...DID we go to the moon?

Status
Not open for further replies.
GeoffP

GeoffP

Caput gerat lupinum
Valued Senior Member
I'm finding it hard to believe I'm writing this... but WTF.

Documentary here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIy8ZqqK5G8

It's presented very sensationally... but what the hell is it with the camera crosshairs, and the lander being in one shot of the same position and not another? Optical illusion? Don't think I buy that stuff about the dust though.

It seems ridiculous, but then again JFK wasn't hit by a magic bullet either. There's a certain propaganda coup to be achieved by saying one has got to the moon first: it won't do anything for the real party adherents, but the laity might be easily influenced.

Anyone interested in examining this, based on the above link? I guess I'd be taking the "pro" side - as in, we haven't been there - since I posted it.
 
Garbage in garbage out, I won't spend time with crack pots and conspiracy theories, a waste of my time.
 
billvon said:
They bleed out of some pictures due to how pictures are developed. (Light areas tend to "bleed in" to dark areas.)
Click to expand...

I guess that's possible. Was it done in the case of these crosshair images?

Haven't heard about that one. What is it?
Click to expand...

I was just suggesting an explanation for the crosshair issue. I couldn't say for certain. Want to have a go at it?

I think the people issue is a major one: how many people would have to be in the dark? How could we tell?
 
GeoffP said:
I'm finding it hard to believe I'm writing this... but WTF.

Documentary here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIy8ZqqK5G8

It's presented very sensationally... but what the hell is it with the camera crosshairs,

[\quote]This is actually a result due to the emulsion of the film. Bright areas tend to bleed over into adjacent dark areas. Since the dark cross-hairs are so thin, they get washed out.
and the lander being in one shot of the same position and not another?
Click to expand...

The simple answer is that the two photos were not taken from the same position. Detailed analysis of the photos do show some differences in the backgrounds.
These photos do rely, in part, on an optical illusion. Since there is no atmosphere on the Moon, there also is no haze to give a clue of the distance of objects. Without it we tend to judge things as being closer than they are. What appear to low hills not to far away are actually much higher and further away. As a result, they look much the same even when looked at from points that are separated from each other by a fair amount.

One of the best arguments that there is nothing to any of this is the silence on the matter from the USSR. At the time and for quite a while after the US and The USSR were in the midst of a "Propaganda war". If the Soviets had thought that they could have cast even a shadow of doubt as to whether the US had actually landed on the Moon, and gotten away with it, they would have been yelling it from the mountain tops. The fact that didn't even try indicates that their experts told them that they would come off as fools in the international community by doing so.
Click to expand...
 
I got as far as the "explanation" that the astronauts were launched but simply orbited the earth for eight days while fake footage was shown. I mean REALLY? Can someone be so dumb? You could see the craft with binoculars. Many countries the were not our friends had radar and could track it. Can anyone believe that they wouldn't have shouted from the rooftops that we were lying if the craft had not at least left for the moon?
 
Yep i believe they went, before my time but i think so. I think the human race is far more advanced than they tell us.

What i think they hid was the fact that secret technology got them there, and thats what nasa was hiding. Thats why they cannot explain the questions, as the technology was far more advanced than they told the public.

The people have every right to ask questions, but they have it the wrong way round, mankind went but had better techs then they told you guys. Thats what they are hiding, i.e that mankind is far more advanced than they tell us.

I even think russia and usa, and europe probably work together behind the scenes at some level, that is totally hidden to the public, while we watch this nasa show, and world going on. I think you will find russia and usa worked together on some levels during the cold war, even though at our level there was alot going on.

But what nasa really is hiding, is that humans are far more advanced than the stuff they told the public, and this is why nasa cannot explain the questions about it.

Nasa was just some publicity stunt to steal countless amounts of money to launder into other projects during cold war.

How does anyone know thinking they where working on the moon project that they may of been working on something else? Everything is compartmentalised, so no one on the inside knows anything more than they are required to know to do there job.

All nato countries are run from underground bases, and the masses have no idea.

I think neil armstrong never spoke about it, as he was pissed of that when he arrived at the moon, humans where already there, and it was all just a show. Thats why he never spoke, and was probably just told to go off and not talk about it, and keep quiet, while his name was made famous for a publicity stunt. When infact humans are far more advanced then they are telling anyone.
 
GeoffP said:
I think the people issue is a major one: how many people would have to be in the dark? How could we tell?
Click to expand...

