Moon Landings Real?

[ERU]

Always a good chat > was it real? To start us off:

*Dust on the moon looks and behaves like nothing on Earth!

*In the bright sunlight of the Moon the photographs features very clear shadows, more obviously so than shadows on Earth. But some people think that the natural behaviour of those shadows prove fakery. They're wrong.

*Most of the theories that concern the photographs are due to a failure to understand how photography works.

Photographs are only two dimensional records of light falling on a chemically treated sheet of plastic. They can easily give a misleading picture of the nature of an unfamiliar three dimensional world, especially if have already decided what you want to see and have no understanding of photography's strengths and limitations


*Millions, if not billions, of dollars were spent in equipping the Apollo missions. In order to successfully land on the moon, NASA needed to either buy in the absolute latest in technology, or develop it themselves. So it should come as no surprise that some of the equipment used was totally unheard of in the 1960s and, because it was designed to work in an alien environment, is still a novelty 30 years later. So most people don't have any experience of this equipment, or understand how it worked.

This lack of understanding is the source of many of the hoax theories. Rather than finding out how this equipment worked, many hoax proponents prefer to take a poor guess at how they think it might have worked, and then show how their own guess wouldn't work.

*Radiation, it's everywhere!

*What do satellite pictures show on the moon?

[steve threlfall]

/\ /\ /\ blatant spam

Edit ..... Indeed. Spam post removed, this does NOT refer to Eru's post - Saracen

I honestly believe that we did land on the moon in the 1960's. Could any governemnt, even the united states fake a global event on this scale?

"Evidence" that suggests we didnt land on the moon seems to be based around the fact that the flag moved in the wind in the vid footage and seeying as theres no wind on the moon it must have been faked right. Perhaps not, there are two sides to every story and the answer to the sceptics is that the flag had wires in it to simulate a flags behaviour on earth.

The conspiracy theory about us not actually having landed on the moon seems to be based on nothing more than a few loose misinterpreted suggestions imo.

Surely the astronauts would have met with an untimely end if there had been any kind of cover up. Someone would have gone public surely!

[telfer12000]

Couldn't agree more - all these 60's conspiracy theories (most of which emanated in the 70's) are becoming a pain in the a***.

The moon theories are all the fault of Capricorn one which was a good film in the 70s starring Elliot Gould which was based on a mission to Mars.

Anyway they're (all the conspiracy theories) mostly all tripe - man landed on the moon in 1969 which was a great achievement at that time.

[ERU]

I agree with the tripe comment but I also can’t come to a definite conclusion of as to whether it is true or not. The US has some very good reasons to show they were winning the space race after all & as lots of documentation now being released from the cold war period shows, some desperate measures were taken to achieve superiority in every aspect.
I have no qualm that they did get there eventually (or perhaps even the first time) but there are some convincing arguments against the first landing.

Have a look at this basic site for the doubters: http://www.dc8p.com/html/moonhoax.html

Watch an interview with two astronauts who claim to have been to the Moon.: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/r...?armstrong.ram

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Moon rocks were fabricated: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/r..._night_apr.ram

Bob Builder - "How is anyone supposed to believe that a space-craft with the total computer power of a pocket calculator made it to the moon and back?"

[ZeroTheHero]

If anyone is really interested in this topic, they should track down the various issues of the Fortean Times that have dealt with this.

If anyone doesn't know the FT, it is a magazine that tries to neither 'want to believe' not to dismiss anything odd out of hand. (30 years anniversary issue out now!)The cumulative articles on the moon landings real or fake debate came down pretty heavily on the 'real' side IIRC but there is still some debate.

Sometimes though with conspiracy theories, those who promote them have a vested interest (book sales, website hits, personal pride and self-importance) and won't let them die no matter how often they are proved wrong!

http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/094_moon.shtml gives the article in the FT that proposed the moon landings were fake. Be sure to read the huge postbag link at the bottom of the page to read the rebuttals from the well-informed FT readers!

[ERU]

If anyone is really interested in this topic, they should track down the various issues of the Fortean Times that have dealt with this

True but this is what his forum was designed for and although you may not be interested in the subject others evidently are. You could also say the same thing about most of the topics in here too!

[Platinum]

Im not sure, If they faked it then where did all the billions spent on the space program go?, then again some of the vids from the landings do look dodgy, I would like to belive that we have been there but i think untill I actualy step foot on the moon myself there will always be a little doubt in my mind.

Hopefully the chinese will go there and confirm or deny the landings, Im sure they would love to go to the moon and find no trace of a landing and make america look very bad (If its possible to make them look worse than they allready do?)

[headbrace]

I think they did it. And anyway, what would be gained by me not believing it?

You dont really need much power at all to get round the moon, just a bit of calculus and newtons laws

[PHTC]

I've seen the evidence that people use to say they were faked, and i dont see how they must mean they were faked.

And if they were why haven't they faked a mars landing?

[Ravens Nest]

Originally posted by Platinum
Im not sure, If they faked it then where did all the billions spent on the space program go?, then again some of the vids from the landings do look dodgy, I would like to belive that we have been there but i think untill I actualy step foot on the moon myself there will always be a little doubt in my mind.

Hopefully the chinese will go there and confirm or deny the landings, Im sure they would love to go to the moon and find no trace of a landing and make america look very bad (If its possible to make them look worse than they allready do?)

My question is, when USA put the flag on the moon what exactly did that represent?

Is it the same as finding a undiscovered country and taking it as your own? and if so if the chinese do land on the moon and find no sign of the flag, lunar lander or rover does that mean they own the moon?

If they do find the flag e.t.c. does that mean they trespassed and it's an act of war?

[ERU]

You know that a very interesting point!
It may not be too important in the imediate future but i guessing one day it will for sure.
I never thought that America OWNS the moon now ... imagine that.

[tonicblue]

I like that point Ravens Nest. Not a nice thought that america can just go up and own the moon. B*****ds.
I believe and why not. Billions of $'s were spent, why not. It seems like all these people that think its fake want it to not have happend for some reason.

[Ravens Nest]

Yeah it's nice to have your own permanent satelite, and can you imagine when they have the technology to start colonising it, and the landmass how does that compare with the U.S.A. or earth in size??

Also who knows exactly what advantage this would give them in there conquest of space once they decide to go out further into the cosmos, and also the miltary and mining opportunity's (mind boggling!)

[ERU]

Eratosthenes (a Greek astronomer) measured the Sun to be about 7o south of his local zenith on the first day of summer (the summer solstice). Based upon this observation is concluded that distance from Alexandria and Syene must be 7/360 or 1/50 that of Earth's circumference since 360o make up a complete circle.
At the time the standardunit of measurement was called a stade and is thought to be about 1/6 of a kilometer. The distance from Syene to Alexandria was about 5000 stades. Thus, Eratosthenes estimated the Earth's circumference to be about
50 x 5000 = 25,000 stades = 42,000 km.
The modern value for the circumference of the Earth is 40,000 km. So Eratosthenes was correct to within 5% of the actual value

Be afraid - very afraid

[tonicblue]

w0w. Very interesting. I love ancient philosophy, science and history. I wonder how much we'd accumplish with brains like that in our (at the moment) modern time, Wether we'd progress even more or wther our brains really have a limit and people like that clever are living now and cant think any higher.

I appologise if this is incoherent and/or doesnt make any sence. I have just come back from pub with crazy people.

tonic needs Sleep

[daveham]

did you miss this one

www.moontruth.com

...have a look at the video!