiracy theorists and includes a book published in France by Thierry Meyssan titled "The Frightening Fraud." In it, the author contends that flight #77 did not end by crashing into the Pentagon and that the whole thing is part of a government plot and cover-up. Meyssan says it doesn't make sense to him that there aren't any airplane pieces left over from the crash and that the Pentagon did not immediately fall from the impact.

The web site asks several questions, which we will deal with in order.

1. "The Associated Press first reported that a booby trapped truck had caused the explosion."
If this AP report was made, TruthOrFiction.com has not been able to find it and none of the sites that makes reference to it lists a source. Conflicting reports are common during breaking stories and if someone did speculate a truck bomb, that theory quickly disappeared.

2. "Can you explain how a Boeing 757- 200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?"
First, the Pentagon suffered extensive damage to more than just the outside. CLICK HERE TO SEE CHART Also, the portion of the Pentagon where the plane hit was probably the most heavily reinforced. In the October 3, 2001 edition of Architecture Week, B.J. Novitski wrote that the impact of the plane was in "Wedge One," which had been strengthened by recent renovation, a project that was inspired, in part, by the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. He says that contrary to what is believed, the casualties among workers in the Pentagon were not low because of vacant offices, but because of the extraordinary structural strength of the building. Novitski says that about 80 percent of the workers in the wedge were on duty that day, but ..."the exterior walls had been reinforced with steel beams and columns, bolted where they met at each floor. Some of these reinforced walls very near the point of impact remained in place for a half hour before collapsing, allowing uncounted hundreds to escape." The hijackers chose one of the most reinforced buildings in the world to crash into.

3. 'Can you explain how a Boeing 14.9 yards high, 51.7 yards long, with a wingspan of 41.6 yards and a cockpit 3.8 yards high, could crash into just the ground floor of this building?'
Eyewitnesses to the crash as well as video from a security camera at the Pentagon show that the plane struck at ground level. Considering the description of the strength of the building (above), it is not surprising that the weaker appendages of the plane such as the tail and the wings would not have had as much of an impact as the main body.

4. "Can you explain why the Defence [sic] Secretary deemed it necessary to sand over the lawn, which was otherwise undamaged after the attack?"
According to the article in Architecture Week, it was for a gravel bed that provided a road for large trucks to have access to the crash site.

5. "Can you explain what happened to the wings of the aircraft and why they caused no damage?"
Same answer as in #3. Photographs show indentations where the stronger, inner portions of the wings may have made impact, but the farther out towards the tips of the wings and the tail, the less they would have had effect.

6. "Can you find the aircraft's point of impact?
We're not sure what this question is supposed to mean. There are plenty of pictures that show clearly where the airplane hit the building. For some reason, the creators of the web site chose two of the pictures that don't show it clearly. Dick Bridges, the deputy manager for Arlington County was quoted by AP on September 14, 2001, as saying that both of the "black boxes" for flight #77 were found "...right where the plane came into the building." If the recorders didn't get much beyond that, the plane not only struck the building at that point, but the ground as well. The cockpit voice recorder was so badly damaged that it didn't yield any information.

Other considerations...

1. If it was not American Airlines flight 77 that hit the Pentagon, then where is the airplane and the 64 people who were aboard?
None of the conspiracy sites answers that question. Few of them even ask it.

2. If it was not American Airlines flight 77, then why do they have evidence of the bodies of known crew, passengers, and hijackers?
C. Christopher Kelley of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology says that the effort to identify bodies that ended on November 16, 2001, identified all but one of the victims of flight 77.

[TheDave]

Just on a side note, wikipedia sucks ****. What? You're going to learn Abraham Lincoln shot Lee Harvey Oswald using Charles Lindberg teeth.

Easy... it was just to show Yavoon what the Van Allen Radiation conspiracy was about...

[Alkazar]

Im not sure if we did or not but ive always believed we did. But, i have heard rumors it was staged and it does beg to question why we havent gone back to the moon since then.
Actually we returned to the moon several times in the seventies. It has just been too cost inefficient to return lately. It the consiracy theorists who claim we never went in the first place.

[watermock]

There is a martian orbiter that we actually visited...inside the radiation belt...which to they were immune... the second stage was never fired...

http://www.angelfire.com/film/birgittesc/Images/simpsons_aliens_1.jpg

[Merlin]

PPS
Post Post Script
=DD
Touche. Nothing like a brain cramp, especially when pointing at other... :hitself:

[Merlin]

Actually we returned to the moon several times in the seventies. It has just been too cost inefficient to return lately. It the consiracy theorists who claim we never went in the first place.
At a certain point it stops being of scientific and political value, so why bother (especially considering the cost). BTW, the last landing was Apollo 17 in 72.

[sonsofkraftybob]

I voted "YES" ... but it's not the length of the trip that's always made me
suspicious. It's more the problem of the naked radiation that astronauts
would be exposed to beyond Earth's protective Van Allen Belt. It would be
something like sitting in a microwave oven for six days and expecting to be
okay when you get out.

