Eurotrans3111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 9 months 4 days ago) and read 3758 times:
Ever since I saw that programme on British Television its made me wonder about the first moon landing. If MAN really did go to the moon all those years ago why hasn't He been there since the historic landing ? With the technology we have now, particularly the Space Shuttles and all the satellites that are being sent far into the Solar System ( and beyond) and not forgetting our beloved Concorde who could fly at such a great height, it leaves us asking why hasn't there been another mission to the Moon in these modern times?
The question is has Man REALLY been to the moon at all?. Watching the claims that the landing of the sixties was a fabrication does make one wonder.
I'm not sure what to believe anymore.
AirKas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 3913 posts, RR: 56 Reply 2, posted (9 years 9 months 4 days ago) and read 3650 times:
I am subscribed to a magazine in which the moon landings had questioned some time ago. They included pictures in which you could see strange things and the reasons they gave were logical. It really made me wander if man actually had been on the moon.
WellHung From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 4 days ago) and read 3604 times:
Well, you know that Fox show was pretty convincing. They had the leading conspiracy theorists in the world. As a matter of fact, I saw one guy on a JFK documentary, too. Said Castro rigged a lawnmower to malfunction and shoot its blade into JFK's head. And he had all this great evidence to back it up - like a diagram he drew.
AviationMaster From Switzerland, joined Oct 1999, 2468 posts, RR: 36 Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3570 times:
"If MAN really did go to the moon all those years ago why hasn't He been there since the historic landing ?"
Give me a good reason why man should return to the moon?
This topic actually came up last week in my class. Some saying that the US never landed on the moon. But why would the US invest billions in a project that would have never materialized. One could colonize the moon and still some jacka$$ would say that no one has ever landed there. You can compare it with saying that America (meaning the continent) has yet to be discovered.
Q330 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1460 posts, RR: 23 Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3565 times:
Yes, of course we have been to the moon. Every time there's a big achievement there will be conspiracy theories.
Just because I took a trip to Europe 4 years ago, and haven't been back since, doesn't mean I didn't really go. What kind of reason is that to think I was pretending?
I don't know why we haven't been back to the moon yet. Maybe because it isn't as interesting as the other planets and their moons. I think the best research that can be done on the moon would be to build a base and see how humans cope with life away from earth.
777263ER, thanks for posting that link. badastronomy.com is an excellent site for refuting the conspiracy theories, and all of you doubters should read it.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2445 posts, RR: 9 Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3535 times:
As someone who watched ALL of the historic Apollo landings and expeditions televised on TV, with coverage stretching over days, I've no doubt whatsoever the U.S. put astronauts on the moon. You couldn't fake all that and have all the independent news organizations in on the conspiracy. Besides, astronomical observatories also tracked the trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft from earth orbit through translunar insertion all the way to the moon and back. With all those people looking, you couldn't say you were sending a ship to the moon but not do so without it being obvious. Maybe one can't absolutely prove there were astronauts on board but the ships did go there. And if all those shots of the astronauts on the linar surface were faked, ala the movie, "Capricorn One", then it was the most brilliant special effects job ever, far surpassing even Kubrick's "2001". I can see how people born after that time might be skeptical, particularly due to these folks that write books and produce programs about it being a hoax. But those history twisters have but one thing on their mind: $$$! If you lived through that time and followed it as fervently as I did, you would believe. And I assure you all, IT WAS REAL!!!
Go4EVA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (9 years 9 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3509 times:
Well, I work for NASA, and used to be stationed at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, where a lot of the personnel and equipment still around are located. If I were to ignore the mountains of other evidence that man went to the moon, my 6.5 years at JSC convinced me we could and did.
That's the most I could add to this discussion... not much really. $0.02.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (9 years 9 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3475 times:
I'm an Apollo nut, and have read all the books in print written by or about the astronauts and the people that led the effort on the ground, like Chris Kraft, Bob Gilruth, Von Braun, Tom Kelly, Max Faget and others. Apollo was developed and performed in full public view all the way, with reporters and camera around every corner, as opposed to the Soviet effort, where nobody knew there was a launch until it was already over. There were 400,000 people involved in Apollo, and not one person, in 30 years, has ever put out a substantially different story. There is no doubt, the moonlandings happened, and the books that are available, written by people who were there, would give you an amazing story of how they did it, step by step.
