Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Illiniblue35

Did we land on the moon?

14,116 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

MID
I have a feeling that for the hardcore Moon Hoax Believers we have no possibility of actually providing any evidence. When the LRO is able to show actual pictures, well, they will have been manipulated to show exactly that, despite that with a little finesse one might actually be able to grab the pictures in transmission and decode them. Nonetheless, they will have been manipulated. Next step would actually be to take said people to the moon and show them in person. Well, if NASA or others can take them to the moon, well, how hard would it have been the place the evidence there beforehand?

I honestly don't see how one can turn the most hardcore believers. That is not the say that there are believers that can and have been turned by a rational explanation to some of the question that has been raised. :)

Best,

Badeskov

Point well made, and likely true...

This is one of the primary reasons why I maintain that I am not giving proof, but rather, am providing knowledge. If one of a hundred HBs can actually take the time and make the effort to learn, and that knowledge opens a door for them, showing them the vast volume of information that they never knew about, then we've been successful, I think.

If it's proof of anything, it's proof that the human mind is not entirely dead and buried in the mire of so much societal silliness and conspiracy consciousness....humans can still learn! We can only hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
If it's proof of anything, it's proof that the human mind is not entirely dead and buried in the mire of so much societal silliness and conspiracy consciousness....humans can still learn! We can only hope.

I second that aspiration! linked-image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
badeskov
If it's proof of anything, it's proof that the human mind is not entirely dead and buried in the mire of so much societal silliness and conspiracy consciousness....humans can still learn! We can only hope.

Very true, indeed!

Best,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rusich

____________________________This message for all, who argued with me.____________________________________

I am finish the dispute because it is exhausted.

Language barrier does not allow to develop a dispute.

Problem of Apollo interesting and extensive, it is impossible reduce to technical questions only. This problem of opposition USSR and USA. For answer to question: "Did we land on the Moon?" is necessary look not in the microscope, is necessary look from heights a eagle flight. So I did not enter into technical fineness of Apollo program on purpose. Though I read encyclopedia of the Getlend. I tried to take a look the history of Apollo from standpoints of ordinary schoolboy. I wanted that my discourses were comprehensible not only to the professor as well as housewife.

As I has got this forum on? Because Google gave me first this branch. I readed this topic on russian's forums three years. I wanted to know as this topic discuss in english forums. I wanted to know my own possibilities for a discussion on a english forum.

What have I done a conclusion from the discuss? You have arguments such either as NASA russian protectors have it. Your answers and answers of NASA russian protectors is the song of good co-ordinated chorus. I am convinced in existance of the international conspiracy between NASA protectors and NASA false critics. This conspiracy provokes a mistrust of society to the present NASA critics.

You turn a notions from legs on the head. For example, you call us believer, but we are sceptics unbelieveing to NASA words. Itself you believer NASA notwithstanding facts name sceptics. You call itself sceptics but believe NASA notwithstanding facts.

You do not have a material evidences for your stay on Moon. You believe in NASA moon behests as in bible. Twelve astronauts, walked on the Moon, are twelve apostles for you. The Specialists confirmed flight on the Moon, are authoritative theologians for you.

Finally the most main conclusion is I insufficiently well know english for the full-fledged debate.

I go to learn a english grammatics. I thank all who have argued with me for the polite attitude co to me. I will not return on this forum, but I not bid farewell with you.

We shall meet on other forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flyingswan
Though I read encyclopedia of the Getlend.

While Gatland was a considerable authority on space matters, he has been dead these 10 years and wrote very little in the 1990s when information about the formerly secret Russian space programme was being revealed. If he was your main source it would explain why you were so poorly informed on the comparative reliability statistics of the early US and Russian space programmes. There is now a considerable amount of data from those years available, including detailed personal stories from insiders in the Russian programme like Kamanin and Chertok. These in general confirm a lot of the work of Western analysts who identified various missions, hidden at the time under the catch-all Kosmos label, as part of a Russian manned lunar programme. If the Russians and the US were collaborating to fool everyone else about their moon programmes, hiding test missions seems a very curious way to go about it. Such a collaboration has no evidential basis and would involve a major re-writing of the history of the 20th century that anyone who lived through those years would find very hard to believe.

The whole reason you have failed to convince anyone in this thread is that you have put forward your hypothesis of US/Russian collaboration in a hoax without in any way attempting to provide supporting evidence.

