Moon Conspiracy?

[reddeadrevolver]

Do YOU think we went to the moon? Or was it an elaborate setup by the US government to win the Space Race. I want to hear your opinion, and facts that support your opinion.

[Freakapotimus]

I've never disbelieved it, never thought not to. But I did find a website with all kinds of evidence against it, but now I can't remember what the URL was.

[Pantomime-Horse]

At 7/13/01 10:40 PM, Tyrant_Nero wrote: Do YOU think we went to the moon? Or was it an elaborate setup by the US government to win the Space Race. I want to hear your opinion, and facts that support your opinion.

The people who claim it was faked are usually just grasping at straws when they try to explain their reasoning, Some have a powerful arguement but that doesn't make it a good one.

The special effects technique to creat footage as convincing as what is said to be the lunar landing didn't exist until around 1986-1988, It cost about $20Billion, The actually lunar landing is said to cost $50Billion, This is more that $20million true but not justifiabley more not to just go to the moon anyway, & in anycase this kind of effect came 17-19 years after the Lunar Landing.

Conspiricists cite the 1974 movie Capricorn 1 as proof that it can be convincingly faked & this movie cost less than 1billion let alone 50billion but Capricorn 1 really is a far from convincing movie.

To actually go to the moon would have cost $50billion as I already mentioned & it would Use around 40% pre-existing technology.

To fake the Lunar landing would require all new technology(possibley beyond the technical capabillity of 1969), & this technology cost $20billion in the late 80(but by this time the Technology was largely pre-existant) But to have Developed this kind of special effects technology from the ground up with no pre-existing technology would cost well over $60billion.
Making really going to the moon the cheeper & technically less taxing option.

There is a discussion on this here http://www.robotmayhem.com/forum/messages/22/3605.html?995093384

you may need to copy & paste.

Here's a very good page about it http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/sites.html

[Pantomime-Horse]

At 7/14/01 02:30 AM, by_the_Motorway wrote:

At 7/13/01 10:40 PM, Tyrant_Nero wrote: Do YOU think we went to the moon? Or was it an elaborate setup by the US government to win the Space Race. I want to hear your opinion, and facts that support your opinion.

The people who claim it was faked are usually just grasping at straws when they try to explain their reasoning, Some have a powerful arguement but that doesn't make it a good one.

The special effects technique to creat footage as convincing as what is said to be the lunar landing didn't exist until around 1986-1988, It cost about $20Billion, The actually lunar landing is said to cost $50Billion, This is more that $20million true but not justifiabley more not to just go to the moon anyway, & in anycase this kind of effect came 17-19 years after the Lunar Landing.

Conspiricists cite the 1974 movie Capricorn 1 as proof that it can be convincingly faked & this movie cost less than 1billion let alone 50billion but Capricorn 1 really is a far from convincing movie.

To actually go to the moon would have cost $50billion as I already mentioned & it would Use around 40% pre-existing technology.

To fake the Lunar landing would require all new technology(possibley beyond the technical capabillity of 1969), & this technology cost $20billion in the late 80(but by this time the Technology was largely pre-existant) But to have Developed this kind of special effects technology from the ground up with no pre-existing technology would cost well over $60billion.
Making really going to the moon the cheeper & technically less taxing option.


There is a discussion on this here http://www.robotmayhem.com/forum/messages/22/3605.html?995093384

you may need to copy & paste.

Here's a very good page about it http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/sites.html

If you look at the Moon footage there is footage of the Lander leaving the moon again, there was Debris falling away from the Lander, the Debris behaved as it should behave in only one sixth Earth gravity & no atmosphere, to have faked that you'de need Silicon Graphics type equipment, It is not technically feasable that each bit of debris was a prop on a wire.

Further proof that it was real is in the way Niel Armstrong moved, Some say he could have been on a cable but the thing is that Nobody actually knew how a person would move in one sixth gravity, Niel actually had to learn how to move when he got up there, If it were being faked it'd probably have been assumed by the hoexers that you could walk in the normal fashion & bounce with each step Instead of actually needing to Jump like Niel Did.

If people are saying that the moon landing was faked why are they not saying that Sojouner(the robot) on Mars was faked? & if this was also faked why was it not faked 20 years ago?

Here's the final bit which really puts a humungus dent in the Hoax theory, The Soviets were tracking Apollo 11 all the way, I'd say they'd know something was up if the signals weren't coming from the moon, The Soviets even observed that they lost contact as the craft passed around the dark side of the moon & came back into contact as it came around, The Soviets were the enemy at the time, If this was all a hoax do you really think the Soviets would go along with it?

[shorbe]

Who can really say. If there is a truth to the matter, it's hidden under so much paper, no one will ever know.

I'm glad there's no space programme in Australia though. It would be just one more way for the government to waste my money.

shorbe

[Blackmagic]

Nah I think we really did go to da moon.

**BLACKMAGIC**

[Pantomime-Horse]

At 7/15/01 08:21 AM, shorbe wrote: Who can really say. If there is a truth to the matter, it's hidden under so much paper, no one will ever know.

I'm glad there's no space programme in Australia though. It would be just one more way for the government to waste my money.

shorbe

Commercial launch sites are planned for 2 locations in Australia but they will be launching communication equipment mainly, Your money? from your profile I'd assumed you were on the dole, in which case you don't pay much tax.

