0

I know.. really.. wtf? I wonder if we will ever know for sure.. We were too competitive during the cold war

0

I know.. really.. wtf? I wonder if we will ever know for sure.. We were too competitive during the cold war

You'd prefer it the other way around, where we just sat back until the Soviets came for us?

0

huh? no, we handled the cold war very well.. we pretty much 'out spent' the soviets, proving that capitalism is far superior to the command economic system. I just don't think the Americans needed to fake the moon landing.. Who gives a damn who landed on the moon first??

0

it is impossible to say wheteher we have made contact, im sure if alien life came across earth they would pass without interfering. Would you interfer with the evolution of a immature and childish civilisation? Exspecially controlled by the leaders of today? The only conclusion is, alien species offering help to eradicate the indigenous species of a planet populated by extremely low level technological mammals.

It is hard to say whether or not the moon landing was faked, the blowing flag is too convincing tho.

If humans came across an (in their eyes) inferior (intellectually, technically) species they'd sure as hell interfere.
We've a lot of experience with it after all. The Brits in India, the Spanish and the Mayas, the Japanese and the Koreans, the Soviets and pretty much everyone they ever met...

The moon landings were definitely not faked.
It's been well established that faking them would be harder and more costly (at the time) than actually going there.
By now they might be able to fake it, but there'd still be thousands of people to blab about it who would have to be permanently silenced in some way that doesn't attract attention. All but impossible in a relatively open society like the US (the Soviets could do it, in fact they did it with the hiding of their own failed moon program).

0

That is crazy!! Wow, how could they lie to the whole world about that though?

what do you think that secret CIA/Mossad/Halliburton/Bush mind control ray and all those chemtrail spraying aircraft are for?

0

I The moon landings were definitely not faked.
It's been well established that faking them would be harder and more costly (at the time) than actually going there.
By now they might be able to fake it, but there'd still be thousands of people to blab about it who would have to be permanently silenced in some way that doesn't attract attention. All but impossible in a relatively open society like the US (the Soviets could do it, in fact they did it with the hiding of their own failed moon program).

It was cheaper to go to the moon than to fake it? lol... I think not... It would be much easier and much cheaper to simply film the first 'moon landing' in a studio or something. And it wouldn't have been that hard to cover it up.. If you don't think that the U.S. government has ever bribed or 'hushed' people then you are a fool.

0

I agree 100% with joshSCH. It would of cost less then 1/100 of the price to stage it. Its no where near that expensive to simply hang some people off string in an astronaut suit in a studio and film it.
The US have done a lot of secret things that people are sworn to secrecy, and do not say anything.

0

In order to fake the landings, they'd need to build a huge airtight set and then remove all the air from it. Without it collapsing. Good luck doing that with 1960s technology. Or 2000s technology.

Also, they'd still need to build the moon lander and spacecraft and launch all those rockets anyway, and having developed all the technology and spent all the money, there's no reason they would suddenly go and build a giant set made out of magical materials that can withstand the weight of the atmosphere.

0

In order to fake the landings, they'd need to build a huge airtight set and then remove all the air from it. Without it collapsing. Good luck doing that with 1960s technology. Or 2000s technology.

Also, they'd still need to build the moon lander and spacecraft and launch all those rockets anyway, and having developed all the technology and spent all the money, there's no reason they would suddenly go and build a giant set made out of magical materials that can withstand the weight of the atmosphere.

huh? airtight set? lol.. did you even look at the video? All they would need is a studio and some cheap imitation spacecrafts.. you obviously haven't seen many scifi movies.. They could have very easily faked it. I'm not saying that they did or didn't. But It is very probable that the first lunar landing was a fraud.. We have probably landed on the money by now anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

0

Give me a couple of tools and you can make that spaceship outa foam and dangle it from the ceiling with some weight inside it. Or itll cost hardly anything to just get a metal frame of the ship manufactured (for the US government anyway).

No air tight stuff needed either, just cables on pullies hanging from the ceiling.

After watching that vid, amazing.

