moon documentary on discovery channel now

uprising

Seems a pro conspiracy on discovery channel now, just letting you know

meglome

I only saw the second half. They found exactly the same things as the Mythbusters one, that they did go to moon.

That's two different separate groups that have used actually experiments to show that the moon landing are real.

meglome

uprising wrote: »

Seems a pro conspiracy on discovery channel now, just letting you know

So what did you think?

humanji

Oh, and do you know what it was called, by any chance?

Ice_Box

Saw it. It was very good. I believe they went to the moon. But then I always did. The evidance against it is very poor.

It was called The Truth Behind the Moon Landings.

uprising

Well I caught it midway, then got a call and had to go out just before the end, but I did see was that the 120 film used in the hassleblad camera's couldn't have survived either the journey or the moonwalk,the radiation would have fogged it beyond being able to get an image from it(same as xray's in airports did up until quite recently) actually the astronaut's couldn't have survived outside the van allen belt either, the moon rock's could easily have been radiated on earth, the best evidence they actually showed was a laser beam reflecting back from a reflector, so the evidence they have are moon rock's and a reflector, these don't need astronaut's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing#Unmanned_landings

And the moon rock's brought back by the astronaut's well, http://news.aol.com/article/moon-rock-in-dutch-museum-is-just/642402#

So nothing really to change my view that it was a hoax.

espinolman

Uprising have you seen these videos by stan deyo :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP4zQ4R8vJg

he used to be involved in designing flying saucers for the illuminati in the early seventies , he explains how they work in his video , you see they may have went to the moon in a flying saucer type spacecraft that they built , i think they did ,you see the reason that technology was not given to the public is because it is to do with free energy technology .

You know i think they did go to the moon on the apollo missions , you see the technology that exists is always way ahead of what the public are led to believe , by this stage i think they have probably been to the nearest stars .

bikeblues

I think its fairly certain after being very wary of believeing they went to the moon, that some at least of the apollo missions went there.

but i also think some didnt - and were faked

and its pretty clear that ALL the pictures have been faked or heavily manipulated

why ?

because of what they found up there - evidence of civilisation - ruins etc .

and some indications are that it was possibly humans that left them -
a long long time ago .

no proof that we are the first humans to evolve here - its possible very very ancient humans had civilisation close to if not better then our own - and either migrated or were wiped out .

the earliest human forms are estimated to be 3 to 4 million years old , its possible a million or more years before this - there was a full space exploring human race

5 millions years is feck all compared to the age of the earth .

what is scary is , where are these guys now , or how did they vanish ?

Mahatma coat

I've always believed that we are the second or third incarnation of an advanced human society,
Some people believe that the original humans Ascended to a higher plane of conciousness (Stargate, the divine prophecies)

Some of us believe that they wiped themselves out in some heavy duty warfare which may have included liberal usage of Nuclear weapons.

Mahatma coat

but yeah I believe humans went to the moon,m the hows of getting there are the interesting part.

Stainless_Steel

bikeblues wrote: »

because of what they found up there - evidence of civilisation - ruins etc .

and some indications are that it was possibly humans that left them -
a long long time ago .

Hey bikeblues, I never heard of the evidence of civilisation on the moon...have you any links to vids or info? Thanks

bikeblues

of course its all heavily debatable - but there does appear to be little slips and mistakes that give credence to moon based ruins


the most recognisable artifical feature on the moon is the south massif - a hexagon shaped giant mountain
there is no way this could be natural - which is why apollo 17 was sent to visit it - with great risk .
keith laney descibes the odditys of this mission as well

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_17/images/hi_res_vert_lg.gif

http://keithlaney.net/Ahiddenmission/A17HMp1.html

have alook at hoaglands work at enterprisemission

http://www.enterprisemission.com/

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/luna/esp_luna_26.htm

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/images/moonalive/ina.jpg


but the moon is one small aspect

MARS is where the real sh1t is hitting the fan - as NASA has been covering up evidence of a planet that you can live and breath on, has water and has life ( at least plant life ) - breathable air - and ruined civilisations .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNRTeVcd1KA

http://keithlaney.net/



then there is the hexagon on saturn .......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOiV1RSfMnQ




i think there is enough evidence to question exactly what is going on in our solar system , and why are nasa covering most if not all it up ?

Have you considered the possibility that these people like Hoagland are just looking too hard at random features on the planets and seeing what they want to see?

It's been known for a pretty long time that Mars does not have a breathable atmosphere.
This includes spectrographic analysis taken on Earth showing the make up of the Martian atmosphere.