(And I don't mean a cheap "Emerson" microwave, either. I'm talking one
of those high-end convenience store microwaves. You know, the ones
with the silver doors?)

the still photos were stunning. Yet that's just the problem. The astronauts took thousands of pictures, each one perfectly exposed and sharply focused. Not one was badly composed or even blurred.

As Rene points out, that's not all: The cameras had no white meters or view ponders. So the astronauts achieved this feet without being able to see what they were doing. There film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless. They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in pressurized suits. It should have been almost impossible with the gloves on their fingers.

9 SPACE ODDITIES:

1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?

3. One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

4. The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

5. The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

6. Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?

7. The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

8. How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

9. The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired

[watermock]

Apollo 18 placed a thermonuclear reentry device of the moon. the mock up at Kennedy space center is just paper mache....

[DomCasual]

Wow, no offense or anything, but you all are crazier than rats in a ****house!

I mean, I still like you and everything, but damn, you are insane!

[Orange_Beard]

WTF?

Next: Who shot JFK?

[broncosteven]

But what evidence do you have of the Moon Landing? Highly questionable grainy video and still photography? Just because everybody believes something does not make it right. The World once thought the Earth was flat.


Apollo 12 had better images though Alan Bean burnt out the Camera when he pointed it into the sun. Apollo 14-17 all had color cameras. Apollo 15-17 had the Moon rover so they could travel up to 5 miles permetier around the LM. We didn't land once we landed 6 times staying longer each time up to 3 days by Apollo 16 & 17.

It took young motived people fresh out of MIT & Jet Fighter testing to get people to the Moon & back. People like my Hero Gene Kranz. The man was TOUGH & COMPETENT. He put people around him that could do their jobs. I respect Gene for being able to project plan & deploy the plan down to the last detail all with a flurry of activity (you should hear the flight loops they had to listen to at Mission Control) going on around him. There were other Flight controllers but he strikes me as the most demanding, exacting, & human of the bunch.

I supposed you think Apollo 13 was a hoax also? BTW Do you think the Beatles played on Ed Sullivan's show in the early 60's that video is black & white & pretty grainy also.

[Bronx33]

Belly button lint? can one make a pillow? or hacky sack? myth or no myth?

[Willynowei]

This is so sad.

The weak democratic government setup in this country erases any likelyhood of such a massive cover-up as faking a landing on the moon to show american superiority over the Soviet Space program.

The united states simply could never do such a thing. How do you keep all those actors in the plan quiet? pay them off? threaten them? You can't with such a weak government, you'd need totalitarian rule of some sort.

[yavoon]

Touche. Nothing like a brain cramp, especially when pointing at other... :hitself:

hehe, no touche just giving out info:)

[sonsofkraftybob]

This is so sad.

The weak democratic government setup in this country erases any likelyhood of such a massive cover-up as faking a landing on the moon to show american superiority over the Soviet Space program.

The united states simply could never do such a thing. How do you keep all those actors in the plan quiet? pay them off? threaten them? You can't with such a weak government, you'd need totalitarian rule of some sort.

Deaths of key people involved with the Apollo programIn a television program about the hoax theory, Fox Entertainment Group listed the deaths of 10 astronauts and of two civilians related to the manned spaceflight program as having possibly been killings as part of a coverup.

Ted Freeman (T-38 crash, 1964)
Elliott See and Charlie Bassett (T-38 accident, 1966)
Virgil "Gus" Grissom (supposedly an outspoken critic of the Space Program) (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
Ed White (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
Roger Chaffee (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
Ed Givens (car accident, 1967)
C. C. Williams (T-38 accident, October 1967)
X-15 pilot Mike Adams (the only X-15 pilot killed in November 1967 during the X-15 flight test program - not a NASA astronaut, but had flown X-15 above 50 miles).
Robert Lawrence, scheduled to be an Air Force Manned Orbiting Laboratory pilot who died in a jet crash in December 1967, shortly after reporting for duty to that (later cancelled) program.
NASA worker Thomas Baron Train crash, 1967 shortly after making accusations before Congress about the cause of the Apollo 1 fire, after which he was fired. Ruled as suicide.
Paul Jacobs, a private investigator from San Francisco, interviewed the head of the US Department of Geology in Washington about the 'moon rocks'. Did you examine the Moon rocks, did they really come from the Moon? Jacobs asked - the geologist did not respond, only laughed. Paul Jacobs and his wife died from cancer within 90 days.
Lee Gelvani claims to have almost convinced James Irwin, an Apollo 15 astronaut whom Gelvani referred to as an "informant", to confess about a cover-up having occurred. Irwin was supposedly going to contact Kaysing about it; however he died of a heart attack in 1991, before any such telephone call occurred.
Spacecraft testing and flying high performance jet aircraft can be dangerous, and all but one of the astronaut deaths (Irwin's) were directly related to their rather hazardous job. Two of the astronauts, Mike Adams and Robert Lawrence, had no connection with the civilian manned space program. Astronaut James Irwin had suffered several heart attacks in the years prior to his death. There is no independent confirmation of Gelvani's claim that Irwin was about to come forward. Moreover, if there was a coverup (that the Apollo 11 and subsequent landings were faked), the coverup would logically have occurred in 1969 and subsequent years - yet all of the deaths listed above occurred in 1967 or earlier. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_conspiracy_theory#Deaths_of_ke y_people_involved_with_the_Apollo_program

[watermock]

Those werent the Beatles, they were the Beach Boys and that plane wasn't from England, it was from California...

