PDA

View Full Version : Science Could moon landings have been faked? Some still think so


Donger
07-17-2009, 08:38 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/space/07/17/moon.landing.hoax/index.html

(CNN) -- It captivated millions of people around the world for eight days in the summer of 1969. It brought glory to the embattled U.S. space program and inspired beliefs that anything was possible.

It's arguably the greatest technological feat of the 20th century.

And to some, it was all a lie.

Forty years after Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin set foot on the moon, a small cult of conspiracy theorists maintains the historic event -- and the five subsequent Apollo moon landings -- were staged. These people believe NASA fabricated the landings to trump their Soviet rivals and fulfill President Kennedy's goal of ferrying humans safely to and from the moon by the end of the 1960s.

"I do know the moon landings were faked," said crusading filmmaker Bart Sibrel, whose aggressive interview tactics once provoked Aldrin to punch him in the face. "I'd bet my life on it."

Sibrel may seem crazy, but he has company. A 1999 Gallup poll found that a scant 6 percent of Americans doubted the Apollo 11 moon landing happened, and there is anecdotal evidence that the ranks of such conspiracy theorists, fueled by innuendo-filled documentaries and the Internet, are growing.

Twenty-five percent of respondents to a survey in the British magazine Engineering & Technology said they do not believe humans landed on the moon. A handful of Web sites and blogs circulate suspicions about NASA's "hoax."

And a Google search this week for "Apollo moon landing hoax" yielded more than 1.5 billion results.

"We love conspiracies," said Roger Launius, a senior curator at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington. "Going to the moon is hard to understand. And it's easier for some people to accept the answer that, 'Well, maybe we didn't go to the moon.' A lot of it is naivete."

Conspiracy theories about the Apollo missions began not long after the last astronaut returned from the moon in 1972. Bill Kaysing, a technical writer for Rocketdyne, which built rocket engines for NASA's Apollo program, published a 1974 book, "We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle."

In the book and elsewhere, Kaysing argued that NASA lacked the technology in 1969 to land humans safely on the moon, that the Apollo astronauts would have been poisoned by passing through the Van Allen radiation belts that ring the Earth and that NASA's photos from the moon contained suspicious anomalies. Video See improved NASA footage of the 1969 moonwalk »

Kaysing theorized NASA sent the Apollo 11 astronauts up in a rocket until it was out of sight, then transferred the lunar capsule and its three passengers to a military cargo plane that dropped the capsule eight days later in the Pacific, where it was recovered. In the meantime, he believed, NASA officials filmed the "moon landing" at Area 51, the high-security military base in the Nevada desert, and brainwashed the astronauts to ensure their cooperation.

Some believe Kaysing's theories inspired the 1978 movie "Capricorn One," in which NASA fakes a Mars landing on a remote military base, then goes to desperate lengths to cover it up. Others insist NASA recruited director Stanley Kubrick, hot off "2001: A Space Odyssey," to film the "faked" moon landings.

Oh, and those moon rocks? Lunar meteorites from Antarctica.

Decades later, Kaysing's beliefs formed the foundation for "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?" a sensational 2001 Fox TV documentary that spotted eerie "inconsistencies" in NASA's Apollo images and TV footage.

Among them: no blast craters are visible under the landing modules; shadows intersect instead of running parallel, suggesting the presence of an unnatural light source; and a planted American flag appears to ripple in a breeze although there's no wind on the moon.

The hour-long special sparked such interest in the topic that NASA took the unusual step of issuing a news release and posting a point-by-point rebuttal on its Web site. The press release began: "Yes. Astronauts did land on the moon."

In various documents, NASA has countered that the Apollo astronauts passed through the Van Allen belts too quickly to be exposed to dangerous levels of radiation; that the module's descent engines weren't powerful enough to leave a blast crater; that the shadows in photos were distorted by wide-angle lenses and sloping lunar terrain; and that the Apollo flags had horizontal support bars that made the flags swing.

Kaysing died in 2005, but not before grabbing the attention of Sibrel, a Nashville, Tennessee, filmmaker who has since become the most visible proponent of the Apollo hoax theories. With funding from an anonymous donor, Sibrel wrote and directed a 47-minute documentary in 2001 that reiterated many of the now-familiar hoax arguments.

Critics of moon-landing hoax theorists, and there are many, say it would be impossible for tens of thousands of NASA employees and Apollo contractors to keep such a whopping secret for almost four decades.

But Sibrel believes the Apollo program was so compartmentalized that only its astronauts and a handful of high-level NASA officials knew the entire story. Sibrel spent years ambushing Apollo astronauts and insisting they swear on a Bible before his cameras that they walked on the moon.

"When someone has gotten away with a crime, in my opinion, they deserve to be ambushed," Sibrel said. "I'm a journalist trying to get at the truth."

In an episode made infamous on YouTube, Sibrel confronted Aldrin in 2002 and called him "a coward, a liar and a thief." Aldrin, then 72, socked the thirtysomething Sibrel in the face, knocking him backwards.

"I don't want to call attention to the individuals who are trying to promote and shuffle off this hoax on people," Aldrin told CNN in a recent interview. "I feel sorry for the gullible people who're going to go along with them. I guess it's just natural human reaction to want to be a part of 'knowing something that somebody doesn't know.' But it's misguided. It's just a shame."

It's been 37 years since the last Apollo moon mission, and tens of millions of younger Americans have no memories of watching the moon landings live. A 2005-2006 poll by Mary Lynne Dittmar, a space consultant based in Houston, Texas, found that more than a quarter of Americans 18 to 25 expressed some doubt that humans set foot on the moon.

"As the number of people who were not yet born at the time of the Apollo program increases, the number of questions [about the moon landings] also may increase," NASA said in a statement. "Conspiracy theories are always difficult to refute because of the impossibility of proving a negative."

Launius, the National Air and Space Museum curator, believes Apollo conspiracy theories resonate with people who are disengaged from society and distrustful of government. He also believes their numbers are overblown.

"These diehards are really vocal, but they're really tiny," he said.

But Stuart Robbins, a Ph.D. candidate in astrophysics at the University of Colorado who gives lectures defending NASA from Apollo hoax theorists, believes their influence can be harmful.

"If people don't think we were able to go to the moon, then they don't believe in the ingenuity of human achievement," he said. "Going to the moon and returning astronauts safely back to Earth is arguably one of the most profound achievements in human history, and so when people simply believe it was a hoax, they lose out on that shared experience and doubt what humans can do."

In its information campaign against Apollo's "debunkers," NASA may have a potent ace up its sleeve, however. Its Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is now circling the moon with powerful cameras, snapping crisp pictures that could reveal Apollo 11's Eagle lander squatting on the moon's surface.
advertisement

Then again, conspiracy theorists may just say NASA doctored the photos.

"Will the LRO's incredibly high-resolution images of the lunar surface, including, eventually, the Apollo landing sites, finally quell the lunacy of the Moon Hoax believers? Obviously it won't," writes astronomer Phil Plait in his blog on Discover magazine's Web site. "These true believers don't live in an evidence-based world."

Douche Baggins
07-17-2009, 08:43 AM
Is Capricorn One any good? Never heard of it.