Edited by flyingswan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID
Problem of Apollo interesting and extensive, it is impossible reduce to technical questions only. This problem of opposition USSR and USA. For answer to question: "Did we land on the Moon?" is necessary look not in the microscope, is necessary look from heights a eagle flight. So I did not enter into technical fineness of Apollo program on purpose. Though I read encyclopedia of the Getlend. I tried to take a look the history of Apollo from standpoints of ordinary schoolboy. I wanted that my discourses were comprehensible not only to the professor as well as housewife.

I think one of the problems that you shall have to overcome is that you cannot discuss Apollo from the standpoint of an ordinary schoolboy. If you do not wish to understand the "technical fineness" of Apollo, how can you expect to understand how it happened, and that it happened?

This is the reason that I repeatedly asked you to put forth questions about Apollo that a schoolboy might ask...questions based upon you doubts. But you resisted, in favor of conspiratorial minded ideas.

Trust me, I can make an answer palpable to a housewife or a schoolboy...

What have I done a conclusion from the discuss? You have arguments such either as NASA russian protectors have it. Your answers and answers of NASA russian protectors is the song of good co-ordinated chorus. I am convinced in existance of the international conspiracy between NASA protectors and NASA false critics. This conspiracy provokes a mistrust of society to the present NASA critics.

It is a good co-ordinated chorus because the science and technology which propelled Apollo, and the un-disputed substantiation of the program, lends itself to a group of people who know something about it and can explain it. They all sound the same because they're all trying to explain to you the same thing...which you do not understand. They all do understand. This is akin to you coming onto a mathematical forum and stating that you believe that there is a conspiracy in place and that 2+2=5. What you will get is a group of mathematicians all telling you the same thing-- that 2+2=4, a substantiated and provable mathematical contention...and you would consider them nothing more than a good, co-ordinated chorus?

...you call us believer, but we are sceptics unbelieveing to NASA words. Itself you believer NASA notwithstanding facts name sceptics. You call itself sceptics but believe NASA notwithstanding facts.

You do not have a material evidences for your stay on Moon. You believe in NASA moon behests as in bible. Twelve astronauts, walked on the Moon, are twelve apostles for you. The Specialists confirmed flight on the Moon, are authoritative theologians for you.

We are well aware that you do not believe NASA.

As I have repeatedly told you, Apollo is about knowledge, not belief. Belief is founded upon faith and conjecture. Understanding Apollo is about understanding the science and technology behind it. We are here to educate...not to foster belief.

Further, if you bothered to research, and pay attention (and again, ask a question based upon your doubts), you would realize that there is indeed material evidence for our stays on the Moon...more than exists for any project in the history of mankind. The specialists who have confirmed our flight to the moon have nothing to do with theology...they are scientists located all over the world.

Finally the most main conclusion is I insufficiently well know english for the full-fledged debate.

That may be true, Rusish, but the attitude you put forth cuts cleanly through any language barrier. You are a hoax believer and conspiracy theorist...a difficult breed. You resist questioning us and resist the aquisition of knowledge in deference to your dearly held beliefs. If you learn English sufficiently to return to such a discussion, it will change nothing unless your mind changes along with your new-found linguistic skills.

You must be open to learning things which you know little about (Apollo). And trust me, we have seen those with fluency in English who are no different from you. Aquisition of language skills will do little more than enable you to be clearly understood in your obstinance, but such skills will do little to help you learn, unless your mind is prepared to accept knowledge that awaits, and is readily available, but which up to this time, you seem completely unwilling to ask about, or listen to when offered.

Good luck with your English studies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jim88
http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87476

this was a guys argument about if we did or didnt land on the moon. I know its prolly been talked about but what do you guys think about it?

Some of the stuff he says has been explained by people debunking the theory that NASA faked the lunar landing. There are websites that debunk it.

This website debunks some of their claims.

http://www.unmuseum.org/moonhoax.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trinitrotoluene

I'll make this quick and brief

If there is no atmosphere in space, no wind on the moon, etc.... why does the flag move in the video ?

Because they were moving it. Say hello to inertia.

Why are the same backgrounds used for various pictures that NASA say are from areas that are supposed to be miles away from each other ?

Due to a lack of hazing as there is no atmosphere it is impossible to judge how distant things are away. Some of those mountains you can see in the background, while they actually look like small hills they are huge mountains.

