The Moon landing.

Popoutman...reminds me of someone.

 

And you tried to pull some-one up on debating

 

I actually already debated it and he never answered me so...

Maybe if you actually read the thread instead of floating all around this forum being a smarmy condescending so and so you would have seen that.

 

I had actually already tried debating it and he never answered me so...

Maybe if you had actually read the thread, instead of floating all around this forum being a smarmy condescending so and so you would have seen that.

 

Touché :smiley-laughing002:

 

:smiley-laughing002:

 

It would probably have been harder to fake the moon landings than actually go to the moon. The reason the Americans havent been back to the moon is the collapse of the USSR because lets face it, thats the only reason the US went to the moon.

That's not fluttering in the wind, it's moving due to the force put upon it by the astronaut.

 

It's not even that. Its the structure of the pole. It's metal - even the top bit holding the flag. So the bars were 'pinged' so to speak and made the flag move - momentum whereby gravity is not needed.

I actually saw a documentary and watched all sides - just so people don't think im a crackpot. :smiley-laughing002:

As for popoutman - did you just join TC to correct the nay sayers of the moonlanding? *

 

The Mythbusters episode on this is good.

 

Probably keep it for Christmas dinner.

 

aye they went to the moon ,i know first hand as i been on the moon or thereabouts a few times ,and i seen them ,,so you can now close this thread,,,,slan happy easter

 

What force? He is clearly not touching it.

 

mythbusters covered this one by putting a flag in a room and sooking the air out of it.flag fluttered in the vacuum .

 

There is a pole in the ground and going up vertically. There is another pole along the top going along horizontally so the flag stays out, so to speak. No pole along the top the thing would just flop down.

When it's planted it would have some movement which would go for some time. They might even have gave it a shake (like a bed cover) for the ripple effect before taking the picture.

 

* speilberg is into everything.

 

Been arguing over this the last few days with a friend firmly in the ‘faked’ camp...

All the 50 years stuff has had the hoax documentaries on tv as well.

I’m kind of surprised by the number of people convinced it never happened..

Leaving aside all the stuff about flags, light, shadows, stars, dust, photographs etc... there are valid explanations for and against all of those...

My thoughts are more about the logistics of carrying out and maintaining such a hoax.

1- Everyone in on it would have to keep silent for 50 years plus. Could be that the number ‘in on it’ was actually very small so reduces risks but still...

2- Why didn’t the Russians say anything as they certainly would if they thought there was anything funny going on.
They’d be first to highlight anything dodgy.

3- Did they hoax it 6 times? Or were some landings real? Would mean that the ‘real first man on the moon’ never got credit.

The things I do find interesting and questionable though are...

1- the suspicious death of Gus Grissom and his crew on the Apollo 1 test - he was outspoken about NASAs safety and had been earmarked to be first on the moon.

2- the ‘third voice’ on radio recordings between Apollo 11 and Houston suggesting a possible choreography to simulate the time delay due to distance.

3- was Apollo 13 a fake as well ? Why fake a failure? Or was it a genuine attempt that genuinely went wrong?

4- the general timescale of the project.

In the space of 65 years the USA had gone from the first 12 second manned powered flight to landing on the moon.

Technology moves in a steepening upwards curve but the supposed advancements between 1964 (when nasa was struggling get anything into earth orbit) and just 5 years later are staggering. Especially when there was a 2 1/2 year shutdown due to the Apollo 1 fire. At this time the Russians were way in advance of the USA and had all but given up on progressing enough to reach the moon.

If you follow the ‘progress curve’ from the Wright Brothers in 1903 to the moon 65 years later .... then 50 years further on we should be way in advance again.
When in fact nobody has left earth orbit since Late 1972!

Instead we seem to be regressing. Yes.. budgets were cut and priorities moved from manned exploration to probes, experiments,telescopes and solar study... but the space shuttle (which was a serious advancement) was shelved and the USA now relies on the Russians to get them to and from the ISS....

...Yet they are talking about colonising the moon and going to Mars.

NASA has even admitted that it does not have the technology or infrastructure to go back to the moon.

I’m not a hoax advocate but it’s still interesting hearing the case for both sides.

Watched ‘Capricorn One’ again recently and was interesting watching how such a hoax could be staged. Worth a watch anyone who’s never seen it.

 

I saw something on YouTube that analysed all the astronauts interviews.
Some ex FBI or CIA guy.
He said in all the interviews they have done they never talk about it as a personal experience - they are always vague in their answers about what it was like to walk up there. They speak more about the simulations than the actual event. Which is odd.

That’s the only thing that makes me doubt it.

 

It happened. The conspiracy theory against it is utter horseshit

 

Agreed, if nothing else, the Soviets would’ve pointed out any fraud.

With regard to the rate of advancement, if you look at technology at the start of WW2 vs the end, it shows you just how quickly we can advance during wartime.

I think the big problem with conspiracy theories is it distracts people from the actual conspiracies.

Moon hoax people think they’re fighting the good fight by being super sceptical, but by ignoring the actual facts and spouting nonsense all they do is remove attention and credibility from actual scandals and conspiracies, and allow people to shout ‘fake news’ at everything.

 

Neil Armstrong should have brought back the head of one of those clangers as proof