I believe that we did. There would have to be to many people involved for it not to have really happened. Somebody would have decided to cash in before now.

No such thing as *really bad science.* Part of the Merriam- Webster definition of science is *knowlege covering general truths...as obtained and tested through the scientific method.*

Something can be unscientific or even science fiction (tho' science fiction can be based on science.)

I believe the Fox show was unscientific in it's claims.

if you do some research you will find out that there is only a given time when one can land on the moon. Yes, you are correct, there is a lot of radiation in space produced by the sun and pushed across along with the solar wind, which can easily kill someone who isn't protected. You are very right on this, but have you ever thought that maybe NASA thought of this and planned to land on the moon when there was minimal radiation on the moon.

Earth sucks up a lot of the radiation and solar wind with it's magnetic fields. There was a blackout in montreal not too long ago because of the solar wind or something similar. The reason why we get the northern/southern lights is because of the exact same thing. NASA would have been smart to use the earth to sheild the moon from this radiation. I would bet you all of the money i will ever make in my life that they took this into consideration, and if you do the math, the earth probably blocked a pretty damn hight percentage of that radiation.

I do know this however. Any person or thing that goes into space at any given time is subject to die of some type of radiation produced from the sun. The solar flairs that the sun produces are huge and sometimes sends a crazy huge amount of radiation or different types of deadly rays and particles towards us in the solar wind. If something were to skip off and come near any spacecraft it could do serious damage. That is simply a risk that these brave men have taken.

Actually... read this...

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/f...html#radiation

Also, like i said before, here is the best 'proof' that we landed on the moon in 69.

Watch the lunar space module thing (or whatever it's called... the little golf cart type motor vehicle thing) and tell me how they could have done something like that on earth. It's impossible for them to do something like that on earth. That should be proof enough.




perfect!






Even still though. 7.something % of the TFP believes that we did not land on the moon in 69, and this place seems like a place of knowledgable people who don't buy into bullshit. To me, this is a very surprising amount of people who are so gullable.

did you know that that word isn't in the dictionary?

you are so gullable!!!!

anyway... to all those who doubt the moon landing

BELIEVE IT OR YOU WILL DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH.. I WILL COME OVER AND SHOOT YOU IN THE HEAD WITH MY B-B GUN (since i am in canada, and i don't even know if that's what that gun is called, cause i don't even have one of those) UNTIL YOU DIE!!!!

"We landed on the moon!?! WE LANDED ON THE MOON!!!" -Jim Carey in Dumb and Dumber. (Sorry, I couldn't resist not quoting that.)

Look. We did land on the moon. It was the greatest achievement of Mankind! It demonstrates how far we've come technologically, and is just the tip of the iceberg of mankind's potential!

There are a few issues I need to address. Some of these are also addressed in the link posted by Cynthetiq.
First of all, there was no visible flame from the Lunar Lander: Of Course Not! The flame we see in rockets leaving the ground is a result of the atmosphere around the exhaust. If you ever watch the complete takeoff of a rocket, you will see that as soon as the atmosphere is thin enough, the flame disappears.
Second, no blast craters on the moon: The Lunar Lander did not blast the moon's surface with enough propellant to leave a crater.
Third, to address mike10270's "Apollo VIII (I think - the one that orbited the Moon) was fake" statement: If you read the mission log reports, then you will know that the whole reason for that mission was to orbit the moon while testing everything. They tested every little peace they could of both the spacecraft and the Lunar Lander to make sure it all worked in space before actually sending it down to the moon. That way they wouldn't be sending their astronauts to die on the moon due to something not working.
Fourth, the radiation: I believe that Toag and Cynthetiq covered this well enough.
Fifth: The reason the Russians never landed on the moon: We beat them, so that part of the program lost the funding from the Russian Government. They switched gears from moon landing to space stations.
Fun Fact: Russia’s original timeline would have had them land on the moon two days before we landed. That timeline was modified after the rocket they were going to use to launch their capsule blew up on the launch pad during it’s first test.:lol:

We landed on the moon.

