was the moon landing a hoax???

[skyeagle409]

zarniwoop---Ok....your always saying give us definate proof of a faked program...well give us proof of a definate landing....<br /><br />sky---Did the Apollo astronauts circle the Earth for days during the Apollo moon missions? If not, then where did they go after the Saturn rockets were launched? Remember, the Soviets had the ability to track our flights as well and their society would have forbid them to go along with an American moon hoax yet they continue admit that America beat them to the moon after all of these years. <br /><br />There is no way you are going to keep so many people who were directly and indirectly involved in America's moon program, quiet after all of these years but as the facts have it, the moon missions were a reality. <br /><br />If you are unable to place the Apollo moon astronauts in Earth orbit after their initial launch nor confirm their splashdown shortly after launch during the life of their particular moon missions, then you have a serious problem in supporting your moon hoax claim and you definitely can't solicite the help from the Russians because they have already confirmed our moon missions as well.<br /><br /><br />

 

[skyeagle409]

zarniwoop---on back in those days you could have bought any russian for a popsicle....let alone millions off dollars. <br /><br />sky---LOL!! I was living in those days and know that what I have stated is right on the money. <br /><br />That "popsicle" would have long melted away years ago and any "hush money" would have long been spent yet the Russians still admit that they lost the moon race to America.<br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo.html<br />

 

[skyeagle409]

zarniwoop,<br /><br />You insist that we never went to the moon so the question for you is:<br /><br />What happened to the Apollo astronauts after the launch of the Saturn rockets? Where did they go? They couldn't have remained in Earth's orbit nor splashed back down shortly afterwards and not be noticed yet they went somewhere. <br /><br />As I've said to you earlier, this is only the beginning if you continue to insist that we never went to the moon and I am in it for the long haul.<br /><br />

 

[skyeagle409]

<p><br />zarniwoop---Ok....your always saying give us definate proof of a faked program...well give us proof of a definate landing....not including the sad old laser story... <br /><br />sky---Moon rocks for one. If you can't accept the "old laser story" then perhaps you can fill your time by studying a few of the other moon experiments. <br /><br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-059C&ex=3 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-059A&ex=7 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-059A&ex=1 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-059C&ex=2 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-059C&ex=5 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-059C&ex=6 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-099A&ex=9 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-099C&ex=4 <br /><br />http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1969-099C&ex=5 <br /><br /></p>

 

[skyeagle409]

zarniwoop---Why not stay in orbit?????....heres one simple way of running hoax.(simplyfied) <br /><br />1 ok blast em into orbit (agreed).... <br /><br />2 all internal video filmed inside lm and cm (agreed) <br /><br />sky---You forgot about data from the tracking stations that followed the flight.<br /><br />3 astronauts stayed in orbit.(maybe) <br /><br />sky---They stayed in orbit only until they were blasted off toward the moon. The Russians can make that confirmation as well.<br /><br />4 whatever was tracked on flight to moon was unmanned. <br /><br />sky---Why would it have been so difficult not to have had astronauts in the unmanned craft?<br /><br />5 astronauts remain in orbit <br /><br />sky---That doesn't make any sense. You are talking of two different spacecrafts. The astronauts would have been tracked from the initial launch and any other hoax spacecraft would have been noted by the Russians as well. What would have been the problem of sending astronauts to the moon in an unmanned spacecraft if as you are suggesting, could have happened? Why spend millions of dollars launching two spacecrafts for the purpose of concocting a moon hoax? What would have happened if the decoy spacecraft crashed on takeoff. What would that have done to the moon schedule?<br /><br />6 actors take over for lunar walks etc etc. <br /><br />sky---What actors? Surely, you can't be talking about "Capricorn One" astronauts! Once again, you wouldn't have been unable to keep so many people quiet after all of these years.<br /><br />7 unmanned probe returns. <br /><br />sky---Nope, the Russians would have been able to identify any additional spacecraft as well and expose any hoax attempts yet they have confirmed that America sent those astronauts to the moon.<br /><br />8 splashdown of astronauts. <br /><br />sky---They would have been tracked the instant they lifted off from the pad, to the moon and back. As I've said earlier, any inconsistent operations would have been noted.<br /><br />The Russians also had

