Did we land on the moon?...I think of course we did but is there anyone out there who thinks otherwise? I'd like to hear opinions. Like, I heard from one person before that the radiation the sun emits on the moon is too much for the space suits to take or something

I don't think any U.S. astronaut has landed on the moon.
I think it is possible, but not probable!

That is why it has taken us 50 or so years before we supposedly go back...lol.
Give me a break.

The Apollo moon landing hoax accusations are a series of claims alleging that the Apollo Moon Landings never took place, but were instead faked by NASA. Nearly all interested scientists, technicians, and space enthusiasts have rejected the claim as baseless.

This whole moon faking thing could have been started up by NASA themselves, because I've heard that they found an alien civilisation up on the moon. The again the alien civilisation theory could have been created by NASA to way people away from thinking that they never went because there too busy going...LITTLE GREEN MEN ARE ON THE MOON!

moon landing hoax accusations are conspiracy theories — claims that conspirators in the possession of secret knowledge are misleading the public in pursuit of a hidden agenda. While conspiracy theories vary widely in their plausibility, common standards of assessment can be applied to all:

Occam's razor – of two theories with similar explanatory power, is one simpler than the other? Is a hoax and cover-up involving the collusion and lying of many individuals simpler than NASA's space program sending men to the Moon?

Psychology – does the explanation satisfy an identifiable psychological need for the believer? Does it fit with the worldview propounded by its supporters?
Falsifiability – are the proofs offered for the explanation constructed with scientifically sound methodology?

Whistleblowers – how many people — and what kind — have to be loyal conspirators? Any hoax claim has to account for a substantial number of NASA employees who would have to maintain the conspiracy for over 35 years.

Skeptics of the hoax note the flurry of conspiracy theories that arose during the Vietnam era, in part due to a loss of trust and rise in cynicism in reaction to the Johnson and Nixon administrations, partly from the discovery of the Watergate scandal.

well...we left a lot of equipment up there that you can still see with a telescope...the little car they drove around...still there...I know some will say that we could have just launched that stuff up there...but with a powerful enough telescope you can see the American Flag...which is stuck perfectly in the lunar dirt...obviously it was placed there by astronauts...end of discussion

Pax is right...We landed on the Moon, no doubt about it.

I've never heard of alien civilzations of the moon, but if it was faked it would be because of the Space Race. The need to beat the Russians to space.

Personally, I think it was faked.

Then how did the American Flag get there? Did we launch it perfectly to stick into the lunar surface???

so the Moon rocks are fake also?

we didnt beat the Russians to space, we beat them to the moon





it wasnt faked, we went to the moon

question is why havent we been back

to say there is nothing worth going back for is ludacris

we didnt look around enough to know if there is anything there useful to us or not

i do believe it is possible at the time we were warned not to return, but of course thats just my opinion

Well, i do beleive we landed on the moon...but in defence of the other theory, we could easily "recreate" the rocks of the moon seeing how, pretty much, all of the same stuff on Earth is also on the moon, like Quarts and stuffs. Also, maybe we did go to the moon, but maybe the aired landing couldve been faked to have us jump ahead in the space race? I dunno, im just throwin stuff out there

I have this crazy theory that the moon landings were real, but the videos were faked. Probably because of mal-functioning equiptment that far from earth, and we needed to show the world we were there, and that we were better than the Russians. Plus the world was looking for a sharp picture. Not a scrambled one. Lot's of things wrong with the video, but all the evidence we've been on the moon.

^^^

agreed...somewhat lol

I did not know you could see the flag from earth. What telescope did you use to see all this stuff on the moon. I have looked at many photo shots from the hubble and just saw creaters and rocks thats all, I have not seen an actual photo of the site, except from other so called lunar landers. So what you have stated is total rubbish, if you do not belive me ask nasa.

http://hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/a...d=77&cat=topten
Quoted:
Can Hubble see the Apollo landing sites on the Moon?
No, Hubble cannot take photos of the Apollo landing sites.

An object on the Moon 4 meters (4.37 yards) across, viewed from HST, would be about 0.002 arcsec in size. The highest resolution instrument currently on HST is the Advanced Camera for Surveys at 0.03 arcsec. So anything we left on the Moon cannot be resolved in any HST image. It would just appear as a dot.

Here is a picture that Hubble took of the Moon:
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/1999/14/

And to see the flag with a powerful telescope it would have to be bigger and better then the Hubble.

