By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Interesting stuff, makes you wonder what else might not be what it seems!.
"Stan work hard, could score goals in the air, and was complete team player. He headed balls off the line, and he had so much skill, balance, finesse and amazing touch. His mobility, that electrifying burst of 30 yards was exciting to watch"...Don Shanks.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:01 - Dec 13 with 2815 views
I saw the spare lunar lander at the Air and Space Museum in Washington. It's pretty ropey but it was over 40 years ago.
All of the debunking theories can be countered. Did this Channel 5 shit go on about the shadows not lining up also? Or did they casually drop that after people recreated the exact same thing using a single light source?
As Brian Cox tweeted #yeswelandedonthemoonyouf*ckwits
Stefan Moore, Stefan Moore running down the wing. Stefan Moore, Stefan Moore running down the wing. He runs like a cheetah, his crosses couldn't be sweeter. Stefan Moore. Stefan Moore. Stefan Moore.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:16 - Dec 13 with 2795 views
Well, I guess it depends on what the expectations were of what the project was meant to be about. Was it more useful taking photos of the Earth, which had already been done dozens of times from space, or analyse interactions, movements etc on the moon. I personally think it was the latter.
A question, not specifically aimed at you Clive, is, if the moon landings were faked to beat the USSR in the space race (or for any other reason), why do it 6 times? Surely once would have been enough, or even twice for a bit of overkill. But 6 times seems a bit excessive.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:32 - Dec 13 with 2770 views
And the ISS doesn't exist either then?That bright light you see passing overhead at 11pm?Plenny o' radiatioin at that altitude. Good reason why you don't get many pix of the earth is some kunt left the hasselblad camera that had been taking shots. Humans got there,and like a dog chasing a car pissed on it and went home. You humans at least should have had bases mining Helium 3 by now,bases on Mars,Jupiter's moons and the first steps into interstellar space using nuclear material found on your moon.
But you blew it.
However I can get you a decent second hand Tachyon Drive unit,save you the hassle,never raced or rallyed......
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:38 - Dec 13 by adhoc_qpr
I found it quite interesting, but i assume that all the evidence for why they didn't happen has also been debunked by experts?
The programme was pretty weighted in favour of conspiracy theories.
Well yeah, cos it was all about those theories about us not having actually gone.
I found it an interesting programme with some arguments I'd never heard before, which I do believe raise some questions. Shirley to debunk/confirm this all someone would have to do is point a relatively strong telescope up at that big Edam and check the Sea of Tranquility for all the rubbish left behind??
QPR - "shit but local"
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:20 - Dec 13 with 2720 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 09:29 - Dec 13 by jonno
Errr....no. The only manned space missions that have gone outside the protection from radiation that is provided by the earth's atmosphere are .... the missions to the moon.
What?!
That's nonsense - loads of space missions that didn't go to the moon but outside the earth's atmosphere.
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:20 - Dec 13 by PinnerPaul
What?!
That's nonsense - loads of space missions that didn't go to the moon but outside the earth's atmosphere.
Yes but there's a little-known but ABSOLUTELY RUDDY MASSIVE stretch of radiation around our planet which begins a few (thousands and thousands) miles outside the Earth's atmosphere. Yes there have obviously been loads of missions to outside of the Earth's atmosphere, but none of them have gone as far as this belt (can't remember what it's called) - the only ones that *allegedly* did are the Apollo missions
QPR - "shit but local"
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:39 - Dec 13 with 2502 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:20 - Dec 13 by PinnerPaul
What?!
That's nonsense - loads of space missions that didn't go to the moon but outside the earth's atmosphere.
That's not actually true, according to the scientists on the programme last night. The atmosphere around the earth provides protection from the sun's radiation while you are in orbit. It's only when you leave that orbit and head away from the earth that the radiation is too intense for humans to stand, unless you have something like a thick lead shielded barrier. That's why there have never been problems with the space stations, space walks etc.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:40 - Dec 13 with 2500 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:32 - Dec 13 by QPunkR
Yes but there's a little-known but ABSOLUTELY RUDDY MASSIVE stretch of radiation around our planet which begins a few (thousands and thousands) miles outside the Earth's atmosphere. Yes there have obviously been loads of missions to outside of the Earth's atmosphere, but none of them have gone as far as this belt (can't remember what it's called) - the only ones that *allegedly* did are the Apollo missions
It's called the Van Allen belt.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:41 - Dec 13 with 2499 views
As said above, why try and fake it 6 times though? Once would have been enough. There would have been nothing to be gained politically by faking it 3, 4, 5 or 6 times. The only thing that would have happened is an increase in the risk of all these fakes being committed. Just makes no sense whatsoever. They could have faked one landing and then said there was no budget for anymore.
