Did we ever Land on the Moon.

Dazzler88

Just thought id start a bit of a Debate.Today is the 40th annisversary of Man Landing on the Moon.And like most historice events a lot of contversary sorronds whether it actually ever happened.Whats your thoughts 'Did man ever land on the moon?'

Bod1

Yes, with 400,000 people involved in the project, faking it would have leaked by now.

Overblood

Yes.

Here, NASA have finally taken photos of the landing site.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html

Now all you conspiracy theorists can shut up. Really. Just be quiet.

Dazzler88

Bod1 wrote: »

Yes, with 400,000 people involved in the project, faking it would have leaked by now.

but one still has to ask the question.if we could do it then why havent we been back after 40 years???

Riamfada

Because its expensive and there is nothing there.

Dublin_Gunner

Yes we did land there. There is still evidence on the moon, left by the few missions that landed - including laser reflecting arrays, which are used to calculate the moons distance form the earth, and are still in use.

To add to Grimes' reply - the only reason we [read, the yanks] ever went there, was to get one up on the Russians - who were winning 2-0, with Sputnik, and Mr. Gagarin. The 'States needed something to garner support and grab the imagination of the people, and NASA were the best way of doing it, regardless of the cost.

Riskymove

I suppose for me there are two differwent questions

1. Did we land on the moon? I believe we did yes

2. Did it happen as is generally considered historical fact? maybe not....I am somewhat open to the idea that the landing occurred before made public, in case it did not work out...as for it being all staged...I find that harder to believe..

King Mob

The more important question is: if they did fake it why didn't Russia ever say anything?

faceman

The mission to the moon was a cold war race for the US to beat the Russians. The Russians would have been first was it not for a technical glitch which set them back.

Even if someone chooses to ignore the overwhelming proof they were there, you have to consider that if the americans did fake it, it would have been all the more reason for the Russians to continue with their plan to debunk that the americans were ever there at all.

Dazzler88

i do beleive they landed on the moon but the theories do leave some unanswered questions in the whole thing.Check this out:www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

ascend

I definitly believe we landed on the moon. Every single conspiracy theory has been put against the landing on the moon has been disproven, from the American Flag waving about when implanted into the moon's surface to the "Mysterious" shadows cast on the surface. Including the photography used in the missions.

eightyfish

Dazzler88 wrote: »

i do beleive they landed on the moon but the theories do leave some unanswered questions in the whole thing.Check this out:www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

Before I clicked on this I expected it to be a crappy hoax site. It's good.

watty

Very informative.

Auvers

Dazzler88 wrote: »

'Did man ever land on the moon?'

yes six times

davidsatelle100

yes - but as riskymove said not the way it happened, something tells me the 'first man on the moon' was there a few minutes before the film started rolling

eightyfish

True 'cos it's on a stamp.

niallo76

It's better than standing on the cheesy
f@@ing thing. Know what I mean, tossing all these satellites
and shuttles out into the cosmos.
What do they think they're gonna find
up there that they can't find down hereThey think if they pi@@ high enough,
they're gonna come across the monkey
with the beard and the crap ideas?And it's, like,
"Oh! There you are, captain!
You know, I mean, the bastards
@ing the Earth up.
- They've gotta f@@k space and all.

mike leigh-'naked'

watty

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/apollohoax.html

Overheal

Mythbusters just had a new Episode today (coincidence?!!?!?!?!!?!111?!/) That effectively and completely Debunked the most popular Fake Landing Theories: The footprint, the moonwalking, and most famously, the Waving Flag.

Myths Busted. Sorry. We landed on the moon. I know you're disappointed :pac:

meglome

Overheal wrote: »

Mythbusters just had a new Episode today (coincidence?!!?!?!?!!?!111?!/) That effectively and completely Debunked the most popular Fake Landing Theories: The footprint, the moonwalking, and most famously, the Waving Flag.

Myths Busted. Sorry. We landed on the moon. I know you're disappointed :pac:

Well this being CT land you're being a little quick to imagine sense will prevail. The Mythbusters episode was shown some months back and I started a thread on it. All was well until people had time to post/trawl the CT sites to find new reasons for the moon landing to still be a hoax. I don't remember them all but one of the main ones was that they used NASA's equipment ergo it's all a big CT.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055419888

bonkey

meglome wrote: »

Well this being CT land you're being a little quick to imagine sense will prevail.

