Nasa lost it's main evidence of Moon landing

[Type941]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/0...eut/index.html

Too funny. Now the conspiracies will not stop. ever. :rotfl:Can you even believe this?

[Torplexed]

Yeah....the Apollo Hoaxers are having a field day with this. I can't understand why. Going by their reasonings if you lose the original video tapes of your wedding ceremony you were never really married.

Why are these tapes so special? Because they have the least generational video information from the Landing Module (among other things). To use a music analogy, these are the master tapes of what has been around and available for years. Nothing more nothing less. Given the quality of today's conversion via digital means, the image quality would surpass all known and existing kinescopes and 2" recordings of the 1969 TV feed. That's assumming they haven't degraded during the years they spent in storage.

[TteFAboB]

It's heartening to see so much opposition to NASA since it's a govt agency. If only they'd stop at that instead of crossing the line into denial. Of course, in the end nobody should care because it brings attention to space programs and that's what's really important, the Moon discussion doesn't matter - it's only a matter of time untill we get a private manned craft to land in the Moon, a long time that can be shortened with more interest and demand.

They don't know, but they'll be partially responsable for getting a man to land on the Moon, once again.

[STEED]

MAN DID NOT LAND ON THE MOON WE BY PASSED IT AND LANDED ON MARS. :p

[Type941]

Originally Posted by Torplexed

Yeah....the Apollo Hoaxers are having a field day with this. I can't understand why. Going by their reasonings if you lose the original video tapes of your wedding ceremony you were never really married.

Then again, if you always claimed you got married but the wife is nowhere to be found, and you only have that video as definate proof... and the video is lost...

I think it's unconcievable - as if NASA has one of those XFile type warehouses with millions of boxes and artifacts in them.

The reason they are having a field day with this is because it's the second time afaik that NASA 'loses' key evidence on otherwise loses credibility on it. Like that 400kg of lunar mass that was supposedly brought down from the moon and when later tested by japanese, it was found to be originated from earth - to which the clumsy response was something like 'oh, a meteorite hit the earth, a piece of earth landed on the moon and the apollo crew happened to pick up exactly that piece'. bollocks.


Anyhow, it's funny. And what's funnier is that Americans get so bloody defencive about it. I wouldn't be surprised that the whole thing was a hoax. After all, the americans did a lot of 'jokes' on the USSR and duped them into spending money on many different things. I think americans are very sophisticated and cunning people who can easily do this sort of thing. Entirely possible more evidence will be lost...

I just wish the Russians send a space ship to the moon and check out the landing place and all that. Should be fun, eh? I'm sure noone will object to such interesting mission. Or would they?

[Yahoshua]

I don't find this sort of situation ubelievable at all. he IRS will lose tax papers all the time but it's NEVER their fault.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Type941

I just wish the Russians send a space ship to the moon and check out the landing place and all that. Should be fun, eh? I'm sure noone will object to such interesting mission. Or would they?

The Russians did sent probes to land on the Lunar Surface in the 1960s and 70s. The Luna and Zond probes. Luna 16 and 17 brought back rock samples from the Moon. They even carried roving vehicles which roamed around on the Moon's terrain. They also listening in on the mission communications and telemetry during all the 1960s and 70s Apollo missions with their own ground stations. If they had obtained evidence that Apollo was a fake I'm sure they would have announced it rather loudly at the height of the Cold War and Vietnam. The response from the Moon Hoax community about this discrepancy is that: "They're in on it."

Part of the problem is that those today that believe the landings were faked do so because that is what they want to believe. These people will continue to believe what they want no matter what evidence is provided. I'm sure new images from new probes will do little to put an end to the moon landing hoax theories. After all if the information relayed back is electronic or digital can't NASA fake that too? If a foreign probe finds the landing sites the excuse will become: "NASA has had 40 years to put it there."

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

I don't find this sort of situation ubelievable at all. he IRS will lose tax papers all the time but it's NEVER their fault.

Space exploration is a waste of government money IMHO. Why waste so much money on things we know nothing about when there are problems here at home that need fixing first. Millions of starving people here on Earth and the government wants to launch some metal and computers into the sky. What a freakin waste of tax payer dollars.

