PDA

View Full Version : The Moon poll - did we do it?



Tone2TheBone
August 15th, 2006, 03:45 PM
Question of the day for my friends. Did "we" land on the moon? For real? Was/is it possible? Really? Tell me what you think.....

Robert
August 15th, 2006, 04:00 PM
Well, Wallace and Gromit went there, so we might have done it too. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104361/)

Tone2TheBone
August 15th, 2006, 04:07 PM
Well, Wallace and Gromit went there, so we might have done it too. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104361/)

LMAO! First time I heard of Wallace and Gromit was at a Burger King in Colorado when my 14 year old was only 11. *sighs*

ted s
August 15th, 2006, 04:40 PM
If we did, why only once ?

Tone2TheBone
August 15th, 2006, 04:46 PM
If we did, why only once ?


Because it's too expensive to fake more than once? :)

t_ross33
August 15th, 2006, 06:58 PM
If we did, why only once ?

Apollo 11 Landing - Mare Tranquillitatis (0°41'15"N, 23°26'E) July 20, 1969
Apollo 12 Landing - Oceanus Procellarum (3°11'51"S, 23°23'8"W) Nov. 19, 1969
Apollo 13 Mission - You saw the movie I'm sure ;)
Apollo 14 Landing - Fra Mauro (3°40'24"S, 17°27'55"W) Feb. 5, 1971
Apollo 15 Landing - Hadley-Apennines (26°6'3"N, 03°39'10"E) July 30, 1971
Apollo 16 Landing - Descartes (8°59'29"S, 15°30'52"E) April 21, 1972
Apollo 17 Landing - Taurus-Littrow (20°9'55"N, 30°45'57"E) Dec. 11, 1972

After that NASA dumped big bucks into a craft that could be used more than once (i.e. the Shuttle). Never got it to the moon and back though, and I've heard that they may be reviving a rocket program in prep for a Mars mission.

But who can believe anything the government says :D

Mark
August 15th, 2006, 07:28 PM
Yes I believe we did, for one I know some of the people involved in the Apollo program and have no doubt. Second the main proponent (not sure if he started it all but he was trod out as an "authority" on one documentary) of this nonsense that we didnt do it, was some toothless whack job in a trailer somewhere. . Plus thinking about it logically a hoax of this magnitude would be impossible to cover up for all these years. Just my nickles worth. Oh yea I heard Paul is dead, after all he is barefoot crossing Abbey road...........LOL

EDIT to remove political stuff, sorry Robert sometimes the fingers get ahead of the gray matter.:)

Robert
August 15th, 2006, 08:07 PM
Just remember guys, no politics.

ted s
August 15th, 2006, 08:08 PM
Apollo 11 Landing - Mare Tranquillitatis (0°41'15"N, 23°26'E) July 20, 1969
Apollo 12 Landing - Oceanus Procellarum (3°11'51"S, 23°23'8"W) Nov. 19, 1969
Apollo 13 Mission - You saw the movie I'm sure ;)
Apollo 14 Landing - Fra Mauro (3°40'24"S, 17°27'55"W) Feb. 5, 1971
Apollo 15 Landing - Hadley-Apennines (26°6'3"N, 03°39'10"E) July 30, 1971
Apollo 16 Landing - Descartes (8°59'29"S, 15°30'52"E) April 21, 1972
Apollo 17 Landing - Taurus-Littrow (20°9'55"N, 30°45'57"E) Dec. 11, 1972
:D

oops, I hate it when I'm a knob.:confused:

marnold
August 15th, 2006, 08:31 PM
There are talks of returning to the Moon now to use it to test equipment for a trip to Mars. It sounds like they are thinking of using a vehicle not that dissimilar to the old Apollo spacecraft.

Spudman
August 15th, 2006, 08:44 PM
You know...I'm there often and I never see anyone else. :confused:

Mark
August 15th, 2006, 11:17 PM
You know...I'm there often and I never see anyone else. :confused:

Yep just waitin for the Grand Opening of the new Moonbase Guitar Center. Just think how light a full stack of marshalls would be up there. :DR

SuperSwede
August 16th, 2006, 03:22 AM
You know...I'm there often and I never see anyone else. :confused:

Erhmmm.. your supposed to be on the light side of the moon, not the dark side spuds.

Tone2TheBone
August 16th, 2006, 08:48 AM
There are talks of returning to the Moon now to use it to test equipment for a trip to Mars. It sounds like they are thinking of using a vehicle not that dissimilar to the old Apollo spacecraft.