Why are the shadows in some of the pictures going in different directions when NASA claims that there was no exterior source of light, except the sun ?

Uneven terrain. Maybe the question to ask here, is if there are TWO light sources as this poster claims, then why aren't there two shadows?

Why was the surface of the moon described as being like powder/dust... yet a rocket landed on the moon and the pictures show ZERO dirt/dust on the landers footpads ?

You can see the disturbance around and under the LM if you actually look. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/20130735.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/20130764.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/20129005.jpg

Why are there no stars visible in the pictures, the sky is supposed to be super clear if you are on the moon.

It is. They were in daylight. The cameras were set for exposure for daylight pictures.

Why havent we gone back to the moon since the 70's ?

Money

Whatever happened with colonizing the moon ?

Someone obviously hasn't been keeping up with their space news ;)

If the lunar lander has a huge rocket that thrusts down as you land on the moon... why is there no blast crater under the lander on the pictures shown by NASA ?

Also, the expectation of having a blast crater (presumably looking like a fresh impact crater?) under the LM is flawed. Does a garden hose sprayed at high pressure into the dirt create a blast crater? It surely blows the surface dirt in a radial direction and will clear out a small hole, but not a blast crater (like an explosion of dynamite, perhaps?). There is even an Earthly example of a rocket landing on dirt. The DC-X was a test flight program of a vertical takeoff and landing rocket. On one of its last flights, it made an emergency landing outside of the pad area. Despite the hydrogen/oxygen engine producing a thrust of some 60,000 pounds (about 20 times the thrust of the LM descent engine!), the engine produced a mark on the desert floor that was barely recognizable. Given that the descent stage engine bell is about 5 feet across at the bottom, and that thrust of the engine at touchdown was about 3,000 pounds, that blast pressure of the rocket exhaust was only about 1 pound per square inch - not much different from the pressure caused by the weight of an astronaut on the Moon standing on one foot while walking across the surface.

Its impossible for the Lander to land without making a crater, specially if how they say that the moon's surface is like powder/dust.

How is it that we can hear the astronouts talking while they are approaching the moon... live rockets are burning at the same time, there should be no way to make out the astronauts words, yet he is heard clearly.

Space = Vacuum. Vacuum = No sound. The only thing they would have heard is the sound travelling through the structure and into the LM. That, and the vibrations. They also had headsets on.

When the rocket lifts up from the moon... why is there no exhaust coming out of the rocket ?

Hydrazine (a fuel) and dinitrogen tetroxide (an oxidizer) were the Lunar Module propellants, chosen for their reliability; they ignite hypergolically –upon contact– without a spark. Hypergolic propellants happen to produce a nearly transparent exhaust.

And no dust cloud either, specially with how the moon is supposed to be covered by powder fine dust ?

Go and watch the video again, there's a huge amount of debris blown up. Plus the engine is hitting the descent stage of the LM.

This is just the tip of things... there is soo much more information than this.

Yes there certainly is. It's all uneducated rubbish.

Watch this special that aired on TV. Its actually a great documentary about this stuff.

Please don't. For the love of God.

They have a NASA spokesperson there and whenever they ask him to refute the claims... all he can say is that they are bogus and from crazy people and not worth the trouble trying to prove them wrong.

They're onto you MID!

If you landed on the moon, and someone said to you that its a lie... would you swear on the bible that you did ?

If someone kept hounding and harrasing you and telling you your lifes achievements are a lie and you are a fake, would you do something for that person?

Edited by Gavsto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
...If someone kept hounding and harrasing you and telling you your lifes achievements are a lie and you are a fake, would you do something for that person?

No, not something for that person, but certainly something to that person (allusion to Buzz Aldrin punching Bart Sibrel). linked-image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID

Ah Gav and Lilly....

What more can I say.

Once again you have explained the situation adequately!

)Lil...I am glad you were not the one that the moron Sibrel harrassed...because what we'd have seen you do to him would likely have been much more virulent than Buzz's swat across the boob's kisser!!!! :devil:

QUOTE

They have a NASA spokesperson there and whenever they ask him to refute the claims... all he can say is that they are bogus and from crazy people and not worth the trouble trying to prove them wrong.

They're onto you MID!

