NationStates Jolt Archive

So your opinion-have they done it for real?

So your opinion-have they done it for real?
Oh, for God's sake! Get real, willya??? :headbang:

I used to believe it, but not now. Especially now after the fiasco with delayed shuttle launch of late.

Of course it was real.

Hasn't this topic of discussion been done to death, though?

evidence they were there vs evidence they were not there- thats how i thought the discussion should be done...

evidence they were there vs evidence they were not there- thats how i thought the discussion should be done...

That's been done at least eight times since I started posting here, and that was back in January.

Yeah...Also, the Berlin Wall never really fell...and there are Ninjas on your lawn, right now, waiting to kill you as you step out to get your mail.

I can call them off for a small "donation".

That's been done at least eight times since I started posting here, and that was back in January.maybe there is some new evidence...

and where are thet posts i tryed to find them but could not...

More proof than you can throw a moon rock at that it happened:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/apollohoax.html

His own paper:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

More proof than you can throw a moon rock at that it happened:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/apollohoax.html

His own paper:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.htmlyes i saw that... very well done ...

yes i saw that... very well done ...

IMHO, Moon landing deniers have about as much credibility as Holocaust deniers.

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now? All we do these days is send robot probes to other places. What happened to Bush's "Man on Mars" thing?

IMHO, Moon landing deniers have about as much credibility as Holocaust deniers.
come on you cant be serious were talking about completelly different things here..

come on you cant be serious were talking about completelly different things here..

Both are historical fact. There is no difference.

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now? All we do these days is send robot probes to other places. What happened to Bush's "Man on Mars" thing?
We can. It's not a technological problem, it's a cost and politics problem. Sending people to the Moon would still be tremendously costly and the people on Earth will start going "we need to be fighting poverty, we need to create jobs, we need more bombers." You know: wah, wah, wah, wah...

So, politicians won't commit to such an expensive proposition that won't be showing a return for many, many years and won't help them get reelected.

The Chinese have a plan to get there, though, and they don't have to worry about elections and people complaining, so they may very well achieve it.

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now? All we do these days is send robot probes to other places. What happened to Bush's "Man on Mars" thing?

Because too much money is being wasted on a pointless war on drugs, entitlement programs, and a foreign military adventure.

If they'd eliminate the Board of Education, lower entitlements and military spending by 10%, eliminate NASA and setup a new pro-market agency set up like the FCC, we'd have colonies on the Moon & Mars, and would have probably several dozen space stations in ten years.

Nevermind all the jobs it would create.

Because too much money is being wasted on a pointless war on drugs, entitlement programs, and a foreign military adventure.

If they'd eliminate the Board of Education, lower entitlements and military spending by 10%, eliminate NASA and setup a new pro-market agency set up like the FCC, we'd have colonies on the Moon & Mars, and would have probably several dozen space stations in ten years.

Nevermind all the jobs it would create.

And built a Death Star help of Chinese slave labour. :p

And built a Death Star help of Chinese slave labour. :p

Hey... it worked for Wal Mart. :(

Yeah...Also, the Berlin Wall never really fell...and there are Ninjas on your lawn, right now, waiting to kill you as you step out to get your mail.

I can call them off for a small "donation".
ROFL! Tell it. ;)

We can. It's not a technological problem, it's a cost and politics problem. Sending people to the Moon would still be tremendously costly and the people on Earth will start going "we need to be fighting poverty, we need to create jobs, we need more bombers." You know: wah, wah, wah, wah...

So, politicians won't commit to such an expensive proposition that won't be showing a return for many, many years and won't help them get reelected.

The Chinese have a plan to get there, though, and they don't have to worry about elections and people complaining, so they may very well achieve it.
Maybe a new space-race will have to start in order to move things in space.1 more proof that competition is healthy...

ROFL! Tell it. ;)
man 1 word of advice--Increase your medication plz!!!

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now? All we do these days is send robot probes to other places. What happened to Bush's "Man on Mars" thing?

Money, or I should say a lack thereof.

Money, or I should say a lack thereof.money and the will to do it

Well duh, of course it was a Hollywood trick. Wake up people, you are being fooled. There is no moon (http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm).

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now? All we do these days is send robot probes to other places. What happened to Bush's "Man on Mars" thing?

Keep in mind, that was during a Space Race. The Russians sent the first man into orbit and the first probe around the moon. we were scared they were going to start sending weapons up there.

We had to get men up there, if for nothing other than morale.

