Area 51 hiding "Moon landing" sets.

[swoll1980]

I'm watching this show on TruTV, and these guys are going on about how area 51 was the site of the "lunar landing hoax" That's why it's so secure, because the "sets" are still there. And all this time, I thought they were hiding aliens in there. Silly me. What do you think?

[lisati]

I saw an item on the news recently claiming that Nasa had reused many of the videotapes of the original footage of the moon landings for other purposes. Shame, really, it could have provided useful material for discussions.

[ghindo]

I think that the idea that NASA faked the lunar landing is really an insult to the incredible hard work that numerous scientists and engineers put into the project. I don't really understand why there is cause to believe that the landing was faked.

[JillSwift]

I think that the idea that NASA faked the lunar landing is really an insult to the incredible hard work that numerous scientists and engineers put into the project. I don't really understand why there is cause to believe that the landing was faked.
^ that ^

[magmon]

I think it doesn't matter either way, we can go there now, so I don't really care if we did it before.

[JillSwift]

By the way, the LRO has some new pictures of the landing sites:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html

[steveneddy]

The latest moon mapping mission orbiting the moon at this time has taken pics of the original moon landing sights.

You can see the shadows of the moon landers in the pacs published today.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html

[TheNosh]

area 51 is an airforce base, it's wear they tested/developed the SR-71 and the U2 as well as a few other projects.

no aliens, no fake moon landing sets

[geoken]

Yeah, because the first thing you do when you perpetrate a hoax of this magnitude is to ensure you preserve every piece of damning evidence.

/s

[TuckLive]

Yeah, because the first thing you do when you perpetrate a hoax of this magnitude is to ensure you preserve every piece of damning evidence.

/s


Yeah, so we can use them again in 2020 when we go back to the moon. :lolflag:

[geekygirl]

Aren't you just getting confused with that movie...whats it called?...oh yeah...

Capricorn One....

*sigh*

[Sublime Porte]

I'm not really a big fan of conspiracy theories, but when I heard a story on NPR the other day about how the original footage of the moon landing supposedly 'got lost', I found it a little hard to swallow. It's supposedly one of the greatest achievements of human kind, yet the original footage accidentally got taped over??? Perhaps for some re-runs of Gilligan's island?

So the only footage Nasa has, is that recorded from television. But supposedly there was a second copy of the original which was recorded at the Parkes Observatory in Australia, but it's, not surprisingly, missing also...

Makes you wonder...

[raronson]

There's no credible reason to believe that the landing was a hoax. These claims have been long refuted and shown to be simple or even blatantly ignorant. It's funny. Half of the world claims or gives lip service to believing in a god that they've never seen, but view science and technology, which has given us so much, with hostility, suspicion, and incredulity. Aside from that, people love a good conspiracy theory--it simplifies a complex world.

[Jose Catre-Vandis]

The latest moon mapping mission orbiting the moon at this time has taken pics of the original moon landing sights.

You can see the shadows of the moon landers in the pacs published today.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html


What I don't get is, if you look at these photographs, the sun's light source appears to be coming from the right hand side, as evidenced by all the shadowing on the craters, but look where the shadow is from the "lander". If these photos have been "photoshopped" then this is a really basic error! How come the landers shadows go the wrong way?

[TheNosh]

What I don't get is, if you look at these photographs, the sun's light source appears to be coming from the right hand side, as evidenced by all the shadowing on the craters, but look where the shadow is from the "lander". If these photos have been "photoshopped" then this is a really basic error! How come the landers shadows go the wrong way?

...the light is deffinitely from the left, craters are sunken, not raised.

[MikeTheC]

The problem as I see it is that, even if NASA offered to take any doubter to the moon's surface so they could personally walk up to and touch the descent stages of any of the several landed missions, these people wouldn't believe it. In fact, right up to the point of taking off their own helmet to prove it's just a sound stage and not an area in total vacuum, these folk wouldn't believe it. In fact, they still wouldn't believe it even then (putting aside that they'd be dead) because they'd still believe it was a specially-designed sound stage built inside a pressure chamber.

You cannot speak to those who choose not to hear.

[Sealbhach]

People love a good conspiracy. And I suppose it's hard to believe they achieved something like that in 1969 but really the basic principles and techniques of aeronautics have not changed much since the early sixties - what we can do now they could have done then.

.

[lisati]

I heard that some of the inflight computer gear had a massive 64Mb RAM

[racerraul]

What I don't get is, if you look at these photographs, the sun's light source appears to be coming from the right hand side, as evidenced by all the shadowing on the craters, but look where the shadow is from the "lander". If these photos have been "photoshopped" then this is a really basic error! How come the landers shadows go the wrong way?

So you think that if you have a light source from the right over a crater the right side of the crater would be illuminated? You can test your logic with a simple flash light and an opaque cup...

The shadows are correct in the photos... light source is from the left not the right.

IIRC, Mythbusters scientifically busted some of the myths supporting the lunar landing was a hoax.

[Sealbhach]

I heard that some of the inflight computer gear had a massive 64Mb RAM

Check out this video about Don Eyles.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8152907.stm

They had 76KB.

.

[lisati]

I heard that some of the inflight computer gear had a massive 64Mb RAM


Check out this video about Don Eyles.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8152907.stm

They had 76KB.

.

Just realised I made a typo, and meant Kb not Mb

[HappinessNow]

I think that the idea that NASA faked the lunar landing is really an insult to the incredible hard work that numerous scientists and engineers put into the project. I don't really understand why there is cause to believe that the landing was faked.

+1

Paranoid scrizophrania is a diagnosable and treatable disease also. ;)

Next they will tell us the Moon itself is fake or merely made of cheese or someplace a rabbit hangs out and makes Mochi (Japanese tale for those who don't know, and if you look at the Moon you will see the Bunny-Girl pounding away and making Mochi).

[stwschool]

Tbh I'm more bothered by the fact that 40 years later we seem to find it almost impossible, like technology has gone backwards.

[gnomeuser]

+1

Paranoid scrizophrania is a diagnosable and treatable disease also. ;)

Next they will tell us the Moon itself is fake or merely made of cheese or someplace a rabbit hangs out and makes Mochi (Japanese tale for those who don't know, and if you look at the Moon you will see the Bunny-Girl pounding away and making Mochi).

Something like this (http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm) perhaps?

I have the greatest respect not only for the brave astronauts who ventured to the moon but to the hundreds of thousands who made it happen. It was an indescribable step for mankind to leave our own home, it will forever mark us. I am sad that America has lost that spirit and love of science that brought mankind that far, that time shall always to me shine trough as their proudest moment and I have every hope that it shall be regained.

[t0p]

Aren't you just getting confused with that movie...whats it called?...oh yeah...

Capricorn One....

*sigh*

Did you know that Capricorn One was made because some Hollywood people had some doubts about the moon missions (http://www.guerrillacampaign.com/moonconspiracy.htm)? And the government tried to frame OJ Simpson for the murder of his wife because of his role in making this movie (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1758/was-the-apollo-moon-landing-a-hoax)?

:p

[diwas]

WHY?
According to news, NASA has re-used all the landing tapes for other uses. What could be more important than the first landing on moon? Did they really run out of tapes for other purposes? LOL, this story is very very awkward.

C'on NASA needs more brain to think of cover-up stories. Their version isn't quite convincing to me.

[koshatnik]

I'm watching this show on TruTV, and these guys are going on about how area 51 was the site of the "lunar landing hoax" That's why it's so secure, because the "sets" are still there. And all this time, I thought they were hiding aliens in there. Silly me. What do you think?

