PDA

View Full Version : 1969 Moon Landing


Crummie
04-28-2006, 02:14 AM
There have been many, many different points of viewing this topic.

While the American government tells us that the moon landing by Neil Armstrong and friends did indeed take place, others believe that it was staged and that the whole thing never actually happened.

What is your stand on the prompt?

Seawolf
04-28-2006, 02:14 AM
Wasn't the first person in space actually a Russian?

Crummie
04-28-2006, 02:17 AM
Yes. The USSR had satellites orbitting Earth way before America, during the Cold War. But Americans landing on the moon before the Russians.

plasmaball3000
04-28-2006, 02:49 AM
Meh, I believe it. I can see the whole Cold War conspiracy thing as plausible, but more often than not, government conspiracies are true if no one's heard about it, and false is people have.

MystiKal
04-28-2006, 03:02 AM
Meh I won't type some huge page post stating my reasons but I say we have never landed on the moon.

RouteMaster
04-28-2006, 08:45 PM
I think we have landed on the moon, but I don't know much about the subject. Isn't there a way to prove it? Didn't the landers leave things on the moon which could be photographed on Earth?

InvertrevnI
04-28-2006, 08:50 PM
I see no reason why not to belive we landed on the moon, it is very possible, and where did all the money used for it go if it was staged? There was technology invented for the mission, and nobody would invest billions of dollars for technology used in a sham.

This is all very silly, we landed, and we taped it. The moon isn't that far from us, and we could have been there in 1959 if we had tried. It was a sucessfull mission, and the conspiricy was created by people who didn't want to belive that there was no alein life on the moon and that the surface wasn't made of cheese.

Nirvash
04-28-2006, 09:14 PM
It happened. We probobly didn't have the tech to do everything that would be needed to create it then. But to compition probably got us. WE probably wanted to do it first and we did.

MystiKal
05-02-2006, 10:06 PM
It never happened people. If we landed on the moon back then. Why haven't we been on it since?

!CeMAn
05-02-2006, 10:28 PM
I saw a conspiracy show years ago detailing the proof of how it never happened. It was convincing enough. I could believe the States would stage it all in a movie studio just to slap the Russians.

While i'm thinking about it, why DiDN'T they let Lance Bass go up there? Could it be it's not even possible :susp:?

InvertrevnI
05-02-2006, 10:28 PM
That's a good question. Probably a number of reasons:

1. We can send automated machines there now.
2. We already have a number of instruments and machines there.
3. Government funding is moving towards larger and equaly importent projects.
4. More interest has been put into public services, rather than large-scale projects.

I understand why there would be some doubt in the matter, but I still belive we were there.

!CeMAn
05-02-2006, 10:37 PM
That's a good question. Probably a number of reasons:

1. We can send automated machines there now.
2. We already have a number of instruments and machines there.
3. Government funding is moving towards larger and equaly importent projects.
4. More interest has been put into public services, rather than large-scale projects.

I understand why there would be some doubt in the matter, but I still belive we were there.
Do you believe you were there because you were taught to, or because objects which cast no shadow when a source of light is on them are common?

InvertrevnI
05-02-2006, 10:43 PM
Do you believe you were there because you were taught to, or because objects which cast no shadow when a source of light is on them are common?
Amusing, wording error. I meant the human species, Homo-Sapien.

Red.Falcon
05-02-2006, 10:49 PM
Amusing, wording error. I meant the human species, Homo-Sapien.
Haw haw haw haw! He said Sapien! Seriously, though, I think it happened. Why would we know the exact force of gravity on the moon? (It's like, 1.98 m/s squared). How would we stage the low gravity? We didn't really have effects like that in the late '60's.

InvertrevnI
05-02-2006, 10:51 PM
Good point, and if they had staged it there would have been cardboard aleins. *Laughs*

I have reached a conclusion, I have seen both sides and infered the data.

~Amen

HKim
05-02-2006, 10:52 PM
There is one single reason why we haven't been back to the moon and it's called... "Space Shuttle".

