You think the moon landings were faked?

Question

Lol, well I used to say definately no, but now NASA has lost the original tapes that nobody has ever seen ^_o

^Confused

Answer 1

Just say no to unfounded conspiracy theories.
As a man of science, you should know this.

Answer 2

It was not hauxed.
There are some facts that makes me say that. The claims that the moon landings were faked is based up on certain questions:
1 Why was the flag waving?
Ans: The flag is not waving it is mounted on a stand which has a metal rod on top too. The flag appears to be waving just like the curtains has fringes.
2. No stars in the sky
Ans : The camera is adjusted to pick out objects at close range which would require less exposure and so the stars cannot be seen.
3. No blast crater
Ans There are no blast craters.

The engine vents total area when divided by the total pressure of the exhaust gases is very less.
4: Shadows in diff directions.
A: The shadows r in diff directions due to parallax.!!

Answer 3

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 4

I believe they were faked. NASA did not have the technology to send people to moon and back. They faked it as a publicity stunt as they were lagging behind the Soviets in the space race. Even today, NASA has gone on record to state that, they consider a trip to the moon unsafe. Any serious student of science today will not agree that man could have landed on the moon 37 years ago and returned to earth to tell the tale. There are so many gaps in the evidence provided by NASA. With so much advancement in technology, it is very easy to blow several holes in their claim.

Answer 5

I think they are real however some of the pictures do not make sense like the one that shows the US flag on the moon blowing in the wind. That is weird because actually there really is no wind on the moon. This is off the subject but I think that Alien autopsy movie that was done in B&W is a hox. Even though the organs were in the corect locations, I don't buy that one but I do think the moon landings were real.

Answer 6

I do not think the moon landings were faked. Case in point: NASA couldn't even keep track of some video tapes, do you really think that they could stage the whole moon landing and not have at least one person come out and have some proof that it was faked?

Answer 7

lets see we have super power telescopes like hubble and satelites going out to pluto and yet no one is taking any pictures of the surface of the moon where we supposedly left all this equipment. ??? then there is the fact that when ever the shuttle gets a certain point up in our space around earth they cant handle all the radiation that is coming at them cuz they are outside our magnetic sphere and how did space equipment 30 years older make it to the moon in the first place?

Answer 8

The technology for landing on the moon is not that exotic in my opinion. To discount the lunar landings, shouldn't we also discount the Martian rovers too, the the probes to the outer planets, and the space shuttle. It was an amazing achievement for its day.

Answer 9

jeez, not again. This is getting really boring.

Just think folks. The effert to fool thousands of scientists, technicians, controllers would be more remarkable than actually going to the moon.

And who would be the massive army of people that set up such a massive scam.

Why can't we put an end to this nonsense?

Answer 10

Well since the landings are surrounded in mystery I doubt the validity of this as a space question.

Answer 11

it was a great idea. it helped ease the american populace and make them more accepting of astronomical things, thus opening a new door to a space age era. without the "moon landings" we wouldn't have advanced as fast as we did in so little time. weather fact or fiction, i give props.