When you think about it it doesn't ring true that man walked on the moon. 45 years on and technology suggests we aren't capable of doing it now let alone in 1969.
When you think about it you realise that we are now able to send people to the international space station for months on end, not just the week the Appolo missions lasted.
The technology is so so advanced of then. Your washing machine has more computer power than Appolo 11
When you think about it it doesn't ring true that man walked on the moon. 45 years on and technology suggests we aren't capable of doing it now let alone in 1969.
Was watching a documentary on this the other day, "Button Moon" I think it was called. Absolutely ridiculous and I didn't believe a word of it I can tell you...
There have been countless proper documentaries disproving all the consiracy theories. Even Mythbusters did a special where they tore apart the most common consiracy theories. And as mentioned above, reflectors were left on the moon and are still in use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment
Aside from all the information out there debunking each and every bit of "evidence", two things spring to mind. One: how many people would have had to keep quiet for over forty years? Two: Having staged the hoax once, why repeat it five more times?
watch it last night & although I cant see how something like the moon landings could ever be covered up, there is def some things that are amiss. Things like why the flag was moving if there is no wind on the moon (but then I ask myself surely if it was a hoax then they would have made sure everything was perfect & would not had filmed a waving flag). Then there is the issue of the photos being perfect and also then the backlighting issue..........
problem is the film Capricorn One is one of my favourite films so I'm biased in a way.......
Could not find it on the internet but a few years back someone showed me a photo of the surface of the moon taken by a powerful telescope showing the tracks, footprints and the blast zone - all proof of man's presence there without any doubt at all. If some wiseguy says that these should have vanished over the years - remember there is no atmosphere on the moon and that things stay undisturbed until a meterorite strikes... There's no wind to disturb the markings on the surface...
It waves because the astronaut moves it around getting it stuck in the ground, and there's no wind resistance to stop that movement.
As for the lighting, it's all down to the surface - it's reflective so can light up the astronauts in the shadows, and the rockiness of it can create the varying shadow directions.
Aside from all the information out there debunking each and every bit of "evidence", two things spring to mind. One: how many people would have had to keep quiet for over forty years? Two: Having staged the hoax once, why repeat it five more times?
This!
32,000 directly associated with the moon landing. All of them can keep a secret forever, no matter if they get drunk, stoned or pissed off when NASA make them redundant...and not one of them tried to make a quick buck by selling the story to the media.
Aside from all the information out there debunking each and every bit of "evidence", two things spring to mind. One: how many people would have had to keep quiet for over forty years? Two: Having staged the hoax once, why repeat it five more times?
This!
32,000 directly associated with the moon landing. All of them can keep a secret forever, no matter if they get drunk, stoned or pissed off when NASA make them redundant...and not one of them tried to make a quick buck by selling the story to the media.
What never ceases to amaze me is how some people obsess over shit like this, when there are far better questions to devote your time to.
Like, for instance, the solipsist argument that we are more likely to be living in a computer simulated universe than not.
Or superstring theory - explaining quantum field theory by postulating that extremely tiny strings vibrating at different resonances produce and govern different sub-atomic particles.
Or how, if time travel is possible, then it stands to reason that everything that happens or has ever happened on Earth or anywhere else has already been interfered with.
If only people would concentrate on things like that, we might actually have a deeper understanding, and greater collective intelligence as a species. Instead of, y'know, wibbling on about what are actually infinitesimally minuscule events in the grand scheme of things.
PS: Having been an insomniac of note for nearly thirty years, I can tell you I've devoted far more time than is healthy to questions like the above three!
I can't remeber where I read the this quote now but it was something along the lines of "Imagine what we could achieve if we all just stopped being dicks."
Recent photos taken by a probe travelling very close to the moon have not only shown the footprints are still there but also every flag except one which was reported to have been blown over by the lunar module blasting back into space. The photos also show the lunar rover vehicles which were left there. If the landings had not taken place then as has been mentioned before the Russians and latterly Chinese would have exposed the lies.
