Moon Landing

[BruceVC]

The moon landing was real but why haven't we gone back in decades? The answer is that the Hibernian Druids have long used a portal to the moon to perform rituals that ensure dominance over the world and they did not want a moonbase full of observers that could expose them.

Hi KP

 

I know you open minded...will you support me in my view that its possible the moon could be made of cheese ?

[Gromnir]

...

 

if you can't see the difference 'tween believing moon landing conspiracies and recognizing negative proof problems, then am having no basis to start a correction of the mistakes.

 

*shrug*

 

honest.  o' all the popular held conspiracies, the manner in which this one endures is perhaps the most inexplicable to us.  is not as if this were a surprising or inexplicable event.  is not as if we lack tangible evidence and is arguing backwards looking for the explanations o' how and why.  you got the best minds from many nations watching and observing an event that were carried out in most public way possible.  

 

the moon thing baffles us.  to make the moon landing conspiracies work, you needs have nasa in possession o' super-science bordering on magic AND you need many scientists and engineers to be in on the conspiracy.  

 

we s'pose that part o' the problem is that modern science is too close to magic. so many amazing things is achieved with such ordinary regularity w/o average people genuine understanding how such stuff works. turn on your flat screen tv and you get pictures displayed in full hd or even 3d, but how many o' us actual understand the science and engineering required to make such magic happen?  also, MODERN visual chicanery is commonplace.  surely the best and brightest o' 1969 could manufacture a visual hoax capable of fooling onlookers, no?

 

...

 

but even so, the Faithful congregation o' moon conspiracy belief is either complete ignorant o' the science, or too lazy to look for answers.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

...

 

if you can't see the difference 'tween believing moon landing conspiracies and recognizing negative proof problems, then am having no basis to start a correction of the mistakes.

 

*shrug*

 

honest.  o' all the popular held conspiracies, the manner in which this one endures is perhaps the most inexplicable to us.  is not as if this were a surprising or inexplicable event.  is not as if we lack tangible evidence and is arguing backwards looking for the explanations o' how and why.  you got the best minds from many nations watching and observing an event that were carried out in most public way possible.  

 

the moon thing baffles us.  to make the moon landing conspiracies work, you needs have nasa in possession o' super-science bordering on magic AND you need many scientists and engineers to be in on the conspiracy.  

 

we s'pose that part o' the problem is that modern science is too close to magic. so many amazing things is achieved with such ordinary regularity w/o average people genuine understanding how such stuff works. turn on your flat screen tv and you get pictures displayed in full hd or even 3d, but how many o' us actual understand the science and engineering required to make such magic happen?  also, MODERN visual chicanery is commonplace.  surely the best and brightest o' 1969 could manufacture a visual hoax capable of fooling onlookers, no?

 

...

 

but even so, the Faithful congregation o' moon conspiracy belief is either complete ignorant o' the science, or too lazy to look for answers.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Gromnir I consider the view that the  moon landing was a fake one of the  " harmless conspiracy theories " 

 

But I'm not sure if you are aware, because you live in the USA, of the number of really irritating and contentious conspiracy theories that exist about the USA and the West that are part of a  broader anti-Western narrative 

 

I generally hear about 2-3 every time there is a debate on a talk show about the USA...I regularly dispute them 

[Gromnir]

governments do lie to folks.  we get that.  people is suspicious o' governments, and the race to the moon were a scientific, economic and political battle being waged by cold war superpowers.  am getting why folks would be suspicious o' the soviets and americans claims circa 1969.  

 

moon landing, however, were not some kinda covert black ops mission.  

 

...

 

is funny, but if there had never been a moon landing and some handful o' conspiracy nutters were arguing that the US had actual been to the moon and had a secret base there along with a the moon is a harsh mistress style space catapult that could be aimed at moscow, that is the kinda conspiracy we could understand enduring.  "prove that it doesn't exist," kinda nonsense?  sure.  not hard to show that US had rockets capable o' reaching the moon, but they sudden, and for no good reason, stopped trying to do so?  why? show documents revealing inexplicable and massive government expenditures... 'cause such always exists. show articles explaining the feasibility o' space catapults.  then hypothesise that the real reason the soviets gave up the cold war is 'cause they knew o' the lunar space weapons.  whatever.  that is the kinda stuff we expect from conspiracy, 'cause it thrives best in the absence o' proof.  start with very reasonable suspicion, then imagine a nightmare into reality?  sure.  but the moon landing were different.  

