Debate: Was the Apollo moon landing real or a hoax?

[Anti-Shadow Rai]

astronaut wrote:

<quoted text>
You ignorant white trash

There you go... I was really wondering when you would finally be forced to use insults as a last recourse... As Leonardo da Vinci once said:
"Insults and violence are the last options of those who know they are wrong."
It's quite easy to shout childish insults like you do... Look, here's what I'm tellin' ya: "Go play with your Mattel/Hasbro lunar module toys, ya crummy would-be-astronaut-that-can't- even-drive-a-car-properly!!! "

[Anti-Shadow Rai]

Scutter wrote:

This is stupid. And hoax believers are idiots or ignorant and need to do a little research before they open their mouths. ALL the hoax claims have been successfully addressed/refuted by respectable science web sites from around the world. Look them up. Here are but a few examples why a hoax would have been nearly impossible:
The astronauts put laser reflectors on the moon. To this day you can fire a laser and bounce a beam off them as many observatories around the world have done for measurement purposes.
Moon rocks have been brought back and examined by scientists from around the world (not just by NASA) they ALL agree for various reasons tht they are from the moon.

Oh, that's a good one... There is no such thing as "laser reflectors" on the moon... Yes, laser can effectively be reflected by the moon, not by human devices installed there, but by naturally reflective pieces of molten rocks that have been melted to form a glass-like substance due to the high-velocity impact of asteroids... Did you know that asteroids hit the moon on a regular basis ?(Or if not, how then do you explain all the craters that plague the entire surface of our natural satellite ?)
As for the "scientists from around the world" saying the rocks given to them by NASA which they studied were really from the moon, the explanation is simplistically trivial: with the correct amount of dough ($$$), you can make any man tell anything! Even scientist are not immune to bribery, you know... Hell, why do you think NASA's budget is that high ? Those bribes are not coming cheap at all...

[Anti-Shadow Rai]

Hukt on Fonix wrote:

<quoted text>
Wrong... and right. The actual craft can be seen... but in such low detail as to be unworthy of dissemination to the general public.

Wow... First time in my life someone tells me I'm both wrong and right at the same time... Isn't there some contradiction in the terms ? Anyhow, the main point is that I see my argument has not been refuted... until improved and better technology gives us a more detailed picture of the lander up there... ;-)
But by then, I guess that the winds on the moon will have recovered the lander will lunar dust, which will explain why we can't see it...:-(

[CAROLINE]

CAROLINE EMMA ANNIE.
WE LOVE THE MOOON.
ITZZ COOOOOOOOOOL.

[Annie Caroline Emma]

Were 14 :)
In Science.
On The Comp :)
Lalalalalaaa.
YEHAHH MAYNNN

[MechEng]

astronaut wrote:

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The flag flaps on the Moon and keeps flapping, because it was hanging on a horizontal pole, and deliberately slightly folded by the astronauts, to look similar to a flag flown in an Earth environment. When the astronauts drove the flags into the lunar regolith (it is very difficult to do this), the material in the flag swung on the horizontal pole and kept swinging for a long time, because there was little gravity to stop it doing so. Gravitional field strength on the Moon is about one sixth of the Earth's, and you could run a bath of water, for example. There is also a very thin atmosphere.

First of all I agree with you, but I couldn't help correcting you on this one. Gravity does not stop anything. It is friciton. If there were no internal fricion in the flag or friciton between the flag and its mounts, in a vacuum it would wave forever. Granted I will give you that the friction is a result of the gravitational pull on the flag, but imagine a pendulum in a vacuum, but under a force of gravity from one direction. If you could eliminate the friciton at the fulcrum, once you set it in motion it would swing forever, provided no other outside forces are provided.

Basically you were using newton's third law when you should have been using his first.

[FossilBob]

Anti-Shadow Rai wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, that's a good one... There is no such thing as "laser reflectors" on the moon...

Yes... Of course there are...they were put there during the lunar landings.

[FossilBob]

Anti-Shadow Rai wrote:

<quoted text>
You poor sob, the software used for Hubble viewing has incorporated features that specifically ADD the supposed image of the lower part of the lander when you view that specific position of the moon... in order to fool simple-minded people like you who think they are "very clever" but using this method using the Hubble telescope... And who controls and pays for the Hubble telescope and everything that's linked to it? Huh? Do you have any idea, my simpleton friend???

Your statement is utterly untrue and, frankly, irrational. You should probably be careful throwing insults around if you lack basic understanding of space technology, history, and science in general...

Do you wish to present proof of your alleged "conspiracy"...? Given the incredibly good documentation of the Lunar landings, there is not the slightest reason to consider them a "hoax".

