Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Was the moon landing fake?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
167 replies to this topic

#1    Guest_Guest_*

Guest_Guest_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 April 2001 - 12:35 AM

Did man ever go to the moon or was it the biggest hoax ever created.

evidence:
1.As the Lunar Module Antares, from Apollo 14, rests on the moon's surface there is no crater beneath its feet, despite the considerable amount of dust that would have been thrown up during its descent.
2.These shots of John Young and James Irwin - like many Apollo photos - show a lunar sky without stars. Yet with no atmosphere on the moon, stars should be visible - a fact confirmed by Maria Blyzinsky, Curator of Astronomy at the Greenwich Observatory, London.
3.what looks like the letter 'C' on a boulder. Is this perhaps an identification letter left on a studio prop?
4.An interesting speech reversal can be found on Neil Armstrong's legendary 'One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind' statement. When played backwards  Neil seems to say 'Man will space walk.' Maybe this is to say that man has not spaced walked as yet, but will eventually. Who knows????

check out more of the evidence at:
http://www.mohammedi.freeserve.co.uk/moonshots.html


#2    Nancy

Nancy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,106 posts
  • Joined:07 Mar 2001
  • Location:South Florida

Posted 01 April 2001 - 01:37 AM

It appears that this subject is getting quite a bit of 'press' lately. For the life of me, I don't know why. Am I gulible? NO. I have personally spoken to an Astronaut that WALKED on the moon. I was still very naive and young in 1969, but the event is embedded in my Blonde brain. It makes NO sense to me for this to have been an expensive HOAX. Eventually NASA would have to 'come clean' and if that were indeed the case, there would be NO credibility or confidence in anything NASA attempted from that date on.Can anyone enlighten me?
:original.gif

dying is easy ... tis the living that's hard...

#3    Saru

Saru

    Site Webmaster

  • 20,014 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." - Albert Einstein

Posted 01 April 2001 - 12:53 PM

I'm open to the possibility that NASA faked the moon landings - it is a fact that they had an obvious motive, and may have resorted to faking the landings so as to beat the Russians to the moon.

One thing that has puzzled me about the moon landings, is why there are no photographs taken of the landing sites from orbit. I may be wrong about this, but I've never seen a single picture of any of the landing sites taken from a satelite. Given that Mars Global Surveyor can photograph individual boulders on the surface of the planet, it would be a relatively easy task mapping the moon in the same way.

Is this because NASA know that there are no landing sites on the moon to photograph ?


#4    Lori Cordini

Lori Cordini

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 132 posts
  • Joined:14 Oct 2002

Posted 02 April 2001 - 01:11 AM

This has created significant stir in my mind as well.  After the recent t.v. "it's a hoax" film there was quite a bit of discussion on UFOTruth, an e-mail list I am on and it seemed from the many professionals and scientists and folks in the know, that there was indeed a moon landing in the late 60s.  

However, againg, there is a kind of gnawing about it all!

Like one that won't let me rest....why hasn't anyone returned lately?  Why not build a station on the moon INSTEAD of a space station that can deteriorate eventually as did Muir?

Why not build a station on the moon instead...more secure, more permanent and more easily occupied and self-contained operation, don't you think?

It it was soooo easy to go to the moon so many times, why hasn't a base been built there????


#5    Magikman

Magikman

    Most Exalted member of the first 15

  • Member
  • 6,280 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States

  • "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur"

Posted 02 April 2001 - 08:35 PM

Dowdy,

  This subject was discussed on one of the older boards some months ago, suffice to say that the claim is pretty sensational, but fails to hold up under expert examination. Here's a link to a web site for you that addresses each claim made by the Fox program and exposes the flaws to them;

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

  It's no wonder so many people have a problem with the mind numbing junk television puts out as 'entertainment'. The emphasis is on the sensational aspect of the subject(see also the 'Alien Autopsy' special), and no time or effort is given to scientific or expert disemination of the subject. They tend to play on a person's ignorance, and far too many people automatically assume anything they see on television is based on the truth(even with the disclaimer at the beginning of the program).

