With the hype about the moon missions being fake,Why not have a telescope like Fernbanks just show the site ?

Question

I mean, I've heard about how the government faked the whole moon mission thing. I personally believe the missions were real, however it seems to me that it would be so easy to prove. Why NASA hasn't done something like this before is strange. Maybe they have and I am the only one who doesn't know it?

Answer 1

Although my wife's father performed fuel calculations for the original Apollo landing, I'll spare you that speech. Instead, I will encourage you to watch two programs. The first show is called Conspiracy Moon Landing that it currently showing on the National Geographic Channel and it pretty much obliterates all of the popular conspiracy theories.

I would also encourage you to watch a movie called Capricorn One. Made it 1978, it is a fictional story about a fake mission to Mars. Although it is a science fiction story, it is a good example of how utterly impossible it would be to fake a moon landing for any length of time.

12 men walked on the moon from 1969 to 1972 and we have neither the resources nor the technology to pull off that big of a hoax for so long. Hundreds of thousands of people have worked on the space program. It would be far easier to put someone on the moon than to try and fake it and keep it secret for nearly 40 years.

The landings came at a time when our space program was ultra competitive with the former Soviet Union. Remember how big of a deal it was when Sputnik was put into orbit? They had the technology to monitor our moon shots and transmissions. Don't you think they would have called us out if they had evidence that it was all fake?

Perhaps the most definitive proof of our trip to the moon is what we left behind. For the last 35+ years, scientists have been beaming lasers to the moon and measuring the return times. How are they doing this? The beams are reflected back by equipment left on the moon on at 3 different locations.

Case closed.

Answer 2

Let's assume that NASA does as you suggest. They photograph the various sites and print it in the newspaper. What happens then?

A head line in the same paper says:

Skeptics denounce authenticity of NASA Photos.

The XYZ agency has brought into question whether or not NASA's photos of the Apollo landing sites were in fact authentic or were they retouched as some experts suspect.

In short, a conspiracy nut is a conspiracy nut. There is nothing you can do to satisfy them. They have adopted a "chaos theory" and no amount of "cause and effect" logic will ever convince them of anything.

Answer 3

I think NASA has better things to do with the little money that congress appropriates for them than to try to try to prove themselves and disprove the lunatic fringe that insist that the moon landing and other things have not taken place. People the insist things like this or "have proof" usually are in their own little fantasy world and an official attempt to disprove thier claims would only bolster them.

Answer 4

good proposal