Nzoner
07-17-2009, 08:48 AM
Is Capricorn One any good? Never heard of it.

As I recall it was worth a watch,definitely dated,but the actors were well known.


<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tf8kdmw7vQc&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tf8kdmw7vQc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

BigRichard
07-17-2009, 08:48 AM
And don't forget that George W. Bush orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.

DaFace
07-17-2009, 08:50 AM
And a Google search this week for "Apollo moon landing hoax" yielded more than 1.5 billion results."

I loathe statements like this. Google's search will yield results that have ANY of the four words in there, so all this means is that there are 1.5 billion web sites that have the word Apollo OR moon OR landing OR hoax on them. Go figure.

Ari Chi3fs
07-17-2009, 08:51 AM
And don't forget that George W. Bush orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.

Silly BigRichard... Bush is just a "Pinnochio"... but you have to Beware of "Gepetto".

keg in kc
07-17-2009, 08:53 AM
:shake:

rockymtnchief
07-17-2009, 08:55 AM
IIRC, The History Channel debunked the debunkers. Everything that these people say couldn't happen was proven to be able to happen. Including different angles of shadows, no stars in pictures, footprints in the dust, etc...

epitome1170
07-17-2009, 08:55 AM
I loathe statements like this. Google's search will yield results that have ANY of the four words in there, so all this means is that there are 1.5 billion web sites that have the word Apollo OR moon OR landing OR hoax on them. Go figure.

This.

However if you do it actually as "Apollo moon landing hoax" (with the quotations) then it reveals still 11,000+.

DaFace
07-17-2009, 08:56 AM
IIRC, The History Channel debunked the debunkers. Everything that these people say couldn't happen was proven to be able to happen. Including different angles of shadows, no stars in pictures, footprints in the dust, etc...

Mythbusters had an episode all about it a while back, too. They got an Emmy nomination for it yesterday as a matter of fact.

rockymtnchief
07-17-2009, 08:58 AM
Mythbusters had an episode all about it a while back, too. They got an Emmy nomination for it yesterday as a matter of fact.

I usually watch that show, but must have missed that episode. What did they say?

Donger
07-17-2009, 09:02 AM
It's going to fun when LRO snaps some high-res shots of the descent stages of the LMs we left behind. The hoaxers probably already have their HTML ready for the explanations.

Donger
07-17-2009, 04:26 PM
It's going to fun when LRO snaps some high-res shots of the descent stages of the LMs we left behind. The hoaxers probably already have their HTML ready for the explanations.

Here's a low resolution shot of the Apollo 14 landing site:

Donger
07-17-2009, 04:33 PM
Apollo 11 (the first manned landing) site:

Bugeater
07-17-2009, 04:36 PM
Those are obvious photoshops.

DaFace
07-17-2009, 04:45 PM
I usually watch that show, but must have missed that episode. What did they say?

In a nutshell, none of the stuff the conspiracy theorists say is damning is, in fact, damning. Big surprise.

rockymtnchief
07-17-2009, 04:48 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(2008_season)#Episode_104_.E2.80.93_.22NASA_Moon_Landing.22

Thanks, I looked it up on the Wiki during the CP "break".

kstater
07-17-2009, 04:48 PM
Wait until the tin-foilers' figure out they are digitally enhancing the original footage.

Frazod
07-17-2009, 04:50 PM
In a nutshell, none of the stuff the conspiracy theorists say is damning is, in fact, damning. Big surprise.

I thought the most interesting part was how they couldn't accurately mimick the walking style without being in low gravity on the plane.

Bugeater
07-17-2009, 04:50 PM
In a nutshell, none of the stuff the conspiracy theorists say is damning is, in fact, damning. Big surprise.
Whatever. :rolleyes:

They must be in on it too.

VAChief
07-17-2009, 05:08 PM
Here's a low resolution shot of the Apollo 14 landing site:

Why won't they release the original? I mean Neil Armstrong was seen at the beach the day before in Florida. :)

Hydrae
07-17-2009, 05:43 PM
Wait until the tin-foilers' figure out they are digitally enhancing the original footage.

That was my first thought when I read about that the other day. For an agency that aspires to such lofty goals it is incredible that they didn't keep the original footage themselves.

Guru
07-17-2009, 06:08 PM
I'm so sick of this. We landed on the moon. It happened. Get over it.

FAX
07-17-2009, 06:14 PM
I wish I could find my original post, so I wouldn't have to type all this again ... nevertheless ... it's already been proven beyond a shadow of Clint Eastwood's hairy nutbag that we did, indeed, land on the moon.

The Japs sent a picture-taking satellite thing to the moon. It went around and around the moon many times. Like a big circle. Taking pictures. These weren't just normal pictures, though. Oh, no. These were 3-D Jap pictures. So, using Jap computers and Jap software, the Japs analyzed their Jap photos and were able to reproduce the exact spot, from eye-level, where one of our astronaughties took some photographs. And guess what? The terrain and moonish features in the background of the astronaughtie's photos were identical to the 3-D photograph proving once and for all that somebody was standing on the moon taking pictures.

By the way, a used tin-foil hat makes a good darn wrapper for storing left over burritos.

FAX

Crashride
07-17-2009, 07:10 PM
if they planted a flag there shouldnt we still be able to see it? that would be proof enough

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 07:31 PM
if they planted a flag there shouldnt we still be able to see it? that would be proof enoughFrom orbit? The flag is pretty small when seen from above. Aren't the pics Donger posted enough? I mean really. This whole "we didn't go there" argument has always seemed very silly and EASILY debunked to me.

Donger
07-17-2009, 07:32 PM
From orbit? The flag is pretty small when seen from above. Aren't the pics Donger posted enough? I mean really. This whole "we didn't go there" argument has always seemed very silly and EASILY debunked to me.

Expect much higher resolution pictures coming up over the next few months. These are really just teasers, IMO.

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 07:33 PM
I wish I could find my original post, so I wouldn't have to type all this again ... nevertheless ... it's already been proven beyond a shadow of Clint Eastwood's hairy nutbag that we did, indeed, land on the moon.

The Japs sent a picture-taking satellite thing to the moon. It went around and around the moon many times. Like a big circle. Taking pictures. These weren't just normal pictures, though. Oh, no. These were 3-D Jap pictures. So, using Jap computers and Jap software, the Japs analyzed their Jap photos and were able to reproduce the exact spot, from eye-level, where one of our astronaughties took some photographs. And guess what? The terrain and moonish features in the background of the astronaughtie's photos were identical to the 3-D photograph proving once and for all that somebody was standing on the moon taking pictures.

By the way, a used tin-foil hat makes a good darn wrapper for storing left over burritos.

FAXThat.

Note, conspiracy theorists, does EVERYTHING have to be a government coverup?

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 07:35 PM
Expect much higher resolution pictures coming up over the next few months. These are really just teasers, IMO.Oh, *I* know. It just seems that no matter WHAT evidence is thrown up there, there are people ready to go to pretty big extremes just to be able to say "Nuh-UH"!

