OT - Conspiracy Theories.... I love the imagination!

[waiting4something]

Why I think the moon landing was fake is because we in a race with the Soviets both on the ground and space. Us landing on the moon would make it appear that the U.S.A. was much farther ahead of the Soviets. How do you go from just being able to orbit the earth a few years earlier to landing a craft on a rock surface in space like the moon that quickly? Why have we only done this once?
It seem like a better challege then just sending our guys up there to orbit around the Earth like we have been doing ever since. It was ironic how our plans to do this again in 2010 got scrapped. I'm guessing they hoped to do this for the first time then, but then figuired they weren't really ready yet. With the world convinced that they have already done this, why risk looking like a liers now if something bad happened.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

Why I think the moon landing was fake is because we in a race with the Soviets both on the ground and space. Us landing on the moon would make it appear that the U.S.A. was much farther ahead of the Soviets. How do you go from just being able to orbit the earth a few years earlier to landing a craft on a rock surface in space like the moon that quickly? Why have we only done this once?
It seem like a better challege then just sending our guys up there to orbit around the Earth like we have been doing ever since. It was ironic how our plans to do this again in 2010 got scrapped. I'm guessing they hoped to do this for the first time then, but then figuired they weren't really ready yet. With the world convinced that they have already done this, why risk looking like a liers now if something bad happened.

Do you have any actual evidence to support these claims?

Do you have any answer to how previous claims of evidence have all be debunked?

Do you have any answer to how there is ample evidence from international 3rd parties that have confirmed the landings? (For not only the first landing but the others as well)

It also seems that there are few fallacies in your reasons as well - affirming the consequent and fallacy of false cause (if I haven't mislabeled the terms). Those shouldn't be good reasons to believe in things even when being skeptical

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

Do you have any actual evidence to support these claims?
Well, of course I don't other wise it would no longer be a conspiracy theory.

Do you have any answer to how previous claims of evidence have all be debunked?
What are you talking about Willis?

Do you have any answer to how there is ample evidence from international 3rd parties that have confirmed the landings? (For not only the first landing but the others as well)
What third parties and what landings where these?

It also seems that there are few fallacies in your reasons as well - affirming the consequent and fallacy of false cause (if I haven't mislabeled the terms). Those shouldn't be good reasons to believe in things even when being skeptical

You shouldn't believe everything you read, because that like believing in everything you hear.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

You shouldn't believe everything you read, because that like believing in everything you hear.

Correct. Which is why you always check the sources of any claims.

In this case there is ample facts (either observable, testable, or verifiable) from a large number of neutral 3rd parties that shows that the landings did indeed occur.

[Webstral]

Moon landings are a better challenge, but they are much harder to pull off. We've been stuck in Earth orbit since the 1970's because the political will to go back go the Moon (and spend the money) isn't there. While I'm not even a well-read amateur on the subject of lunar exploration, I do know that getting people there and back requires a much greater expenditure of energy, which translates into much greater cost than an orbital destination. While I firmly agree that we should be returning to the Moon (and exploiting lunar resources), the political will just hasn't been there.

Just wait till China (or worse, India!) puts something significant on the lunar surface. Then you'll see the political will return like a bad case of acid reflux.

Webstral

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Webstral

Moon landings are a better challenge, but they are much harder to pull off. We've been stuck in Earth orbit since the 1970's because the political will to go back go the Moon (and spend the money) isn't there. While I'm not even a well-read amateur on the subject of lunar exploration, I do know that getting people there and back requires a much greater expenditure of energy, which translates into much greater cost than an orbital destination. While I firmly agree that we should be returning to the Moon (and exploiting lunar resources), the political will just hasn't been there.

Just wait till China (or worse, India!) puts something significant on the lunar surface. Then you'll see the political will return like a bad case of acid reflux.

Webstral

I firmly believe that the next astronaut to set foot on the moon will be Chinese. The first expedition to Mars will be international -- but the way the economy and the will of the electorate is going in this country, there may not be an American on that first crew that goes to Mars. The people and politicians in this country don't seem to have the stomach or resolve to tackle the big projects anymore, even important ones like getting off fossil fuels (which should be a priority for the entire human race -- an international effort like that which sent astronauts to the moon, scaled-up). And our politicians are barely willing even to do something that might be politically risky or cost them campaign dollars. I believe that without colonizing space (and soon) the human race is not going to have a chance to survive even if we get through the next century intact, but the people of this country by and large can't see the necessity of almost any large-scale scientific research, let alone something hugely expensive like human space exploration and colonization.

