I've got to doubt that man ever landed on the Moon...

[D_Crystallized Ginger]

I wouldn't be too surprised if this thread was unpleasant to somebody,especially usa citizens, but I really want to put it off my chest...
Some years ago I was staring at the Moon in a wonderful night and I thought that is very strange the Man don't go to it anymore... If Moon trips aren't possible today, how the hell did the Nasa manage to make the Man land on it more than 40 years ago??? Also although it was filmed and forecasted in every Country, Italy included, nothing assure us it all wasn't a big special effect... just my thought and I don't mind to offend anyone, I like USA culture and people and I m not saying the USA government was a lier but boys let's think a bit about what I said before... 40 years after the first man landed on the Moon the trips to the Moon aren't a reality...

 

[tgirlsrgreat]

i don't think you will offend anybody. we went to the moon for that good old american reason, to prove we could! and it was competition with the soviets and we love competition. tons of scientific and medical advances came out of it(like tang).

like a lot of the conspiracy theories out there, do you really think our government is that well organized that we could keep it a secret that long??? really???

besides, once we confirmed it was not made of cheese we decided it was not worth our effort any longer.

 

[Mr. Snakey]

Many people think this. I think we did. However my question is why we never went back? I think we were told hey get the fuck off my lawn. Many of the astronauts saw things so shocking they are now basket cases.

 

[RedScrotum]

. Many of the astronauts saw things so shocking they are now basket cases.

Can you elaborate on that a little, Mr. Snakey?

 

[monel]

Can you elaborate on that a little, Mr. Snakey?

I think this is what happened though nobody wants to talk about it.

YouTube - ‪Superman II recut‬‏

 

[B_Nick8]

Oh, dear.

When you come to the States, we'll have a Tea Party for you.

 

[lafever]

Personally I'd like to know how the astronauts survived the radiation, I would guess that they would have been cooked like hotdogs in a microwave with the long exposure they would have gotten with a moon landing.
Even in a video about Van Allen Radiation Belts they still don't dicuss how the feat was accomplished only that it was.
And that anyone who explores past 350 miles is subject to a lethal dose of radiation.
Just saying, I'm not a scientist but I would like to know how the astronauts cheated death.


YouTube - ‪Van Allen Radiation Belt‬‏



edited: There was a typo in my original posting, I cannot confirm that the video is from NASA, only that the video clearly outlines the dangers of space travel.

 

[hypoc8]

Personally I'd like to know how the astronauts survived the radiation, I would guess that they would have been cooked like hotdogs in a microwave with the long exposure they would have gotten with a moon landing.
Even in an NASA video they still don't dicuss how the feat was accomplished only that it was.
And that anyone who explores past 350 miles is subject to a lethal dose of radiation.
Just saying, I'm not a scientist but I would like to know how the astronauts cheated death.


YouTube - ‪Van Allen Radiation Belt‬‏

Just one of the many issues that we'll never get a straight answer about. I too have questioned whether we've actually been there or not. To many things just don't add up.

 

[tgirlsrgreat]

Just one of the many issues that we'll never get a straight answer about. I too have questioned whether we've actually been there or not. To many things just don't add up.

like what?? a pristine bullet?? oh wait, wrong conspiracy...

 

[tgirlsrgreat]

like what?? a pristine bullet?? oh wait, wrong conspiracy...

personally, i can go with the kennedy conspiracy far easier than our not doing this. guess i lived in houston too long and knew too many people directly involved in it all.

 

[PornForPatric]

Personally I'd like to know how the astronauts survived the radiation, I would guess that they would have been cooked like hotdogs in a microwave with the long exposure they would have gotten with a moon landing.
Even in a video about Van Allen Radiation Belts they still don't dicuss how the feat was accomplished only that it was.
And that anyone who explores past 350 miles is subject to a lethal dose of radiation.
Just saying, I'm not a scientist but I would like to know how the astronauts cheated death.


YouTube - ‪Van Allen Radiation Belt‬‏

Yes, the Van Allen Belts pose a hazard to both men and machine in space. However, it isn't a uniform thing. There are areas of high radiation and areas of lower radiation. From what I can recall, the Apollo missions used a specific trajectory to avoid the densest parts of the belt. I remember their total radiation exposure was something like 15 REM.

