Did the US land on the moon?
#1
For the past year, my girlfriend has been bothering me with bits of trivia with regard to the impossibility of NASA's trips to the moon. She staunchly contends that there is an abundance of legitimate theories out there and that it is impossible that such an event ever occurred. For the most part, I dismissed her claims as sensational. However, last night, I came across a program on the space network that raised doubts in my mind as to the veracity of America's Apollo missions. They even had the gall to suggest that the deaths due to accident, etc. of approximately 15% of all of the astronauts involved in the program could be government-sponsored assassinations intended to hide the cover up.

Some of the evidence was VERY convincing; however, as is usual for shows such as this, there was very little in the way of effective rebuttal. I figure that this could be for one of two reasons: 1.) they didn't want their points to be weakened, or 2.) there is no rebuttal!. The show emphasized the importance of the space race to the outcome of the Cold War.

Some (I can't quite recall all of it) of the evidence:

1. Many photographs taken on the moon have shadows in two separate directions, indicating that there were two light sources present when the pictures were taken. This is, of course, impossible.

2. Photos taken of astronauts who are in the shadows seem strangely illuminated (they should have been mere sillhouettes) as though the cameras used had a flash. The cameras designed for the mission had no such technology.

3. The photographs taken are of extremely high quality and the images are centered and focused. The cameras used on the expedition were attached to the astronaut's chests and the viewfinders could not be seen by astronauts due to mobility restrictions of their suits.

4. There are 6 crosshairs present in each photo taken on the moon. They are always placed over top of the subjects of the photos. In several photos, the items in the picture are superimposed over the crosshairs.

5. There are at least three STARTLING instances when it seems that the same footage of the "moon" was used in different situations. In particular, there is one picture of a moonscape in which there is a lunar lander and another of the exact same moonscape, minus the lander. They superimposed such images over one another and it is clear that they are the EXACT SAME IMAGE, same angle, same distances...

6. The flag seems to be waving (not that convincing, in my mind)

7. The construction of the lunar lander was such that in tests conducted on earth by Neil Armstrong (they showed the footage), it was completely unmanageable due to there only being one rocket providing lift. It crash landed and he barely escaped with his life, ejecting at the last second. Scientists claimed that any movement on board would have shifted the balance of the craft and sent it off course.

8. There is a spot of land in Area 51 that looks EXACTLY like a moonscape. It was shown by satellite photo in the program and the cratered surface, etc. looked like an exact match. It has been suggested that this, and not other concerns, is the primary reason for the security of Area 51.

9. The lunar lander did not raise up any dust, nor did it leave a blast crater when it landed.

10. The feet of the lander were completely clean after it landed on the moon. It would seem likely that some dust would have been stirred up onto the "landing feet".

11. When the tape of the astronauts "moon walk" is sped up, they simply appear to be running.

12. It seems unlikely that the lander would have been entirely silent, as it appears in the landing footage of the Apollo 11 footage. We shouldn't have been able to hear their voices as clearly, if at all.

13. We can see absolutely no stars in any of the footage. They should have been clear and plentiful.

14. (This may or may not be a big one, I don't know enough about it to comment) The radiation present in "deep space" would have killed the astronauts in short order, particularly given the fact that the largest recorded solar flare of the 20th century took place at a time when there was supposedly men on the moon. (Former Russian cosmonauts attested to the veracity of this "radiation" theory and claimed that this was the primary reason that Russian's never landed on the moon.)

15. Just two years prior to the first successful moon landing, it was generally felt by NASA officials that they would never land on the moon due to all of the immense complications involved.

16. Members of the Apollo mission who tragically burned up in a test mission on Earth inside of the lunar capsule had overtly criticized the Apollo program and raised doubts as to the possibility of actually landing on the moon.

Anyways, that's a whole bunch of the arguments as they were presented. I found it to be rather persuasive, particularly given the fact that so much of it was visual and the guy from NASA could only say that, essentially, "these guys are crackpots", which seemed unlikely. I'm sure that there are many of you who have looked into this in greater depth than I have. Just curious as to what your opinions are and why. In particular, I'm wondering how much of this evidence can be refuted and on what grounds.
But whate'er I be,
Nor I, nor any man that is,
With nothing shall be pleased till he be eased
With being nothing.
William Shakespeare - Richard II
Reply
#2
Yeah, yeah, next you'll be telling us the holocaust didn't happen either. Or that there are codes embedded in the Bible that prophecy current events. Exactly the same rhetorical techniques are used in these scams, so if you are vulnerable to one you are vulnerable to all of them.