  As to your question, Gareth, most of the mapping of the Moon was done by satelites prior to the manned missions, & this information was used to help determine the landing sites for the manned missions. Truthfully, after the manned missions, I don't think there was anything anymore interesting about the Moon that hadn't been covered. Its been so long ago now, I don't remember myself whether there where any attempts by later missions to photograph previous landing sites(maybe because they were in different locations far off the orbital path?).

  To answer your question Lori, there was such an uproar amoung Americans about the cost involved in sending astronauts to the Moon and the perception by the majority that it was just a lifeless pile of
rocks, that NASA finally ended the program. Back then (and even now) the concern was that too much money was being wasted on projects where the benefits were suspect, and not enough on our childrens education and health care. Economics is a harsh reality. This would also be the answer to your second question. It is far too costly to send the materials needed to the Moon for a space station(1/2 million miles round trip each time x the Lord knows how many trips) than to build one in Earth orbit.

Magikman

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense. ~ Carl Sagan

"...man has an irrepressible tendency to read meaning into the buzzing confusion of sights and sounds impinging on his senses; and where no agreed meaning can be found, he will provide it out of his own imagination." ~ Arthur Koestler

#6    Magikman

Magikman

    Most Exalted member of the first 15

  • Member
  • 6,280 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States

  • "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur"

Posted 02 April 2001 - 11:45 PM

Reese,

  They only stopped going to the moon after 7 or 8 missions. So they spent billions of dollars(total - that was a lot of money at that time) on something they deemed important, and only when they failed, in the general populations mind, to come up with anything concrete or enormously beneficial to mankind, people began to make a fuss. If you are old enough to remember, the Viet Nam war was enough of a drain on the economy, and a non-beneficial space program suffered. No big conspiracy, no hidden agenda, just plain economics.

  If it was so easy for NASA and the government to fake the moon landing photo's, why didn't the Russians? At the time there was a great propaganda battle between the US & the USSR. It should have been just as easy for Russia to fake a moon landing and claim to be first. They had all the same resources and scientific knowledge, & their desire to be seen as the greatest nation on the planet was probably even stronger, so what kept them from doing it? A desire to be seen as the best is a great motivator, I for one cannot see the reason for the Russians at the time to not try to exploit it. Then again, why would we be viewed as the "greatest country in the world" just because we made it to the Moon? Even back then we faced many problems, ie; poverty, rioting(Viet Nam war), poor health care, et al. There may have been a certain amount of pride in being the first to the Moon, but thats about it.

 In my honest opinion the claims about the moon landing being a hoax are patently ridiculous and without any concrete scientific documentation or reasoning. Anyone with a little common sense and who was around at the time can but only shake their heads at the absurdity of it all.

Magikman

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense. ~ Carl Sagan

"...man has an irrepressible tendency to read meaning into the buzzing confusion of sights and sounds impinging on his senses; and where no agreed meaning can be found, he will provide it out of his own imagination." ~ Arthur Koestler

#7    Magikman

Magikman

    Most Exalted member of the first 15

  • Member
  • 6,280 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States

  • "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur"

Posted 03 April 2001 - 03:06 AM

Reese,

   This will be my last post on this subject, as it's relevance just doesn't deserve this much attention.