On another tack, what power telescope does it take to pick out the landing sites on the Moon? It's actually an urban myth that you can see the Great Wall of China or other large man-made structures from orbit with the naked eye -- you need a lens with a pretty decent magnification to see even the largest man-made structures from orbit. During the day, from the orbits that the Space Shuttle and the ISS use, you can't even look down with the naked eye and see our largest cities -- you need a lens with a magnification of at least 4x to start seeing them. (At nighttime, however, you can see the lights from the cities fairly well with the naked eye.) It seems that you'd need one of those huge telescopes like the 200-inch one on Mt. Palomar to see the landing sites from the Earth.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

In regards to how did we go from orbiting the Earth to landing on the Moon so quickly, I'd just like to say that in the 1920s we had aircraft made of wood, wire and canvas, then in the 1940s they were made from metal and powered by jet engines and could just reach the sound barrier. In the late 1950s they began the design that resulted in the SR-71, a high altitude Mach 3 aircraft that first flew in 1964. In 1981, the first US Space Shuttle launch was achieved, a spacecraft designed in the 1970s.
So in 50 years we have gone from wood & canvas biplanes to the space shuttle, I think we could easily have achieved the Moon landings. The technology was sufficient and the political will and funding were strong enough to support the efforts

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

Why I think the moon landing was fake is because we in a race with the Soviets both on the ground and space. Us landing on the moon would make it appear that the U.S.A. was much farther ahead of the Soviets. How do you go from just being able to orbit the earth a few years earlier to landing a craft on a rock surface in space like the moon that quickly? Why have we only done this once?
It seem like a better challege then just sending our guys up there to orbit around the Earth like we have been doing ever since. It was ironic how our plans to do this again in 2010 got scrapped. I'm guessing they hoped to do this for the first time then, but then figuired they weren't really ready yet. With the world convinced that they have already done this, why risk looking like a liers now if something bad happened.

I always thought the technology we would need to go to the Moon, except for rockets with sufficient thrust, was around by the 1930's. You basically needed a sealed container with a life support system along with carrying enough oxygen and/or even an air recycling system. Most likely you would use batteries for power. Radio, we were just starting to experiment with UHF. Space suits, the aeronauts who went to 70,000 feet plus had suits where with some modifications, be able to be used on the Moon. As to food and water, I'm sure you can pack food that will not be messy.

I do believe we did go to the Moon, you just needed the will and the money plus with the added rocket technology from World War II and the refinement on it, going to the Moon was accomplished.

Getting back to my original ideas, the theories were worked out a long time ago, it just took the will and money to test and bring them about.

I think the reason why many people believe the Moon trip was a hoax is, one an entire generation of adults are alive who never saw a Moon landing on TV. I'll be 44 in July and I remember watching Apollo 11 even though I was 3 at the time. Two, most of that same generation grew up with computers, CD's, DVD's to an extent and so on, they ask, "how can the technology of the 1960's do such a thing," it would seem so ancient to them. We could go the Moon now but we don't have the will and money.

Chuck

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Nowhere Man 1966

I think the reason why many people believe the Moon trip was a hoax is, one an entire generation of adults are alive who never saw a Moon landing on TV. I'll be 44 in July and I remember watching Apollo 11 even though I was 3 at the time. Two, most of that same generation grew up with computers, CD's, DVD's to an extent and so on, they ask, "how can the technology of the 1960's do such a thing," it would seem so ancient to them. We could go the Moon now but we don't have the will and money.

Chuck

I just turned 48 today -- I used to watch every space mission closely. I can remember all the way back to watching the Gemini 12 mission when I was 4 years old.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I just turned 48 today -- I used to watch every space mission closely. I can remember all the way back to watching the Gemini 12 mission when I was 4 years old.

Happy Birthday!!!! I don't remember much before Apollo, but I have always been fascinated by space. BTW, I think the last Gemini mission flew when I was 5 months old.

Chuck

[Targan]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I just turned 48 today -- I used to watch every space mission closely. I can remember all the way back to watching the Gemini 12 mission when I was 4 years old.

Happy birthday Paul!!!

[TiggerCCW UK]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I just turned 48 today -- I used to watch every space mission closely. I can remember all the way back to watching the Gemini 12 mission when I was 4 years old.

Happy birthday!!

[Webstral]

Happy birthday, Paul, and many more!

Webstral

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Webstral

Happy birthday, Paul, and many more!

Webstral

I'm getting older and fatter! Please no more!

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I'm getting older and fatter! Please no more!

Don't I hear that. My wife keeps washing my pants wrong, and they're all shrinking.

Webstral