Here's some evidence to add to NiceGuy's post.

Consider the time we went to the moon. 1969. The United States and Russia were in the midst of a space race and at the same time both countries were watching eachother like hawks because of the fear of nuclear strike.

Now at the dawn of ICBM technology. The Russians were watching everything the United States did in space and the United States was watching everything the Russians did in space. So if we didn't really land on the moon, the Russians would have known it and they would have used the opportunity to humiliate the United States in front of the world.

So we definatly landed on the moon. Just ask the Russians.

Hey Niceguy,

If you're gonna quote me:

Third, to address mike10270's "Apollo VIII (I think - the one that orbited the Moon) was fake" statement

Then PLEASE use the WHOLE quote:

Strangely no-one ever suggests that Apollo VIII (I think - the one that orbited the Moon) was fake

And please DON'T lump me in with the"Lunar Hoaxers".

Thanx,

Mike.

Fox will do anything to make a buck. :D

Sorry, Mike.

I didn't mean to mix you in with the "Lunar Hoaxers." It was just one more thing on the list that needed addressed.

I have a hard time believing they had success on the first attempt yet haven't been able to return 30+ years later.

People were more apt to believe it back then. If the government told you it was so then so it was. Can the current space program land men on the moon?

No, but that's actually a funding issue. During the 60's, 4 cents of every tax dollar went into the space program, and that was before the inflation ridden 70's so the dollar was worth more.

Today 1 cent of every tax dollar goes to the space program. And the dollar is worth less than it was then.

They might get paid a lot of money to fake it...

I think you will find that most americans believe they did, and most of the rest of us don't.

For the record, i don't.

No, because the camera is free standing of the lander. It's a camera on a movie set.

Who says they haven't returned? Do you think that 69 was the only time that man landed on the moon? 69 was the only time it was broadcasted internationally because it was such a huge thing at the time. Have you ever seen the movie apollo 13? Remember when they are all talking on tv and they think they are being broadcasted on national television, but in fact they weren't. People weren't interested in it at the time, and i can assure you that we have landed on the moon since then. Here is a link you can check out.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/apollo_landings.html




I KNOW they landed on the moon, and i am not american. Ask the russians, like someone suggested. They also KNOW that the landing happened. You are just too gullable and ignorant to believe the truth and too many people in this world think that there is something else behind everything that anything associated with the government does. Give me one good reason why you don't believe that we landed on the moon. One solid fact. I'll give you mine.

Try to mimic the lunar rovers movement and the perfect parabolic arcs taht the sand flying off the wheels take before they hit the ground on earth. It's impossible to do without being in a vacuum with minimal gravity. Now, try creating a vacuum that massive (big enough to hold the entire area that the lunar rover covered in one of the video footages.


If anyone believes in the hoax, explain that and give me good scientific reason why it's true.

If Germany wasn't the first country to make it to the moon, then its pure bullshit. Now let's review the "facts". The USA was the first to make it to the moon-- is the USA also known as "Germany"? Nope. Its pure bullshit. Only way I figure that the USA could have done it is if all the engineers were Japanese, Hindu, and German... or at least not American. Maybe around 90% of the engineers at my college are from out of the country. I've seen pictures of students from MIT and a lot of them look Asian or of Arabic descent. Who knows. All I know is that it wasn't American ingenuity that made it to the moon, if such a feat has ever been accomplished.

why would u say it isn't. there no reason for the government to make it up, it's NOT some kinda conspiracy.

they went to the moon, realized it was borin, took some rocks, and havent been back :p

I can't believe what I'm seeing. I mean how could we not have landed on the moon. I mean we can send people into outerspace so why deny the fact that we have landed on the moon. I almost find it hilarious that things like this can even be considered!! Basically saying we never landed on the moon is practically disregarding everything that is related to any countries space program ever.

If we never went to the moon...explain the MOON ROCKS?? Yeah I know you could say that they are just regular/fake rocks. Its also true that if we really intended to fake a moon landing the number of people involved would be staggering. The whole idea that we never did is absurd and anyone who doubts it should have Buzz Aldrin come over to your house and woop your ass.