I think people are idiots.

[Paqman]

I'm watching this show on TruTV, and these guys are going on about how area 51 was the site of the "lunar landing hoax" That's why it's so secure, because the "sets" are still there. And all this time, I thought they were hiding aliens in there. Silly me. What do you think?

Area51 is secure because it was a site for secret experimental aircraft. There's no reason to think it was ever used for anything else.

The moon landing hoax story is just moronic. If the landing was a hoax then why didn't the Russians expose it? They had a moon programme of their own, so they definitely had the equipment, manpower and (most importantly!) the motivation to do so.

[gnomeuser]

WHY?
According to news, NASA has re-used all the landing tapes for other uses. What could be more important than the first landing on moon? Did they really run out of tapes for other purposes? LOL, this story is very very awkward.

C'on NASA needs more brain to think of cover-up stories. Their version isn't quite convincing to me.

One should never ascribe to malice that which equally well could be ascribed to stupidity

Or the ever popular:

You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity

Odds are that NASA, being a big bureaucratic mess simply lost them, I mean they had video of the landing shown already and at the time there was no means to transmit to the average citizen the high resolution originals. How often does one need those originals after all. So they probably got stuffed away somewhere and everyone forgot. If that did not ruin the recordings or the equipment required to play it back hasn't been lost for all time then some joker probably recorded over it. It was common, TV stations have done so for years before ample storage became available.

Yes it would be nice if we had the original clean recordings but I am perfectly happy with the restored secondary videos which were transmitted to the world that day. It is equally stunning regardless of the fact that it was recorded by pointing a camera at a TV displaying the feed from the moon. It's mankind on the face of another celestial body regardless of what way you look at it.

NASA were extremely stupid, they lost a part of our history as a species. I don't think that makes them villains, merely in that department utterly incompetent.

[HappinessNow]

One should never ascribe to malice that which equally well could be ascribed to stupidity

Or the ever popular:

You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity

Odds are that NASA, being a big bureaucratic mess simply lost them, I mean they had video of the landing shown already and at the time there was no means to transmit to the average citizen the high resolution originals. How often does one need those originals after all. So they probably got stuffed away somewhere and everyone forgot. If that did not ruin the recordings or the equipment required to play it back hasn't been lost for all time then some joker probably recorded over it. It was common, TV stations have done so for years before ample storage became available.

Yes it would be nice if we had the original clean recordings but I am perfectly happy with the restored secondary videos which were transmitted to the world that day. It is equally stunning regardless of the fact that it was recorded by pointing a camera at a TV displaying the feed from the moon. It's mankind on the face of another celestial body regardless of what way you look at it.

NASA were extremely stupid, they lost a part of our history as a species. I don't think that makes them villains, merely in that department utterly incompetent.
+1

To back this up Hollywood themselves lost countless classic movies this way.

It is more common then you think.

[Yannick Le Saint kyncani]

I, for one, much more prefer the alien conspiracy.

Little green mans, you know like the squeeze toy aliens in toy story :)

[gn2]

If you ever meet him, don't call Buzz Aldrin a liar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ez-NpFVwQw

[Sealbhach]

If you ever meet him, don't call Buzz Aldrin a liar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ez-NpFVwQw

Called him "a coward, a liar and a thief". Some people, aaaarrgh!:confused:

.

[reyfer]

If you ever meet him, don't call Buzz Aldrin a liar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ez-NpFVwQw

Can I have the name of the guy calling Mr. Aldrin a liar and a coward? I can give him the other 99 punches he deserves.

[gnomeuser]

Called him "a coward, a liar and a thief". Some people, aaaarrgh!:confused:

.

Bart Sibrel has a long history of ambushing astronauts even invading their privacy. He is a deeply dishonest man, he deserved that punch to the face but I still wish Buzz hadn't done it since now Bart and his sockpuppet army uses it to play martyr.

[3rdalbum]

WHY?
According to news, NASA has re-used all the landing tapes for other uses.

The originals, yes. They made backup copies in the early 1970s and sent some of them to Curtin University in Western Australia for study. The university later decided to "get rid of" the tapes, but thankfully the person in charge of it just decided to put them into a cool, dark basement. The tapes were recently recovered.

The reason why old tapes were reused in NASA was because there was a shortage of tape in the 70s and 80s. A lot of TV stations have wiped important old footage because of it - for instance, there are episodes of Doctor Who that are simply gone because of this.

[stinger30au]

[quote=3rdalbum;7635599 A lot of TV stations have wiped important old footage because of it - for instance, there are episodes of Doctor Who that are simply gone because of this.[/quote]

ABC TV in australia did this years ago as well and destroyed the originals to many AC DC songs they recorded for the band in the studios for their tv show "count down" from the 70's and 80's
many history making moments gone forever cos some idiot decided to reuse the tapes

[SunnyRabbiera]

Granted I believe there is something other then experimental aircraft at area 51 but come on the fake moon landing thing is BS, mythbusters pretty much aced all claims made by conspiracy theorists on the moon landing.
Hey granted I do think there is some truth behind the reports of alien craft at area 51 but only because of the many kinds of aircraft that came out after the Roswell crash.
Though these days yes I think Roswell was actually a Russian incident as it makes sense with the cold war and all but other "crash sites" are a lot more credible.
Roswell is the most famous but there are others that might be more credible.

[TheNosh]

there are episodes of Doctor Who that are simply gone because of this.

is it wrong that i'm far more worried about the loss of those Doctor Who episodes than the NASA footage?

[mmix]

<sarcasm>
please, to someone in area51, unleash the alien technology to remove Great Pacific Garbage.
</sarcasm>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch

[forrestcupp]

I don't really understand why there is cause to believe that the landing was faked.

Some of the evidence that it was faked is pretty convincing, like in a couple of the pictures how part of the lunar lander is in front of the camera's crosshairs. There are lots of convincing evidences. I actually started to wonder after seeing some of this stuff.

But after watching Mythbusters explain how all of these things actually would happen, I stopped wondering.

Also, here is a good web site (http://www.iangoddard.com/moon01.htm) explaining how some of the photo hoaxes aren't really hoaxes.

[tjwoosta]

Mythbusters suck at busting myths!

how about this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM&feature=related

why would they have to fake anything, if the landing was real?

[JillSwift]

Mythbusters suck at busting myths!

how about this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM&feature=related

why would they have to fake anything, if the landing was real?
Nothing was faked. The color images could not be broadcast from the spacecraft because the more complex color signal would require more power to broadcast, and the equipment far heavier, so it could be clearly received on Earth. Lower power would mean signal degradation and a useless image. So, color camera footage was recorded then brought back. Simpler, low resolution black-n-white images made live video possible given the technology of the time.

The reason the B&W images weren't given to the networks as a direct feed is because it wasn't a standard broadcast signal. It was both the wrong aspect ratio, and the wrong scan order, and a lower scan frequency than that used for TV broadcasting. It was far easier and cheaper to just film the results rather than build something to translate from one format to another in real time.

All the linked video proves is that, given a little glib context building, you can make anything seem like a conspiracy.

[tjwoosta]

Did you even watch the video?

They darkened all the lights in the spacecraft, moved the camera to the very back and took a shot of the little round window in the front facing the earth. Then they said the camera was in the window and the little round window was the earth. (its all on camera)

[JillSwift]

Did you even watch the video?

