Moon landing

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1138935117048624484&q=moon-landing+nasa&hl=en

Did we really land there?

In 2008, Japan will be taking photos of the moon via a probe of some sort, and we'll know for sure based on whether the base of the lander and whether the vehicles are there or not.

How about the radiation belts that would kill people (the space station isn't far enough away to be in the belts), or the photos that had the crosshairs show up behind items, or multiple light sources in the pictures that the sun was supposedly the only light source, or the fact that when the live footage gets played at 2x speed, it looks like people running?

Until I saw this video, I was very skeptical of it being a hoax--I thought only a 5% chance of it. After I saw this video, I'm 80% sure it was a hoax.

2008 will be an interesting year.

One of the best rebuttals to that horrid show I've ever found:

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

We didn't walk on the moon, we lambada'd.

The moon landing was a fake and was staged in Wisconsin. Here's the proof! (or in Cheddar, for you Brits )

Interesting site. It dispels a lot of things. Instead of thinking 75% of a chance of being a hoax I think it's about a 25% chance of a hoax. Thanks for the info.

The other thing is, how many people would have been involved in staging something like that? And none of them spoke up? Ever? Not even a deathbed confession? A passing comment in the throes of Alzheimers? That just don't make sense.

100% proof we landed on the moon: There is a laser reflector that the astronauts set up to measure very accurately how far away the moon is from Earth. To this day you can still bounce a laser off of it and see the reflection.

Of course it could just be an extremely shinny rock that just happens to be angled just right.

We didn't walk on the moon. I was a small child at the time of the first moon landing. There's a good chance many of the posters in this thread weren't even born yet.

However, Neil Armstrong, Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, Charles "Pete" Conrad, Alan Bean, Alan Shepard, Edgar Mitchell, James Irwin, David Scott, Charles Duke, John Young, Harrison Schmitt, and Eugene Cernan did. Jim Lovell and Fred Haise almost did.

We'll know for sure in 2008 when japan sends out a probe. Until then I'm going to still have some skepticism.

How do you know the images that the Japanese publish really are of the moon? Couldn't they be faked? You know, a deal set up with the government of the US to "prove" that we landed on the moon?

What do you think those laser beams are being reflected by?

Reflected off the flying saucers from Zeta Reticuli. Der.

Look, the main thing is that I think it's possible, maybe not that probable, but possible, that we may not have actually had the technology necessary at that time to walk on the moon. When I can speed up footage and it looks like people running, even if that's really what it looks like when you speed up a video of people walking in low gravity, I can't give it absolute trust until we actually walk on the moon again and have new footage that isn't so damn grainy. Why haven't we done this again since 1972? Have we really found out everything we could about the moon from 1969-1972? Of course not.

I really want to believe that people really walked on the moon.

Nasa really needs to find those tapes--the news of them not being able to find them is the main thing that made me start questioning whether the hoax theories might have some credence--previously I only gave the hoax theories 5% credence, after they couldn't find the tapes I gave the theories 12% credence, and after I saw the documentary it went to 75% and then back down to 25% after I saw the explanations.

Yes, I can flip-flop pretty easily, but it's based on when I receive new pieces of information (and not like Kerry who flip-flops based off trying to look good to the constituents he's currently speaking with).

I think anyone appreciates that questioning things is a good thing, but the questions asked in this conspiracy theory are designed to throw off those with little scientific knowledge, it's deliberately misleading.

It will probably be more of a task to send manned missions to the moon now than it was in 1969. The many risks taken in order to beat the Russians would not be acceptable now.

No faaaiiir.... you're arguing with logic and science!


However, I think it was Buzz Aldrin who made the best response when he attended the Venice Film Festival in 2000 and a reporter (not Bart Sibrel) accused him of being a liar and demanded proof of him having been on the moon: The 70 years old ex-astronaut knocked the young man out with a single punch.

This poll needs multiple answers because we did walk on the moon and pie and cookies rock your world.

MM

This is the American Goverment you are talking about. There is no way possible for them to cover it up and for so long. Also they would need the help of the Soviet Union at that time and they would of been more than happy to expose the Americans as liars. They after all were sending probles to the moon at the same time.
No a coverup of something like this is just not possible, someone somewhere would of talked.

pppssssttt!!! hey when the hell are those two legged critters going to realize we went there first?

Running is a series of short jumps. In low gravity, you move in a series of short jumps when on a planetary surface. So THEY WERE RUNNING on the moon because walking was just right out.

Radiation "belts" aren't the issue you're addressing. You're referring to Solar Flares. And if a major flare event occurred while people were on the sun side of the moon, they would die horribly. Just because it didn't look dangerous doesn't mean it wasn't.

Crosshairs on old camera film show up behind items if you shine the light through the back of the negative instead of the front. It's just how it was developed.

As for the multiple light sources, easily explained by flashlights, the reflective materials on their helmets and equipment, and sunlight reflected off of the landscape.

Sigh ... and people wonder why the USA is losing is edge as a scientific leader.

I remember way back in college I had a professor who believed the moon landing was faked. I swear he could have been an Oliver Stone clone. He believed that LBJ authorized the fake landing so that NASA's budget could be secretly diverted to the Vietnam war, which existed for one reason, LBJ would have a reason to draft african americans so they could be sent to fight and killed.

He didn't like it when I asked him if that meant he voted for Nixon.

Actually, it was the cow who jumped over the moon. The little dog(s?) on the other hand just layed around and laughed to see such a sight.