People who think that the moon landing was faked make my head hurt.
;_;

The "Moon" is the oldest example of mass hysteria and the power of suggestion the human race has ever known.

It is truly astonishing that people are still willing to give credence to tired and thoroughly refuted old conspiracy theory. The facts are that there is no (not one) claim advanced by the conspiracists that carries even the slightest credibility. Every single argument against the reality of the Moon landings has been soundly discredited.

Yet there are those who still believe. The fact is that there will ALWAYS be those who will believe. Just as there are those who continue to believe that there is an artificial face on Mars. Just as there are those who insist that the World Trade Center was brought down by missiles fired from fake airliners and that it was all set up by the US Government.

The simple crux of the matter is that there are those who are bored of their lives and want them to be more like the movies. They want to believe that our governments are in cahoots with aliens. They want to believe that there are shadowy things going on that would everything a lot more exciting. They... well, as Fox Mulder's poster said, they just "Want To Believe" - full stop.

Yes, the Moon landings DID happen. Yes, they were real. No, there's no reason why they were IMPOSSIBLE. The pictures from the Moon show no inexplicable anomalies. The radiation in the Van Allen belts was not enough to cause any discomfort for the astronauts, let alone kill them. The maths involved in projecting the capsule as far as the Moon was complex, but it was maths - and maths is precise and reliable.

Capricorn One was just a movie - not a whistle being subtly blown.

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now? All we do these days is send robot probes to other places. What happened to Bush's "Man on Mars" thing?

Ya, i was wondering about that. But shouldn't all the money he would spend on it be better spent on ending world poverty? I mean, setting up a colony on the moon (or putting ppl on mars, as you pointed out) would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, so why can't we use it to give ppl in africa some descent housing, food, and drink. The moon isn't important enough to come before the lives of the 3 billion ppl world wide living below the poverty line (something like that...it's pretty horrible, isn't it?)!

It is truly astonishing that people are still willing to give credence to tired and thoroughly refuted old conspiracy theory. The facts are that there is no (not one) claim advanced by the conspiracists that carries even the slightest credibility. Every single argument against the reality of the Moon landings has been soundly discredited.

Yet there are those who still believe. The fact is that there will ALWAYS be those who will believe. Just as there are those who continue to believe that there is an artificial face on Mars. Just as there are those who insist that the World Trade Center was brought down by missiles fired from fake airliners and that it was all set up by the US Government.

The simple crux of the matter is that there are those who are bored of their lives and want them to be more like the movies. They want to believe that our governments are in cahoots with aliens. They want to believe that there are shadowy things going on that would everything a lot more exciting. They... well, as Fox Mulder's poster said, they just "Want To Believe" - full stop.

Yes, the Moon landings DID happen. Yes, they were real. No, there's no reason why they were IMPOSSIBLE. The pictures from the Moon show no inexplicable anomalies. The radiation in the Van Allen belts was not enough to cause any discomfort for the astronauts, let alone kill them. The maths involved in projecting the capsule as far as the Moon was complex, but it was maths - and maths is precise and reliable.

Capricorn One was just a movie - not a whistle being subtly blown.well now they are saying that the amount of fuel onboard wasnt enough for the trip to the moon and back if u calculate it there wasnt any fuel left for ANY kind of manuvers,and getting of the moon with eagle was impossible...so thats what a maths says.

well now they are saying that the amount of fuel onboard wasnt enough for the trip to the moon and back if u calculate it there wasnt any fuel left for ANY kind of manuvers,and getting of the moon with eagle was impossible...so thats what a maths says.

Very cute. But there is no "Moon" to travel to.

Yeah...Also, the Berlin Wall never really fell...and there are Ninjas on your lawn, right now, waiting to kill you as you step out to get your mail.

I can call them off for a small "donation".

I KNEW it! *locks self into Ninja Proof Room*

Yes, of course it was real. And I find myself dumbfounded that people honestly believe it was faked.

Oh, we've been to the moon, I can tell you that. I can also tell you who is behind NASA'a recent troubles getting anywhere near it again.

Well duh, of course it was a Hollywood trick. Wake up people, you are being fooled. There is no moon (http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm).

that site is great.

"There were no photgraphs taken of the moon before 1850"

Gee, I wonder why that was. Could it be because it was impossible with the early cameras until Eastman invented rolled film?

Number 1: Holiwood? I mean, come ON!