   If you click on his about me link, you will get a history of his qualifications and experience. His writing style is admittedly a little tearse, its obvious he doesn't suffer fools gladly, especially for those who proport to have "controversial new information" on a subject or an event they have little or no scientific knowledge about. He 'shreads' many of their findings by using solid scientific reasoning and experience with the subject matter. You seem to think he has gotten most of his information from someone who worked for NASA and wrote a journal about one of the missions. That isn't true. In one instance while trying to describe the effect of perceiving objects at certain distances(parallax view) in an airless environment vs. an environment with air(and the corresponding haze and pollution which distort this perception), he directs the reader to a web site that deals with the subject in a more detailed way. This happens to be the archieve site of the Apollo Lunar Missions. Its here that you can access all the information written down by the lunar astronauts on their missions and transcribed by editors. Its an incredible storehouse of information, for those who would actually want to read what's there. The man isn't afraid to admit when he's not absolutely sure about his information, so he actually takes the time to find a credible source for you to follow-up on. He provides links to other web sites that support his position, which go into even further detail scientifically if you desire. You could even try the NASA.gov website, but of course whats the point if they mean to continue the deception, even if it's 40 years later. He doesn't do this for his own personal financial gain, but rather to expose these 'con-men' to people who may be duped by them. There is one thing that you say that baffels me. What do you mean about not wanting to believe everything you read? What is it that you have to fear about something that is concisely written, and supported by undeniable facts? You had to have read or seen something that made you think the Moon landing was fake(or did you always think that?) What were their qualifications? What scientific reasoning did they use to support their position? I'm hoping it's something a little more substantial than the Enquirer.

  You still haven't answered my question. Why didn't the Russians fake a Moon landing? The benefit to them would have been greater, and easier to pull off considering how they suppressed their press and the truth to their people. Back then damned little escaped the attention of our press,ie; videotape of soldiers bodies in Viet Nam, the Watergate scandal, student riots, the demonstrations in Chicago, etc. I'm not denying that coverups never happened, but there would have been too many people involved in this to keep it quiet. The Russians had the ability to track our space craft, why didn't they say anything? Any knowledge they would have had, heck, even a suspicion, would have been all over the news. Sure the Moon landing made us feel good about ourselves, but I don't remember it lasting that long. The war in Viet Nam, rioting, inflation and other problems quickly dimmed its importance. Putting a man on the Moon sure scared the hell out of the North Vietnamese, didn't it? Its hard to see what purpose faking a Moon landing served us, even in the short run.

  It was a great scientific achievement, nothing else. Hard work and determination by a group of people following a natural progression of events accomplished a goal. No mystery, no deception. Do yourself a favor and really read the information provided at the site I suggested, or not. It's up to you.

Magikman

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense. ~ Carl Sagan

"...man has an irrepressible tendency to read meaning into the buzzing confusion of sights and sounds impinging on his senses; and where no agreed meaning can be found, he will provide it out of his own imagination." ~ Arthur Koestler

#8    Saru

Saru

    Site Webmaster

  • 20,014 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." - Albert Einstein

Posted 03 April 2001 - 11:13 AM

I think in all probability, if the moon landings had been faked, it would be a lot more obvious, and we would know all about it by now. It's also likely that out of the vast number of people who would have been involved, at least one of them would have come forward and revealed the truth.

If the landings were faked, then everyone involved is still lying to this day - including all the Astronauts, all the NASA admins, all the men who were involved in putting together, launching and monitering the spacecraft and so on. This in itself seems unlikely - I wouldn't expect such a large number of people could continue to lie convinvingly for this amount of time.

Still, the possibility exists - and I'm sure there will be a lot more controversy over the subject for a long time to come.


#9    Saru

Saru

    Site Webmaster

  • 20,014 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." - Albert Einstein

Posted 06 April 2001 - 10:28 AM

There is obviously a considerable difference of opinion on this subject, and there is evidence to support both theories regarding the validity of the moon landings.

One important thing that I don't think has been mentioned in this thread yet, is the moon rocks that have been brought back by astronauts on several ocasions. These rocks have been examined by hundreds of independant scientists, and they all agree that the rocks did indeed come from the moon.

In 1969, robotic technology capable of carrying out a sample return mission involving such a large quantity of material from the moon was just not available, meaning that astronauts must have been there and retrieved it themselves. The Russians sent a probe to the moon at around the same time as the original moon landing, and managed to bring back a very small amount of rock indeed.

