First U.S. Moon landing real or fake?
 

my friend and I were discussing this one

All the Apollo flights were observed by thousands of average citizens with normal telescopes in their backyards. The damage (O2 venting) to #13 was even observed. Yes the flights really happened. :yep:

EDIT: Laser reflectors were placed by the crews on the moon that still help mesure its distance today IIRC. Also sismographs placed by prevous missions detected the colision of #13's IVB stage on the moon. :know:

First U.S. Moon landing real or fake?
 

Must have been real. Back in the '70s I saw the launches on TV!
:D

The moon hoax conspiracy kooks never explain what America's Cold War rival the Soviet Union was doing in on the con. They sent several unmanned Luna and Zond probes up in the early 1970s. They brought back moon rocks geologically compatable with the ones the astronaunts returned with. Pictures looked a lot the same too. They also never explain why it was neccessary to include a 'failed' mission like Apollo 13 in the grand hoax.

Picture of Lunokhod 1 rover leaving lander October 1971....

http://pages.preferred.com/%7Etedstryk/lk104.JPG

First U.S. Moon landing real or fake?
 

I clearly remember a rocket going up and a few days later its nose cone dropping in the ocean.
Who needs more proof...

The woo-woo conspiracy types would claim you staged the take-off and splash-down with fake footage filmed on a movie set inbetween. Ever see the 1977 movie Capricorn One where a corrupt NASA adminstration fakes a Mars landing because it was beyond their technical means? ;)

First U.S. Moon landing real or fake?
 

So you mean they shoot a rocket with some astronauts on board in the general direction of the moon. They circle the moon but don't land. NASA shoots footage of the astronauts in a studio, pretending to be walking on the moon. A few days later the nose cone splashes back into the ocean and there you have your fake moon landing?
So the astronauts did at least circkle the moon, or were they not in the capsule during launch?

And you repeat that over and over again...?

Sounds like a big waist to me.
:D

P.S.
Let me guess; all the (hundreds of) participants were sworn to secrecy, all the footage is destroyed, etc....
Right?

You just summed it up in a nutshell Abraham. :cool:

One example: Back in 2001 Fox aired a program called 'Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?'', hosted by X-Files actor Mitch Pileggi. The program was an hour long, and featured interviews with a series of people who believe that NASA faked the Apollo Moon landings in the 1960s and 1970s. The biggest voice in this is Bill Kaysing, who claims to have all sorts of hoax evidence, including pictures taken by the astronauts, engineering details, discussions of physics and even some testimony by astronauts themselves. The program's conclusion was that the whole thing was faked in the Nevada desert (in Area 51, of course!). According to them, NASA did not have the technical capability of going to the Moon, but pressure due to the Cold War with the Soviet Union forced them to fake it.

Remember...these people have books and videos to sell. They'll push any amount of bad science to do it. ;)

There are certain things, like the moon landing, JFK and most recently, Flight 93, which have aspects that can be attributed to other causes, or explained by other theories.

Of course, that doesn't mean they're true. Life is like that. Just because no one hears a tree fall in the forest doesn't mean it didn't fall.

Unfortunately, the landings are one of those. The "faked" theory has legs because it would have been easier to fake, and would have looked just as beliveable. Combine that with the fact that the Russians were planning to beat us there, and it begins to become quite plausible. However, that same pressure can explain the developments needed to actually get us there too.

The moon landings were a first for mankind, but we had successfully accomplished space travel already. As such, the moon landings were not that unbeliveable.

So, I believe they happened, but I also believe that there could very well have been such a "Capricorn One" type plan waiting in the wings had the technology not been there in time.

I'm glad they pulled it off. I wouldn't want Buzz pulling his punches. :lol:

i have no doubt that thousands of people watched rockets go up in the air but there far to many anomollies in the pictures taken on the so called landings my fav being 2 landscapes supposedly being from differnt landing areas being exactly the same and the pictue of the astronaught that overlaps the scaling grid that is on the lens of the camera which is an imposibility it was a great bt of propoganda that stopped the russians trying and saved billions on acctually going there

Just imagine what Philip K. Dick would made of this! :D

But there is a kind of contradiction here. It is argued that thousands of people having seen this or that cannot be wrong. Now think of UFOs, radar operators in towers, highly skilled personnell, I mean, those famous 5% or less of sightings that so far noone ever has explained as an atmopheric or otherwise natural phenomenon. Sometimes also thousands of people have seen this event, that sighting, or technicians were able to cinfirm that the radar of that time was fully functional when displaying some kind of strange anomnalies or flight maneuvers no man-made craft ever would be able to perform. The radar sightings often get wiped of the tables as "weather ballons". Weather ballons doing 7000 km/h, and abruptly changing colurse by 90, 130, 180 degrees? Or thiousands may have shared sightings of light symptoms in the air, performing in a comparable fashion: usually here is the talk of military missile exercises, or unknown aTMOSPHERIC WEATHER PHENOMENONS; FAR AWAY BLIZZARDS OR gas from swamps going of in fire.

what I mean is, the argument that "thousands have seen this or that" in case of the moon landing is given that the moon flights took place. In case of UFOs it is wiped off the table.