I have a hard time believing that we traveled from here to the moon using 1960s technology and material and design...flying through freezing space in thin walled ships....landing correctly and safely and then launching off the surface, docking and then returning home.

Ok I got a question maybe someone can answer it for me. Who was manning the camera that filmed the Lunar Module taking off from the moon back up to dock with the Command Module? The film shows the LM taking off from the surface of the moon rather quickly and the camera pans up to follow it's accent. Who was filming it? Someone? No because they left to go back to the CM. A computer? If a computer...how was that film returned back to us when we had already left? This is the least important argument I know but I've always wondered about this. LOL

And why is the moon so grey? Why isn't it different colors of grey or tan or green or yellow? Because the moon material is composed of the same thing everywhere?

I would love to see us try and go back thats for dang sure. I'm gonna watch it again and pay closer attention. ;)

jpfeifer
August 16th, 2006, 03:05 PM
I'm sure that we did.

I used to work for a company that made sattelites. There was so much thought that went into the design of these for almost every aspect, from how to keep the temperature evenly distibuted when subjected to the extremes of space environment, to shielding it from space-borne particles that could disrupt the circuitry. There is a ton of technology that goes into making something that can operate in space reliably. A lot these things were learned over the years of the space program.

If this whole mission to the moon was some conspiracy to fool the public then there wouldn't be any technology to show for all the effort that went into the development of the various equipment used to make these missions.

-- Jim

tiefnig
August 16th, 2006, 03:17 PM
I don't think we did, once I stand up there I will believe it :D
The only real mystery I can think of is the toast thing.

Katastrophe
August 16th, 2006, 03:30 PM
If the moonshot was fake, then 'rasslin's real.

I dunno, I'm just sayin' is all.;) :D

Tone2TheBone
August 16th, 2006, 03:31 PM
If the moonshot was fake, then 'rasslin's real.

I dunno, I'm just sayin' is all.;) :D


I heard that somewhere Kat! heh

Iago
August 17th, 2006, 08:54 AM
I do believe in the Sasquatch though..

Tone2TheBone
August 17th, 2006, 09:27 AM
I do believe in the Sasquatch though..

Uhuh....and Yetis. :)

marnold
August 17th, 2006, 10:54 AM
I believe I'll have another beer.

Tone2TheBone
August 17th, 2006, 12:58 PM
Wow...looks like it's tied for total yes or no. Let's see some more votes guys!

Spudman
August 29th, 2007, 10:34 PM
Here is a pretty good hoax buster
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

or this one...the smoking gun?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxdPP7DdieI

LagrangeCalvert
August 29th, 2007, 11:16 PM
Im a science buff, avid astronomer and was a mechanical engineer major and physics student in school....I never finished cause my mother came down with terminal cancer.....arg it sucks I couldn't finish school...I digress. So check this stuff out.

MIRRORS.....if we didn't do it how could we reflect lasers off of mirrors on the moon if we didn't put them there?....we measure how much the moon drifts away from the earth each year with these mirrors.

Heres some other stuff.

CONSPIRACY
Where are all the stars in the photos?
When you see pictures of the astronauts on the moon, the sky is dark and yet you can't see any stars. Why?

ANSWER
The astronauts were out and about on the moon during the day. The sun was above the horizon and was shining down on the moon's surface, the lunar module and the astronaut's white spacesuits. In order to take photos of these relatively bright objects a fast shutter speed was used. This will capture the brightly lit objects (astronauts, Lunar module, moon) but not dim objects (stars). When the astronauts looked overhead they would have seen plenty of stars but with the fast shutter speed on the camera none were caught on film.



CONSPIRACY
The shadows on some photos do not run parallel!! Non-parallel shadows indicate that more than one light source was present (studio lighting) whereas if the photos had really been taken on the moon the only light source would have been the sun.

ANSWER
This a perspective effect that is partly due to the fact that the sun is low in the sky and partly due to the undulating nature of the moon's surface. If there had been two light sources then objects would have cast two sets of shadows but you can clearly see from all the photos that each object casts just the one.



CONSPIRACY
Why does the American flag appear to be blowing in a breeze?
In the vacuum of space this should not be possible.