Whether true or not (I think it did happen), it is a valid historical investigation. In fact in many Year 9 school history textbooks in the UK students are asked to investigate the moon landings. It isn't quite an open and shut case - certainly some inaccuracies in NASA's original evidence.
Also watched the filem Wag the Dog last........makes you think anything is possible in terms of government cover ups.
Whether true or not (I think it did happen), it is a valid historical investigation. In fact in many Year 9 school history textbooks in the UK students are asked to investigate the moon landings. It isn't quite an open and shut case - certainly some inaccuracies in NASA's original evidence.
Also watched the filem Wag the Dog last........makes you think anything is possible in terms of government cover ups.
One of the things that's wrong with the world today is that the internet has allowed people to grow up with an inflated sense of their own self-worth - whereby somehow thinking that their crackpot bullshit theories have as much legitimacy as those of people who actually know what they're talking about. Strangely, people are garrulous enough to believe any old shit they read if they quite fancy the idea that it's true - despite not knowing the first thing about the subject at hand.
However, I suspect that if 'proving' the moon landings were not faked IS a part of the curriculum (not having kids I wouldn't know), then it's only there to try and 'jazz up' what is a pretty dry subject for most kids. Rather like if your Biology teacher asked you to 'prove' creationism was not a valid evolutionary theory - the question is designed to get you to demonstrate how to deconstruct and rebut an outlandish statement/argument.
What never ceases to amaze me is how some people obsess over shit like this, when there are far better questions to devote your time to.
Like, for instance, the solipsist argument that we are more likely to be living in a computer simulated universe than not.
Or superstring theory - explaining quantum field theory by postulating that extremely tiny strings vibrating at different resonances produce and govern different sub-atomic particles.
Or how, if time travel is possible, then it stands to reason that everything that happens or has ever happened on Earth or anywhere else has already been interfered with.
If only people would concentrate on things like that, we might actually have a deeper understanding, and greater collective intelligence as a species. Instead of, y'know, wibbling on about what are actually infinitesimally minuscule events in the grand scheme of things.
PS: Having been an insomniac of note for nearly thirty years, I can tell you I've devoted far more time than is healthy to questions like the above three!
Comments
The technology is so so advanced of then. Your washing machine has more computer power than Appolo 11
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment
That's just what the CIA want you to believe is true, so that you ignore the truths in other conspiracies ;-)
problem is the film Capricorn One is one of my favourite films so I'm biased in a way.......
As for the lighting, it's all down to the surface - it's reflective so can light up the astronauts in the shadows, and the rockiness of it can create the varying shadow directions.
At least that's what they said they were.
;o)
32,000 directly associated with the moon landing. All of them can keep a secret forever, no matter if they get drunk, stoned or pissed off when NASA make them redundant...and not one of them tried to make a quick buck by selling the story to the media.
Like, for instance, the solipsist argument that we are more likely to be living in a computer simulated universe than not.
Or superstring theory - explaining quantum field theory by postulating that extremely tiny strings vibrating at different resonances produce and govern different sub-atomic particles.
Or how, if time travel is possible, then it stands to reason that everything that happens or has ever happened on Earth or anywhere else has already been interfered with.
If only people would concentrate on things like that, we might actually have a deeper understanding, and greater collective intelligence as a species. Instead of, y'know, wibbling on about what are actually infinitesimally minuscule events in the grand scheme of things.
PS: Having been an insomniac of note for nearly thirty years, I can tell you I've devoted far more time than is healthy to questions like the above three!
Also watched the filem Wag the Dog last........makes you think anything is possible in terms of government cover ups.
However, I suspect that if 'proving' the moon landings were not faked IS a part of the curriculum (not having kids I wouldn't know), then it's only there to try and 'jazz up' what is a pretty dry subject for most kids. Rather like if your Biology teacher asked you to 'prove' creationism was not a valid evolutionary theory - the question is designed to get you to demonstrate how to deconstruct and rebut an outlandish statement/argument.
Two people each time so out of the 7 billion people on Earth just 12 have gone to another planet.