moon landing

[natarajana]

Hi All,

What's the quote about any sufficiently advanced technology seeming like magic...

To some of the people posting here I suspect than an elastic band or a paperclip must be pretty magical...



All the best.

Robert.

 

[SGTSCHULTZ]

(this was to be posted before Aegis' reply but my connection went down for a while)



That it is .



All the previous replies then sound like "spoonfed crap"?

See my previous comment for instance, you posted something that made no sense at all and demonstrated complete ignorance of elementary physics and spaceflight. So how can you comment on informed rebuttals? If you are really interested in a subject you should try and learn what you need in order to form an informed opinion - note: that does not mean go looking for ways to confirm the opinion you already have!

60's technology? Von Braun had a prety good guided rocket some 20 years before he made the Saturn V, and pilots were already performing stunts in wood and canvas wrecks 30 years before that.



I wouldn't disagree with the rest, but man, you do sound like a conspiracy theorist in this thread!

 

[Maura]

This site will refute some of the absurd claims made by conspiracy nuts, er proponates.

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

 

[agirlhere2helpyou]

I think I saw the same programme and similar. The conspiracy theorists gave a more convincing argument than the guys from NASA, who essentially shrugged his shoulders and said that the conspiracy theorists were crazy, yet offered no 'evidence'. Having said that, film/programme makers can edit footage to their hearts content to give one side more credence than the other...

 

[das_ist_shiesse]

You are right. The orbiter is much smaller. Nearly 90% of the almost 400' high Saturn V was engines and fuel. Then was a compartment housing the LM, then the Coofftopicnd Module, wich was mostly O2 tanks, then the capsule which housed the crew. Remember that you only need a large amount of fuel to leave orbit, after that it's all momentum. A small amount of fuel is needed for attitude control.

Even the shuttle mostly glides back in.




There was plenty of O2 in the coofftopicnd module. If you remember Apollo XIII, it was not the capsule that was hit, but the air supply in the back part of the coofftopicnd module. That part is jetissoned just before erentry.

 

[MissMcCalifornia]

Hi Robert.
About conspiracy.
Did the Americans go to the moon ???
Yes,of cource they did.
Where the pictures original ???
NO?THEY WHERE NOT.
The reson is verry simple:the limits of technologie !!!!!
It has everything to do with the difference in temperature between the bright and dark side of the moon.
There was and is no camera in this world who can survive under these conditions.
And yes,the Soviets new this from the first moment.
Why they diden't tell this to the world ???
The reson was purely political,but i don't now more about that.
What i do now is this:the whole movie about the the landing was a fake.
It was made by thesame man who made the movie:A SPACE ODYSEE 2001.
I can't remember his name now,but he was the great specialist of spacemovies at that time.
There is a fantastic documentary about this,it has been shown in several
European countrys,i have seen it.
It's a chocking document and the reporter who introdused it told:this has not
been seen in America and probably never will.
To manny powerfull peaple involved in this are still allive and even members
of the actual administration.
The man in charge of this was nowone else then RICHARD NIXON !!!
I want to say clearly:i'm NOT joking,this is serius.
Most of the peaple involved in this where murderd by cia agents on orders of
thesame man who was in charge.,they new to mutch.
I have seen the statement with my own eyes.
It was made by a secretary of state and a verry close freind of your actual
president,he was allso in the Nixon administration.
I realy wisch i could show you this document,i coulden't believe what i was seeing.
I now you will feel nothing but disbelieve for this,i don't blame you.
This was stronger then SF.
Manny peaple would love to see that no traces would remain about this.
This would still be to ambarrasing.
If you have questions,pleas let me now.
If i can help,i will.

 

[fluffybunny1]

Ummm... ---- it... We did go to the moon. With an explanation like that I couldn't possibly bear to be in the same boat with others with that mentality.

You heard it here folks. I'm a believer! Neil Armstrong is my hero! I will wear I

 

[Kumayasha]

So your saying it was all faked? Have you been smoking the funny stuff again? And hey, can we get a spell check here?