Number 2: Of course we went to the moon, but we can't go back. Sure, we COULD, but that would mean bringing out our old rocket-ships. Y'see, Space Shuttles are fine and dandy for getting into space to go in orbit, but they just can't go as far as the moon, and they for sure couldn't reach Mars.

Keep in mind, that was during a Space Race. The Russians sent the first man into orbit and the first probe around the moon. we were scared they were going to start sending weapons up there.

We had to get men up there, if for nothing other than morale.

In short, just another arms race. Far more glorified though than the usual stuff.

I rekon its real wots the point of facking it any way an we can poor the 3 billon poor in moon colinoys :D

In short, just another arms race. Far more glorified though than the usual stuff.

Basically. At least we keep getting cool stuff out of it.

Very cute. But there is no "Moon" to travel to.

So whats that big rock in the night sky?

So whats that big rock in the night sky?
How do you know its a rock? ;)

You can see it. But think about it – without the help of so-called "experts", how do you really know what you’re looking at? It could be a hologram, projected from various government installations throughout the world. It could be a large, crudely painted balloon, held in place by helium and propelled by tiny sails and rudders (which is why it moves across the sky so slowly). Or, most likely, it could have been different things at different times and different places, depending on the technology available to the conspirators and the culture and beliefs of the population being deceived.
The hoax could easily have been imposed on a gullible world at many points in human history. Perhaps it began as a collective hallucination or a religious myth, or perhaps an especially bright star that came to be exaggerated over time. However the moon story started, early proponents of the hoax were swift to recognize how it could be exploited for their benefit, and shrewdly devised a scheme to use it to their advantage.

They began to spread rumors, falsify scientific observations, and invent new gods to represent this fictional celestial body. They ingeniously concocted the idea of "cycles of the moon", and as their resources increased, were able to create the illusion that this object in the sky actually went through such changes. To make their hoax more plausible to early, superstitious societies, they arranged for these cycles to coincide with the months of the year.

How do you know its a rock? ;)

You can see it. But think about it – without the help of so-called "experts", how do you really know what you’re looking at? It could be a hologram, projected from various government installations throughout the world. It could be a large, crudely painted balloon, held in place by helium and propelled by tiny sails and rudders (which is why it moves across the sky so slowly). Or, most likely, it could have been different things at different times and different places, depending on the technology available to the conspirators and the culture and beliefs of the population being deceived.
The hoax could easily have been imposed on a gullible world at many points in human history. Perhaps it began as a collective hallucination or a religious myth, or perhaps an especially bright star that came to be exaggerated over time. However the moon story started, early proponents of the hoax were swift to recognize how it could be exploited for their benefit, and shrewdly devised a scheme to use it to their advantage.

They began to spread rumors, falsify scientific observations, and invent new gods to represent this fictional celestial body. They ingeniously concocted the idea of "cycles of the moon", and as their resources increased, were able to create the illusion that this object in the sky actually went through such changes. To make their hoax more plausible to early, superstitious societies, they arranged for these cycles to coincide with the months of the year.

So, the tides. They just DO that, do they?

So whats that big rock in the night sky?

Post-hypnotic suggestion and mass hysteria.

So, the tides. They just DO that, do they?

The ocean is alive, and it makes tides itself.

How do you know its a rock? ;)

You can see it. But think about it – without the help of so-called "experts", how do you really know what you’re looking at? It could be a hologram, projected from various government installations throughout the world. It could be a large, crudely painted balloon, held in place by helium and propelled by tiny sails and rudders (which is why it moves across the sky so slowly). Or, most likely, it could have been different things at different times and different places, depending on the technology available to the conspirators and the culture and beliefs of the population being deceived.
The hoax could easily have been imposed on a gullible world at many points in human history. Perhaps it began as a collective hallucination or a religious myth, or perhaps an especially bright star that came to be exaggerated over time. However the moon story started, early proponents of the hoax were swift to recognize how it could be exploited for their benefit, and shrewdly devised a scheme to use it to their advantage.

They began to spread rumors, falsify scientific observations, and invent new gods to represent this fictional celestial body. They ingeniously concocted the idea of "cycles of the moon", and as their resources increased, were able to create the illusion that this object in the sky actually went through such changes. To make their hoax more plausible to early, superstitious societies, they arranged for these cycles to coincide with the months of the year.

Just so. Thank you for helping clear all that up, Womble.

The Moon is a HOAX!

I used to believe it happened, now I'm not too sure. I watched this program a year or so ago, about the whole 'hoax' and they made some interesting points...