And of course there's the fact that since Mars is so small it's gravity could hold onto a very thick atmosphere.
Add this to the weak magnetic field on Mars you get even less of an atmosphere.

What good scientific evidence is there that there is a breathable atmosphere on Mars?

As for the hexagon on Saturn: how do you know it's artificial?

bikeblues

sorry Mr Mob, I tend to ignore what you say as you have nothing to contribute other than a deaf , dumb and blind scientific following myopia to the CT forum

bikeblues

bikeblues wrote: »

sorry Mr Mob, I tend to ignore what you say as you have nothing to contribute other than a deaf , dumb and blind scientific following myopia to the CT forum

Oh ok then.
I'll stop questioning stuff then.

namloc1980

bikeblues wrote: »

I think its fairly certain after being very wary of believeing they went to the moon, that some at least of the apollo missions went there.

but i also think some didnt - and were faked

and its pretty clear that ALL the pictures have been faked or heavily manipulated

I have looked up and seen alot of claims about lunar photo manipulation but no real convincing evidence has been produced by the CT crowd with regard to photos being faked etc. in my view. There is the usual parallel shadows one but even a 5 yr old would tell that that one is a load of crapology.

bikeblues wrote: »

because of what they found up there - evidence of civilisation - ruins etc .

and some indications are that it was possibly humans that left them -
a long long time ago .

The evidence for this is where?? A mountain that looks kinda odd? Forgive me but the 'hexagonal mountain' looks like a slightly unusual geological feature...nothing more...nothing less.

bikeblues wrote: »

no proof that we are the first humans to evolve here - its possible very very ancient humans had civilisation close to if not better then our own - and either migrated or were wiped out .

the earliest human forms are estimated to be 3 to 4 million years old , its possible a million or more years before this - there was a full space exploring human race

5 millions years is feck all compared to the age of the earth .

No proof at all for these claims.

bikeblues wrote: »

what is scary is , where are these guys now , or how did they vanish ?

They would have to exist in the first place.

uprising

namloc1980 wrote: »

I have looked up and seen alot of claims about lunar photo manipulation but no real convincing evidence has been produced by the CT crowd with regard to photos being faked etc. in my view. There is the usual parallel shadows one but even a 5 yr old would tell that that one is a load of crapology.

I can tell you from 18 years of photography experience, that their light source was a lot closer than the sun, take a photo of any landscape with direct sunlight as the only source and ALL shadow's will follow the EXACT same direction, and yes a 5 year old would tell you that, but when men of science try it on it's a total different ball game.

namloc1980

uprising wrote: »

I can tell you from 18 years of photography experience, that their light source was a lot closer than the sun, take a photo of any landscape with direct sunlight as the only source and ALL shadow's will follow the EXACT same direction, and yes a 5 year old would tell you that, but when men of science try it on it's a total different ball game.

What the CT crowd don't take into account is topography of the landscape. If the landscape is perfectly flat then yes all shadows should fall in the same line and direction but topography totally changes this as shadows will appear to fall in different lines because the landscape isn't flat. The moon isn't flat. This happens on earth - go out and have a look if you don't believe me! Plus trying to interpret what a landscape and shadows look like from a flat 2D photo just makes no sense at all. The shadow argument is the weakest one the CT crowd have in relation to fake moon landings.



Random image from google search. Clearly the shadow of the fence is not all parallel.



What's that....more non parallel shadows? Surely not

uprising

uprising wrote: »

I can tell you from 18 years of photography experience, that their light source was a lot closer than the sun, take a photo of any landscape with direct sunlight as the only source and ALL shadow's will follow the EXACT same direction, and yes a 5 year old would tell you that, but when men of science try it on it's a total different ball game.

Unless the ground was uneven and made it look like the shadows weren't parallel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

Old theory. Debunked years ago.

ynotdu

Even now after the LCROSS lunar probe has taken pictures of the landing stages of the lunar modules of Apollo 11,12,14,15,16&17 as well as unmanned vehicles that went before, the CT,s Still question did it happen

When Apollo 11 landed, America,s arch enemy the now defunct Soviet Union devoted twelve minutes of their main evening news to the event.
ok many will say that the soviet union did not have the tracking abilities it has now to ensure that the signals they were receiving on their OWN ground-based dish.s could some how have been conned.That is simply not true as it was the soviet union that sent the first pictures of the 'dark side'of the moon back to earth in the late 1950,s.Jodrell Bank verified this.

