SpaceSimCentral

I know there has been plenty of claims in the past about the photos and video that was displayed during the mission. And I believe currently we don't have the technology to zoom in on the moon to take some pictures of the landing site, but there was things left behind by the Apollo crew. Couldn't we have a satellite do a fly by the landing zone and snap some pictures?Here is a website I was doing some reading on and it covers why the moon landing was legit and answers all suspicious questions about the landing. Very interesting read here: http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm

Honestly .... ( think what you want of my opinion ) ...... I truly believe we did land on the moon and I don't care if some ppl think otherwise. And no conspiracy theory movie can proove me wrong, they can only suggest but they can't proove and that's a fact.

Did we, no idea, I were not there :-)But I would like to believe that we did. Else, whats left if every second thing is a big conspiracy

I think NASA did indeed land on the moon, have a look at this videohttp://www.videosift.com/video/Laser-Pointer-Mythbusters-Bust-Moon-Landing-Conspiracies

I am hoping that this entire topic is a hoax. :)Going to the Moon isn't even difficult, assuming that you believe that we really have satellites and space shuttles that can orbit the Earth. If you buy that one, then going to the Moon just means packing a big lunch box with enough fuel and air scrubbers to get to the Moon and back. At the speed of an orbiting satellite, a straight trip to the Moon would take about 15 hours (of course, real travel time is longer because current space ship engines are not powerful enough to simply take us wherever we want; whenever we want).[hsimg]http://www.freemars.org/jeff/speed/speed9.png[/hsimg]The hard part is getting a vehicle into orbit. From there, a trip to the Moon and back does not take much longer than a drive to a nearby state. And the arguments are just silly...
Darkone wrote:
Here is a website I was doing some reading on and it covers why the moon landing was legit and answers all suspicious questions about the landing. Very interesting read here: http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm
No stars in the black sky? Even the question is a joke! The color of the sky has nothing to do with visibility of stars. Earth's sky is blue because of our atmosphere. We see stars at night ("black" sky) because of the lack of direct sunlight, not because of a lack of atmosphere! A picture of the Moon's dark side might show stars in the background, but you wouldn't get much of a picture of the Moon without a flash... the light from which could drown out the light from the stars. Jeepers, who thinks of either the questions OR the answers to these questions?!
Geraldine wrote:
I think NASA did indeed land on the moon, have a look at this video http://www.videosift.com/video/Laser-Po ... nspiracies
That's a better try, Geraldine, but even the laser-reflector "experiment" only proves that there is a reflective object on the Moon. It does not prove what the object is or where it came from. It could be an old beer can that the Man in the Moon accidentally forgot to pick up after having one too many. Or maybe it was a reflector left by a Martian expedition? Or maybe even just a shiny spot -- like a quartz deposit or something.MythBusters didn't bust a thing. In fact, they work for a television network that may, in fact, be part of the conspiracy. Could their attempt at weak science be part of an ongoing cover-up?
Darkone wrote:
Couldn't we have a satellite do a fly by the landing zone and snap some pictures?
Well, a standard Earth-orbiting satellite is 200-20,000 miles from Earth, while the Moon is 240,000 miles. So most satellites would not be much help. However, if you mean a lunar satellite, such as the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), then the pictures are already posted at [url]http://www.NASA.gov/LRO[/url] But remember that those pictures come from the same people who claimed to have landed on the Moon, so are you really going to believe them? ;)Here is an example of a "photograph" of the Moon, supposedly taken from the LRO:Take a close look at that supposed "photograph" of the Moon and the Lunar Lander Module. How "real" does that look to you? Oh, sure, it is a much more clever hoax than the pictures from 1970, but remember that the original Apollo missions were pre-Photoshop. For comparison, here is a supposed "photo" from an Apollo mission:The arrows indicate the directions in which shadows are falling; showing evidence of inconsistent illumination. Yet there is something even more obviously wrong with this picture...If the length of the lower support column of the lunar lander was 4 feet tall, this would indicate that the astronaut was over 8 feet tall, which none of the astronauts were.You have probably seen these photos before but, in case there is any remaining question about whether we actually landed on the Moon, more of the supposed "photos" from the Apollo missions can be found here: Suspicious photos from an Apollo mission.

That picture of the Clangers took me back Bullwinkle. Loved that show as a kid. As for the topic, I really don't think this controversy will ever go away until we go back there in a joint international effort. One thing is for sure, if they had been anything funny going on, the Russians would have noticed it and blown the lid off it. They were watching Apollo's progress very carefully.