Designing things for heavy radiation exposure isn't too hard. Think of the space probes we send to Jupiter which has a massively powerful radiation belt that operate for years and years. Even back in the 60's, the could come up with materials to mitigate the dangers of flying through the Van Allen Belts.

BTW, for those who don't believe we went:

1) Where did the moon rocks we have to study come from?
2) How did the man made objects (landers, rovers, laser reflectors) get to the moon?

 

[lafever]

Yes, the Van Allen Belts pose a hazard to both men and machine in space. However, it isn't a uniform thing. There are areas of high radiation and areas of lower radiation. From what I can recall, the Apollo missions used a specific trajectory to avoid the densest parts. of the belt. I remember their total radiation exposure was something like 15 REM.

Designing things for heavy radiation exposure isn't too hard. Think of the space probes we send to Jupiter which has a massively powerful radiation belt that operate for years and years. Even back in the 60's, the could come up with materials to mitigate the dangers of flying through the Van Allen Belts.

BTW, for those who don't believe we went:

1) Where did the moon rocks we have to study come from?
2) How did the man made objects (landers, rovers, laser reflectors) get to the moon?

You can collect moon rocks in the arctic circle or with a metal detector in the arizona desert, we're not talking about satelites or rockets, which can place a roving robot on any planet, we're talking about human beings.

Check this video out, it blows what your saying apart, there's no way to escape the radiation.


YouTube - ‪Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem‬‏

 

[hypoc8]

like what?? a pristine bullet?? oh wait, wrong conspiracy...

Since you asked;

1. Why did NASA recently announce that it would take scientists 15 years to design and build a craft to go back to the moon? Why should it take longer now with more technology? We did it in less than 10 years back in the '60's or did we?

2. How could they have powered air conditioning in 200+ degrees for three days with only batteries?

3. The space shuttle has killed approximately 14 people just orbiting about 250 miles above the earth how is it a half century ago we have gone six times to another planet and back with no lives lost?

4. Why does the flag that was placed on the moon billow in the wind when there is no atmosphere or wind?

5. Why did NASA in 2002 admit that they could not adequately protect the astronauts working in the International Space Station from radiation yet we did it back in '69?

Shall I continue?

 

[B_Hickboy]

Since you asked;

1. Why did NASA recently announce that it would take scientists 15 years to design and build a craft to go back to the moon? Why should it take longer now with more technology? We did it in less than 10 years back in the '60's or did we?

2. How could they have powered air conditioning in 200+ degrees for three days with only batteries?

3. The space shuttle has killed approximately 14 people just orbiting about 250 miles above the earth how is it a half century ago we have gone six times to another planet and back with no lives lost?

4. Why does the flag that was placed on the moon billow in the wind when there is no atmosphere or wind?

5. Why did NASA in 2002 admit that they could not adequately protect the astronauts working in the International Space Station from radiation yet we did it back in '69?

Shall I continue?

I've an intuition you've heard answers to all these questions and found those answers unsatisfactory

 

[MASSIVEPKGO_CHUCK]

I know the OP of this thread must be on the moon in one fashion or the other.....

 

[Pompeynate]

Wasn't there something about shadows being cast in different directions in the moon landing footage/photos too?

 

[ManofThunder]

This might help. Moon landing hoax? (Part 1 of 5.)

 

[Calboner]

Wasn't there something about shadows being cast in different directions in the moon landing footage/photos too?

There is a lot of inaccurate and badly reasoned stuff out there. Here is a reply by astronomer Phil Plait (source) to that particular item, as it was presented in a television program broadcast by Fox rolleyes in 2001 called "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?":

Bad: Another argument by the HBs [hoax believers] deals with shadows. Several photos from the Moon are shown where objects on the lunar landscape have long shadows. If the Sun were the only light source, the program claims, the shadows should be parallel. The shadows are not parallel, and therefore the images are fake.

Good: This is an interesting claim on the part of the HBs, because on the surface (haha) it seems to make sense. However, let's assume the shadows are not parallel. One explanation is that there are (at least) two light sources, and that is certainly what many HBs are trying to imply. So if there are multiple light sources, where are the multiple shadows? Each object casts one shadow, so there can only be one light source.