They darkened all the lights in the spacecraft, moved the camera to the very back and took a shot of the little round window in the front facing the earth. Then they said the camera was in the window and the little round window was the earth. (its all on camera)
And?
So they got a nice shot of earth in the distance, without the glare of sunlight from surrounding panels. Why does this suggest fakery to you?

Or, are you accepting the claim that the window itself was what was being filmed, and being used to give the appearance of Earth in the distance by viewing a small portion of the planet through the roundel? If that's the case, take a closer look at the images. That is clearly not a tiny bit of the Earth, it's not a LEO image, it's the whole sphere. That's very clearly Earth at quite a distance, say the distance of Lunar orbit.

[MikeTheC]

Somewhere in probably Book Two, Buck, Apollo, Wilma, Adama, Dr. Huer and others will be gathered to commemorate the Apollo 11 landing at Mare Tranquillitatis. Of course, by the 2400s they've had to erect force field barriers around the various landing sites to keep them from being vandalized or burglarized. It's sad, but that's human nature for you.

[tjwoosta]

And?
So they got a nice shot of earth in the distance, without the glare of sunlight from surrounding panels. Why does this suggest fakery to you?

Or, are you accepting the claim that the window itself was what was being filmed, and being used to give the appearance of Earth in the distance by viewing a small portion of the planet through the roundel? If that's the case, take a closer look at the images. That is clearly not a tiny bit of the Earth, it's not a LEO image, it's the whole sphere. That's very clearly Earth at quite a distance, say the distance of Lunar orbit.

And the continents?

It's a small portion of the earth shown through the window at the other side of the spacecraft to make it look like the circumference of the earth, watch closer you will see a guy even puts a piece of cardboard up to the window to simulate the dark side of the earth.

[JillSwift]

And the continents?

It's a small portion of the earth shown through the window at the other side of the spacecraft to make it look like the circumference of the earth, watch closer you will see a guy even puts a piece of cardboard up to the window to simulate the dark side of the earth.
*facepalm*
I should know better by now than to get drawn into this junk with a hoaxer.
Never mind.
It was all faked, all those involved have astonishingly been able to keep their secrets for 40 years. The reflectors left on the moon that have given us such valuable data about the lunar orbit were really put there by the use of a giant trebuchet.

[richg]

New shots show Apollo's discards

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/20090718_New_shots_show_Apollo_s_discards.html

Can't wait to see what these clowns will think up next.

Rich

[MikeTheC]

Personally, I wouldn't mind gathering all those folks up who dream up this crap, put them on the surface of the moon (but nowhere near any of the landing sites -- I don't want them mucking 'em up), open the hatch, push 'em all out in space suits, and tell them "Have a nice day!"

But then again, that's just me.

[MaxIBoy]

Personally, I wouldn't mind gathering all those folks up who dream up this crap, put them on the surface of the moon (but nowhere near any of the landing sites -- I don't want them mucking 'em up), open the hatch, push 'em all out in space suits, and tell them "Have a nice day!"

But then again, that's just me.They're not worth the expense.

[subdivision]

I think that the idea that NASA faked the lunar landing is really an insult to the incredible hard work that numerous scientists and engineers put into the project. I don't really understand why there is cause to believe that the landing was faked.

Quoted for truth and justice.

[raronson]

Michael Moore's movies seem pretty convincing too. That is, until you realize it's the product of massive editing and quoting people out of context to get the effect he intends for. It's all about presentation. But good presentation, like a good argument, doesn't make something true. The mind is, afterall, just a complext Turing machine...

[raronson]

Mythbusters suck at busting myths!


Agreed. Myth Busters is a pop-culture pseudoscience entertainment show...

I'm actually really pissed about the Discovery Channel dumbing down its content so much. It used to be all about educating people about natural science--now it's all hotrods, motorcycles, explosions, and pop-science trash.

It's a shame.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

The reason why old tapes were reused in NASA was because there was a shortage of tape in the 70s and 80s. A lot of TV stations have wiped important old footage because of it - for instance, there are episodes of Doctor Who that are simply gone because of this.

I don't remember a shortage of tapes in those days; however, those 14 inch diameter reels of tape we used were expensive. They may have been 9700 feet long; however, at 120 ips they recorded for 15 minutes and at 15 ips they lasted 2 hours. Not much of what we recorded could use less than 60 ips (1 hour per reel).

I worked at NASA's Johnson Space Center Houston in the late 70's and early 80's. NASA was not in the business of preserving history, it was established for the purpose of space exploration. It was business-as-usual to reuse tape. I know I degaussed tapes during those days. I can't remember if I degaussed just hundreds or if it was thousands of reels. Yes, I degaussed tapes from the first shuttle mission. I also degaussed tapes from shuttle simulator training exercises prior to the first shuttle mission that recorded John Young and Robert Crippen joking. I remember listening to them joking (not the tapes) and I was LMAO.

Edit: PS, if you are going to risk your life by strapping your a** into a rocket built by the lowest bidder, you better have a sense of humour.

[PartisanEntity]

In answer to the conspiracy theorists, I would point out that we have placed mirrors on the moon that universities around the world routinely use for experiments.

Several radio stations around the world also picked up the radio transmission from the lunar aircraft.

Last but not least, the rock samples brought from the moon were found to contained a mineral that does not exist on earth.

So, taking all facts into account, this would have to be a conspiracy theory where thousands of people around the world were recruited to help keep it up over a period of 40 years.

[MikeTheC]

Edit: PS, if you are going to risk your life by strapping your a** into a rocket built by the lowest bidder, you better have a sense of humour.

+1 To that...

Totally ROFLMAO'd over that observation.

[Delever]

They must have extreme amounts of faith to discard tons of contrary evidence for some facts with hoaxed explanation.

[tjwoosta]

In answer to the conspiracy theorists, I would point out that we have placed mirrors on the moon that universities around the world routinely use for experiments.

Several radio stations around the world also picked up the radio transmission from the lunar aircraft.

Last but not least, the rock samples brought from the moon were found to contained a mineral that does not exist on earth.

So, taking all facts into account, this would have to be a conspiracy theory where thousands of people around the world were recruited to help keep it up over a period of 40 years.


The theory never says that we haven't made it to the moon, it says that the footage of it was falsified.

[Delever]

The theory never says that we haven't made it to the moon, it says that the footage of it was falsified.

Oh, thats a change. Maybe evidence became too overwhelming?

Conspiracies of the gaps...

[HappyFeet]

You'll never convince me that man went to the moon. Considering what a monumental feat it would be today, and then consider 60's technology. Ain't gonna happen. They basicaly went there in a tin cup. Yeah right.

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.

[TheNosh]

You'll never convince me that man went to the moon. Considering what a monumental feat it would be today, and then consider 60's technology. Ain't gonna happen. They basicaly went there in a tin cup. Yeah right.

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.

my linux computer? ...they don't

[Grant A.]

I'm not really a big fan of conspiracy theories, but when I heard a story on NPR the other day about how the original footage of the moon landing supposedly 'got lost', I found it a little hard to swallow. It's supposedly one of the greatest achievements of human kind, yet the original footage accidentally got taped over??? Perhaps for some re-runs of Gilligan's island?

So the only footage Nasa has, is that recorded from television. But supposedly there was a second copy of the original which was recorded at the Parkes Observatory in Australia, but it's, not surprisingly, missing also...

Makes you wonder...

