Did we really land on the Moon?

Post Reply New Topic

It would have looked ridiculous to people with brains....

Where are all the exposes of people who were "in on it!"

That's what I was "babbling on about" all along. Lintar and b9 seem to think unmanned probes equal manned deep space flights which get sent out by the US and Russia all the time.

Nobody except the USA has ever sent HUMANS out past the van allen belts onto deep space. The US did it a half dozen times one after the other half a century ago.

That's why I have some doubt that it ever really happpend in the first place.

That's like asking where are all the exposes of all the people involved in a top secret operation if it really was a top secret operation?

How many legitimate exposes has the media done on Area 51 personnel? George Knapp has been diging away at that for decades.

In my opinion, there would have been more speculation in all matter of media had there truly been a hoax.

Actually a small group of conspirators can, and often do, control the opinions of many others.

Look at the Manhattan Project where thousands of workers were scattered to almost a couple dozen sites in North America being told various misleading and vague stories about their jobs while not being told about their overall mission. Sprinkle in some patriotic expectations of "zipped lips," as well as immediate and lasting retribution for ever sharing the truth with others, and you got yourself an ironclad operation.

Governments and their militaries do this all the time. So do corporations who want to protect their interests by avoiding disclosure of the truth. So, it isn't surprising that NASA, whose employment roster has always been ladened with military and government staffers, might do it, too. Democrats accuse Republicans of doing this, too, and vice versa. FBI director J. Edgar Hoover intimidated enough people to hide a lot of his intelligence work, and the incidental transvestism for decades. Now, it is common knowledge and punch lines.

I harbor just two doubts about the moon missions: Why did Armstrong observe strict silence for decades, and why did he and his mission cohorts fake film images of Earth (especially when color film is heavy and expensive to waste when everything on the mission was weighed by the ounce)?

Last edited by AspieUtah on 03 Aug 2017, 8:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

The command module is out in space in high orbit, while footage is being sent from it and marines in spacesuits transmitting out in the desert, bouncing their broadcast off a satellite back to earth. How would the media be able to detect that? Especially back in 1969-70?

It would be obvious to many astronomers and countries with access to radar and high powered telescopes that it was just sitting there and never went to the moon. Russia especially would be monitoring it for any foul play. Like any hard sci-fi fan knows, there ain't no stealth in space.

They had that technology then.

The first worldwide satellite broadcast, I believe, was in 1967. It showed the Beatles doing "All You Need is Love" to the accompaniment of a small symphony orchestra.

There will always be questions from people inclined to skepticism, and they are understandable questions.

I just don't see the sense in the US attempting to perpetuate a hoax of this magnitude.

Are there any pictures of them going all the way out to the moon taken from telescopes? Did radar of the day have the range to pick up stuff in high orbit?

I am almost 100% certain that they had the means to track the astronauts all the way to the moon. There were "radio silences" at certain times, though.

I'm not sure of the capability of radar in the 1960s-1970s. I haven't studied that much.

There was an episode of "I Dream of Jeannie" where they put this guy on a fake "spaceship" because the guy had found out that "Jeannie" was a genie. A globe of the Earth, slowly becoming smaller, was presented as evidence that they were leaving the Earth. The only problem: The Atlantic Ocean was indicated by the words "Atlantic Ocean."

False analogy.

The Manhattan project was a secret only during the brief time it was underway ( only a few years during the war). And then it ceased to be a secret once it succeeded, and the war ended.

The Manhattan Project did not continue to be a secret for endless decades after the war in a way that would be analogous to how a hoaxed Apollo 11 landing would have to have been kept a secret (not only at moment it happened, but continuing to be a secret until now).

And even the Manhatten Project wasn't perfectly "ironclad". The American people didn't learn about it while it was underway, but Stalin DID learn about it when it was underway. So there was leakage even with the Manhatten Project.

And as big as the atom bomb project was it was still tiny compared to the Apollo Program. Apollo cost 13 billion a year at it height. The Vietnam War costed the taxpayer 30 billion a year at its height. So you're talking about a government program that took almost half as big a chunk out of the economy as the Vietnam War. that's huge.

Last edited by naturalplastic on 03 Aug 2017, 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-par ... n_landings
Entire list of third party verifications right there with sources. No doubt many more were observing and would have spoken up if they saw something out of place.

One should also read the Wikipedia article about the Moon Landing Hoax.

I'm not sure....but I believe Jules Verne used a slingshot-like device to send a rocket to the moon LOL

No. It was a great big muzzle loading cannon.

If the moon landing was a hoax, then why not Columbus' discovery of America? So who's to prove that I'm not really typing this from modern America? Who's to prove that I'm not typing this at all?!?!?!

Since a symptom of Trump Derangement Syndrome is believing in dumb conspiracy theories according to some, I would think I would be more susceptible to threads like this. Happily surprised to find I'm not susceptible--maybe I'm beating this terrible disease after all!