[yhufg]

actaully when the falg kept moving its coioos summion like when it was psuhed it cudnt stop cos of sum force :S

[MechEng]

yhufg wrote:

actaully when the falg kept moving its coioos summion like when it was psuhed it cudnt stop cos of sum force :S

First of all, are you drunk, or maybe you've never used a keyboard before?

Next, do you think you could at least read Newton's three laws of motion before you misrepresent them?

Force causes ACCELLERATION. Do you really think you have to have a force acting on something at all times for it to keep moving?

What exactly would that force be? Cosmic thrust? The power of stupidity, perhaps?

[Gag Reflex]

I remember that week very well. My uncle, Donald Karl, was part of the pad safety team for the Apollo 11 mission and I caught a glimpse of him on TV in mission control when they took off.

The first lunar samples were assigned, but not sent, to one of my geology professors, Harry Hess, who was going to be responsible for assiging them for detailed studies. Unfortunately, he died four weeks after the mission returned.

No, they were really there. Read some of the scientific articles published on the moon rocks that first year. Or better yet, go to the Smithsonian and see one of the rocks.

[Gag Reflex]

FossilBob wrote:

<quoted text>
Your statement is utterly untrue and, frankly, irrational. You should probably be careful throwing insults around if you lack basic understanding of space technology, history, and science in general...
Do you wish to present proof of your alleged "conspiracy"...? Given the incredibly good documentation of the Lunar landings, there is not the slightest reason to consider them a "hoax".

Flat earth, UFOs, faked lunar landings, JFK on a ward in Bethesda (or Walter Reed), WTC. Chill man. Grab a frosty and kick back.

Speaking of fossils, did you ever see a Tully monster?

[FossilBob]

Gag Reflex wrote:

I remember that week very well. My uncle, Donald Karl, was part of the pad safety team for the Apollo 11 mission and I caught a glimpse of him on TV in mission control when they took off.
The first lunar samples were assigned, but not sent, to one of my geology professors, Harry Hess, who was going to be responsible for assiging them for detailed studies. Unfortunately, he died four weeks after the mission returned.
No, they were really there. Read some of the scientific articles published on the moon rocks that first year. Or better yet, go to the Smithsonian and see one of the rocks.

Very cool... I got the chance to view lunar rock slides in class in the early 80's (one student "palmed" the lunar slide, and tossed a blank slide across the table...the professor nearly died! I can't remember if the student passed or not:). A couple of my friends who are teachers have been able to have lunar samples for special events (you have to LIVE with those samples!!!)

[FossilBob]

Gag Reflex wrote:

<quoted text>
Flat earth, UFOs, faked lunar landings, JFK on a ward in Bethesda (or Walter Reed), WTC. Chill man. Grab a frosty and kick back.
Speaking of fossils, did you ever see a Tully monster?

Many times! But...I've never found one myself:(

I use the "Moon Hoax" story to start out each semester in my classes... I find it a good example of the value of having some basic knowledge... which MANY people lack:)

[Matt from Akron]

FossilBob wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes... Of course there are...they were put there during the lunar landings.

Anti-Shadow Rai seems like a "Poe's Law" kinda guy doesn't he?

[FossilBob]

Matt from Akron wrote:

<quoted text>
Anti-Shadow Rai seems like a "Poe's Law" kinda guy doesn't he?

Yep...

It is SO surprising to me that ANYONE "buys" this nonsense. My student told me that a local high school SCIENCE teacher spent a whole class "explaining" how the Moon landings were "faked"!

Teachers I have taught have also said that they had students come into class after the FOX broadcasts a few years ago, claiming the Moon landings were fake 'cause they saw it on TV!

People know SO little about the world around them that you can convince them of anything!!!

[Annie Caroline Emma]

Why Has No One Returned The Comment We Wrotee??

RUDE!

x

[Annie Caroline Emma]

Yehhh Sooooo ?

[Matt from Akron]

FossilBob wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep...
It is SO surprising to me that ANYONE "buys" this nonsense. My student told me that a local high school SCIENCE teacher spent a whole class "explaining" how the Moon landings were "faked"!
Teachers I have taught have also said that they had students come into class after the FOX broadcasts a few years ago, claiming the Moon landings were fake 'cause they saw it on TV!
People know SO little about the world around them that you can convince them of anything!!!

It's easy to dismiss these people as nutcases, but I think that most haven't been taught to use their brains properly - you know, critical thinking and all that. We spend too much time teaching children in their formative years all these facts, but we don't teach them how to intelligently process information.

"That's why I love elementary school, Edna. The children believe anything you tell them."

- Principal Skinner, "The Simpsons"

[Anti-Shadow Rai]

FossilBob wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes... Of course there are...they were put there during the lunar landings.

They could not have been put there "during the lunar landings", because there were no such lunar landings at all.
I gave a scientific, plausible and reasonable explanation to the laser reflection, and you didn't come up with any refutation of my argument.