i dont think we went to the moon what about you?

Question

ok, their are many debates about if we went to the moon or if it was a hoax. well first off a reason to fake it was that the first to the moon would prbly win the cold war and many predicted if we lost the cold war it would be the downfall of the US. also their is a radiation belt that surrounds the earth (Van allen Radiation belt) and protects us from the sun. it will also kill any who pass without proper protection. and at the time of the space race with the current technology we would need 6 feet of lead to protect the space craft (which was not their). another little question is that just a couple of months ago it was announced that we would go back to the moon between 2017 and 2020 by NASA. and if we went to the moon in the 60's and 70's why wait 10 years to go back why dont we use the same space craft. no one died on the trip to the moon. so why not use the same technology, unless the technology didnt exists and we faked it with a couple of cameras. what are your opinions.

sry i forgot to clarify. i think that humans have never been to the moon i have never said robots haven't. also what about power, the batteries were in no way protected in the +200 in the light and -200 at night. so how did they function.

please watch a movie called "astronauts gone wild" the creator ,Sibrel, will come to your school, church, community center for about 3 grand and guarantees that he will convince you that we didn't go to the moon and it is a money back guarantee. i have never seen it but he may come to my school.

Answer 1

I really don't know what to think. My parents, for example do not think that it really happened. But I'm not sure. I think that there is a way to make it look like we did go up there, and if we really did, then there will still be skeptics, right?
Hm. Yeah, so no yes or no from me.

Answer 2

"also their is a radiation belt that surrounds the earth (Van allen Radiation belt) and protects us from the sun. it will also kill any who pass without proper protection."

Wrong on both counts. The van allen belts do not protect us from the sun. It is simply trapped subatomic particles. While the radiation experienced there would be higher than normal, the apollo astronauts spent less than an hour going through them, during which they recieved a dose of radiation similar to what we get in one day here on Earth. Van Allen himself agrees that the short exposure the astronauts experienced was not dangerous.

"if we went to the moon in the 60's and 70's why wait 10 years to go back why dont we use the same space craft. no one died on the trip to the moon. so why not use the same technology, unless the technology didnt exists and we faked it with a couple of cameras. what are your opinions."

Ok, well first of all it's been 35 years since we've gone to the moon. We stopped going because it was extremely expensive to do it, and after we made it first, public interest in the moon missions quickly declined. It was difficult to justify the costs any longer. After a few more missions using the Saturn V rocket (skylab etc), NASA moved on to working on the new space shuttle program. Since then we've focussed on low orbit operations and building the space station as far as manned spaceflight goes.

And why not use the old Apollo spacecraft? Well for one thing, technology has improved greatly in the last 35 years. We can develop more powerful launch vehicles for less money and do it more efficiently. The new Orion CEV which is going to be the new manned spacecraft after the shuttle is retired in 2010 can carry 6 people into space, and can carry 4 people and supplies to the moon. Additionally, all 4 men will land on the moon. On Apollo, only 3 men could go and only 2 landed on the moon.

These new missions will spend much more time on the moon and will even begin establishing a permanent presence there. We had the technology in 69 to get there. We didn't have the technology to make a good enough fake to convince the world and Russia, and one that would hold up to scrutiny today.

Answer 3

The story about the Van Allen belts is just plain rot. Current astronauts pass through the lower reaches of this belt pretty often and some have stayed in space for far longer than the Apollo astronauts. The Apollo astronauts passed through the belt in minutes, 6 feet of lead is not and was not required.

There is no debate on this. That the Moon was landed on several times is a fact. The other side is just a set of lies.

The liars are speaking to an American audience who have forgotten, if they ever knew, that there are hundreds of thousands of perfectly capable scientists and engineers outside the USA who bear no allegiance to it. Those non-American scientists and engineers who were about in 1969 and interested for the Apollo 11 landing would have spotted a fake right away. This particularly included the Russians, but also scientists and engineers in Britain, Germany, France, Australia, Spain and probably a dozen other countries. It is the scientist and engineers who are saying that Apollo was real, not the lying sellers of cheap books and fraudulent television programs.

In fact most of the staff at official ground stations outside the USA which received transmissions from the Moon were not Americans but Australians and Spanish. That was just the official stations.

