| JoxerTheDeityPirate 19.07.2009 06:25 |
so,40 years ago man landed on the moon or did they? lets see what the general consensus is on QZ regarding the lunar landings.. i for one am of the cynical opinion that it was all a big set up from the US government,there's too many oddities in the footage for it to be completely true but lets try and have some form of meaningful discussion on the subject without it degenerating into a form of bear baiting.. |
| john bodega 19.07.2009 07:16 |
The fact that people exist today who don't want to accept that the Lunar Landings were real is really a triumph of pseudo-science and human nature. Unsurprisingly, most arguments that the landings were faked are found knee-deep in 'well my friend says' and 'well I still don't think that ...' True - one should always be prepared to question authority. Never accept (without critical analysis) anything that comes down from 'up top'. We are right to be cynical, but the facts are clear here. The lunar landings did happen. Every (EVERY) theory from the conspiracy crowd has been debunked, solidly. And I'm not even talking about the obvious stuff that the Mythbusters took care of. Using 1969 technology, it was easier to go to the Moon than to fake it. I have yet to see anyone say otherwise in a way that wasn't unscientific in some fashion. Our guys went to the Moon; end of discussion. They have the lunar soil and the cataracts to prove it. |
| john bodega 19.07.2009 07:31 |
Of course, hehe ... The thing is; you simply can't win against someone who refuses to believe something. If we take the conspiracists to the moon and show them the original landing sites (which are all still up there), they will simply say that someone went up there and did it ... afterwards. Ha-ha. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 19.07.2009 14:19 |
^i wouldnt go as far and say that someone went up afterwards,i just have my doubts that they went there in the first place. when JFK gave his 'man on the moon by the end of the decade' speech it sort of put a bit of pressure on the US space programme to get it done,esp when the russkies sent Uri Gellar up into orbit a few years later in the middle of the cold war. there's just something not quite right about it all and just seems a little convenient that Louis Armstrong and Buzz Lightyear landed on the moon as and when they did and aparantly i'm not alone with thinking that in the UK as approx 40% of the public also dont think it happened. as for taking people up to show the debris,who come we cant see it through these super-dooper telescopes that are now available here on Earth and how comes the hubble thingy has never taken a pic of the landing site? |
| john bodega 19.07.2009 14:58 |
Hubble isn't that kind of telescope. At my best recollection it can resolve features on the Moon's surface around 280ft across - the lunar landers and their associated junk isn't even close to that size. To my knowledge they could do it now with other probes, but as yet they haven't - which I find a little irritating personally, as they could shut *some* people up in the process. Of course there would then be a group of people insisting that the landing sites have been photoshopped. Ah, just found this : link So they will be doing it, but I'm not surprised that it's taken them this long to be honest. People have funny ideas about space probes, like 'well it'd be so cool to get a photo of this or that' when in actual fact they're used to gather scientific information. The fact that some of us might think Miranda is a pretty moon is really immaterial! Carl Sagan had to lobby for a good long while to get the 'Pale Blue Dot' photo taken (this was not hoaxed either, folks...) and regardless of it's meaning to human culture, it was of little scientific use at the time. What I was going to get around to saying here (hehe) was that NASA probably could've gotten around to photographing the landing sites a long, long while ago, but there is very little scientific reason to do so. Convincing people that the landings were real would be an ultimate display of the law of diminishing returns - there will always be someone (from, say, a sample group of people who cannot go to the Moon and see for themselves) who will believe that it never happened. This post is getting long and boring; my apologies. The information is out there for people who can be buggered seeking it out. That 40% of people in the U.K, in some sense, have reason to be distrustful of the government and the news media - people should always be critical in that sense. The Apollo gig is something else though. There was an abundance of scientific findings, raw research tapes on the lunar environment, a ton of pretty pictures, a lunar laser ranging experiment, a shitload of rocks, and (as I said) a bunch of guys with cataracts from the radiation ... none of this was faked. It may have been the biggest political exercise of it's day, and people can argue over whether or not it was a good idea until Judgement Day ... The actual business of going to the Moon has never really been convincingly shown to be a hoax. Every (read : without exception) video or book that says otherwise has been shown to be unscientific nonsense. But as Eugene Cernan put it ; truth needs no defence. It's no good when people argue and name-call on the topic because it really comes down to a lack of proper education on what IS a pretty scientific topic, and of course basic human nature. Governments lie to us about so much as it is! |
| «¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» 19.07.2009 23:16 |
I've always had my doubts on this one. If there is no "air' in space, then how does a flag possibly wave? But the scientists say: In actuality, the flag was equipped with a bar to keep it extended rather than hanging limp and the ripples in the cloth were due to its folding in the packaging. That's a possible "concept" of course, but the American government is always going to have their top scientists to back up any, and all theories. |
| john bodega 20.07.2009 01:08 |