Maybe civility could, though

BaZmO*

Grimes wrote: »

Because its expensive and there is nothing there.

Actually, isn't there some type of mineral/rock that is not found on Earth and is the key component in a new form of Nuclear Fision/Fusion (whichever one that hasn't been done)

Was watching a documentary a while back and apparently if the Fision/Fusion thing is cracked there'll be the high possibility of another space race to harvest the bounty.

humanji

BaZmO* wrote: »

Actually, isn't there some type of mineral/rock that is not found on Earth and is the key component in a new form of Nuclear Fision/Fusion (whichever one that hasn't been done)

Was watching a documentary a while back and apparently if the Fision/Fusion thing is cracked there'll be the high possibility of another space race to harvest the bounty.

Well the cost of mining the mineral would be astronomical (not sure if that's a pun ) especially when there's the possibility that nothing could come from it. It just wouldn't be worth it.

BaZmO*

humanji wrote: »

Well the cost of mining the mineral would be astronomical (not sure if that's a pun ) especially when there's the possibility that nothing could come from it. It just wouldn't be worth it.

Apparently the power produced negates the astronomical costs of getting the raw materials

Riskymove

davidsatelle100 wrote: »

yes - but as riskymove said not the way it happened, something tells me the 'first man on the moon' was there a few minutes before the film started rolling

I mean can you imagine...live to all of the world.....a defining moment....."one small step for...OH NO...BOOOOOOMMMM"

bonkey

BaZmO* wrote: »

Actually, isn't there some type of mineral/rock that is not found on Earth and is the key component in a new form of Nuclear Fision/Fusion (whichever one that hasn't been done)

Was watching a documentary a while back and apparently if the Fision/Fusion thing is cracked there'll be the high possibility of another space race to harvest the bounty.

I think you're referring to He3, which is (or is believed to be...not sure which) more plentiful on the moon than here on earth...and would be pretty useful stuff in a fusion reactor.

As to whether or not it would be energy-positive...dunno.

BaZmO*

It was a while since I saw the documentary so I'm not so sure on the finer details.

Dirty Dave

BaZmO* wrote: »

Actually, isn't there some type of mineral/rock that is not found on Earth and is the key component in a new form of Nuclear Fision/Fusion (whichever one that hasn't been done)

Was watching a documentary a while back and apparently if the Fision/Fusion thing is cracked there'll be the high possibility of another space race to harvest the bounty.

Helium 3 - Saw a quote from some Chinese space agency guy that said you could provide enough power for everybody in the world with three space shuttle loads per year from the moon.

On topic though, yes we did land there. People I mean.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_3

meglome

bonkey wrote: »

Maybe civility could, though

Sorry

MoominPapa

I like the way Buzz Aldrin deals with the issue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

BAAM!
Apparently the guy getting chinned brought Buzz to court and the judge threw out the case saying he got what he deserved:)

eightyfish

JoCavendish wrote: »

Mate, the moon is not like a trip to the local holiday park.

Which is why it's the most impressive thing mankind has ever done.

Dublin_Gunner

JoCavendish wrote: »

Assuming for one moment that it was not a scam, what a stupid statement you just made.

What benefit has this had to humanity at large??? Oh you can wave you little flags and cheer, you even fund the experiments, however Fish, you'll never get near a space ship.

Exactly what are you talking about?? For an achievement, yes, it benefitted ALL mankind to show the advances we can make, when we put our minds to it.

Let alone the technology that has been derived from being developed from the moon landings, the science from finding out exactly what makes up the moon, and the resources that someday we WILL need.

What a stupid statement you just made.

400,00 people, billions of dollars, and scientific equipment usable from earth all say that it did happen. Now you tell me your reasons for believing it was a scam.

WillieCocker

No, we didn't.





























The Americans did though.

WillieCocker

JoCavendish wrote: »

Do you still believe in the tooth fairy?

Why, did she land on the moon too?

Dublin_Gunner

JoCavendish wrote: »

I love the use of this word "WE". We had nothing to do with it, just like we have no say in anything else these days. "WE" are not all in this togeather.

