1969 Moon Landing

[whoareyaaa]

We will never know either way as they will not admit it even if it was faked, so its pointless really...

The Mars rover lands tomorrow which should be fun to watch I think their is a live stream on the xbox live and nasa tv. 8.30pm

[marty78]

We will never know either way as they will not admit it even if it was faked, so its pointless really...

The Mars rover lands tomorrow which should be fun to watch I think their is a live stream on the xbox live and nasa tv. 8.30pm

Well it will remain in every significant historical documentation as absolute fact so I'll go with the history books.

I think it is due to land early Monday morning 06:30, going so well they have cancelled a planned trajectory correction.

[fleckneymike]

We will never know either way as they will not admit it even if it was faked, so its pointless really...

The Mars rover lands tomorrow which should be fun to watch I think their is a live stream on the xbox live and nasa tv. 8.30pm

Well yes we will because all the evidence, both first and third party proves they did. Some people will claim they didn't because they have a book to sell whilst others will believe them because they like to feel they are in on some big secret which gives their life significance and purpose.

[Zingari]

No not at all, maybe if I was mechanical engineer I would be fascinated by them. I've never even thought about until today and probably never will again after today.

Come off it ;

The design papers for these projects should be like gospels and the dead sea scrolls to scientists and engineering students around the world . They would be historic inspirational documents , and the engineers would be household names like Brunel Edison , or at the very least like Trevor Bailey .

Unless there was a reason for them to disappear ,they would have been treasured .

Unless you can put up and prove he's lying , and that they are still in existence rather than trying to convince twats like me that they are unimportant , then many people will continue to doubt .

I really can't understand the time and effort you're spending on individuals such as me , when all you have to do is write to Grumman. It would be much quicker and a lot less frustrating for you

.

[Leicester_Numan]

You make it sound like it's a 5 minute job that would cost a coupe of quid!!!

I don't really care what it sounds like. These conspiracy theories only exist because NASA haven't produced the evidence to prove it beyond all doubt. I'd say it's their responsibility to prove they didn't pull off one of the world's most elaborate cons. It's not beyond their capability to do so and until they do i won't believe either them or the conspiracy theorists. Not that they'll lose any sleep over it or me for that matter.

[marty78]

Come off it ;

The design papers for these projects should be like gospels and the dead sea scrolls to scientists and engineering students around the world . They would be historic inspirational documents , and the engineers would be household names like Brunel Edison , or at the very least like Trevor Bailey .

Unless there was a reason for them to disappear ,they would have been treasured .

Unless you can put up and prove he's lying , and that they are still in existence rather than trying to convince twats like me that they are unimportant , then many people will continue to doubt .

I really can't understand the time and effort you're spending on individuals such as me , when all you have to do is write to Grumman. It would be much quicker and a lot less frustrating for you

They will continue to doubt regardless of any evidence, which we know to be true given all the evidence against them and their continuing and ever changing claims. Its like creationists thinking the Earth is 6000 years old despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It is difficult to educate the willfully ignorant unfortunately.

I don't really care what it sounds like. These conspiracy theories only exist because NASA haven't produced the evidence to prove it beyond all doubt. I'd say it's their responsibility to prove they didn't pull off one of the world's most elaborate cons. It's not beyond their capability to do so and until they do i won't believe either them or the conspiracy theorists. Not that they'll lose any sleep over it or me for that matter.

Yes they have. They have presented all their evidence which hoax believers choose to ignore before spreading their poison based on no scientific evidence. I am surprised that Russia never produced the evidence of a hoax considering they monitored Apollo missions, not to mention the other observatories that did the same the World over, including our very own Jodrell Bank.

See my point above about creationists. Have scientists not proven evolution and an Earth that is billions of years old? Does it matter to Creationists that it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt? Not a bit.

It is hard reason with the unreasonable.

[marty78]

Well yes we will because all the evidence, both first and third party proves they did. Some people will claim they didn't because they have a book to sell whilst others will believe them because they like to feel they are in on some big secret which gives their life significance and purpose.

It saddens me that this statement is true but true it is. These people convince the ignorant and make a fortune doing so and are nothing short of criminals.

[Zingari]

It saddens me that this statement is true but true it is. These people convince the ignorant and make a fortune doing so and are nothing short of criminals.

