And no other planet in our solar system is anything like the earth. I fail to see the relevance here. The moon's position releative to the earth is well understood. It is also unique in that it's a single moon...but we also have Charon and Pluto, "way out west", as it were, a single moon almost as large as the planet itself. That, too, is unique in the solar system.

So?

Jesus Christ, how many times have we gone through this topic?

Can't everybody just accept we never landed the moon?

Because MID, you are contradicting yourself, in an earlier post when I stated our moon was unique, you argued it wasn't and even said something irrelevant such as even Venus cause eclipses on earth. Also, yes , MID there ARE openings in the moons surface. Craters that shoot gas are even there. How could you even say there are no openings on the surface? I find that very odd.

I think you are confused...The topic of that was eclipses...

I am referring to a response MID made to me in this thread earlier. I said our moon is unique in its placement. he said it is not.

regardless, as bland as the truth may be...these theories are still wonderful to ponder, can you imagine the moon just up and taking off one day??

No

What?
Who's making fun of you? You're the one who made inference to the fact that the moon may be a hollow spaceship. You re-iterated that idea in your lengthy follow-up post.

I was merely pointing out the implausibility of that notion in the face of the well-understood facts about our moon.

The facts we understand regarding the moon show that it is indeed a unique body, but not any more unique than the many other more exotic moons that exist in this solar system (there are some very strange worlds out there).

And, there is nothing mysterious about the moon and total eclipses of the sun. It's perfectly natural given its angular size and its orbital position in relation to the earth. There is no scientific probability involved in this. It is a well understood and relatively simple fact of nature. Besides, eclipses are non-events. They have absolutely no bearing on anything, save that they make an interesting visual display sometimes.

I for one, have never said that any other moons in the solar system are in the same relative position and dynamic as the moon is to the earth. Who said that?

I think you are over-reacting, and veering off course.

This thread is about the Apollo lunar landings, not astronomical statistics regarding the moon.

My original veering off course was originally listing all the extravagant theories about the moon. Some people responded and it went from there. Even you participated.
I find it interesting that ancient civilizations have recorded history stating the moon wasn't always there, that it appeared in the sky over night about 12,000 years ago. (recorded by the people of Tiahuanaco, Bolivia as reported by Aristotle's findings.)
We all know the government covers things up. Watergate anyone? And now there are herds of people that worked for NASA in the early 70's stating they were hired to "clean up" pictures of the moon that were to be released to the public. WHat did they clean up? Things the public could not handle. Once again these are not my words.
Also what about the hoards of people who listened to the original moon landing broadcast on ham radios, and heard the undisturbed broadcast of Neil stating there was a spacecraft. When regular radio listeners only heard 'we are experiencing difficulties"

Who knows? I don't. and neither do you, for sure.
I just find it interesting. And if you can't come here and discuss things of interest such as these, where can you go?
it's all in fun.
the original poster of this thread is also entitled to discuss his beliefs or want to talk to others about it, without being mocked and ridiculed. To do so makes you look petty. I am sure you believe things others would ridicule as well. So why do it?

Now you are getting silly.

I did not ever argue thgat the moon was not unique. I agrued that there was nothing unusual about eclipses, and your statement that no other planets exhibit the properties of being able to cause eclipses was false.

Baloney. I said that Mercury and Venus also eclipse. BUT THAT WE CAN'T SEE THEM BECAUSE OF THE ANGULAR SIZE OF THE BODIES.

You are now completely irreleveant to this thread. You also obviously don't read what I say.

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT THE APOLLO LANDINGS!

Stay on topic, or start another thread about the unusual and impossible nature of the moon!

You said you were finished here.

Start your own topic, and stop mis-representing things you don't understand...like what I said.

You are beginning to flame, and you are off topic.

We've already had one person destroy another thread which might have gone somewhere save for his trolling...how about you just fulfill your own statement and be finished here?

What hoardes of people?
I was there, and heard the whole thing...all of it from start to finish.

There were no "technical difficulties" which prohibited any transmissions from being broadcast, and there were no discussiuons about alien spacecraft.