Another explanation is that the light source is close to the objects; then it would also cast non-parallel shadows. However, a distant source can as well! In this case, the Sun really is the only source of light. The shadows are not parallel in the images because of perspective. Remember, you are looking at a three-dimensional scene, projected on a two-dimensional photograph. That causes distortions. When the Sun is low and shadows are long, objects at different distance do indeed appear to cast non-parallel shadows, even here on Earth. An example of that can be found at another debunking site. The scene (near the bottom of the above-linked page) shows objects with non-parallel shadows, distorted by perspective. If seen from above, all the shadows in the Apollo images would indeed look parallel. You can experience this for yourself; go outside on a clear day when the Sun is low in the sky and compare the direction of the shadows of near and far objects. You'll see that they appear to diverge. Here is a major claim of the HBs that you can disprove all by yourself! Don't take my word for it, go out and try!

Incidentally, the bright Earth in the sky will also cast shadows, but those would be very faint compared to the ones made by the Sun. So in a sense there are multiple shadows, but like not being able to see stars, the shadows are too faint to be seen against the very bright lunar surface. Again, you can test this yourself: go outside during full Moon and you'll see your shadow. Then walk over to a streetlamp. The light from the streetlamp will wash out the shadow cast by the Moon. You might still be able to see it faintly, but it would difficult against the much brighter landscape.

[Note added June 29, 2001: Again, check out Ian Goddard's work for more about this.

And here is Plait's reply to the business about the flag supposedly waving in the breeze on the moon:

Bad: When the astronauts are assembling the American flag, the flag waves. Kaysing says this must have been from an errant breeze on the set. A flag wouldn't wave in a vacuum.

Good: Of course a flag can wave in a vacuum. In the shot of the astronaut and the flag, the astronaut is rotating the pole on which the flag is mounted, trying to get it to stay up. The flag is mounted on one side on the pole, and along the top by another pole that sticks out to the side. In a vacuum or not, when you whip around the vertical pole, the flag will ``wave'', since it is attached at the top. The top will move first, then the cloth will follow along in a wave that moves down. This isn't air that is moving the flag, it's the cloth itself.

New stuff added March 1, 2001: Many HBs show a picture of an astronaut standing to one side of the flag, which still has a ripple in it (for example, see this famous image). The astronaut is not touching the flag, so how can it wave?
The answer is, it isn't waving. It looks like that because of the way the flag was deployed. The flag hangs from a horizontal rod which telescopes out from the vertical one. In Apollo 11, they couldn't get the rod to extend completely, so the flag didn't get stretched fully. It has a ripple in it, like a curtain that is not fully closed. In later flights, the astronauts didn't fully deploy iton purpose because they liked the way it looked. In other words, the flag looks like it is waving because the astronauts wanted it to look that way. Ironically, they did their job too well. It appears to have fooled a lot of people into thinking it waved.

This explanation comes from NASA's wonderful spaceflight web page. For those of you who are conspiracy minded, of course, this doesn't help because it comes from a NASA site. But it does explain why the flag looks as it does, and you will be hard pressed to find a video of the flag waving. And if it was a mistake caused by a breeze on the set where they faked this whole thing, don't you think the director would have tried for a second take? With all the money going to the hoax, they could afford the film!

Note added March 28, 2001: One more thing. Several readers have pointed out that if the flag is blowing in a breeze, why don't we see dust blowing around too? Somehow, the HBs' argument gets weaker the more you think about it.

But trying to argue people out of the belief that the moon landing was a hoax is as futile as trying to argue people out of the belief that President Obama was born in Kenya, that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job, and other such conspiracy theories. The only real cure is a bit of sanity.

 

[lafever]

For those who need it explained in much simpler terms here's a beginners video

YouTube - ‪Elmo's World: The Sky Active‬‏

 

[Calboner]

For those who need it explained in much simpler terms here's a beginners video

YouTube - ‪Elmo's World: The Sky Active‬‏

Okay, but it's not as good as the Itchy and Scratchy cartoon in which Itchy uses a rocket to tie Scratchy's tongue around the moon; then Scratchy's tongue reels in the moon until it crushes him.