In terms of the cost, the majority went on building Saturn 5 and getting that off the ground. Seems quite extreme to send that into the atmosphere 17 times to build a hoax story. Landing on the moon cost a fraction of getting there in the first place. Is anyone suggesting that Saturn 5 didn't actually take off either?
Not only that, based on some of the "conspiracy" evidence it would appear that NASA could come up with amazing film sets, filming and lighting techniques etc to fake all this, but then publicise pictures with studio lights in?
And NASA then decided that they needed a change and throw in a pretend disaster in the making with Apollo 13. All seems very bizarre to me.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:48 - Dec 13 with 2478 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:32 - Dec 13 by QPunkR
Yes but there's a little-known but ABSOLUTELY RUDDY MASSIVE stretch of radiation around our planet which begins a few (thousands and thousands) miles outside the Earth's atmosphere. Yes there have obviously been loads of missions to outside of the Earth's atmosphere, but none of them have gone as far as this belt (can't remember what it's called) - the only ones that *allegedly* did are the Apollo missions
I think they use polyethylene now as shielding....
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:41 - Dec 13 by TW_R
As said above, why try and fake it 6 times though? Once would have been enough. There would have been nothing to be gained politically by faking it 3, 4, 5 or 6 times. The only thing that would have happened is an increase in the risk of all these fakes being committed. Just makes no sense whatsoever. They could have faked one landing and then said there was no budget for anymore.
In terms of the cost, the majority went on building Saturn 5 and getting that off the ground. Seems quite extreme to send that into the atmosphere 17 times to build a hoax story. Landing on the moon cost a fraction of getting there in the first place. Is anyone suggesting that Saturn 5 didn't actually take off either?
Not only that, based on some of the "conspiracy" evidence it would appear that NASA could come up with amazing film sets, filming and lighting techniques etc to fake all this, but then publicise pictures with studio lights in?
And NASA then decided that they needed a change and throw in a pretend disaster in the making with Apollo 13. All seems very bizarre to me.
The rockets took off all right and they went into orbit. The programme suggests that's where they stayed though, and never went to the moon. Other questions, why no crater under the LEM from it's retro's when it landed? Why no settlement of dust on it's feet etc. Why was the US flag flapping in an environment with no atmosphere and no wind etc?
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 13:07 - Dec 13 with 2447 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:57 - Dec 13 by jonno
The rockets took off all right and they went into orbit. The programme suggests that's where they stayed though, and never went to the moon. Other questions, why no crater under the LEM from it's retro's when it landed? Why no settlement of dust on it's feet etc. Why was the US flag flapping in an environment with no atmosphere and no wind etc?
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:32 - Dec 13 by QPunkR
Yes but there's a little-known but ABSOLUTELY RUDDY MASSIVE stretch of radiation around our planet which begins a few (thousands and thousands) miles outside the Earth's atmosphere. Yes there have obviously been loads of missions to outside of the Earth's atmosphere, but none of them have gone as far as this belt (can't remember what it's called) - the only ones that *allegedly* did are the Apollo missions
Ok, but we're not talking about just one mission are we?
There were previous missions that orbited the moon but didn't land - were those all faked as well?
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 13:43 - Dec 13 with 2275 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 12:32 - Dec 13 by QPunkR
Yes but there's a little-known but ABSOLUTELY RUDDY MASSIVE stretch of radiation around our planet which begins a few (thousands and thousands) miles outside the Earth's atmosphere. Yes there have obviously been loads of missions to outside of the Earth's atmosphere, but none of them have gone as far as this belt (can't remember what it's called) - the only ones that *allegedly* did are the Apollo missions
As with all radiation, it's about time of exposure. If you sat stationary in the Van Allen belt you would be exposed to the radiation for a long time and be affected by it. Going through it would have negligble effect. In fact the astronauts that went to the moon were exposed to the pretty much the same amount of radiation as those sitting in the International Space Station.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 14:03 - Dec 13 with 2226 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 14:01 - Dec 13 by TW_R
As with all radiation, it's about time of exposure. If you sat stationary in the Van Allen belt you would be exposed to the radiation for a long time and be affected by it. Going through it would have negligble effect. In fact the astronauts that went to the moon were exposed to the pretty much the same amount of radiation as those sitting in the International Space Station.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