That is a fantasy...it may be fun, but it is a fantasy.

MID, you did state there was nothing unique about the moon. Why are you getting so angry? because someone is proving you wrong? You are the one who went on in length about my original posting about the hollow moon theory, so it is you who are guilty of extending this subject. maybe you should stop arguing with me? It is obvious your intention is to mock people and prove yourself superior. WHich you have done a poor job of. I am sure i am the one who will get banned and not you, (when you started it all from my innocent post in the first place, and went into some tirade)
geez
So I guess I will stop now.

well regular radio broadcast has a time lapse, where if something happened while live, it can stopped before reaching the receiver. Ham radios hear it as it happens and cannot be edited. There are a lot of people who state the ham broadcast was different than what the regular radio listeners heard. i am not one of them. i am saying there are people who state this.

You already said that you were done.
I hope you are.

ok.... so do i, im getting bored of this

Hey, punk...

Yes, I understand that.

Sometime before our friend here started to become irrelevant with hollow moon talk and the opinions of philosophers who, lived 2500 years ago, I did address your picture questions...it looked like you were going to bring some other questions on board.

But I can understand if you forgot your train of thought!

My mistake MID, thanks for clearing that up. I was confused because he uses a cropped picture version of AS11-40-5886 elsewhere.

Funny, I seem to have lost that bad taste in my mouth now.

Because by saying so, you have called a very large number of good people liars.

There's also that pesky little part where you keep bringing up points that have already been refuted. Like the age of the moon being older than the earth. I already said why moon rocks we found are older than any earth rocks we've found. But you've decided to ignore that. You're ignoring valid points that people make, only to rehash them in another way with bad science.

It would be much easier to believe the moon landing was faked if the alternatives weren't so fantastical and there was actual evidence of fakery. Everything brought up is speculation, bad science, and flat out wrong.

Hi, I believe I am the one that brought up the moon rocks being older than earth rocks. Not funkymonkey, and as far as I know it was only mentioned once.
You and your co-horts have done a wonderful job of debunking all this "fakery" and I thank you for your views and enlightenment.

When a geology question is posed like that, I have to answer. It would be an offense to 9 years of academic study in geology if I didn't.

thank you for clearing that up, xymox. and for the fact i am calling people liars... i am just using my brain and observations.... maybe you could use it sometime

I did not say you are calling people liars. Boorite said that.

Sigh, no. No you aren't. You aren't even observing the other posts in this thread or else you wouldn't have kept saying the same things over and over as evidence after people more knowledgeable than you proved why your evidence was wrong.

You need more practice, a LOT more practice.



The people that you are effectively calling liars:

• The crews of the Apollo missions
• The Governments of the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (amongst others)
• All those present in Mission Control
• The engineers and scientists of NASA
• The operators of the communications dishes in the USA, Australia and (I believe) Spain
• Just about every radio astronomer active in the late 60's and early 70's (many of whome used their radio telescopes to track the missions).
• Just about every planetary astronomer and geologist that has been active since the late 1960's
• The thousands of workers, engineers and scientists of the sub-contractors that built the Apollo space craft and Saturn V launcher.

There are probably a lot more as well.

If your observations are correct all of these people have to be liars.

You are "just" saying that the most documented technical achievement in human history is fake, and all the people involved are fakers. Please feel free to say this, but you asked why we might have a problem with it, and I am telling you.

If this is you using your brain, then it's broken.

Actually 'xymox', you brought it up here in this post.

You said, "Also the moon does not revolve like the earth does, so one side always faces the earth, or did you even know that as well??"

I answered you here in this post.

I said, "Wrong...completely wrong. The moon both revolves and rotates. We don’t see that rotation because the moon rotates at the same rate as it revolves around our Earth...that's why we only see the one side. It appears that perhaps you don't know as much as you think you do?".

Waspie is right. Observation alone, without evidence or knowledge, is not proof of very much. The human mind tends to "fill in the blanks" when observing, to conclude things that may not be so, especially when lacking certain knowledge.