The reason why nobody went back there afterwards was a result of the reason why we went in the first place. Kennedy called for a crash program to get to the moon and back within 9 years. Apollo accomplished the mission, but with single-minded purpose. Get there, and come back. The only thing that came back to earth out of the entire nearly 400-foot Saturn V stack was the tiny command module. Extremely inefficient and wasteful. But it worked, and served the purpose for which it was designed within the timeframe alloted by Kennedy.
NASA actually did not want the job. NASA wanted a slower but steadier approach, first developing a space station, then a space shuttle to go back and forth between the earth and the station, and the station to be used as a base from which to send missions to the moon using far larger vehicles than what was possible from a single Saturn V launch from earth. Apollo was a shortchut to bypass the station and the shuttle.
After Apollo came Skylab, and the Space Shuttle was then designed to shuttle between the Earth and Skylab, at least to start with. But the shuttle fell behind schedule, and Skylab fell back to Earth in 1979, so the Shuttle had no place to shuttle back and forth between. Finally with the ISS, it has a job for which it was originally designed (and was proposed by NASA back in 1960-61).
The problem with ISS is that it is a mish-mash of parts from everywhere, and has a difficult time simply staying in one piece. If man wants to go to Mars, it would require a far larger earth-launched vehicle than even the Saturn V, or you could make numerous smaller lauches (using Shuttles) and assemple the pieces at the station (Earth Orbit Rendezvous). But this assumes that the station is more than some floundering space whale, but is a place where there are workshops, maintainance and repair facilities, research and testing labs, etc. I.E., we are talking about a space station far more advanced than ISS.
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3 Reply 24, posted (9 years 9 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3448 times:
Cfalk, a manned Mars launch could be done on a smaller rocket platform if it were done in several phases. I recall reading one plan where unmanned rockets would deploy various modules to Mars. A small, manned ship is launched with enough fuel for a round trip, only containing the astronauts and supplies needed to keep them alive in space for the 6-9 months.
25 Cfalk: Cfalk, a manned Mars launch could be done on a smaller rocket platform if it were done in several phases. That's right. I was refering to an all-up la
26 NWA Man: But why would the US invest billions in a project that would have never materialized. Hehe... ahh, you're not American... explains it. The U.S. invest
27 Cfalk: It will one day be settled. One day, 10, 20, 100, or 10,000 years from now, someone will return to the Sea of Tranquility, the Ocean of Storms, Hadley
28 MD11Engineer: Currently there is a new telescope under construction at the European ESA Southern Hemisphere observatory in Chile. Acc. to what I´ve head, once read
29 FDXmech: >>>........it leaves us asking why hasn't there been another mission to the Moon in these modern times?
30 BartiniMan: Ive read convincing articles (not by the stupid conspiracy theorists) on why NASA hasn't been back to the moon. Many people believe that the astronaut
31 Go4EVA: Ive read convincing articles (not by the stupid conspiracy theorists) on why NASA hasn't been back to the moon. Many people believe that the astronaut
32 Flyingbronco05: There is no wind on the moon, yet the flag is waving. What's up with that? I'm not saying we didn't land on the moon, but I'm also not saying that we
33 BartiniMan: Gee, Go4EVA, Im sure you're the bloke at NASA that knows everything and is told everything. I wouldnt be surprised now if you told me that you know wh
34 Cfalk: There is no wind on the moon, yet the flag is waving. What's up with that? There is a wire along the top edge that holds the flag out. Pretty low-tech
35 Jhooper: I do believe that we went to the moon, but what's the explanation for the alleged "fake" photos??? Again, I'm not saying that it's a conspiracy, but I
36 777236ER: Flyingbroncos05: You take great delight in telling people this, so I'm going to take great delight in telling you: 1. Check it out on Google first. 2.
37 Yyz717: There is no wind on the moon, yet the flag is waving. What's up with that? Maybe it's just stiff and crinkly. That would explain it.
38 Cptkrell: Of course we have been to the moon, as documented, however there is a conspiracy of omital of published information that Bartiniman suggests. From the
39 Ybacpa: To everyone that discounts anyone that questions whether we ever landed on the moon, all I ask is for a minute have an open mind and take a look at th
40 Go4EVA: Gee, Go4EVA, Im sure you're the bloke at NASA that knows everything and is told everything. I wouldnt be surprised now if you told me that you know wh
41 777236ER: Lol!! That video is hilarious. You might want to look at the link at the BOTTOM of the page that says "And click here to discover that the above is al
42 Arsenal@LHR: The conspiracy theorists make some strong points, but one source you cannot discount is the Soviets. The Soviets were watching carefully, and if they