Donger
07-17-2009, 07:39 PM
Oh, *I* know. It just seems that no matter WHAT evidence is thrown up there, there are people ready to go to pretty big extremes just to be able to say "Nuh-UH"!

I know, too. See #12. The resolution should be good enough to clearly ascertain the descent stage, rovers, etc.

They were probably placed there after the fact, however.

Chaunceythe3rd
07-17-2009, 07:43 PM
And don't forget that George W. Bush orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.

Yes, and the Earth is only 10,000 years old per Mike Hucklebee.

Bowser
07-17-2009, 07:46 PM
WHY HAVEN'T WE BEEN BACK THERE SINCE 1969????

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 07:49 PM
WHY HAVEN'T WE BEEN BACK THERE SINCE 1969????Because A)We accomplished our goal and B)We couldn't afford it anymore.

Hydrae
07-17-2009, 07:52 PM
WHY HAVEN'T WE BEEN BACK THERE SINCE 1969????

We went back a couple of times after 1969. We haven't been back since something like 1972. ;)

I wonder if we were to take up some new batteries if we could get the Russian robots working again.

Coach
07-17-2009, 07:54 PM
I cannot believe there are still people convinced that this landing the moon thing is still a hoax. :shake:

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 07:56 PM
I cannot believe there are still people convinced that this landing the moon thing is still a hoax. :shake:I know. The truly scary part is that they have NO IDEA how dumb they look. It's been debunked many times by many people. We landed (and walked) on the moon. Period.

Bowser
07-17-2009, 08:00 PM
I'm still waiting for the Monoliths.

Skip Towne
07-17-2009, 08:10 PM
The world is flat.

Bwana
07-17-2009, 08:15 PM
Let me guess. This is the same group of people that thinks the "Mother Ship" is coming to pick them up in 2012?

JuicesFlowing
07-17-2009, 08:16 PM
So there is wind on the moon? Sincerely, waving American Flag.

Mojo Jojo
07-17-2009, 08:17 PM
Come on everyone knows that Area 51 is really the sound stage where the government filmed all the "moon landings." This is why it is top secret...they couldn't get rid of all the props.

At least this is what Art Bell said on the radio at 3 AM.

Miles
07-17-2009, 08:19 PM
I'm still waiting for the Monoliths.

That shit happened 8 years ago.

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 08:24 PM
So there is wind on the moon? Sincerely, waving American Flag.No, but there is inertia in the wire holding the flag out horizontally.

FAX
07-17-2009, 08:26 PM
WHY HAVEN'T WE BEEN BACK THERE SINCE 1969????

Wow. Don't you conspiracy guys ever quit, Mr. Bowser?

We haven't returned to the moon because the aliens have a subterranean base there and they gave us a message for the Freemasons who, in turn, passed it along to the Vatican who, in turn, agreed to put an end to Soviet Russia if we would agree not to go back to the moon. Simple.

FAX

JuicesFlowing
07-17-2009, 08:28 PM
Wow. Don't you conspiracy guys ever quit, Mr. Bowser?

We haven't returned to the moon because the aliens have a subterranean base there and they gave us a message for the Freemasons who, in turn, passed it along to the Vatican who, in turn, agreed to put an end to Soviet Russia if we would agree not to go back to the moon. Simple.

FAX

But where is Al Qaeda in all of this?

Bowser
07-17-2009, 08:28 PM
Wow. Don't you conspiracy guys ever quit, Mr. Bowser?

We haven't returned to the moon because the aliens have a subterranean base there and they gave us a message for the Freemasons who, in turn, passed it along to the Vatican who, in turn, agreed to put an end to Soviet Russia if we would agree not to go back to the moon. Simple.

FAX

Makes sense, Mr. FAX. Certainly kills my fear that we found a race of beautiful wmoen who want nothing more than to mate with us. The only problem is that they would have penises for breasts and venus flytraps for vaginas.

I like your theory better.

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 08:33 PM
You know what? If anyone on this thread really believes we didn't go, check out this site; http://www.clavius.org

Raised On Riots
07-17-2009, 08:42 PM
Yes, and the Earth is only 10,000 years old per Mike Hucklebee.

ROFL:clap:

Shaid
07-17-2009, 10:18 PM
So there is wind on the moon? Sincerely, waving American Flag.

They covered that on mythbusters. You should really check out that episodes, pretty good stuff.

Guru
07-17-2009, 10:21 PM
That shit happened 8 years ago.ROFL Things get more interesting next year.

Raised On Riots
07-17-2009, 10:39 PM
They covered that on mythbusters. You should really check out that episodes, pretty good stuff.

Mythbusters also said you can't build a lightsaber;



Piss on Mythbusters!

macdawg
07-17-2009, 10:56 PM
I've always thought the moon landing was a hoax.

audio on the subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfXec0pztRg&feature=related

literature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_conspiracy_theories#Predominant_hoax_claims

"Bob" Dobbs
07-17-2009, 11:11 PM
I've always thought the moon landing was a hoax.

audio on the subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfXec0pztRg&feature=related

literature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_conspiracy_theories#Predominant_hoax_claims
The truth: http://www.clavius.org/

Lzen
07-17-2009, 11:20 PM
As I recall it was worth a watch,definitely dated,but the actors were well known.


<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tf8kdmw7vQc&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tf8kdmw7vQc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

That was a pretty good flick. At least they didn't let OJ have too many lines.

Raised On Riots
07-17-2009, 11:21 PM
I've always thought the moon landing was a hoax.

audio on the subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfXec0pztRg&feature=related

literature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_conspiracy_theories#Predominant_hoax_claims


I like this; nice contribution.:thumb:

Lzen
07-17-2009, 11:25 PM
I'm still waiting for the Monoliths.

Kubrick FTW!

Lzen
07-17-2009, 11:33 PM
ROFL Things get more interesting next year.

The year we make contact?

Lzen
07-17-2009, 11:33 PM
I've always thought the moon landing was a hoax.

audio on the subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfXec0pztRg&feature=related

literature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_conspiracy_theories#Predominant_hoax_claims

Try to no be so naive.

Raised On Riots
07-17-2009, 11:35 PM
Try to no be so naive.

And once again, no one even hits the link. It's a debate, not a propaganda reel.

Guru
07-17-2009, 11:39 PM
The year we make contact?Exactly:clap:

Guru
07-17-2009, 11:41 PM
And once again, no one even hits the link. It's a debate, not a propaganda reel.There is no reason to if you don't believe the conspiracy theory. To the majority of humanity, there is no debate.

Raised On Riots
07-17-2009, 11:43 PM
There is no reason to if you don't believe the conspiracy theory. To the majority of humanity, there is no debate.

I like your take. I think I'll question nothing else in this life ever again.


See how dumb that sounds?

Guru
07-17-2009, 11:45 PM
I like your take. I think I'll question nothing else in this life ever again.


See how dumb that sounds?I will question things that I believe need questioning. This is not one of them in my own opinion.

Raised On Riots
07-17-2009, 11:46 PM
I will question things that I believe need questioning. This is not one of them in my own opinion.

I like your take. I'm going to keep my knowledge-base within my own periphery.


:D

Guru
07-17-2009, 11:49 PM
I like your take. I'm going to keep my knowledge-base within my own periphery.