The Germans didn't bomb pearl harbor, it was the Dutch....

Kennedy was actually a clay puppet waving at the crowd...He's living in Peru with a 16 year old.

[orange 4 life]

I'm sure that the same people that came up with this conspiracy theory are the same ones that believe it was not an airliner that struck the Pentagon on September 11th.

good point, and im NOT saying i dont believe the moon landing took place OR that the pentagon crash was a cover, but i WILL say this.

there IS evidence backing the pentagon incident.
at least enough to make one sit back and think.
it is EXTREMELY odd that the plane would hit the pentagon at that precise angle, have the damage be to such a "structured" looking area, and its impossible (to my knowledge) to explain how there would be no damage to the grass and land in front of the building.
the plane wouldve had to come in about 5 feet off the ground and been flying that way for a while.

that said, im NOT saying it was bush behind it so he could justify a war or any other nonsensical explanation.
im SIMPLY saying that there is more than enough evidence to make you stop and think about it.

as for the moon, i dont even see any evidence supporting that it didnt happen.
i dont see people coming forward to dispute it, and EVERYTHING points to it actually happening.
i can certainly see why skepticism exists, simply because the technology was so DRASTICALLY reduced compared to now.
for God's sake, it took an entire ROOM to get 1/10th the computer power we now have at our fingertips.
that said, i think its pretty far out there to think it was a conspiracy.

i ABSOLUTELY believe the govt. CONSISTENTLY covers things up, but i dont think the moon landing was one of them.

jake

[broncosteven]

the still photos were stunning. Yet that's just the problem. The astronauts took thousands of pictures, each one perfectly exposed and sharply focused. Not one was badly composed or even blurred.

As Rene points out, that's not all: The cameras had no white meters or view ponders. So the astronauts achieved this feet without being able to see what they were doing. There film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless. They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in pressurized suits. It should have been almost impossible with the gloves on their fingers.

9 SPACE ODDITIES:

1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

He hit it with one arm with the club face offset not a traditional 2 handed grip.

2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?

Mission control did after the astronauts parked the rover sothey could film the liftoff before they prepped for the end of the EVA

3. One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

I have only seen the shot from the camera mounted on the leg of the LM, Buzz also had a color camera from inside the LM but that was blurry from the sun coming through the window.

4. The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

The suits had a system of weights & pullys built into them to help with the joint movement. I am reading "Moonwalker" by Charlie Duke (just Average Astronaut book so far but it is an AUTOGRAPHED COPY!) & he says the Suits were about 200lbs on earth but 60lbs on moon.

5. The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

This was discussed at length & deemed impossible to be seen & or friviolus. Apollo 11 did leave a Mirror setup so Laser range finders could get the exact distance between the earth & the moon. There were other items discussed to be dropped as proof but everyone agreed that science (i.e. rocks) & video proof would be enough.

6. Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?

I need to see the pic in question but everyone after Apollo 11 had a camera with a Timer & stand.

7. The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

1st off Which landing? If 11 like I think THe curvature of the moon is more than that of the earth so the shadows are not where one expects them to be. Plus the angle of the sun is different from the earth (this helps prove they were there!), The flag had wires in it because Nasa was afraid it would not be visible to an American Public that paid Billions of dollars to get a picture of the flag on the moon before the end of the 1960's.

8. How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

Stars are not visible during a moon day just like they are not visible during an earth day

9. The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired

On Apollo 11 the 1st thing Neil Armstrong did was check the Bell of the LM. There was concern that the bell of the engin had or could have become blocked & could have caused an explosion at landing on that mission or future missions. He found that the area around the Bell looked like a sand trap where all the sand had been blown away & the flames did scare the ground but they had plenty of clearence & did not need to worry about any explosions. The ground or crust of the moon is very dense, on Apollo 14 when they tried to drill into the crust/ground they kept breaking bits. Running the engine for the 10 seconds they hovered over that one spot before power down would not have burnt a crater into anything.

See my responses in orange I have read everything on Mercury/Gemini/Apollo I can get my hands on.

[yavoon]

u know everyone is just cut n pasting the hoax plus the hoax rebuttal, why not just give links?

[Willynowei]

Deaths of key people involved with the Apollo programIn a television program about the hoax theory, Fox Entertainment Group listed the deaths of 10 astronauts and of two civilians related to the manned spaceflight program as having possibly been killings as part of a coverup.