Basically, you are presented with a blizzard of plausible sounding objections, each one of which requires some specific technical knowledge to see through. Even if only a few of these objections cause doubt in your mind due to your own lack of knowledge, you then have accepted the premise. Then when you come here, you expect correspondents such as myself to prove a negative if you expect the conspiracy theory to be disproved.

The only way to defend yourself against these things is to insist on ironclad proof from whoever puts forward the hypothesis. It would help if you knew what constituted 'ironclad proof', and were less gullible than a teenage girl.

The 'points' you list betray an unfamiliarity with the counterintuitive properties of the vacuum, low gravity, and the glare of the sun. The astronauts did not in fact move while the lunar lander was firing manuevering jets. And that is as specific as I will get here, I've lectured enough.

Growler
Growler

"To excuse such an atrocity by blaming U.S. government policies is to deny the basic idea of all morality: that individuals are responsible for their actions." -- Salman Rushdie writing of September 11th
Reply
#3
Most of that stuff is from the stupid Fox special (at least what I saw in a glance at it most of the arguments are the same so I didn't bother really reading your post, just skimming it).

Bad Astronomy.com does a very nice job of answering all those points in this article. I don't have the time to elaborate so just read that page.
---
It's all just zeroes and ones and duct tape in the end.
Reply
#4
Bleah, been in this debate before. The only thing I still have problems with is the way they moved versus what is known about the moon's gravity. I forget the exact values, but the amount of weight per footspace was rather small, and the only "explanation" I got was that Neil's muscles were a little "stiff" from lying down during the "long flight" Not very convincing at all.
Reply
#5
Next Stupid Question? The Film Capricorn One, with James Broland and OJ Simpson, was a movie, not a documentary.

Flags don't wave where there is no air to blow them. As I recall, they knew that would be the case, and used a flag that would not just flop down when put up.

Alan Sheppard did in fact take a 6 iron up there and hit a golf ball. He had no reason to lie about that.

The Moon Rocks were brought back.

The cute little jeep is still up there.

What amazes me is that people think it was a hoax. Too many people in NASA from 60-75 knew enough that were it a hoax, that truth would have been out since about Gerald Ford's days.

I spoke with Astronaut Irvin back in 1977. He had no reason to lie to me, and I believed him when he spoke of his emotions when he saw earthrise for the first time on the moon.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#6
Occhidiangela,Mar 24 2003, 03:28 PM Wrote:I spoke with Astronaut Irvin back in 1977.  He had no reason to lie to me, and I belived him.
On blind faith alone , and my 'exposure' to the entity I refer to as "Occhi" this statement alone is enough to make me a believer :) .

Capricorn 1 wasn't a documentary ? :P Didn't OJ die in that ? (wow , was that a horrible movie , or what ? I bet this was the real cause for people to even start questioning the lunar landing in the first place ..... ;) )
Stormrage :
SugarSmacks / 90 Shammy -Elemental
TaMeKaboom/ 90 Hunter - BM
TaMeOsis / 90 Paladin - Prot
TaMeAgeddon/ 85 Warlock - Demon
TaMeDazzles / 85 Mage- Frost
FrostDFlakes / 90 Rogue
TaMeOlta / 85 Druid-resto
Reply
#7
*blush*

I forget the details, but I remember that the Black Helicopters caught OJ and the funny guy, but that James Brolin made it 'home.'

I think that there had been non-believers on that score for some time before the movie was ever made, even around the time of the first successful mission. But I only heard of them, I never met any until many years later, in the Navy, when an old Warrant Officer first offered his opinion to me that it was all a hoax. I was floored, as I had never considered the possiblity. I saw Capricon One a year or so later, and Gunner "S" was fresh on my mind by the time the film was over.

Yeah, no Oscars on that one.

"Mom's on the roof!" :)
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#8
Edit: Someone allready gave a link to a good site above that explains it all. It supported almost all of my answers, and showed some to not be the very best (the one why areas in the dark doesn't look all black). Oh well. Go read that article instead :)
There are three types of people in the world. Those who can count and those who can't.
Reply
#9
.....since everybody knows the Moon is made up of green cheese ! :D I actually remember watching this same video once , now that I've had time think about this topic. I just wonder what the purpose is of trying to convice everyone of a conspiracy is ?
Stormrage :
SugarSmacks / 90 Shammy -Elemental
TaMeKaboom/ 90 Hunter - BM
TaMeOsis / 90 Paladin - Prot
TaMeAgeddon/ 85 Warlock - Demon
TaMeDazzles / 85 Mage- Frost
FrostDFlakes / 90 Rogue
TaMeOlta / 85 Druid-resto
Reply
#10
This brings to mind the movie "Amazon Women on the Moon".
There, in a show called "Bull#$%& or not" Henry Silva raises the question if Nessie had actually been Jack the Ripper. You see some HILARIOUS footage of Nessie dressed up in Sherlock Holmes Wear™ picking up a hooker, walking around the corner ->"Nooo, Nooo, aaaahhhhh!". I suppose it's possible:

1:Nobody knows what Jack the Ripper looked like. He could have been huge, green and aquatic.