So lets say the Soviets and the Chinese did NOT have tracking antenna for the Apollo,s way back then?Well they certainly have now for LCROSS and they are still not disputing the facts or photo,s!

I have no doubt NASA had some back-up mad cap plans if things went really wrong(possibly even photo,s taken on Earth in the event NIXON wanted to claim they landed if they had not or their camera's had failed.Nixon had two speechs ready for Apollo 11,one was the one he phoned to Neil&Buzz,The other was mourning the loss of them:))

So PLEASE guys accept,it happened and find a NEW CT!
If not Buzz Aldrin might just punch you on the nose as he did when he was leaving a cinema with his wife and a CT heckled him that the 1st moon landing had never happened.Buzz was charged with assault,You wont be surprised to hear the Judge let him walk free without a stain on his character:)

bikeblues

err, I accept they got there - a little doubtful about 11 12 14 , but 15 - 17 did get there.


but they have covered up everything they found there -
all the data has been manipulated and edited to hide the truth about the moon .


http://www.aulis.com/exposing_apollo1.htm

Mahatma coat

theres a lot of chatter now about the 'Bogeys' or 'santaclause' much more than before, ther may be some revalation shortly, I dont dout tha amstong believd he was teh first msn on thr moon, however I think he figured out fair quick that he wasnt, even in his own lifetime

squod

ynotdu wrote: »

Even now after the LCROSS lunar probe has taken pictures of the landing stages of the lunar modules of Apollo 11,12,14,15,16&17 as well as unmanned vehicles that went before, the CT,s Still question did it happen

When Apollo 11 landed, America,s arch enemy the now defunct Soviet Union devoted twelve minutes of their main evening news to the event.
ok many will say that the soviet union did not have the tracking abilities it has now to ensure that the signals they were receiving on their OWN ground-based dish.s could some how have been conned.That is simply not true as it was the soviet union that sent the first pictures of the 'dark side'of the moon back to earth in the late 1950,s.Jodrell Bank verified this.

So lets say the Soviets and the Chinese did NOT have tracking antenna for the Apollo,s way back then?Well they certainly have now for LCROSS and they are still not disputing the facts or photo,s!

I have no doubt NASA had some back-up mad cap plans if things went really wrong(possibly even photo,s taken on Earth in the event NIXON wanted to claim they landed if they had not or their camera's had failed.Nixon had two speechs ready for Apollo 11,one was the one he phoned to Neil&Buzz,The other was mourning the loss of them:))

So PLEASE guys accept,it happened and find a NEW CT!
If not Buzz Aldrin might just punch you on the nose as he did when he was leaving a cinema with his wife and a CT heckled him that the 1st moon landing had never happened.Buzz was charged with assault,You wont be surprised to hear the Judge let him walk free without a stain on his character:)

King Mob wrote: »

Unless the ground was uneven and made it look like the shadows weren't parallel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

Old theory. Debunked years ago.

Big news people, the moon landings didn't happen. You can try debunk stuff all day and forever. If they didn't happen they didn't happen. End of.
As I said before LCROSS takes low res pics of landing sites and standard shots of terrain??????????

Look through JAXAs pics, the first twin camera hi-def imaging satellite, KAGUYA. Oh and tell me again why there's gonna be another probe sent before 2020 to measure radiation?

''Debunked years ago'', whatever.

6th

squod wrote: »

Big news people, the moon landings didn't happen. You can try debunk stuff all day and forever. If they didn't happen they didn't happen. End of.
As I said before LCROSS takes low res pics of landing sites and standard shots of terrain??????????

Look through JAXAs pics, the first twin camera hi-def imaging satellite, KAGUYA. Oh and tell me again why there's gonna be another probe sent before 2020 to measure radiation?

''Debunked years ago'', whatever.

Have you read the bit in the charter about claiming stuff as fact and backing it up?

squod

6th wrote: »

Have you read the bit in the charter about claiming stuff as fact and backing it up?

Is this directed at me? Have you read the charter? I'm not the one telling people about something that didn't happen. Here's some golfing on the moon type hillarity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdqBL5pdRT8

squod

squod wrote: »

Big news people, the moon landings didn't happen. You can try debunk stuff all day and forever. If they didn't happen they didn't happen. End of.

And why do you believe the moon landings didn't happen?
How do you explain the mountains of evidence that they when there and came back with samples.
And most importantly why haven't the Russians said anything?

squod wrote: »

As I said before LCROSS takes low res pics of landing sites and standard shots of terrain??????????