Five Reasons to Believe We've Been to the Moon

Reason #1 -- Moon Rocks
Apollo astronauts didn't return empty-handed. They brought 841 pounds of the Moon back with them. Apollo Moon samples range in size from sand and pebbles to basketball-sized rocks. Moon rocks are completely different from rocks native to Earth. Their mineral content is unique and they show distinctive signs of exposure to the solar wind, cosmic rays and meteoroid impacts. To a trained geologist there's no mistaking a Moon rock. But you don't have to take the word of an expert. There are museums in the United States where you can inspect Moon rocks for yourself and see the distinctive meteoroid impact pits that pepper nearly all rocks from the Moon. It's rock-hard evidence that the Apollo program really did happen!

Scientists from dozens of countries, many that were Cold War "enemies" of the United States, have analyzed Apollo Moon rocks. Every single researcher agrees that the Apollo Moon rocks are genuine.

Reason #2 -- Witnesses
The most famous participants in the Apollo program are the twelve astronauts who walked on the Moon. Nine of them are still alive today; they are powerful witnesses to the reality of the Apollo program. And they're not the only ones. Approximately 360,000 scientists, engineers, civil servants and contractors worked on the Apollo program. They designed the rockets, sewed the space suits, cut the pay checks, guarded the doors, swept the floors and much more. These hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life can testify that the Apollo program was real.

Can you imagine a government conspiracy involving nearly 400,000 people without even one whistle blower revealing the truth?

Reason #3 -- The Paper Trail
The Apollo program left an awesome paper trail, including blueprints, spec sheets, memoranda, budgets -- you name it! Every nut and bolt on a Saturn V rocket, every clasp in an astronaut's space suit, every welding joint, every pressure valve... you get the idea ... all these things were meticulously documented. "For the Saturn V rocket alone there is more than 2000 linear feet of documentation stored in the National Archives outside of Atlanta." says Roger Launius, NASA's chief historian. That's nearly the same length as seven football fields laid end-to-end.

For a physical scientist, the unique composition of Moon rocks might be the most persuasive evidence that humans visited the Moon and returned. But for a research historian, the staggering number of self-consistent original documents testifies powerfully to the reality of Apollo.

Reason #4 -- More Witnesses
Tens of thousands of people personally (not on TV -- they were there in person) saw the Apollo Saturn V rockets blast off for the Moon. Watching the departure of those behemoths -- the largest rockets ever built -- was an unforgettable experience for the spectators. The rockets were even visible in space. "At the time of the Apollo 8 mission I was heading a team at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory's satellite tracking station on top of Haleakala, Maui, Hawaii," recalls astronomer David Le Conte, "We took lots of photographs of the trans-lunar burn, clearly showing the spacecraft turning and heading out of Earth's orbit. These photographs were widely published, for example in Time and Life magazines. On subsequent nights (and for subsequent Apollo flights, including Apollo 11, when I was Manager of the Mount Hopkins, Arizona, station) we photographed the receding spacecraft and their waste dumps as far we could with our equipment."

"I can only think that the (conspiracy) theorists are relatively young. Nobody who experienced the Apollo Program first hand could ever doubt its achievements." -- Le Conte

Reason #5 -- Things Left Behind on the Moon
Apollo astronauts left something behind on the Moon that we can see from Earth -- small mirrors called "corner cube retroreflector arrays." The first retroreflector was positioned on the Moon in 1969 by the Apollo 11 astronauts so that it would point toward Earth and be able to reflect pulses of laser light fired from our planet. Because the retroreflectors require no power, they are still operating normally more than 30 years after Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon. Scientists from around the world regularly bounce laser pulses from these distant reflectors to learn more about tides, the Moon's rotation, Einstein's theory of relativity, and much more.

The Soviet Union and France also deposited a retroreflector on the Moon using an unmanned spacecraft, Lunakhod 2. That device was not placed on the lunar surface as carefully as the Apollo astronauts were able to situate their retroreflectors. As a result, the Lunakhod 2 mirror produces a weaker laser echo than the smaller Apollo reflectors -- devices that benefited from the personal attention of humans on the Moon.

See, I knew I'd read something was visible that was left behind...blame it on the public education system.....also speaking of HUGE conspiracies...I think that also applies to 9/11, impossible to cover up something that would take so many people to pull off

^^^
just in my defence, i said i do believe in the moon landing, lol, so i hope that wasnt a snipe at me, im just tryin to keep the thread going

there is a great movie about the supposed 9/11 conspiracy called Loose Change (again, im not trying to take sides but...)anyway, back on subject

no 'snipe' intended...

k...lol

im not so knowkegeble, but ive heard that the moon contains pretty much all the same elements and rocks as the Earth does, and would it not be possible to, idk, somehow apply radiation to rocks to create the illusion that they were on the moon?

In general the rocks collected from the Moon are extremely old compared to rocks found on the Earth, as measured by radiometric dating techniques. The youngest of the rocks is older than the oldest rocks seen on Earth. They range in age from 3.2 billion years from the basalt samples from the lunar mares, up to 4.6 billion years in the highlands.