 

too much bad understanding o' science is needed to make a fake moon landing plausible.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Meshugger]

I think that this is in order: 

 

https://youtu.be/wptn5RE2I-k?t=92

Edited February 6, 2016 by Meshugger

[Calax]

The moon landing was real but why haven't we gone back in decades? 

Fun fact, if we did it now we'd be able to do it cheaper, and get a LOT more stuff up there. 

[Keyrock]

Ask yourself this question:

 

Which is more likely?

 

A) Thousands of highly paid professionals, scientists, engineers, and mathematicians from a multitude of nationalities have collaborated to execute and perpetuate what would be the single greatest and most elaborate hoax in the history of humanity, fabricating a veritable mountain of seemingly solid scientific evidence and expending a small fortune to make it happen.

 

B) The moon landing really did happen, the rock solid evidence is real, and the people wearing aluminum foil hats and continuing to create more an more implausible conspiracy theory scenarios to "disprove it" have more than just a few brain cells missing.

[Gromnir]

 

The moon landing was real but why haven't we gone back in decades? 

Fun fact, if we did it now we'd be able to do it cheaper, and get a LOT more stuff up there. 

 

fun fact: in 2004, President Bush recommitted the US to serious space exploration along with a 2020 goal o' a return to the moon. Obama took the moon off the table in 2010.  am knowing it is ez to dislike Bush, but it were democratic Congress getting stingy with nasa money that functional disabled any return-to-the-moon plans, with the final deathblow being delivered by Obama.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[JadedWolf]

Here is some 100% undoctored footage for you, Sarex:

 

[Woldan]

Didn't read through all these pages, but isn't there a flag up there, among other trash and a freakin' moon rover that can be, you know, seen from a good telescope from earth?

I watched the documentary, all the crap about the missing stars on the pictures, the shadows, the camera  blah blah, there is only one strange thing they did not address that piqued my interest -  there is a picture showing an astronauts boot footprint right under the landing craft, like right under it. That one is rather strange and makes no sense. 

[Keyrock]

Didn't read through all these pages, but isn't there a flag up there, among other trash and a freakin' moon rover that can be, you know, seen from a good telescope from earth?

 

As a (very) amateur astronomer, I can tell you that no telescope on Earth exists that is even remotely close to having high enough magnification to see something the size of the equipment left on the moon, that's not even taking into account that there is a practical upper limit to magnification of a terreastrial telescope of about 400X due to distortion from our atmosphere.

[ManifestedISO]

Fumbduckery H. Christ would be a great handle. 

[Blarghagh]

I think the real question is... can rocket fuel met steel beams?

[Sarex]

Well belief in God is a little different. That is something that requires a leap of faith. In the end God simply cannot be proven and there is compelling evidence that supports both sides of the argument. But as far as the Apollo Landings it's not a leap of faith to say it did happen, and IMO the argument that it didn't relies on dismissing a lot of hard evidence that it did out of hand and streching logic past the breaking point that such a massive conspiracy even COULD be pulled off. I realize you are not making that argument and this is a rhetorical exercise but to say the moon landing didn't happen in the face of so much evidence that it did is nearly as absurd as claiming atoms don't exist.

 

I would agree with you partly (a lot of the claims are far fetched), but the facts remain that some parts of the moon landing were very sketchy. The biggest culprit being the videos and pictures. The fact that the what you saw on TV when watching the moonlanding was the press filming the canvas on which the the footage was projected, or the fact that to this day none of the original film rolls were ever shown to anyone (which would do a lot to disperse the claims), the fact that there are so many inconsistencies in the pictures/films to some of which there are no answers and for the others the answers are more far fetched then some of the claims by the conspiracy theorists.

 

I am of the opinion that the moon landing did in fact happen, but that either the film footage and pictures were all unusable and thus need to be recreated for the public or a more far fetched theory that the astronauts were very sick upon return and needed to be replaced. I am more inclined to believe the former.

