Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
stevemagegod

Why havent we gone back to the Moon yet?

202 posts in this topic

Probably we haven't been back because the original effort to get a Man on the Moon was largely political, to get one over on the Reds. There hasn't been the impetus for that lately, although who knows, there may be if the Chinese continue to develop their space program, or if good ol' Vlad Rooty Poot starts to give the Russian space program some serious direction.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope because aliens told us not to go back.

Hahahahaha best reply ever!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as Ive said before, man is going to the moon again, read this link

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/31/china_confirms_plans_for_first_moon_visit_later_this_year/

And gold is extremely heavy to transport

I hope they won't filled the moon with counterfeit products as they did on earth.... :)

Edited by qxcontinuum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought today a tasco space station 70x800 mm magnification 600x

If there is any alien bases on moon will see them tonight. It will be full moon and free clean sky. A bottle of californian wine in the fridge and the fondu pot is ready....

Edited by qxcontinuum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..careful with that wine....

youll wind up seeing leprechauns and bigfoot up there too :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to check out the alleged alien bases. :alien:

A certain professor, who wished to remain anonymous, was engaged in a discussion with
Neil Armstrong
during a NASA symposium.

Professor
: What REALLY happened out there with Apollo 11?

Armstrong
: It was incredible, of course we had always known there was a possibility, the fact is, we were warned off! (by the Aliens) There was never any question then of a space station or a moon city.

Professor
: How do you mean "warned off"?

Armstrong
: I can't go into details, except to say that their ships were far superior to ours both in size and technology. Boy, were they big!... and menacing! No, there is no question of a space station.

Professor
: But NASA had other missions after Apollo 11?

Armstrong
: Naturally. NASA was committed at that time, and couldn't risk panic on Earth. But it really was a quick scoop and back again.

Armstrong confirmed that the story was true but refused to go into further detail, beyond admitting that the CIA was behind the cover-up.

More information in Cities Found on the Moon!

http://www.bibliotec...anomalies02.htm

Dear God Zoser get serious. bibliotec is an archive site. All they do is repeat what they search on the internet. It doesn't make it credible....and claims that Neil Armstrong witnessed anything other than "beautiful desolation" on the Moon are BS.

Posting such nonsense denies you of credibility.

I have mentioned this to you before about bibliotec...and again you demonstrate that you frequently do not read, or at least absorb, the information submitted here by members with vastly more experience in these subjects than yourself.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any professional telescope that can be affordable and accessible to everyone and that can help a user visualizing moon's details? I am sure that will be helpful for this threat.

Dobsonians are the best bang for buck.

You could also book time at any local observatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought today a tasco space station 70x800 mm magnification 600x

If there is any alien bases on moon will see them tonight. It will be full moon and free clean sky. A bottle of californian wine in the fridge and the fondu pot is ready....

WTF! Give me a chance!! :D LOL.

One of these hey?

312UN8rNcqL.jpg

Great start mate, there are some excellent astronomy forums like Ice In Space that have many members who will help you with any starter problems. I know I had my share, and was grateful for the helpful advice.

A filter might be a good idea if the moon is full, you will be surprised how much light comes back from the moon. And should be inexpensive. Sun filters cost a packet, but just colours for moon and planet viewing should be quite benign.

If you decide to expand your collection, these Dobs are very well priced IMHO and offer a great deal. A brand new 10" only set me back $550.00 au.

Good luck finding those moon bases, LOL, but enjoy what you find in the meantime. The Moon is great, but I find Messier Objects mesmerising.

dob10.jpg

I sincerely wish you all the very best on your new journey to the stars.

More people should just go out and have a look instead of relying on Youtube to tell them what they might see.

Edited by psyche101
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought today a tasco space station 70x800 mm magnification 600x

If there is any alien bases on moon will see them tonight. It will be full moon and free clean sky. A bottle of californian wine in the fridge and the fondu pot is ready....

:tu: whoa tiger - hehe, well at least you do what you say! heres one similar to mine! Only advice I can give is...If you decide to upgrade at some point, try get the widest lens possible, you'll see lots more! And let us know how your moon gazing is?

opplanet-rasco-1000x114-galaxsee.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:tu: whoa tiger - hehe, well at least you do what you say! heres one similar to mine! Only advice I can give is...If you decide to upgrade at some point, try get the widest lens possible, you'll see lots more! And let us know how your moon gazing is?

opplanet-rasco-1000x114-galaxsee.jpg

Nice!!!

I reckon for the moon, he has the right tool for the job, deep space I agree holds wonders that have to be seen but he is going to get some very nice views of the moon out of that scope.

Awesome isn't it! Great to see someone actually get out there and really look up. He best prep up to join the skeptics in the near future after making a sensible decision like that........................... :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear God Zoser get serious. bibliotec is an archive site. All they do is repeat what they search on the internet. It doesn't make it credible....and claims that Neil Armstrong witnessed anything other than "beautiful desolation" on the Moon are BS.

