Here Today... Gone To Hell!

.

Anyone who believe the moon landing is fake needs to get laid.

I'm fairly sure such extreme paranoia is, at the least, an early sign of schizophrenia

Elvis is alive too!

Kennedy shot himself!

Ringo called John Lennon!

^agrees....

and for all of you who doubt, here's a simple question....


do you honestly think USSR would keep their mouth shut if the landings were a fake?!
After all, those guys had the means to verify it.

Well, 40 years later NASA says they don't know how to do it anymore...

take a look at the movie "idiocracy"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy
that should make things clear :)

^because unmanned probes are more useful and cost efficient than a dude with a shovel and a golf club bouncing around on the moon.
unlike man crafts, unmanned vehicles/moon satellites can stay on the planet/orbit longer, and gather more info.

and after the Columbia accident, and the psycho astronaut (the one with the dippers and killer instinct), do we really need those guys out there?

manned missions are a matter of prestige, and not science. Personally, I'm hoping that they'll start to work on "moonbase" project, rather than some random moon missions that serve nobody. ---we've already seen all there is to be seen on moon. now we need to start using it as a way to get to other places.

I hate people who dont believe we landed on the mooon

I cant say i hate pepole that think it but it anoyes the shit out of me


Peace

Question to those who believe we landed on the moon: Have you studied the details involved in a mission like this? Have you compared them to prior tests and capabilities of technology?

Or do you simply believe it 'because it was on tv?"

Have you studied those issues Polluxlm?  Are you able to understand them.  I sure as hell know that kind of physics is beyond me.  Or have you just watched a couple of videos and read some loosely binded papers by authors with no background or formal education in this matter?  Some one has already said it, but I will echo it.  The Soviet Union would have exposed the US had it not landed on the moon.  The entire operation was watched closesly from the ground and at space.  If the Soviets didn't debunk it, there was nothing to debunk.

Well, that's the problem with the moon landings. You apply deductive reasoning, like you, it happened. You apply inductive reasoning it didn't happen.

So the conclusion is that one of them contains one or more flaws, and I doubt you'll find too many flaws in the laws of physics.

whats next?
Paul McCartney died in 66?
Elvis lives?
Kurt Cobain killed?


some people are too paranoid!

but it is a cool study nonetheless

I don't see what those got to do with anything.

conspiracy theories?

okey.. maybe not the Elvis and Kurt one.. heh..

but still, wild assumptions that you cant really confirm or deny....

If you can't deny a theory, how do you know your theory is true?

haha..

well... good point.

it is a theory until proven wrong.

but damn.. i see i didnt read the whole thread :p so i dont really have anything to add now  :P

They don't. They decommissioned the Saturn 5 Rocket and the plans to build it were destroyed in a routine housecleaning of NASA documents. They don't know how anymore.

I call Bullshit, Right when I'm trying very hard to learn a little humility, something like this comes along. I didn't bother to click the links because I have seen all that psuedo-scientific BULLSHIT before, and rather than waste my time in a futile attempt at providing refuting arguments to moronic theories, I will let someone else, who is much better qualified than myself anyway, refute the BULLSHIT. The Bad Astronomer aka Phil Plait does a very good job HERE (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html)

Sometimes I think the Buzz Aldrin approach might achieve better results.



Bullshit, where in the hell do you come up with this ... nevermind I already know.



Theories are not denied, they are an accumulation of scientific evidence That support the postulates. When new evidence comes along, they are modified accordingly.


Exactly, the Physics behind a moon landing are simple and hundreds of years old.


As a matter of fact, I have. Take any entry level Physics or Calculus class at your favorite University and some of the first problems you will encounter are orbital mechanics and trajectory motion.


It is a hell of a lot easier to land on the Moon than to re-enter Earths atmosphere ... Just curious, do you deny re-entry of the Shuttle ... or perhaps it's take-off?


It is a boondoggle, Why waste the money on ANY MANNED FLIGHT. The science that could be achieved would/is a thousand or more times greater for the buck. This whole going back to the Moon, and Putting men on Mars is a tremendous waste of resourses. It will take away from REAL science missions that have the possibility of making REAL discoveries.

Someone(Dim?) said somewhere that you don't want politicians deciding strategy for combat operations ... or something like that. It is true, and the same applies to space missions.

^^See above

Yeah, aren't you the prime example of intelligence right now.

 After more than a quart of whiskey, I can still see the bullshit associated with morons. my brain is a bit befuddled, but I will still take on the best.

See you when....if you're sober.