Why not invest the same energy and money into the resources we have here on Earth to better harvest and utilize them. Things like the Ocean for example. It's got oxygen in it, it's got food in it, it's got creatures living in it that might lead us to find cures for all sorts of diseases and cancers and to better sustain human life.

I think it's way too early to be exploring space when there is sooooo much here on Earth that has yet to be fully explored.

[Subnuts]

Originally Posted by Type941

Anyhow, it's funny. And what's funnier is that Americans get so bloody defencive about it.

Here's my official list of 32 questions for people who think the moon landings were faked. Give it a shot.


1)The LM Descent Engine generated 2600 pounds of thrust upon landing, and should supposedly have burned a massive blast crater in the lunar surface. In that case, shouldn't the heat from the 75,000-pound thrust turbofans on the Boeing 777 melt concrete and vaporize baggage handlers hundreds of feet away?

2) You say that non-parallel shadows are the result of multiple stage lights. If that were true, wouldn't "lunar" objects cast multiple shadows?

3) If the rocket motors hidden inside the F-1 were of such limited thrust, why did they generate flames more than 600 feet long?

4) How would a complete rocket assembly fit into the 14-inch diameter thrust chamber of the F-1?

5) An empty Saturn V rocket weighs 213 tons. With an Apollo spacecraft on top, about 250. How do these tiny rocket motors, which surely must employ an exotic high-ISP propellant, lift such a heavy assembly into Earth orbit?

6)How was it possible for NASA to reproduce the parabolic trajectories of billions of specks of dust in an Earth-bound environment?

7) You say that lunar gravity was simulated using slow-motion. When I speed the Apollo footage up to simulate "Earth gravity", the astronauts hop around like coke addicts. How many times per minute can a man wearing a 150-pound backpack hop up and down?

8) You say that the LEM is too fragile to operate in outer space, noting it's aluminized mylar thermal blankets and thin aluminum pressure hull. In that case, are most communications and weather satellites fake, also?

9) Apollo 15 astronaut James Irwin had a religious epiphany upon his return to Earth. Was he that impressed by the special effects?

10) You seem to feel as if the 1960s were some sort of dead-end in the arena of aerospace engineering. Were Gemini, the Concorde, the SR-71, XB-70, X-15, etc., also fakes?

11) Supposedly the Van Allen belts contain deadly radiation that will fry anyone in minutes. The ISS spends a good portion of the time in the inner layers of the belt. Is it also a fake, or do the astronauts retreat to a lead-lined chamber several times a day?

12) Supposedly the Apollo spacecraft stayed in Earth orbit. When the SIVB stage burned for five minutes to send the spacecraft to the Moon, how did it manage to so this with zero delta-velocity?

13) How did the CSM/LM, a 60-foot aluminum spacecraft covered in mylar foil and aluminized kapton, remain unseen by ground-based observers?

14) Why is it that the mid-60s era Apollo guidance computer was incapable of carrying out it's task, yet the mid-70s Space Shuttle computers are capable of flying a vastly more complicated spacecraft?

15) How come the United States create an Atomic Bomb essentially from scratch in four years in the 40s, but can't put a man on the Moon in nine years in the 60s?

16) Have you ever noticed that those supposedly whistle-blowing crosshairs appear only behind objects when that object is bright white?

17) In the early 70s, the Russians expended three 770-ton rocket to land three six-ton spacecraft on the Moon, which returned a single pound of rocks. In six missions, Apollo returned 836 pounds of samples. How many unmanned sample return missions, carried out in perfect secrecy, would be required to return 836 pounds of samples?

18) Let's assume the Moon rocks were actually Earth rocks created in a "radiation oven." At least one of the Apollo samples were given to the Russians two years before their sample return mission. How did we manage to perfectly recreate an actual moon rock, on Earth, two years before those superior Russians had their own?

19) If the flag is being blown around by air currents on the stage, why isn't the dust around it being blown?

20) There's no atmosphere on the Moon, so stars should be visible in the photographs taken there. Photographs taken during every manned spaceflight also show a lack of stars. Were they fake, too?