Among the new minerals found on the Moon was armalcolite, which is named for the three astronauts on the Apollo 11 mission: Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins.

Moon Rocks

Has Nasa ever really given a reason as to why it's been so long since we've decided to go back?

I'm a pretty reasonable guy, but in my opinion this is just retarded unless they have a really good reason for not going back.

what would have been a good reason for America to shell out billions of dollars, to explore an airless, scorched cinder? just wondering...

we are interested now, because we believe substantial amounts of water may be there. making a base much more possible

I don't know, what's a good reason that we don't stop alot of the world hunger with the tons of money we use on other things, and then we try to rationalize the reasons we have to spend it on these other things.

My thoughts exactly...the question isn't why have we not been back, but why should we???

cause nobody cares as much about the starving, they want to go off world. water is important to going off world.

Why wouldn't we go back? We havn't really explored it much the first time.

EDIT: I do believe we've gone before though. Just don't know why we didn't in so long and then now we do again all of a sudden.

The simple reason no-one has been to the moon since 1972... money. In the US the direction changed to "cheap access" to space, Hence the shuttle was born. It was supposed to make spaceflight cheaper. It was believed, in the '70's, that the shuttle would lead to space stations, a return to the moon and then on to Mars. In fact the shuttle was far more difficult and expensive to fly than was envisioned. NASA could not afford to return to the moon whilst spendig a quater of a billion dollars per flight for the shuttle. This is the reason that Bush has killed the shuttle programme. The last mission will fly in 2010 wu=ith the first flight of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), esentially Apollo mark II, flying in 2012.

The Soviet Union, having been beaten to the moon never succeeded in getting their moon rocket, the N1, to fly. After 4 (I think) failed launch attempts it was finally abandoned in the mid '70's. From then on the USSR focused on building space stations.

So, on the original topic - why is it we could not have hoaxed the initial Moon Landing in order to televise it to the world to show how America beat Russia in the space race?

I have no idea if this actually happened or not, but considering the tension during the cold war, it certainly seems entirely possible that a hoax was pulled off. We may have been up hours/days/weeks later than originally planned, and I think it is ridiculous to believe that we have never been to the Moon. As shown in this thread, there is far too much evidence to the contrary.
There is certainly some real funny 'faked landing' clips getting around the net.

Warned of??? You think Aliens may be territorial? Don't come near my Moon? What is this theory?

Not that it really matters anyways. We have been, not much to see, built a dud spacecraft we are stuck with for a few decades because it blew the budgets horrendously, and nobody will give that sort of trust again easily. Makes sense why we did not go back, not like it is shrouded in Jungles, so nothing to explore, it has no atmosphere, so the idea of life ever existing there as we know it is unlikely. What could we gain, more resources to plunder maybe, but we still have some of those left here on earth........

In my opinion the US didn't land on the moon, there's too much evidence to say that humans have never set foot there.

Hey if Astronauts took first step and it was all filmed wasnt it the camera man on the Moon first or did they overlook that and expected everyone else on Earth to do the same?

Now I was reading up on this, and from the impression I got is that NASA could have sent unmanned probes up to the moon like Russia, to deposit these cubes. It is also funny that Russia sent the same thing to the Moon.
No one has been to the Moon since 1972. Wow, if a country can spend billions of dollars on nuclear technology and not take advantage of a nuclear base on the moon would be a fool. The cost of the space programs is very small compared to the arms build up.

Why didn't the Russian's follow up their program? You can say that they failed, but if I know Russia they would not let the US beat them, look at the first space launches. Maybe they knew that it was impossible to go to the Moon without an electromagnetic field, or one foot of lead shielding around the space craft. This would protect humans from the solar radiation, this technology does not exist yet (publicly maybe), but thankfully the Earth does it naturally. This is also why all Astronauts since the so-called Apollo missions never left the earth’s magnetic field. Titanium alloys are light and give good protection so we might see some real lunar landings.
Also what about extreme temperature change, how do suits and air conditioners keep up with that on the Moon?

A common misperception. A very small amount of people would have to know the full story, and the rest would just do their jobs as they are told or do it under false pretenses. For example: the people flying the planes into the towers may have thought they did it for Allah (and for Al-Qaeda), but what if someone were controlling Al-Qaeda? They'd never know.

Sorry to take it off track.

The problem if the Moon landings were all hoaxes is that before the US - or China - land on the Moon again, the hoaxers will have to secretly land on the Moon themselves in order to plant all the stuff that was supposedly left there in the 60s and 70s......

And in any case, we know someone has been to the Moon - where else would all the cheddar and gorgonzola come from, if not from the alien's cheese mines there?