But I try not to think about it, in fact I just odn't think about it. I really couldn't care less.

Number 1: Holiwood? I mean, come ON!

Number 2: Of course we went to the moon, but we can't go back. Sure, we COULD, but that would mean bringing out our old rocket-ships. Y'see, Space Shuttles are fine and dandy for getting into space to go in orbit, but they just can't go as far as the moon, and they for sure couldn't reach Mars.

And they are made to land on airport runways? Just a thought.

I used to believe it happened, now I'm not too sure. I watched this program a year or so ago, about the whole 'hoax' and they made some interesting points...

But I try not to think about it, in fact I just odn't think about it. I really couldn't care less.

Read the badastronomy link in the first page, it debunks all the claims from that show.

And they are made to land on airport runways? Just a thought.

Sorry, what's the connection?

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now?

Because NASA doesn't get 4% of the nation's GDP anymore. And there is no more Cold War, hence no more massive space race. The only reason we went to the moon was to show that we could do it and the Soviets couldn't.

Which brings up another point: if we didn't get to the moon, and actually made the whole thing up, don't you think the most espionage-savvy nation in human history (USSR) would have exposed us in front of the rest of the world?

You don't know about the runways on the moon? Of course, they don't exist because the moon doesn't exist either. No matter what all those pesky scholars and scientists say.

How do you know its a rock? ;)

You can see it. But think about it – without the help of so-called "experts", how do you really know what you’re looking at? It could be a hologram, projected from various government installations throughout the world. It could be a large, crudely painted balloon, held in place by helium and propelled by tiny sails and rudders (which is why it moves across the sky so slowly). Or, most likely, it could have been different things at different times and different places, depending on the technology available to the conspirators and the culture and beliefs of the population being deceived.
The hoax could easily have been imposed on a gullible world at many points in human history. Perhaps it began as a collective hallucination or a religious myth, or perhaps an especially bright star that came to be exaggerated over time. However the moon story started, early proponents of the hoax were swift to recognize how it could be exploited for their benefit, and shrewdly devised a scheme to use it to their advantage.

They began to spread rumors, falsify scientific observations, and invent new gods to represent this fictional celestial body. They ingeniously concocted the idea of "cycles of the moon", and as their resources increased, were able to create the illusion that this object in the sky actually went through such changes. To make their hoax more plausible to early, superstitious societies, they arranged for these cycles to coincide with the months of the year.


Thats not an answer. Its a vague accustation of a conspiracy. Where is the hard evidence that debunks the thousands of years of proof?

Thats not an answer. Its a vague accustation of a conspiracy. Where is the hard evidence that debunks the thousands of years of proof?

You've been conditioned to the extent that you believe the so-called 'Moon' to exist.

Again, not an answer. Its a backdoor way of insulting me.

Debunk the evidence that supports the moon exists.

You say the sea is a living organism that handles the tides istelf. Prove it.

You say that its a giant balloon or hologram I'm seeing in the sky. Prove it.

And saying I'm conditioned or that there is some conspiracy that has hidden all your proof doesn't fly. Those are cop outs.

Again, not an answer. Its a backdoor way of insulting me.

Debunk the evidence that supports the moon exists.

You say the sea is a living organism that handles the tides istelf. Prove it.

You say that its a giant balloon or hologram I'm seeing in the sky. Prove it.

And saying I'm conditioned or that there is some conspiracy that has hidden all your proof doesn't fly. Those are cop outs.
do you think that he is serious about the moon not existing???

Again, not an answer. Its a backdoor way of insulting me.

Debunk the evidence that supports the moon exists.

You say the sea is a living organism that handles the tides istelf. Prove it.

You say that its a giant balloon or hologram I'm seeing in the sky. Prove it.

And saying I'm conditioned or that there is some conspiracy that has hidden all your proof doesn't fly. Those are cop outs.

Geez, you're taking all of this rather seriously. Okay, time out:

Yes, the supposition that the Moon is a hoax is patently false. I didn't actually expect anybody to take it as an attempt at making a valid argument. I hardly think I'm going to devote any time at all in order to prop up an obviously incredibly ludicrous fabrication.

You've just got no sense of humour, do you?

Very cute. But there is no "Moon" to travel to.So whats that big rock in the night sky?
That's no moon. It's a space station.[/QUOTE=Obi-Wan]

(Why did no-one post that?)