Oh sure, I love the space shuttle. The first one built was named after the Star Trek Starship Enterprise. But they are very limited in what they can do (which is basically travel around the Earth). They were created to a growing market demand for satellites. Sadly, after the US beat the USSR, the demand for moon landings no longer existed. There was no point or no dream. Kennedy, the president who pushed for the landing, was dead and there was no one else to fill his shoes.

Space is still as much a frontier as it was forty years ago. Sure, we stepped on the moon and played in the sand, but we did not do anything that would help us settle there. We have lost the drive and that is why we have not gone back.

Also, conspiracy theories are merely that, theories. They are great fiction to read and think about, but poor applications of logic and intelligence.

InvertrevnI
05-02-2006, 10:54 PM
There is one single reason why we haven't been back to the moon and it's called... "Space Shuttle".

Oh sure, I love the space shuttle. The first one built was named after the Star Trek Starship Enterprise. But they are very limited in what they can do (which is basically travel around the Earth). They were created to a growing market demand for satellites. Sadly, after the US beat the USSR, the demand for moon landings no longer existed. There was no point or no dream. Kennedy, the president who pushed for the landing, was dead and there was no one else to fill his shoes.

Space is still as much a frontier as it was forty years ago. Sure, we stepped on the moon and played in the sand, but we did not do anything that would help us settle there. We have lost the drive and that is why we have not gone back.

Also, conspiracy theories are merely that, theories. They are great fiction to read and think about, but poor applications of logic and intelligence.

Beautifull *Cries*, this is what I have been meaning to say. That is an excelent application of literature and logic. I conclude, from my point of view, that humans stepped on the moon.

MystiKal
05-02-2006, 11:08 PM
Haw haw haw haw! He said Sapien! Seriously, though, I think it happened. Why would we know the exact force of gravity on the moon? (It's like, 1.98 m/s squared). How would we stage the low gravity? We didn't really have effects like that in the late '60's.
Ever heard of being lied to?

NASA does it a lot.

InvertrevnI
05-02-2006, 11:12 PM
Ever heard of being lied to?

NASA does it a lot.

Ever heard of common sence? Look at it, if they lied about this technology invented based on those facts would have failed. It didn't, see?

Like HKim said, conspiricies are good to read, but lacking in logic or information. Now, lets go visit The National Enquirer and tell them about Roswell.

MystiKal
05-02-2006, 11:16 PM
Ever heard of common sence? Look at it, if they lied about this technology invented based on those facts would have failed. It didn't, see?

Like HKim said, conspiricies are good to read, but lacking in logic or information. Now, lets go visit The National Enquirer and tell them about Roswell.
Never heard of common sence, but I have heard of common sense.

Since the moon is so important to people, and people can do more than robots on a planet. Why not go back?

!CeMAn
05-02-2006, 11:19 PM
Never heard of common sence, but I have heard of common sense.

Since the moon is so important to people, and people can do more than robots on a planet. Why not go back?
Can't go back if you've never been.

InvertrevnI
05-02-2006, 11:22 PM
That's a good question. Probably a number of reasons:

1. We can send automated machines there now.
2. We already have a number of instruments and machines there.
3. Government funding is moving towards larger and equaly importent projects.
4. More interest has been put into public services, rather than large-scale projects.

I understand why there would be some doubt in the matter, but I still belive we were there.

Reasons 2-4 explain my viewpoint, the way the USA works.

MystiKal
05-02-2006, 11:24 PM
Reasons 2-4 explain my viewpoint, the way the USA works.
So not knowing about other planets is not important to us?

Thrall
05-02-2006, 11:53 PM
Well yeah it is important.It is very possible that it could have been stage BUT what would have happened to those Billions of dollars.It's not like Kennedy stashed them somewhere.America should go back into space to get rid of these theories but America doesn't have the time or the money.We have a "WAR" for oil and we have these rallis for the Illegal Aliens.

