Did we really land on the Moon?

Page 9 of 16 [ 248 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 16 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

04 Aug 2017, 12:13 pm

AspieUtah wrote:

kraftiekortie wrote:

I still feel SOMEBODY would have written a comprehensive expose had there actually been a hoax. There was not even an inkling of speculation of this nature until about 6 years after Apollo 11.

Yes, there were motivations for having a man on the Moon by the end of the 1960's--per the Kennedy speech, and the national ego of the United States. And this motivation was great enough for somebody to have at least contemplating perpetuating a hoax in the absence of the "real thing."

But I still find it implausible, for many reasons, that a hoax could have perpetuated.

Several exposes have been published and/or broadcast. But, they are dismissed as conspiracy theories. Don't underestimate the lengths to which a secretive, militarized federal agency would go to never leave traces of facts, and hide them if they do pop up.

It is interesting that a majority of Americans doubt the official explanation of the assassination of President Kennedy (and the growing list of admitted government conspiracies, hoaxes and scandals), but accept the Moon missions as legitimate.

For me, the ideas that the first human to walk on the moon essentially said nothing after the fact by going to great lengths to be left alone, and that a NASA film showed the Apollo 11 crew faking images of the Earth are enough to convince me that "something ain't quite right" about the whole idea.

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

04 Aug 2017, 1:04 pm

EzraS wrote:

AspieUtah wrote:

kraftiekortie wrote:

Thanks for adding the YouTube.com link, Ezra. I tried, but was in a rush. Did you like the video?

_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

04 Aug 2017, 4:39 pm

AspieUtah wrote:

EzraS wrote:

AspieUtah wrote:

kraftiekortie wrote:

Thanks for adding the YouTube.com link, Ezra. I tried, but was in a rush. Did you like the video?

I found it mighty interesting. It's plainly obvious the Earth being filmed through a little round window, like they're really in orbit instead of being far away. And looking at pictures of the command module, it does have a round window that size.

This is something that came up in my mind fairly recently. I wasn't aware of the phenomenon. I'll most likely forget all about it by next month.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

04 Aug 2017, 5:01 pm

AspieUtah wrote:

Tollorin wrote:

So basically thousand of engineers conceived a rocket and spaceships with intention to land on the moon going through every details to make it a successful lunar mission and instead of doing what their equipments was made to do, NASA and the US government decided that it just orbit the Earth; for reasons?

The U.S. space program had been beaten quite badly in the 1950s and early 1960s by the largely successfully Soviet Union space program. In the mid- and late-1960s, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Leonid Brezhnev had essentially doubled down on its arming and financing of Viet Nam and other Soviet proxies in southeast Asian nations. The U.S. government saw that as provocative, and set about creating its own policies to dissuade the Soviet government from its harden course of action by building up U.S. troops in the region. One of the dissuasive policies was to show U.S. military might by achieving President Kennedy's dream of "landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth."

But, the number of NASA failures compared to the Soviet successes demanded that any attempt by the U.S. government to landing on the moon and returning had to succeed at any price. Under such conditions, would it be so strange to shift NASA operations at the highest levels to make it appear that the U.S. government has succeeded? Extremely few individuals would need to know before, during and after the hoax. Meanwhile, the U.S. government would be celebrating undeniable victory on the world stage; and would have created a distraction in the Soviet government that might just have ended the deadly and unending Viet Nam war. That would be some tempting results for any government leader.

So, there were some desirable reasons to fake that achievement: first, because it really was a technically impossible endeavour, and secondly, Kennedy had essentially painted the U.S. government into a corner where it couldn't ever admit that failure was an option. Add in the possible side effect of ending expansionist war(s) in southeast Asia, and you got some easily convinced government leaders willing to flip the switch "just this once."

After all, how many military hoaxes were perpetrated by the U.S. and U.K. government in World War II? Practice makes perfect, right? And, it didn't hurt that NASA wunderkind Wernher von Braun had seen and understood those hoaxes as Nazi V-2 rocket engineer and SS officer. It wouldn't be a stretch of the imagination to believe that Von Braun could foist a convincing hoax, too.

The competition between the super powers was the whole reason for the moon program. That much is obvious. But what your saying about Vietnam makes no sense. Who got to the moon first would have had no bearing on who won the war. And fake, or real, when we did land on the moon in 1969, it didn't stop Saigon from falling in 1975.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

04 Aug 2017, 5:02 pm

Are two WP members seriously considering these "alternative facts" about the moon landing to be legit, or are they just being smart a$$es?

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

04 Aug 2017, 10:45 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Are two WP members seriously considering these "alternative facts" about the moon landing to be legit, or are they just being smart a$$es?

I like to consider certain things from different angles. Did you bother to watch that short lil video, or are you doing the close your eyes and put you fingers in your ears while yelling LA LA LA LA! thing?

I'd be interested in points of view about it.

mikeman7918
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Mar 2016
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929
Location: Utah, USA

05 Aug 2017, 12:50 am

I would argue that we did indeed land on the Moon. Yes, the motivation did exist to fake a moon landing but space flight was not the only technology in it's infancy in the 1960's, video making technology was as well. The movie 2001: A Space Odyssey was made about when the Apollo program was going on and it includes shots of astronauts on the moon and ships orbiting the Earth, I have seen that movie and by today's standards it's honestly pretty laughable yet footage from the Apollo missions.