Why? ... oh, is that a dig.  :no: Surely you can do better than that.

it's an evidence a lot of the photos were remade in studio.
it's a bit like guns n'rose live era you know, the shows were real, but axl has redone the vocals.  :hihi:

i suppose the nasa shooting on the moon was really shitty, and they had to do some nice studio shots for propaganda in the media.

but for the moon landing itself, it's true of course (i hope, or it's the biggest history trickery)

the real proof will be a good shot from the earth showing the american flag on the moon, when telescopes will be able to do it...

flag that fails to move?

you do realize that the fact the flag doesn't move is evidence of it really being on the moon don't you?

You've got it backwards, the Van Allen radiation belt surrounds Earth, not the moon.  Look at the diagram you posted, those belts have that characteristic horseshoe shape dont they? Just like a bar magnet placed in iron filings, the Earth's magnetic field influences the charged particles coming from the Sun.  People *were* concerned about how this field would affect life as it left Earth, so they sent a bunch of animals out first.  The astronauts who traveled through the belt do indeed have much higher levels of radiation exposure than ordinary Earth-dwellers.


Are you taking the stance that even a robotic/unmanned mission could not travel such a distance?  Then you'd be on very shaky ground.  Separate from all of the Moon landings, we have sent probes (Voyager, Galileo, etc) to much farther distances than that, all the way out to Saturn even.  It needs enough fuel and thrust to reach escape velocity to leave the Earth, but once out in space, it sets on a course and can be maneuvered by gravitational assists as it enters the domain of another body.  You can write a little program to simulate this, we get our first-year students to do this.

The thing to keep in mind with the moon footage is things behaves very differently when there is no atmosphere. No wind, no air resistance, the sunlight wont diffract and refract through the lens of the atmosphere in the way that we're used to.   But to me, the only way to teach this to people is to go back there...

On a more personal note, the final lunar landing, Apollo 17 carried a civilian geologist on board, Harrison Schmitt.  I had the chance to meet him some years ago.  He is not your macho top-gun fighter pilot astronaut type, just a plain-spoken geologist.  He was explaining to our group some of the geologic processes on the moon - on earth we are used to plate tectonics and the rocks being weathered down over millenia, this does not happen on the moon.  He was a very down-to-earth (pardon the pun) guy, and I would be hard pressed to tell him he is a liar.

Indeed. Voyager 1 is actually 13.8 Light hours away from earth. Thats over twice the distance from earth two pluto (5.5 light hours). Its actually been in the Heliosheath since 2004.

NASA has stated as much. It doesn't mean they never were there, it means they don't know how to get back.

Errrr

The "documentary" you are linking to is Dark side of the moon.  The whole documentary is  basically it's creators  having a laugh.

If there is a serious point or a message in there, it would have to be the fact it is terrifying how easy it is to lie to people via TV. How easy it is to give idiotic statements and sound credible if you are in expensive suit, have a spooky music in backround  and keep your poker face.

I mean..come ooooon, some of the stuff in there:)

Stanley Kubrick helping Nasa to fake moon landings and getting murdered by CIA later on??
Undercover CIA officials at vietnam getting exposed because they ate hamburgers all the time?
U.S officials speaking French, and getting dubbed to English?
an outtake reel at the end credits, with "Donald Rumsfeld" and co laughing their asses off?
And tons of other stuff.

It' a GREAT watch in all it's insanity imo, but for love of god don't take it too seriously.

Well I don't know if they faked it or not, but there is some evidence that points towards that. The flag moving for instance, and also the position of the shadows.

a small step for a man....
unsure if mankind reaped the giant benefits.

I think there's an astronaut on this board.

See the link to BA's site at the beginning for a thorough debunking of this nonsence.

Space exploration isn't done to convince conspiracy theorists of the reality of the mission, it is done to further knowledge ... to explain the unknown.

america did it in area 51.

they didnt land on the moon, not that time anyway, maybe some other time but not the famous time/

I'm just wondering if anyone posting in this thread is a member of the Flat Earth Society?

I might join if you can tell me whether arrogance and low self esteem are virtues or not.

Well, I guess that was well deserved after my drunken rant of late. My apologies.

For the record: I drink a couple of bottles a week. I love my Bourbon ... everthing about it ... mmm mmm good.

As regards the arrogance, I have a low tolerance for what I feel is foolishness.

A right hook=A moon landing period.

There are those who believe that we are capable of putting a man on the moon (and may their lives be so much richer for it)............. and there are those who do not wish to imagine that humans are indeed capable of such a feat.

The children of the 60s who witnessed the landing are a pretty special lot! Their eyes would have been popping out of their heads and their brains would have been in overdrive to see such a thing!

Question: do those who believe the album is coming out soon also believe in the moon landing?  :P




In the meantime watch the movie Capricorn One (moon landing is filmed entirely in a studio)!

This documents the greatest threat to our world. (http://www.vidilife.com/video_play_697362_South_Park_Season_10_Episode_6_1006_ManBearPig.htm)