Geraldine wrote:
I really don't think this controversy will ever go away
Everything I said about it was firmly tongue in cheek... is there anybody who really takes this topic seriously? I thought that Darkone was just stirring the pot -- trying to get people to talk about something fun. The "controversy" itself is a hoax, don't you think?Of course we went to the Moon. As I said, it is not even a difficult thing to do.(and, by "we", I mean Earthlings. You can count yourself in the global "we", even if you live in a different "colony", Geraldine! )Going anywhere else may be a big trip, but the Moon is not far away, by astronomical standards (one quarter of a percent of an A.U.). Heck, I've driven that many miles -- perhaps four times over.

I like stirring pots and see what good stuff gets created. I believe that we did in fact land on the moon. And I am more angry about our space programs all around the world. With our technology we could land the shuttle on the moon with little effort and create a station there. Why does it need to be in orbit?How come no other country including the USA has made another trip...? That question right there is the one that eats at me. In over 40 years not another attempt has happened, seems odd.Is the moon a totally worthless piece of rock? Can we not build there because of something in space us civilians don't know about? We have the technology, we have the iphone which probably has more computing power than the whole Apollo 11 capsule. Why are we limiting ourselves....? There must be something we don't know? We as a populous waste billions upon billions of dollars on worthless programs, why can't we spend billions on something that would unite people and spur imagination in our children and want them to go into science and technology fields.I remember when I was a kid that is all I thought about (besides the cowboy and indian things). Now outer space probably doesn't enter half of our childrens minds. Hey cover my family expenses and I will go in space for free, I would gladly take the risk to do something so few have.

Darkone wrote:
Hey cover my ... expenses and I will go in space for free
There, in a nutshell, is the answer to the rest of your questions, Darkone! Unlike early Russian cosmonauts (who died as heroes when their ships failed), the US press is a bunch of whiners who think it is a tragedy every time a launch vehicle bursts into flames. Considering the explosive potential of a Saturn V (said to be equivalent to a small nuclear device), it is surprising that we do not have more failures. Surprising and... phenomenally expensive!
Darkone wrote:
Is the moon a totally worthless piece of rock?
Worse... the Moon is a worthless piece of rock that costs hundreds of millions of dollars to reach.
Darkone wrote:
How come [nobody] has made another trip...?
The question that Congress asks NASA is, "Why should we bother going back to the Moon when we can find worthless pieces of rock on Earth? We can save the money and put it into schools or expensive campaign funds or invading Canada or something else that is more productive."
Darkone wrote:
we could land the shuttle on the moon
Probably. The problem is that the current space shuttle has no engine (only maneuvering thrusters). Maybe it could land on the Moon, but getting back home would be more of an issue.
Darkone wrote:
we could ... create a station there [on the Moon]. Why does it need to be in orbit?
Great point... and one that is not lost on NASA.Before the truth came out about just how bad our economy is, NASA was planning to put a McDonald's on the Moon during this decade. Well, they did not actually name the commissary vendor, but they did say that they planned to put a permanent station there, which is pretty much what you suggest.Also, don't forget that an orbiting station is actually BETTER than a Moon base for some functions:[*:228ob5tl]Crystals grow almost perfectly in weightless environments... something that cannot be accomplished on Earth. It would not surprise me if Intel will someday build an orbiting wafer fab line.[*:228ob5tl]The hard part about space ships (right now) is getting into orbit. Once there, assembling ships that can travel to other planets is relatively easier. So expect the current space station to evolve into Spaceport One. Cruise ships that circle the Moon will probably launch from there rather than from Earth. Eventual trips to other planets will require a similar orbiting launch point.
Darkone wrote:
I remember when I was a kid [space was] all I thought about (besides the cowboy and indian things).
Cowboy, Astronaut, Fireman... every young lad's dreams. :)I wanna be like Buckaroo Banzai when I grow up. In addition to the above, he is a secret agent, rock star, and neurosurgeon, too.No no no! Don't tug on that! You never know what it might be connected to!-- Buckaroo Banzai to Jeff Goldblum (during brain surgery)

Heh im not even gonna read the post but put my 3 cents in. It's not hard to tell we've been to the moon. Get a telescopre or a high-powered pair of binoculars.. and just look at it. You can see the american flag they planted there. Hard to fake that.

Mogymog wrote:
It's not hard to tell we've been to the moon. Get a telescopre or a high-powered pair of binoculars.. and just look at it. You can see the american flag they planted there. Hard to fake that.
It's impossible to see it with binoculars or a telescope. In fact even the Hubble cannot see the flag on the surface of the moon.The closest I think we have see is from this here: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.htmlAnd even with a satellite taking pics from orbit we can't see the flag and in the pics its really hard to say that what they are looking at is in fact what they are describing.... Still no absolute fact proving/disproving it I love making people wonder...

either way we went there. All it takes is watching an episode of Mythbusters to find that out.