Posting such nonsense denies you of credibility.

I have mentioned this to you before about bibliotec...and again you demonstrate that you frequently do not read, or at least absorb, the information submitted here by members with vastly more experience in these subjects than yourself.

If you don't like what the website say's disregard it. Isn't that standard skeptic policy?

Nuff said.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posting such nonsense denies you of credibility.

:tu: He lost his credibility ages ago, now hes just a bringer of deep exasperation and face-palms. People like him put a huge dent in serious Ufology and he doesnt even realise he's doing it, but he should as he gets told often enough

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:tu: He lost his credibility ages ago, now hes just a bringer of deep exasperation and face-palms. People like him put a huge dent in serious Ufology and he doesnt even realise he's doing it, but he should as he gets told often enough

Then it should be very easy for you to explain away a number of people who are prepared to swear in court that they have witnessed authorities tampering with images in order to keep the truth from the public.

Here is the post which all seemed to conveniently ignore.

http://www.unexplain...90#entry4924506

Until you can, then there are other options on the table as to why we have never been back to the moon.

In other words it's an open case.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're all agreeing on this subject. We haven't been back to moon ' not due to existence of aliens (that would have normally been seen by everyone using powerful scopes) but due to monetary reasons.

However if every serious business man will have deep understanding of the fact how gold is formed , moon should be seriously considered. On earth gold was brought by the latest meteorite bombardment over 200 millions ago. Gold is the result of melting stars exploding . Moon is continuously bombarded and was in the past as well. On earth gold is going underground more and more due to its higher density and weight + gravitational forces, but on moon these are lot less. Chances to find gold on the top layers on moon are very strong and high.

This is truly a serious reason to go to the moon.

Good Point. It'll be like the Gold Rush all over again. However this time around it will be a Nation's Gold Rush. Specifically United States, Russia, China, North Korea, India etc., who will be going to get to the Gold not individual people like in the old days.

Edited by stevemagegod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it should be very easy for you to explain away a number of people who are prepared to swear in court that they have witnessed authorities tampering with images in order to keep the truth from the public.

Here is the post which all seemed to conveniently ignore.

http://www.unexplain...90#entry4924506

Until you can, then there are other options on the table as to why we have never been back to the moon.

In other words it's an open case.

Donna Hare has been debunked so many times, only the ignorant and the gullible choose to keep sicking up her stories :tu:

Do you know the interview of Mrs. Donna Tietze Hare recipient of numerous N.A.S.A. space awards ?

http://www.azuredoor.freeserve.co.uk...ushconfess.htm

Well, I read it. And, charitably speaking, it's a load of bovine byproduct.

1. She is variously described as a "NASA employee" and "NASA subcontractor". Which is it?

2. Her awards are touted, but even supposing she did receive them - big deal. They are handed out to everyone who worked on a successful project, even slide technicians. (I have several NASA achievement awards, and all they are are "attaboys" I received with a lot of other folks working on this or that.) Nice, but they don't mean she was singled out for recognition. If she even worked there.

3. Her descriptions of security procedures are laughable. I have worked on projects with classified content, and you either have access to an area because you need it, or you don't. You don't just wander in and out; and you're either allowed to look at something, or you're not. I flatly reject her claims about the photo markup area, and the guy getting clubbed, as contrary to the reality of classified operations - never mind the bizarre UFO claims themselves!

4. There is no evidence, none whatsoever, to support any these claims.

5. There are other problems with her claims; see this post by Jim Oberg.

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?23038-Faked-Moon-Landings/page17&p=719229&highlight=donna%20hare#post719229

and Jim Obergs debunk here, do read it

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?2284-Donna-Teitze-Hare&p=37352&highlight=Donna%20Tietze%20Hare#post37352

Donna Hare has been debunked before; . As for the other guy, his description of a supposedly high-security operation is laughably amateurish. Finally, there's no evidence for such an operation, just uncorroborated stories from two people.

Moreover, it doesn't make any sense. How do you conceal half-mile structures from Earthbound telescopes or the cameras of other nations' spacecraft? :tu:

In short, the story makes no sense, the details are literally incredible, the claimants have no credibility, and there's no evidence to back up the claims. And now I want back the few minutes of my life I wasted watching that drooling idiocy.

http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/863?page=3

Shall I post more sources? Nah I wont waste my time. Every thread or post you make is getting more and more desperate. Im surprised you can still type , id have thought the amount of times you desperately scrape your barrels youd have no skin left on your knuckles :clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donna Hare has been debunked so many times, only the ignorant and the gullible choose to keep sicking up her stories :tu:

Do you know the interview of Mrs. Donna Tietze Hare recipient of numerous N.A.S.A. space awards ?

http://www.azuredoor....ushconfess.htm

Well, I read it. And, charitably speaking, it's a load of bovine byproduct.