Well, the U.S. government has never really been known to keep a tight ship. It's quite impossible for the United States to have perpetrated such an incident without someone taking some sort of photo home with them, and leaking it to the press.

I think the whole rumor was started by the Soviets because they were jealous of us getting there first, and wanted to destroy the credibility of such an event.

[KiwiNZ]

You'll never convince me that man went to the moon. Considering what a monumental feat it would be today, and then consider 60's technology. Ain't gonna happen. They basicaly went there in a tin cup. Yeah right.

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.


And some still say the world is flat.
The sun orbits the earth:rolleyes:

[jrusso2]

You will never convince me the world is not flat. I don't see any curve here.

[DownTown22]

You'll never convince me that man went to the moon. Considering what a monumental feat it would be today, and then consider 60's technology. Ain't gonna happen. They basicaly went there in a tin cup. Yeah right.

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.

My favorite......conspiracy nuts!

[Giant Speck]

Humankind doesn't exist. It's a conspiracy.

[Delever]

I think I found unbelievable conspiracy. Do you know how many transistors there are inside of CPU? Almost 2 BILION, yeah, with B. It is laughable. Do anyone seriously believe that we managed to fit THAT into 1cm²?? They say they are working with 32um technology. I LOOKED THAT UP. It is 100000 times smaller than human hair! 10 times smaller than length of visible light wave! I think humans were never capable to create such technology, therefore I have more sensible explanation for it. It may be that all current computers are all alien technology. The way it came here is unknown, but it might be that it was harvested from fallen spacecrafts by USA and sold for corporations. Or worse, it could be that aliens are running this world in secret. Maybe reptilian form.

I should write a book about that.

[reyfer]

You'll never convince me that man went to the moon. Considering what a monumental feat it would be today, and then consider 60's technology. Ain't gonna happen. They basicaly went there in a tin cup. Yeah right.

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.

And you will never convince me that part of that "governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things" consist on leaving the supposed sets up there for 40 years, and that not a single human being leaked an ounce of solid evidence, against hundreds of pictures of the landing sites taken with telescopes around the world. What is it with Amaricans and not feeling proud of the amazing achievement it was to reach the moon in 1969? As someone else said, if it was a hoax, during Cold War, with the soviets on the race, don't you think the KGB would have found the evidence and published it?

[jflaker]

I heard that some of the inflight computer gear had a massive 64Mb RAM

More like KILOBYTES....and the number was something like 4KB....If I remember right, each step of the mission has to be unloaded so the next step could be loaded....

[Tipped OuT]

Oh geez, not this conspiracy crap again *sigh*.

[linuxguymarshall]

I think it doesn't matter either way, we can go there now, so I don't really care if we did it before.

Yeah, assume they did and move on with it. If the Soviets didn't call shenanigans then I am convinced.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

Oh geez, not this conspiracy crap again *sigh*.

Sadly true.

I actually thought that Ubuntu users were a little more educated than the average public.

Another myth busted!!!!

[subdivision]

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.

Paranoid much? You give the government waaaay too much credit. To pull off these conspiracies smart people would have to be in charge and people would have to be able to keep secrets.

You know how to get two people to keep a secret right?

Shoot one.

[H2SO_four]

I didn't waste any of my time reading the previous posts. Lets just think about this. If the landing was faked, why would they save the sets where it was supposedly filmed? For 40 years? That is crazier than the assumption that it was a fake in the first place.

Just my .02

[subdivision]

I didn't waste any of my time reading the previous posts. Lets just think about this. If the landing was faked, why would they save the sets where it was supposedly filmed? For 40 years? That is crazier than the assumption that it was a fake in the first place.

Just my .02

Because otherwise it wouldn't be a conspiracy, duh.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

Paranoid much? You give the government waaaay too much credit. To pull off these conspiracies smart people would have to be in charge and people would have to be able to keep secrets.

You know how to get two people to keep a secret right?

Shoot one.

+ 1

Even the president of the US couldn't keep his mouth shut about the AWACS plane in the 1980's.

The government can't keep a secret. :lolflag:

[subdivision]

+ 1

Even the president of the US couldn't keep his mouth shut about the AWACS plane in the 1980's.

The government can't keep a secret. :lolflag:

Can't even do what they're supposed to be doing anyway, but that is not a discussion for here. :)

[Delever]

See! THEY place puppets in front political lines so that public can be easily fooled!

Seriously, I suggest NOT to argue :) Those who live in fantasy can rationalize anything.

* Goes back to Doctor Who forums *

[Zorael]

Obligatory link! (http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song) <-- Truth finally revealed here

[Tipped OuT]

Because otherwise it wouldn't be a conspiracy, duh.

Which is why I laugh at the people who believe in this stuff. :P

[Grant A.]

And you will never convince me that part of that "governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things" consist on leaving the supposed sets up there for 40 years, and that not a single human being leaked an ounce of solid evidence, against hundreds of pictures of the landing sites taken with telescopes around the world. What is it with Amaricans and not feeling proud of the amazing achievement it was to reach the moon in 1969? As someone else said, if it was a hoax, during Cold War, with the soviets on the race, don't you think the KGB would have found the evidence and published it?

Exactly. This kind of behavior just makes us people in the U.S. look even more foolish.

[lisati]

Some of the conspiracy theories are a bit like the claims that the holocaust never happened (another potential can of worms, let's not go there any more than we have to), in spite of there being many people still alive whose lives were directly affected by it. (And yes, I do have a relevant anecdote which, in the interests of privacy, I'm not ready to share.)

[tom66]

I think a powerful laser pointed at the moon mirrors is enough to prove we've visited there. It's pretty definitive.

[racerraul]

It's amazing what people choose to believe...

A video about the moon landing, featuring real live austronauts and physiscal technology used, and other tangible evidence, etc...
or a video claiming the moon landing is a fake.

I find it amazing that the video making the claims of a fake moon landing can be at all convincing when they themselves base all their BS on speculation on how it was all made. They really offer no real proof, but rather a bunch of skepticism and theories of how it COULD have been faked.

Whatever...

[Blacklightbulb]

1. Area 51 contains nothing, because it's fame is known around the whole world only a stupid **** would store sensitive items/data in it.
2. Probably Area 51 is just a hoax created by whoever is in charge (I doubt it's the government or the too famous CIA) to distract people.
3. Coming to this also the UFOs I believe were some kind of hoax created to distract people of that country about some really sensitive issues.
4. The lunar landing could have been a hoax.
5. Whether or not it was a hoax it was just an irresponsible amount of money and HUMAN LIVES wasted to go on a rock in space which brought no knew developments but created the american illusion that America is stronger and more advanced than USSR.
6. Point is the American Government wasn't working for the people than as it isn't now either.
7. The most developed countries are victims of their own governments which unlike less developed countries can't open their mouth.
8. You are stupid if you believe some random theory from a random guy on a random forum (like me).

just blabbing away...... :D

[tom66]

Going to the moon, and developing space travel, brought many advancements. For example, because we have moon mirrors we can accurately measure that the gravitational constant has changed by less than 1 part in about 100 billion, providing support for Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. Additionally, Velcro, microwave ovens, Teflon, GPS and zero-gravity ballpoint pens all owe themselves to the space program...

But mostly, it was a show off. It provided advances, but it was just to prove that the US were better than the USSR. The US were scared by the USSR getting the first man in space.

[richg]

This news report will bring on some new theories. I wonder how NASA did that? :o:o

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/20090718_New_shots_show_Apollo_s_discards.html

New shots show Apollo's discards

By Seth Borenstein

Associated Press
WASHINGTON - New NASA photos of the moon show the leftovers from man's exploration 40 years ago.

