do you believe that we have been to the moon?

Question

actually I don't. I have seen way to much proof that the whole thing was staged. not to mention we haven't been back since 1969. I find it to be a load of crapola.

your answers are very interesting and yet no one wants to discuss why we haven't been back in 37 years.

Answer 1

Yes I do. Then you must belong to the Flat Earth Society. They started that tale when we returned from the moon with photo's of the round earth. They claimed it never happened and that it was all staged in a studio.

Added: We haven't been back because of the cost. It was a few billion dollars a trip and the sentiment turned toward social programs, ending the war and the environment back in the early 70's. Going to the moon was just not a popular way to spend billions of dollars anymore. .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society

Answer 2

That 'proof' is crapola. Take a picture of the moon tonight. Then look for stars in that photo. GEE! It MUST have been staged!!!
There is a mirror that the Apollo 11 astronauts set up in 1969. It has proven not only that we were there, but that the moon is moving away from the earth about 1-1/2 inches per year.
As to why we haven't been back, that's because Armstrong and Aldrin were informed in no uncertain terms by the aliens who watched the landing from a few dozen yards away that we were NOT to make a habit of going there. There are websites that tell THAT story too!

Answer 3

Yes. We definitely went to the moon. There isn't a single argument put forth by the "we staged it" conspiracy theorists that holds water.

Let's look at a few:

Missing data - telemetry, blueprints -- NASA is a government agency and loses things all the time. So what?

There are no stars in any lunar photos -- Stars are relatively dim objects. Most lunar landing shots were taken on the light side of the moon. Sunlight is INTENSE there. There's no way to get photographic film to correctly expose foreground objects and stars. Even on Earth, getting stars to show up on film takes exceptionally long exposure times.

Death by Van Allen belt radiation exposure -- The exposure time in the belt is negligable at 17,500 MPH. You'd have to stay there for hours to get a toxic dose, and the astronauts passed through it in minutes.

I dunno. I could go on like this for hours. There are dozens of naive observations that claim to prove that the Apollo program was a hoax. I've never seen a single one that holds water. If you examine the films and video, you'll see that all objects, including the very dust on the ground being kicked up by the rover's wheels obey the behavior principles of objects in a vaccuum. The idea that it was all a hoax just doesn't hold water, and doesn't make sense. The risks of embarrassment to the government after the inevitable exposure of the truth are too great for too little benefit.

I'm definitely of the opinion that the U.S. government does a lot of shady things, and that cynicism is jusified, but doubting the lunar landings crosses the line to paranoid. Sorry.

------------------

Follow-up

You state that nobody has answered "why we haven't gone back in 37 years?"

There hasn't been any particularly compelling reason to go back, yet, that would justify the extreme expense. NASA accomplished it's goals for the Apollo program, then moved onto other priorities, such as Apollo/Soyuz, Skylab, the STS system and ISS, not to mention scores of unmanned probes and many diverse areas of research. NASA simply doesn't have the budget to do all the things it's done since the early '70s and continue to go to the moon. By the end of the Apollo program, public interest and support in the live lunar program was very low. About the only thing that would revive it sufficiently, at this point, to justify the stupifyingly huge expense of going back would be a clear commercial justification.

The fact that we might WANT to go back, just for the experience, or the romance, or the adventure doesn't cut it in the real world of multi-billion dollar launches. This isn't Flash Gordon, this is reality, and space is expensive. Find a reason to justify $25,000,000,000 per trip, and we'll go back. Can't think of one? Not surprised.

In any case, two points. One: I'm not telling you anything that isn't obvious or that two minutes of Google research couldn't have helped you out with, so why ask?

Two: In what way does the question of not going back in 37 years support your original point? You make it sound as if the fact that nobody addressed it supports you. Nobody addressed it because it's completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with your original question.

Answer 4

Yes we have been to the moon. If we hadn't, how do you suppose the reflectors got there that NASA uses to bounce laser beams off of? It's used to measure the distance between the Earth and Moon.

Also, considering the fierce competition between the United States and the Soviet Union, if the Russians had the slightest suspicions that we faked it, they would be screaming louder than anyone else. They also wouldn't have abandoned their attempts to get there. That's strike two against the theory of the moon landing being fake.

Finally, and here comes strike three, of the thousands of people involved in the moon missions at the time, if it were all staged, how come nobody squealed? Surely something of this magnitude would have someone spouting off about it all being fake, someone on the inside. Yet the only people that dispute the moon landing are a bunch of crackpots.

So, yeah, the moon landing was real. If you don't want to believe me, give NASA a call.

Answer 5

Yes I believe we have sent people to the moon. The whole idea that it was staged was probable set up by communists or the "flat earth society" or both. Any so-called evidence that we staged it is purely conjecture. A conspiracy this big would never be able to be covered up. We haven't been back since 69 because there has been no reason to. The only reason we went in the first place was a cold war stunt to beat the russians there as a source of national pride.

Answer 6

No of course not. This was faked by George Bush's grandfather conspiring with the Nazis so they could hide their dasterdly UFO base there. Every good lib knows this. This base is where the 9/11 planes came from and why they couldn't be tracked. They were special moon based airplanes of course. It all must be true because I read it on the Internet.

Answer 7

It was not staged, but we only went there in the first place to prove to the world and Russia that we are more powerful than Russia. Scientists would love to go back and do much more research, but the U.S. won't allow it because they do not respect science and don't want to give up a big hunk of dough.

Answer 8

specific i do the reason at the back of this is ther is a radiation ring that could have given all the astronuts many varieties of maximum cancers although out their existence and this hasnt exceeded off. yet another element is in 2000 nasa suggested they didnt have the techno to bypass. so how did they in 1969? and final 86% % made it on primitive computers and mediocore navigation yet with techno thats thousands and thousands cases extra useful in basic terms approximately 28% of mars missions made it

Answer 9

yep. there are many ppl that don't. (Flat Earth Society mentioned above) they say that the earth is flat. what about all the stuff science says? it's a hoax. lolol. but yeah we've landed on the moon. some people say that it's too bright... wouldn't the moon be dark? IT"S GOTTA B STAGELIGHTS! but nooo, it's actually sunlight bouncing off the mooon's surface

Answer 10

YES, and anyone who thinks otherwise is retarded! the whole moon program was designed to get american support for funding of research into rocket technology. not to be the first on the moon, but to be able to consistently be able to launch objects into space(ex:spy satellites, icbm's etc...)so we did go to the moon, just not for the reason every one thinks we did!