Ted Freeman (T-38 crash, 1964)
Elliott See and Charlie Bassett (T-38 accident, 1966)
Virgil "Gus" Grissom (supposedly an outspoken critic of the Space Program) (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
Ed White (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
Roger Chaffee (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
Ed Givens (car accident, 1967)
C. C. Williams (T-38 accident, October 1967)
X-15 pilot Mike Adams (the only X-15 pilot killed in November 1967 during the X-15 flight test program - not a NASA astronaut, but had flown X-15 above 50 miles).
Robert Lawrence, scheduled to be an Air Force Manned Orbiting Laboratory pilot who died in a jet crash in December 1967, shortly after reporting for duty to that (later cancelled) program.
NASA worker Thomas Baron Train crash, 1967 shortly after making accusations before Congress about the cause of the Apollo 1 fire, after which he was fired. Ruled as suicide.
Paul Jacobs, a private investigator from San Francisco, interviewed the head of the US Department of Geology in Washington about the 'moon rocks'. Did you examine the Moon rocks, did they really come from the Moon? Jacobs asked - the geologist did not respond, only laughed. Paul Jacobs and his wife died from cancer within 90 days.
Lee Gelvani claims to have almost convinced James Irwin, an Apollo 15 astronaut whom Gelvani referred to as an "informant", to confess about a cover-up having occurred. Irwin was supposedly going to contact Kaysing about it; however he died of a heart attack in 1991, before any such telephone call occurred.
Spacecraft testing and flying high performance jet aircraft can be dangerous, and all but one of the astronaut deaths (Irwin's) were directly related to their rather hazardous job. Two of the astronauts, Mike Adams and Robert Lawrence, had no connection with the civilian manned space program. Astronaut James Irwin had suffered several heart attacks in the years prior to his death. There is no independent confirmation of Gelvani's claim that Irwin was about to come forward. Moreover, if there was a coverup (that the Apollo 11 and subsequent landings were faked), the coverup would logically have occurred in 1969 and subsequent years - yet all of the deaths listed above occurred in 1967 or earlier. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_conspiracy_theory#Deaths_of_ke y_people_involved_with_the_Apollo_program

Still doesnt cover it.

Think about the massive amounts of man power required to cover it up. You're talking the people who film it, the actors, the broadcasters, PR reps, the multiple scientists who saw the rock, down to the doctors who diagnose teh deaths of those people who "conveniently died".

Not to mention, the bueraucrats involved in the matter.

Its going to be more than the 12 listed people and what about the rest? Even if they were assasinated, then you have to worry about the assins talking, so you must keep them well paid.

The man power to kill those involved in the coverup would be heavier than the original cover up. Then you've got coverups over coverups. It gets worse and worse. It just can't happen in this country.

[broncosteven]

I voted "YES" ... but it's not the length of the trip that's always made me
suspicious. It's more the problem of the naked radiation that astronauts
would be exposed to beyond Earth's protective Van Allen Belt. It would be
something like sitting in a microwave oven for six days and expecting to be
okay when you get out.

(And I don't mean a cheap "Emerson" microwave, either. I'm talking one
of those high-end convenience store microwaves. You know, the ones
with the silver doors?)

The Astronauts were Bombarded with Comsic Radiation once they entered TransLunar Space. They could see white flashes stream past their eyes like shooting stars but very quickly. Buzz Aldrin was 1st to point this out although 2 other missions had been to the Moon in Orbit already, Neil thought he was nuts at the time & didn't want him to report it to Houston until the return trip. They later did a test on Apollo 16 with the astronauts while in Translunar space & verified it was Cosmic Radiation. They wore Blinders & found particles much like you would at a Particle accelerator like Fermilab out here by me.

Cosmic Radiation is a big deal for longer term missions like to Mars or beyond though Water is a good insulator. For the Apollo & other short week long type missions it was not a big deal they did not get any more Rad's than a Leathery 50 year old Chick that Tans too long at the beach & thinks she is a Stone Fox.

[broncosteven]

u know everyone is just cut n pasting the hoax plus the hoax rebuttal, why not just give links?


I typed from Memory.

[orange 4 life]

There are a few reasons why we haven't went back.

1) Cost was prohibitive and the general public had lost much of the initial interest.

2) We won the race there.

3) No water of any sustainable amount hence, no reason to return.

4) We learned more from our moon trips than anything else concerning space until Hubble came around.

As for if we went or not. We absolutely did. AND, here's why.

1) Non-believers say that the "flag" was "waving" on the surface of the moon that has a very miniscule atmosphere (the current myth is that the moon has NO atmosphere). The flag was not "waving" per se, but moving due to the astronaut planting it into the ground. It almost immediately stops moving the moment the astronaut removes his hand from it.

2) Non-believers say that "there are no stars in the background" and this shows the ignorance of the United States. There are reasons WHY there are no stars in the background and none of them include that it was done in stuide. The moon is a very reflective celestial body. Its white and grey surface reflects a lot of the sunlight. Why is this important? Any stargazer knows that light pollution dims out stars in cities and makes it look like there are only a few stars. Well, the daytime side of the moon is VERY bright due to reflections of the sun off the surface adn the sun itself. Further, the camera's used during the Apollo missions were NOT capable of picking up the dim light of stars.

3) Non-believers say that the distance was too far (200K miles or something) for us to travel. Again this goes back to ignorance of basic physics. The vast majority of the fuel used to get to the moon was used in the launch and escaping Earth's orbit. However, once out there only minimal fuel is needed to maintain speed and only for HALF the trip as the moon's gravity then takes over from Earth's gravity and no more fuel need be spent on the trip to the moon.

