Did NIEL ARMSTRONG really stepped on the moon or it was just a lie?

Question

It really keeps my mind blurred!!!Niel armstrong,Niel armstrong and many more Niel Armstrong.....But my FRESHMEN teacher say's that it was just a big bunch of lie!!!Cause if really NIEL ARMSTRONG stepped into the moon.....then surely many people would go & go over the moon,right?Huhhuhuhu....Please help me!!!I NEED YOUR ANSWER.......

Answer 1

Once an article was published in the Indian News Papers that stepping out on the moon by Neil was a big lie created by the U.S. scientists in connivance with the photographers and the lie was created through the advanced technology of photography.

About nine or ten reasons were given to prove the lie which I don't remember but it proved to be a big lie.

Answer 2

Your teacher must not be qualified, as the evidence in favor of the Moon landings is simply overwhelming. This is not my own subjective opinion, but rather a scientific fact.

If you want to debate this with your teacher, these are some key pieces of evidence in favor of Apollo:
1) Several of the landings left behind retroreflectors that astronomers have detected thousands of times. These are used to precisely measure the distance to the Moon.
2) Independent radio telescopes verified the presence of a spacecraft on the Moon. When these telescopes were pointed at the Moon, they detected the Apollo transmissions. If there wasn't ship there, they wouldn't have detected anything.
3) Geologists have carefully examined the Moon rocks and have concluded that they are indeed lunar in origin. These rocks match perfectly with Moon rocks returned by an unmanned Soviet probe. There's no way to fake this.
4) No scientist rejects the landings, but scientists would be the first to notice anything fishy. Instead, scientists are the first to vigorously defend the landings.

On top of all of that, there's no evidence against a landing. The conspiracy theorists rely exclusively upon bad science, faulty common sense, anti-government bias, and, more generally, fiction that's made to seem like fact.

That we haven't returned to the Moon since 1972 means absolutely nothing. Going to the Moon is astronomically expensive and fraught with danger. NASA's budget simply doesn't allow for it to go back to the Moon. Following your teacher's logic: I haven't been to California in seven years; therefore, since I haven't returned in a while, I never went in the first place. It's a remarkably illogical standpoint.

To reject the lunar landings and the evidence supporting them is to reject modern science.

Answer 3

If the Moon landings in 1969 and later had been faked thousands of scientists and radio experts around the world would have known straight away. Specially the Russians, but also Germans, French, Spanish, Australians, British, you name it.

Not everyone who worked on Apollo was a US citizen, I know one Australian who was in on it and there were many more. Almost anyone who was good with tools and had a bit of money could build a suitable antenna and tune a suitable radio into the transmissions from the Moon. There is nothing secret about the construction of such antennas, I have a book on it right here.

The astronauts brought back hundreds of pounds of Moon rocks which were analysed by scientists all over the world. Not all of them were US citizens either. If those rocks had been faked those scientists would have seen it. In any case, the Russians also returned Moon rocks to Earth in an unmanned probe and published the analysis results. The American samples were consistent with the Russian ones.

The Apollo program came to an end because the US public lost interest, when that happened, funding dried up and NASA could not afford to send any more.

This site is devoted to the mostly Australian men and women at the Honeysuckle Creek tracking station in Australia which received some of the Apollo transmissions. You can hear one man talking directly to the astronauts on the Moon.

http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/

Those who claim that the Apollo missions were faked are hoaxers at best and liars at worst. You can make money out of cheap TV programs and hastily written books if you convince enough people that the reality of the missions was doubtful.

Answer 4

Oh dear God..............NOT AGAIN!!

Your teacher should be strung up - students go to school to be taught facts, not half-a r s ed conspiracy theories.

Without going through it ALL again,

1. There was a laser reflector left on the moon to enable earth-bound scientists to carry out a daily experiment to measure the distance between earth and moon.

2. The signals of the Apollo landings were monitored by people all over the globe, including the Russians. Those signals enabled the location of the astronauts to be mapped.

3. NASA employed around half a million people at the height of the Apollo mission. Do you think that this number of people could keep such a massive secret that we never went to the moon without so much as a small leak?

Do yourself a favour - read a little about the true story of the incredible Apollo mission and tell your teacher to stop talking crap - he's disrespectful of the bravery of the astronauts who went on these missions and to those who died in the process.