For the first time, photos from space pinpoint equipment left behind from the Apollo landings, and even the well-worn tracks astronauts made on the moon surface. The images are from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which was launched last month and now circles the moon in search of future landing sites.

The photos were released yesterday, in time for Monday's 40th anniversary of the first moon landing in 1969. A photo of the Apollo 11 site shows the Eagle lunar module used by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin.

"It was really great to see the hardware sitting on the surface, waiting for us to come back," said Arizona State University scientist Mark Robinson, who runs the camera on the orbiter. "You could actually see the descent module sitting on the surface."

But that's only if you know where to look. NASA helps out by putting a giant arrow on each photo. The lunar landers look to be square white blobs; the Eagle is a fuzzy image near a crater.

NASA landed on the moon six times; the orbital camera so far has photographed only five of the landing sites: those of Apollo 11, 14, 15, 16, and 17. Apollo 12's site will be done later.

Apollo 13 never landed on the moon because an explosion on board the spaceship on the way there forced it to return to Earth.

The images for Apollo 14 are the best so far. Taken Wednesday, they show the path made by Alan Shepard and Edgar Mitchell as they went back and forth from lander to work site.

[MikeTheC]

Going to the moon, and developing space travel, brought many advancements. For example, because we have moon mirrors we can accurately measure that the gravitational constant has changed by less than 1 part in about 100 billion, providing support for Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. Additionally, Velcro, microwave ovens, Teflon, GPS and zero-gravity ballpoint pens all owe themselves to the space program...

But mostly, it was a show off. It provided advances, but it was just to prove that the US were better than the USSR. The US were scared by the USSR getting the first man in space.

And, thanks to the Soviets and their Sputnik I, we have DARPA. And thanks to DARPA, we have the ARPAnet, and thanks to that we have the Internet.

So, the next time you decide to send someone an email, or to post on this message board, you can in some small part thank the 50s/60s space race.

[Grant A.]

And, thanks to the Soviets and their Sputnik I, we have DARPA. And thanks to DARPA, we have the ARPAnet, and thanks to that we have the Internet.

So, the next time you decide to send someone an email, or to post on this message board, you can in some small part thank the 50s/60s space race.

Indeed, many consumer goods at some point started their existence in a government program.

[swoll1980]

Indeed, many consumer goods at some point started their existence in a government program.

Tempur-Pedic beds. (http://www.tempurpedic.com/)

[MikeTheC]

How would you folks react if you met someone who didn't believe that Apple ever lost it's place in the market and that Microsoft became the dominant OS player?

"Oh, I simply don't believe Microsoft could have *that* many customers."

[Giant Speck]

Tempur-Pedic beds. (http://www.tempurpedic.com/)

I soooooo want one, but there's no way I could afford it. Also, I'd have a very hard time trying to have it delivered to my dorm on base.

I have thought about getting one of their mattress toppers, though, but those are also hellaciously expensive.

[Grant A.]

I soooooo want one, but there's no way I could afford it. Also, I'd have a very hard time trying to have it delivered to my dorm on base.

I have thought about getting one of their mattress toppers, though, but those are also hellaciously expensive.

Those Tempur-pedic beds are known to trap heat. So it might be quite uncomfortable.

[swoll1980]

I soooooo want one, but there's no way I could afford it. Also, I'd have a very hard time trying to have it delivered to my dorm on base.

I have thought about getting one of their mattress toppers, though, but those are also hellaciously expensive.

I have the topper. I could only dream of owning the actual bed. The topper is very comfy though. Way better than the spring-loaded, back-killer, underneath the topper.

[Giant Speck]

I have the topper. I could only dream of owning the actual bed. The topper is very comfy though. Way better than the spring-loaded, back-killer, underneath the topper.

My parents have a California King Tempur-Pedic bed. It is sooooo comfortable.

But don't ever try to plop down on... that freakin' hurts!

[Incense]

is it wrong that i'm far more worried about the loss of those doctor who episodes than the nasa footage?

+ 1

[gnomeuser]

You'll never convince me that man went to the moon. Considering what a monumental feat it would be today, and then consider 60's technology. Ain't gonna happen. They basicaly went there in a tin cup. Yeah right.

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.

Lets start with the Moon hoax:

Firstly there is Phil Plaits famous debunking of the Fox show on the moon landing.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

Additionally the user shanedk on youtube has some excellent videos on the moonlandings and there are many more. Solid science debunking the lies of the conspiracy people.

Microsoft has no backdoor to my computer, they have nothing to do with my computer. They haven't for a decade, regardless you provided no evidence to boast your case here.

The JFK thing I am actually sympathic to, I used to believe in that but the science and pure logic won me over. For a good quick rundown of the evidence in the case I recommend that book Case Closed. In addition to being very well researched and referenced it spends a great deal of time dealing with Oswalds life up to the point of the assassination. It is important to understand him to understand his actions. For an online reference addressing specific books and movies as well as interview transscripts from the investigations on the JFK assassionation then http://www.jfk-online.com/ is a good place.

Does the government cover things up? Naturally they do, we all do - I certainly didn't eat those delicious looking cookie.. the cat did.
Largely they historically tend to do so for the reasons we all do, to cover stupidity not malice. There are also the cases where illegality has taken place such as taking bribes, naturally someone doing that will cover his tracks. This is covering up wrongdoing.

So no, I am a full blown skeptic, having as such reviewed the evidence for all these cases and come to the conclusion that the official stories are backed by evidence enough to support them

[RATM_Owns]

My friend's dad works for NASA, he was saying that Russia and the U.S. were watching each other so closely that if one faked it, the other would know immediately.

[swoll1980]

I'd have a very hard time trying to have it delivered to my dorm on base.


Are you in the service?

[moster]

Well, I have one link that I think you people will find interesting. It deals with moon and mars too. If you click long enough there will be no doubt in you that some pictures was gimped/photoshopped :)

http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-directories/3-civilization/civilization-directory.htm (http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-directories/3-civilization/civilization-directory.htm)

edit:
Do I believe in fake moon landing? I do not really know. Do I believe it is possible? Hell yes!

If Bush can attack other country (iraq) with reason of weapons of mass destruction, and when could not find any. He said just "Woops, we were wrong. But we cannot leave now when we are already there, hehe." Result. Dead americans 4000+, wounded 30000+
If they can pull that, faking moon landing was just child game.

[Bodsda]

I don't really understand why there is cause to believe that the landing was faked.
Lets see. Apart from the countless cases put forward in this thread, aswell as in the links, also you have the radiation, the falg in the wind and the 'accidental' loss of the original footage.


There's no credible reason to believe that the landing was a hoax. These claims have been long refuted and shown to be simple or even blatantly ignorant. It's funny. Half of the world claims or gives lip service to believing in a god that they've never seen, but view science and technology, which has given us so much, with hostility, suspicion, and incredulity. Aside from that, people love a good conspiracy theory--it simplifies a complex world.
You cannot deny a conspiracy theory just because you do not wish to believe it, you have given no proof of said refuted claims.


