The moon. Humans travelled there... didn't they?

I believe they did.

On the anniversary of the "moon landing" it appears that there is still an element of scepticism that the Apollo XI mission in 1969 was not in some way faked. There is a lot of argument and counter-argument but I'm down with them having gone there when said they did in pretty much the way that they said they did.

Apparently 89% of the US public agree with me, 6% don't and 5% are undecided. There is right now a unmanned NASA craft the LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) circling the moon (ok "supposedly circling the moon") which has sent back supposed pictures of the supposed Apollo moon landing sites.

Agree? Dare to disagree?

I don't know. I've seen the discussions, and the best anybody can do is make an educated guess - which isn't worth it to me. I don't need a full-fledged opinion on the subject.

Yes without doubt we did. All the conspiracy theories come from people applying earth physics to the moon or misunderstandings.

*I started typing a long conspiracy theory debunking post..but found this online which serves the same purpose.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sciencean...-debunked.html

1) When the astronauts are putting up the American flag it waves. There is no wind on the Moon.

The flag is held up by a horizontal bar and simply moves when it is unfurled and as the pole is being fixed into position by the astronauts. The flagpole is light, flexible aluminium and continues to vibrate after the astronauts let go, giving the impression of blowing in the wind.

2) No stars are visible in the pictures taken by the Apollo astronauts from the surface of the Moon.

The Apollo landing takes place during lunar mornings, with the Sun shining brightly. Exposure time on the cameras is set very rapid so as not to let in too much light and obscure detail. The stars, whilst being visible to the naked eye on the Moon, are not bright enough to be captured in the photographs.

3) No blast crater is visible in the pictures taken of the lunar landing module.

The landing module touches down on solid rock, covered in a layer of fine lunar dust, so there is no reason why it would create a blast crater. Even if the ground were less solid, the amount of thrust being produced by the engines at the point of landing and take off is very low in comparison to a landing on Earth because of the relative lack of gravitational pull.

4) The landing module weighs 17 tons and yet sits on top of the sand making no impression. Next to it astronauts’ footprints can be seen in the sand.

The layer of lunar dust is fairly thin, so the landing module sits on the solid rock. The dust, whilst blown away by the blast from the descent engines, quickly settles back on the ground and is under the astronauts when they begin their moonwalk.

5) The footprints in the fine lunar dust, with no moisture or atmosphere or strong gravity, are unexpectedly well preserved, as if made in wet sand.

The lack of wind on the moon means the footprints in fine, dry lunar dust aren’t blown away in the way they would be if made in a similar substance on Earth.

6) When the landing module takes off from the Moon’s surface there is no visible flame from the rocket.

The rockets in the landing module are powered by fuel containing a combination of hydrazine and dinitrogen tetroxide, which burn with no visible flame.

7) If you speed up the film of the astronauts walking on the Moon’s surface they look like they were filmed on Earth and slowed down.

The best you can say is: yes, a bit, but not really.

8) The astronauts could not have survived the trip because of exposure to radiation from the Van Allen radiation belt.

This claim is largely based on a claim from a Russian cosmonaut. The short time it takes to pass through the belt, combined with the protection from the spacecraft, means any exposure to radiation would be very low.

9) The rocks brought back from the Moon are identical to rocks collected by scientific expeditions to Antarctica.

Some Moon rocks have been found on Earth, but they are all scorched and oxidised from their entry into the Earth’s atmosphere as asteroids. Geologists have confirmed with complete certainty that the Apollo rocks must have been brought from the Moon by man.

10) All six Moon landings happened during the Nixon administration. No other national leader has claimed to have landed astronauts on the Moon, despite 40 years of rapid technological development.

This is a favourite among conspiracy theorists because it needs no evidence but points the finger at the presidency of Richard Nixon. The fact is that after the Apollo landings, the race had been won and the money dried up. The USSR has no interest in coming second, and politicians on both side realised that lower-orbit missions had much greater commercial and military potential.

Moon Photo conspiracy theory debunking

Hmm. I don't trust get-your-opinion-here debunked-for-your-convenience sites, and those answers evoke as many new questions as they answer. Maybe it's just simplified for a simple audience, but they hardly settle the debate.

So even though every question people can come up with have been debunked or at least shown to be plausibly deniable by scientists, researchers and more its still not enough.

I just dont see what the big issue is. During the space race both America and Russia were gigantic, nationalistic machines. Getting the moon first is a big cockwaving opportunity for either of them.

If we had the technology to send satellites into space and to probes to the moon then putting enough air, dried food and water for a small crew to get there and back is not a huge leap in technology. Never mind the fact that you had millions of dollars being pumped into the operations and the worlds greatest scientific minds grinding together to accomplish it.

If we wanted to go back to the moon could we? Yeah, but there's no need to. We have nothing to prove anymore except to quiet the conspiracy theories. Even if we go back and find amazing things like billions of gallons of oil, new energy sources or more we don't have the money or the technology to do anything with it. Can we send a rocket with a small, claustrophobic lander there to drop a crew to bounce around and play golf? Yeah. Is there any real need to do so now that the cockwaving opportunity has been achieved? Not really.

When technology gets to the level that we can routinely send people back and forth in ships with a cheap fuel source and easily replaceable shielding/armor then we can worry about moon bases and more.