Earlier I asked you why you were so concerned about what idiots like me believed.( not sure if it was you personally )

You ( or whoever)said you are so concerned about the integrity of science and are trying to stop ridiculous theories circulating tinterweb ( or words to that effect) and befuddling the weak minded among us in a criminal manner , but now you’re so unconcerned as to actually write to Grumman to prove the point.

Surely your concern for scientific integrity should stretch that far and you would prove these documents exist , not for us, but for yourself .

Are you really more concerned about scientific integrity or stoning non believers .

I don't care if they exist or not ( they'd mean zilch to me), but why keep calling a man who has been dead since '98 a liar if you're not prepared to prove it

Seriously which is the easier option, constant repetition or obtaining (or at least proving the existence of, ) what should be easily available scientific papers ?

[Rincewind]

I'm sure some people are confusing the Moon landing with the Holywood film which was about a faked mission to land on Mars. The same explainations are being offered that were in the film. Only difference so far is that Neil Armstrong and co-astronauts have not been killed off by the government.

That is one thing that convinces me that it happened. If it was fake could they have kept up the pretence for over 40 years? I saw a program where they spoke to one of them think it was Buzz Aldrin. Seemed a genuine nice bloke. Did not come across as the sort of person that would lie for so many years. Behind him in the interview there was a bookshelf full of books on astromony and space travel.

There are also the thousands involved in the mission. Were they in on the conspiracy too? Or were they duped as well? The effort needed to pull it off would have been too much just to say we landed on the moon in the time span JFK hoped they would. It would have been a lot simpler to say 'We are not quite ready'

The Russians seemed convinced anyway because they gave up. If they thought that the landing was a fake would they have not pursued it to find out more?

And all this is before we get down to the scientific evidence which has already been well covered much better than I could by other posters.

[marty78]

Earlier I asked you why you were so concerned about what idiots like me believed.( not sure if it was you personally )

You ( or whoever)said you are so concerned about the integrity of science and are trying to stop ridiculous theories circulating tinterweb ( or words to that effect) and befuddling the weak minded among us in a criminal manner , but now you’re so unconcerned as to actually write to Grumman to prove the point.

Surely your concern for scientific integrity should stretch that far and you would prove these documents exist , not for us, but for yourself .

Are you really more concerned about scientific integrity or stoning non believers .

I don't care if they exist or not ( they'd mean zilch to me), but why keep calling a man who has been dead since '98 a liar if you're not prepared to prove it

Seriously which is the easier option, constant repetition or obtaining (or at least proving the existence of, ) what should be easily available scientific papers ?

All the following taken from National Archives (USA)

http://www.hq.nasa.g...grams/ad013.gif

http://www.hq.nasa.g...grams/ad016.gif

http://www.hq.nasa.g...grams/ad002.gif

http://www.hq.nasa.g...grams/ad014.gif

http://www.hq.nasa.g...grams/ad018.gif

The following three drawings can be enlarged should you wish. There is more available but I think the point is made.

http://www.ehartwell...ipment_sht1.jpg

http://www.ehartwell...ipment_sht2.jpg

http://www.ehartwell...AndEVA_Aids.jpg

You would think with Colliers journalistic connections such information would be easy to find. Is he a liar?

[marty78]

More information and links here:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-LRVdocs.html

[Zingari]

well done although they don't exactly look that technical to me,( only looked at a few) and I'm not sure if this is quite what he was referring to , but i'll accept that at least you've tried and it's good enough for me at least . Whether everyone else with doubts is satisfied by them ,I really wouldn't know .

I'm leaving it here for the time being now , unconvinced but not worried about it either good luck with ridding the web of criminal disinformationists ( if there is such a word)

[marty78]

well done although they don't exactly look that technical to me,( only looked at a few) and I'm not sure if this is quite what he was referring to , but i'll accept that at least you've tried and it's good enough for me at least . Whether everyone else with doubts is satisfied by them ,I really wouldn't know .

I'm leaving it here for the time being now , unconvinced but not worried about it either good luck with ridding the web of criminal disinformationists ( if there is such a word)

I think I would have to fly you to the Moon myself to get you to believe but you are entitled to your beliefs (or lack of) although I can't respect them as they are baseless from my point of view. If someone did prove a hoax they would become one of the most famous people of their generation and would immortalised in history.

I believe sending men to the Moon was the one the greatest accomplishments of Mankind even if it was pointless in so many ways. It is a testament to mans spirit of adventure and desire to explore and understand and should be held up as beacon of hope for future exploration of our Universe. I hope I am lucky enough to see a man on Mars before I die but it seems unlikely, hopefully the children of our time will be luckier.

