moonbeam, i hope you realize how much of a retard you just acted.
if you believe that we landed on the moon you probably believe that global warming is real and the Holocaust really did happen, too. idiots.
yes we're not making a mess of our planet with global warming and hitler faked all the dead jewish people in the camps. please tell your uncle George bush to put you away in a dark cell.
2006-07-28 11:49:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by gets flamed 5
·
1⤊
4⤋
The effectiveness of keeping a conspiracy intact is completely dependent on the number of people involved; the more people there are, the less likely the conspiracy will hold over time. There were literally tens of thousands of people involved in the Apollo program, and it has been over thirty years since the last lunar landing; faking the landings and keeping the people silent would have been more difficult than actually performing them.
On three of the Apollo missions, laser reflection dishes were set up which scientists use to this day to accurately calculate the distance between the Earth and the Moon. This equipment could only have been set up manually; no robotic missions could have performed these tasks.
The Clementine lunar satellite was able to take a picture of the Apollo 15 landing site, but the resolution was too low (100 meters) to be considered overwhelming evidence. The Indian space program plans to send a remote sensing spacecraft in 2007, called Chandrayaan I, which has a five meter resolution. Assuming the craft is successful, its images should provide definitive evidence that the moon landings were real.
No matter what evidence one provides, however, someone will always come up with an excuse to negate it. "The scientists are in on the conspiracy with the laser reflector experiment", or "The images from the satellite are fake", or "They set up the Apollo landing sites afterwards using robots". One has to set their own limits on when evidence becomes definitive, and then stand by that limit.
2006-07-29 08:09:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by ndcardinal3 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
The people who deny the moonlanding would not have a problem with it if they did not hate the west in general and the USA in particular.
Even at the height of the Cold War, when the USSR and the Americans were close to anhilating each other and the world, The Russians never denied the Moon landing, and they had every reason to not want the world to admire their worst enemy. They also had the technical means to verify or deny these facts.
Instead, Russian scientists and political leaders congratulated their rivals for their successes, spurred on as they were, by competition.
If Russia believes, who is anyone to deny?
2006-07-28 11:05:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by aka DarthDad 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Why in the name of everything that is cool, would the government spend billions of dollars on NASA just to fake going to the moon? It's possible, it's been done, and I'm sure with an extremly powerful telescope you can see the footprints on the Moon.
2006-07-28 12:28:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
We also faked the birth of Muhammed, and Christ, and Buddha, and . . .
We also faked the discovery of gunpowder, and glass, and metal, and stone, and animals, and . . .
The claims that the moon landings were faked are the fever dreams of a bunch of conspiracy theorists who have nothing better to do with their time than try to convince the scientifically illiterate that they are smarter than everyone else. What astounds me is how many folks actually buy into that claptrap.
The United States sent men to the moon on six different occasions. They landed there, walked on the surface of the moon, took samples, made scientific measurements, and left behind instruments and devices we continue to use to this day.
2006-07-28 10:46:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dave_Stark 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
I have heard all the explanations of why some people think the landings are fake, and I cannot believe people are so ignorant to make such ridiculous statements. No dust cloud? Of course, because no air. Flag waves, but shouldn't because no air? 1st, it doesn't wave, just LOOK at the video. 2nd, doesn't that contradict the first statement about dust clouds. And on and on and on. These people know NOTHING about space.
2006-07-28 16:04:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
The state of "FX" in the late 60's would have made it more difficult to fake something like that than say, putting a man on the moon.
P.S.
Columbus did not reach the new world, He died in the canary islands!
2006-07-28 11:17:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Sleeping Troll 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
I thought this rumor was long dead - my grandfather used to talk about this in the very early 70's. The US did not fake the moon landing. Pamela Anderson has had plastic surgery. Dan Quayle did not invent the Internet. Cold weather does not cause colds. And on it goes...
2006-07-28 13:37:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by ginabgood1 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Yeah, and what about the ones that think we're all in the same place. Like if you get on a train, they just flash a movie on the windows, and re-arrange the scenery, so when you get off it looks like you went somewhere different. You know, they always do that to you all the time!!! Ever notice that? Hmm?
2006-07-28 10:55:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by 361.572347 degrees 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
no we did not. where is "their" evidence?? photo's that are fkd up and wrong to scientific fact. hey don't let the facts get in the way of the truth.also, if you believe that we landed on the moon you probably believe that global warming is real and the Holocaust really did happen, too. idiots.
2006-07-28 10:52:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by moonbeam 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
If they launched into space (and there's no question they did that - millions of people have seen that live) then they did the really hard part. It's preposterous that people say we didn't complete the mission from Earth orbit to lunar landing. That's the easier part.
I can pick apart any argument people have that they have "evidence" that we didn't go. Feel free to email me at fortitudinousskeptic@yahoo.com
if you have questions about their "evidence". I can explain all of that.
2006-07-28 10:47:09
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