Another claim that gets used as a method of saying it didn't happen is that all missions, despite being horrendously complex, went flawlessly. Here's how 'flawlessly' the Apollo missions went.

VII (First manned Earth orbit test of the Command Module) - Hardware fine, but the crew gets head colds early on and became so argumentative and rebellious against Mission Control that the controllers are half-ready to have them splash down in the middle of a typhoon! The mission commander had announced his retirement before the flight, so he could not really be reprimanded effectively, but the other two crew members were never allowed to fly in space again.

VIII (First lunar orbit flight) - Mission commander Borman comes down with a 24-hour flu early in the flight. Mission Control seriously considers aborting the mission - although this still would have meant looping around the Moon to get back to Earth.

IX (First manned test of the Lunar Module in Earth orbit) - Due to Lunar Module Pilot Schweickart coming down with motion sickness, flight test of the Lunar Module is almost abandoned.

X (Dress rehearsal for the landing - Lunar Module flies to within fifty thousand feet of the lunar surface) - Due to astronaut error in setting a switch in the Lunar Module, the LM goes into wild gyrations just before dropping the descent stage in lunar orbit, placing the crew at real risk of crashing into the Moon.

XI (The Big One!) - Communications problems immediately before descent make things very difficult for Mission Control to decide whether or not to continue. During descent to the surface, a mis-set switch causes a computer overload, almost aborting the landing.

XII (First precision landing) - The giant Saturn V booster gets struck by lightning not once, but TWICE, within the first minute after lift-off from Cape Kennedy. If that isn't potentially a serious problem, then frankly I don't know WHAT is! NASA seriously tightens up weather restrictions for all future manned launches.

XIII (The only actual Apollo abort) - 'Nuff said.

XIV - Crew almost unable to dock with the Lunar Module and extract it from the third stage of the Saturn rocket on the way to the Moon. Just before the landing attempt, Mission Control detects the Lunar Module computer reading a faulty abort signal, which would cause the landing to be automatically aborted by the computer as soon as the engine starts to brake them out of orbit towards a landing. MIT rewrites the software on the spot just in time for the landing to proceed. Landing radar fails to lock on to the lunar surface until very late in the landing sequence, almost at the stage at which mission rules would require an abort. Radar locks on with about a minute to spare.

XV (First use of the "moon buggy") - No major problems.

XVI - A problem with a backup engine control system on the Service Module delays the landing by six hours and almost causes it to be scrubbed.

XVII - A failure of a cheap electrical component in the launch control equipment causes a $450 million mission to be held on the launch pad over two hours past the scheduled launch time (the only Apollo launch delay). Otherwise, the most successful mission of all.

The engineers who built and flew Apollo KNEW that they were building a massively complex system, so they subjected it to MASSIVE amounts of testing, which accounted for a large part of the $20 billion (in 1972 US dollars) pricetag of Apollo. For instance, they had a test stand which could hold a complete Saturn V rocket, with the two Apollo spacecraft, and SHAKE THE WHOLE THING to see how it would hold up to the vibrations of launch. They did things like tune the engine exhaust nozzles to vibrate at different frequencies to avoid resonance - i.e. the vibrations of two or more engines adding to shake the whole vehicle to pieces, the same reason the military gets troops to break step when crossing a bridge.

In comparison, the Russians spent only about a tenth of this amount on their lunar landing program. The only occasions that all of the engines in the first stage of their rocket, the N1, were fired at the same time were when it flew - and none of the four test flights reached Earth orbit, let alone the Moon.

Did we really land on the moon?
 

well what do you think, did Americans really land on the moon, did anyone really walk on the moon, etc?

I think we did, but i would just like to hear some reasons why people think we may not have, I have heard some pretty silly ones, like "How could we land on the moon in something covered in tin foil?"

I think that man has made it to the moon and back. If we can send probes to Mars, we can go to the moon.