Even today, bringing material back from another planetry body is not easy - given the amount of time NASA has taken to attempt bringing rocks back from Mars. This would indicate that the only way these moon rocks could have been acquired in 1969, is if they were brought back by astronauts.


#10    Jamie

Jamie

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 131 posts
  • Joined:03 May 2001

Posted 04 May 2001 - 02:20 AM

I have heard story after story about the moon landing being fake, but I just dont believe it.  There are a lot of signs that point to yes it was fake, but until I have hard core proof I will never believe it.

Jamie


#11    Homer

Homer

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,814 posts
  • Joined:16 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

Posted 05 May 2001 - 10:33 AM

I must admit I've never researched the moon landings,but just to reiterate what SuRaMaN stated earlier.

I cant see how the truth about the "fake" landing could elude the population, and especially the media all the way to this day.

And they brought back some rocks. Even the experts agreed these werent manufactured stage props.

אַ֭תָּה אֱלֹהֵ֣י יִשְׁעִ֑י

#12    JesusFreakGS

JesusFreakGS

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 108 posts
  • Joined:14 Oct 2002

Posted 04 August 2001 - 06:42 PM

This topic is really old... but I still want to just say something about it. After the Fox program on the subject of the moon landing being fake, I was SO convinced that it was one big hoax. After it was aired, my Tech Ed teacher decided to talk about it with our class. He hadn't seen it, so we told him point after point that we remembered from the program. He was able to knock down each and every one of them, so I then thought that it probably wasn't a hoax. You really can't be sure about it though... I don't know how much experience my teacher has with this kind of stuff, but he sure did make some interesting points. Sorry, this happened last year and I forget what they were, but I do know that they were quite convincing. Then again, so was the Fox program, so... who knows?


#13    Mentalcase

Mentalcase

    Space Cadet

  • Member
  • 5,346 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chi-Town

  • Most Thugish Member of the Six Worst Men of the Apfelschnaps

Posted 23 August 2001 - 11:22 PM

Is there any amature film footage from earth of the landing?  Or any sightings with a telescope?

http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/  <~Ancient Aliens DEBUNKED!
I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers are the results of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence than of the unknown rational efforts of extra-terrestrial intelligence ~Richard Feynman http://www.myspace.com/7leafclover

#14    Magikman

Magikman

    Most Exalted member of the first 15

  • Member
  • 6,280 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States

  • "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur"

Posted 24 August 2001 - 07:35 AM

MC,(didn't really want to call you m*****case, I was going to go with Bill, but don't know if that is your name),

 The technology doesn't even exist today for someone to video tape a moon landing from the earth, nor are there any telescopes powerful enough to view a 'landing', much less anyone capable of doing it back in the late '60's or early '70's.

 In 1998 NASA's Lunar Prospector mapped the surface of the moon with high resolution capabilities. However, even from its orbit, the pixel resolution wasn't fine enough to render recognizable detail to the Apollo 16 landing site. You could go to the NASA website to see the available pictures. Meanwhile, click on the other links provided in this thread if you want to get an overview of the various viewpoints.



MAGIKMAN

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense. ~ Carl Sagan

"...man has an irrepressible tendency to read meaning into the buzzing confusion of sights and sounds impinging on his senses; and where no agreed meaning can be found, he will provide it out of his own imagination." ~ Arthur Koestler

#15    Mentalcase

Mentalcase

    Space Cadet

  • Member
  • 5,346 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chi-Town

  • Most Thugish Member of the Six Worst Men of the Apfelschnaps

Posted 24 August 2001 - 05:06 PM

The name is bill, but mc will do.  i guess i can understand that we didn't have the technology then, but now?  You would think we could at least see a lander with todays technology. Anyways, i've allways felt it was fake.

http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/  <~Ancient Aliens DEBUNKED!
I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers are the results of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence than of the unknown rational efforts of extra-terrestrial intelligence ~Richard Feynman http://www.myspace.com/7leafclover




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users