 

governments do lie to folks.  we get that.  people is suspicious o' governments, and the race to the moon were a scientific, economic and political battle being waged by cold war superpowers.  am getting why folks would be suspicious o' the soviets and americans claims circa 1969.  

 

moon landing, however, were not some kinda covert black ops mission.  

 

...

 

is funny, but if there had never been a moon landing and some handful o' conspiracy nutters were arguing that the US had actual been to the moon and had a secret base there along with a the moon is a harsh mistress style space catapult that could be aimed at moscow, that is the kinda conspiracy we could understand enduring.  "prove that it doesn't exist," kinda nonsense?  sure.  not hard to show that US had rockets capable o' reaching the moon, but they sudden, and for no good reason, stopped trying to do so?  why? show documents revealing inexplicable and massive government expenditures... 'cause such always exists. show articles explaining the feasibility o' space catapults.  then hypothesise that the real reason the soviets gave up the cold war is 'cause they knew o' the lunar space weapons.  whatever.  that is the kinda stuff we expect from conspiracy, 'cause it thrives best in the absence o' proof.  start with very reasonable suspicion, then imagine a nightmare into reality?  sure.  but the moon landing were different.  

 

too much bad understanding o' science is needed to make a fake moon landing plausible.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

The question to ask would then be why didn't the Soviets go to the moon? I mean every first that was made in space the other one recreated (mostly the US) but when it came to the moonlaning suddenly the race stopped.

 

Didn't read through all these pages, but isn't there a flag up there, among other trash and a freakin' moon rover that can be, you know, seen from a good telescope from earth?

 

I watched the documentary, all the crap about the missing stars on the pictures, the shadows, the camera  blah blah, there is only one strange thing they did not address that piqued my interest -  there is a picture showing an astronauts boot footprint right under the landing craft, like right under it. That one is rather strange and makes no sense. 

 

What about the triangular pocket that was opened in the picture, but the film footage of the moment the picture was being taken showed it as buttoned up?

 

Ask yourself this question:

 

Which is more likely?

 

A) Thousands of highly paid professionals, scientists, engineers, and mathematicians from a multitude of nationalities have collaborated to execute and perpetuate what would be the single greatest and most elaborate hoax in the history of humanity, fabricating a veritable mountain of seemingly solid scientific evidence and expending a small fortune to make it happen.

 

B) The moon landing really did happen, the rock solid evidence is real, and the people wearing aluminum foil hats and continuing to create more an more implausible conspiracy theory scenarios to "disprove it" have more than just a few brain cells missing.

 

But as I said it really didn't need to be thousand of people that were in on it, they just needed the astronauts (who after the landing gave very few interviews), the people who helped fake it and the people who ordered it. The guy who made the screws for the Lunar module would believe that they were going to the moon, as would the guys who worked on everything else.

[Blarghagh]

So... to fake the moon landing and keep it a secret they had to spend millions to build an actual working Lunar module?

[BruceVC]

So... to fake the moon landing and keep it a secret they had to spend millions to build an actual working Lunar module?

 

Yes....TN....does it make sense?

[Hiro Protagonist]

They should send a Rover to the moon to confirm all the stuff up there is there.

[Sarex]

So... to fake the moon landing and keep it a secret they had to spend millions to build an actual working Lunar module?

 

In that case it would be "working".

 

 

They should send a Rover to the moon to confirm all the stuff up there is there.

 

The Chinese already have one up there. I hope they send it there.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Sarex

[Blarghagh]

This makes your argument even less logical.

 

Situation A: It's working. We just decided not to send it up and make a fake video instead.

 

Situation B: It's "working" wink wink and none of the multitudes of massively smart engineers and scientists working on it realize it's a dud despite how much access engineers, mathematicians and scientists would need to have to the plans due to the math and physics required. It's not just "some guy who makes the screws", after all.

 

Situation C: It's "working" wink wink and every single one of those engineers and scientists are in on it, and none of them have ever let the secret slip.

 

None of them make sense.

[Sarex]

This makes your argument even less logical.

 

Situation A: It's working. We just decided not to send it up and make a fake video instead.