ANSWER
The flag had a pole inserted across the top edge so that it would be unfurled for the photos and not hanging limply on the flagpole. The Apollo 11 astronauts were not able to extend the horizontal pole fully and it left a crease in the flag. This gave it the appearance of the flag fluttering. The later Apollo astronauts liked the way this looked and decided to also leave the horizontal arm partially extended.



CONSPIRACY
Why weren't the astronauts killed by the enormous dose of radiation they received during the mission?

ANSWER
Much of this argument centres on the Van Allen belts. These magnetic fields around the earth trap particles from the solar winds and the theory is that passing through these regions would have given the astronauts deadly amounts of radiation poisoning. This is true if they stayed in the belts for a long period of time but on the Apollo missions they passed through the belts in about an hour. Also the metal spacecraft protected the astronauts from most of the radiation.



CONSPIRACY
The cameras were mounted on the astronauts chests and would have been very difficult to line up. How come the photos are so good?

ANSWER
The astronauts were given many hours of training purely on taking good shots of the moon. NASA had spent a fortune getting there, they weren't about to leave things to chance. They used specialist cameras from the top manufacturers and extensively tested them. The films were protected from the extreme temperatures of the moon in special canisters and when they arrived back on earth each of the hundreds of frames were individually developed by specialists in their own lab. Any dud photos that were taken would not have been published.



CONSPIRACY
Why is there no blast crater?
When the lunar module landed it should have made a large crater.

ANSWER
By the time the LM was near the landing site it was descending quite slowly and the guidance rockets would have been powered down to less than 3000 pounds of pressure. Unlike on earth where most of the thrust from the rockets would have pushed air downwards and created vertical streams of pressure to disturb the dust, in the space vacuum this pressure disperses in all directions much more evenly and this creates less disturbance of the moon's surface hence no big crater.


These are some of the main arguments that the conspiracy theorists put forward and as you can see with the appliance of science and a bit of common sense they quickly fall apart. Now lets turn the spotlight around 180 degrees and see how the conspiracy holds up when it is examined.
Here are a few of the questions I would like answered by the pro-hoaxers:

RUSSIAN WHISTLEBLOWERS
The moon landings were the culmination of a fraught space race between the Americans and the Russians. Both nations threw the kitchen sink at trying to get a man on the moon first. Now if the Americans were hoaxing the whole thing the Russians would have quickly latched on to the fact that none of the audio or video transmissions were actually coming from the moon. Why didn't they step forward and declare the whole thing an American sham and gloat about it for the next two decades? It is simply not feasible that NASA could have duped the Russians. On the other hand maybe the Kremlin decided it was such a great wheeze they would play along with it.


THE SCOOBY DOO FACTOR
As we all know when somebody tries to pull a scam like this it normally ends up with the bad guys saying "and if it hadn't been for those pesky kids we would've got away with it."
There would have been hundreds if not thousands of people in on this conspiracy and yet nobody said a word. Surely somebody would have let the cat out of the bag. The astronauts, the NASA management, the NASA technicians, the film crews, the people who created the moon stage, directed the film, dealt with the outtakes, the scientific advisors who would have needed to be on hand to oversee every aspect of every bit of film , video or voice transmission to make it as authentic as possible. Surely some of these people (if not most of them) would have had a guilty conscience and picked up the phone and rung the Washington Post or NBC...surely.


IT'S OK GUYS I'VE HAD AN IDEA
Another question I would like answered by the pro-hoaxers is this.
At what point did the hoax begin?
From Alan Shepard's 15 minute flight that made him the first American in space to the Apollo moon landing, many many missions were flown to try out new technology, gain experience and learn exactly how to get to the moon. The Mercury missions extended the amount of time and earth orbits the astronauts were spending in space. The Gemini missions developed the astronauts ability to manoeuvre and dock space craft and the Apollo missions took the astronauts, first into moon orbit and finally to its surface. Everything was done in relatively small steps. At what point did NASA and the US government decide that rather than land on the moon it would be far easier to con the population of the world with the biggest, most complicated, costly and risky hoax the world has ever known? Never that's when.


A good sight to check out if your a hoax believer.........to convert to the truth of science.

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

http://www.iangoddard.net/moon01.htm

Bloozcat
August 30th, 2007, 07:47 AM
I have a hard time believing that we traveled from here to the moon using 1960s technology and material and design...flying through freezing space in thin walled ships....landing correctly and safely and then launching off the surface, docking and then returning home.