[Rincewind]

The moon landing was supposed to be a forerunner to better space exploration. I don't think they intended to go back but it was a tester to see if they could go further maybe to mars. They then found out it was going to cost to much and the US government prevered to spend money exploring other countries and helping the people to run them in exchange for oil and a promise not to bomb them too much.

So the space program was put on hold and they found better ways for less money.

[BoneDog]

I've got about 8 pages to catch up in this thread. I did pop in the other night and caught up with a few pages.

I've still not seen any evidence to prove man has stepped onto the moon. Until somebody can explain why we could make a spacesuit capable of keeping a human alive on the moons surface 40 years ago, but can't do so today - even with the astounding technological advances available to us - then I'll always have the same opinion. People can shout, "Physics!" as their proof of man going to the moon (they have to shout this as there is no actual physical evidence of the 'trips to the moon' as NASA lost it all), but until we can make a spacesuit capable of the job, shouting "Physics" and showing some maths is totally meaningless!

Another thing that I haven't seen satisfactorily answered - Why aren't we sending men and women that little bit further than 220 miles into space*? Surely, if possible, we would be experimenting with further travel to see what effects it has on us? Why aren't they sending people to 1000 miles out? That is not a big distance. The moon is 240,000 miles away and we supposedly made that journey a number of times in the 60's and 70's and yet today we can't muster up even 500 miles on a good day!

I've already mentioned the correct answer to that question. We are trapped on and around our small planet and will not get humans safely further than 1000 miles. Machines yes, humans no. We certainly won't survive out there, and that is the only reason we aren't doing it. The sooner people on this planet realise that, the sooner we might force our governments to start to look after this place a little better.

Anyways, I'm going to try and catch up on thread so will probably have another ten or so posts to make. I've tried to stay out of it but I just canna force myself to stay away a

Edit : * I say space, what I mean is 220 miles up in the air - about 3 times higher than the x-15 went. As I said earlier, the International Space Station is a very misleading name.

[purpleronnie]

Hey El, why do you think we can't build a suit that can keep humans alive on the moon?

whats your views on the LRO 's pictures from 2009 that clearly shows footprints and various other stuff left on the moon from back in 69-71.

[marty78]

I've got about 8 pages to catch up in this thread. I did pop in the other night and caught up with a few pages.

I've still not seen any evidence to prove man has stepped onto the moon. Until somebody can explain why we could make a spacesuit capable of keeping a human alive on the moons surface 40 years ago, but can't do so today - even with the astounding technological advances available to us - then I'll always have the same opinion. People can shout, "Physics!" as their proof of man going to the moon (they have to shout this as there is no actual physical evidence of the 'trips to the moon' as NASA lost it all), but until we can make a spacesuit capable of the job, shouting "Physics" and showing some maths is totally meaningless!

Another thing that I haven't seen satisfactorily answered - Why aren't we sending men and women that little bit further than 220 miles into space*? Surely, if possible, we would be experimenting with further travel to see what effects it has on us? Why aren't they sending people to 1000 miles out? That is not a big distance. The moon is 240,000 miles away and we supposedly made that journey a number of times in the 60's and 70's and yet today we can't muster up even 500 miles on a good day!

I've already mentioned the correct answer to that question. We are trapped on and around our small planet and will not get humans safely further than 1000 miles. Machines yes, humans no. We certainly won't survive out there, and that is the only reason we aren't doing it. The sooner people on this planet realise that, the sooner we might force our governments to start to look after this place a little better.

Anyways, I'm going to try and catch up on thread so will probably have another ten or so posts to make. I've tried to stay out of it but I just canna force myself to stay away a

Edit : * I say space, what I mean is 220 miles up in the air - about 3 times higher than the x-15 went. As I said earlier, the International Space Station is a very misleading name.

So is your evidence simply the lack of evidence?

For anyone that can be bothered with this circular argument:

http://www.clavius.org/

[AdamN]

I've already mentioned the correct answer to that question. We are trapped on and around our small planet and will not get humans safely further than 1000 miles. Machines yes, humans no. We certainly won't survive out there, and that is the only reason we aren't doing it. The sooner people on this planet realise that, the sooner we might force our governments to start to look after this place a little better.

