Hi all

I've seen alot of threads posted about how man didn't land on the moon, i thought i'd open one that offers the alternative view. Now the same old arguments come out, With sceptics claiming one thing and then the believers trying to refute it but here i want an intelligent debate.

For example if your going to make a claim to support the view that man didn't land on the moon, please back it up with scientific facts and preferably links aswell. If your going to make a claim to support the view that man did land on the moon then same goes for you too.

Ultimately i want everyone to have a good discussion thats based around facts and not theories. At the end i want everyone on both sides to be a little more enlightened on the Apollo moonlandings

I guess i'll start with the first opening shot, Although i believed man landed on the moon, something has niggled me a little bit. The amount of photo's taken. From what i've read it seems that an impossible amount of photo's were taken, i can't find the original site but here's the wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations) article that mentions it (click on the photographs section). Now on average there were photo's taken every 50 seconds. But on the original site that i found, in the later apollo missions people were taking photo's on average every 20-30 seconds.
People your thoughts please?

Indeed this has been discussed at Sciforums too many times to count. In the years I've been here almost every two or three months after the previous one has died there is a new "moon landing fake" thread.
Many of these have been discussed in depth and with scientific evidence, so I really don't see a need for yet another one. But of course that is just my opinion.

I think the best evidence that man wasn't on the moon are the moonrocks they brought home.

Moon rocks...rocks....


Everybody knows the moon is made out of cheese.

nuff said.

Do we have a copy and paste rebuttal and explanation for moon landing conspiracists? If not, then I should probably go through the last 6 threads in which the points usually raised are covered in detail and amalgamate them into one essay-type thing.

rocks could have been brought back by a robot craft.

the best evidence that america landed a man on the moon is the russians
if the russians had any evidence that we didn't land on the moon they would only be too happy to rake us over the coals.

Damn straight they would. Plus, there's a set of mirrors that I think Apollo 12 or 14 placed on the moon, they're small, but if you set it up right, you can bounce a laser right off of them and if the laser is hooked up to a computer, calculate the distance between the mirrors and your point of origin. I've seen it done once or twice on TV, and once in person with my Astronomy 205 teacher at like 3 in the morning when the class was out observing a meteor shower. If you have a good enough telescope, you can look close enough to make out the lunar landers, that is, if you have a good enogh telescope, a crappy one won't see jack, but a good one can make out some increadible details.

Damn straight they would. Plus, there's a set of mirrors that I think Apollo 12 or 14 placed on the moon, they're small, but if you set it up right, you can bounce a laser right off of them and if the laser is hooked up to a computer, calculate the distance between the mirrors and your point of origin. I've seen it done once or twice on TV, and once in person with my Astronomy 205 teacher at like 3 in the morning when the class was out observing a meteor shower. If you have a good enough telescope, you can look close enough to make out the lunar landers, that is, if you have a good enogh telescope, a crappy one won't see jack, but a good one can make out some increadible details.

Ask Nasa to have them point the Hubble towards some of the Apollo landing areas. Should be able to see a few empty beer cans scattered around a barbecue pit and maybe a few cigar butts too, if we're lucky. :D

rocks could have been brought back by a robot craft.

They were, by the Soviets!

the best evidence that america landed a man on the moon is the russians, if the russians had any evidence that we didn't land on the moon they would only be too happy to rake us over the coals.

Damned straight. There's no way they'd have let this one slip if it was a fake. This was all about prestige, and they weren't going to let the USA cheat to win. Not that the USA did 'win' the space race, they just got to the Moon first, after being beaten to everything else.

rocks could have been brought back by a robot craft.
Technically yes, but the Ruskies did it that way and brought back only a fraction of the amount of rocks that the Apollonauts collected. Also, take into account the orange regolith. That could only have been found by a human, because otherwise the robot would have had to have landed smack in the middle of the orange soil, and brought back nothing but orange soil.

Technically yes, but the Ruskies did it that way and brought back only a fraction of the amount of rocks that the Apollonauts collected. Also, take into account the orange regolith. That could only have been found by a human, because otherwise the robot would have had to have landed smack in the middle of the orange soil, and brought back nothing but orange soil.

Too bad they didn't bring back part of that huge mysterious monolith that was discovered in the crater Clavius. That could have been interesting. Right Hal?:D

Man didn't land on the moon because flags dont blow in zero gravity, shadows are always parallel, rocks dont have numbers on them, there are no stars, you wouldn't get past the van allen belt without having a heart attack, neil arstrong was warned off by aliens, area 51 was used to film it and god wouldn't allow it anyway.
Face it the evidence is there, we didn't go to the moon!

Man didn't land on the moon because flags dont blow in zero gravity

I think you are mixing your metaphors somewhat!

I think you are mixing your metaphors somewhat!
No metaphors dont blow in zero gravity either so it's certain we didn't go to the moon then!