[TFX]

I believe that we've been to the moon. As for what we've gotten out of it except pride and some rocks is beyond me.

[Low-Budget-Superhero]

At 7/15/01 01:54 PM, TFX wrote: I believe that we've been to the moon. As for what we've gotten out of it except pride and some rocks is beyond me.

We got more than pride... we got bragging rights!

[reddeadrevolver]

There's a kid at my school who thinks we didn't go to the moon, and wanted to fight me when I told him what I thought. It was so funny, he seriously wanted to fight me over something that stupid... Oh well. I think we went to the moon. I really don't have any reason not to believe. I'm sure the government has lied about numerous other things, but I don't think they'd risk the chance of doing something like that. If they were exploited, then that would mean total disgrace for the US.

[Pantomime-Horse]

At 7/15/01 10:59 PM, Tyrant_Nero wrote: There's a kid at my school who thinks we didn't go to the moon, and wanted to fight me when I told him what I thought. It was so funny, he seriously wanted to fight me over something that stupid... Oh well. I think we went to the moon. I really don't have any reason not to believe. I'm sure the government has lied about numerous other things, but I don't think they'd risk the chance of doing something like that. If they were exploited, then that would mean total disgrace for the US.

Print out this whole post & pin it up in every room he's likely to be in.

[anhnonymous]

If you were an American why would you not believe in the lunar landing? And what about that picture of the flag with the earth in the background, that looks pretty real to me. It's kind of hard for me to believe in the credibility of the website based on the fact that the author is a is from the middle east. There's alot of evidence that tells me the author is anti-American. For all I know he could be a member of hamass or jihad, paid alot of money by osama bin laden to start a conspiracy on U.S. soil. If there was such solid evidence why have I not seen anything about it on all the news channels. Why isn't there a special on the Discovery Channel? There has always been a resentment towards America after the landing. Why didn't the russians look into it the "hoax" since they were in the race. These days with our technology its real easy to tamper with original photos and add what ever we want to the pictures.

[reddeadrevolver]

At 7/16/01 01:37 PM, anhnonymous wrote: If you were an American why would you not believe in the lunar landing? And what about that picture of the flag with the earth in the background, that looks pretty real to me. If there was such solid evidence why have I not seen anything about it on all the news channels. Why isn't there a special on the Discovery Channel?

There have been several television specials, but nothing that I know of on the Discovery channel. Mostly about a bunch of theories that support both sides. Of course, I dont think american News would do a story on such a thing.

There has always been a resentment towards America after the landing. Why didn't the russians look into it the "hoax" since they were in the race. These days with our technology its real easy to tamper with original photos and add what ever we want to the pictures.

Sure we have the technology now, but I dont think we did back in 1969.

[pyroarchy]

My uncle babbles about that all the time, he thinks they shot it in the desert. And then he starts throwing half full alcohol bottles around.

[Shrapnel]

At 7/14/01 12:05 AM, Freakapotimus wrote: I've never disbelieved it, never thought not to. But I did find a website with all kinds of evidence against it, but now I can't remember what the URL was.

I found a similar site
here

Panto put some good links up so I'm only going to refute a few points here.

4. The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

A: I think somebody needs to study physics of the space suit rather than using their knowledge of pseudo-science.... If the pressure is greater wouldn't they looked all compressed rather than puffy???

7. The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

A: There are 3 sources of light one has to consider when you are on the moon: The sun, the Earth and the moon itself. Also, the astronaut fiddled with the flag before the picture was shot, hence it's "fluttering" until it drops from the gravity.

8. How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

A: Read the part about the sources of light I wrote earlier. The stars are too dim to see- even in space and especially with the large amount of light from the sun, earth and moon. You need long exposures to take pictures of stars.

9. The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired.

A: For those who don't know, the moon only has some dust covering it... beneath this is a solid surface... the blast of the engine would not affect it.

There were thousands of people involved in this project. I quoted this in an earlier post and I'll quote it again, "Three people can keep a secret if the other two are dead".

I hate to explain quotes but there is no way that such a large amount of people can keep this the moon landing hoax a secret if it was indeed a secret.

I'm not saying conspiracies don't exist but to think the moon landing was a consipracy is ludicrous.

[Shrapnel]

Bah!

[anhnonymous]

At 7/16/01 01:51 PM, Anti-You wrote:

At 7/16/01 01:37 PM, anhnonymous wrote:

Sure we have the technology now, but I dont think we did back in 1969.

No. You misquoted me. I said that it's easy to tamper with the ORIGINAL photos with today's technology. Which brings me to the picture of the U.S. flag with the earth in the background. That is original since they did not have the technology back then to "cut and paste".

[reddeadrevolver]

At 7/16/01 10:32 PM, anhnonymous wrote:

At 7/16/01 01:51 PM, Anti-You wrote:

At 7/16/01 01:37 PM, anhnonymous wrote:

Sure we have the technology now, but I dont think we did back in 1969.

No. You misquoted me. I said that it's easy to tamper with the ORIGINAL photos with today's technology. Which brings me to the picture of the U.S. flag with the earth in the background. That is original since they did not have the technology back then to "cut and paste".

Sorry. My mistake.