moon landing

[AlexisInfectious®]

That's exactly it. The political will was failing before 1969. NASA had enough momentum to get off a few more shots, but the last three still got cancelled. War on poverty, Vietnam, the whole "Been there, done that" mentality all played a role.

NASA didn't start focusing primarily on Earth research until after 1986. It was one of the recommendations out of whatever they called the Challenger Accident Investigation Board.

The other factor is, the 1960's moon shot was done as a "get there quick" scheme, it didn't build the INFRASTRUCTURE necessary to stay anywhere near it.

 

[shivi]

I was expecting this kind of reaction.
Pleas,reed my post again.
I did not say the moonlanding was fake.
The pictures where fake,nothing more.
The whole problem started when Nixon whanted live tv of the landing.
The was not poseble,but Nixon woulden't axept no for an answer.
So ,what the whole world has been seeing as the moonlanding was made in a studio.
I allways believed the pictures where genuine,untill the day i was watshing that documentary.
The person who was interviewd was DONALD RUMSFELD,i think he is now secretairy of defence.
The interview was taken one day afther GEORGE.W.BUSH was elected as president(the first time)
Rumsfeld was in a hotel with a bottle of champagne in front of him.
He was in a funny mood(i had never seen him like that before).
He clearly stated that Nixon was scared this would come out,and was prepaired to prevent it ,no metter what.
He admited that things got out of hand and that Nixon became "uncontroleable".
I now this is not easy to accept,but i think Rumsfeld told the truth.
He had no reason to make this up.
I wish i had taped this on video,as this is indeed the most unbelieveble story you can iofftopicgine

 

[Awnserman]

Quite true, very unbelievable. We had already figured out radio waves quite some time ago, so sending signals back and forth between the moon wasn't really a problem.

 

[rtnaa]

Food to eat, water to drink, air to breathe, sewage, building supplies, maintenance supplies, getting all the stuff there to build the facilities --- it's a nightmare. Doing stuff on earth is easier, so the politicians never committed to putting forth the efforts at building that moon base.

Still, I wish they would. It'd be so totally cool.

 

[eastnybrooklyn08]

No actually I couldn't tell if you were in favor of the conspiracy theory or against....sorry.

 

[bellababi44]

I totally believe we landed on the moon.

What I don't understand to 100% no questions asked debunk any doubters - Didn't the module that returned to Earth leave behind its 'legs', or landing gear, or whatever you would call it. Can't we point a telescope at the moon and see this? Or still see the flag/footprints assuming they have not been hit by something.

...Sometime around 2000 we launched a satilite that uses Ion propulsion for deep space exploration - you know the same stuff that The Star Ship Enterprise uses from Star Trek - Yet there was almost zero press about this event, IMO it should have been huge. I have a feeling that there is alot of space exploration stuff going on that we never hear about, no facts to back that up though. I personally think NASA should have a budget about like the militairy.

 

[BlBall]

Quite true, very unbelievable. We had already figured out radio waves quite some time ago, so sending signals back and forth between the moon wasn't really a problem.[/QUOT

Hi althour.
It has nothing to do with radiowaves.
The limit of technologie was the camera itself.
Its the interaction between the lense(the eye of the camera) and the casing.
They react completely differently on extreme changes in temperatures.
It's complicated,perhaps you can asc a proffesional about his oppinion.

 

[jonasobsession12345]

What is it with people that just come up with random explanations that have little or no basis in reality?

Do you not understand that there were plenty of pictures taken while on the moon? How can you even hope to enter a discussion of the moon landing if you aren't aware of what part of the crew was doing during the landing...

eg. taking pictures.

A camera is about as a simple piece of technology you can get. A lense, a shutter and a film plane and your pretty much there. You could get even simpler and just make a pinhole camera with a cardboard box.

Aerospace and aviation have been using cameras since day one. And yes I'm aware there are issues with shutter function at extreme temperatures... but I don't really think it was much of an issue during the moon landing. If it was someone forgot to tell the astronauts as they spent over an hour taking pictures with a Hasselblad.