 

[elfin420]

LOL!
You painted yourself into this corner with your absurd assertions.
Enjoy you new found friend.

 

[electra_glide_069]

I have to put in my two cents here.
One of the arguments, stems from lack of sufficient technology.
The moon landing was in 1969. We had already sent dogs, monkeys and people (among other things) into orbit. The British already had radio guided missiles in 1917. Though rockets weren't really used for war until WWII, and then by the Germans with V-1s and V-2s.
We had achieved nuclear explosive devices in 1945 for crying out loud. And you doubt mans ability to do these things without computers?

As for the NASA scientists ineffective arguments against conspiracies, from their point of view, technology was, and is sufficient to fake these things, so all of the evidence they have to prove these things really happened, happen to be the same "evidence" the theorists are using to refute the landing.

As for the recording media becoming degraded, I really am not sure. If stored properly, magnetic media can last quite a while, and currently, can be restored quite easily. It may have simply been lost.

The pictures are neat though, but, as an amateur graphic designer, I know how easily these things can be fabricated, so while I believe they're authentic, I don't expect everyone to.

Finally, things like the Hubble and other man made, image transmitting satellites do something interesting these days (or did for awhile, I'm too lazy to find a link). NASA will release the raw files on line for people to convert into visible spectrum and images themselves and submit back, and NASA will show these to the public while they work on the same files themselves, and then show the finished product. It can probably be said that the raw files could be false, etc. etc., but you have to trust somewhere, or not.

 

[Emmahleeeeett]

Fail.

 

[IhaveN]

Just because I'm a skeptic does not put in the same league as a dope smoking conspiracy theorist who seems to think he's seen a document signed by Richard Nixon regarding political assasinations performed by CIA agents.

 

[Pipe]

I can tell you the TRUE answer of whether or not they landed on the moon. And it is...

yes. yes they did.

 

[detroit11011]

But how can we believe you?

 

[topboy]

Someone better mention that they were using electronic computers in the 40's, to make hydrogen bombs among other stuff.

 

[Haylz]

Mudo;949946']Seems strange that we would go to the moon and then never follow it up. I mean, why isnt there a perminent research facility on the moon? Are we supposed to believe the naff technology they had at the time managed to gather all the information the moon has to offer?

Yet for some reason NASA decided to totally change its research focus to deepspace (unmanned) stuff.

Im sure the dark side of the moon would be a perfect place build an observatory.

The moon is also a perfect place to perfect offworld technologies...and its neglegable distance away...

...and still...nothing.

Does that not strike anyone else as bizarre?

 

[HollisterFREAK]

Mudo;949952']And why not use the moon as the basis for space travel?

Its escape velocity is tiny.

 

[psychodudebrett]

You know I always thought the same thing. Zero ambient light and a perfect platform to look into deep space. I'm sure there are some physics issues about bending signals around the moon so we could receive them. Perhaps an intermediately placed satellite....

 

[Quibish]

I think it didnt happen because of political reasons. The Stars and Stripes were on the moon instead of the Hammer and Sickle, the Cold War was starting to die down, getting to the moon was costing loads that could be spent on other things.

It is a shame like. Apparently Bush wants man back on the moon to use it as a staging ground for a Mars mission (it would make sense to test the technology and stuff somewhere closer). If Nixon (or whoever was in charge then) hadnt cancelled the exploration we could have been on Mars back end of the 90's at the latest.

 

[pyromaniac_228]

Hi 'Jeepee' and All,

You seem to think I'm American, I'm not, I'm a Brit and live in England. I have seen the documentary (almost certainly the same one that you have) and it's very convincing. Sadly though it's NOT true. If you do an Internet search you can find several websites that debunk that documentary and explain how all the things that make you think WOW they never went to the Moon are in fact not true...

A rumour always seems to be better than the facts and a conspiracy is much more exciting than the plain old truth - The Americans went to the Moon.

All the best.

Robert.