:DHey, I think you are on to something there.:)

Raised On Riots
07-17-2009, 11:51 PM
Hey, I think you are on to something there.:)

ROFL

Pitt Gorilla
07-18-2009, 12:11 AM
That.

Note, conspiracy theorists, does EVERYTHING have to be a government coverup?Have you heard about the birth certificate coverup?

tmax63
07-18-2009, 07:31 AM
There isn't any way in hell that the number of people that would of been required to pull off a hoax of that magnitude would of been able to keep quiet for 40 years. Somebody would of gotten rich by "spilling the beans" long before now if it had been a hoax. Pioli can't keep contract #'s secret and there's only a few people involved in that. And we all know the Chiefs is the new bar for the level of secrecy.

Psyko Tek
07-18-2009, 08:17 AM
That.

Note, conspiracy theorists, does EVERYTHING have to be a government coverup?

our government couldn't cover up who farted in an elevator

milkman
07-18-2009, 08:22 AM
If Herman fucking Edwards could land a job as as head coach in the NFL, then anything, including man landing on the moon, is possible.

Micjones
07-18-2009, 08:24 AM
our government couldn't cover up who farted in an elevator

Shit. Sorry...

:(

Dave Lane
07-18-2009, 08:35 AM
Post this over in DC I'll bet the anti Obama crowd and the birth certificate loonies will lap it up.

Saccopoo
07-18-2009, 09:57 AM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?

Donger
07-18-2009, 10:01 AM
Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?

Yes. Millions of people physically witnessed the Apollo 11 launch. They were seeing things?

Bugeater
07-18-2009, 10:02 AM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?
Couple things, I'm pretty sure Kennedy had aspirations of making this happen as early as 1961, long before the Vietnam war started.

And my mother still has the same toaster that she bought when she moved into her house in 1968.

kstater
07-18-2009, 10:13 AM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?

Dumbass

FAX
07-18-2009, 10:31 AM
There's no question that the government has in the past and continues to engage in cover-ups of various sorts and for a variety of reasons. People who think that they do not or cannot are very mistaken. The US, for example, engages in black ops all the time that we never hear about, spends money on projects that will never see the light of day, and authorizes the CIA to conduct activities that are kept secret for a reason. Besides, there's a purpose behind the various "secret" classifications (the existence of which no one disputes).

And, of course, the argument that "someone would spill the beans" rings as hollow as a Liberty Bell made of frozen Spam. When a whistle-blower does come forward, he or she is labeled a kook and a nut-job and a poop-stained monkey-lover quicker than you can say, "I want a divorce from this damned monkey." The government and/or the involved, interested parties instantly field hoards of "experts" to debunk the whistle-blower which is indicative of a sincere concern that certain secrets stay that way. As Shakespeare said, "Methinks he protests too much."

There are plenty of conspiracies to go around but the moon landing isn't one of them. We did travel to the moon and took pictures and gathered rocks and came home and splashed down in some water. That all happened pretty much like they say it did. There's ample proof.

FAX

milkman
07-18-2009, 10:33 AM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?

I'm sold.

Where do I sign up?

RNR
07-18-2009, 10:39 AM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?

:rolleyes:

Param
07-18-2009, 11:47 AM
if they planted a flag there shouldnt we still be able to see it? that would be proof enough

No. The cameras on the LRO cannot detect objects that small, including the dune buggeys and whatever else was left there.

Stewie
07-18-2009, 11:51 AM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?

Cognitive dissonance much? It runs rampant in this conspiracy.

There's an observatory in Texas that bounces lasers off of mirrors left behind on the moon to track lunar orbits. The astrophysicist that runs the observatory has said all conspirators are welcome to see for themselves. None of them have ever shown up - it would destroy their book sales.

Donger
07-18-2009, 03:39 PM
No. The cameras on the LRO cannot detect objects that small, including the dune buggeys and whatever else was left there.

The camera on the LRO (the LROC) is capable of resolutions down to a meter, so the flag should be achievable, as will the rovers and the descent stages.

Valiant
07-18-2009, 04:05 PM
Just have who ever does google earth go over there and take some photo's.. Either we are going to see the pod or some alien's mooning us..

Param
07-18-2009, 04:53 PM
The camera on the LRO (the LROC) is capable of resolutions down to a meter, so the flag should be achievable, as will the rovers and the descent stages.

Unfortunately, the images will not be that detailed. The landing site will be similar to the Opportunity pictures at the Victoria crater on Mars. This was my one disappointment when LRO was going to be launched. But, then again this wasn't the primary mission of LRO.

Donger
07-18-2009, 05:56 PM
Unfortunately, the images will not be that detailed. The landing site will be similar to the Opportunity pictures at the Victoria crater on Mars. This was my one disappointment when LRO was going to be launched. But, then again this wasn't the primary mission of LRO.

Are you saying that the one meter resolution of the LROC is not going to happen?

Miles
07-18-2009, 06:21 PM
Is Capricorn One any good? Never heard of it.

It's on TCM late Tuesday night.

chasedude
07-18-2009, 07:45 PM
The Russian's were monitoring transmissions at that time. If they discovered it wasn't coming from the moon they would have been all over it.

FAX
07-18-2009, 08:04 PM
The Russian's were monitoring transmissions at that time. If they discovered it wasn't coming from the moon they would have been all over it.

As a matter of fact, the Ruskies wholeheartedly believe that we haven't returned to the moon because of the evil, badass aliens, Mr. chasedude. That's why they haven't gone themselves.

Instead, they have their own SETI program and, for decades, have been attempting to make contact with the moon aliens using radio signals. Unfortunately, the message they've been sending over and over for years in a vain attempt to get a response is, "Покажите нам ваши груди" which, loosely translated, means "Show us your cold, frozen tits".

Dumbass Ruskies. Everybody knows aliens are entirely titless.

FAX

Pioli Zombie
07-18-2009, 08:27 PM
Well if the Holocaust never happened then how hard could it be to fake a moon landing?
Posted via Mobile Device

Pioli Zombie
07-18-2009, 08:29 PM
JFK is alive too. He is advising Obama from his Miami Condo.
Posted via Mobile Device

bishop_74
07-18-2009, 08:33 PM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?

Here ya go smart guy. The SR-71 line was in service from 1964 to 1998. You saying that was just a hopped up toaster? Seriously. Why don't people think before they talk?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird

chefsos
07-18-2009, 08:48 PM
If 1969 era industry couldn't build a decent toaster, how in the fuck could they come up with the cgi neccessary to fake the goddamn moon landings?

Raised On Riots
07-18-2009, 08:56 PM
If 1969 era industry couldn't build a decent toaster, how in the fuck could they come up with the cgi neccessary to fake the goddamn moon landings?

You don't need George fucking Lucas to suspend some guys from wire then replay the tape slowed down!

chasedude
07-19-2009, 12:55 AM
As a matter of fact, the Ruskies wholeheartedly believe that we haven't returned to the moon because of the evil, badass aliens, Mr. chasedude. That's why they haven't gone themselves.