21) You complain about the lack of dust on the LM footpads. How is dust supposed to billow in a vacuum?

22) The lunar module ascent engine used UDMB/N2O4 for propellent, which produced a near-invisible flame when fired on Earth. Why should it produce a "bright orange" flame when fired in space?

23) Supposedly every picture taken on the Moon was perfectly framed. Are the hundreds out-of-focus shots of boots, gloves, and dirt completely intentional?

24) You say that Gus Grissom was murdered by NASA so he wouldn't spill the beans about the hoax. Wasn't there any easier way to go about this than killing three astronauts and destroying an $80 million spacecraft?

25) Approximately how many technicians were required to create the special effects for the missions, and how many months would it take them?

26) When I walk through a store parking lot on a sunny day, the streetlights cast non-parallel shadows on the ground. The sun is the only light source. Is NASA using special mind powers to trick me?

27) Did NASA use special mind powers to fling Pete Conrad from a moving motorcycle before he could spill the beans?

28) On a hot summer day, it could get up to 105 degrees outside. Shouldn't it be 105 degrees the instant the sun rises, just like it does on the Moon?

29) Richard Nixon was incapable of covering up an apartment burglary. How did he manage to pull off the biggest cover-up in human history in six months just three years before?

30) Is a 17,500 mph orbital velocity constant no matter what the mass of the body the spacecraft is orbiting?

31) Why didn't the Russians, who had their own manned space program, were planning on sending men to the Moon, and an extensive tracking network, blow the whistle on the hoax?

32) Why does NASA, an evil government-controlled bureaucracy with everything to hide, allow free and unrestricted access to documents detailing in insane detail the mechanical and operational details of their spacecraft, along with transcripts and technical documents relating to every detail of each manned mission?

[The Noob]

I think the USA were there. But it could be possible that they had to Film it down Here on earth because of Radiation. That would destroy the Films. If they did, they would of course try to hold it secret to avoid the Crazed Conspirancy Guys. Oh Well, Failed.

But i don't really believe the stated above theorie, it just could be.

Plus if they were not there, the Ruskies would have noticed and of course Published it, to harm the USA. They were kinda hostile at the time.

So, yes. USA Landed on Moon.

The original films have been around for thirty-five years; why destroy them now?

No, they were misplaced. Before anyone thinks 'cover-up', they should first think 'screw-up'.

[Yahoshua]

Yep...somebody out there is missing half their ass cuz it was chewed off by their superiors.

The poor bastard will have to wait for it to grow back before he can walk again.

[The Noob]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

No, they were misplaced. Before anyone thinks 'cover-up', they should first think 'screw-up'.

Well Said!

[joea]

Originally Posted by Type941

Then again, if you always claimed you got married but the wife is nowhere to be found, and you only have that video as definate proof... and the video is lost...

I think it's unconcievable - as if NASA has one of those XFile type warehouses with millions of boxes and artifacts in them.

The reason they are having a field day with this is because it's the second time afaik that NASA 'loses' key evidence on otherwise loses credibility on it. Like that 400kg of lunar mass that was supposedly brought down from the moon and when later tested by japanese, it was found to be originated from earth - to which the clumsy response was something like 'oh, a meteorite hit the earth, a piece of earth landed on the moon and the apollo crew happened to pick up exactly that piece'. bollocks.


Anyhow, it's funny. And what's funnier is that Americans get so bloody defencive about it. I wouldn't be surprised that the whole thing was a hoax. After all, the americans did a lot of 'jokes' on the USSR and duped them into spending money on many different things. I think americans are very sophisticated and cunning people who can easily do this sort of thing. Entirely possible more evidence will be lost...

I just wish the Russians send a space ship to the moon and check out the landing place and all that. Should be fun, eh? I'm sure noone will object to such interesting mission. Or would they?

Come on I heard someone claim the same thing for Gagarin's flight. Governments screw up often with their records...there is so much scientific evidence that it did happen, and the proofs put forward by the hoax believers are such bollox.

[Type941]

Originally Posted by Subnuts

Here's my official list of 32 questions for people who think the moon landings were faked. Give it a shot.

Ok. You got that off somewhere else. Comon! .. My list!