Aw, c'mon Gav...you know I'm not the type of NASA disinformation agent who does that sort of wave-off...despite the fact that many of the woo woos who put forth this poppycock are in fact crazy people, and not worth the trouble of trying to prove wrong (they do this themselves most often anyway!).

But really, to Jim88:

Have you ever seriously thought about this?

Do you actually have doubts?

If so, ask about them ...ONE-AT-A-TIME, right here.

Do not supply a laundry list taken from some other web page. Think about your own doubts, and ask about them.

Here, you will get a thorough explanation, sources, and reference material so that you can research the answers for yourself and see that Apollo happened precisely as it has been described.

Think about it, and come back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trinitrotoluene
Aw, c'mon Gav...you know I'm not the type of NASA disinformation agent who does that sort of wave-off

That's exactly what a NASA disinformation agent WOULD say MID! ;) hehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID
That's exactly what a NASA disinformation agent WOULD say MID! ;) hehe

You've got a point there, Gav...

:blush:

Once a NASA disinformation specialist, always one, I suppose!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
badeskov
You've got a point there, Gav...

:blush:

Once a NASA disinformation specialist, always one, I suppose!

I thought you had graduated to Government disinformation specialist ;)

Best,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
)Lil...I am glad you were not the one that the moron Sibrel harrassed...because what we'd have seen you do to him would likely have been much more virulent than Buzz's swat across the boob's kisser!!!! :devil:

Who me? :innocent: No, I have two "nice little doggies" that would most likely attach themselves to the most convenient part of anyone's anatomy who tried to push me around (not to mention my 6' 3" 235 lb 19 year old son with the black belt in Kempo). Actually, I think that considering how annoying Mr. Sibrel has been to various astronauts and their families he really did "get off cheap" with just one good smack on the kisser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID
I thought you had graduated to Government disinformation specialist ;)

Best,

Badeskov

Oh yes...I almost forgot.

It was a pay-grade increase as well...never noticed because us GDAs work all the time, and can't find the time to spend their money anyway!

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID
Who me? :innocent: No, I have two "nice little doggies" that would most likely attach themselves to the most convenient part of anyone's anatomy who tried to push me around (not to mention my 6' 3" 235 lb 19 year old son with the black belt in Kempo). Actually, I think that considering how annoying Mr. Sibrel has been to various astronauts and their families he really did "get off cheap" with just one good smack on the kisser.

Well, yes, of course...that's what I meant.

You would sic your two "nice little doggies" upon the poor silly man, they'd bite him into submission (probably puking at the taste...), and then you would turn to your overtly large offspring, and say, "Sic 'em!"

You'd just stand there and direct the whole affair, a wry smile on your face!!!!

That's power!

...I'm glad you're not an astronaut who walked on the Moon, and that I'm not a half-rate moron named Sibrel who decided to accost you!

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
You'd just stand there and direct the whole affair, a wry smile on your face!!!!

That's power!

Why yes, that is indeed power of a sort! I never thought of it that way before, then again I've never been accosted by the likes of Mr. Sibrel either (thank goodness).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID
Why yes, that is indeed power of a sort! I never thought of it that way before, then again I've never been accosted by the likes of Mr. Sibrel either (thank goodness).

Sure! I can see it now.

Miss Lilly, first woman on the Moon, is walking into a building where she is to address a convention of folks, and here comes Sibrel, camera man trailing, holding a Bible...

"Excuse me Miss Lilly, people call you an American heroine, but I think your a liar. You can prove me wrong by putting your hand on this Bible and swearing right here before God and America that you walked on the Moon!"

Miss Lilly, the ever dignified heroine of the American Space Program, would never think of swatting him across the face, or kicking him in the pants...as other astronauts have done. No, not Miss Lilly! She turns slowly to face Mr. Sibrel, smiles gently, and with an imperceptiple motion of her eyes, summons Junior...a 6' 9" tall kempo guy with a really mean look on his face into action.

SUddenly...without him ever seeing what was happening, Sibrel's knees buckle beneath him, he gasps, and he finds himself grasped in a vise-like choke hold. Miss Lilly, always cool and collected, gazes upon the now choking and supine Sibrel...and feels compassion as she sees that he is in obvious distress...indeed, a few more seconds and he may explode, since his head is swelling and his eyes are bugging out and his skin color is a rosy, cherry red.