As for why nobody has been there since, nobody has had a compelling enough reason to. The first time it took a cold war and a massive national effort which was politically pushed by the people wanting to beat the Soviet Union. NASA has tried to go to the moon since then like with the Ares program canceled by politicians who don't have a cold war pushing them to support it. We already have bragging rights about having been to the Moon which is really what we were after the first time, so if we go there again it would have to have a more practical reason.

Yeah, the rocket science of the era was pretty primitive compared to today. I mean, you would think that they might have a rocket catch on fire on the launch pad (Apollo 1), have another one have something important explode on the way to the Moon (Apollo 13), have another one suffer serious flight computer problems during Lunar decent (Apollo 11), and having two astronauts nearly stranded on the Moon after an important switch breaks (also Apollo 11). Well, all that stuff did happen though, their safety record was about what you would expect when trying to land people on the Moon in a hurry with 1960's technology.

I'm just going to start listing evidence that the Moon landings really happened here, if anyone wants me to talk about anything in more detail and provide sources for a particular claim then just tell me.

- The Soviet Union would have loved to show that America wasn't really on the Moon, which is why they pointed radios at the Moon and to their dismay heard the transmissions from the space crafts.

- Retro-reflectors were left on the Moon and used to determine that the Moon is slowly receding at a few centimeters per year. Anyone with the right equipment can send radio waves to them.

- The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has taken detailed surface images of the Moon that include the Apollo landing sites, which means that either it's real or they are still putting effort into faking it to this day.

- People saw the Apollo spacecrafts departing for the Moon, during the Lunar injection burn the engine glow was bright enough to be seen from the ground.

- Many more people including my grandfather witnessed the launch of Apollo rockets, which means that really huge rockets were shot into space. Why would they build a rocket big enough to go to the Moon and then proceed to not go to the Moon with it.

- Finally, in he words of Randall Monroe: "If NASA were willing to fake great achievements then they would have another one by now".

_________________
Also known as MarsMatter.

Diagnosed with Asperger's, ADD, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder in 2004.
In denial that it was a problem until early 2016.

Deviant Art

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Aug 2017, 2:22 am

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Are two WP members seriously considering these "alternative facts" about the moon landing to be legit, or are they just being smart a$$es?

Yes, I did watch it, and I found it unconvincing. Sure, the technology was so primitive at the time that those space craft might as well have been a flying coffin, but where there's a will, there's a way. And "primitive" is only a modern assessment of the sixties and seventies technology. Why is it so hard to believe that scientists dedicating their lives to a single purpose be disregarded?

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

05 Aug 2017, 9:44 am

One should realize that computers is not the only "technology."

They had advanced stuff in the 1960s. We weren't in the Stone Age.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

05 Aug 2017, 9:49 am

A true tin hatter believes in both the moon landing hoax in 1969, AND that the Philadelphia Experiment really happened during WWII.

They faked the Moon landing in 1969 because we have less technology than they want you to believe we have.

AND they cover up the Philadelphia Experiment (in which the US Navy supposedly caused a 2000 ton Navy destroyer to jump around in time) because they don't want you to know that we have MORE technology than you believe we have.

We are both more advanced than you think, and less advanced than you think, at the same time.

Right.

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

05 Aug 2017, 11:47 am

Conpiracy theorists are skeptical as a default....

Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,674
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

05 Aug 2017, 11:57 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Are two WP members seriously considering these "alternative facts" about the moon landing to be legit, or are they just being smart a$$es?

Just try hards desperately trying to be seen as quirky & alternative

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

05 Aug 2017, 12:30 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:

Conpiracy theorists are skeptical as a default....

It becomes difficult to deny all of the U.S. government's conspiracies when just these alone have been admitted:

Global surveillance disclosures (2013–present)
Operation Fast and Furious (2011)
CIA involvement in Contra cocaine trafficking (1996)
Nayirah testimony (1990)
Iran-Contra affair (1986)
Project MKUltra (1975)
Watergate (1974)
Tuskegee syphilis experiment (1972)
Gulf of Tonkin incident (1964)
Operation Northwoods (1962)
Operation Paperclip (1946)
Denatured alcohol toxicity deaths (1920s)

...and so it goes.

mikeman7918
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Mar 2016
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929
Location: Utah, USA

05 Aug 2017, 1:27 pm

AspieUtah wrote:

Yes, conspiracies like this do happen but that does not mean that any conceivable conspiracy like the Moon landings being faked is real. I consider myself a skeptic and I take conspiracy theories with as much salt and skepticism as I take official stories.

_________________
Also known as MarsMatter.

Diagnosed with Asperger's, ADD, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder in 2004.
In denial that it was a problem until early 2016.

Deviant Art

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

05 Aug 2017, 2:05 pm

I just don't find the Moon landing hoax idea to be plausible.

It doesn't mean that somebody who espouses the idea is necessarily nuts.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

05 Aug 2017, 2:29 pm

AspieUtah wrote:

kraftiekortie wrote:

Conpiracy theorists are skeptical as a default....

you're slitting your own throat and defeating yourself.

All of those conspiracy were almost immediately uncovered. And all were tiny in scale.

you're just demonstrating that something as vast as a hoaxed Apollo eleven could not have been kept secret for so many decades.

Page 9 of 16 [ 248 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 16 Next

Jump to:

Did we really land on the Moon? Post Reply New Topic

Did we really land on the Moon?