The moon landing hoax story is just moronic. If the landing was a hoax then why didn't the Russians expose it? They had a moon programme of their own, so they definitely had the equipment, manpower and (most importantly!) the motivation to do so.
Your argument to why the hoax stories are innacurate is that the other side did not notice? Wow, at least conspiratist have some usable evidence. I think that NASA obviously had the money and time to trick 90% of the world so convincingly that the Russians couldnt find anything.


the fake moon landing thing is BS, mythbusters pretty much aced all claims made by conspiracy theorists on the moon landing.
I actually have no idea about this mythbusters thing that everyone is harping on about, I have no idea where I can find information on it as no links have been provided so I find it difficult to believe that some TV program can 'ace pretty much all claims' otherwise we wouldnt be having this discussion.


is it wrong that i'm far more worried about the loss of those Doctor Who episodes than the NASA footage?
Hell no, Doctor Who is way more important! :)


Some of the evidence that it was faked is pretty convincing, like in a couple of the pictures how part of the lunar lander is in front of the camera's crosshairs. There are lots of convincing evidences. I actually started to wonder after seeing some of this stuff.

But after watching Mythbusters explain how all of these things actually would happen, I stopped wondering.

Also, here is a good web site (http://www.iangoddard.com/moon01.htm) explaining how some of the photo hoaxes aren't really hoaxes.
I can sort of understand some of them, but the crosshair one still isnt refuted, it claims that light diminishes thin lines, yet in their final example the line is still visible on top of the object, but in the two 'landing' pictures it is not visible what so ever


Nothing was faked. The color images could not be broadcast from the spacecraft because the more complex color signal would require more power to broadcast, and the equipment far heavier, so it could be clearly received on Earth. Lower power would mean signal degradation and a useless image. So, color camera footage was recorded then brought back. Simpler, low resolution black-n-white images made live video possible given the technology of the time.

The reason the B&W images weren't given to the networks as a direct feed is because it wasn't a standard broadcast signal. It was both the wrong aspect ratio, and the wrong scan order, and a lower scan frequency than that used for TV broadcasting. It was far easier and cheaper to just film the results rather than build something to translate from one format to another in real time.

All the linked video proves is that, given a little glib context building, you can make anything seem like a conspiracy.
Wow, you really didnt watch that link did you? It spent like 1 minutes discussing the picture quality then moved on to far more convincing theories.


And?
So they got a nice shot of earth in the distance, without the glare of sunlight from surrounding panels. Why does this suggest fakery to you?

Or, are you accepting the claim that the window itself was what was being filmed, and being used to give the appearance of Earth in the distance by viewing a small portion of the planet through the roundel? If that's the case, take a closer look at the images. That is clearly not a tiny bit of the Earth, it's not a LEO image, it's the whole sphere. That's very clearly Earth at quite a distance, say the distance of Lunar orbit.

Yes, we are accepting the claim that the window was being filmed through which they could see a low orbit visual of the Earth. They used the angle of the camara and cardboard to block certain parts of the image to give the impression of distance and shape.


*facepalm*
I should know better by now than to get drawn into this junk with a hoaxer.
Never mind.
It was all faked, all those involved have astonishingly been able to keep their secrets for 40 years. The reflectors left on the moon that have given us such valuable data about the lunar orbit were really put there by the use of a giant trebuchet.
Wow, you refute claims of conspiracy with sarcasm and not eveidence. You know that really helps in the fighting your side of the argument.


Last but not least, the rock samples brought from the moon were found to contained a mineral that does not exist on earth.

So, taking all facts into account, this would have to be a conspiracy theory where thousands of people around the world were recruited to help keep it up over a period of 40 years.
Erm, things have been falling onto this planet for millenia, it is not far fetched at all to belive that 'moon dust' found its way to Earth naturally. I am also quite happy to believe that the largest government in the world would keep a cover up going for 40 years, they are, afterall the American Government, scared of anyone looking better then them.


You'll never convince me that man went to the moon. Considering what a monumental feat it would be today, and then consider 60's technology. Ain't gonna happen. They basicaly went there in a tin cup. Yeah right.

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

If you believe that governments won't go to extraordinary lengths to cover up things, then you live in a fairy tale world.
Totally agree with the tin cup thing, the lone gunman... I dont really know much about but Snipers are pretty nifty. +1 to the last paragraph


And some still say the world is flat.
The sun orbits the earth:rolleyes:
erm, the earth is flat, it rides on the back of 4 elephants who themseleves stand on a giant turtle, who is pushed by a dung beetle. The fith elephent crashed into the land causing the continants to break and mountains to rise.


Sadly true.

I actually thought that Ubuntu users were a little more educated than the average public.

Another myth busted!!!!
Hmm, does that statement mean that Ubuntu users are not of the general public? I find your post insulting sir/madam.


I didn't waste any of my time reading the previous posts. Lets just think about this. If the landing was faked, why would they save the sets where it was supposedly filmed? For 40 years? That is crazier than the assumption that it was a fake in the first place.

Just my .02
Agreed, I dont think that theory is credible, but you can hardly dismiss all theories based upon one not-so-credible theory.


1. Area 51 contains nothing, because it's fame is known around the whole world only a stupid **** would store sensitive items/data in it.
2. Probably Area 51 is just a hoax created by whoever is in charge (I doubt it's the government or the too famous CIA) to distract people.
3. Coming to this also the UFOs I believe were some kind of hoax created to distract people of that country about some really sensitive issues.
4. The lunar landing could have been a hoax.
5. Whether or not it was a hoax it was just an irresponsible amount of money and HUMAN LIVES wasted to go on a rock in space which brought no knew developments but created the american illusion that America is stronger and more advanced than USSR.
6. Point is the American Government wasn't working for the people than as it isn't now either.
7. The most developed countries are victims of their own governments which unlike less developed countries can't open their mouth.
8. You are stupid if you believe some random theory from a random guy on a random forum (like me).

just blabbing away...... :D
1) So, the american government is definately keeping stuff there (no insult to americans)

2) Probably a double edged conspiracy to elud people of area 42, where the real aliens are kept.

3) Hmm, distract americans with UFO's, or, just make another bad comedy.

4) Agreed

5) Pointless: yes, No new inventions: No

6) Agreed

7) Fail to see the relavence of this point, but, agreed.

8) You had a theory?


I find it odd how people can argue without giving credible evidence. So, can some anti-conspirisist please tell me, how they did not die of radiation poisining, why the flag was flapping in the wind and also deny the evidence in the linked video earlier on.

Thanks,

Bodsda

[lisati]

Here's a scary thought: the moon landing could never have happened, because Mrs Lisati, who happens to be one of the most brilliant people I know, was only a couple of months old at the time. She hadn't had the time to go school yet, let alone work out all the necessary designs.
):P





(Just kidding)

[tom66]

I'm still waiting for a rebut on the reflectors on the Moon. How else could they get there? You couldn't fly them up there, especially with 60's technology, you would need to know the position quite accurately.

[moster]

They did TRY to go to moon. But when they get to the half way it just PUFF. Electric cable from earth was too short :D

After that, they just filmed it..

[t0p]

Exactly. This kind of behavior just makes us people in the U.S. look even more foolish.

Don't fret, pet. Nothing could make you all look more foolish.

:p

[Delever]

You cannot deny a conspiracy theory just because you do not wish to believe it, you have given no proof of said refuted claims.

Your argument to why the hoax stories are innacurate is that the other side did not notice? Wow, at least conspiratist have some usable evidence. I think that NASA obviously had the money and time to trick 90% of the world so convincingly that the Russians couldnt find anything.


Evidence against moon landing has this problem: evidence for moon landing. You have to take both into account.