Why it would be that everytime i read a post of someone saying "the moon landigs were fake, the moon is an alien spaceship", the image of the conspiracy nerd form MIB 2 cames into my mind.

People where different back then. People for the most part had values. If it was happen today i would beilve it to be a hoax. Just remember what you know and what you think you know someone out there has already done it.

They sure where. Generally they were not so daft as to believe everything was a hoax or conspiracy.



Why? Do you believe that today hundreds of thousands of people would lie without one single, believable source ever telling the truth?

I find that people today are much keener to scream "conspiracy" or "fake" than they used to. Take our own image gallery for example. Even Hubble space telescope photographs get branded as Photoshop jobs by some people, including pictures of natural phenomena such as lightning, twisters and even clouds.

I don't think any space agency is going to be able to pull off a Moon landing now without there being a flood of conspiracy theories in it's wake. After all if you believe a convincing Moon landing hoax could be pulled off in 1969, then doing so now with today's computer graphics and photographic manipulation software available it should be a doddle.

I agree. People either ignore the fact that the Soviet Union would have known if the Moon landings were faked or claim they were in on the conspiracy. The same will be true this time. Even when the Chinese make it to the Moon and prove that Apollo landed there the conspiracy theorists will just shout "New World Order."

Its amazing the difficulty some people have accepting something as simple and obvious as their inability to fly to the Moon. Do you have any idea what your real capabilities in space are even now, 40 years later. In spite of all the technological advances, you still can't get anywhere near the Moon. You don't know, you don't care. The only Space you are interested in is the Make believe kind, the Moon is just some far away place that you project your vain fantasies on. No matter how often we explain it to you, you refuse to grasp the truth, and you seem to believe that that is the same as being right. You can declare your omniscience over and over but in reality your Space program is going nowhere. That's what's important, in your mind you really do believe that you can fly to the Moon, but that is just is just a measure of your vanity and ignorance, but in reality you are failing at doing next to nothing. All you are doing is freeloading off the Russian Space program.
The problem is that you believe this so devoutly, that you lack the ability to even question it, just because you can't tolerate the truth doesn't mean that you should deprive others of the right to know it. You are too ignorant to ever realize it, so you will have to wait until you are told, then you still wouldn't understand. The same sort of mentality that can convince yourself that you really can fly to the Moon, even though your real capabilities are far short of that can convince yourself that your inability to realize the absurdity of thinking that you were capable of landing on the Moon 40 years ago does not reflect upon your intellectual capabilities. The only reason reason you feel so threatened by this idea is because it's true, and it tells you things about yourself that you cant accept.
Well if you want to change those things all you have to do is change your mind. Thats how you win, by realizing the truth. What reward do you get for your delusions, a few Moon rocks and a Space program that sucks. As it stands the most I can hope for is that you know that I know it was fake and I know you'll hate me even more for it when they finally clue you in. Think for yourself, question authority, and you really can't fly to the Moon, the sad thing is you have to be told that, because you lack any capacity to figure it out even with our help. But once you accept the truth, it wouldnt matter. Obviously we cant fly to the Moon, no one is going there, so what. The only reason this is so important is because there still people who believe in it, and the more you resist it the more important it is. You still got lots of time, NASA is under no pressure to reveal the truth, they must wonder, if people need to be told that the Moon landings were fake, what does it matter what they think. Why even bother to explain it to them. What relevance do their beliefs have to anything happening in Space or even back here on Earth. Thats the point, you aren't flying to the Moon, you are just fooling yourselves, and that is a very easy thing to do.

With your attitude we'd have accomplished nothing

There are people who measure the very moons distance using lasers, with a reflective pad put by us on the moon, im supposing their job is a falsity. Questioning things is fine in my eyes, but perhaps your want for consiracies to be true outwieghs what we can achieve in terms of our technology sublunar or lunar. Perhaps you would indulge me and tell me what your current field is, in terms of job/expretise, so only in as far to validate your claims.