Sweet Jesus... even amatuer photographers know this. Mechanical cameras are not rocket science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_11

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/moon/2.htm

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/hasselblad/cameras/hasselmodels/models/space1.htm

 

[creolerose1115]

The Enterprise uses a warp drive in all its incarnations... it warps space and has nothing to do with ion thrusters!

I believe you mean the Imperial Twin Ion Engine fighter from Star Wars .

 

[aslan]

If they could take pictures from early jets breaking the sound barrier, and from early orbital launches, the moon wouldn't have been a problem.

As for setting up a base on the moon, I actually read a book awhile back (too lazy to search for the title) that insisted that not only is it easier to get to mars in terms of fuel and trajectory, but it'd be easier to build a self sustainable habitat on mars, due to already existing materials.

The moon's a tricky beast to lasso, besides, if we haven't made self-sustaining underwater bases here on earth, or even successful bio-domes, putting a base on the moon would be a major resource hog. Heck, they have problems sometimes getting a supplies to a handful of people on the ISS in our own orbit!

 

[bhupinderk]

Damn I stand corrected

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/search/result.html?type=article&search=propulsion&category=

I swear I read elsewhere at some point, oh well...

 

[DelaneyK]

Well in the late 60s early 70s the Vietnam war was draining the American Government's coffers and Kennedy, the president with the initial vision was quite dead. It would have been strange for the space program to have continued at the same pace.

 

[gftobecom]

we definately went to the moon. i think we would have found out, or other countries would have found out when they went to the moon, or found that was "impossible" to go there. but we definately went there. im all about conspiracy in the government, but even the moon landing thing i cant agree with that conspiracy. the moons a personal enemy of mine.

 

[MitchD]

We did not go to the moon. That is my belief.

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

 

[NelsonS]

yeah wow... you certainly did bend over backwards to find some credible data to cite.

Way to go champ.

 

[cordlessphone01]

You are correct, but most people are to foolish to check for credibility, and they believe what they see, I am trying to persuade people to believe we didnt land on the moon in 1969. You are very wise. Here is a more credible link.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

 

[ChinwenduO]

obviously. you link was rubbish as is the newer one.

why would checking for credibility be foolish?




or... some people actually have an understanding that exceeds that of highschool level conspiracy theorists.


Then you're gonna have to work just a tad harder if you don't want to be considered and idiot or a troll or both.


whoa.... wey hey.... un hunh.... you really knocked yourself out.... credible in the extreme.


In fact that guy is such a genius that he can't figure out the 'crosshairs' in a camera are on the ground glass (as in the Hassey that was used) but they don't appear on the film plane. Thus they wouldn't show up on the film because there is nothing to burn them onto the film plane during the exposure of a frame. They are silkscreened onto the ground glass. Total genius that guy is.

 

[JohnnyOohOoh]

I wasnt saying its stupid to check for credibility, I was saying that most people dont check, and they belive whatever they read.
I seriously dont believe we landed on the moon, I really cant find a great link though. I guess my thoughts are all I have.
Here's a link I did find though to help lighten the mood.
http://www.cis.rit.edu/education/isnt/hunt2002/seniors/manonmoon_files/frame.htm

 

[maple_sarip]

My coworkers, who were in the aerospace industry in the 60s, said we landed on the moon. Why do you call them liars?

 

[jollymcmoo]

You dont know if what they saw was real either, There are people who worked for NASA who believe that we did. The way it was set up was so everybody would think that its real, even the people working at NASA. Only a few people would truely know for sure. The government and the astronauts who were on the Apollo. I believe it was a conspiracy to beat Russia to the Moon. I have posted links, you might not think they are credible, but you can try searching this, because thats how I feel.
I am not calling your co-workers liars, because they probably didnt know what they were seeing either.

"He who lies isn't a fool, anybody whom believes him is."
~ Myself