4) Non-believers say its a huge conspiracy. Fact: Conspiracies exist but no conspiracy has EVER been kept under wraps that involved more than 50 thousand people and that is a moderate estimation of how many were involved in the Apollo missions.

5) Non-believers say we did not have the technology to do it in 1969. Yet, we had a nuclear bomb in 1945 (24 years earlier), computers in the 50s, understanding of the necessary physics in the 1920s and the materials in the late 50s and early 60s so how did we NOT have the technology?

6) Neil Armstrong (the first guy to set foot on the moon) has answered this question with extreme malice to anyone who questions whether or not he risked his life on top of a huge rocket full of some of the most explosive material ever gathered by humans. Knowing Neil Armstrong's training and background, I tend to believe him over the ignorant masses.

bump.

fantastic post.
that pretty well sums it up in my book.

like alec says here, i believe that there are MANY coverups that take place (and likely some that involve space, UFO'S, etc.), but landing on the moon isnt one of them.
simply too many people involved.

maybe some photo's have been enhanced, but that doesnt mean they didnt go.
further, to all the people saying "why didnt we go back?", we DID go back.

did everyone miss the "apollo 13" film?

we landed on apollo 11. we went back SIX TIMES after that, with the final landing being apollo 17, and of course 12 didnt actually land.

fact is, like alec said, the novelty wore off (from the publics perspective), we had learned what we needed, and the cost became unjustified.

jake

[broncosteven]

bump.

fantastic post.
that pretty well sums it up in my book.

like alec says here, i believe that there are MANY coverups that take place (and likely some that involve space, UFO'S, etc.), but landing on the moon isnt one of them.
simply too many people involved.

maybe some photo's have been enhanced, but that doesnt mean they didnt go.
further, to all the people saying "why didnt we go back?", we DID go back.

did everyone miss the "apollo 13" film?

we landed on apollo 11. we went back SIX TIMES after that, with the final landing being apollo 17, and of course 12 didnt actually land.

fact is, like alec said, the novelty wore off (from the publics perspective), we had learned what we needed, and the cost became unjustified.

jake

There were bad photos but they were just not published in LIFE or in the Papers.

I think they had too many missions (10) scheduled just to find out the orgin of the moon it was pretty much settled after Apollo 15 when they found the Genesis rock, even the Astronauts knew how important it was when they found it. 6 was just about right. Too bad we could not have kept Skylab going & got some sort of Moon base developed but the economy was bad in the 70's & 80's & all the $ that we saved from not spending on going to the Moon gave us our current "Eden" right? Everyting is perfect now that we are not spending it on space right? No more starving kids, everyone gets to go to college, 2 chickens in every pot, no homeless people, cancer is cured no one is sick any more, we no longer have a dependancy on oil or fosil fuels, we have restored or enviroment & reversed Polution, etc...am I right?

[TheDave]

WOW... just going by the current poll numbers (70 vs 15) 21% of people belive that landing on the moon was a hoax... It's official, the human race is doomed.

[Bronx33]

WOW... just going by the current poll numbers (70 vs 15) 21% of people belive that landing on the moon was a hoax... It's official, the human race is doomed.

Another reason democrats and republicans don't get along.

[broncosteven]

WOW... just going by the current poll numbers (70 vs 15) 21% of people belive that landing on the moon was a hoax... It's official, the human race is doomed.


THis is why animals have been known to eat their young.

[GonzoLays]

Hitler once said, "The great masses of the people will fall victim to a big lie than a small one."

I think people are in denial about even QUESTIONING whether we landed on the moon or not. They simply cannot comprehend a lie that big. Instead of thinking whether it happened or not, the majority goes to any length to defend that actually did happen. No matter what questions persist.

[yavoon]

Hitler once said, "The great masses of the people will fall victim to a big lie than a small one."

I think people are in denial about even QUESTIONING whether we landed on the moon or not. They simply cannot comprehend a lie that big. Instead of thinking whether it happened or not, the majority goes to any length to defend that actually did happen. No matter what questions persist.

I dont know seems to me there are lots of rebuttal sites out there. also every hoax site I've seen has some egregiously dumb assertions, kind of reminds me of the evolution debate. instead of trying to figure out the answer the only purpose is to attempt to poke holes.

anyway do u sincerely believe we haven't landed on the moon or is this some social experiment ur doing for class?

[alkemical]

Of course we landed on the moon first. Who else would have?

*end transmission*

[bronco militia]

Hitler once said, "The great masses of the people will fall victim to a big lie than a small one."



how ironical...

bwhahaha

I guess your next thread will be about the Holocaust being fabricated too...




unbelievable..

Ha!

[GonzoLays]

I dont know seems to me there are lots of rebuttal sites out there. also every hoax site I've seen has some egregiously dumb assertions, kind of reminds me of the evolution debate. instead of trying to figure out the answer the only purpose is to attempt to poke holes.

anyway do u sincerely believe we haven't landed on the moon or is this some social experiment ur doing for class?

I seriously QUESTION whether we went to the moon. Before Apollo 11, we have never even sent a spacecraft to moon, much less three people there and back. First try, bulleyes? With something that complicated and the technology that we had in 1969? A caculator of today has 32k of memory, thats all we had in 1969.