 

[skyeagle409]

<br /><br />ok so maybe time to talk sense....maybe we went ...just maybe we didnt........dont you think some things are just a bit suspect????...what are they not telling zarniwoop---us?.....as stated in privious posts....their hiding something.....what is this closely guarded secret?. <br /><br />sky---Secrets can be held for so long and you can't keep so many people quiet after all of these years and money is not a gurantee that people won't talk years later. I believe that what secrets NASA is hiding has nothing to do with a moon mission hoax.<br /><br />The astronauts were tracked from takeoff to splashdown and any inconsistencies would have been evident and noted by the Soviets who regularly bragged about their superiority over the West to the whole world on numeruous occasions and you can believe that the Soviets would definitely not have been a participant of an American moon hoax and allow America, their main enemy, to take credit for moon missions had they not occurred, and they had the means to determine whether we went to the moon or not and as you can plainly see in the news article, they admit that America beat them to the moon. <br /><br />________________________________________________________________________________________ <br /><br /><br />KOROLYOV, Russia (Reuters) <br /><br />"We had everything to fly around the moon. We had the rockets, the space ship, the crew was ready, but we didn't have Korolyov," said Leonov, who keeps small framed U.S. and Soviet flags flown on Apollo 11 on his office wall. "But even with Korolyov, we would not have beaten the Americans to be the first on the moon." <br /><br />http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/russia_moon_wg.html <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[qso1]

zarniwoop:<br />I see we are still arguing this old point...........come on admit it and lets move on.....the moon landings were faked!!!!!!!!!!...end of story.<br /><br />My response:<br />I've always put it this way.<br /><br />I cannot prove we went to the moon 100% because I did not personally go there and see the evidence for myself. But the evidence available is overwhelmingly in favor of landing on the moon. I'd say at least a 95% probability and thats really good odds. Furthermore, you say for us to prove it was not faked. No matter what I or anyone else say, you would never be satisfied. Now the reason I seemgly waste my time debating this tired old theory is that I think people should have both points of view and see which side can provide reasonable evidence for their side of the issue.<br /><br />You cannot flatly state that we didn't send people to the moon precisely because you cannot prove it any more than I can 100% prove we did. HB evidence IMO is much too weak to say we faked it. Hoax Believers or HBs. The HB evidence I have seen is full of flaws. The biggest being the idea stars should be visible in Apollo images of astronauts on the surface of the moon. Any photographer with half a brain stem knows why the stars are not visible in lunar surface images. Can you guess why?<br /><br />1.....Amazing as landing on the moon was, it was not all that amazing, the science behind it had been established for over 400 years, it simply took the industrial era to provide the engineering means to get there and a competition to provide the will.<br /><br />2.....It was a politically motivated cold war p*****g contest so our Government would have known that the Soviet Government would be able to detect a hoax.<br /><br />3.....One of our own anti Apollo politicians never claimed it was faked. If he could have, he sure would have. BTW that politician was Walter Mondale. And he was by no means the only one anti Apollo.<br /><br />4.....Something was surely put into orbit because I <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

If it says that Hoagland agrees Apollo happened and hes the one saying NASA supressed stuff. That makes sense and after re-reading it, thats what it appears to be. I only questioned it because I highly respect Callis opinions and knowledge, and yours as well in the relatively short time I've been here.<br /><br />So when I saw that, I naturally thought...if Calli is saying NASA is suppressing something. There may be something here well worth investigating. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Couldn't agree with you more. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

I also wanted to point out that as a relative newcomer, I try to give equal weight to all opinions including those contrary to mine. This is one of the traits I notcied about you and Calliarcale. I think a person is more likely to want to converse with someone who tries to do this than one who considers only their own opinion. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[lacotta]