Imagine the moon flights had been a hoax. then Apollo 13 might have been introduced becasue of the increased realism of a scenario where technology fails.(someone asked for this above).

I personally do not believe the moon flights had been a fake. I do think that a very small percentage of UFO sightings is something true, but that it probably is not of that Hollywood-style nature and origin than UFOlogists usually believe. And they believe very hysterically sometimes, don't they.

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/croshair.jpg
Question: why do crosshairs and scaling grids appear behind sunlit white objects on the moon?

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/lensline.jpg
Answer: Strong luminosity can washout thin lines.
Test: Hair across lens is washed out by sunlit white paper.
With no atmosphere on the Moon, sunlight is stronger.

In this test a strand of hair was taped across a camcorder lens, which was then pointed at a sunlit white paper. While the test failed to vanish the hair-line completely, it demonstrates that diffuse solar reflection on a white surface can wash out a thin line. This result is sufficient to render the phenomenon of crosshair vanishing over sunlit white objects not anomalous. Also reflective intensity and thus crosshair-knockout potential would be greater on the Moon with no atmosphere to reduce solar intensity.

Another old chestnut did they land on the moon or not this will go on for years. Sorry to say I am with Homer Simpson on this one “Quick change the channel.� I am not interested one bit. :P

it didn't happen.

What was the question? :88)

The real conspiracy is... the US never left. We've been terraforming the moon for 26 years. What you see at night is a holograph projected by a satellite. In another 20, all US citizens will be eligible to live there and escape the coming global warming catastrophe. :know:

I got me a nice little spread by the rim of the South Pole-Aitken basin. Y'all come visit, ya hear?

The real conspiracy is NASA hids the existence of the Moon Babes so Neal can have them to himself. Houston...we have no problem. ;)

http://zioxville.homestead.com/files/MoonWimmen.jpg

It's all a fake! And I have the reasons why! :o

-35 years ago, I read in a textbook from 1959 that the Van Halen Belts contained deadly radiation that would kill anything in them.
-I heard on a TV show that rendezvous in orbit is hard. So they couldn't have done it, unless they climbed up to the command module from the rope that was hanging out of it.
-If Apollo 13 really exploded, the astronauts would have died.
-It's 250 degrees on the Moon, so the astronauts would melt. This is also why NASA is covering up liquid water on the Moon, since its wicked witch-like astronauts would obviously melt from the water.
-My Uncle Betty says that his aunt's cousin's wife's roommate’s former acquaintance said that he didn't think we landed on the Moon.
-Neil Armstrong didn't fly all the missions.
-Nixon had Kennedy shot by Castro because he knew that we couldn't land on the Moon. Nixon was elected president the next day.
-On Apollo 10, the booster "POGO"ed. But the pogo stick was invented in 1919, so they should have been able to solve this problem.
-On Apollo 9 the rocket was hit by lightning 8 times. But everyone knows that thunder is faster than lightning, so the astronauts would have heard thunder before the lightning hit.
-On the Moon, there's no air to support combustion. Therefore, the lunar rover couldn't go.
-Once I weighted a feather and dropped it and it dropped just as fast as a hammer, proving that the experiment from Apollo 22 was faked.
-Oxygen turns into a different kind of oxygen when it leaves the Earth's atmosphere, so you couldn't breathe it.
-Russian rockets don't fall over because they're wider at the bottom.
-Someone told me once that the lunar module should have created a crater underneath it. But someone else told me it didn't. So it couldn't have landed.
-The Apollo Conical Space Capsule (tm) couldn't have carried enough fuel to continuously fire the engine for all two weeks of the mission.
-The Apollo Conical Space Capsule (tm) was 13 feet wide. The parachutes were 80 feet wide.
-The rocket couldn't have flown because as everyone knows, tall things tend to tip over, and the moment the tower released it the rocket would have fallen on it's side. That's why the space shuttle is so big and fat - it's more stable.
-The technology was so bad back then they couldn't even figure out how to put microphones in the helmets. That's why they used gold foil to cover the face, as the pictures and movies are of stunt doubles. The real astronauts were off to the side recording
-There is no Sun on the Moon, otherwise the sky wouldn't appear to be black.
-There isn't any gravity on the Moon, so time would stop flowing and create an oxbow lake.
-There's no air in space to hold the dust grains on the lunar surface apart, so it should have compacted into a hard, rough, hard material.
-There's no gas on the Moon, so the astronauts would have had no way to refuel the rover.
-There's nothing for rockets to push against in space. I tried jumping in midair but I couldn't, proving that rockets couldn't move in space.
-Tom Hanks was able to fake it. I couldn't tell the difference.
-We never landed on the moon because Tony's mom said "there's an goddamned man down there at the water cooler who says NASA never landed on the Moon. Everyone was talking about it ... I just didn't know what to say!"

Lol, good point, he also faked Normany and had me fooled until the part about "sticky bombs". :-j

Anyone remembering "Capricorn One"? :)