It was not past the ability of even radio amateurs in the 1960s to build antennas capable of receiving signals transmitted from the Moon. This kind of technology has been round since the First World War and there has never been much secrecy about it. There are tens of thousands of radio amateurs outside the USA and there were then, too.

The other thing that the liars do not, or rarely mention is the fact that the Russians sent an unmanned probe to the Moon which returned with rock samples. These rocks were analysed and the results were published internationally.

Apollo astronauts returned with hundreds of pounds of rock samples and when these were analysed the results were consistent with the Russian samples. Not all of these rocks were analysed by Americans, some of the analysis was done in Australia by Australians and by other non-American scientist in other countries. If the results were entirely consistent with Earth rocks these analytical chemists would have been very suspicious. However they were not, but they were consistent with the Russian samples.

Analysis of the isotopic content of these rocks showed that they were older by up to a billion years than the oldest known Earth rocks then known. It is only recently that zircon crystals found in Australian rocks (themselves very old) have been found which match the age of the Moon rocks. These Moon rock ages are also consistent with the ages of recovered meteorites.

The reason for the closure of the Apollo program was that the US public lost interest. Politicians therefore reduced funding and NASA could no longer afford to run the program, plus set up the Mariner and Voyager probes, design and fit out Skylab and continue work on the proposed space shuttle. At the time also there was a shortage of oil and the US was losing the Vietnam war.

NASA stopped building heavy lift rockets when shuttle was being developed and the Saturn V was more or less abandoned. Most of the people who worked on it have retired or died, and I heard the other day that some of the drawings had been lost.

The Russians were not completely discouraged by the success of Apollo 11. However when a subsequent Apollo mission landed within a few hundred yards of an unmanned US probe sent beforehand they realised they were too far behind, They concentrated on manned orbitals flights which were cheaper, and unmanned probes, which also were cheaper.

The Russians sent the first satellite into space in 1957, the first animal and the first man and the first woman. You don't have to be on the Moon to "win the cold war", in fact that might even have been a disadvantage.

Edit -
By the way, I'm not a US citizen and don't live there.

Answer 4

There were so many people involved in that project that a faked Moon landing would have been so hard to keep a secret that it would have been easier to just go ahead and go. The U.S. ended the Apollo project which was not slatted to go past Apollo 20 for financial reasons. Apollo 18,19,and 20 were canceled after the near tragedy of Apollo 13 and in the face of shrinking budgets caused by the lack of enthusiasm on the part of the public and the cost of the Viet Nam war.

They are going to retire the Space Shuttle and replace it with the Orion C.E.V. (Crew Exploration Vehicle) It will not have wings and NASA will no longer use the same vehicle to carry cargo and people. A separate heavy lift vehicle the Orion V, is going to be built...(roman numeral five as a tribute to the Saturn V), and they will use Earth orbit rendezvous when the system is used for a Moon landing. NASA had it's hands tied when it developed the Shuttle. After the Apollo program ended there was a real possibility, incredible as it may sound, that there would not be any U.S. manned space program AT ALL! The decision to build the space shuttle passed through congress in 1972(by one vote) and NASA was told they would have to work with the Air Force to develope the system and had to do it for 5.5 billion dollars. The Air Force insisted on a 60 foot payload bay for their large spy sats when NASA had designed it with a 40 ft one. Even the wings were included because of Air Force requirements. NASA had already done a lot of research into a lifting body type orbiter. NASA has always done one thing best and that is keeping their own jobs. They knew that 5.5 billion was not enough money to develop such a sophisticated system but their jobs and the entire future of U.S. manned space was at stake. Considering what they had to overcome the Shuttle was pretty much a success despite the two accidents.
.
Contrary to popular belief passing through the Van Allen radiation belt would not kill you. The astronauts got a dose of radiation equal to two x-rays at the doctors office. The Apollo project started as a cold war exercise to prove which ideology was capable of producing the technology to do such a feat. The United States invented manned space travel from scratch and did it in a matter of ten years.
.
NO NUMBER OF SKEPTICS CAN EVER DIMINISH THIS THE GREATEST TECHNOLOGICAL ACCOMPLISHMENT IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

Answer 5

1- as you mention it, UNPROTECTED. The astronauts were in a shielded spacecraft that was meant to protect them adequately; and second, they did not linger in the Van Allen belt, so radiation exposure was minimal. For the record, if it was deadly, then it would also be deadly when we would be returning, the Van Allen belt have not gone away, you know...
And that quote of 6 ft is ludicrous. Where did you get this bogus figure? The particles in the Van Allen belt have energies that would be stopped by 1 mm of lead. That is 0.04 inch, the thickness of a cardboard sheet.