Then there are VIABLE questions of whether we went or not. The hoax site questions are VIABLE questions and who knows whether they are right or not because people who think we did answer as if they went to the moon themselves and they understand light reflection angles, and flags blowing in space and "space photography." They already know about the radiation that exsists in the Van Allen Belt and that is not harmful to humans. Who knows? There are two sides to every story.

I will tell you one thing, it is a hell of a lot easier to go the moon in a studio than hit right on the head the first time. You don't need thousands of people to be "in on it." You just need the main players.

To many questions persist. Thats my point of view.

[DomCasual]

WOW... just going by the current poll numbers (70 vs 15) 21% of people belive that landing on the moon was a hoax... It's official, the human race is doomed.
And I posted that it was a hoax, thinking that this thread was a hoax - so that skews the numbers even more.

[TheDave]

And I posted that it was a hoax, thinking that this thread was a hoax - so that skews the numbers even more.

Fair enough, i also noticed that Yavoon had done the same thing. So i don't fear for species as much... but there are still between 7-12 nut jobs roaming this board

[alkemical]

Dave,

Please don't refer to me as a nut job.

IT ONLY MAKES ME ANGRY! :)

[yavoon]

I seriously QUESTION whether we went to the moon. Before Apollo 11, we have never even sent a spacecraft to moon, much less three people there and back. First try, bulleyes? With something that complicated and the technology that we had in 1969? A caculator of today has 32k of memory, thats all we had in 1969.

Then there are VIABLE questions of whether we went or not. The hoax site questions are VIABLE questions and who knows whether they are right or not because people who think we did answer as if they went to the moon themselves and they understand light reflection angles, and flags blowing in space and "space photography." They already know about the radiation that exsists in the Van Allen Belt and that is not harmful to humans. Who knows? There are two sides to every story.

I will tell you one thing, it is a hell of a lot easier to go the moon in a studio than hit right on the head the first time. You don't need thousands of people to be "in on it." You just need the main players.

To many questions persist. Thats my point of view.

we had all the calculational technology we needed. u know right now we could send a person to mars and back? I dont think hoax sites are viable, they are unscientific attempts to shotgun attack a theory. every rebuttal is perfectly reasonable. as for "understanding light reflection angles" are u ****ing kidding me? we can make and store anti matter and u think there does not exist ppl who understand optics? I mean HOLY ****.

there may be two sides to every story but in this case one side is a mountain and the other side is an anthill.

[TheDave]

Dave,

Please don't refer to me as a nut job.

IT ONLY MAKES ME ANGRY! :)

My bad... let me rephrase "Reality Challenged" ;)

[Mile High Shack]

My bad... let me rephrase "Reality Challenged" ;)

and you wouldn't like him when he's angry

[Denver Crush]

there's no atmosphere on the moon the only way u could blow anything around is by direct contact with the exhaust from the landers engine, which is small because luckily there is also very little gravity on the moon.

u simply wont get the same thing that ur use to seeing in an environment w/ air patterns.

I believe it happened. However, if that is how you prove it, why was the American flag waving?

[Bronx33]

Fair enough, i also noticed that Yavoon had done the same thing. So i don't fear for species as much... but there are still between 7-12 nut jobs roaming this board

Nut job count is up to 19.32%

[Rock Chalk]

12th man, 200lbbronco, Alec, Alkazar, Antilles, Arkansas_Bronco, backup qb, Breck Bronc, bro1ncos, Bronco in TN., bronco militia, BroncoBuff1, broncosteven, Bronx33, CBF1, ChampBailey24, chrisp, clarker, ClevelandBronco, clint7, CoBear23, Cosmo, dakranker, davidtkd, Deacon Blue, dipsomaniac, doonwise, elsid13, enjolras, Falconer, FlaBroncosFan, footstepsfrom#27, fuzzy, GreatBronco16, hades, Hercules Rockefeller, Kaylore, Kid A, KipCorrington25, L2M, listopencil, Malcontent, Maximus, Merlin, Mile High Shack, minibronco, MrPeepers, O&B4Life, Old Dude, orangeatheist, OrangeCrush77, OrangeShadow, orinjkrush, ORTHO, Paladin, Phantom, Popps, rdskier, RhymesayersDU, ScottXray, scttgrd, smalltowngrll, spdirty, SprintRightOption, TexanBob, TheChamp247, TheDave, therightlegion, tomcat, TUG, whatsgolden

Smart people.

[alkemical]

For the record, i believe we landed on the moon. I just like this one conspiracy alot. It's fun.

[yavoon]

I believe it happened. However, if that is how you prove it, why was the American flag waving?

goto websites, it wasn't.

but lets pretend for half a second that it was waiving, so ur telling me a gust of wind went INTO THE SET WHERE THEY WERE STAGING THE MOON LANDING, caused the flag to wave, they snapped the picture and no1 was like "umm maybe we should reshoot."