You mean the LRO?
And those where the highest res pictures ever taken of the moon.

It wasn't sent there just to take pictures of the landing sites, NASA have better things to do.

squod wrote: »

Look through JAXAs pics, the first twin camera hi-def imaging satellite, KAGUYA.

Those cameras only have a resolution of 10 metres, not enough to make out the landing sites even if it passed over them.

squod wrote: »

Oh and tell me again why there's gonna be another probe sent before 2020 to measure radiation?

But Kaguya isn't there just to measure radiation either, it has 12 other instruments.
And I'd imagine they're sending another one to do more science.
What's wrong with that.

squod wrote: »

''Debunked years ago'', whatever.

Yes that particular myth has long been debunked.
Can you explain why you don't think this is so?
What's wrong with the explanation given by the MythBusters?

squod

King Mob wrote: »

And why do you believe the moon landings didn't happen?
How do you explain the mountains of evidence that they when there and came back with samples.
And most importantly why haven't the Russians said anything?


You mean the LRO?
And those where the highest res pictures ever taken of the moon.

It wasn't sent there just to take pictures of the landing sites, NASA have better things to do.

Those cameras only have a resolution of 10 metres, not enough to make out the landing sites even if it passed over them.


But Kaguya isn't there just to measure radiation either, it has 12 other instruments.
And I'd imagine they're sending another one to do more science.
What's wrong with that.


Yes that particular myth has long been debunked.
Can you explain why you don't think this is so?
What's wrong with the explanation given by the MythBusters?

You're saying the moon landings happened, prove it! Your story is certainly not backed up by NASA. They will send up a third probe before they go to the moon, to measure the radiation. Despite what you are saying, that they've been there six times already???? There's no evidence for your story, none. Not even from the recent Japanese missions.

humanji

Which bit of the mountain of evidence don't you believe?

6th

squod wrote: »

Is this directed at me?

Yes.

squod wrote: »

Have you read the charter?

I wrote it.

squod

squod wrote: »

You're saying the moon landings happened, prove it! Your story is certainly not backed up by NASA.

Really? Here's me thinking that NASA says they went to the moon quite a lot.

squod wrote: »

There's no evidence for your story, none. Not even from the recent Japanese missions.

Except for the 382kg of returned samples from the moon by the apollo missions. All of which have been extensively studied by various independent institutions around the world, and are completely consistent with the smaller samples returned by Russian probes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_rock

And the laser reflectors left by Apollos 11, 14 and 15 who's positions are known to metre accuracy. These reflectors are used regularly by observatories all around the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_Experiment

And all the tracking that was done of the missions on earth by practicially every radio telescope and many amateurs.

And all the film footage simply not replicable on earth, such as dust moving in a ballistic path, a hammer and feather falling at the same rate and of course the flag staying motionless despite astronauts hopping past it.

And of course the footage of the earth rising on the moon etc.

And all of this is beofre you look at the actual science that was done.

And I'll ask again: Why didn't the Russians expose the hoax?

squod wrote: »

They will send up a third probe before they go to the moon, to measure the radiation.

Except they aren't sending another probe just to measure the tradition.
I assume that your trying to say that the radition levels on the moon make it impossible for people to go there.
Can you back this up?

squod

King Mob wrote: »

Really? Here's me thinking that NASA says they went to the moon quite a lot.



Except for the 382kg of returned samples from the moon by the apollo missions. All of which have been extensively studied by various independent institutions around the world, and are completely consistent with the smaller samples returned by Russian probes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_rock

And the laser reflectors left by Apollos 11, 14 and 15 who's positions are known to metre accuracy. These reflectors are used regularly by observatories all around the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_Experiment

And all the tracking that was done of the missions on earth by practicially every radio telescope and many amateurs.

And all the film footage simply not replicable on earth, such as dust moving in a ballistic path, a hammer and feather falling at the same rate and of course the flag staying motionless despite astronauts hopping past it.

And of course the footage of the earth rising on the moon etc.

And all of this is beofre you look at the actual science that was done.

And I'll ask again: Why didn't the Russians expose the hoax?

Except they aren't sending another probe just to measure the tradition.
I assume that your trying to say that the radition levels on the moon make it impossible for people to go there.
Can you back this up?

The first three pionts you make didn't require manned missions.
Without going through endless threads again and debunking the usual stuff. I'll take these two thanks. The Russians hadn't built the long range radar needed before the 'missions' stopped. Convenient?
And no I'm not saying radition levels on the moon make it impossible for people to go there. NASA is.

squod

6th wrote: »

Yes.