Moon landing produced imagery<br /><br />somebody still need a proof of a hoax? Watch the documentary! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[dragon04]

Sorry, can't watch it. I seem to have misplaced my tin foil hat and popcorn.<br /><br />You see, back in the '60's, there was this stuff. Jiffy Pop popcorn. Basically, it was a tin foil pan that you heated on the stove. As the popcorn popped, the tin foil covering expanded until al the popcorn was popped. Or caught fire if you forgot about it.<br /><br />Anyways, the tin foil "bonnet" created by the opped popcorn could then be removed, and put on the head. The important thing was to let the "bonnet" cool down though. We had really short haircuts in the 60's and you could get head burns very easily.<br /><br />The bonnets were also used extensively at beauty shops to facilitate hair drying, but that's another story entirely, and not germane to this topic, so I'll stop talking about it.<br /><br />So there I am, that warm summer night in 1969, waiting with my popped Jiffy Pop popcorn and a cold Pepsi, for the Moon Landing of Apollo 11.<br /><br />I'm not sure what made me do it (personally, I think it made me feel "girly" and I was in that phase where I'd try on my Mom's pantyhose and silk underwear), but I put the tin foil bonnet on, glued to the TV. Of course, I had to sit like 6 inches from the screen because my eyesight was bad.<br /><br />Little did I know at the time, but mom's underwear and pantyhose have the same effect on the eyesight of an 8 year old boy, that certain other "simian discipline" activities have on a 12 year old boy, if they are too strict with their monkey too often. But I digress.<br /><br />The Big Moment arrived. No, not <b>that</b> big moment. Remember. I was only 8, not 12. And a "late bloomer" at that. The Big Moment as in the Moon Landing.<br /><br />With a mouthful of popcorn and Pepsi (I don't know why, but that was an excellent combo) and my foil bonnet on, as the LEM was touching down, I saw this kind of shadow in the background that for all the world looked like a guy dropping a fishing line with a LEM on the end. And no, my popcorn didn't have mu <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[brellis]

Dragon, thank you for sharing your Jiffy Pop moment. Yikes, I'm like, as old as you are! Remember, since we're from THAT generation, we're really gullible, easy victims of the moon hoax. It is incredible that the 400,000 people connected with the <b> fake </b> Apollo project could all keep their lips sealed for so many years! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#ff0000"><em><strong>I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better.</strong></em></font> </p> </div>

 

[dragon04]

My pleasure, Sir. I am here to facilitate rational and obvious truths with a touch of nostalgia to seal the deal. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[qso1]

If this is all you have for evidence of a moon hoax...your not doing serious investigation. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[spaceinvador_old]

I ask, why can't we see the U.S. flag or any equipment left on the moon through the assistance of a very powerful telescope? Reply, not even Hubble is that powerful.<br /><br />Another reply I got was, we have left a mirror that reflects laser light and so we had to of gone there. Of course I think it's completely possible we've been to the moon, but I feel some things don't add-up?... <br /><br />#1. Without multiple thrusters like that on the space shuttles, just how did they land upright on the moon without horizontal momentum knocking the ship sideways and over?... How did they land that thing vertically straight down?<br /><br />#2. Why is it the only real proof anything manmade left on the moon is this so called mirror?...<br /><br />We have spy satelites that can read newspaper print from hundreds of miles up. We have manmade objects on mars, but yet man has never been there. Why is there a race now for us to get back to the moon before China?... <br /><br />Oh yea, we have moon rock. Case closed...<br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[thugz]

http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm<br /><br />pretty sure it answers those questions

 

[qso1]

