Subject: Moon Landings: Fact or Fake?
Posted by: lesn
Date: Dec 13 18
Having watched some pretty convincing arguments for the Moon landings being fake, I wonder what others think?
Posted by: lesn
Date: Dec 13 18
Having watched some pretty convincing arguments for the Moon landings being fake, I wonder what others think?
23 replies. On page 1 of 2 pages. 1 2
brm50diboll 
|
It's total, complete, unadulterated nonsense. The moon landings happened. They were not faked. Mass ignorance of science is the only reason people believe such idiocy. If people actually knew a little astronomy, chemistry, biology, physics, and math, they wouldn't be so horribly gullible. The idea that millions of people are all involved in a giant conspiracy to fake something is insulting to to the people that put years of hard effort into the very real accomplishment that was the moon landings. Such know-nothings deserve no more serious consideration by actually scientifically literate people than do the flat-earthers. Reply #1. Dec 13 18, 4:04 PM |
lesn
|
I'm more open minded about it, It is actually because of biology, physics, and math, that lead many to doubt is happened, the Van Allen Belt for example. I remember seeing what was supposed to be a lunar module at the Science museum and was shocked at how flimsy it was and covered in what looked like silver foil. You wouldn't need millions to be involved either, just a select few. Or maybe i've watched too many Mission Impossible TV episodes in the 60s? ;-) Reply #2. Jan 03 19, 6:03 AM |
| brm50diboll
|
The purpose of the thin silver foil is to reflect solar radiation to keep the module from overheating once in orbit. It is deployed *after* the lunar module is separated from the command module. It is thin because the weight needs to be minimized. Actually, you would need *millions* for a conspiracy to fake a moon landings, because millions of people are involved in various parts of the project, including radio and TV transmission at sites all over the world, scientists who study the moon rocks and verify they couldn't have come from earth, scientists who use the lunar reflectors placed on the moon by the astronauts to determine the precise distance from the earth to the moon to the exact centimeter, a laser test that hundreds of different university labs all over the world have done independently and which even amateur astronomers who know what they're doing can do on their own. Peer-reviewed journals that discuss any inconsistencies about any issue with regards to the moon landings and on and on. It is not about being open-minded. It is about reading *enough* on the subject to understand the vast interconnectedness of what went into that collosal project which took spanned several years. There was much more to the moon landings than the astronauts and NASA. Reply #3. Jan 03 19, 11:35 AM |
| lesn
|
All good points and I am not being too dogmatic about this, but humans travelling through the Van Allen belt is something NASA say is not yet possible, yet Moon landing Astronauts would need to get through it. Regarding you would need *millions* for a conspiracy to fake a moon landings, That's not necessarily true. Those not involved would see what the ones faking it wanted them to see. There are some interesting studies by behavioral analysts showing him lying in interviews. But like I say i'm not being dogmatic about this, I just see the possibility of it being a hoax interesting. Reply #4. Jan 07 19, 6:00 AM |
| brm50diboll
|
You don't know enough about science to recognize just how far wrong you are. Humans can pass through the Van Allen belt, just as they can get CT scans. The cumulative exposure to radiation from a few minutes of passing through is actually much lower than what the Cosmic Ray exposure below the Van Allen belt in low earth orbit is for the hundreds of astronauts who have spent many days (or in some cases even months) in space shuttle or space station orbits. But you probably don't know the difference between charged particles trapped in a magnetic field and muons traveling at 99% of the speed of light. Unfortunately, I cannot teach several semesters of physics here, but you need it to understand the issue. Cosmic rays are vastly more energetic than Van Allen belt particles. It is *cumulative* exposure to significant radiation that has potential danger, not brief exposure to something less energetic than the UV in a tanning booth. Just living at altitude in a city like Denver causes people there to be exposed to three times as much ionizing radiation as those living at sea level, and yet Denver is one of the healthiest cities in the US. It is not Chernobyl. The level of radiation from a real threat is many thousands of times what you would find in space. NASA required telemetry data which was *recorded* from hundreds of stations all over the world which did not answer to NASA, but are part of a general agreement of scientists all over the world to obtain and share information freely without deception. That is the scientific method. Nothing was faked. You should read about the Dunning-Kruger effect. Science is not a democracy. It is not about the number of people who believe something. Most people are too ignorant to even know what the correct questions to ask about a scientific issue are. The Van Allen belt is not a significant danger to human space travel. Reply #5. Jan 07 19, 1:37 PM |
| lesn
|
Hey i'm not claiming to be a scientist and I bow to your superior knowledge. I was just quoting what NASA scientists had said about the Van Allen Belt. If we landed on the Moon that's great (although pointless) However if something is true you don't ever need to falsify information regarding it. So why did Neil Armstrong give Holland 'Moon rock' that turned out to be made of wood? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html Reply #6. Jan 09 19, 2:38 AM |
| brm50diboll
|
Anyone can find articles on the internet that supports a position they want to believe, no matter how false. That is the problem with the internet. It has no filter. There are no editors and truths, half-truths, and outright falsehoods can be in any article without any proper context. Neil Armstrong is a hero. He wasn't part of any conspiracy, nor did he deceive anyone. People who assert such things are despicable in my opinion. A proper science education (rare today) focuses on critical thinking. This is why going to a doctor who actually knows what he is doing is superior to looking up medical advice on the internet, because most people don't actually understand what they read, they only think they do, which is awful. This false sense of understanding is responsible, for example, for the antivaccination hysteria that exists in the US and is responsible for the resurgence of diseases that should be eradicated, like measles. The plural of anecdote is not data. Anecdotes have extremely limited utility in science. Reply #7. Jan 09 19, 9:57 AM |