'WE' is used as a term for 'humans' & 'mankind'. I thought that was quite obvious.

You must live on planet good guy, where everyone is out to do you good. Everyone just wakes up in the morning and says"how can I improve the lot of Dublin Gunner today?"

I have no idea what this comment is about.

What technology has been developed from the moon landings, the need for slicker filming when you are pulling off a con job?

Well, I see for you ignorance is bliss. Here's a nice tidy list of things developed from the space program as a whole- which includes items derived from the moon program.

http://www.spacecoalition.com/products.cfm

And here's NASA's own page on the spin-off technology's developed from their entire space programs
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/


here's some more reading for you to do:
http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/it-business/it-organisation/in-depth/index.cfm?articleid=2387

I can get more information for you if you like - though I would assume a conspiracy theorist like yourself may indeed just blank fact and information shown to you, as they don't support your views.

BaZmO*

Jeez, why are you bothering lads? He's obviously trying to get a rise. And so far he's been successful.

Dublin_Gunner

BaZmO* wrote: »

Jeez, why are you bothering lads? He's obviously trying to get a rise. And so far he's been successful.

No harm in posting the info for anyone else reading the thread though, eh?

Some more links:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2009/0710/1224250386365.html

http://news.idg.no/cw/art.cfm?id=999B3FD8-1A64-67EA-E453938866E7DE00

WillieCocker

BaZmO* wrote: »

Jeez, why are you bothering lads? He's obviously trying to get a rise. And so far he's been successful.

Well if we don't entertain him , the mods will have to deal with his forum conspiracy issues in feedback.:rolleyes:

eightyfish

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

No harm in posting the info for anyone else reading the thread though, eh?

True. Also there's this proof.

Dublin_Gunner

eightyfish wrote: »

True. Also there's this proof.

Yep, I was alluding to those when I posted this

400,00 people, billions of dollars, and scientific equipment usable from earth all say that it did happen. Now you tell me your reasons for believing it was a scam.

They are used quite regularly.

watty

Article about preparation for manned visit. The Prequel
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/22/destination_moon/

Very interesting stuff.

http://www.slideshare.net/kcowing/presentation-by-dennis-wingo-on-the-lunar-orbiter-image-recovery-project-at-the-2009-apple-wwdc
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/ranger.html

Interesting article mentions the NEW LRO images
http://www.moonviews.com/

Despite this attempt to coax a little clarity out of the noise, the damage to the tape precluded an image of the quality we had hope for - and had achieved for other images. That disappointment aside, we feel that it is important to show our failures and disappointments as well as our crowning achievements. As you will see when you compare it to the best Lunar Orbiter images, the resolution is low. Yet if you compare it with the new LRO images you can clearly see that something appeared in the image and that the regolith was disturbed around that object (humans).

We will be combing through the Lunar Orbiter tapes this weekend with the hope that there is another (hopefully undamaged) version of this image.

We feel that it is equally important to reveal our failures and disappointments as it is to crow about our successes. We expect to have many of both.

My emphasis

I'd be suspicious of Apollo if this hadn't happened.

partyguinness

Guess people were watching that programme of Saturday morning debunking the conspiracy theories.

The best the "We didnt land on the moon" brigade came up with was chatting to some crazy cat loving old man living in a trailer park in the Nevada desert...:rolleyes:

IrishSideOfMoon

MoominPapa wrote: »

I like the way Buzz Aldrin deals with the issue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

BAAM!
Apparently the guy getting chinned brought Buzz to court and the judge threw out the case saying he got what he deserved:)

Believe that was the guy who done the documentary "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon" Link provided below.

I believe Buzz called the guy the following day and apologized for the attack.

Should be interesting that NASA admitted a few years back that they had apparently recorded over the original tapes of the moon landing recordings. Now we are going to have this re-mastered HD Version coming out in September.

All a bit strange to say the least

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6858681477520427064&ei=UEJsStXHLdCA-Aa66vj3AQ&q=a+funny+thing+happened+on+the+way+to+the+moon

---

Regards,

Shane
http://irishsideofthemoon.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/IrishSideOfMoon

eightyfish

partyguinness wrote: »

Guess people were watching that programme of Saturday morning debunking the conspiracy theories.