Geez, you're taking all of this rather seriously. Okay, time out:

Yes, the supposition that the Moon is a hoax is patently false. I didn't actually expect anybody to take it as an attempt at making a valid argument. I hardly think I'm going to devote any time at all in order to prop up an obviously incredibly ludicrous fabrication.

You've just got no sense of humour, do you?


OK, fine, you got me. I've actually got a great sense of humor, but you'd be shocked what some people try to push on here.

I've read posts where an idiot tried to tell me "Gaia" punished Asia with that tsunami because Bush didn't sign the Kyoto agreement and it was in fact tied to global warming.

Hell, there is a moron with a website trying to disprove the moon exists.

I can't take anything or anyne for granted over the net.

Hell, there is a moron with a website trying to disprove the moon exists.


I'm somewhat disappointed you didn't link in to that drivel here. I could always use a laugh.

The Earth does not exist.

I'm somewhat disappointed you didn't link in to that drivel here. I could always use a laugh.

The Holy Womble linked it already on page 2

http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

The more I look at the ite, the more I wonder if he is just having fun with the nuts.

Of course they did it!!!! What a stupid question! The so-called evidence of a fake has been debunked and I wish people would get their lives on to more sane pursuits.

The Earth does not exist.

Now there's a conspiracy theory I want to hear more about.

well now they are saying that the amount of fuel onboard wasnt enough for the trip to the moon and back if u calculate it there wasnt any fuel left for ANY kind of manuvers,and getting of the moon with eagle was impossible...so thats what a maths says.No - that's what "THEY" say, apparently. But as is so often the case with conspiracy nuts, you've neglected to mention just who "THEY" are. Is this going to be the first example of such information coming from reliable sources? Or are "THEY" going to be Other Conspiracy Nuts, as is usual?

The crew of Apollo 13 discovered full well the narrow error margin the moon flights had in terms of fuel - but enough to do the job there most certainly was.

Come on, now. Photographic 'anomalies': Discredited.
Claims about high radiation: Discredited.
Not enough room for the Lunar Rover: Ridiculous and discredited.

The list goes on.

So "now they're saying" doesn't really hold any water at all. It's far too close to "okay, let's see if THIS one works".

If we did land in 1969, why can't we return in 2005 with better technology and all new tech we have now? All we do these days is send robot probes to other places. What happened to Bush's "Man on Mars" thing?


WHo say's we coulden't?

No we cannot go to the moon in our current shuttles because they are "Orbiters" used to lock on to space stations and orbit the earth for scientific reasons and/or Maintaning sattlites. Therefore they are not meant to go to the moon. Thats what the Apollo 11 Satun V multiple stage rocket was for. It was designed solely for the perpose of taking Astronauts to the moon, and returning them safely to Earth. If we really wanted to, we could go back to the moon, the question is, why would we want to waste the time and money on a mission that would serve no real scientific perpose in our current day and age? Plus we would have to construct a brand new Ship that would be desinged for this one misson. It is not in our best interest.

Here is a site that puts those conspiracy people in the ground:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/moontruth.asp

Urban legends aside.. it isn't as hilarious as this one:

http://www.snopes.com/science/sunboom.htm

OK, now that I am thinking clearly, the Mad Revisionist is obviously just joking.

The moon is an extremely large Kidney Stone from one of my Prevoius Incarnations. I was the Steve people were talking about when they say 'Adam and Steve'. Adam was a jerk. He wouldn't share the fruit.

The Holy Womble linked it already on page 2

http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

The more I look at the ite, the more I wonder if he is just having fun with the nuts.
:rolleyes:

You, sir, are lacking both a sense of humour and the intelligence needed to analyse simple texts.

Take a closer look. The Mad Revisionist website by its very name suggests "having fun with the nuts. What they are really out to do is mock the so called Holocaust revisionists, who are attempting to "disprove" that the Holocaust of the Jewish people ever took place during World war II. The Mad Revisionist simply applies the same methodology used by the Holocaust denial crowd to other subjects such as the moon, the 9/11 and the Titanic. Plus they do it with a high degree of wonderful humour.

Ya, I got it. You're only two hours behind.

And you should know, I used to have a neighbor that was into the Flat Earth Society, so I have seen just how crazy conspiracy nuts can be.

The Earth does not exist.

Well, not since the Vogon Construction Fleet...

Ive seen a few of the landing sites via my universities telescope...so unless they have a fake picture in front of the telescope that i somehow didnt see, its real...