[broncosteven]

12th man, 200lbbronco, Alec, Alkazar, Antilles, Arkansas_Bronco, backup qb, Breck Bronc, bro1ncos, Bronco in TN., bronco militia, BroncoBuff1, broncosteven, Bronx33, CBF1, ChampBailey24, chrisp, clarker, ClevelandBronco, clint7, CoBear23, Cosmo, dakranker, davidtkd, Deacon Blue, dipsomaniac, doonwise, elsid13, enjolras, Falconer, FlaBroncosFan, footstepsfrom#27, fuzzy, GreatBronco16, hades, Hercules Rockefeller, Kaylore, Kid A, KipCorrington25, L2M, listopencil, Malcontent, Maximus, Merlin, Mile High Shack, minibronco, MrPeepers, O&B4Life, Old Dude, orangeatheist, OrangeCrush77, OrangeShadow, orinjkrush, ORTHO, Paladin, Phantom, Popps, rdskier, RhymesayersDU, ScottXray, scttgrd, smalltowngrll, spdirty, SprintRightOption, TexanBob, TheChamp247, TheDave, therightlegion, tomcat, TUG, whatsgolden

Smart people.


KAHN?!?!

I can't believe you think Gene Kranz would Lie to the World let alone the USA!

Khan, you let me down bud...

[Bronx33]

I went to lunch with my father in law today and he was at kennedy space center in 69 working on the apollo 11 project he also worked on the next couple missions, his job was to test stuff such as rocket boosters and engines to see when exactly they would blow up (cool huh). Also to put them through different senerios to see what would happen. Also when i told him about this thread he said he11 ya i got paid to create this massive hoax then laughed then he said yes it went to the moon and landed with no doubt.

[broncosteven]

I went to lunch with my father in law today and he was at kennedy space center in 69 working on the apollo 11 project he also worked on the next couple missions, his job was to test stuff such as rocket boosters and engines to see when exactly they would blow up (cool huh). Also to put them through different senerios to see what would happen. Also when i told him about this thread he said he11 ya i got paid to create this massive hoax then laughed then he said yes it went to the moon and landed with no doubt.


You got to get me Gene's Autograph!

[orange 4 life]

Another reason democrats and republicans don't get along.

youre right.

evidence that there are simply too many stupid people out there that actually thought the last election was actually about abortion and gay marriage.

sorry, couldnt resist.

[orinjkrush]

we didn't land in the phillipines, on vero beach, in haiti, or on the sea of tranquility. its ALL made up.

nobody's boobs are real any more either. except BIYIM

[BroncoBuff]

BroncoBuff1

Smart (person).
Thank you, Alec.

[BroncoBuff]

evidence that there are simply too many stupid people out there that actually thought the last election was actually about abortion and gay marriage.

I'm a democrat, and Alec says I'm smart ... so that means
it's NOT STUPID that I think anti-gay marriage or related-
topic initiatives on ballots in 21 states fifteen months ago
had a definite impact on the presidential totals. I don't know
whether Kerry would've won otherwise, but I DO KNOW
that had the election been held anytime between March '05
and now, Kerry would be president.

(And I DON'T think the 2000 election was stolen. I don't
even think "Bush lied" about pre-war intelligence. So you
can't paint me a moon-bat. Bush merely did what politicians
do - he stressed the facts that supported his policy
initiatives, and downplayed those that did not.
And God was watching http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/9996/untitled3zo1.png (http://imageshack.us)).

[Bronx33]

I'm a democrat, and Alec says I'm smart ... so that means
it's NOT STUPID that I think anti-gay marriage or related-
topic initiatives on ballots in 21 states fifteen months ago
had a definite impact on the presidential totals. I don't know
whether Kerry would've won otherwise, but I DO KNOW
that had the election been held anytime between March '05
and now, Kerry would be president.

(And I DON'T think the 2000 election was stolen. I don't
even think "Bush lied" about pre-war intelligence. So you
can't paint me a moon-bat. He merely did what politicians
do - he stressed the facts that supported his policy
initiatives, and downplayed those that did not.
And God was watching).


Do not hijack this thread....

[BroncoBuff]

I typed from Memory.
I believe you, and it's very impressive. Both your logic
and your recall. But what should we expect from a guy
who has Gene Krantz in his avatar, signature and slogan?

But you responded to my post - that the rads exposure
was similar to tanning bed overdose. But what are we to
make of the photos of Van Allen belts that show enormous
showers of radiation bouncing off and away from Earth?

And what about the Aurora Borealis? Aren't those streaks
and sparks are just a small visual sample of the rads that
would be going right thru the astronauts' bodies?!

Another question: Did Aldrin spot the streaks when he
closed his eyes? I heard something not too long ago that
talked about the streaks they saw when they closed their
eyes. Finally, those Western Electric phone company guys
who discovered the microwave "background radiation"?
Wouldn't those microwaves be far more concentrated
outside earth's atmosphere, and wouldn't they constitute
a separate danger altogether?

[ZachKC]

I don't know if you are joking or not, but I do have inside info. My father was an aerospace machinist and worked for NASA since before it was called NASA. Trust me. It happened. I think some (stupid) people don't believe it because they judge their fellow men with a prejudice based on their own lack of ability. The idea of space travel is so complicated to them that they are sure that no one could possibly attain it. Whatever. I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove space travel.
Cool.