The best the "We didnt land on the moon" brigade came up with was chatting to some crazy cat loving old man living in a trailer park in the Nevada desert...:rolleyes:

What channel was this on?

stevejazzx

There's a reflector on the moon that has been validating the official story since the early days. From certain observatorys you can shine light at this reflector you can predict the waves you get back.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=reflector+on+the+moon&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7ADBF_en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=rKttSqf8HMOrjAfy0YmzCw&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4#

IrishSideOfMoon

stevejazzx wrote: »

There's a reflector on the moon that has been validating the official story since the early days. From certain observatorys you can shine light at this reflector you can predict the waves you get back.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=reflector+on+the+moon&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7ADBF_en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=rKttSqf8HMOrjAfy0YmzCw&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4#

Hey Steve,
Some maintain that the original 69 landing was faked, but that some of the latter ones happened which may explain the items left behind. I really don't know if they did or didn't go and there's a conspiracy about almost every major topic one can think of.

Some people also point out that the russians were way ahead of the US at the time and i think they do (did) hold almost every other record at the time for space, so for the US to achieve this before them didn't quiet fit.

---

Regards,

Shane
http://irishsideofthemoon.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/IrishSideOfMoon

King Mob

IrishSideOfMoon wrote: »

Hey Steve,
Some maintain that the original 69 landing was faked, but that some of the latter ones happened which may explain the items left behind. I really don't know if they did or didn't go and there's a conspiracy about almost every major topic one can think of.

And Apollo 11 was the first mission to deploy a retro-reflector. It's position is well know and consistant with the first moon landing.

IrishSideOfMoon wrote: »

Some people also point out that the russians were way ahead of the US at the time and i think they do (did) hold almost every other record at the time for space, so for the US to achieve this before them didn't quiet fit.

Not really.
The US had a much better R+D department and was better funded.
The Russians never had a working concept of a craft to get to the moon let alone launched any test beds for it.

And the Russians weren't that far ahead. The first Russian in space was only a month before the first American.
And the first Russian flight nearly ended in disaster and Gagarin had to eject before the landing where as the American one was entirely successful.

eightyfish

IrishSideOfMoon wrote: »

Some maintain that the original 69 landing was faked [...] Some people also point out that the russians were way ahead of the US

Some people are crazy.

watty

The Russian heavy lifter was unreliable, too many engines.

The USA solved problem of scaling an engine to larger size so Saturn lifter had about 1/5th as many engines for more thrust. That single technical advance is what got the US ahead.

IrishSideOfMoon

King Mob wrote: »

And Apollo 11 was the first mission to deploy a retro-reflector. It's position is well know and consistant with the first moon landing.

Wasn’t aware of that so thanx for the info.

Not really.
The US had a much better R+D department and was better funded.
The Russians never had a working concept of a craft to get to the moon let alone launched any test beds for it.

And the Russians weren't that far ahead. The first Russian in space was only a month before the first American.
And the first Russian flight nearly ended in disaster and Gagarin had to eject before the landing where as the American one was entirely successful.

Agree on most of the above and my statement of “way ahead” was over stating the point. But the Russians had first satellites, animal, person in orbit, Person in outer space, 2 manned flights & multi man flights, first probes to the moon, first craft on the moon, and at the time was leading the US in the space race (agreed not by much).

I also agree that the US later took over in the space race due to a far larger financial investment.

I’m not saying that I believe that the US never landed on the moon in 69 just pointing out some of the arguments people promote as to why they don’t believe the US landed on the moon, like some people believe that the Russians were leading the way at the time.

To me if they didn’t land you’d think the Russians would have had the ability and the desire to show the Hoax for what it would have been which clearly they didn’t do which says a lot to me

---

Regards,

Shane
http://irishsideofthemoon.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/IrishSideOfMoon

IrishSideOfMoon

eightyfish wrote: »

Some people are crazy.

Hey eightyfish,
LOL yip i agree that's why i said "there's a conspiracy about almost every major topic one can think of."

---

Regards,

Shane
http://irishsideofthemoon.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/IrishSideOfMoon