|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
|
Supposedly, the 1st moon landing was done by Neil Armstrong and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin. Some background information: The space program in America was started to counter the U.S.S.R.'s program which launched not only the 1st object into space (Sputnik the satelite), but the 1st manned mission into space. We had to beat them somewhere, so why not the moon? Unfortunately, Russia beat us to the moon, with the unmanned Luna missions. Luna 16, 20, and 24 all returned with moon rock samples. This is all considered fact and so far, undisputed. Here is where the contraversy starts: The U.S. was convinced (and in my opinion, rightly so) that we were being embarrassed by the Soviet's advances in their space program, which was obviously doing way better than ours. So we had to save face by beating them somewhere. And thus the Apollo program was created. The mission of the Apollo program was to put a man on the moon, and safely return him to Earth. With several unsuccessful missions to the moon, Apollo 11, containing the now famous Neil Armstrong and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin landed on the moon. Five other missions landed as well:
There are many people who are convinced we haven't landed on the moon. I would be interested to hear your opinions. I personally think that we did, in fact, land on the moon, based on the information provided. And I apologize if this thread has been done before, I have done a keyword search of this forum and found absolutely nothing. *Excerpt from wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
let it snow~
|
Well, the reason there's controversy is because of all the strange happenings and the timing of it all.
As I recall from a special a few years back, here's a breakdown of it all. 1) Wind on the moon. Flags shouldn't be waving because there's no air. Flags in the footage clearly wave. 2) Doctored photos. Grid marks should be in front of everything, but some are covered. 3) Multiple shadows. There's only one source of light on the moon: the sun. Some photos have two shadows on them. 4) Perfect photos. The cameras were chest-mounted and had no viewfinder. Hard to imagine great photos taken with those. 5) Radiation. Huge belt of radiation around Earth that a half-inch layer of lead wouldn't protect against. 6) Deaths. A lot of people who knew things died. One in particular was a safety inspector who decided the Apollo was totally not ready for space travel. He died days later in an accident. I've seen evidence supporting and refuting these claims, so I don't know what to think. Personally, I don't see why anyone doesn't just get a super-powerful optical telescope and point it up at the moon. Surely we'd find the remnants of the landers or the flags, right? Last edited by Squeek; 05-22-2007 at 10:26 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
I'm not completely sure, though. I believe several countries were planning on making moon missions of their own to see if america had indeed landed on the moon, yet seem not to willing to do so. As for the flag waving, supposedly the pole was vibrating from when they put the pole into the ground, and this caused the flag to shake. You would think that the government if they were to fake something this big on scale, that they would throw out this obvious of footage.
__________________
Last edited by MRTL_mrclean17; 05-22-2007 at 10:36 PM.. Reason: oops...mispelled... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
FFR Player
|
I searched up "did we land on the moon?" on Google and this site popped up: http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm.
His stance is we did land on the moon and focuses a lot about the photography. He explains why the photos are legitimate and many other space related things. In college, he took a lot of astronomy related classes as well as one in photography. ~Tsugomaru
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
let it snow~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
(The Fat's Sabobah)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum User
|
Had to:
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
is against custom titles
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
FFR Simfile Author
|
It's ridiculous that some people still actually think we didn't we didn't land on the moon.
The apollo missions were not faked. All claims against the missions being real are usually based on virtually no understanding of astrophysics. Claims like, "hey look the flag is blowing around" and, "hey look that rock has a C on it must be a prop" are laughable at best.
__________________
Last edited by Reach; 05-23-2007 at 10:38 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
FFR Player
|
There are logistics of any government associated incident that can make anyone shout 'conspiracy'. Only in rare cases have i heard it was staged and anyone who suggests it can only find a few details that really arent significant to scream "the government is lying!"
On the shadows thing, just because the sun is the only source of light doesnt mean its the only thing shining light on the moon. Let me explain, we see colors and light everywhere on earth right? While it initially came from the sun, the light rays are reflected off of things and onto others. In this case, other planets and things floating around in space can reflect the suns light while the moon experiences some of this reflection. I am fairly sure its safe to say that if you look at the earth from the moon you will see it glowing, which is the light reflecting off of it from the sun in your direction. Also, how is it possible for it to be staged if we have eye witnesses who watched the shuttle take off, go into space, and come back with people inside? |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | ||
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
FFR Simfile Author
|
Quote:
The radiation you would get from the belt would be harmless unless you stayed in it. At best it might increase the likelyhood slightly of getting cancer down the road... But hell, when you go to the dentist your getting smashed with radiation and people survive that just fine Ever gotten a full jaw xray? Yea, I'm pretty sure you're getting just as much radiation from that as flying through that belt. It does make it pretty hard to sleep though, as you would likely see flashes even with your eyes closed...but they were only there for a short period of time. I think it takes 3 days to get to the moon, though they could probably get them there in less than 24 hours now (with questionable gforces >_>). Edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMzfqP0oWKs related 8) Edit: changed video, I think that one has the moonlanding part in it XD
__________________
Last edited by Reach; 05-23-2007 at 11:45 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 69
|
The Moon landing was real. Even it was more than at least 50 years ago from now it is truly believed as a true moon landing.
The reason why people does not believe the moon landing is because they are jealous and they envy NASA because the astronauts went to the moon and the jealous non-believers did not. The issue of the lunar landing is actually a human mental error which was caused by too much emotions. It is easily resolved through mental resolutions and deeper understanding of human philosophy, but, people today are too mindless, too arrogant, too physical and too emotional. There's no place and time for the mind for humans today. ![]()
__________________
Many people today play DDR Extreme, DDR Supernova and later. But I still play 1st and 2nd mix in the arcades. Too bad for me. Visit the Humanslayers here. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 76
Posts: 268
|
Why would someone go through all that effort just to fake landing on a rock? I think it would be much more difficult to lie about it than it would be just to launch some guy in a tin can onto the thing and call it a day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
Imagine trying to shoot a target moving 10 mph from mile away with a bullet that travels 15 feet/second. Something like that, just with a lot more precautions you need to take.
__________________
last.fm Last edited by lord_carbo; 05-26-2007 at 02:46 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
But even so, his point still stands. All of the objections to the logic of "putting a man on the moon" hold just about as well for "putting relatively sensitive pieces of equipment on the moon" which the soviets had claimed to have done.
As far as I'm concerned, it is to me a given that either they -both- were lying, or they -both- did what they say they did. Having trumped the soviets by putting a person on the moon, and having the cold war end before it was feasible to top -that- (by establishing some kind of permanant structure on the moon) the sheer lack of any useful reason to bother going back is why nobody has gone back. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
FFR Simfile Author
|
Quote:
If anything, the most dangerous part of the mission that noone ever mentions is flying through the debris belt in the upper atmosphere. Screw the radiation belt, that's not even a threat. There is so much **** floating around in the upper atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 mph. As I recall a mission almost went catastropic once when the shuttle was hit by a mere paint chip >_>. I think they track most of the known debris with computers now, but even then it's literally a gamble every time the shuttle goes up because of this stuff. It's kind of hard not to run into these foam problems when the shuttle is being blasted by ****. Also yea, as devonin said, there is no reason to go back to the moon anymore. Unless of course they go ahread with the lunar base plans.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|