Here’s ther deal. I recently saw a special on television that argued the case of whether we went to the moon for real or not. The arguement was based on certain photologic evidence that showed various defections in the quality of the pictures taken, arguing that they had been hollywood created. One particular argument they made that I thought worth considering was whether or not the Lunar Module had enugh protection to pass throuhg a very thick part of space that was highly radioactive. The narator stated that their is no way that the underprotected module [with basically tin-foil for walls] would be able to protect the astronauts to this radiation. My question is therefore, is there radiaation in space near the moon for us to have pass through to set foot on the moon? It seemed to have some substance or validity to their argument but as a child of the 90’s I am naive so I need to know. I wonder if we really did go? May it have been possible for the US to have the biggest and most expensive cover-up in human history? Did we fail after 40 billion dollars invested in 1969, which is the equivalent to trillions today?
Also, next time you see the moon footage, pay attention to how the dust acts when it gets kicked up by the astronauts’ feet. Instead of forming puffy little dust clouds, it falls down in sheets. JUST like it would act in a vacuum. This tiny effect is extremely difficult to fake on Earth (not even “Apollo 13” got it right) – in 1969, it would have been impossible.
Hi Miguelon, and welcome to the SDMB. as Attrayant has obliquely, albeit very politely, pointed out, this question has been discussed before. Please check out the ‘Search’ function (top rh corner) and don’t forget to change the ‘search by date’ to ‘any date’ before starting new threads.
Failure to observe this precaution may result in indiscriminate deployment of irony.
Don’t let this minor admonition put you off hanging around this little oasis of (in)sanity please. This gorgeous corner of cyberspace consists of some of the most wonderful people it has ever been my privilege to virtually meet.
Of course we landed on the moon. What are you thinking. the people who made that telivision show made it so people who want to think that everything done by the government is a farce. Next thing your gonna think is the titanic was really sunk by a gurman U-boat not an ice-burg. It was all a government coverup. My history teacher told us this is how it happened. The movie now helps cover the real thing that happened. NO! Think what you will, but we landed on the moon!
Puh-leeze! it is so obviously a hoax that it almost stops being funny.
For one, the rockets that really did go into “space” (really just Near Earth Orbit) are a basic ballistic move, just like old Werner (the father of the U.S.space program) used to play with in Germany. The only difference between shooting from Peenemuende to London and from Florida to the Pacific is one of elevation and duration of propulsion. Whereas going around the moon, let alone landing there & taking off again is so entirely different, it really doesn’t need much thought to determine that the latter by no means is a logical progression from the former.
For seconds, the way the supposed trip to the moon & back was supposed to have taken place is almost an exact replica of a bugs bunny cartoon released in 1954 (!) fully fifteen years before the supposed landing! The level of similarity is stunning, up to and including the concept of a Lunar Module!
In his book “To the Moon” Julius Fern describes how one of the voice actors doing the soundtrack to the supposed landing (he was to be “Neil Armstrong”) was replaced at the last minute because NASA had gotten wind that he was going to say “What’s up-doc?” (as an obscure “in” joke) instead of the pre-planned memorable line. This last minute replacement, by the way, is responsible for the slight fumble in that “Neil Armstrong” line.
For thirds, it is interesting that NASA now finally feels it has sufficient know-how to perform actual interplanetary flight. We all saw how well they did in putting just a box on Mars: they want us to believe that more than 30 years ago (remember that’s even before “Pong” was invented) they were able to put multiple guys on the moon & safely return them? Come on!
The Apollo missions were so faked. Honestly, how you guys didn’t notice it before is beyond me. But, in the interest of fighting ignorance, I’ll show you the tricks they used.
First, if you look closely at the spacecraft, you can see strings holding it up.
Secondly, if you watch the video of the men and women in NASA control, you’ll see how it instantly changes from day to night and back to day again several times.
Third, Neil Armstrong died during the training of the Apollo missions. Rather than hire a completely new astronaut, they had someone else pretend to be Neil Armstrong. He wore a black cape and stayed in the shadows during the entire time he was on film.
Fourth, the newsmen report several times about “atmospheric conditions in outer space” but there isn’t an atmosphere out there!
Fifth, several astronauts died during the missions, but later scenes show them clearly watching their own funeral.
Sixth, the spacecrafts cast HUGE shadows as they leave their “planet” - an obvious inflatable toy.
It’s quite clear. I have lifted the wool off my eyes. NASA shall conceal this no longer. Whatever plan they have for outer space, I shall go the whole nine yards to stop them!
I’m sure we went. The science isn’t REALLY all that fancy; Jules Verne worked out most of the details (okay, a couple of them) 150 years ago.
OTOH, as a paranoid ex-hippie, I think SOME of the photos MIGHT have been retouched, or even faked. The association of Richard Nixon and [sub]Nazi War Criminal[/sub] Werner Von Braun with ANY project makes me suspicious.
I’m not even going to bother trying to argue with you, lsosleepy, but I’ll just make this one remark. Didn’t you find it the least bit suspicious that a book about the moon missions was written by a fellow calling himself “Julius Fern”? If he’s not even going to give you his real name, what makes you think that anything else he wrote was true?
I’m not so sure you should argue with Isosleepy. Note the smiley at the bottom. One of us has been had. I’m going to take the Pong comment along with the smiley, and hope it wasn’t me.
Of course we landed on the Moon. Where else do you think I got 6 million tons of Queso Verde? I’ll sell you a 2 lb. block for only $39.95 plus shipping and handling. It makes very good nachos and quesadillas, and is a certain party pleaser. Order yours now!
Hey, that’s my usual line of argument, the stuff about dust sheeting in a vacuum instead of billowing up. It’s especially prominent in later mission films with films of the lunar rover, the tires kick up big gobs of lunar soil but it all falls right to the ground. The films showed the rover covering miles of territory. If this isn’t the moon, it is some other nearby planet in a total vacuum. The moon hoaxers claim these films are really filmed in slow-mo and you can see them in realtime if you speed them up slightly. But that still doesn’t account for the dust sheeting.
You should see the HBO “From Earth to Moon” series, they’re rerunning it early AM like 7AM Central. They’re replaying the Apollo 11 segment this morning and again this week. I saw this episode and even with the latest new special effects technology, they could not fake the behavior of dust in a vacuum.
But these shows do have great techy detail. I wonder how they did the special effects of Armstrong’s crash in a LEM simulator jet. I dunno, maybe they used the real thing, there’s no substitute for the original NASA films.
NASA has a little tour at Edwards AFB (weekdays, no holidays, free, call NASA at EAFB for a morning or afternoon reservation). The tour consists of a short film, Then out to the parking lot for an description of the aircraft on static display there. After that comes a walk through the NASA building (familiar to millions from the I Dream of Jeanie teevee show) to the flightline. The guide will describe whatever happens to be there and how NASA uses them. A walk across the ramp brings the tour to a very small hangar. Inside is the original lifting body (a wingless aircraft – this one made of plywood over a tubular steel frame), a model of the Space Shuttle that was used in Space Camp, and the “Flying Bedstead” LEM Simulator.
I asked the tour guide about the LEM Simulator, explaining that I had recently seen From the Earth to the Moon, and I wondered if it had been used in the movie. She said that it had indeed been refurbished and used in the series.
