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 -

Moon Landings - A question for Waspie_Dwarf.


Abramelin

Recommended Posts

When I want to know something about genetics, I'll ask Cormac McArth.

When I want to know something about geology, I'll ask Piney, Swede or Doc Socs Junior.

When I want to know something concerning linguistics, I'll ask Alchopwn.

I know there are many more specialists posting on UM, so I'm sorry I didn't mention your name.

 

And, when I want to know something about astrophysics, astronomy, and so on, I'll ask Waspie_Dwarf or Liquid Gardens.

But Waspie has his own sub-forum, so I think it's proper to start a thread here.

Now the question:

I have heard and read a lot of bs stories about the moonlandings of the past century being fake. I even have a collegue who is convinced those moonlandings never happened (- He also believes the earth is flat ... sigh ... and I told him I am grateful to have had the chance to study physics, many years ago ).

Of course I argued with him, and asked if the USA would really spend billions of dollars to create a lie?

But here is my question, one my collegue often poses, and to one I don't have a good answer ready:

Why were the Americans finally able to travel to the Moon, land there, and do a series of experiments on the Moon half a century ago, and that a couple of times, but somehow have the greatest problems repeating the same in this day and age?

Is it money?

Musk has more than enough money, so that can't be it.

And so have others and other countries.

Ok Waspie, thàt was my question.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, Abramelin said:

When I want to know something about genetics, I'll ask Cormac McArth.

When I want to know something about geology, I'll ask Piney, Swede or Doc Socs Junior.

When I want to know something concerning linguistics, I'll ask Alchopwn.

I know there are many more specialists posting on UM, so I'm sorry I didn't mention your name.

 

And, when I want to know something about astrophysics, astronomy, and so on, I'll ask Waspie_Dwarf or Liquid Gardens.

But Waspie has his own sub-forum, so I think it's proper to start a thread here.

Now the question:

I have heard and read a lot of bs stories about the moonlandings of the past century being fake. I even have a collegue who is convinced those moonlandings never happened (- He also believes the earth is flat ... sigh ... and I told him I am grateful to have had the chance to study physics, many years ago ).

Of course I argued with him, and asked if the USA would really spend billions of dollars to create a lie?

But here is my question, one my collegue often poses, and to one I don't have a good answer ready:

Why were the Americans finally able to travel to the Moon, land there, and do a series of experiments on the Moon half a century ago, and that a couple of times, but somehow have the greatest problems repeating the same in this day and age?

Is it money?

Musk has more than enough money, so that can't be it.

And so have others and other countries.

Ok Waspie, thàt was my question.

I certainly don't want to jump the line, but I don't think your colleague understands the difficulties the Apollo program actually had. It wasn't as simple and easy as they are alluding to.

The simpler way of answering is from an area of geopolitical relevance. If at the time the USSR had spies that discovered the landing to be fake why wouldn't they broadcast it to the world to discredit the "capitalist pigs" and highlight we were liars on the world stage? Also with all of the recent Chinese missions, the same logic would/should apply. It stands to reason verifying that the US did or did not accomplish this feat would be  a huge factor for leveraging global influence and opinions.

I'll defer to @Waspie_Dwarfto answer for their distinct perspective.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Abramelin said:

And, when I want to know something about astrophysics, astronomy, and so on, I'll ask Waspie_Dwarf or Liquid Gardens.

That's very kind of you, I do my best.

 

1 hour ago, Abramelin said:

But Waspie has his own sub-forum, so I think it's proper to start a thread here.

It's not mine, it's most definitely Saru's, but I do like posting here. Having said that I am going to move this thread to the Conspiracies and Secret Societies forum. As it stands it's perfectly reasonable to post it in the Space Exploration and Spaceflight forum, but in the past topics like this have attracted debate that better suits the conspiracies section.

1 hour ago, Abramelin said:

But here is my question, one my collegue often poses, and to one I don't have a good answer ready:

Why were the Americans finally able to travel to the Moon, land there, and do a series of experiments on the Moon half a century ago, and that a couple of times, but somehow have the greatest problems repeating the same in this day and age?

It's not really a legitimate question. It's comparing apples and oranges and making a lot of false assumptions.

The Apollo lunar module had two astronauts on board and they possessed the greatest computer known to mankind... the human brain. Apollo 11, for example, would have failed if it hadn't been for the flying abilities of Armstrong and Aldrin. The LM guidance computer was aiming for a crater filled with rocks. Armstrong took manual control and landed safely. Even in the 1960s many uncrewed missions, both US and Soviet, failed and, let's not forget, that Apollo 13 failed and the Apollo 1 crew were killed before the first crewed flight.

Also, remember, the USA hasn't attempted a lunar landing in more than half a century. Spacecraft back then were simpler, they simply used radar or a timer to fire their engines at the right moment and hope that the landing zone was relatively safe. The result of this is that the lunar missions of the 60's were sent to flat, featureless areas to provide the best hope of a successful landing.

Skip forward 50 years and the landers have sophisticated computers onboard. They can scan the terrain and make autonomous decisions about where to land. The result of this is that landers are now being sent to far more challenging locations where, 50 years ago, the chances of success would have been minimal. This is all fairly new technology and will improve all the time.

We now know that there is water ice at the lunar poles, we didn't know that in the 60's, and so this is the main area of interest for these new missions. A mission to the poles was beyond the capability of the 60's technology.

1 hour ago, Abramelin said:

Is it money?

Musk has more than enough money, so that can't be it.