Alonso
05-03-2006, 02:12 AM
WOW!! Who ever started this one, thank you. This is a very good discussion. Just the other day I was reading about this and the conspiracy theories and their are several factors that show that we might have not gone to the moon.
I am actually struggling with the answer to this. There are some good arguments that leaves me undecided.
The Flag Waves
Sure it does. The flag had a stiffening rod on the upper side so it would stand out from the staff. When the astronauts moved the pole, the free corner lagged behind by simple inertia. The flag actually flops unnaturally quickly because there is no air resistance to impede it.
^This makes no sense^
-No stars are visible.
-No dust on the lander Footpads.
Basically what this is saying is that if dust were to be kicked on the moon then it would keep going and going and not plummet back down to the floor. That is what happened in the video. It plummeted down to the surface.
-The Radiation belt

One thing that sticks in my mind is that why the hell would the US spend billions of dollars on rockets and Apollo missions just to end up faking the lunar landing. It wouldn't make sense. If it WAS impossible to go to the moon because of the radiation belt then why even make the fake movie if the Russians wouldn't have beaten us there anyway.

InvertrevnI
05-04-2006, 08:42 PM
Good ol' facts and science. Nice to see you post on the matter SC, good logic and use of reasoning. You appear to know a bit about the subject. Objects on the moon are still affected by gravity. Weaker gravity, but gravity. An object dropped on the moon will fall, and not fly straight up. This can be seen in the video, and appears to be accurate.

The special effects required to stage this would have been impossible in the sixties, and nowadays we could see if it were staged with knowladge on the subject. What I mean to say is, if it were staged we would have seen a painted background.

Alonso
05-04-2006, 10:05 PM
Good ol' facts and science. Nice to see you post on the matter SC, good logic and use of reasoning. You appear to know a bit about the subject. Objects on the moon are still affected by gravity. Weaker gravity, but gravity. An object dropped on the moon will fall, and not fly straight up. This can be seen in the video, and appears to be accurate.

The special effects required to stage this would have been impossible in the sixties, and nowadays we could see if it were staged with knowladge on the subject. What I mean to say is, if it were staged we would have seen a painted background.
Very true about the painted background.
What you stated about the gravity is so true. How did I not realize that. I am a hypocrite. I use to say all the time to my brother that there IS gravity on the moon just it is very little. But I stated that the sand that was kicked up and then it came down. I didn't say anything about dropping objects and then those flying up, that is ilogical on a planet. Just like the men walking on the moon walked and jumped the sand can fall back down too. Doh!
No stars are seen: WTF, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN SEE STARS ON EARTH DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN SEE STARS FROM THE MOON. They have no proof.

Red.Falcon
05-04-2006, 10:09 PM
Very true about the painted background.
What you stated about the gravity is so true. How did I not realize that. I am a hypocrite. I use to say all the time to my brother that there IS gravity on the moon just it is very little. But I stated that the sand that was kicked up and then it came down. I didn't say anything about dropping objects and then those flying up, that is ilogical on a planet. Just like the men walking on the moon walked and jumped the sand can fall back down too. Doh!
No stars are seen: WTF, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN SEE STARS ON EARTH DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN SEE STARS FROM THE MOON. They have no proof.
The reason there are no stars is because (I think, this is my theory) the astronauts landed on the "light side" of the moon, right? Well, that's the side the sun faces. If you put little lights up around you, and then light up a huge light in the middle of your vision (AKA, the Sun, from the Astronaut's point of view). You won't be able to see the little ones because the bigger one dominates them.

Alonso
09-26-2006, 01:10 AM
I know this would be reviving a thread and people hate it when it happens and all that crap and that the guy who started this thread is convinced that the US landed on the moon. So please a thousand pardons. But why have people only tried to prove the Apollo 11 mission was a hoax and not the other Apollo missions that landed on the moon. It just popped in my head today and I remembered about this thread.

BTW, some guy believes that the US really landed on the moon but that everything on the tape and pictures has been edited only to cover up what is really on the moon eg. aliens :tongue:

If you want to flame me just say ~pie~.

Alakazam
09-26-2006, 10:28 AM
There have been many, many different points of viewing this topic.

While the American government tells us that the moon landing by Neil Armstrong and friends did indeed take place, others believe that it was staged and that the whole thing never actually happened.

What is your stand on the prompt?

Many, many different points viewing this topic?

Er...not really, there are some bizarre bull**** conspiracy theories, but other than that, what's there to discuss?

boltAge
09-26-2006, 10:47 AM
Admitting that you revived an old thread doesn't mean you're allowed to do it.