0

huh? airtight set? lol.. did you even look at the video? All they would need is a studio and some cheap imitation spacecrafts.. you obviously haven't seen many scifi movies.. They could have very easily faked it. I'm not saying that they did or didn't. But It is very probable that the first lunar landing was a fraud.. We have probably landed on the money by now anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

Terra has an atmosphere. It is composed mostly of Nitrogen, with a large secondary body of oxygen and other trace materials.

Luna does not have an atmosphere. On the lunar surface, any object not encased within some kind of protective barrier is exposed to vacuum.

It is possible, in limited amounts, to generate a vacuum chamber (totally devoid of any form of atmosphere) on earth. After doing so, any objects present within the chamber will exhibit certain characteristics associated with the nature of vacuum. The most commonly-used example is the feather/ball falling scenario; in a vacuum, the two will fall at the same rate, as there is no air resistance to slow the feather down.

Objects within the original lunar footage display characteristics demonstrated by objects in a vacuum, not objects in an atmosphere. The motion of dust and dirt, for example, is not enhanced by air currents as it would be on earth.

In order to have faked those scenes, even leaving aside all problems but this one, NASA would have had to build a massive studio (large enough for the presumed 'actornauts' to walk around in for some distance), and find a way to make this entire location not only airtight (presumably sealing the actornauts inside beforehand), but to remove the atmosphere from within the studio as well.

Make sense?

0

It's very obvious that those 'wires' are the same photographic effects that you get from filming the sun -- why do you think you only see them when the helmet catches a glint of light?

0

It's very obvious that those 'wires' are the same photographic effects that you get from filming the sun -- why do you think you only see them when the helmet catches a glint of light?

Maybe because the wires attached are reflecting the light?? I mean, that's pretty much common sense.

0

There were several motives that suggested for the U.S. government to fake the moon landing. I know of two that are pretty popular motives...

1. Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned missions canceled, around the same time that the US ceased its involvement in the Vietnam War.
2. The U.S. government considered it vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the landing, thereby ensuring success.

And one question I've always wanted to know, How could the flag flutter when there's no wind on the moon?

0

indeed i mentioned that earlier as nevada = home of area 51. I mean nowadays they still have trouble getting into orbit without blowing up so the idea of getting to the moon like 40 years ago seems impossible.

0

And one question I've always wanted to know, How could the flag flutter when there's no wind on the moon?

The. Flag. Didn't. Flutter.

1. When the astronauts are actually setting the flag, it appears to be waving. The effect is caused by common physics - The flag is attached to a horizontal bar coming off of the vertical flagpole. The entire top of the flag is connected to this bar. Thus, when moving the pole, the top of the flag will begin to move as the bar moves. The bottom of the flag will not immediately move (inertia) but will eventually begin to do so, causing the motion to run across the flag.

2. The photos of the standing flag, astronauts not touching it, appears to be wavering in a breeze. There is a simple reason for this: On the Apollo 11 flight, the boom arm (horizontal bar) wasn't working properly, and they couldn't get it extended the full distance. Therefore, like a curtain that's been partially opened, the material of the flag is sort of folded in on itself. The astronauts liked the effect that the Apollo 11 flag shots had, so they intentionally duplicated it in later flights. If the arm had been working properly on the Apollo 11 flight, this particular 'hoax proof' would have never existed.

0

Okay? Then prove this to be false...

The major point which has helped convince me that the moon landing was faked was the fact that when the control room asked a question to the astronauts, the replies were instant with no delays. This seems strange as even with technology in the 1990's there is a delay from satellite links from the UK to the US. There is about a 0.7 second delay from London to California so how is it possible for instant replies from the Moon ?
There is also evidence that when people go into space that their voice goes tense although the astronauts voices have been analyzed and found to be normal, and 7/10 people said it sounded like someone reading from a script.

When Houston is talking to the module you should not be able to hear the responses at least when the module is landing and the infamous "eagle has landed" quote, this is due to the noise that should have been created by the rocket motor which generates several hundred thousand pounds of thrust 20 ft below the astronauts. The noise would have completely drowned
the vocals out.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.