 

Situation B: It's "working" wink wink and none of the multitudes of massively smart engineers and scientists working on it realize it's a dud despite how much access engineers, mathematicians and scientists would need to have to the plans due to the math and physics required. It's not just "some guy who makes the screws", after all.

 

Situation C: It's "working" wink wink and every single one of those engineers and scientists are in on it, and none of them have ever let the secret slip.

 

None of them make sense.

 

 

Situation D: It's "working" but can't get past the Van Allen belt, though we will tell everyone that it can.

 

Situation E: It's "working" but we know that micrometeorites will make Swiss cheese out of it.

 

Situation n: It's ''working" but we can't get past some problem so will stay quiet about it.

 

I don't know how the moon landing program worked but it wouldn't be a stretch to say that it was compartmentalized, going by previous operations done by the US. Everyone would do their part and know about their part only.

[Rostere]

 

This makes your argument even less logical.

 

Situation A: It's working. We just decided not to send it up and make a fake video instead.

 

Situation B: It's "working" wink wink and none of the multitudes of massively smart engineers and scientists working on it realize it's a dud despite how much access engineers, mathematicians and scientists would need to have to the plans due to the math and physics required. It's not just "some guy who makes the screws", after all.

 

Situation C: It's "working" wink wink and every single one of those engineers and scientists are in on it, and none of them have ever let the secret slip.

 

None of them make sense.

 

Situation D: It's "working" but can't get past the Van Allen belt, though we will tell everyone that it can.

 

Situation E: It's "working" but we know that micrometeorites will make Swiss cheese out of it.

 

Situation n: It's ''working" but we can't get past some problem so will stay quiet about it.

 

I don't know how the moon landing program worked but it wouldn't be a stretch to say that it was compartmentalized, going by previous operations done by the US. Everyone would do their part and know about their part only.

 

But none of the factors involved in going to the moon is especially esoteric. A cover-up based on the premise that they couldn't handle some particular problem would require the collaboration of very many scientists in countries other than the US. Besides, there have been other trips to/around the Moon with biological payload, before and after, both Soviet and American, so unless you believe all of these are hoaxes as well, travelling to the Moon is indeed feasible. So conspiracy theories about the Moon landing really just add more assumptions than the questions they answer.

 

TBH the most reasonable conspiracy theory (apart from the one that the Moon recordings were somehow destroyed and had to be recreated) would be that both scientists and astronauts wussed out due to the many things that could go wrong, not due to orders from above but on their own initiative (even though a trip to the Moon was largely feasible to do), did an unmanned mission to the Moon and recorded all material here. They might even have fetched some material from the Moon in this way. But in this scenario, they could still just as well have brought astronauts on board, plus they would have needed some pretty sophisticated semi-automatic control system (although considering this was a mission to the Moon, such a system might not have been infeasible to create).

 

Anyway, the Moon landings doesn't really feel like the type of thing you would go in 100% to fake. If they were fake, I think we would know by now. I don't see the harm in revealing the conspiracy. Things that would be completely covered up and never revealed would rather be more serious things like assassinations on the behalf of countries or political factions.

[Blarghagh]

 

This makes your argument even less logical.

 

Situation A: It's working. We just decided not to send it up and make a fake video instead.

 

Situation B: It's "working" wink wink and none of the multitudes of massively smart engineers and scientists working on it realize it's a dud despite how much access engineers, mathematicians and scientists would need to have to the plans due to the math and physics required. It's not just "some guy who makes the screws", after all.

 

Situation C: It's "working" wink wink and every single one of those engineers and scientists are in on it, and none of them have ever let the secret slip.

 

None of them make sense.

 

 

Situation D: It's "working" but can't get past the Van Allen belt, though we will tell everyone that it can.

 

Situation E: It's "working" but we know that micrometeorites will make Swiss cheese out of it.

 

Situation n: It's ''working" but we can't get past some problem so will stay quiet about it.

 

I don't know how the moon landing program worked but it wouldn't be a stretch to say that it was compartmentalized, going by previous operations done by the US. Everyone would do their part and know about their part only.

 

 

Um. If it's not working, it's a dud. So that's either B or C. Why are you under the impression you offered new scenario's here?

[Sarex]

Um. If it's not working, it's a dud. So that's either B or C. Why are you under the impression you offered new scenario's here?