That's not an answer. Simply saying "we can't" is no basis for an argument.

[I am Rod Hull]

Hey El, why do you think we can't build a suit that can keep humans alive on the moon?

whats your views on the LRO 's pictures from 2009 that clearly shows footprints and various other stuff left on the moon from back in 69-71.

NASA got the space suits off them dead aliens that crashed in Roswell.

[BoneDog]

I'm seriously concerned for el empty's mental health.

Why, because I find it hard to believe an impossible fairy story that has no original, or present day, physical evidence as proof?

This gets better. The ENTIRE cold war was a hoax so they could build bigger and better weapons. Who, pray tell, were we building these weapons to defend ourselves against if the only two superpowers in world were in cahoots with each other?

Even you can't seriously believe some of the stuff you're writing.

No, the entire cold war was not a hoax. Events did happen during this time, but the powers that be were not actually at war with one another. I'll try to explain what I mean later.

I'm still waiting for some science to explain why we couldn't possibly travel through the Van Allen belts.

I'm still waiting for some physical human evidence to prove that we can. It's about time they got on with it. We've got the means to travel through the belts but nobody seems to be doing it with human cargo for some reason.

Please give me the science which says it's not possible for a human to travel through it.

'Science' can't prove that we can travel through the belts safely without backing it up with real mission data. If we are supposedly preparing to send men to our moon, and to Mars, then you would think that we would be doing a few tests to see what we have to prepare for regarding the belts. But no, nothing is happening.

The guy who discovered the Van Allen belt is actually a liar, apart from his discovery.

He's an establishment 'science' guy so I don't 100% trust him like you seem to do. He may well speak some truths but he is also involved in negative things - as his agreeing to detonate nukes in the belts proved. If he'd have said that detonating the nukes out there was good for us as a species you obviously would have agreed with him, because God forbid somebody should disagree with the establishment guy. Same with other establishment people like Dawkins (mind you he's not really a scientist is he). Just because Allen discovered the belts doesn't mean he can explain their effects on humans away without actually sending humans up there to experiment, or doing it himself. Observing something from afar does not prove that you know what effects the thing you are observing will have on humans who enter the area.

I am still eagerly awaiting the scientific explanation as to why we can't travel through the Van Allen belts.

The only thing that science has proved about the Van Allen Belts is that they exist. There have been no experiments or efforts in recent times, if ever, to prove that we can send humans back and forth safely through the belts. There has been no progress in regards to humans traveling in space since we've manned the space station a mere 220 miles up. It's the Van Allen Belts, and what's outside them that are stopping that from happening, and not a lack of ambition, lack of funds or health and safety as some have said.

Does El Empty think that the US, USSR or Great Britain have ever achieved anything worthy of credit that can't be disputed with a crackpot conspiracy theory?

Yes of course. Thousands of things.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I once typed conspiracy theory into Google and looked at the results. The results were nothing to do with my beliefs. True, I don't trust the official story of 9/11 for example, but believing that 19 hijackers, many of whom are alive, didn't do the impossible and commit 9/11 isn't crackpot.

Believing that the worlds major politicians and some military top brass don't tell lies is crackpot. You've got it the wrong way round. Me pointing out some of the lies is not crackpot.

I've just looked on my bookshelf. There are two possible 'conspiracy' books on there out of a couple of hundred. One is 'The New Pearl Harbour', and the other is 'The Strange Death of David Kelly', both books are far from crackpot. All of my other non-fiction books are by well known military folk, politicians and famous journalists from the right and the left.

Oh and there are a couple of Velikovsky books on there too. Some of you 'science is God' folk should perhaps read his 'Stargazers and Gravediggers' to help you realize that not all of the scientific establishment is really what it calls itself, and used to pride itself on being - open and honest. From what I've read since I'm sure that things in that regard have got no better, so this book is still relevant and will continue to be so for a long time.

Footnote - I'm a bit busy right now but will carry on from where I left off in a while - barring a catastrophe.

[BoneDog]

That's not an answer. Simply saying "we can't" is no basis for an argument.

True though. They're not going about it the right way if they're trying to prove otherwise.

[purpleronnie]

True though. They're not going about it the right way if they're trying to prove otherwise.

please answe my questions on this page el, this is the best thread ever, very amusing.....don't take that the wrong way though its interesting to hear the alternative view even though I dont believe it.

Oh and I dont understand why you feel we cant travel through the belt either.

thanks.