2- as you mention it was a race with the USSR, which had therefore both the motivations and the means to prove completely and withouht dounb the moon mission was a hoax if it was, and expose it ofr huge political effect. They said nothing, because it was real and THEY KNEW IT.
Got that? THEY KNEW IT; and you seemingly do not have the equipment they have. So what are your credentials?
Were you even born when man first walked on the moon? Do you believe that science and technology had to wait for you to get started?


3- The Saturn 5 assembly plant was shut down, no more rocket was left except for the few used as static display model (2 if I am not mistaken, one in Florida, and one in Houston), and the one used to loft Spacelab. No more money from congress, who insisted NASA used all their reduced budget on the shuttle instead. No rocket means no mission. For the record, NASA wanted to go right up to Apollo 20, and budget cuts stopped them at 17.
Since the Satrun 5 is no longer in production, and all the designers and builders have since retired (the last mission was over 35 years ago already!) the only option is to design something from scratch (and of course politicians will insist on a design that is cheaper to build).

My opinion is that you should stop reading and believing garbage that claims the moon shots were fake, and read good reliable history and science instead. That might also improve your horrible syntax.

Answer 6

Winning the cold war is a motice that is served just as well by actually landing on the Moon, so is not admissable in any debate about faking it.

You certainly do not need six feet of lead to protect against the radiation in the van Allen belt. That is partcle radiation, best protected against using light metals and plastics, such as those used in Apollo. Dr van Allen himself specifically stated that they were not a barrier to manned space flight, and a large amount of commercial satellites operate within the van Allen belts. If the belts did indeed need more protection than was offered on Apollo a very large number of people would be aware of that by now and Apollo would have been proven fake many years ago.

And we can't use the same technology because you just can't rebuild a spacecraft that was last built thirty-five years ago. Building a spacecraft and a rocket requires specialised tooling. Once the rocket stopped being made the tooling is inconvenient to store and is hence dismantled.

The +200 and -200 temperatures refer to the lunar surface. In the absence of an atmosphere on the Moon that does not apply to anything on the surface. Thermal control of spacecraft was a well-practiced technology by the time of Apollo. If robotic spacecraft can survive on the Moon so can the electrical systems such as batteries used on manned flight.

And Bart Sibrel is a liar and a fraud. I know this from personal experience. He makes claims he is utterly wrong about, and he knows they are wrong, yet he still maintains them. Astronauts Gone Wild is a video of him provoking the astronats into angry outbursts, with all the provocation edited out to make it look like they are just attacking him for no reason. They know who he is, and he has lured many of them into his interviews by outright lies. He then asks them to swear on a Bible that they really went to the Moon. At least three astronauts did, but he hasn't changed his view that it was all faked. So those who don't swear he says are hiding something, and those who do he still maintains are lying. He stacks the deck totally in his favour, and is utterly incapable of conducting a reasoned and detailed debate.

Answer 7

Don´t advertize for scam artists on Yahoo! You will get banned.

Your total ignorance towards scientific knowledge is absolutely laughable. So to keep from hurting myself laughing while explaining your errors I´ll just put a little history in instead.

The USSR were not just sitting idly by while the US were sending people to the moon. They had a very elaborate lunarprogram involving unmanned spacecraft. There was a soviet probe hot on the trail of Apollo 11 and the soviets could track Apollo 11 just as they could track their own probe. So the soviets knew for certain that Apollo 11 were just where NASA said it would be. And they knew that Apollo 11 actually landed. Had there been anything suspicious about any of the Apollo missions the soviets would have known that too. The soviets also got lunars soilsamples back and they matched the US samples in compisition. This would have been impossible if the US had just made up their samples. So with all these chances to expose the US as a fraud and getting the biggest propaganda boost ever the soviets said nothing. And the only reason is that the US beat them to the moon fair and square.