I actually have no idea about this mythbusters thing that everyone is harping on about, I have no idea where I can find information on it as no links have been provided so I find it difficult to believe that some TV program can 'ace pretty much all claims' otherwise we wouldnt be having this discussion.


Well, moon surface is reflective thing hence variations of brightness in the shadows. Moon surface is not very flat, hence different rock shadows. Moon is very bright compared to the stars, therefore you don't see them. Flag swings more after touching it in lower gravity and without any air resistance. And they have left mirrors on damn moon.



Hell no, Doctor Who is way more important! :)


Agreed. Wait... No :)



Wow, you really didnt watch that link did you? It spent like 1 minutes discussing the picture quality then moved on to far more convincing theories.


There is a problem with that link - I see at least two fades before bigger earth is visible. It would be sad if that woman is consciously flat out lying all that time.



Yes, we are accepting the claim that the window was being filmed through which they could see a low orbit visual of the Earth. They used the angle of the camara and cardboard to block certain parts of the image to give the impression of distance and shape.


I think there is someone holding camera for long period of time, and earth sometimes gets out of the window frame. And there are two questions: is that orb before last fade really earth or another object, and again... why the fade?



Wow, you refute claims of conspiracy with sarcasm and not eveidence. You know that really helps in the fighting your side of the argument.


Because it is pointless, I used to believe in some conspiracies too, I would simply NOT listen to any other evidence just to keep cool story going.



Agreed, I dont think that theory is credible, but you can hardly dismiss all theories based upon one not-so-credible theory.


Well, I would not dismiss, I just say that it is so unlikely, that for my purposes I can think it is false.



I find it odd how people can argue without giving credible evidence. So, can some anti-conspirisist please tell me, how they did not die of radiation poisining


What evidence there is that they would have died? You know, evidence that it is survivable will be given next time someone goes same distances.

And there was remote viewer who saw that aliens live on invisible side of the moon. That one requires fake moon landing too.

I don't remember who, but someone said: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[hansdown]

I don't remember who, but someone said: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

http://quotes4all.net/quote_989.html

[swoll1980]

I'm still waiting for a rebut on the reflectors on the Moon. How else could they get there? You couldn't fly them up there, especially with 60's technology, you would need to know the position quite accurately.

Anytime anyone mentions something the theorist can't refute, they stick their fingers in their ears, and go "LA LA LA LA LA LA I'm not listening LA LA LA"

[TheNosh]

I'm still waiting for a rebut on the reflectors on the Moon. How else could they get there? You couldn't fly them up there, especially with 60's technology, you would need to know the position quite accurately.

what if certain parts of the moon just happen to be naturally reflective?

(actually though, i believe we landed on the moon... and i'm still upset that we lost doctor who episodes due to them being taped over)

[issih]

The amount of effort necessary to have perpetrated this scam, and managed to keep it going for 40 years would be monumental, it would involve thousands of people all of whom would need to keep their mouths shut...

It would be utterly impossible and unthinkable....a truly astonishing feet...It would be about as hard as say actually sending a ship to the moon.

This one is NOT a scam.

They really did develop rockets, after all the v2's that made lots of nice holes in London were made by the same guy (mr von braun), and he had 24 years and a basically limitless budget to develop them into the apollo.

The survivability of space had been addressed by the u2 program (or are those fake too, they seem to keep appearing on tv programs, and being shot down, but I may be imagining it)

The russians were getting damn close too (they had some bloody impressive rockets down in baikonur) those were fake I presume?

We really can send things into orbit, and once you've done that, slingshotting to the moon is not that hard, getting down safely and getting back was tricky, but nowhere near as tricky as getting off earth in the first place (gravity this relation to the mass you see....sigh)

It happened, and it was one of the greatest achievements of all time, it should be celebrated without being tainted by your ill judged scepticism.

Oh, and 60s and 70s tech gave us concorde, the blackbird, the u2 and a whole host of other bits of technology we have never surpassed, because the pursuit of the goal was swallowed whole by the pursuit of the dollar. If it doesn't turn a profit these days, we can't be bothered. We could go to the moon tomorrow (well maybe next year, we'd need to build a few things) but theres no good reason to, until we can stick a mcdonalds on it to flog burgers to the passing aliens...

Sad world we live in these days :(

[Tipped OuT]

@ Poster Above Me

What? lol

[tjwoosta]

The theories say the videos were falsified, nothing else. They don't say that nobody has ever gone to the moon, or that the space program doesn't exist.

[hobo14]

Those who believe we went to the moon probably also believe that Microsoft doesn't have a back door to your computer, and that JFK was killed by a lone gunman.

Are you serious?? You actually think MS has a backdoor to everyone's computers?
What on earth would they use it for?

Do you actually think if there was, that no-one would be able to find it? After all, every computer expert in the world has access to a copy of windows...

If a back door were discovered, poof! Bye-bye to MS's entire business, billions upon billions upon billions of dollars.

I can only assume you don't know anything about software. Nothing in software given to others can be kept secret, given enough time and effort.


The theories say the videos were falsified, nothing else. They don't say that nobody has ever gone to the moon, ...
Er, yes they do...

[JillSwift]

Because it is pointless, I used to believe in some conspiracies too, I would simply NOT listen to any other evidence just to keep cool story going.
^That. Thank you, Delever.

[TheNosh]

Are you serious?? You actually think MS has a backdoor to everyone's computers?
What on earth would they use it for?

Do you actually think if there was, that no-one would be able to find it? After all, every computer expert in the world has access to a copy of windows...

If a back door were discovered, poof! Bye-bye to MS's entire business, billions upon billions upon billions of dollars.

I can only assume you don't know anything about software. Nothing in software given to others can be kept secret, given enough time and effort.

here you go. (http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/sec/0927sec2.html)

[hobo14]

I find it odd how people can argue without giving credible evidence. So, can some anti-conspirisist please tell me, how they did not die of radiation poisining, why the flag was flapping in the wind and also deny the evidence in the linked video earlier on.

Thanks,

Bodsda

It may be silly of me to argue with someone's religion, but anyway:

A satellite in the Van Allen belt with 3mm of aluminium shielding receives about 25sv per year according to wikipedia, so if the astronauts took 6 days worth (for example), behind similar shielding, they would receive just 0.5 Sv, as radiation dose is inversely proportional to time, which is not enough for them to even feel the effects of, let alone die.

The only time the flag flapped was when, and just after, an astronaut moved it. See these photos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NASA_As11-40-5874-75-2.gif

What "evidence" was in the video? I heard lots of talk, but saw zero evidence. There was no piece of cardboard, and nobody claimed that a shot of the window filled by the earth was actually a shot of earth in space. The early shot of the window showed the window completely filled by part of the earth when they were close, and later shots showed the entire earth when they were further away.

Here's a question for you: how did they manage to get dust to fall in perfect parabolic arcs on their "movie sets"?

[hobo14]

here you go. (http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/sec/0927sec2.html)

Mmm, yes? An article that says MS didn't build a backdoor into NT. So?

[Grant A.]

Mmm, yes? An article that says MS didn't build a backdoor into NT. So?

Where is it?



MS is nothing compared to the great Ken Thompson when it comes to backdoors.

