Apollo Landing Sites Photographed by NASA

[Zak33]

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ollosites.html

Allegedly, these are the photo's to prove that the Apollo Landings occured...

the Moon Vehicles and the rubbish left behind and even a trail of messed up dust where the guys walked back and forth.

What do you think chaps? Are we being duped 40 years later with a bit of Photoshop?

[Andy3536]

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ollosites.html

Allegedly, these are the photo's to prove that the Apollo Landings occured...

the Moon Vehicles and the rubbish left behind and even a trail of messed up dust where the guys walked back and forth.

What do you think chaps? Are we being duped 40 years later with a bit of Photoshop?

Should check out the mythbusters episode on on the moonlandings. They left reflectors on the surface and the guys went to an observatory and pointed the scope at the position they were supposed to be at, fired a laser and recorded the light returning on a laptop. Wasn't a nasa observatory.
They pretty much debunked all the other arguments the conspiracy theorists had aswell. Unless Mythbusters is now somehow part of the conspiracy

[SiM]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orvMZn8L1f0

[Andy3536]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orvMZn8L1f0

That's the one, the other that i found particuly interesting was the photos. One of the things the conspiricy theorists are always banging on about is the fact that the shadows aren't going in the same direction in the photos. Really simple answer as to why and should have really been obvious (although i never got it )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0
Edit* and the moonlander shade picture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtWMz...eature=related

[Clunk]

I've no idea if the landings occurred or not, but those photos aren't showing anything at all.

You could point an arrow at any of those bumps and claim them to be absolutely anything really.

[MadduckUK]

how would the distance of the light source affect the difference in height needed to alter the shadows?

[Saracen]

I can't see that the photos prove a darn thing .... but then, I've never felt it needed proving. I've always thought the conspiracy theory was a ridiculous load of bunkum anyway .... and probably motivated by a desire to sell books or TV programs.

I can't prove it, but as far as I'm concerned, the moon landings were genuine and the conspiracy-theorist's suggestion that they weren't is twaddle and drivel of the first order.

[Andy3536]

A little related, there is (or was?) a Japanese satalight orbiting the moon that's given some stunning shots of the surface and the earth rising.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBppg...layer_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KWt...eature=channel

Fantastic to see some of those views in such good quality.

[Zak33]

Im my gut, I think that no one from earth has landed on the moon

it's not a conspiracy theory that I'm following... Just don't think we got there.

There....it's out....Zak thinks that Buzz and Neil are fibbing.... and I always thought it.

[Jay]

I actually think that they didn't go but I also think that a lot of the people who worked at NASA where tricked into thinking they did. Some of the shots don't look right, the one where the lander took off from the moon look really wrong to me.

Its such a massive task to get that far I just can't see how they could have done it in 1969. It was hard enough to get people into orbit and still is today! I really do think we could get to the moon these days but it would still be a HUGE job to do so.

[pollaxe]

I'm exactly with Saracen; I think we landed up there mutiple times.

Every theory that says otherwise has been debunked as far as I'm concerned.

[Zak33]

Its such a massive task to get that far I just can't see how they could have done it in 1969. It was hard enough to get people into orbit and still is today! I really do think we could get to the moon these days but it would still be a HUGE job to do so.

that's where I'm stood too.

The retro reflector thing...it doesn nothing for me as satellites are covered with them, so you've just gotta catch on of those and bingo.....you've got a pulse from your uber laser.

[Funkstar]

Its such a massive task to get that far I just can't see how they could have done it in 1969. It was hard enough to get people into orbit and still is today! I really do think we could get to the moon these days but it would still be a HUGE job to do so.

They also managed to build the worlds fastest passenger jet in 1969 with engineers drawing things out on paper.

Yet they haven't been able to produce a replacement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde

This doesn't mean the first one was a fake.

[Jay]

They also managed to build the worlds fastest passenger jet in 1969 with engineers drawing things out on paper.

Yet they haven't been able to produce a replacement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde

This doesn't mean the first one was a fake.

Only because it doesn't make a profit, do you not think if Concord was a profitable venture we would see faster and faster passenger liners?
NASA is not for profit an airliner is.

[shaithis]

I'm sure the Russians spent a good decade or two trying to prove that the US didn't land on the moon when they said they did.

I beleive it happened.

[ajones]

I'd like to think we got there, I hope that eventually it's prooved that the conspiracy theories are wrong. However, the arguaments against it are compelling.