Easiest ways to tell:

Bounce a laser off the retroreflector they left at the landing site. (Been done.)

Take a picture of the landing site with a good telescope. (Been done.)
 
I'll have to look that up. Thanks! Thought I was losing it there.
 
...DID we go to the moon?

I don't know about you, but I certainly did not.

By the way I don't believe china exists. It is pretty clear that there are a bunch of americans that had squinty eye surgery and are just speaking gibberish, to trick us. Have you ever noticed that every single chinese resturant has the exact same menu - coincidence, I think not!
 
As a leader of a small Asian nation that absolutely exists, I can scarcely tell you how appropriate origin's comment is. I've often doubted the existence of China, even that time when we launched a nuke at them and they invaded us.
 
origin said:
.........a bunch of Americans that had squinty eye surgery and are just speaking gibberish, to trick us. Have you ever noticed that every single Chinese restaurant has the exact same menu - coincidence, I think not!
Click to expand...

Ever consider a career in the Diplomatic Service?
 
Saw a doco like this years ago. Freaked me out a little too. But afterwards I did some research and discovered that every single piece of so called "evidence" that cast doubt upon the legitimacy of the moon landing was ultimately the result of ignorance. Hell, Mythbusters even did a special on it, although their busting wasn't quite so exhaustive. I'm too lazy to compile any links though, sorry! But what I will do is share a little revelation I had all by myself when watching an Australian movie called "The Dish" shortly afterwards. Two words: radio telescope. I mean really, the extraordinary amount of skill, effort and precise execution that would be required to fake transmissions consistent with a trajectory from the earth to the moon and back again, with several radio telescopes around the world looking and listening, would have made doing so pretty much impossible. Surely it would have been easier to just actually go to the fucking moon instead. And really, I think that's the crux of it. The easier way to fake a moon landing such that it could stand up against the careful scrutiny of the technologically competitive country you just humbled by supposedly getting there first, would be to actually perform a real one.
 
Last edited:
Rav said:
The easier way to fake a moon landing such that it could stand up against the careful scrutiny of the technologically competitive country you just humbled by supposedly getting there first, would be to actually perform a real one.
Click to expand...
That's what I always say. It's easier to do it than to fake it - and cheaper. Look how much a blockbuster movie costs compared to a moon landing.
 
Actually the way it works is simple, the conspiracy theorists post edit the moon images and make them irrational and illogical.

If you want proof of Appollo and Luna missions being on the moon, look at raw footage from LRO database.
 
I'll be silly for the fun of it.

What if the answer is both? Look what NASA did with the Challenger under political pressure.

How much pressure was NASA under in 1969? Kennedy said get to the Moon before the decade was out.

Face it. No one had been to the Moon before. It was complicated. Any of a thousand and one things might go wrong.

What if they were working on faking it at the same time they were really trying to do it but were not absolutely sure it would work. The fake might just have been the back up plan. But then they actually pulled it off but all of the evidence of the backup fake was still around even though it was never used.

So the people who prefer to think it could not be done can point to the left overs from the fake that was never actually used and say the real thing didn't happen. How could NASA now admit they were willing to fake it just in case?

So there! You can have your cake and eat it to. :cool:

Is that paranoid conspiracy theorist enough for you? :D

psik
 
Not just Russia but much of the world, Britain, Austria, Europe, had radio telescopes that were listing and tracking the Apollo missions. For the USA to have faked it they would have had to send a robotic mission, land it on the moon and then fly it back, all the while beaming back per-recorded or on-the-fly uploaded radio chatter. I dare say that that would have been technologically harder back then then actually landing men on the moon! Then there are the tens of thousands of people that work on the Apollo program, to hold down a conspiracy of this size is approaching mathematical impossibility: it's statistically impossible that the number of people that would be in the know would keep their mouths shut after this many decades! That is why questioning the moon landings is absolute stupidity, it defies logic to do something that is harder like trying to convince the whole world that you landed on the moon, rather then actually landing on the moon.

The problem is we did not go back, we degenerated technologically, we become to unorganized governmentally to achieve such a thing again, the USA is in decline, some people just can't accept all that so they have to come up with or believe in ideas that are even more radical.
 
psikeyhackr said:
Any of a thousand and one things might go wrong.

What if they were working on faking it at the same time they were really trying to do it but were not absolutely sure it would work. The fake might just have been the back up plan.
Click to expand...
Something did go wrong with Apollo 13. Why didn't they fake that one into a success?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top