[TheNosh]

Mmm, yes? An article that says MS didn't build a backdoor into NT. So?

the article says MS said they didn't build a backdoor, and that was only regarding the NSA key, if i'm not mistaken (and i could be mistaken) the first key was for microsoft themselves i.e. their backdoor (unless i entirely missunderstood that, which is again possible so please correct me if i'm wrong)

[Tipped OuT]

the article says MS said they didn't build a backdoor, and that was only regarding the NSA key, if i'm not mistaken (and i could be mistaken) the first key was for microsoft themselves i.e. their backdoor (unless i entirely missunderstood that, which is again possible so please correct me if i'm wrong)

Either way, what would be the point of Microsoft doing this? I mean really? So they can brain wash everyone and take over the world?

:lolflag:

[tom66]

what if certain parts of the moon just happen to be naturally reflective?

(actually though, i believe we landed on the moon... and i'm still upset that we lost doctor who episodes due to them being taped over)

The reflectors have to be retroreflectors so they reflect the light directly back to the source. Like ones on your bike or car.

[moster]

Either way, what would be the point of Microsoft doing this? I mean really? So they can brain wash everyone and take over the world?

:lolflag:

Oh, you are naive like a french maid :)

[handy]

Apparently it is ridiculous to consider that the Moon landing was a hoax. Some people must think that the "Capricorn One" movie was something like what really happened with the Moon landing.

Have a read on this site if you want to see the theory torn to pieces:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

[hobo14]

the article says MS said they didn't build a backdoor, and that was only regarding the NSA key, if i'm not mistaken (and i could be mistaken) the first key was for microsoft themselves i.e. their backdoor (unless i entirely missunderstood that, which is again possible so please correct me if i'm wrong)

Are we reading the same article? There is no comment from MS there.
In paragraphs 6 and 7 the author makes it clear he doesn't believe it's a back door.

There was something, sure, but not a back door, and surprise, surprise, someone found it! And MS got a red face...

[oxf]

I'm watching this show on TruTV, and these guys are going on about how area 51 was the site of the "lunar landing hoax" That's why it's so secure, because the "sets" are still there. And all this time, I thought they were hiding aliens in there. Silly me. What do you think?

And there's people who claim 9-11 was an inside job too!
Oh and yes I saw Elvis the other day as well~

[emeraldgirl08]

It's kind of funny when you go to the NASA LRO (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html) site it allows comments on the bottom of the page. There are people who literally mock NASA and call them out.

I love a good conspiracy theory!

Modern day ghost-stories :)

[Bodsda]

And there's people who claim 9-11 was an inside job too!
Oh and yes I saw Elvis the other day as well~

I would quite happilly believe that 9-11 was an inside job. Much more likely then a bunch of amature suicide nuts hijacking and flying an immensely complicated aircraft directly into a building.

Elvis is not dead, he just went home. Have you not seen Men in Black?

[PuddingKnife]

I would quite happilly believe that 9-11 was an inside job. Much more likely then a bunch of amature suicide nuts hijacking and flying an immensely complicated aircraft directly into a building.


Same here. However, I dont think its smart to get into that kind of talk on this forum.

[tjwoosta]

agreed

[moster]

It's kind of funny when you go to the NASA LRO (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html) site it allows comments on the bottom of the page. There are people who literally mock NASA and call them out.

I love a good conspiracy theory!

Modern day ghost-stories :)

Just believe in everything your beloved government tell you and you will live long and healthy. Btw, you can even join the army and help, they need strong faithful people like you :D

[Blacklightbulb]

Just believe in everything your beloved government tell you and you will live long and healthy. Btw, you can even join the army and help, they need strong faithful people like you :D

Yeah until you get some serious medical condition and your medical insurance screws you up. The government should secure and protect the citizens but he seems more friendly with the insurance companies.

On a serious note once Einstein said:

If A is a success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut.

I doubt he knows anything about todays politics and distributions of power but that quote applies everywhere to anyone (unless you're in an oral examination :lolflag:).

[jflaker]

1. Area 51 contains nothing, because it's fame is known around the whole world only a stupid **** would store sensitive items/data in it.
2. Probably Area 51 is just a hoax created by whoever is in charge (I doubt it's the government or the too famous CIA) to distract people.
3. Coming to this also the UFOs I believe were some kind of hoax created to distract people of that country about some really sensitive issues.
4. The lunar landing could have been a hoax.
5. Whether or not it was a hoax it was just an irresponsible amount of money and HUMAN LIVES wasted to go on a rock in space which brought no knew developments but created the american illusion that America is stronger and more advanced than USSR.
6. Point is the American Government wasn't working for the people than as it isn't now either.
7. The most developed countries are victims of their own governments which unlike less developed countries can't open their mouth.
8. You are stupid if you believe some random theory from a random guy on a random forum (like me).

just blabbing away...... :D

In response to Area 51, I believe that what ever MAY have been there at one time, was moved some time ago to Wright-Paterson in Ohio as well as others....It hasn't been disproven that they have or had something, but it hasn't been proven either....that goes right along with Plausible Deniability of a top-secret research facility.

The fame of the base may be "allowed" as a red herring in a way. A whole community survives on it, so the economy of an otherwise ghost town thrives and those who work there can enjoy themselves after their shift is over.....No one is getting into Nellis/Groom Lake unless they can cross the several miles of open land without being caught, so what ever thrill seekers go to the base perimeter are kept at bay by an impressive mountain range, miles of desert, modern technology that can sense movement along the perimeter's DMZ and a very watchful and mobile patrol force.

[moster]

I got to say... Edgar Mitchell, 6th man on the moon, astronaut of Apolo 14. He said that it is time that government admit that they know and have some contacts with aliens. I mean, to become an astronaut, man has to pass many vigorios tests. They do not want that somebody flip there in space operating 1 bil $ equipment. If he said that, I think he frikin walk on that moon and russians were watching every step he made from space and from earth. And for sure he know what is use of area 51.

[Blacklightbulb]

I got to say... Edgar Mitchell, 6th man on the moon, astronaut of Apolo 14. He said that it is time that government admit that they know and have some contacts with aliens. I mean, to become an astronaut, man has to pass many vigorios tests. They do not want that somebody flip there in space operating 1 bil $ equipment. If he said that, I think he frikin walk on that moon and russians were watching every step he made from space and from earth. And for sure he know what is use of area 51.

I'm not really a conspiracy theorist. I just don't trust people. As such I'm sure that any conspiracy theorist will find your statement quite "dry" of proof.

[moster]

Well, in that time I just do not know what would I bring back. Pictures, video, rocks... At least 6 people walked on moon, they left some garbage there that can be seen. All of it in more then 1 mission (3-4?)
They only did not take one russian with them and let him walk on moon FIRST :D

I know that nearly everything can be faked, but come on, even russians did not say anything against.

edit:
Russian presidents were not people that would be easily fooled and for sure they did not watch landing from their bedroom window. They were in space, they just could not landed and get out of there ALIVE. First americans did not have much chance for surviving either. Too much thing can go wrong, even now. That is actually why people still not been on mars. Chance of surviving is still too low.

[Blacklightbulb]

Well, in that time I just do not know what would I bring back. Pictures, video, rocks... At least 6 people walked on moon, they left some garbage there that can be seen. All of it in more then 1 mission (3-4?)
They only did not take one russian with them and let him walk on moon FIRST :D

I know that nearly everything can be faked, but come on, even russians did not say anything against.

Tell that to the conspiracy theorists. I understand what your saying. Well if they did or didn't I certainly don't care. It's just that if they didn't that would be another lie added to the list..... The only politician I'll ever like (apart from a dead one) is JFK who unfortunately is dead.

[moster]

Yeah... but scary number is 6%. And linux users are like.. hm.. 1-4%. What that make us, crazy? :)