Skyraider22
The One and Only Big Daddy
Wow you make a very good point I still say it is kind of hard to fake a moon landing :dunno:But hey that is me
Did man really land on the Moon ?
- Thread starter Skyraider22
- Start date
Yes, to involve 400 000 people over many years with the whole world watching and to fool them all is some hoax.Easier by far to put some men on the moon.
Thanks for the input.
You mean moon-ron?!? Coz only Lunar-tics thing we didn't?!?
Er. . .anyone?! :dunno:
(cough) I'll get my coat!
Skyraider22
The One and Only Big Daddy
I was digging in my closet and look what I found.
Not only did we land on the moon! We banged it!
lechepicha
Prince of the Rotten Milk
about this topic, there's a great documentary who says that it was (is) a hoax.
i've seen it and it's pretty convincing.
here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Funny_Thing_Happened_on_the_Way_to_the_Moon
i've seen it and it's pretty convincing.
here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Funny_Thing_Happened_on_the_Way_to_the_Moon
"Sibrel has also gained some national exposure as an astronaut stalker.[2] One infamous incident was with Buzz Aldrin. Sibrel asked Aldrin to put his hand on a Bible and swear that he walked on the moon and when Aldrin refused, Sibrel called Aldrin a coward, liar and thief. This led to an angry Aldrin punching Sibrel in his face."
WTG BUZZ!!!!!!!:thumbsup:
Should have made one small step on his head while you were at it ,damn crazy conspiracy whacko's.:crash:
EXPOSED - Bart Sibrel is Caught Cheating
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX7UKH3_xuA&NR=1
Bart Sibrel Being Hooked by Buzz Aldrin (Apollo 11)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUFO8AGMwic
"I pity the fool" ...
This video focuses on the early missions, namely 11 and 12. In all honesty, NASA did a poor job of "all the touches," including the cameras used and other details. It wasn't until the latter missions that geology, media, rover, etc... details were addressed.
But could you fault NASA? Their task was the build a capsule, multi-staged launch and insertion vehicle, lander, etc... in literally only four (4) years. And then they were scrambling on the "smaller details."
The only "conspiracy theories" I will remotely believe in is that Apollo 11 and 12 have some added A/V that is not actual, but staged or, later, re-created, because of the limited media capability that was actually carried on-board.
Hell, Al Bean screwed up one camera all on his own with Apollo 12 because some basic, but very necessary details, were overlooked in training. Even "The Eagle" (Apollo 11's lander) ran into many technical, procedural and other issues on that first, real run, that design, training and other considerations were never considered. Armstrong came damn close to running out of fuel and crashing the thing -- let alone Buzz overloaded the computer by leaving extra radars on (in case they needed to abort and return), etc...
That was how hastily the program was run early.
It's still amazing that more people weren't killed beyond Apollo 1 and the near disaster of Apollo 13. Every Apollo mission had major things go wrong with it.
Going to the moon is difficult, but not with concerted, national effort. As far as his theory that it was about military capability, understand that NASA was actually founded as an explicit, civilian agency what was NOT allowed to use military hardware.
Of course that set back the US program by 5 years and was rectified by the early '60s. He clearly shows his ignorance and has no comprehension of the often self-defeating politics of NASA's early history. It's now considered the most fatal error of the US that it had the "pie-in-the-sky" idea to use a 100% civilian program, including 100% "clean room" designs separate from military.
Everything overlaps. As I regularly try to "educate" people on "missile defense," it's just the natural evolution of general air defense. Hit-to-kill isn't new, and being able to down different types of targets crosses many of the same details -- whether it's an aircraft or a missile.
Including intercepting missiles that are fired at ships, not just land.
But most people don't think like an engineer, in terms of the technical challenges and resulting requirements -- let alone come to the solutions that have commonality. They think "politically" instead of stepping back and realizing that engineers can't build "political" solutions, only "technical" ones (even if they are used politically).
As were the prior documentaries on the "science" that was allegedly "wrong" with the NASA videos. If you ask 90% of Americans, they'd agree. Unfortunately, 100% of engineers laugh.
This video focuses on the early missions, namely 11 and 12. In all honesty, NASA did a poor job of "all the touches," including the cameras used and other details. It wasn't until the latter missions that geology, media, rover, etc... details were addressed.
But could you fault NASA? Their task was the build a capsule, multi-staged launch and insertion vehicle, lander, etc... in literally only four (4) years. And then they were scrambling on the "smaller details."
The only "conspiracy theories" I will remotely believe in is that Apollo 11 and 12 have some added A/V that is not actual, but staged or, later, re-created, because of the limited media capability that was actually carried on-board.
Hell, Al Bean screwed up one camera all on his own with Apollo 12 because some basic, but very necessary details, were overlooked in training. Even "The Eagle" (Apollo 11's lander) ran into many technical, procedural and other issues on that first, real run, that design, training and other considerations were never considered. Armstrong came damn close to running out of fuel and crashing the thing -- let alone Buzz overloaded the computer by leaving extra radars on (in case they needed to abort and return), etc...
That was how hastily the program was run early.
It's still amazing that more people weren't killed beyond Apollo 1 and the near disaster of Apollo 13. Every Apollo mission had major things go wrong with it.
Going to the moon is difficult, but not with concerted, national effort. As far as his theory that it was about military capability, understand that NASA was actually founded as an explicit, civilian agency what was NOT allowed to use military hardware.
Of course that set back the US program by 5 years and was rectified by the early '60s. He clearly shows his ignorance and has no comprehension of the often self-defeating politics of NASA's early history. It's now considered the most fatal error of the US that it had the "pie-in-the-sky" idea to use a 100% civilian program, including 100% "clean room" designs separate from military.
Everything overlaps. As I regularly try to "educate" people on "missile defense," it's just the natural evolution of general air defense. Hit-to-kill isn't new, and being able to down different types of targets crosses many of the same details -- whether it's an aircraft or a missile.
Including intercepting missiles that are fired at ships, not just land.
But most people don't think like an engineer, in terms of the technical challenges and resulting requirements -- let alone come to the solutions that have commonality. They think "politically" instead of stepping back and realizing that engineers can't build "political" solutions, only "technical" ones (even if they are used politically).
ChefChiTown
The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
I'd like believe, yes, man did really land on the moon. I love full body suits (space suits, radiation protection suits etc.) because when you don one of those, your race, ethnicity, gender and even your personal individual identity diminish and all that is left is a human being. Pure and simple human being. Landing on the moon can easily be the single most ambitious and daring goal achieved by human beings and it is a proof of invincibility of human intrigue and courage.
If moon landing was really a hoax, it is one of the biggest insults for humanity and it is unforgivable at any cost. The fact that moon landing was more of a political stunt for US government than a tribute to human courage a scientific achievement gives way to the hoax theories. For time and again, American politicians have proved that there is no line they won't cross for short-term political gain without an iota of care for fellow human beings.
If moon landing was really a hoax, it is one of the biggest insults for humanity and it is unforgivable at any cost. The fact that moon landing was more of a political stunt for US government than a tribute to human courage a scientific achievement gives way to the hoax theories. For time and again, American politicians have proved that there is no line they won't cross for short-term political gain without an iota of care for fellow human beings.
i really dont think that that they landed on he moon, to this day neil armstrong never really spoke to the public about it, there is quite a few documentaries on the net, have a look at them
Skyraider22
The One and Only Big Daddy
Moon Rocks are they really worth a million dollar:1orglaugh
Similar threads