[loborugger]

Once upon a time, I subscribed to a fair amount of conspiracy theories. Now, not so much. And the simple reason is this... its too damn hard for that many people to keep a secret.

Think about how many folks woulda been in on it? Thousands, would be my guess. Its seems unlikely to me... more unlikely than the technological feat.

I remember reading about WW2 and the Enigma project in Bletchley Park. The Brits had about 1000 code breakers that worked breaking the German codes during the war. It was considered by many an almost miraclous feat that they could keep it secret not only during the war but until the 70s when the British Govt decided to reveal the program.

Think about how many Gov't secrets become exposed on a regular basis... The Soviets stole our atomic secrets. The existence of the Stealth Fighter years before it came around. Most recently, the secret jails in Europe.

People like to talk. Those with secrets really wanna talk. I refuse to believe that a faked Apollo landing could be held down for over 30 years.

[Bronco Bob]

Does anyone honestly think the Russians were in on it if it were a hoax?
Keep in mind at the time the Soviets were our mortal enemies. They
would do anything to make us look bad. Do you honestly think their
scientists wouldn't be able to detect a hoax and plaster it all over
the world's newspapers if they could show it was a hoax? The Russians
alone prove to me the moon landing was legitimate.

[TheDave]

sadly, at current count, nut job concentration is now hovering around 25%... were doomed again.

[Tombstone RJ]

Does anyone honestly think the Russians were in on it if it were a hoax?
Keep in mind at the time the Soviets were our mortal enemies. They
would do anything to make us look bad. Do you honestly think their
scientists wouldn't be able to detect a hoax and plaster it all over
the world's newspapers if they could show it was a hoax? The Russians
alone prove to me the moon landing was legitimate.

That's an extremely good point. If you want to claim that the Apollo missions were a hoax, you must, by logical extension, also believe that the Russian space program was a big hoax too.

All the Russian missions to space were just a big hoax. No way they spent all that time, money and governmental brut force on competing with NASA, if the Apollo missions were a big lie.

Hell, the Russians had spies all over the place. You don't think they'd uncover a major conspiracy if NASA was just perpetuating a hoax?

Damn good point.

[broncosteven]

I believe you, and it's very impressive. Both your logic
and your recall. But what should we expect from a guy
who has Gene Krantz in his avatar, signature and slogan?

But you responded to my post - that the rads exposure
was similar to tanning bed overdose. But what are we to
make of the photos of Van Allen belts that show enormous
showers of radiation bouncing off and away from Earth?

That is Solar Radiation, Solar radiation is different from Cosmic radiation & they measured the rad's & it was all at acceptabale levels during the week voyage though it was a big concern

And what about the Aurora Borealis? Aren't those streaks
and sparks are just a small visual sample of the rads that
would be going right thru the astronauts' bodies?!

Again Solar radiation, it does not penetrate the same way Cosmic radiation does. Less Nutrinos or something the way I understand it.

Another question: Did Aldrin spot the streaks when he
closed his eyes? I heard something not too long ago that
talked about the streaks they saw when they closed their
eyes.
They saw them with eyes open & closed but it was easier to see closed as less interference & they were able to focus on it. The Cosmic radiation went THROUGH their eyes corena's & all as well as the rest of their bodies so they saw what was presented to the lens of the eye as it went THROUGH their body, pretty creepy!
Finally, those Western Electric phone company guys
who discovered the microwave "background radiation"?
Wouldn't those microwaves be far more concentrated
outside earth's atmosphere, and wouldn't they constitute
a separate danger altogether?

I think you are taking about the guys that found the background Microwave Radiation left over from the "big bang" It is essentially Static & too weak to pose a threat to humans travelling in deep space, it should be at the ends of the universe. It is noise they found no matter what direction they pointed their Radio telescope.



The real thing any deep space mission would not have to protect it that the Earth does not have is the Magnetive Field, The magnetive field is the Earths biggest protector of Solar & cosmic radiation it directs all the radiation to the Earths poles away from the heavly poplulated warmer climates & it is the cause of the Aurora in the North & south poles. Nova had an interesting show about how True Magnetive north could shift south recently on PBS. Van Allyn belt just keeps gases in side the atmosphere.

[broncosteven]

That's an extremely good point. If you want to claim that the Apollo missions were a hoax, you must, by logical extension, also believe that the Russian space program was a big hoax too.

All the Russian missions to space were just a big hoax. No way they spent all that time, money and governmental brut force on competing with NASA, if the Apollo missions were a big lie.

Hell, the Russians had spies all over the place. You don't think they'd uncover a major conspiracy if NASA was just perpetuating a hoax?

Damn good point.


Same time Apollo 11 was in orbit around the Moon Sovites had an Unmanned lander in orbit which were on different orbits Nasa was a little concerned about it until they were sent the orbit trajectory by the Soviet government. It later crashed into the moon & was a failure, before Eagle left to attempt to land. so both contries had ships in orbit of the moom at the same time

[Bronx33]

http://www.collectmyflock.com/MOVIE__MOON_LANDING__mondlandung.mpeg