Instead, they have their own SETI program and, for decades, have been attempting to make contact with the moon aliens using radio signals. Unfortunately, the message they've been sending over and over for years in a vain attempt to get a response is, "Покажите нам ваши груди" which, loosely translated, means "Show us your cold, frozen tits".

Dumbass Ruskies. Everybody knows aliens are entirely titless.

FAX

I've seen these moon people. You are correct Mr. Fax they are titless and plan on ruling the world. I'm glad there's cartoon network around to keep me up on this things.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh166/ultimateflash/aquateen01jy3.jpg

Dick Bull
07-19-2009, 01:00 AM
As a matter of fact, the Ruskies wholeheartedly believe that we haven't returned to the moon because of the evil, badass aliens, Mr. chasedude. That's why they haven't gone themselves.

Instead, they have their own SETI program and, for decades, have been attempting to make contact with the moon aliens using radio signals. Unfortunately, the message they've been sending over and over for years in a vain attempt to get a response is, "Покажите нам ваши груди" which, loosely translated, means "Show us your cold, frozen tits".

Dumbass Ruskies. Everybody knows aliens are entirely titless.

FAX


Mr. Fax maybe the south moon people are titless. The north moon people have 3 tits consisting of 4 nipples on each one.

Saccopoo
07-19-2009, 02:11 AM
Here ya go smart guy. The SR-71 line was in service from 1964 to 1998. You saying that was just a hopped up toaster? Seriously. Why don't people think before they talk?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird

Big engine, pressure suit, belly camera and some oxygen tanks. Whoopdeedoo.

It's not the same as putting a manned whatever into space, working that thing to the moon which involved getting it through the radiation in the earth's high atmosphere, navigating the moons gravity, landing it (safely), re-launching out of the moon's gravitational field, passing once again through the Van Allen Belts, and into earth atmosphere and making sure that you don't accidently land in anything other than nice, soft water with the technology that was available in 1969. And then, because it was such a monumental achievement for all of mankind, never do it again, nor have any other country do it, because, well, shit...we already did it once, so what's the point of doing it again.

SPchief
07-19-2009, 02:49 AM
Big engine, pressure suit, belly camera and some oxygen tanks. Whoopdeedoo.

It's not the same as putting a manned whatever into space, working that thing to the moon which involved getting it through the radiation in the earth's high atmosphere, navigating the moons gravity, landing it (safely), re-launching out of the moon's gravitational field, passing once again through the Van Allen Belts, and into earth atmosphere and making sure that you don't accidently land in anything other than nice, soft water with the technology that was available in 1969. And then, because it was such a monumental achievement for all of mankind, never do it again, nor have any other country do it, because, well, shit...we already did it once, so what's the point of doing it again.

Um, not to try and debunk the retardedness of this post, but I'm pretty sure they went there (and came back safely) more than once

Dick Bull
07-19-2009, 02:53 AM
Big engine, pressure suit, belly camera and some oxygen tanks. Whoopdeedoo.

It's not the same as putting a manned whatever into space, working that thing to the moon which involved getting it through the radiation in the earth's high atmosphere, navigating the moons gravity, landing it (safely), re-launching out of the moon's gravitational field, passing once again through the Van Allen Belts, and into earth atmosphere and making sure that you don't accidently land in anything other than nice, soft water with the technology that was available in 1969. And then, because it was such a monumental achievement for all of mankind, never do it again, nor have any other country do it, because, well, shit...we already did it once, so what's the point of doing it again.

Oh I don't know, maybe because it cost a shit ton of money for people to walk on the moon.

LaChapelle
07-19-2009, 04:11 AM
In answer to the thread title -Does it make a difference in your life if we went to the moon or not? Really?

lostcause
07-19-2009, 04:13 AM
Take the red pill.

Saccopoo
07-19-2009, 12:27 PM
Oh I don't know, maybe because it cost a shit ton of money for people to walk on the moon.

Yeah, like spending US taxpayer dollars on frivolous, inane shit wouldn't be/isn't something that our government does on a regular basis - especially if it involves one or more of the US "defense"/military/space related industry corporations.

And since we never really did anything other than supposedly walk around for a couple of minutes, what was ultimately the point of even going to the moon? I mean, where's the justification for the immense waste of tax payer dollar which has been going on ever since for retarded manned space flight? And since we had the "technology" to go to the moon back in '69, why haven't we expanded on it since then? I mean, other than those ultra important scientific breakthroughs of floating a couple ant farms and bean sprouts around the shuttle's cargo bay.

One would have thought that we would have utilized that tremendous technology that we had in '69 that enabled us to surface land a several ton, manned craft along with a dune buggy on the moon, but all we've been able to accomplish since then is to put a RC car into a gigantic beach ball and take four pictures of what looks to be/is supposed to be the surface of Mars.

Just seems to me that we have wasted that amazing ingenuity and technology and almost scientifically impossible to achieve feat of landing all that shit on the moon.

Skip Towne
07-19-2009, 12:32 PM
Yeah, like spending US taxpayer dollars on frivolous, inane shit wouldn't be/isn't something that our government does on a regular basis - especially if it involves one or more of the US "defense"/military/space related industry corporations.

And since we never really did anything other than supposedly walk around for a couple of minutes, what was ultimately the point of even going to the moon? I mean, where's the justification for the immense waste of tax payer dollar which has been going on ever since for retarded manned space flight? And since we had the "technology" to go to the moon back in '69, why haven't we expanded on it since then? I mean, other than those ultra important scientific breakthroughs of floating a couple ant farms and bean sprouts around the shuttle's cargo bay.

One would have thought that we would have utilized that tremendous technology that we had in '69 that enabled us to surface land a several ton, manned craft along with a dune buggy on the moon, but all we've been able to accomplish since then is to put a RC car into a gigantic beach ball and take four pictures of what looks to be/is supposed to be the surface of Mars.

Just seems to me that we have wasted that amazing ingenuity and technology and almost scientifically impossible to achieve feat of landing all that shit on the moon.

I think it's that giant leap for mankind they are after.

Donger
07-19-2009, 02:21 PM
Yeah, like spending US taxpayer dollars on frivolous, inane shit wouldn't be/isn't something that our government does on a regular basis - especially if it involves one or more of the US "defense"/military/space related industry corporations.

And since we never really did anything other than supposedly walk around for a couple of minutes, what was ultimately the point of even going to the moon? I mean, where's the justification for the immense waste of tax payer dollar which has been going on ever since for retarded manned space flight? And since we had the "technology" to go to the moon back in '69, why haven't we expanded on it since then? I mean, other than those ultra important scientific breakthroughs of floating a couple ant farms and bean sprouts around the shuttle's cargo bay.

One would have thought that we would have utilized that tremendous technology that we had in '69 that enabled us to surface land a several ton, manned craft along with a dune buggy on the moon, but all we've been able to accomplish since then is to put a RC car into a gigantic beach ball and take four pictures of what looks to be/is supposed to be the surface of Mars.

Just seems to me that we have wasted that amazing ingenuity and technology and almost scientifically impossible to achieve feat of landing all that shit on the moon.

At this point, I must presume that you are being facetious.

whoman69
07-19-2009, 03:36 PM
There are idiots that will believe anything.