Thankyou

Looter,
You offer not one piece of evidence for you belief except a picture of the distance to the moon. The moon is a quater of a million miles away, so what? It is very close in astronomical terms. Un-manned spacecraft are operating at the very edge of the solar system.

We can't build the pyramids today so they most be fake too. We can't go to the moon now because NASA retired the Saturn Vs. These are not some imagined piece of trickery, hundreds of thousands of people were present at their launch.

The only distance that I see that is too great for mankind to bridge is reality and the Hoax Believers grasp of it.

I suppose all the other craft in space are hoaxes too. Definitely the Mars lander. And all those cell phone, tv, and other satellites are hoaxes too. Because if we don't have the ability to fly to the moon, then how do we even have the ability to put those in orbit to begin with? I'm sure the International Space Station (and MIR) were hoaxes as well. The ISS is such a feat of technology that (I think) the moon landings pale in comparison.

Why haven't we been back? Well, here's one reason: Safety. We can do a much more efficient and much safer job with robots than with humans. Which is why we sent robots to Mars. During the space race, the US and USSR were so desperate to be the first one up there, that safety wasn't a primary issue. In some instances (especially in the USSR) it was outright ignored. The only thing that mattered was being there first. Then we got there first and were so pleased with how well it worked, we went back 11 more times in just about the same getup.

Today we'd most likely have to design a whole new system to take humans to the moon or Mars. Why use 40 year old technology for something like that? Not to mention the cost associated with it. I'd be interested in seeing a cost analysis of sending robots versus sending humans.

To whoever mentioned an ancient philosopher saying there was something wrong with the moon...can I just point out that no matter how smart or insightful he may have been back then...there's still the problem of that philosopher living a few thousand years ago. THOUSAND. In human science terms, that's like someone from the Salem witch trials trying to understand the Enterprise's warp core.

You know who didn't believe the moon landing was real back in the 60's? Poor, uneducated people. People who didn't have even basic knowledge about how it could be done. Who doesn't believe the moon landing is real today, despite the wealth of information and technology that was a direct result of the space race? People who don't know how to use the brains and talents they were born with. "Reference books contain information, but you have to have brains to use it."

With all the amazing technology we have today, it's sad to think that anyone believes we don't have the capability to send people to the moon. As someone said, if a moon landing was done today, many more people would believe it was a hoax because of advancements in computer graphics.

I'm so glad I don't live in that sad, dismal world.

That ancient philosopher I speak of paved the way for modern science and made discoveries that are currently being utilized. The fact that he lived thousands of years ago is not relevant. You say you have studied geology for nine years, yet have never studied these things as well? What do you attend ? Sally Struther's "do- you -wanna- make- more- money- school- of -geology?"
I wrote of him because he reported the discovery of the ancient cave wall scrolls, that said the moon appeared overnight. he didn't say he supported it, he discovered it.
ALso to say the only people who didn't believe we went to the moon were poor, uneducated people, is so foolish a statement it completely dissolves anything you have contributed to this thread in my eyes. It is only a sad dismal world when someone only sees a narrow path with a narrow mind.
Really the way that some of you try to prove your point by calling others uneducated and ignorant is wrong and is a text book case of basic psychology. Look it up

Actually, I was alive during the moonshots, and at the time, and in my experience, anecdotally speaking, it is true that the only ones I ever heard espouse the opinion that the moon landings were faked happened to be poor persons with little or no formal education. I mean illiterate or semiliterate persons. Clearly, that is not the case today. People who can put sentences and paragraphs together and post them on websites are propagating the moon hoax nonsense. So something has changed.

BTW, I encourage you to argue geology with ivy if you would like to know how it feels to be thoroughly outclassed.



You're clearly not uneducated, so you have no excuse for buying this BS.

Oh, you poor poor creature you. Even if I did go to your fake little idea, it would be thoroughly above anything you have.

University of Wyoming. One of the best research universities in the world, especially for geology. I'd love to see you come here, I really would. Because once you got out of it, you'd actually have a basic understanding of how science works.