1. She is variously described as a "NASA employee" and "NASA subcontractor". Which is it?

2. Her awards are touted, but even supposing she did receive them - big deal. They are handed out to everyone who worked on a successful project, even slide technicians. (I have several NASA achievement awards, and all they are are "attaboys" I received with a lot of other folks working on this or that.) Nice, but they don't mean she was singled out for recognition. If she even worked there.

3. Her descriptions of security procedures are laughable. I have worked on projects with classified content, and you either have access to an area because you need it, or you don't. You don't just wander in and out; and you're either allowed to look at something, or you're not. I flatly reject her claims about the photo markup area, and the guy getting clubbed, as contrary to the reality of classified operations - never mind the bizarre UFO claims themselves!

4. There is no evidence, none whatsoever, to support any these claims.

5. There are other problems with her claims; see this post by Jim Oberg.

http://cosmoquest.or...hare#post719229

and Jim Obergs debunk here, do read it

http://cosmoquest.or... Hare#post37352

Donna Hare has been debunked before; . As for the other guy, his description of a supposedly high-security operation is laughably amateurish. Finally, there's no evidence for such an operation, just uncorroborated stories from two people.

Moreover, it doesn't make any sense. How do you conceal half-mile structures from Earthbound telescopes or the cameras of other nations' spacecraft? :tu:

In short, the story makes no sense, the details are literally incredible, the claimants have no credibility, and there's no evidence to back up the claims. And now I want back the few minutes of my life I wasted watching that drooling idiocy.

http://apollohoax.pr...read/863?page=3

Shall I post more sources? Nah I wont waste my time. Every thread or post you make is getting more and more desperate. Im surprised you can still type , id have thought the amount of times you desperately scrape your barrels youd have no skin left on your knuckles :clap:

Just claiming a debunk does nothing. Your sources do nothing.

"Her stories make no sense.............

"There is no evidence.........

"JIm's debunked it all................

"Her stories are laughable..........

Is that it?

Really?

She said she was a subcontractor and gives all the information in her testimony.

Which again you have not listened to.

I'm still waiting for evidence; oh and there are another 4 people in the clip with the same story.

Better get busy.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better get busy.

How do you conceal half-mile structures from Earthbound telescopes or the cameras of other nations' spacecraft? :tu:

Answer this one mastermind? Boring Zoser again

not-listening-chimp.jpg

.

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boring Zoser again

Where is the refutation of the people in the testimonial clip? I just saw protests in your post; no supporting evidence.

Nothing new there.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the refutation of the people in the testimonial clip? I just saw protests in your post; no supporting evidence.

Nothing new there.

How do you conceal half-mile structures from Earthbound telescopes or the cameras of other nations' spacecraft? :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you conceal half-mile structures from Earthbound telescopes or the cameras of other nations' spacecraft? :tu:

You know the moon? Does it have something called a dark side?

Why is that do you think?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know the moon? Does it have something called a dark side?

Why is that do you think?

the moon has been mapped by the Chinese, the Russians, the Japanese, and the Japanese and Chinese are the most recent. Using much better equipment than early NASA mapping of course, OBVIOUSLY as technology today is sooo much better, - and no other country has pathetic claims there is stuff on the moon, only the morons you heap praise on

Funny that isnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the moon has been mapped by the Chinese, the Russians, the Japanese, and the Japanese and Chinese are the most recent. Using much better equipment than early NASA mapping of course, OBVIOUSLY as technology today is sooo much better, - and no other country has pathetic claims there is stuff on the moon, only the morons you heap praise on

Funny that isnt it?

And that does exactly what to disprove the testimonies? Do you think really that the Chinese and Japanese will release details of every square foot of the unseen part of the moon?

Dream on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoser, you've seen my challenge to Hare -- if her story is correct, NASA had space pictures sharp enough to see tree shadows, and merely 'cleaned them up' prior to release.

Find me one.

NASA pictures of Earth's surface, circa 1970, taken by spacecraft [not helicopters, for example], in which the shadows of trees can be discerned.

Find me one and I'll shut up for a year here.

Fail to find one, you gotta shut up until you learn better.

You do trust Donna, don't you? Put her credibility on the line, and provide supportive evidence.

ONE space-based picture from NASA 1970 era, where you can see a tree's shadow.

Why don't you suspect there aren't any? Because when pushed, you DO suspect she was making it all up, don't you?
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoser, you've seen my challenge to Hare

Unfortunately, its a wasted effort. If zoser sees an article that DOESN'T support his confirmation bias, he simply ignores it. Hence why he is shunned by many here. Thats also why he appears totally ignorant of real facts. He simply doesn't do any realistic research. he just regurgitates what he sees on very dubious websites and thinks he's the main man...
:lol:

.... You can lead a horse to water etc etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously we haven't landed another Human on the Moon in 41 years. In that time frame are technology has become so much safer and better. Not to mention we have a international space station now which could be used as a Gas Station. To and from the Moon which we didn't have back then. Sure a Moon trip is pretty expensive but still why hasn't another country besides the US landed someone on the moon?

Because if we went back we'd have to rename it the Obamoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.