About 6% of the US population is retarted and believes that we did not actually land on the Moon. WOW! IDIOTS!!! I just want to hear your stupid reasons like "You can't see the stars". Answer for this: The cameras were set for daylight exposure because it was daytime on the Moon, and daytime exposure on the cameras = no stars. Another one: Radiation would have killed the astronauts and destroyed the film. That is why space suits are worn, and the film is stored in metal containers, protecting it. If you have another stupid reason, I will find out what the answer is.
2007-02-04 06:43:19 · 9 answers · asked by box778899 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
The guy that wrote about evolution: that depends on your religion, if you are or not.
2007-02-04 06:59:30 · update #1
For al of you sensible people, I found a website with some AMAZING pictures here: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html
2007-02-04 07:04:01 · update #2
People want to believe that the lunar landings are fake for the same reason why tabloids do so well. It always seems more exciting to hear or promote "contrary news", it seems so sophisicated. For example, when men didn't think travel to the moon was possible, tabloids or dime magazines would blare, "men on the moon!". Once we HAD men on the moon, the new soundbite became, "Men DIDN'T land on the moon!". If people ever got to the point (say, a hundred years in the future with no space travel) where nobody believed that we ever landed men on the moon, you can be SURE that tabloids will come back to saying, "We landed men on the moon!". And there'll be all kinds of conspiracy theorists showing pictures and documents of the Apollo flights. You just can't win.
2007-02-04 07:36:37 · answer #1 · answered by Scythian1950 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lots of idiots.
In reality you do not have to go into all that stuff about flags waving and stars not in the sky. There is a concept in math and science called "first principles".
By first principles, even if someone could have filmed the thing in some desert somewhere, it is inconceivable that it could be injected into the systems so as to fool hundreds of experienced controllers over the seven years of the Apollo program.
These people worked in shifts around the clock. Anyone with any idea of the complexity of installing computer systems knows immediately that the logistics of creating the software and installing it without all the frontline experts knowing about it, makes it laughable to even think about it.
To think that these people sitting at their monitors could be fooled into thinking they were watching the moon landings instead of a hollywood, is paramount to lunacy. Even the thought of just getting the timing right - it took several days to get to the moon, just think of the complexity of just getting the "production" timed correctly second by second, so that these experienced, highly trained people (and there were at least 50 per shift) should think they are watching the real thing.
The problem is that the kids born after Apollo do not know the story, the complexity of the program. I think they only think of making a rocket, men climbing in it and off they go. It is sad really. but sadder still is that from what I have seen on this forum, there are some teachers that think it was a hoax. So, what hope for the kids education.
2007-02-04 06:58:19 · answer #2 · answered by nick s 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Moon landings were faked to cover up the existence of the secret military Moon base. Let the conspiracy idiots figure that one out.
2007-02-04 06:57:31 · answer #3 · answered by christopher N 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
>For one, our economic equipment is shot, the country is merely about bankrupt. there is no way lets have adequate money to construct the rover. the finished value of the interest challenge is $2.5 billion. us of a manages to have adequate money to pay for its defense force to the track of that a lot each and every 33 hours. no longer days. Hours. interest is a drop contained in the bucket with assistance from evaluation. Do you actually imagine that that one very last drop is the merely bit your united states of america won't be able to have adequate money? >now to not coach fund a challenge to deliver it to Mars. now to not coach the "pictures" resembles a great number of terrain utilized in a great number of Sci-Fi videos featuring the "purple Planet". Gee, perchance which could be because the flicks needed it to look life like? >Theoretically it ought to take type of a year for the rover to even make it to Mars. about 8 months, really. and that is how lengthy it did take. It change into released in November 2011. >we wasted billions of tax payers money to be the first united states of america to achieve a lifeless rock. really, a minimum of 5 different landers outfitted with assistance from the united states have also landed on Mars, the first one in 1976.
2016-11-02 07:39:32 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course the landings were fake!
I've seen the documentary 'Capricorn One' - think it was on Discovery or History channel recently. Those poor bastards never had a chance against an evil regime intent on lying to the masses!
2007-02-05 15:42:08 · answer #5 · answered by Angela 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As you said, they are "retarded," so you will not hear a logical argument from any of them. Anyone of them who try to cite so called scientific evidence have never themselves passed a science course at any level.
2007-02-04 09:58:24 · answer #6 · answered by Stan the Rocker 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's ridiculous. Something like 50% (maybe more) of people also don't accept evolution. It's frustrating.
2007-02-04 06:50:32 · answer #7 · answered by Chris S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Six percent? It seem a lot higher here. . .
2007-02-04 13:33:50 · answer #8 · answered by Walking Man 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
rofl
2007-02-04 06:50:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