Pioli Zombie
07-19-2009, 03:40 PM
It was real and it was spectacular.
Posted via Mobile Device

"Bob" Dobbs
07-19-2009, 03:41 PM
There are idiots that will believe anything.Who are the idiots? Those that believe NASA or the ones who don't?

Pioli Zombie
07-19-2009, 04:00 PM
US: "Well they didn't fake it with me"
USSR: "I see"
US: "What?"
USSR: "Its just that no country thinks its happened to them and every government at one time or another has done it so you do the math"
US: Well I can tell
USSR. Ok. ( Long pause ). Oohh
US. You ok?
USSR: Houston, Tranquility base here. The Eagles has landed. That's one small step for man, one Giant leap for mankind
China: I'll have what Russia is having.
Posted via Mobile Device

Guru
07-20-2009, 02:18 PM
Happy 40th!!!

ROYC75
07-20-2009, 02:57 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/space/07/17/moon.landing.hoax/index.html

(CNN) -- It captivated millions of people around the world for eight days in the summer of 1969. It brought glory to the embattled U.S. space program and inspired beliefs that anything was possible.

It's arguably the greatest technological feat of the 20th century.

And to some, it was all a lie.

Forty years after Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin set foot on the moon, a small cult of conspiracy theorists maintains the historic event -- and the five subsequent Apollo moon landings -- were staged. These people believe NASA fabricated the landings to trump their Soviet rivals and fulfill President Kennedy's goal of ferrying humans safely to and from the moon by the end of the 1960s.

"I do know the moon landings were faked," said crusading filmmaker Bart Sibrel, whose aggressive interview tactics once provoked Aldrin to punch him in the face. "I'd bet my life on it."

Sibrel may seem crazy, but he has company. A 1999 Gallup poll found that a scant 6 percent of Americans doubted the Apollo 11 moon landing happened, and there is anecdotal evidence that the ranks of such conspiracy theorists, fueled by innuendo-filled documentaries and the Internet, are growing.

Twenty-five percent of respondents to a survey in the British magazine Engineering & Technology said they do not believe humans landed on the moon. A handful of Web sites and blogs circulate suspicions about NASA's "hoax."

And a Google search this week for "Apollo moon landing hoax" yielded more than 1.5 billion results.

"We love conspiracies," said Roger Launius, a senior curator at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington. "Going to the moon is hard to understand. And it's easier for some people to accept the answer that, 'Well, maybe we didn't go to the moon.' A lot of it is naivete."

Conspiracy theories about the Apollo missions began not long after the last astronaut returned from the moon in 1972. Bill Kaysing, a technical writer for Rocketdyne, which built rocket engines for NASA's Apollo program, published a 1974 book, "We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle."

In the book and elsewhere, Kaysing argued that NASA lacked the technology in 1969 to land humans safely on the moon, that the Apollo astronauts would have been poisoned by passing through the Van Allen radiation belts that ring the Earth and that NASA's photos from the moon contained suspicious anomalies. Video See improved NASA footage of the 1969 moonwalk »

Kaysing theorized NASA sent the Apollo 11 astronauts up in a rocket until it was out of sight, then transferred the lunar capsule and its three passengers to a military cargo plane that dropped the capsule eight days later in the Pacific, where it was recovered. In the meantime, he believed, NASA officials filmed the "moon landing" at Area 51, the high-security military base in the Nevada desert, and brainwashed the astronauts to ensure their cooperation.

Some believe Kaysing's theories inspired the 1978 movie "Capricorn One," in which NASA fakes a Mars landing on a remote military base, then goes to desperate lengths to cover it up. Others insist NASA recruited director Stanley Kubrick, hot off "2001: A Space Odyssey," to film the "faked" moon landings.

Oh, and those moon rocks? Lunar meteorites from Antarctica.

Decades later, Kaysing's beliefs formed the foundation for "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?" a sensational 2001 Fox TV documentary that spotted eerie "inconsistencies" in NASA's Apollo images and TV footage.

Among them: no blast craters are visible under the landing modules; shadows intersect instead of running parallel, suggesting the presence of an unnatural light source; and a planted American flag appears to ripple in a breeze although there's no wind on the moon.

The hour-long special sparked such interest in the topic that NASA took the unusual step of issuing a news release and posting a point-by-point rebuttal on its Web site. The press release began: "Yes. Astronauts did land on the moon."

In various documents, NASA has countered that the Apollo astronauts passed through the Van Allen belts too quickly to be exposed to dangerous levels of radiation; that the module's descent engines weren't powerful enough to leave a blast crater; that the shadows in photos were distorted by wide-angle lenses and sloping lunar terrain; and that the Apollo flags had horizontal support bars that made the flags swing.

Kaysing died in 2005, but not before grabbing the attention of Sibrel, a Nashville, Tennessee, filmmaker who has since become the most visible proponent of the Apollo hoax theories. With funding from an anonymous donor, Sibrel wrote and directed a 47-minute documentary in 2001 that reiterated many of the now-familiar hoax arguments.

Critics of moon-landing hoax theorists, and there are many, say it would be impossible for tens of thousands of NASA employees and Apollo contractors to keep such a whopping secret for almost four decades.

But Sibrel believes the Apollo program was so compartmentalized that only its astronauts and a handful of high-level NASA officials knew the entire story. Sibrel spent years ambushing Apollo astronauts and insisting they swear on a Bible before his cameras that they walked on the moon.

"When someone has gotten away with a crime, in my opinion, they deserve to be ambushed," Sibrel said. "I'm a journalist trying to get at the truth."

In an episode made infamous on YouTube, Sibrel confronted Aldrin in 2002 and called him "a coward, a liar and a thief." Aldrin, then 72, socked the thirtysomething Sibrel in the face, knocking him backwards.

"I don't want to call attention to the individuals who are trying to promote and shuffle off this hoax on people," Aldrin told CNN in a recent interview. "I feel sorry for the gullible people who're going to go along with them. I guess it's just natural human reaction to want to be a part of 'knowing something that somebody doesn't know.' But it's misguided. It's just a shame."

It's been 37 years since the last Apollo moon mission, and tens of millions of younger Americans have no memories of watching the moon landings live. A 2005-2006 poll by Mary Lynne Dittmar, a space consultant based in Houston, Texas, found that more than a quarter of Americans 18 to 25 expressed some doubt that humans set foot on the moon.

"As the number of people who were not yet born at the time of the Apollo program increases, the number of questions [about the moon landings] also may increase," NASA said in a statement. "Conspiracy theories are always difficult to refute because of the impossibility of proving a negative."

Launius, the National Air and Space Museum curator, believes Apollo conspiracy theories resonate with people who are disengaged from society and distrustful of government. He also believes their numbers are overblown.

"These diehards are really vocal, but they're really tiny," he said.

But Stuart Robbins, a Ph.D. candidate in astrophysics at the University of Colorado who gives lectures defending NASA from Apollo hoax theorists, believes their influence can be harmful.

"If people don't think we were able to go to the moon, then they don't believe in the ingenuity of human achievement," he said. "Going to the moon and returning astronauts safely back to Earth is arguably one of the most profound achievements in human history, and so when people simply believe it was a hoax, they lose out on that shared experience and doubt what humans can do."