| brm50diboll
|
Regarding the article, most probably just a mixup, and probably Neil Armstrong himself never touched the rock in question. There are hundreds of moon rocks in labs all over the world which have been scientifically verified. The existence of one (poorly documented) story of one rock that was not what it was purported to be doesn't prove anything. A real investigative reporter would have looked into the "chain of custody" of this rock. Some clerk somewhere might have a real moon rock at home as a result of this carelessness. By the way, it is quite easy to tell genuine moon rocks (which have been verified by many independent labs.) The frequency of certain elemental isotopes in moon rocks is different from the frequency of those isotopes in rocks from earth (for one thing, there are many other giveaways) and these frequencies are well-known and documented. There are hundreds of pounds of moon rocks which have been verified in labs and museums all over the world. Reply #8. Jan 09 19, 10:08 AM |
| brm50diboll
|
Much of primary science has no immediate demonstrable value to the general public, but some of it will turn out years later to have laid the groundwork for practical applications in many areas. These are called "spinoffs" and the Apollo project has produced many spinoffs which are used today. The question of whether Apollo was "worth it" is an opinion one, not a factual one. The fact is the project was cancelled early (Apollos 18 and 19 had been planned) because of its expense and the reason we have not returned to the moon (or any other nation) in all this time is again because of the expense. It is always fair ground to debate whether a particular project is worth the expense. I, for one, think the California high-speed rail project is a massive boondoggle that should be cancelled (years ago, to tell the truth.) But I digress. More to the specific point: analysis of moon rocks showed they were demonstrably different from earth rocks and advanced the science of geology considerably. Now when meteorites are discovered, we can determine what the source body was. Some meteorites actually originated on the moon, or Mars, or Venus, or other exotic places (most came from the asteroid belt). This has improved our understanding of how the early solar system formed. Admittedly, this doesn't help people pay their heating bills in the winter, but the fact that most people may not care about the scientific advancement that Apollo produced doesn't mean it didn't happen or that it won't lead to something greater in the future. I myself do not reflexively support all proposed science projects. Manned missions to the moon need to serve a purpose that cannot be achieved by unmanned missions and explained to the public to garnish support beforehand, not just to "plant the flag again". Reply #9. Feb 27 19, 10:46 AM |
lez
|
In recent years, NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) mission has returned images of the moon’s surface – taken from orbit – showing the shadows of the various Apollo landers. LRO also acquired images of five of the six Apollo missions’ American flags on the moon; only the first flag to be planted – by the Apollo 11 crew – now lies on the lunar surface after being accidentally blown over by the takeoff rocket’s exhaust. Sorted! Reply #10. Mar 19 19, 3:12 AM |
| brm50diboll
|
In addition to snopes.com, there are numerous YouTube videos debunking faked moon landings conspiracy theories. MythBusters also debunked this in one of their episodes. Google is my friend. Reply #11. Mar 19 19, 6:02 PM |
jasa9092
|
Fact Reply #12. Oct 27 20, 8:25 PM |
Hannah500
|
Fact Neil Armstrong walked on the moon in 1969! Reply #13. Jan 27 21, 12:55 PM |
VBookWorm
|
Based on what I know, I feel more inclined to believe it was faked. Don't get offended. If you want to believe it was real, go ahead. It doesn't even matter to me. Reply #14. Feb 10 23, 6:15 PM |
gracious1
|
But why would they fake it? Reply #15. Apr 14 24, 1:34 AM |
Cymruambyth
|
It happened. Problem is that the we live in the Age of Conspiracy Theories, which, combined with the general dumbing down of the education system, makes it easier and easier for people to believe in nonsense like the Deep State, pedophile rings active in Virginia/Maryland/D.C. area, and other conspiracy claptrap. People no longer think for themselves, but believe all the hokum on the internet and social media. Reply #16. Apr 16 24, 2:43 PM |
misdiaslocos
|
If you actually think that we landed on the Moon, you should go watch the documentary “ Capricorn One”!! The truth is there. Reply #17. Apr 18 24, 8:45 AM |
pennie1478
|
Scarlett Johansen and Channing Tatum are in a movie called "Fly Me To the Moon" that has the moon landing in it, but TPTB want Scarlett Johansen to film a fake moon landing in case the astronauts don't make it to the moon. Reply #18. Apr 18 24, 10:18 AM |
Dagny1
|
Is there even a "documentary" called "Capricorn One"? There's a movie named "Capricorn One" and it is one of my all-time favorite movies. Not that I believe the movie, but it at least answers a question of "why fake it" with an answer of political/financial/publicity reasons. Reply #19. Apr 18 24, 11:17 AM |
| misdiaslocos
|
Dagny You’ve never seen that expose of the truth? It is narrated by Dr. Orenthal James and directly exposes all of the lies that we have been told by our government about the truth about the moon landings!! Dr. James shows how the rocket launch was a fake and it was scrubbed at the last minute in favor of filming the landing on a sound stage. James really slashes through the false evidence and sticks it to the government. He even shows a bit of his own role in the conspiracy with his sign off to camera at the end of the documentary saying, “…it would have happened like this. IF I DID IT.” His co host, Dr. Waterston, brings a lot of Order to the Laws of physics proving that man could never go to space. If you’ve never seen it, you should. OPEN YOUR MIND TO THE TRUTH. Reply #20. Apr 19 24, 9:57 PM |
23 replies. On page 1 of 2 pages. 1 2
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
|
: