Did man really go to the moon?

We've had proof for 36 years. This mission will do nothing to appease the conspiracy theorists; rational explanations from people with infinitely more knowledge on the subject mean nothing to them.

Man on the moon...

Bollox...

@ Grinner

And your credentials on the subject are...? Here's somebody who does have the credentials to make claims on the matter. Here's another quality site.

The smartest thing to do when you can't understand the science yourself is to trust those who can.

real proof...

Oh dear, someone has handed Grinner the key to DW's clockwork again...

yep...

@ OhFFS

There's just something about very strong opinions from the ignorant that rubs me the wrong way

Hey baby, what's your sign? You know, there's a lot you can tell about a person by what quadrant the moon was in at the very moment of their birth.

You can have one today:
[img]http://www.autothing.com/images/Fun%20Things/AT%20News%20Room/AT%20News%20Pics/ATNews%2010-14-03/10-14-03-Aquacar-a.jpg[/img]

Wallace and Grommit proved that the moon was made out of cheese. And that it's inhabited by a strange coin-operated parking attendant who likes to ski.

Although, they couldn't identify which British cheese the moon surface most tasted like...

Wendeslydale!

Nothing beats a bit of moon between two white slices. MMmmMM!

...and I'm still voting for this as Post Of The Year 2005. Nearly wet myself laughin'

Man on the Moon

Well Grinner understood what I meant DW, but I didn't really expect that you would

Uhh, I haven't replied since. Of course I understoood what you said, not that I'm gonna let him or anybody else get away with it regardless

Fairy snuff, I assumed it was British-only slang.

Posted with gun pointed at my head...

As it is July 20th, and apparently something happened in 1969 with the moon that day, Google has it's symbol somewhat different today...

I would suggest following the link to try "Google Moon" and zoom all the way in. Conclusive evidence i do believe.

So it happened again today..A colleage of mine in class seriously mentioned it was all a hoax...I guess this is how conspiracy theories and pseudo science get started...people forget things and suddenly the whole way of looking at things changes.

Lupo - get real. You're in a class full of brewers. You get to drink copious quantities of beer.

The world is being taken over by pink elephants.

WAKE UP!

Before it's too late.

I´ve got it, I´ll open the Moon´s first brew-pub! Dark Side Ale anyone? Penumbral Pilsener? Next stop Mars.

Oh for God's sake.

I just read a very good article in Popular Astronomy about this. Proves it was not a hoax. Brave astronauts went to the moon and stood on its surface.

Man went to the moon. They were Americans. All due respect to those brave to go there. All respect to American ingenuity (except the clowns in power today!)

Said.

Here is the uncensored version of Neil Armstrong's dialogue when he first set foot on the moon.
Enjoy this moment.
Take care,
space

Moonwalk dialogue

Quality !

funny as fuck

Saw a news paper story yesterday...

The US gov is about to spend 56BILLION USD to put men on the darh side of the moon...!

I am waiting for the obvious responses...

G

...and they've just picked the team to go up:

[attachment=21616:attachment]

I'll believe it when I see it but there are good reasons to go to the dark side as well as to the poles rather than the equator. We've done the equator half a dozen times, and while the Sea of Tranquility, Fra Mauro and other sites were great, they yielded little more than geology. We don't know what's on the back and we're pretty sure there's water at the south pole.

Landing at a pole is a lot harder but it's a much better exploration/colonisation point. In the right area (like Shackleton) you get more constant temps and light. The poles also haven't been impacted nearly as much as the center which would allow us to get more pure rock from the moon itself (and, therefore, from the early days of our own rock) rather than the moonrocks mixed with accretia.

Still, until there's a national will to actually do it (something that the Chinese landing program is helping to stir), that money's going to weapons contractors and NASA will have to beg for chump change just to get replacements for important satellites up in orbit.

woof.

Don't get all techie on us Dog. We all know they're goin' up to find Saddam's WMD. Bastard hid them on the dark side so we wouldn't see 'em.

Meiow

Cant you add, Tony Blair and cabinet to your team (I will fork out for the extra fuel that it would take to get the rocket off the ground if John Prescott were on it ) (Question is, will it get off the ground with Prescott on board?)

I will send you a bank account number.

here is my source...

[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c148/satman124/Spacestory001.jpg[/img]

[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c148/satman124/Spacestory002.jpg[/img]

[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c148/satman124/Spacestory003.jpg[/img]

Can you tell who wrote it?

The SUN?

Just a wild guess.

I dont believe we went to the Moon. But likewise I dont believe it was a hoax. We may have gone to the Moon and then again we may not have. I think it is incredibly lazy to presume or to simply accept something without questioning it.


Did the astronaut shimmy it back and forth into the surface? I've not seen any footage of this act. But I suppose its an acceptable assumption just like wind on a movie set.
Inertia still exists in a vacuum? Why not. Lack of air to dampen the movement? How bout a very big massive object (The Moon) compared to the tiny flag affecting its movement. Inertia is a body's resistance to changes in momentum (body's inertial mass). I wish someone could bother to explain the maths for this to work from inertia otherwise the hoax theorists have a point. Theres something about scientists that bugs me. LAZINESS

I wonder in what context the writer Isaac Asimov was thinking:

According to Isaac Asimov in "Understanding Physics": "This tendency for motion (or for rest) to maintain itself steadily unless made to do otherwise by some interfering force can be viewed as a kind of "laziness," a kind of unwillingness to make a change. And indeed, Newton's first law of motion As Isaac Asimov goes on to explain, "Newton's laws of motion represent assumptions and definitions and are not subject to proof. In particular, the notion of 'inertia' is as much an assumption as Aristotle's notion of 'natural place.'...To be sure, the new relativistic view of the universe advanced by Einstein makes it plain that in some respects Newton's laws of motion are only approximations...At ordinary velocities and distance, however, the approximations are extremely good." (wikipedia)

Now will we have to start taking Haisch and Rueda more seriously for this inertia thing to work. The so called "scientific community" has largely ignored their work. But US government funding continues to be ever present.

If scientists actually bothered to attack the possibility that the lunar landings could have been fixed. Rather than coming up with quite simplistic supporting ideas for why it happened we might all get to the truth. For the moment I dont know which side to believe. One side is courageous and silly. The other is lazy and unable to think out of the box.

I can't say if the americans went to the moon in 69 or later. I couldnt say unless I had been up there as well.

However how long will it be before china or the russians put people on the moon and if the americans did not land there, how much will it cost for the 'landees' to keep quiet?

Both russia and china would love that kind of leverage, either for public political gain or for concessions.

If I was a part of the space program and we didnt land on the moon I would be a little worried a lot of poeple were about to find out we told some porkies.

It's not courageous to be a conspiracy nut, it's just silly. And you have a nerve saying that the thousands of people that it takes to get someone to the moon cannot think "out of the box". You think every one of those thousand people have managed to keep their mouth shut about a hoax? You're right, that's silly.

Yes, you can. You only have to pull your head out of your ass to do so. Reading is fundamental. Every fucking stupid claim has been thoroughly debunked. You don't personally have to go to Japan to know it exists.

woof.

I could care less if the Americans landed on the moon or not.

Yeah, fuck science!

Agree

I'm still waiting for the Americans to do something that REALLY would impress me.

Maybe I should start a thread entitled "What do you think the Americans have done or contributed that's impressive?".

I think the list will be lacking.

As if anyone would care...

I think you mean that you couldn't care less..

You "couldn't" be more correct. Thanks .

What would be impressive, which is unfortunately lacking in today's society, would be the technology to bring your IQ up to a level closer to the average.