The same could be said of the improbability that Columbus could have sailed three small, technologically limited ships accross uncharted ocean, with limited navigation equipment. There is ample evidence that Norsemen accomplished this same task in the North Atlantic with even less capable vessels and navigation equipment. And then there's the theorized migration by South Americans across the vast expanse of the Pacific ocean to Polynesia on little more than rafts. Theory that was later proven possible by Thor Heyerdahl's Kon Tiki experiment. Many human feats that when looked upon through the prisim of history, appear impossible. Has that ever stopped mankind from attempting the "impossible" in any generation.

Ok I got a question maybe someone can answer it for me. Who was manning the camera that filmed the Lunar Module taking off from the moon back up to dock with the Command Module? The film shows the LM taking off from the surface of the moon rather quickly and the camera pans up to follow it's accent. Who was filming it? Someone? No because they left to go back to the CM. A computer? If a computer...how was that film returned back to us when we had already left? This is the least important argument I know but I've always wondered about this. LOL

This one's easy. A camera was left on a tripod on the moons surface specifically to transmit visual images of the LEM's liftoff. This is a true fact. You can't question the technology that was used to accomplish this without questioning the techlology as a whole that transmits visual images. How could one sit in front of a TV in that era watching visual images that were transmitted over the airwaves and not accept that the same technology was employed on the moon? And for that matter, why not question any and all visual images from the space program from its inception?

And why is the moon so grey? Why isn't it different colors of grey or tan or green or yellow? Because the moon material is composed of the same thing everywhere?

Have you ever looked at the moon through a powerful telescope? What colors did you see? It's always the same bluish-gray and white colors with the occasional tanish-brown appearing in isolated areas. Except for those occasional tanish-brown colors, the same can be seen with the naked eye on a full moon on a clear night. There are many books that have been published with extremely vivid photographs of the Lunar surface that were taken by the various Apollo astronauts. The colors on the astronauts suits show up quite well, as did the colors on the American flag that was raised. Another thing to remember is that the famous scenes of the first astronauts to walk on the moon, were recorded by an Australian from a terribly bad signal that was then reproduced for airing. Hardly a good representation of the lunar surface.

I would love to see us try and go back thats for dang sure. I'm gonna watch it again and pay closer attention. ;)

You may get your wish here, if NASA is serious about their recent statements about returning to the moon. NASA has long held that any manned mission to Mars would likely have to be launched from the moon. A Mars space craft equipped with enough space, supplies, fuel and other necessities would be so large and heavy that it could not be launced from Earth with enough fuel to complete the journey after burning so much just to escape the Earths gravity. Launching from the moon would all but eliminate this problem (albeit with other obstacles that would have to be overcome).


Living here in Florida just a couple of hours away from the Cape, I've come to know several people who worked on the Apollo program. Unless every one of them was deluded, deranged, or have been subjected to some kind of mind altering drug that has wiped out only their memories of the Apollo mission and nothing else in their lives (talk about something that's hard to believe), then they're telling the truth about the authenticity of the moon landings.

I'm not trying to slam you here tone2thebone. You posed some serious questions for which there are logical and credible answers. I don't know if you've ever had the pleasure of visiting Cape Canaveral, but it's really an eye opener. Just standing beneath the Jupiter rocket that was used to propel the Apollo craft to the moon, is awe inspiring. The enormity of this rocket alone along with the entire project that surrounded it, is way to extensive and expensive just to have been created to perpetuate a hoax. Were they "flying by the seat of their pants" during the course of the mission? Were they pushing the technology to the limits of the day and beyond? You bet they were, and those who worked on the project will tell you so. But, they did it...

Tone2TheBone
August 30th, 2007, 08:54 AM
Awesome posts LG and Blooz! And Blooz...everytime I read your posts I hear Data's voice and it's quite appropriate in this thread.

I would absolutely love to go to the Cape someday and especially witness the shuttle going up. Don't get me wrong...I've been a space buff since I was a kid and pretended to be "Don" anytime we played "Lost in Space". My lunch boxes were space themed...my toys...all the cool space stuff in the '60s were in my house. In fact I wish I could GO to space. Even just 100 miles out would be cool. I've been talking to lots of people about this especially just before the time Endeavor came back to earth. The other day I rented the movie "Apollo 13". I am looking forward to what NASA has in store and I wish that we'd spend more funding on space programs than we do on other "things" that are less productive. These have been great replies you guys thanks. :DR

Bloozcat
August 30th, 2007, 11:15 AM
Awesome posts LG and Blooz! And Blooz...everytime I read your posts I hear Data's voice and it's quite appropriate in this thread.