This whole scenario reminds me of all the people saying the pyramids, stone henge and the like could not have been created by people with their outdated technology. It must have been aliens or some other line of crap. No 1960's scientists did not have the technology of today but they had intelligence, tons of money and a nationalistic desire to succeed against a rival nation.

ive been to the moon :p:

as a matter of fact, ill take someone with me. whos down to go? :thumb:

There's only two scenarios of why the moon landing may have been faked that make sense, and either one doesn't really make very much of it.

-NASA is just a front for the CIA or other secret organization with no real interest in space exploration and they faked the moon landing simply so that they would receive the money from the public.

This is skeptical because the government already spends billions on covert operations and dummy funds, and they have legitimate reasons to have a NASA organization and scientists would want to go to the moon if they were able to (which they are, technologically speaking.)

-NASA really did send people to the moon, but they discovered something there, most likely aliens, that they didn't want the public to know, so they made a fake moon landing tape.

This requires you to believe the evidence of alien existence over the evidence of the real moon landing, which is pretty dumb.

The better one, which goes kind of along with the second of those two, is that they sent a crew to the moon, and failed miserably and the real crew died. So, instead of looking like failures, they filmed the fake one in a Hollywood basement.

Seems plausible enough. That's the best part of conspiracy theories. Impossible to prove one way or the other, and they usually piss a lot of people off.

And Kess, I'll head to the moon with ya. I'd kind of like to see that Space Mountain everyone's talking about...

My whole thing on the subject is they always make a big deal of the FIRST moon landing. What about the other 5? Are the conspiracy theorists saying the U.S. made up all 6? I think if the U.S. wanted to make it all up, 3 landings would have more than sufficed. Why drag on the lie 3 more times?

No good war to occupy people's attention? I don't know when the other ones were done/faked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nathanmbailey

The better one, which goes kind of along with the second of those two, is that they sent a crew to the moon, and failed miserably and the real crew died. So, instead of looking like failures, they filmed the fake one in a Hollywood basement.

Seems plausible enough. That's the best part of conspiracy theories. Impossible to prove one way or the other, and they usually piss a lot of people off.

And Kess, I'll head to the moon with ya. I'd kind of like to see that Space Mountain everyone's talking about...

---

****Seems plausible enough***

No, because all the astronauts in the space program, since they were first picked, were seen as celebrities and were shown off as such, years before the first man landed on the moon. If a real crew had died in a different attempt, the news would be all over it. You can't have a bunch of people, who were all known in the news and the world, just fall off the face of the Earth and nobody asks questions about it. The Russians would be the first to notice crew members had disappeared out of the program and start trying to blow the lid off of it.

They sent the stunt doubles, DUH! They launched real shuttle with a different crew, simple crew switch that was being done in movies years ahead of time. They sent those guys into space while the celebrity crew was kept in hiding. Disaster strikes, so they film the fake version and let the celebrity crew look like heroes while the real crew is lost in space and their family payed off, along with being forced to sign a gag order.

I'm just saying, all stuff that is completely possible, I'm not saying that's what went down, but it could have...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nathanmbailey

They sent the stunt doubles, DUH! They launched real shuttle with a different crew, simple crew switch that was being done in movies years ahead of time. They sent those guys into space while the celebrity crew was kept in hiding. Disaster strikes, so they film the fake version and let the celebrity crew look like heroes while the real crew is lost in space and their family payed off, along with being forced to sign a gag order.

I'm just saying, all stuff that is completely possible, I'm not saying that's what went down, but it could have...

---

So....Ahhhh...Then what would have happened if the stunt doubles actually made it safely to the moon?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax Knucklebones

So....Ahhhh...Then what would have happened if the stunt doubles actually made it safely to the moon?

---

if they made it to the moon those stunt doubles wouldn't have made it back to earth:D

But yeah, people did go to the moon. If they didn't the conspiracy theories that I see going on aren't possible.:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KessM

as a matter of fact, ill take someone with me. whos down to go? :thumb:

---

Well, looks like Nathan signed up for that first Moonshot, but I've got my bags packed, and am willing to become a Kesstronaut anytime. ;)

If the doubles had made it there and back, they would have simply been payed off and given a gag order and the celebrity ones would have been given all the credit.

I was just talking about that movie the Astronaut Farmer. Go see it. it's cool. It sticks it to The Man.

My friend asked me "Didn't that really happen?"

I said, "Yes. It's a documentary. Billy Bob Thornton really built a rocket."

He said, "I mean, did the guy really go into space."

"Yes, he did. Well...I mean that's what happens in the movie. The real guy? I have no idea."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nathanmbailey

If the doubles had made it there and back, they would have simply been payed off and given a gag order and the celebrity ones would have been given all the credit.

---

So, in the context of that rationale, it is possible then, that the stunt doubles did actually make a safe moon landing, came back, and got paid a shitload of money to keep there mouths shut?

YAY! We made it to the moon! U S A! U S A!

Fuck you, you Russkies!

Of course we've been there. That is how we found out about the alien bases on the far side. Duh...

Pft...I've been there...

Not only did we without a doubt go to the moon, there's a really great and insightful article in this month's Popular Mechanics written by Neil Armstrong outlining his opinions of the current and future plans for NASA. It's a really interesting read.

I actually believe "we" did after hearing different Art Bell guests. :1orglaugh

I think anyone that doesn't believe we went to the moon should be placed into a rocket and fired onto the surface of it.