Musk is a bit of a re herring here. He's not really interested in space exploration as such and definitely not lunar exploration. His interest is in colonising Mars. SpaceX provide 2 services, the launch satellites and spacecraft for customers and they provide the Starlink satellite internet service. Musk intends to pour the profits from these into his Mars colonisation dream. The Crew Dragon spacecraft was built as part of a NASA program and was paid for by NASA as will be their Lunar Starship for landing astronauts on the Moon.

Money is part of the problem. It's not that the US can't afford to go back to the moon, it's that the political willpower to spend money on going back to the moon hasn't existed. Several presidents have attempted to return the US to the moon (both Bush's come to mind) but there was not the political support. Now China is showing interest in lunar exploration the US is once again finding the money.

2 hours ago, Abramelin said:

And so have others and other countries.

Other countries have found the money. China has landed a series of spacecraft on the moon in recent years. In the last few months India and Japan have joined the club. China has ambitions to land astronauts on the moon by 2030 and then establish a permanent moon base.

The US has already sent an Orion capsule around the moon. The next Artemis mission will send astronauts around the moon for the first time since 1972. Artemis III will return US astronauts to the moon.

The wave of uncrewed US lunar spacecraft we are beginning to see this year are part of the Artemis program, preparing for a crewed return to the moon. In other words the US is currently doing exactly the thing your colleague claims they aren't.

I hope that makes sense.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Trelane said:

Also with all of the recent Chinese missions, the same logic would/should apply. It stands to reason verifying that the US did or did not accomplish this feat would be  a huge factor for leveraging global influence and opinions.

A very good point.

In fact international missions provide evidence for Apollo. If we ignore NASA's LRO, which has actually imaged the Apollo LM descent stages on the moon (we'll ignore it because conspiracy theorists simply wave away this evidence with the arguement that it's a NASA mission so can't be trusted) then both Japan and India have produced some conclusive evidence of Apollo. JAXA (the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) had a lunar orbiter called Selene. The cameras on Selene were not powerful enough to pick up Apollo artefacts themselves it did however show the disturbance of the lunar regolith from the engines of the landing lunar modules. ISRO's Chandaryaan 2 DID have powerful enough cameras to see the artefacts and imaged the LM descent stages of both Apollo 11 and Apollo 12. Here is the image of Apollo 11:

image.jpeg.9adccd478382b29da610b63248b75747.jpeg

Source: wikipedia

  • Like 5
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to Moon Landings - A question for Waspie_Dwarf.

I have changed the topic title from "A question for Waspie_Dwarf" to "Moon Landings - A question for Waspie_Dwarf" to make it more obvious what the topic is about.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

I have changed the topic title from "A question for Waspie_Dwarf" to "Moon Landings - A question for Waspie_Dwarf" to make it more obvious what the topic is about.

That's ok with me, and thanks for your reply. Greatly appreciated! And also Trelane, thanks!

This is the kind of 'ammo' I need.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always ask these moon hoaxers these questions.

1. If the moon landings were fake. Then why did NASA fake the Apollo 13 mission where the spacecraft malfunctioned, and astronauts had to return?

2. If the moon missions were fake. Then why didn't the Soviets go to the press and claim the US fabricated the missions?

I always get ridiculous answers like the US owns the media is the reason why the Soviets couldn't get it out to the press. :wacko:

Former cosmonauts say they monitored the missions from Cuba and say the moon landings are real.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hawken said:

Former cosmonauts say they monitored the missions from Cuba and say the moon landings are real.

There is a very good book called Two Sides of the Moon: Our Story of the Cold War Space Race, written by American astronaut David Scott and Russian Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov in which Leonov describes how the Soviet Union tracked the Apollo missions.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hawken said:

I always ask these moon hoaxers these questions.

A simple, and killer, question to ask is, "how did the laser reflectors get there?"

Apollo 11,14 and 15 left reflectors which Earth based observatories can bounce lasers off of to measure the exact distance from the Earth to the moon. Those reflectors are still there and still in use.

Watching them try to explain these is rather fun as they tie themselves in logical knots. Having generally claimed that Apollo was faked because the technology didn't exist in the '60s they then start inventing explanations that requires technology that definitely didn't exist in the '60s.

_____________________________________________

Footnote:

I am really missing MID at the moment.

For those of you who don't remember him, he was our resident Apollo expert. He forgot more about spaceflight drinking a cup of coffee than I will ever know. He would have had brilliant answers to all the questions and could immediately back up his answers with references and photos.

He was modest about his past, but he was part of the Apollo program.

RIP MID.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

There is a very good book called Two Sides of the Moon: Our Story of the Cold War Space Race, written by American astronaut David Scott and Russian Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov in which Leonov describes how the Soviet Union tracked the Apollo missions.

I watched an interview of Alexei Leonov, and he said he watched the Apollo 11 mission from Cuba.

He said he was actually pulling for the astronauts to succeed in the mission. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Hawken said:

He said he was actually pulling for the astronauts to succeed in the mission. 

There was camaraderie between the astronauts and the cosmonauts, they were after all doing the same job and were not, on the whole, politicians. Apollo 14 left a memorial to fallen astronauts on the moon, it contains not only the names of 8 US astronauts that had died, but 6 Russian cosmonauts as well.

Incidentally, had Russia pushed ahead with its Zond programme, Leonov had been selected to be the cosmonaut that would have attempted to be the first Russian (and indeed first person) around the Moon. Apollo 8's triumph put an end to those plans.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.