Heres how I view it.<br /><br />Technically, I cannot prove man went to the moon 100% but the evidence for it is overwhelming. However, I"m not the best at explaining it but I'll give it my best here.<br /><br />SPACEINVADOR:<br />I ask, why can't we see the U.S. flag or any equipment left on the moon through the assistance of a very powerful telescope? Reply, not even Hubble is that powerful.<br /><br />Me:<br />This is true and theres a formula that can be used to calculate the size and light gathering power of a telescope that would be required to see artifacts left on the moon but I don't have the formula handy. A few years ago, it was claimed somewhere that when the European Southern Observatory (ESO) scopes are fully linked interferometer capable. There would be an attempt to image a landing site. I'll be wanting to see the image if they do it.<br /><br />I recently completed a graphic novel in which a lunar crew is imaged by an earth based telescope (The year is 2018). I use Lightwave 3D to do the models and I build to scale. I actually took the virtual camera and aimed it at the lunar base which I positioned 240,000 miles from the camera and had to squeeze the cam FOV way down to see the base, or more accurately outpost. The camera settings were well beyond the FOVs of telescopes currently in operation.<br /><br />Even so, some folks won't believe an image of lunar artifacts anyway.<br /><br />Same goes for the laser reflectometer.<br /><br />SPACEINVADOR:<br />#1. Without multiple thrusters like that on the space shuttles, just how did they land upright on the moon without horizontal momentum knocking the ship sideways and over?<br /><br />Me:<br />The LM did have multiple thrusters arranged in quads on the ascent stage. The LM basically balanced itself on the descent engine thrust during landing and utilized ACS thrusters (The quads I mentioned) to keep it balanced. In addition, it was vertical only for the last few minutes of flight after pitchover. In that state, there is l <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

I'm not out to change ones views, only to put up the evidence that very strongly suggests we went and that I based my research on thirty years (On and off) of investigation of multiple sources rather than depend on a Fox channel TV special or other conspiracy theory works.<br /><br />How bout you present your evidence and research, or are you just believing the hoax theories because its the cool thing to do? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[enigma10]

You truly have no clue. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>

 

[qso1]

Who has no clue, zarniwoop, me, or YASKY? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[enigma10]

the person i replied to. y-ask-y . i wouldn't dare get inbetween you and the (insert inane low iq mammal name here) trying to say the moon landing was a hoax. I'm related to one of the people that landed on the moon. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>

 

[qso1]

I was just curious. I had noticed you replied to Y_ASK_Y but thought you might have been responding to me or zarniwoop. Which Apollo astronaut are you related to? If you don't want to answer, I understand. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

FYI, Y_ASK_Y was banned from this forum last February. They won't be replying, I'm afraid. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>#1. Without multiple thrusters like that on the space shuttles, just how did they land upright on the moon without horizontal momentum knocking the ship sideways and over?... How did they land that thing vertically straight down?<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />It *did* have multiple thrusters. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />The LEM was a fiendishly difficult thing to pilot, but it worked on basically the same principle as the robotic lunar landers such as the Surveyor series. First, you tip the vehicle so that the main descent engine is pointing into the direction of travel. Then you fire the engine to deorbit. Still in that orientation, you coast for a while, letting gravity pull you down. Then, still with the engine pointing into the direction of travel (basically with the LEM on its side) you start firing the descent motor in pre-determined pulses to slow your lateral motion down. During this phase, you're basically lying on your stomach relative to the lunar surface, looking straight down through the LEM's front windows, while the vehicle travels towards your feet. You keep burning the motor periodically to slow you down. When you reach the desired landing spot, you fire the motor again to cancel your forward motion, then use the small RCS (Reaction Control System) thrusters to pitch the LEM upright. The descent motor is now used exclusively to keep you from falling too quickly. You can control the throttle on the descent motor, allowing you to descend slowly, hover, or even rise up a little bit, limited mainly by the available propellant. Your RCS can give you lateral motion while you're balancing on the descent motor's thrust, but not very fast. It's enough to be able to tweak your landing site, though. Then, once satisfied with your landing spot, you throttle the descent engine down, allowing yourself to gradually fall down to the lunar surface, cutting the engine when the conta <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>