She becons her immense son to let him go, and of course, he does. A snap of her fingers and her two canine companions (always at her side...indeed, it has been rumored that she took them along to the Moon with her in her Personal Preference Kit...two doggie travel kennels stowed in the lower equipment bay of her spacecraft) assume a menacing position at Sibrels now depleted flanks.

Her son grabs the Bible and holds it in front of Sibrel, and Miss Lilly says, "Now, Mr. Sibrel, you're going to put your hand on that Bible and swear that I went to the Moon, walked on its surface, and returned 200 pounds of Moon rocks to the Earth, and you're going to say that you've been a complete weenie and a moron about this whole thing, that you've been wrong the whole time, and...you're going to apologize and guarantee that you'll never harass anyone again about this....or, my two sweet dogs here, who are obviously very hungry, are going to eat you while your cameraman films it, OK?"

He does so. Miss Lilly, the astute business woman that she has always been, has the film produced on DVD, sells a million copies, and makes a fortune on it.

Yep...that's POWER.

You should've gone to the Moon. Then, we wouldn't have this moronic upstart putting out his silliness!

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waspie_Dwarf

It is good to see some humour on this subject, but maybe we should leave it here. It is a fine line between a bit of fun and overstepping the mark to the point where people begin to take offence. Let's get back on topic before we over step that mark.

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
Yep...that's POWER.

You should've gone to the Moon. Then, we wouldn't have this moronic upstart putting out his silliness!

Indeed, a most clever and amusing fantasy you've dreamed up there MID. I especially like the part about me making a boat load of money! :tu:

But, like Waspie said, back on topic before we get too far 'out there'! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID

Ah yes, well, we've gotta have some humor every once in a while...

But, the original topic again is, "Did we land on the Moon?"--that question which defies description and origin, but which nonetheless continues to rear its head...

My Opinion:

We certainly did.

We arrived there at precisely 4:17:40 pm EDT on Sunday, 20 July 1969, and we left for the last time at 8:29:52 pm EST on 14 December 1972--certainly the most intense, stimulating, and remarkable 3 1/2 years of many people's lives.

I'd love to say, "Case closed," but alas...that I feel shall not be possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waspie_Dwarf
I feel that the moon landing was all a hoax.

In fact, I know.

Well I believe. I believe my grandpa. He said it was a hoax, and I believe him!

He should know.

Forget all the evidence that proves beyond a doubt that Apollo landed on the Moon. Ignore the photographic proof. Put out of your mind that amateur astronomers and radio enthusiasts from around the world (as well as the highly professional experts of the Soviet Union) tracked the spacecraft there and tracked them back. Abandoned the fact that we have samples of Lunar soil whose authenticity has been confirmed by experts from many nations. Disregard the signals from the scientific packages left behind by the astronauts or the laser reflectors still being used today.

All of this means nothing because ExpiredBattery was told by his grandpa that it was fake. That is the clinching evidence. Except for one flaw in his argument: my Dad told me iot is true and as my dad is better than his grandpa he must be wrong.

I really hope you were attempting humour here ExpiredBattery because if this was a serious attempt at debate I suggest you Google the word "evidence".

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MID
I feel that the moon landing was all a hoax.

In fact, I know.

Well I believe. I believe my grandpa. He said it was a hoax, and I believe him!

He should know.

OK:

First you feel, then you know in fact, then you believe.

I think we're getting somewhere!

Belief is generally at the base of all hoax ideas.

Now, you are 16, as evidenced by your profile.

That means that your grandpa couldn't be much younger than his late-50's or perhaps early 60s, right?

Not too many people in that age range actually would consider that the Apollo program was a fake. There are a very small few, of course....

He couldn't know that.

Trust me, I DO KNOW that he is incorrect...if indeed he is telling you this sort of thing.

How about you leave your grandpa out of this, and tell me:

What is it that you believe that leads you to the erroneous conclusion that the most documented and substantiated occurrance in human history was a fake?

Your own questions would be of value here...

That'll tell me your brain is working; you have your own questions; and, that you have a desire to learn something which you do not know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flyingswan
He should know.

Why should he know? What special qualifications does he have for knowing? Is he in fact one of the hitherto elusive hoaxers? Give us the details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RamboIII

I spoke with an alien as of late, and he assured me that we landed there, but he has been there for much longer, and we should stop making such a big deal out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.