Hmmm... Telephone, toilet paper (my favorite), telegraph, refrigerator, typewriter, cotton gin, coffee pot, light bulb, hearing aid, electric iron, artificial heart, blue jeans, escalator, revolving door, camera, zipper, air conditioner, aeroplane, assembly line, safety razor, windshield wipers, band-aid (plaster), photocopier, defibrilator, microwave oven, cellular phones, laser, oral contraceptive, polio vaccine, optical fiber, calculator, internet...

to name just a few that might impress.

I'm a big fan of the airplane myself. But I think a Canadian invented the laser. Not the giant kind envisioned by Dr. Evil...

If it wasn't for people like Marc Andreesen you would not even be able to the write that in the first place...which probably would have been a good thing in your case.

The telephone was invented by Meucci, an Italian and commercialised by Graham Bell, a Scotsman

Ermm, telephone ?

Wow, down shepp.

There maybe something up my ass and it feels like a nose.

Is that sniifing I hear

@BD not so matey. Given that I, like most poeple do not care...

I can read all I want but as I am not involved/trained/know anything about what is involved is the science and logistics or sending anyone to the moon I cannot say 'yes, it happened'. I have to take a scientists word for it that 'hey, we produced a quark at Cern yesterday'.

Slap on the back from me, well done Mr Scientist person.

I am not saying he is wrong or right but I couldn't tell one way of the other.

Anymore than I can come to your office and demonstrate Darkmatter or the the presence of multiple dimensions.

I could head off to siberia to a place where the people kind of live like they did 200/300 years ago and say to them 'hey guys, read this, the world is actualy dohnut shaped. No matter where you go you will always be able to get back here. isn't that fantastic.

I could even provide them with photos and diagrams and big words they have never heard of to support what I am saying.

They do not have the internet, WIKIpedia, the knowledge or experience to argue.

As such they cannot prove I am right or wrong. They could say, 'well, this guy from the west says this place is shaped like dohnut and as he has letters before his name he must be right'. They may also add 'whats a dohnut?'..

They are in the same position as myself when I watch a nice TV program about some high science thing with lots of long equations that make even the longest finnish Noun look short.

As you say, I do not have to go to japan to know it exists but I can ask the 1000's of people that have been there though. As in science, repatition is good isnt it?

When I can chat to 1000's of people who have been to the moon I may be more able to say 'ok, 1000's of poeple have been there, here are the millions of photos'...of the oringinal moon landing site complete with little flag.

At present, I like almost everyone else have to take the word of the people who say it happened. I don't care one crap and as the russians/chinese will get there sooner rather than later they will be able to take pictures. This will add to evidence that it happened or didn't.

They could of course just airbrush the pictures to make it look like it didn't happen and produce some scientists/experts to present this evidence. Then I have two lots of scientists saying the opposite. Who do I believe?

I will prepare myself for more sniffing and a WIKI/internet assault.

There is a lot more written about a God than the moon landings, the books have been around for more years and have been read by a lot more people. There are also a lot more people who believe in a God.

I can read all I want unless I see God I am non the wiser.

You see, unless I or a lot of other people see it, it is just some people telling me its true. I cannot myself evaluate the evidence.

I have no idea if fusion is possible in earth, I also have no idea if an ice age (70's prediction by scientists) is on the way or I am going to suffer from global warming (current in vogue theory). I can however read a lot about it.

I trust a scientist as much as I trust a politician as every drug that has been released for general use that has caused problems was proven by some scientists to be safe.

People read about how safe it was, looked at the nice literature and thought 'this drug for morning sickness is said to be safe, our child will be safe'...

We all know how that went.

I expect the people were reading it was safe right up until the point the first problem was found.

The one difference with the moon landing is that when other countries get there they will be bale to tell everyone if it happened or not.

Well how do you explain Way... Way out?

It showed the Americans and Russians on the moon in 1966.

I thought the conspiracy theory du jour was that the moon had already been colonized long before Armstrong, et al arrived there, and that the Apollo missions were supposedly supply runs for the REAL mission to colonize Mars. And something about lobotomizing and sterilizing uninteresting people to work as slaves there.

No?