Answer 8

extremely ordinary: loss of funds. Congress cut back NASA's investment after the 6th lunar landing in 1972 via fact the customary public appeared to have misplaced pastime interior the Moon and the "area race" with the Soviet Union were won. It became into tragically undesirable timing, via fact Apollo 17 in 1972 became into the _first_ Apollo voyage to have a experienced scientist, Harrison Schmitt, on board, and became into meant to be the 1st of three scientific expeditions. extra became into discovered regarding the Moon and its historical past in that voyage than interior the previous 5 prepare, and much extra could have been discovered if the two next voyages were funded. quite the US area software became into redirected into the boondoggle of the holiday and area station courses, neither of which has made plenty contribution to technology. each time this question is asked, some human beings respond that we now understand each and every thing there is to renowned regarding the Moon. What a ludicrous theory! How can everyone say that we discovered each and every thing some place with exceedingly much as plenty dry land via fact the Earth in six visits of a few hours or days?

Answer 9

You mention the Cold War, do you REALLY think our enemies in that "war"--i.e. the Soviets--would have been duped by a hoax? They even helped confirm the location of signals received from the Apollo missions' spacecraft and astronauts. They know we went to the Moon and they had the most to gain by proving if it had been faked. We went there. To date there has not been anyone who has been able to present evidence of it being faked and have that evidence stand up under scientific examination. Every bit of "proof" has been easily explained by even simple high school level physics and chemistry as to why it is really only proof it really happened. For a better site visit http://www.badastronomy.com this guy MAY come to some sort of event, withtout charging, and he'll only bring true facts with him, not vague conspiracy notions.
However, if you are willing to believe things people tell if only because they tell you in a convincing manner, please think of me as an investment consultant. I have some awesome waterfront property in southern Florida that you should invest in. Just get with me and I will tell you where to send your money. It's a great opportunity, really.

Answer 10

Every one of your "scientific" arguments is scientifically incorrect (I won't go into the facts around shielding and the Van Allen belts).
The US government stopped the high level of funding, and redirected NASA into other research during the 1970's and into the next decades. Now, the directive is to "follow the water", and there is no definitive proof of water or ice on the Moon.

I saw it, millions of others saw it, thousands of technicians and scientists were involved (no way that many people can keep that kind of secret), the lander and other larger objects left behind can be seen from Earth (with larger telescopes).

Answer 11

People wonder why we get angry with those who know very little about space, but then suddenly decide "I think we never went to the moon".

But can you imagine how one of the actual astronauts feels after sweating his balls off in simulators for years, putting his life on the line atop a 360 foot rocket, with enough fuel underneath to imitate a small atom bomb if it blew up on the pad.

Then to take the leap from Earth’s orbit into the nothingness of space, and later to negotiate a horrendously tricky landing on a terrain full of holes, rocks, and talcum powder surface, any of those threatening a slow death if the lander fails to land upright. Then to chance the once only firing of the rockets to get back up to the control module – misfire, and he is doomed,

After finding the correct path for re-entry (couple degrees out and he goes off into space forever, or re-enters too steep and cooks), he faces the horrifying inferno of re-entry, hoping the module keeps its heat shields facing forward, otherwise he is cooked. And finally, when he has survived all that, he prays the chutes will open, otherwise he will be splattered all over the ocean.

Can you imagine then, some twirp with half a brain, never done anything worthwhile in his life but look for silly conspiracies where they don’t exist, coming up to him and saying he thinks it all a fraud. Can you imagine that. I can’t.

Can you imagine how the guys who spent most of their waking moments for 8 years to develop a lander light enough to take to the moon, while being strong enough and manouverable enough to actually land safely on that totally alien surface, and have enough power available to get off again. How do you think they feel?

Thousands devoted their lives to Apollo and it is an insult to of the highest order to all of them to proliferate this totally unscientific garbage.

Sadly, the arguments that the hoaxers put up sound scientific to the largely ignorant and unread public, but to anyone who has any basic science, or is willing to read the real history, it is absolute nonsense.

And the saddest thing about the whole thing is that these ignramouses will not read all the good sense we put here and that is available all over the internet.

And there aren't many debates about whether we went to the moon, as you suggest. There is no debate. It is a case of intelligent people trying to get these ridiculous notions out of the air-heads who only take notice of tabloid news and do not read real science.