You only need to look at a decent sized photo of one of the American flags on the moon : link ... to see that it is actually being suspended with a rod at the top. A suspended flag like this one would indeed move around if it were moved by the astronauts, and the fabric would wave around - but not the way it does in Earth atmosphere. The lack of atmospheric friction would actually make it behave somewhat differently, which easily explains the odd movement of it in the videos. |
| 7Innuendo7 20.07.2009 03:49 |
842 lbs lunar dust saturated with helium-3. conspiracy theorists won't find that kind of dirt on Earth. google 'Harrison Schmitt' ... |
| john bodega 20.07.2009 04:18 |
Indeed! Or the minute volcanic glass found on the lunar surface; samples of which don't exist on Earth because they're worn down in a (comparatively) short time. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 20.07.2009 09:23 |
Interesting article on this subject... "What we didn't know about the moonwalk" |
| Micrówave 20.07.2009 12:55 |
approx 40% of the public also dont think it happened. Whoa. Slow down. There can't be THAT many people that even care in the first place, let alone believe it was staged. There is plenty of solid evidence that we DID send multiple ships to the moon, as well as solid evidence that we touched down, planted a flag, gathered rocks, and played golf. The only solid evidence that it didn't happen is the movie Capricorn One, which was really a bad movie... although it did contain O.J. Simpson's second best acting performance. But what benefit (other than beating the Russians) did we get? At no point was patriotism towards NASA and the space program higher. They could get funding for just about anything or slap a NASA Approved sticker on poo poo and sell it. Are you going to say that was all predicated on a badly filmed B Movie? Why wouldn't they get a budget like The Right Stuff had produce a decent fake moon landing instead of that crappy one we're stuck with? Also: JFK was shot and killed by Lee Harvey Oswald. But, if you create a mystery surrounding the events, you can bring millions to a city in tourism even 50 years later. Never mind the fact that the conspiricy stories originated from writers from the Dallas Morning News. Do you know how many people still come to Dallas just to walk Dealey Plaza? Yet some believe that maybe this guy shot him. Or that someone must have been in the Grassy Knoll because this cop is running over there. Yet there doesn't appear to be anyone in the Grassy Knoll in this picture. No one's holding a rifle on the overpass either. And believe me, they looked. Yet Oliver Stone and his completely made up Super Bullet can feed the frenzy even now. |
| john bodega 20.07.2009 14:13 |
Clearly the Rockefeller's don't want us to hotlink to those images. The truth will not be suppressed. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 20.07.2009 16:00 |
Micrówave wrote:
Also:
JFK was shot and killed by Lee Harvey Oswald. But, if you create a mystery surrounding the events, you can bring millions to a city in tourism even 50 years later. Never mind the fact that the conspiricy stories originated from writers from the Dallas Morning News. Do you know how many people still come to Dallas just to walk Dealey Plaza? Yet some believe that maybe this guy shot him. Or that someone must have been in the Grassy Knoll because this cop is running over there. Yet there doesn't appear to be anyone in the Grassy Knoll in this picture. No one's holding a rifle on the overpass either. And believe me, they looked. Yet Oliver Stone and his completely made up Super Bullet can feed the frenzy even now.
==== Bummer. All that work to post links and not one of them works. :-( |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 20.07.2009 20:09 |
most of the other 60% [according to the report on the tv over the weekend here in the UK] think that Louis Armstrong was the first man on the moon and Buzz Lightyear was his co-pilot [hence my reference in the earlier post] i hasten to add that these people asked were aged between 16-35 |
| Major Tom 21.07.2009 08:10 |
Damn, where's TM when you need him? NWO-Rockafeller conspiracy. Ah, BOB SAGET! |
| Major Tom 21.07.2009 08:18 |
JoxerTheDeityPirate wrote: most of the other 60% [according to the report on the tv over the weekend here in the UK] think that Louis Armstrong was the first man on the moon and Buzz Lightyear was his co-pilot [hence my reference in the earlier post] i hasten to add that these people asked were aged between 16-35No no no, you got it all mixed up. LANCE Armstrong was the first man on the moon and his co-pilot was a worn-down Goodyear tire. Back in the command module in orbit was Phil Collins and Michael Jackson. |
| ParisNair 21.07.2009 09:48 |
The conspiracy theories did sound sensational when they first started out, but NASA has pooh-poohed them good enuf for me. And where IS TM? Long time no see. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 21.07.2009 11:58 |
ParisNair wrote: The conspiracy theories did sound sensational when they first started out, but NASA has pooh-poohed them good enuf for me. And where IS TM? Long time no see.he's a man,he cant multi-task.he can only wank his brother off or type stuff on here but not both at the same time.. anyways havent you heard of the proverbial bad penny? they always turn up when you least want them too.. |
| PauloPanucci 21.07.2009 13:13 |
Do you belive????????? The man went to the moon??????????? It's a dificult thing to discuss,,,,,, half saied yes, he went,, half say no....... i stay in the meadle,,, belive,, not belive... and u? |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 21.07.2009 18:24 |
queenpaulo wrote: Do you belive????????? The man went to the moon??????????? It's a dificult thing to discuss,,,,,, half saied yes, he went,, half say no....... i stay in the meadle,,, belive,, not belive... and u?dont take this the wrong way as i dont mean to poke fun in a nasty way but after reading your post i really want you to be a meerkat called Alexander that says "simples" a lot |