I really hope that you are joking!

If the US had faked the moon landing how come the USSR didn't blow the whistle. The spacecraft could easily be tracked by the Soviet Union as easily as by the US. The Saturn V upper stage with Apollo spacecraft attached is, to this day, the biggest object placed in orbit by a single launch. The radar systems of the US and the USSR can track objects as small as a screw driver. There is no way that the Soviet Union could not have known what the US was up to.

Damn good point.

Case closed.

The foot of shielding myth is untrue except in the circumstances of a solar storm.

If the USSR knew that a manned mission to the moon was impossible why didn't they say so. Instead they spent billions of Rubles on a programme to beat tje US to the moon and then spent decades trying to cover it up when it failed.

The USSR tried to build a Saturn V class rocket called the N1. At the time the USSR could not build an engine as powerful as the F1 engine on the Saturn V first stage. Instead of 5 engines it used 30. This produced a nightmare of plunbing. Between 1969 and 1972 all 4 launch attempts ended catastrophically. None of the N1s lasted more than 107 seconds.

The Soviets may have attempted to beat the US to the Moon but they failed. As a result they denied the existance of the N1, despite it's existance being well known, in fact it was nick-named Webbs Giant in the west after the NASA Administrator who made it public. After the break up of the Soviet Union the Russian government admitted the failed moon programme, showing of the Russian lunar Module for the first time.

Some questions for the non-believers:

If the US had the capabillity to launch all the equipment to the moon needed to fake the moon landing how is it thet weren't able to put people on board.

Why did the US kill 3 astronauts in the Apollo 1 fire if the programme was fake.

Why did the US fake a failed mission, namely Apollo 13.

One final thing. Watch the Apollo film footage. Pay careful attention to the dust being kicked up by the astronauts feet. It follows a perfect parabolic trajectory. That could only have been achieved in a vacuum. Now it is entirely possible that the "stage set" on which the Apollo missions were "faked" was in a vacuum but doesn't that rather destroy the conspiracy theorist claim that the flag is waving in a breeze? More importantly than the vacuum is the fact that whilst the astronauts are moving at normal speed the dust falls back to the ground far more slowly, as if it is in one sixth gravity. It may be possible to fake that now with CGI but not in the late '60's.

We landed on the moon.
They did not have fries.
We went home.

If the US did not land on the moon, my father got paid quite a nice salary for doing a bunch of nothing.

I don't get the POINT in not believing we landed on the moon.

I am just guessing Purplos, and it is my guess that existence beyond earth and the complete dominance and control of man disturbs their comfort bubble.

yes we landed on the moon, duh .

LOL

Is it all right if you elaborate on this wealth of evidence?

Money



What evidence do you have?

how can u see a small little flag on a large body miles upon miles away from earth?

As the main driving force was political, once the first landings had been accomplished and the USSR soundly beaten, the government finance started to dry up. The Apollo missions were incredibly expensive and people were starting to wonder if it was worth it now we knew it was just a dry lifeless rock and that the Russians weren't in the running anymore. The USSR space program had hit a number of very explosive failures and weren't so keen to go either now. There's little glory in being second on the moon. Within a decade or so and the USSR had enough problems running the country and their nuclear reactors to even consider trips to the moon.

The military weren't so bothered either. The idea of some kind of missile base on the moon was never a consideration. By the time it took the missiles to reach Earth everything would be over anyway. What was much more practical was satellites, spy and otherwise, and any military developments could be achieved easier and cheaper in low orbit than on the moon anyway. So the military preferred the money to be spent on the Shuttles.

That just leaves scientific reasons. The scientists would love to go back to the moon as there's bound to be lots more to discover. Unfortunately the scientists aren't in charge of handing out the money. If you're American ('cos lets face it, they're the only ones who could afford it) and you want to go back to the moon, then tell your politicians that. They need convincing.

Give me one prove that the american flag realy is on the moon, just one !

NASA started on a project on going to the moon, but the hole project was a failure. So instead of just saying that they couldn`t go to the moon and be laughed out by the hole world, they launched up the rocket without anyone on it and filmed a fake mission in Hollywood. And most people working on the project belived it was real ! Only the astronauts, the gouvernment, and some other people knew about what realy was happening. It was probobly only around 200 peoples who realy knew what was happening.

Rubbish. If as you say the project was a failure then it would take more than 200 people to be included. The astronauts would have had to have known. Engineers not just at NASA but at contractors and sub-contractors would have known. People in mission control would have had to have known. Radio astronomers all around the world (not just in countries friendly to the USA) would have known.

I found it amazing that the conspiracy loons are happy to believe that aliens can break the laws of physics and make it to earth and yet refuse to believe that the USA is capable of putting a man on the moon.