2:Nessie doesn't appear in regular intervals in Scotland. Proof of vacation in London.

3:Big animal -> big appetite -> perfect motive

I could go on for hours :P

Oh yes, the CIA blew up WTC, all American presidents are illuminati, the same killed JFK and an American will win a medal in alpine skiing. No wait that really happened (go Bode!)


Nuur
"I'm a cynical optimistic realist. I have hopes. I suspect they are all in vain. I find a lot of humor in that." -Pete

I'll remember you.
Reply
#11
They have a film that proved it to be made of cheese! hehe At least they got to the moon for cheaper than NASA. :)
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#12
Quote:In particular, I'm wondering how much of this evidence can be refuted and on what grounds.

Apparently you didn't read my comments very well. I was very hesitant to buy this stuff, but possess insufficient knowledge to refute it. What I wanted was "the other side", which wasn't portrayed in this presentation. Without it, yes, the information is persuasive. I merely felt that there were, no doubt, many people on the Lounge who had encountered these arguments before and could refute them. But thanks for the lecture.

Quote:Even if only a few of these objections cause doubt in your mind due to your own lack of knowledge

As I said, this was exactly the point of the post, to expand my knowledge and possibly raise some issues of debate. Nothing more.

Why the raised hackles?

The link provided later in the post was very useful as I arm myself to face the naysayers!

P.S. I don't think that the fact that I am unfamiliar with these arguments makes me
Quote:[as] gullible [as] a teenage girl.
If that was the case, I would have posted that these facts of the mission were "ironclad proof". I did not. I merely asked for some insight as to why these points, which are, at first and without specialized knowledge, quite persuasive, were perhaps not as valid as they initially appear. Nothing more, nothing less.
But whate'er I be,
Nor I, nor any man that is,
With nothing shall be pleased till he be eased
With being nothing.
William Shakespeare - Richard II
Reply
#13
Thank you very much, very helpful.
But whate'er I be,
Nor I, nor any man that is,
With nothing shall be pleased till he be eased
With being nothing.
William Shakespeare - Richard II
Reply
#14
Thank you as well, Jarulf :)
But whate'er I be,
Nor I, nor any man that is,
With nothing shall be pleased till he be eased
With being nothing.
William Shakespeare - Richard II
Reply
#15
You forgot the curse some indian shaman put on America after tens of thousands of his people were killed in a battle. He said that every 20 years, the leader of america will die!

William Henry Harrison - died April 4, 1841, under mysterious circumstances.
Abraham Lincoln - died April 14, 1865, to an assasin.
James A. Garfield - died September 19, 1881, to an assasin.
William McKinley - died September 14, 1901, again, to an assasin.
Warren Harding - August 2, 1923, strange, but natural causes.
Franklin D. Roosevelt - died, April 12, 1945, natural causes.
John F. Kennedy - died, November 22, 1963, to an assasin.

The only other president to die, was Zachary Taylor, to natural causes.

The curse has failed only once:
Rohnald Raegan, nearly died Mar 30, 1981.

Has the curse weakened? If not, George W Bush is next...
"One day, o-n-e day..."
Reply
#16
From a cold, the flu, or pneumonia: it depends on who you read. Pre-penicillan, was 1841.

Catching your death of a cold was not all that uncommon, hence the phrase.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#17
NuurAbSaal,Mar 24 2003, 09:06 AM Wrote:1:Nobody knows what Jack the Ripper looked like. He could have been huge, green and aquatic.
Actually, recent research strongly suggests that Jack the Ripper was a relatively well known Enligh painter.
I cannot recall the name, and have been so far unsuccessful in locating the section of the EXN.ca website which had the information.
Reply
#18
NOOOO!
It can't be! My beautiful theory!

*hangs himself*

:P

Nuur
"I'm a cynical optimistic realist. I have hopes. I suspect they are all in vain. I find a lot of humor in that." -Pete

I'll remember you.
Reply
#19
is a kinder, gentler, sort of reptile.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
Reply
#20
I couldn't resist. :lol:
Roland *The Gunslinger*
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)