[BoneDog]

1. Hey El, why do you think we can't build a suit that can keep humans alive on the moon?

2. whats your views on the LRO 's pictures from 2009 that clearly shows footprints and various other stuff left on the moon from back in 69-71.

1. Because it's technologically impossible. We can't make a suit that can protect somebody from temperatures that go from way above boiling point straight down to instant freeze with no inbetween. If it was possible they'd make some.

2. I think the pictures are rubbish! So are the flag pictures. As for the landing craft pictures - they are the most ridiculous ones of all. They show a black patch that has obviously been squiggled over on MSPaint, and they show an unidentifiable light coloured object inside the edges of the black squiggles. The pictures are very poor pieces of evidence in my opinion.

[fleckneymike]

Why, because I find it hard to believe an impossible fairy story that has no original, or present day, physical evidence as proof?

No, the entire cold war was not a hoax. Events did happen during this time, but the powers that be were not actually at war with one another. I'll try to explain what I mean later.

I'm still waiting for some physical human evidence to prove that we can. It's about time they got on with it. We've got the means to travel through the belts but nobody seems to be doing it with human cargo for some reason.

'Science' can't prove that we can travel through the belts safely without backing it up with real mission data. If we are supposedly preparing to send men to our moon, and to Mars, then you would think that we would be doing a few tests to see what we have to prepare for regarding the belts. But no, nothing is happening.

He's an establishment 'science' guy so I don't 100% trust him like you seem to do. He may well speak some truths but he is also involved in negative things - as his agreeing to detonate nukes in the belts proved. If he'd have said that detonating the nukes out there was good for us as a species you obviously would have agreed with him, because God forbid somebody should disagree with the establishment guy. Same with other establishment people like Dawkins (mind you he's not really a scientist is he). Just because Allen discovered the belts doesn't mean he can explain their effects on humans away without actually sending humans up there to experiment, or doing it himself. Observing something from afar does not prove that you know what effects the thing you are observing will have on humans who enter the area.

The only thing that science has proved about the Van Allen Belts is that they exist. There have been no experiments or efforts in recent times, if ever, to prove that we can send humans back and forth safely through the belts. There has been no progress in regards to humans traveling in space since we've manned the space station a mere 220 miles up. It's the Van Allen Belts, and what's outside them that are stopping that from happening, and not a lack of ambition, lack of funds or health and safety as some have said.

Yes of course. Thousands of things.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I once typed conspiracy theory into Google and looked at the results. The results were nothing to do with my beliefs. True, I don't trust the official story of 9/11 for example, but believing that 19 hijackers, many of whom are alive, didn't do the impossible and commit 9/11 isn't crackpot.

Believing that the worlds major politicians and some military top brass don't tell lies is crackpot. You've got it the wrong way round. Me pointing out some of the lies is not crackpot.

I've just looked on my bookshelf. There are two possible 'conspiracy' books on there out of a couple of hundred. One is 'The New Pearl Harbour', and the other is 'The Strange Death of David Kelly', both books are far from crackpot. All of my other non-fiction books are by well known military folk, politicians and famous journalists from the right and the left.

Oh and there are a couple of Velikovsky books on there too. Some of you 'science is God' folk should perhaps read his 'Stargazers and Gravediggers' to help you realize that not all of the scientific establishment is really what it calls itself, and used to pride itself on being - open and honest. From what I've read since I'm sure that things in that regard have got no better, so this book is still relevant and will continue to be so for a long time.

Footnote - I'm a bit busy right now but will carry on from where I left off in a while - barring a catastrophe.

I think we would all be grateful if you didn't as you have zero understanding of either physics or science.

[marty78]

1. Because it's technologically impossible. We can't make a suit that can protect somebody from temperatures that go from way above boiling point straight down to instant freeze with no inbetween. If it was possible they'd make some.

2. I think the pictures are rubbish! So are the flag pictures. As for the landing craft pictures - they are the most ridiculous ones of all. They show a black patch that has obviously been squiggled over on MSPaint, and they show an unidentifiable light coloured object inside the edges of the black squiggles. The pictures are very poor pieces of evidence in my opinion.

Faked pictures and video footage must be very easy to prove as hoax when from 40 odd years ago with the technology available now then. Be interesting to see if can succeed where the countless before you failed. Good luck with that.

You seem to discount science in favour of distrust in authority and call it evidence. Very strange.