I wrote it.

I didn't ask who wrote it.

squod

squod wrote: »

The first three pionts you make didn't require manned missions.

Actually they do.
The only unmanned missions that returned samples only returned a few grams.
If it was an unmanned mission you have to assume that these probes where designed and built in total secrecy Then dozens of missions run totally in secret.
And this secret space program (that would have hundreds if not thousands of employees) would then have to stay completely hidden for over forty years.
Doesn't seem likely.
Have you any evidence?

squod wrote: »

Without going through endless threads again and debunking the usual stuff. I'll take these two thanks.

So in other words you can't address the other points.

squod wrote: »

The Russians hadn't built the long range radar needed before the 'missions' stopped. Convenient?

Well they did have the radar technology then.
And they would have monitered the radio transmissions. And would have analysed the photos and the data returned. And later would have had access to the lunar samples.
The you have to consider the fact they had spies everywhere, so even if they couldn't find proof that manned missions where fake, they'd certainly know about the secret unmanned program that would have to exist for your silly theory to make sense.

The reason they stopped going to the moon was lack of funding and lack of public interest. They don't exactly make a secret of that.

squod wrote: »

And no I'm not saying radition levels on the moon make it impossible for people to go there. NASA is.

No that's not what Nasa say at all.
NASA say quite clearly that they went to the moon.

squod

King Mob wrote: »

Actually they do.
The only unmanned missions that returned samples only returned a few grams.
If it was an unmanned mission you have to assume that these probes where designed and built in total secrecy Then dozens of missions run totally in secret.
And this secret space program (that would have hundreds if not thousands of employees) would then have to stay completely hidden for over forty years.
Doesn't seem likely.
Have you any evidence?

So in other words you can't address the other points.

Well they did have the radar technology then.
And they would have monitered the radio transmissions. And would have analysed the photos and the data returned. And later would have had access to the lunar samples.
The you have to consider the fact they had spies everywhere, so even if they couldn't find proof that manned missions where fake, they'd certainly know about the secret unmanned program that would have to exist for your silly theory to make sense.

The reason they stopped going to the moon was lack of funding and lack of public interest. They don't exactly make a secret of that.



No that's not what Nasa say at all.
NASA say quite clearly that they went to the moon.

Yeah, yeah. I say prove it, then you don't prove it, now I'm still unconvinced. We've all been here before...............

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tkB3raSbyo

.

squod

squod wrote: »

Yeah, yeah. I say prove it, then you don't prove it, now I'm still unconvinced. We've all been here before...............

.

I have shown amble proof.
You have not explained why what I have provided is not proof. Or addressed any of the points I've raised.
Have you not wondered this might be because you are wrong?

I seriously doubt any amount of evidence with change your mine because I doubt your position is based on evidence in the first place.

squod

King Mob wrote: »

I have shown amble proof.
You have not explained why what I have provided is not proof. Or addressed any of the points I've raised.
Have you not wondered this might be because you are wrong?

I seriously doubt any amount of evidence with change your mine because I doubt your position is based on evidence in the first place.

Token reply.

Never happened, don't worry about it. Here's some more of the same evidence or whatever.
''The images from this epic mission are silent witnesses to the art of photographic fakery raised to the highest degree and further evidence that all is not well with the Apollo photographic record''

http://www.aulis.com/exposing_apollo2.htm

Whatever.

bonkey

squod wrote: »

The Russians hadn't built the long range radar needed before the 'missions' stopped. Convenient?

I'd go with "irrelevant" rather than "convenient".

Somewhat intuitively, you should be able to figure out a way to track and locate sources of radio emissions by means other than using radar.

bonkey

squod wrote: »

Oh and tell me again why there's gonna be another probe sent before 2020 to measure radiation?

I can think of several reasons.

The most obvious is this...validation of already established reasults.

The next most obvious is the use of different techniques, to see whether or not consistent results are found.

After that, would come the notion that as technology progresses, we have the ability to more accurately measure things.

Need we continue?

squod

bonkey wrote: »

I can think of several reasons.

The most obvious is this...validation of already established reasults.

The next most obvious is the use of different techniques, to see whether or not consistent results are found.

After that, would come the notion that as technology progresses, we have the ability to more accurately measure things.

Need we continue?

Please do........

Fascinated....

humanji

squod wrote: »

Please do........

Fascinated....