I would absolutely love to go to the Cape someday and especially witness the shuttle going up. Don't get me wrong...I've been a space buff since I was a kid and pretended to be "Don" anytime we played "Lost in Space". My lunch boxes were space themed...my toys...all the cool space stuff in the '60s were in my house. In fact I wish I could GO to space. Even just 100 miles out would be cool. I've been talking to lots of people about this especially just before the time Endeavor came back to earth. The other day I rented the movie "Apollo 13". I am looking forward to what NASA has in store and I wish that we'd spend more funding on space programs than we do on other "things" that are less productive. These have been great replies you guys thanks. :DR

It's always good to be skeptical and question things. I know that I do it all the time. My wife often asks why I wasn't an engineer instead of a business major, not only because I'm very methodical in my approach to problems, but because I question everything until I'm convinced that a plan is sound. That might explain the Data voice you were hearing...:D

You really need to visit Cape Canaveral some day tone. It's a space junky's dream. In my wife's previous career, she would often get to go places that the average person can't access (like me). She actually sat in the space shuttle once...when it was atop the rocket on the gantry! We have the picture at home of her in the white "clean suit", sitting in the pilots seat (which of course, was inverted in the take off position). It would just kill me when she had opportunities like that, because she doesn't really care that much about technology...although even she was excited with this opportunity. (I lovingly call her my "technot";) ).

Tone2TheBone
August 30th, 2007, 11:56 AM
It's always good to be skeptical and question things. I know that I do it all the time. My wife often asks why I wasn't an engineer instead of a business major, not only because I'm very methodical in my approach to problems, but because I question everything until I'm convinced that a plan is sound. That might explain the Data voice you were hearing...:D

You really need to visit Cape Canaveral some day tone. It's a space junky's dream. In my wife's previous career, she would often get to go places that the average person can't access (like me). She actually sat in the space shuttle once...when it was atop the rocket on the gantry! We have the picture at home of her in the white "clean suit", sitting in the pilots seat (which of course, was inverted in the take off position). It would just kill me when she had opportunities like that, because she doesn't really care that much about technology...although even she was excited with this opportunity. (I lovingly call her my "technot";) ).

That's crazy! I would kill for an opportunity like that! :) Well we often travel to conferences and if there is ever one in FL then I'd have to find a way to shoot over there and see what I can see.

Mark
August 30th, 2007, 12:04 PM
I have no doubts whatsoever that we went there in addition to knowing folks who where involved in these Apollo missions and hearing it from their own lips. All the claptrap that we didint in easily disproved. Finally a lot of this nonsense is born out of revisionists coming up with weak attempts to denigrate the country where these flights originated. Suffice it to say in order to leave politics out of this, there is a certain country that is to be attacked and denigrated at every turn according the the pop culture mentality. Best thank god for the space program in general as most of the convienences you enjoy today were born out of the program. The list is to long to post here.:)

LagrangeCalvert
August 30th, 2007, 12:14 PM
Heres some fun information that scientists are coming up with now......

The moon was and is actually a part of the earth. When the earth was being formed a large body struck it.....the "spin off" from the colission made the moon and probably seeded the earth with the needed atoms for life - its either that or a comet full of intergalactic junk struck the earth....either way were foreign to this rock......I digress....AH the MOON.....ok.

When the moon was young - like the earth - it hung sooooo close to the earth that the tides of lava and molten rock (remember when the earth was being formed...it was a ball of liquid) would rise and fall up to 300ft.

If you want some good Science Fiction reading....and a good look on what future space flight will be like check out Ben Bova. He is a florida native, and a scientists and writer. Bova has been writing books for almost 50 years now and has shown why he is on top of his art. Bova is also an insight into the future. He was writing about tech. 20-30 years BEFORE it was coming out. You can call it luck, but when he does it over and over its scary.......Google his name and read up on him.....his series that is named after every planet in the solar system is awesome. Its about flight to each of the planets.

zeusse
August 30th, 2007, 05:38 PM
I always figured it could be a hoax to many people had moon rocks when I was a kid:D

Katastrophe
August 30th, 2007, 06:14 PM
I voted "yes, we did..." But there are people in my county that believe the moonshot was fake, and 'rasslin's real.:D