SM70....did you get a chance to see the special on it? I did and it certainly put a whole lot of doubt in my head. They analyzed the screen shots and made comments on many things that give reason to believe it was indeed a hoax. I saw it about 2 years ago so the details escape me at this particular moment, but it left me thinking that it was a well planned hoax that technology caught up to when it came down to the finer details.

fox moon special explained

I had looked into this awhile back, and this seemed to me to be the most thoroughly researched and cogent explanation.

Just thought I'd share it if anyone was interested.

*sigh* i can't believe people are only reading the last couple of comments on a very well worked thread...

read the thread.... it's all there.

if man did not take his rocket ship to the moon, then we would not have tang, the delicious orange breakfast drink.

we have tang. so moon, yes!

Although the argument is amusing, I think it is beyond stupidity to think that we could get into space and not be able to land on the moon. But, you know... to each his/her own.

Ive read allot from both sides. I saw the special and have seen the explanations debunking it. Some of them explain it well others dont. WHen I think that it would be impossible for the government to pull something like that I think about everything else its pulled and gotten away with.

The shot of the Earth rising in the background seem compelling proof to me. I do question why we havent went back. To say they have enough data and theres no reason seems weak to me. It would seem that having a lunar base would be just as; if not more beneficial that a space station.

I keep hearing about Japan doind an orbit around the moon, nut nothing concrete. That will silence any doubt or any lies.

yes because if they didn't then the REAL man on the moon would have been more hyped up... if they've done it afterwards then they obviously had to have done it at a time when it wasn't done before... yeah.. < confusing

I think they did land on the moon, although I wouldn't put it past them to trick us either :P

yes, but not in the year that they claim to land in the moon, years later....

Yeah, my bad Cynthetiq.

Awww, you beat me to it. Anyone who reads this article and still thinks the moon landing never happened is beyond hope.

The people who don't believe we landed on the Moon and love to speak highly about it are just looking for some form of attention and that's exactly what they get too. And there are some kinds of people who will never believe what you tell them despite insurmountable evidence proving so. They could probably see the flag up there on the Moon themselves and they still wouldn't want to believe it.

those are the same people whose family lineage can be traced to those same people who thought the earth was flat and the center of the universe.

In fact, I'm sure that some producer out there could come up with some compelling evidence showing that the earth still is the center of the universe and that all science proving otherwise is flawed. I'd even bet my bottom dollar that if such a show existed we'd have thread here on it and several people who would actually believe the show's viewpoint.

I saw this broadcast a couple years ago...it was convincing at the time...but a bit ridiculous, now that I look back on it...

Had to be true.

Technology back in 1969 wasn't good enough to fake it.

Thanks for listening.

My biggest issue with this and other conspiracy theories is that people just don't keep secrets this well. While Clinton was the most powerful man on the planet he was unable to keep secret his dalliance with an intern

There are many other examples; Iran-contra, Watergate, Enron. To fake the moon landing would require the cooperation of thousands for decades. NASA janitors and the heads of state would be involved and someone would be talking about it.

Yes I think we landed on the moon. There is a great website that debunks the fox program; I can't find the link right now though. I'll return when I find it.

Eh, I missed the second page where i was linked! Doh, sorry.

http://www.moonmovie.com/

I didn't read the whole thread because I could care less what others think on the matter, just personal preference.

I believed it was true up until I watched this movie and did some research. Not that this one movie changed my whole outlook, but if you watch it, you will second-guess yourself and the footage they have at the end, of them staging the half circle of the earth is just insane. If ANYONE is interested in this stuff watch this movie, it changed my whole outlook on the landing.

I don't want to start an arguement, so thats why I am not really reading this thread :) but some of BadAstronomy.com's arguements are totally bunk and arrogant. "The astronaughts wanted the flag to wave, it seems it worked to well!" Good scientific proof there buddy.

Who's totally bunk and arrogant?

What does your name mean in Korean? Is that what you were going for? I believe you spelled it wrong if you were.

If you wouldn't have cut out half my message you would have saw I didn't want to read others opinions because I didn't want to start any arguements. Arguements can be good mm kay? But that is not the message I am trying to convey.