In its information campaign against Apollo's "debunkers," NASA may have a potent ace up its sleeve, however. Its Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is now circling the moon with powerful cameras, snapping crisp pictures that could reveal Apollo 11's Eagle lander squatting on the moon's surface.
advertisement

Then again, conspiracy theorists may just say NASA doctored the photos.

"Will the LRO's incredibly high-resolution images of the lunar surface, including, eventually, the Apollo landing sites, finally quell the lunacy of the Moon Hoax believers? Obviously it won't," writes astronomer Phil Plait in his blog on Discover magazine's Web site. "These true believers don't live in an evidence-based world."


WHAT ? You mean we have landed on the MOON ? :eek:

DaFace
07-20-2009, 03:46 PM
In case anyone cares, Mythbusters is re-airing their episode on this tonight.

Miles
07-20-2009, 07:47 PM
In case anyone cares, Mythbusters is re-airing their episode on this tonight.

Thanks for the heads up.

Buehler445
07-20-2009, 07:55 PM
They actually did a pretty good job. This is right up their alley...special effects.

Guru
07-20-2009, 08:00 PM
In case anyone cares, Mythbusters is re-airing their episode on this tonight.What time is it on overnight?

macdawg
07-20-2009, 11:20 PM
even after reading your link just seems odd to me that people think I'm on crack or something for thinking we had the technology to land on the moon 40 years ago with some video that wouldn't be hard to produce and rocks identical to those found in Antarctica in 1967. I'm guessing I'm from a different generation than most of you guys.

“Yes. Millions of people physically witnessed the Apollo 11 launch. They were seeing things?”

Rockets go into outer space all the time. How often do they land on the moon? One time 40 years ago? Pictures & video a 5 year old could record and rocks brought back from the Moon are identical to rocks collected by 1967 scientific expeditions to Antarctica.

“Oh I don't know, maybe because it cost a shit ton of money for people to walk on the moon.”

I agree it would cost a shit ton, imagine how much it would have cost 40 years ago considering technology doubles about every year and a half.

If it was faked, no one would want to admit it, lots of the apollo dudes had questionable deaths.

In a television program about the hoax allegations, Fox Entertainment Group listed the deaths of ten astronauts and of two civilians related to the manned spaceflight program as having possibly been killed as part of a cover-up.
• Theodore Freeman (T-38 crash, 1964)
• Elliot See and Charlie Bassett (T-38 accident, 1966)
• Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967). His son Scott Grissom said the accident was a murder.[88] Bill Kaysing also makes this claim.[15], p. 41
• Edward Higgins "Ed" White (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
• Roger B. Chaffee (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)
• Edward "Ed" Givens (car accident, 1967)
• Clifton "C. C." Williams (T-38 accident, October 1967)
• X-15 pilot Michael J. "Mike" Adams (the only X-15 pilot killed during the X-15 flight test program in November 1967 - not a NASA astronaut, but had flown X-15 above 50 miles).
• Robert Henry Lawrence, Jr., scheduled to be an Air Force Manned Orbiting Laboratory pilot, who died in a jet crash in December 1967, shortly after reporting for duty to that (later canceled) program.
• NASA worker Thomas Ronald Baron (automobile collision with train, 1967 shortly after making accusations before Congress about the cause of the Apollo 1 fire, after which he was fired). Ruled as suicide. Baron was a quality control inspector who wrote a report critical of the Apollo program and was an outspoken critic after the Apollo 1 fire. Baron and his family were killed as their car was struck by a train at a train crossing.[88][89]
• Brian Welch, a leading official in NASA's Public Affairs Office, died a few months after appearing in the media to debunk the Fox pro-Moon hoax television show cited above.[14]
All but one of the astronaut deaths (Irwin's) were directly related to their job with NASA or the Air Force. Two of the astronauts, Mike Adams and Robert Lawrence, had no connection with the civilian manned space program. Astronaut James Irwin had suffered several heart attacks in the years prior to his death. There is no independent confirmation of Gelvani's claim that Irwin was about to come forward. All except two of the deaths occurred at least one or two years before Apollo 11 and the subsequent flights. Brian Welch's death would had been a blow against the alleged Hoax Conspirators since he was a debunker of pro Moon Hoax arguments.
As of July 20, 2009 nine of the twelve astronauts who landed on the moon still survive including Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin.[90]


“In answer to the thread title -Does it make a difference in your life if we went to the moon or not? Really?”

Not really, I just said I always thought it was BS even as a kid seeing the Apollo videos it just seemed fake to me.

Crashride
07-21-2009, 08:20 AM
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/.a/6a00d8341bf7f753ef01157124947a970c-800wi

The pic is from http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/07/new-nasa-images-of-moon-landing-sites-reveal-footprint-trail.html

If they can see foot prints, then they surely should be able to see the flag and dune buggies.

Donger
07-21-2009, 09:38 AM
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/.a/6a00d8341bf7f753ef01157124947a970c-800wi

The pic is from http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/07/new-nasa-images-of-moon-landing-sites-reveal-footprint-trail.html

If they can see foot prints, then they surely should be able to see the flag and dune buggies.

Considering that is a picture of the Apollo 14 landing site, and Apollo 14 did not include a rover, it isn't surprising that you can't see the rover in that picture.

Donger
07-21-2009, 09:40 AM
even after reading your link just seems odd to me that people think I'm on crack or something for thinking we had the technology to land on the moon 40 years ago with some video that wouldn't be hard to produce and rocks identical to those found in Antarctica in 1967. I'm guessing I'm from a different generation than most of you guys.

“Yes. Millions of people physically witnessed the Apollo 11 launch. They were seeing things?”

Rockets go into outer space all the time. How often do they land on the moon? One time 40 years ago? Pictures & video a 5 year old could record and rocks brought back from the Moon are identical to rocks collected by 1967 scientific expeditions to Antarctica.

We landed on the Moon six times, not once.

wild1
07-21-2009, 09:56 AM
These are the same people who sink their wealth into gold coins and call into the radio at night claiming they were abducted by aliens.

It seems to me that the tech used in the missions, aside from propulsion and such, is not all that advanced. For it's day, sure. But looking back, it's not hard to believe at all.

Katipan
07-21-2009, 09:57 AM
Considering that is a picture of the Apollo 14 landing site, and Apollo 14 did not include a rover, it isn't surprising that you can't see the rover in that picture.

You are such a sexy smooth nerd.

Crashride
07-21-2009, 10:06 AM
Considering that is a picture of the Apollo 14 landing site, and Apollo 14 did not include a rover, it isn't surprising that you can't see the rover in that picture.

I wasnt making an attempt at a debate. Earlier I asked if they could see the flag it would be proof enough. In that pic they can see foot prints, so I got my answer. Plus two other posters were talking about the zooming capabilities of some camera. I dont expect you to read the whole thread though you sexy poster you.

"Bob" Dobbs
07-21-2009, 10:07 AM
I always found it interesting that Mike Collins never COULD actually find Eagle on the moon from orbit; It took almost 40 years to get any sort of visual on the exact site. Of course, the luneys will jump on that as evidence we weren't there, somehow.