Not that the USA did 'win' the space race, they just got to the Moon first, after being beaten to everything else.
i believe the US was first on some things, like joining two spacecraft together and changing their orbit.
but you are correct, the russians were kicking our butts.
america had to land on the moon just to break even so to speak.

No metaphors dont blow in zero gravity either so it's certain we didn't go to the moon then!
you must be the sole no vote.

i believe the US was first on some things, like joining two spacecraft together and changing their orbit.
but you are correct, the russians were kicking our butts.
america had to land on the moon just to break even so to speak.
HOW MANY PARTS DOES THE SPACE SHUTTLE HAVE WHEN IT GOES TO THE MOON?

you must be the sole no vote.
No I wouldn't vote on it, NASA will come to my house and I will disappear.

Also more proof that we didn't land on the moon is its hollow and plants dont grow there.

HOW MANY PARTS DOES THE SPACE SHUTTLE HAVE WHEN IT GOES TO THE MOON?

the space shuttle doesnt go to the moon.

the space shuttle doesnt go to the moon.
I meant when it goes to mars sorry.

Also more proof that we didn't land on the moon is its hollow and plants dont grow there.
your screen name says it all. see ya.

OK but remember we didnt go to the moon, we may have went to mars I dont know nasa wont tell us but we certainly didnt go to the moon.

Man didn't land on the moon because flags dont blow in zero gravity, shadows are always parallel, rocks dont have numbers on them, there are no stars, you wouldn't get past the van allen belt without having a heart attack, neil arstrong was warned off by aliens, area 51 was used to film it and god wouldn't allow it anyway.
Face it the evidence is there, we didn't go to the moon!
Either you're having a laugh, or you are incredibly stupid. I honestly can't tell.

Either you're having a laugh, or you are incredibly stupid. I honestly can't tell.
You are just trying to make me look stupid because you have lost the argument.
WE NEVER LANDED ON THE MOON!
the evidence is too much against it.

Who is we?

Who is we?
OK what about the alien moon base isn't proof?

Mankind did go to the moon and land on it and returned.

IMHO

Norval

I meant when it goes to mars sorry.
The space shuttle can't get to mars. Not enough delta V for one thing. I mean, it's not rocket science. Oh, wait...

No metaphors dont blow in zero gravity either so it's certain we didn't go to the moon then!

The Moon is not 'Zero Gravity'. It has approx 1/6 Earth's gravity, not 'zero'.

I think you mean 'Zero Atmosphere', but if you confuse 'Atmosphere' with 'Gravity' it's clear you are either a troll or an idiot.

OK but remember we didnt go to the moon, we may have went to mars I dont know nasa wont tell us but we certainly didnt go to the moon.

OK, TROLL ALERT! 'We may have went to Mars'. Your deliberate illiteracy is too much of a clue that you are yanking our chains.

btw, for reference, Moon, 384,400 Km away, Mars, between 114,000,000 and 342,000,000 Km away. So I know you are a troll, as not even a complete idiot would think it easier to travel so much further! A factor of several hundred more!

I think "Imaplanck" first wrote a joke response involving all the reasons that mankind never made it to the moon, but people looked into it a little too seriously and now, well they seem to like stating obvious falsities for fun.

This whole "mankind didn't make it to the moon" discussion has been completely overdone, people list the same sources of "proof" yet none of them ever point to actual true NASA archive imagery and any comments that the professionals at NASA have said are often scrutinised as a debunking effort.

Theres no wonder why so many of these professionals are so apprehendsive about making any comments on request nowadays if they are going to get scrutinised by a whole fruit baskets worth of loons. (This can be said about professionals in any particular field from Astronomy, Astrophysics to Economics)

Someone please tell me imaplanck. is joking. :(

I thought it was a spoof, because I've read some of his posts in the physics section... and he seemed to have brains :D
Read some of his other posts - he can spell. He can punctuate. He's doing woo-woo impressions

Yeah I was just having a laugh and some went along.
Obviously it isn't due to atmosphere that a flag will wave(of course anything with a mass exerts a gravity), and ionizing radiation knocks off electrons causing mutation not heart attack. obviously we haven't been to the moon since the early seventies and we've never been to mars(well not in person anyway).

Sorry. :D

I had to check a couple of times that the imaplanck doing the woo-woo bit was the same I'd see arguing so well in the physics forum. I thought initially someone had duplicated your ID somehow for their own sock-puppet. Had me going. Nice one. :D

Yeah I was just having a laugh and some went along.
Obviously it isn't due to atmosphere that a flag will wave(of course anything with a mass exerts a gravity), and ionizing radiation knocks off electrons causing mutation not heart attack. obviously we haven't been to the moon since the early seventies and we've never been to mars(well not in person anyway).

Sorry. :D
*really big sigh of relief*
The only person who has ever mixed up so many wrong things who was actually being serious was duendy, what with her "psychedelic drugs give you psychic powers but the male oppressors try to hide this and repress it with the Church which is actually the illuminati who are actually dimension shifting beings from space"

If you had been serious, you would have drawn with her.