And yes, I have studied philosophy at another college. While it was interesting, it was hardly something I was interested it. That's why I majored in geology, not philosophy. I wasn't saying the ancient philosophers were dumb, far from it. I said their level of understanding of how the world works, while revolutionary and highly advanced in their time, can't be applied to what we know of astronomy.



Yeah, because people in times where we were still drawing on caves had a great understanding of how the world works. I bet there's a cave painting of an eclipse that signals armageddon too. Next you'll tell me that people in medieval times were correct in not washing their hands because stench keeps demons at bay.



I never said the only people who believed it was a hoax was the poor and uneducated. I meant people in general who didn't have the basic understanding of science because they didn't either have the opportunity or the training and therefore couldn't even comprehend that we have the technology to do those things. I'm talking about people who don't believe in germs because they can't see them and have never seen a microscope. I'm talking about people who barely know how the radio works. And despite what people would like to think, poor does equal uneducation in many parts of the country where a proper education is either unavailable or unattainable.

Yes, there were plenty of people who were education who thought the moon landing was a hoax at the time. But they were very few. I was saying generally, people who have knowledge about sciences such as basic astronomy, physics, geology, or even engineering would know there's nothing fantastical or unobtainable about landing on the moon.



How is believing humans have the technology and amazing ability to do something so great like travel to the moon mean I have a narrow mind? You won't even acknowledge that your evidence, which has been refuted by people with more knowledge and experience than you, is bunk. How many times do we have to point out basic astronomy and physics to you?



No, you have proven yourself to be uneducated by ignoring the obvious, using "evidence" that has been disproven for ages (and can be disproven by a 6th grade science student), and not having the brains to comprehend what's in front of you. You just pick up more fantastical "evidence" that either have nothing to do with real science, or something someone probably made up.

As far as I'm concerned, you're no different than the people who force Creationism to be taught in schools.

Yes, we need their vacuum tubes for our guitar amps.

Oh, oh, I can answer this one! Apparently, it has to be pointed out over and over... ad infinitium. Sadly, even such repetitive efforts appear to have little effect.

This definition of narrow mindedness seems to me to mean that you are narrow minded if you are able to make an informed decision based on evidence.

Presumably to be open minded in xymox1971s universe is to have an opinion based on no evidence at all and then to ignore all the information available because the real world doesn't agree with your opinion.

In which case I am so thankful that I'm narrow minded.

I think that this thread is really run it's course and is going in circles...unless somebody can come up with something compelling, it seems like it would be best to just let the sun set on this baby and let it go the way of all of the moon hoax threads before it...

I am reminded of an interview I saw on the TV sometime after the launch of Apollo 16, way back when we couldn't land on the moon, you know (ca. April 1972). I think it was a CBS news crew who interviewed a 100 year old former slave who went by the name of Charlie Smith.

They asked this dear old fellow what he thought of all of this stuff. He was at the cape and witnessed the launch.

I remember smiling when he said, "Ain't nobody been dere!" when asked about men going to the moon. The reporter pressed him a little (gently, of course), and he said, "Ain't nobody been to no moon!"

God bless him , I understood that.

After all, old Charlie was being whipped on some plantation, picking cotton for some oppressive "massa" somewhere "down south", long before a man ever flew in a rudimentary airplane. Here he was, witnessing something that must've been mind numbing to him (after all, it was still kind of mind numbing to me, and this was the 8th time a Saturn V had launched men to the moon). He obviously had no tacit understanding of what he was witnessing.

Perfectly understandable.

But this tirade is not. It qualifies as little more than modern-day psycho-babble. The prattlings of someone who probably didn't live through Apollo, certainly had no experience in anything associated with manned space flight as it was back then, and who has little background in the foundational sciences which allowed us to do this thing, all those years ago.

That's sad, because this knowledge is available to this person. It wasn't to Charlie's 100 year old mind.

He speaks of those of us who experienced this thing first hand as "believers". There was no belief involved. There may be for him, or her as the case may be, since he or she did not live it, but experience is a viable substitute for conjecture, most assuredly. And, while that particular experience may not be available to our friend, the records of it, in explicit detail, are.