"Bob" Dobbs
07-21-2009, 10:08 AM
I wasnt making an attempt at a debate. Earlier I asked if they could see the flag it would be proof enough. In that pic they can see foot prints, so I got my answer. Plus two other posters were talking about the zooming capabilities of some camera. I dont expect you to read the whole thread though you sexy poster you.Were you a believer in the NASA story before? I wonder if anyone has changed their minds in the last few days.

Donger
07-21-2009, 10:10 AM
I wasnt making an attempt at a debate. Earlier I asked if they could see the flag it would be proof enough. In that pic they can see foot prints, so I got my answer. Plus two other posters were talking about the zooming capabilities of some camera. I dont expect you to read the whole thread though you sexy poster you.

I have read the thread. LRO is not yet in its final parking/mapping orbit. Once it is, the resolution of the pictures it will take will be double to triple the resolution of these shots.

Donger
07-21-2009, 10:11 AM
You are such a sexy smooth nerd.

I'm not quite sure why that is the case, but I appreciate the apparent compliment.

Crashride
07-21-2009, 11:13 AM
Were you a believer in the NASA story before? I wonder if anyone has changed their minds in the last few days.

I do believe we landed on the moon if thats what your asking.

Crashride
07-21-2009, 11:14 AM
I have read the thread. LRO is not yet in its final parking/mapping orbit. Once it is, the resolution of the pictures it will take will be double to triple the resolution of these shots.

Well hopefully it works out and shuts up all the non-believers.

"Bob" Dobbs
07-21-2009, 11:17 AM
They'll find a way to say the LRO shots were faked as well.

JOhn
07-21-2009, 11:55 AM
Funny thing, no one doubts the space shuttle program, and what is has done. yet it was first flown using 70's era technology.

Mr. Kotter
07-21-2009, 12:10 PM
Some people are stupid. Some are really stupid.

Neither should procreate. The government should sterilize all of them. Tomorrow.

Pioli Zombie
07-21-2009, 12:21 PM
Some people here need to have a Novasure treatment.
We landed on the fucking moon you morons.
Posted via Mobile Device

wild1
07-21-2009, 12:24 PM
They'll find a way to say the LRO shots were faked as well.

If you took them to the moon personally and showed them the landers and evidence all around the landing site, they'd still say it was some kind of trick. NASA probably planted all that stuff last week.

Skip Towne
07-21-2009, 12:26 PM
The earth is FLAT, dammit.

FAX
07-21-2009, 12:29 PM
What about this? What if the moon is just a big hologram thing? You know, to cover up a giant spaceport that circles the Earth where aliens vacation? The Earth and all its inhabitants could be just part of a complex video game and the aliens could be controlling us with joysticks and high-fouring each other whenever they start a war. What about that?

FAX

Radar Chief
07-21-2009, 12:35 PM
What about this? What if the moon is just a big hologram thing? You know, to cover up a giant spaceport that circles the Earth where aliens vacation? The Earth and all its inhabitants could be just part of a complex video game and the aliens could be controlling us with joysticks and high-fouring each other whenever they start a war. What about that?

FAX

?

Pioli Zombie
07-21-2009, 02:14 PM
This is the only place to get the real poop

www.doodie.com.
Posted via Mobile Device

Extra Point
07-21-2009, 02:31 PM
Newton computed the mass of the sun, the moon, and the earth, according to the historical notes in the diff-eq book I used 30 years ago. I'm amazed at what these eggheads could accomplish, using arithmetic, hundreds of years ago.

I have no problem believing that men walked on the moon, and that Grissom, Chaffee, and White didn't die for nothing. Where, though, have we gone since the moon landings? The Hubbell project has been of great benefit, some of the products developed for the space program have had commercial success. (Yes, of course, Tang included.)

What's sad is that with calculators and computers, we're not able to do more, like actually make stuff in this country. That's the next challenge: to get our GDP going, sans health care, government spending, and service income.

mlyonsd
07-21-2009, 02:38 PM
The earth is FLAT, dammit.

STILL sticking to that theory Skip?

BCD
07-21-2009, 03:51 PM
I watched the Mythbusters Moon episode last night. They did a kick-ass job of debunking of the conspiracy theorists.

BCD
07-21-2009, 03:53 PM
Height of the Vietnam War - protests against the war were building at an almost exponential rate. The MIC (military industrial complex) needed to develop a distraction of significant magnitude. "Man on the moon" was the perfect mix of over the top government expenditure to the vast majority of the same corporations that were benefitting from the financial output related to the war and focusing the publics attention on something other than the war itself.

In addition, in 1969 a high-tech company was lucky to make a decent toaster that actually worked. Does one truly think that the infinite number of technical intricacies that would have been required to actually land a craft on the moon at that time even existed?R-tard

Guru
07-21-2009, 03:56 PM
What about this? What if the moon is just a big hologram thing? You know, to cover up a giant spaceport that circles the Earth where aliens vacation? The Earth and all its inhabitants could be just part of a complex video game and the aliens could be controlling us with joysticks and high-fouring each other whenever they start a war. What about that?

FAXIt's the Truman Show on a much grander scale.

RJ
07-21-2009, 04:15 PM
We landed on the Moon six times, not once.


Fool me once, shame on you, fool me six times, shame on me!

Donger
09-04-2009, 10:40 AM
New LRO image of Apollo 12 site.

Buck
09-04-2009, 10:46 AM
What do all those mean Donger?

Donger
09-04-2009, 10:50 AM
What do all those mean Donger?

All those what?

Stewie
09-04-2009, 10:51 AM
The moon is fake.

ChiefJustice
09-04-2009, 10:52 AM
Bringing up old threads makes Buzz Aldrin cry....

Buck
09-04-2009, 10:53 AM
All those what?

Sharp, Bench, Head, ALSEP

Donger
09-04-2009, 10:57 AM
Sharp, Bench, Head, ALSEP

Oh. The first three are just crater names. ALSEP stands for Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package.

kepp
09-04-2009, 11:15 AM
The moon is fake.

I never thought about it that way. The landings have to be fake then.

Donger
11-05-2009, 10:18 AM
New 50m resolution shot of Apollo 12:

Donger
11-05-2009, 10:19 AM
Apollo 17 100m shot:

Donger
11-05-2009, 10:20 AM
Challenger, the LM of Apollo 17:

loochy
11-05-2009, 10:22 AM
Welcome to conspiracy Thursday here on ChiefsPlanet.

Buck
11-05-2009, 10:28 AM
Photoshop, I can see the pixels.

"Bob" Dobbs
11-05-2009, 10:43 AM
Hopefully, these new high-res shots from LRO will finally slow down the hoax nonsense. They won't, though. I wonder how much of the hoax believers "belief" is real as opposed to being simply internet trolls out to push peoples buttons.

Jerm
11-05-2009, 10:44 AM
Capricorn One...still an awesome movie.
Posted via Mobile Device

"Bob" Dobbs
11-05-2009, 10:48 AM
Capricorn One...still an awesome movie.
Posted via Mobile DeviceYes it is.