Answer 5

It is your teacher that is the liar. You should have him fired. He is obviously incompetent if he doen´t know that facts about the moon landings.
Or maybe he is just spurring you to write essays on the subject. You should look up this question here on yahoo and go through all the reasons and links to evidence of it being real. The question has been asked and properly answered many many times.

The main reason for there being no human outposts or cities on the moon today is that there is no point. It was a political mission. Not a scientific one. Even if there had been gold on the moon (as there was in Africa) if wouldn´t have been profitable to mine it. The cost of going there is that great. It was just a race and the US won it. And if you have already won a race and there are no more contestants what would be the point of running the race again? Especially if cost of running it is in the $billions? There was a very expensive war going on in Vietnam.
After they had lost the race to the moon the soviets started another race. A race to build spacestations in low earth orbit. NASA followed suit with Skylab and the development of the spaceshuttle.

Answer 6

No-one replaced into filming him stepping off the ladder. this question comes up lower back and lower back and that i'm consistently surprised by ability of the form of human beings who think of a digicam desires somebody at the back of it to artwork. the television digicam replaced into fixed in a pallet stated as the MESA. As Armstrong exited the LM he pulled a preserve that opened the MESA and the digicam popped out on slightly sprung platform aimed in direction of the ladder. Alrdin switched it on from interior the cabin, and hey presto, stay television of the 1st guy to set foot on the moon, without the choose for absolutely everyone to be accessible earlier him. As to the pictures, in the event that they don't look to be stills from the television photos or from the sixteen mm action picture taken from interior the LM, then they are of Aldrin and the caption is erroneous. hassle-free as that.

Answer 7

Do you think moon landing was faked?...Probably another Nasa cover-up?...i believe and think so.
just scroll down when you open the page..and compare the two photos of astronaut Aldrin facing the flag...

heres the link:

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

The first photo shows that Aldrin is saluting the flag...then the second photo: Buzz Aldrin's hand is down, head turned toward the camera, the flag is unchanged.

Im just curios because if you compare the two photos, the flag is not waving..


I dont really care about nasa ufo cover-ups...My main concern was: is moon landing also a coverup?.
I don’t trust NASA. full of lies diverting our knowledge away from the truth. Cover-ups..cover-ups and loads of conspiracies.

PS: nasa will soon announce elvis and jfk are alive. O_o

Answer 8

Your teacher needs to learn critical thinking. Going to the Moon is PHENOMENALLY expensive and inherently risky. People DID go back to the Moon after Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed there on Apollo 11. Five more landings took place, in fact. After that, NASA's budget was cut and no-one was interested in going to the Moon any more.

Answer 9

Of course it is a big lie.
Neil Armstrong fell ill just before the moonblast, so was replaced by a stand-in (Elvis Presley, no less!) who was surgically altered to look just like him. Meanwhile, the real Neil Armstrong was also surgically altered to look like Elvis Presley and was sent to Las Vegas to sing and entertain people.
How is that?

Your freshmen teacher should be fired on the spot. What is his personal agenda spreading falsehoods like that?

The moon missions stopped after 1972 because congress cut the funding to put money on REALLY important things like the Viet-Nam war, and covering Nixon's butt after the Watergate scandal (just in case you missed it, "really important" is meant ironically). Most of NASA's reducing budget was diverted to the space shuttle after the last moon mission, and the shuttle cannot go beyond low Earth orbit.

Answer 10

Your teacher really did you a disservice by feeding you that claptrap. The moon trip probably, in all likelihood did happen- though there is a possibility given the cold war climate that it didn't- but if it didn't it would have to be the biggest hoax ever.

The reason that people don't go over and over is because of the lethal dose of radiation one gets and the danger of a manned mission- it's far too risky because out in space there is no protection from solar flares and other big, unpredictable problems. So with no reason to put a human in space, outside of the earths magnetosphere (the space station we have is within it), we won't do it.

Tell your teacher he/she should be teaching you how to work that out for yourself, rather than giving you an answer that the majority of scientific thinkers out there reject, and for such a paltry reason too!

Pffft, obviously not a science teacher. What a silly thing to be telling your students, next thing you know he'll be telling you Bush planned 9/11!!!

Answer 11

I answer this a lot. But here goes. When they went to the moon they left a corner reflector. A corner reflector is an interesting device in that it reflects the light exactly back where it came from. On the earth, the distance to the moon is monitored by technology that uses the corner reflector. They even have public demonstrations. Anyone who wants to take the time to learn about corner reflectors and attend a demonstration can verify the moon landing.