Seriously, are you trolling? You don't seem interested in any sort of debate. Rather you dismiss everything that's said and then make flippant comments as if you'd better things to do.

squod

humanji wrote: »

Seriously, are you trolling? You don't seem interested in any sort of debate. Rather you dismiss everything that's said and then make flippant comments as if you'd better things to do.

Missed a few posts? Read back some pages. Flippant comments aren't comming from me dude. The story telling is, as I said; facinating.

humanji

squod wrote: »

Missed a few posts? Read back some pages. Flippant comments aren't comming from me dude. The story telling is, as I said; facinating.

:rolleyes:

So going back a bit, why exactly do you not believe people went to the moon? You've demanded proof, yet seem to not take into account the mountain of evidence. Citing a couple of ambiguities that are easily explained with bit of research is hardly a solid basis for founding such a belief. So what is it that makes you refuse to accept it?

PirateShampoo

squod wrote: »

I didn't ask who wrote it.

No you asked had he read it, which im gonna guess yes unless he typed it blind folded.

bikeblues

errr lets hold on a second , although i belive some missions went there

there is no definitive proof we went to the moon either -
it can all have been faked

1/ fact - you dont need a mirror to bounce a laser of the moon - it was done directly off the surface - before anyone went there.
lasers prove nothing for apollo

http://www.k3pgp.org/lasereme.htm


2/ the russian rock samples DO NOT match the usa ones -
i have seen this in a few places , but will look for the link

jarah whites you tube chanell is a good one for the lander skeptics .

squod

humanji wrote: »

:rolleyes:

So going back a bit, why exactly do you not believe people went to the moon? You've demanded proof, yet seem to not take into account the mountain of evidence. Citing a couple of ambiguities that are easily explained with bit of research is hardly a solid basis for founding such a belief. So what is it that makes you refuse to accept it?

Because it didn't happen! There's pages and pages and pages of stuff written about this same thing. Do we need to add to it? No. Let's all just move on and enjoy the event when it occurs, probably somewhere in the late twenties.

bikeblues

bikeblues wrote: »

1/ fact - you dont need a mirror to bounce a laser of the moon - it was done directly off the surface - before anyone went there.
lasers prove nothing for apollo

http://www.k3pgp.org/lasereme.htm

Except a device designed to be reflective would be more reflective that the dirt around it.
It's easy to tell the difference.

Here Mythbusters explain this exactly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orvMZn8L1f0


So why didn't the Russians point out that the sites NASA claim are reflectors are as reflective as the rest of the moon dirt and blow the hoax wide open?

bikeblues wrote: »

2/ the russian rock samples DO NOT match the usa ones -
i have seen this in a few places , but will look for the link

And is it possible that this claim is just wrong but often repeated anyway?

And again why didn't the Russians (or any of the thousands of scientists who examined the samples) say anything about this?

squod

squod wrote: »

Because it didn't happen! There's pages and pages and pages of stuff written about this same thing. Do we need to add to it? No. Let's all just move on and enjoy the event when it occurs, probably somewhere in the late twenties.

So why couldn't we have gone to the moon then?

And how do you know we didn't?

At least answer that question rather than brush it off like you have with the literal mountain of evidence that we did go to the moon.

ynotdu

Scroud!When your in a hole STOP digging!

unless it's for moonrocks!

humanji

squod wrote: »

Because it didn't happen! There's pages and pages and pages of stuff written about this same thing. Do we need to add to it? No. Let's all just move on and enjoy the event when it occurs, probably somewhere in the late twenties.

So we should just open up this forum to wild, baseless accusations and if questioned on anything we can all accept the answer of, "Because I said so!"?

mockler007

didnt the big rocket give it away, if they could get a rocket to blast into space and get the capsule to land back on earth, im sure they could manage a moon landing, after all wasnt the world flat, and that we had witches on brooms, whats next ben and jerries icecream is resposible for the end of the world

squod

mockler007 wrote: »

didnt the big rocket give it away, if they could get a rocket to blast into space and get the capsule to land back on earth, im sure they could manage a moon landing, after all wasnt the world flat, and that we had witches on brooms, whats next ben and jerries icecream is resposible for the end of the world

http://www.universetoday.com/2009/07/14/build-your-own-apollo-11-landing-computer/

Build your own Apollo guidance computer today. Up to 4ks of ram and up to 8 jobs at a time. Then simply ignore them as you approach the moon and attempt manual landings, backwards, in an unfamilliar environment. It'll all be fine though. Ppffttttttt.