 

Because you seem to be under the impression that everyone working on it had to have know, which simply isn't true.

 

 

But none of the factors involved in going to the moon is especially esoteric. A cover-up based on the premise that they couldn't handle some particular problem would require the collaboration of very many scientists in countries other than the US. Besides, there have been other trips to/around the Moon with biological payload, before and after, both Soviet and American, so unless you believe all of these are hoaxes as well, travelling to the Moon is indeed feasible. So conspiracy theories about the Moon landing really just add more assumptions than the questions they answer.

 

TBH the most reasonable conspiracy theory (apart from the one that the Moon recordings were somehow destroyed and had to be recreated) would be that both scientists and astronauts wussed out due to the many things that could go wrong, not due to orders from above but on their own initiative (even though a trip to the Moon was largely feasible to do), did an unmanned mission to the Moon and recorded all material here. They might even have fetched some material from the Moon in this way. But in this scenario, they could still just as well have brought astronauts on board, plus they would have needed some pretty sophisticated semi-automatic control system (although considering this was a mission to the Moon, such a system might not have been infeasible to create).

 

Anyway, the Moon landings doesn't really feel like the type of thing you would go in 100% to fake. If they were fake, I think we would know by now. I don't see the harm in revealing the conspiracy. Things that would be completely covered up and never revealed would rather be more serious things like assassinations on the behalf of countries or political factions.

 

 

I didn't know about there being trips with a biological payload done before it.

 

As for why they would have done it, I would guess that the public was losing confidence because the Soviets were doing everything first. It's interesting that today it's considered more important that a man landed on the moon that the fact that man went in to space at all, it's like the end of the race was who landed on the moon first. As for why they don't reveal it, I mean why would they? They gain nothing by it and only invite people to look closely to every other event that happened.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Sarex

[Blarghagh]

 

Um. If it's not working, it's a dud. So that's either B or C. Why are you under the impression you offered new scenario's here?

 

Because you seem to be under the impression that everyone working on it had to have know, which simply isn't true.

 

There is only one possible reason why I seem to be under that impression to you and it's that you didn't read what I said because that is the core premise of scenario B.

[Rostere]

 

But none of the factors involved in going to the moon is especially esoteric. A cover-up based on the premise that they couldn't handle some particular problem would require the collaboration of very many scientists in countries other than the US. Besides, there have been other trips to/around the Moon with biological payload, before and after, both Soviet and American, so unless you believe all of these are hoaxes as well, travelling to the Moon is indeed feasible. So conspiracy theories about the Moon landing really just add more assumptions than the questions they answer.

 

 

TBH the most reasonable conspiracy theory (apart from the one that the Moon recordings were somehow destroyed and had to be recreated) would be that both scientists and astronauts wussed out due to the many things that could go wrong, not due to orders from above but on their own initiative (even though a trip to the Moon was largely feasible to do), did an unmanned mission to the Moon and recorded all material here. They might even have fetched some material from the Moon in this way. But in this scenario, they could still just as well have brought astronauts on board, plus they would have needed some pretty sophisticated semi-automatic control system (although considering this was a mission to the Moon, such a system might not have been infeasible to create).

 

Anyway, the Moon landings doesn't really feel like the type of thing you would go in 100% to fake. If they were fake, I think we would know by now. I don't see the harm in revealing the conspiracy. Things that would be completely covered up and never revealed would rather be more serious things like assassinations on the behalf of countries or political factions.

 

 

I didn't know about there being trips with a biological payload done before it.

 

As for why they would have done it, I would guess that the public was losing confidence because the Soviets were doing everything first. It's interesting that today it's considered more important that a man landed on the moon that the fact that man went in to space at all, it's like the end of the race was who landed on the moon first. As for why they don't reveal it, I mean why would they? They gain nothing by it and only invite people to look closely to every other event that happened.

Well, there were trips around the moon with biological payload before the Moon landing. This was called the Zond program (and of course the earlier Apollo missions, if you don't count that as being the same thing as the actual lunar landing).

 

There's been revealed lots of crazy stuff from declassified files. For example, medical testing without the consent of the subjects. That strikes me as way more controversial than that the films from the moon landing were fake/reconstructed.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Rostere