The fact that the U.S. manned space program has done no actual exploration in 34 years is a sign of societal factors, not a sign that we couldn't, or didn't do it before. We most assuredly did.

We do not have the capability to do so now because of myriad factors that have been explained ad-nauseam before. However, we will have this capability, if all goes according to plan (and if some new administration of the future doesn't pull the plug on it), in the years to follow. The technological capability has always been present to continue what Apollo started.

Comparing today's space program with the one we had between 1961 and 1973 is like comparing apples to oranges. It doesn't work.

There was no need for belief to convince us we could fly to the moon in the 1960s. A mandate to do so, and the utter drive and dedication of a very large group of talented people in fact accomplished this goal. That seems to be the thing that modern-day hoax believers cannot understand--that such an ability, such a desire, and such a mindset actually existed at one time. It most certainly did. And, it is a shame--a terrible shame--that an entire generation or more has grown up in the wake of Apollo, and that many of them have grown to believe that the whole thing was faked, because the mindset that allowed us to accomplish this extraordinary thing all those years ago has been rendered inert by the societal evolution that has issued forth since.

This poster is an unfortunate by-product of that evolution. To him, or her, the idea that we could possibly go to the moon is "absurdity".

That is sad...especially given the fact that the entire program, in its most miniscule detail is laid out in more detail than any other human accomplishment has ever been.

This person says, "I know it was fake..." That is delusion.

Richard Nixon, in his message for the Apollo 17 crew, read up to them while they were on their way home from the moon in December 1972, said at one point that that flight would probably be the last time anyone went to the moon for decades to come.

It was a depressing and stunning statement to make (I shall never forget that moment), but it set the tone for the future of space flight as it has evolved. It also set the stage for an entire generation or more to grow up not having had the experience of at least seeing what happened back in those days, and it produced what we see above, a very sad state of affairs in human thought.

What is truly amazing is the difficulty some people seem to have in doing a little research, a little study, and a little personal investigation...which, given a modicum of intelligence, would point them to the obvious and incontrovertible conclusion, rather than spewing off in the fashion shown above, and illustrating a mindset that is the equivalent of the comprehensive capability of the mind of a 100 year old former slave, witnessing the launch of the 8th manned mission to the moon.

Old Charlie of course had a completely understandable reason for his comments.

But to see someone in 2006 spitting psycho-babble out in support of the same conclusion is really rather tragic.

It is obviously not a good idea to match geological wits with ivy...

He and Jack Schmitt would get along splendidly, and chew you up... and spit you out.

I'm thinking that's already happened.

I also don't think anyone goes into Geology to make alot of money (it's possible of course, but it's a pure science, really rather fascinating, and people go into that field out of passion, not a desire for greenbacks).

This is unfortunate, but it may be true.


The point of this discussion is to have a discussion...regarding the moon landing.

I'll say what I've said over and over again:

Don't come on here making statements, berating, or putting forth a bunch of psycho-babble.
Don't make definitive statements to the contrary and get arrogant about them. It serves no purpose but to make the poster of such messages look silly.

If you have doubts, ask specific questions so they can be answered.

That promotes discussion.


Otherwise, this thread is gonna be closed up for lack of any substance...thanks to a few who overwhelm the place with a bunch of unsubstantiated junk.

You're right, I never went into geology to make money. I suppose I could if I wanted to go into petrology and work for oil companies and the like, but honestly, petrology bores me to tears. I was always much more interested in paleontology, stratigraphy, and structural geology. I started because I wanted to work for builders, giving them the low down on how to safely build something in a geologically unstable area (as I watched a Dairy Queen near my hometown crack in half because some idiot had built it on unstable ground next to an annually flooding creek). There's a little money in that, but also the frustration of people not listening to what the geologist has to say. "Don't build in a sinkhole prone area!" *building collapses*

Paleoclimatology is another area I've been studying, though I've really only just begun. No real money in anything I'm interested in, I'm afraid. I just do it because I love it.

Also, I have girl parts.

Excellent post!!!




And the Earth is flat. Watch you don't fall off the edge.