Did Man Ever Walk on the Moon?

Question

Im a 15 year old so give me some slack and yeah I never witnessed the moon landings ofcourse however I have seen repeats from youtube and I have considered that maybe the reason NASA might of faked a moon landing was because of their fear of the Soviet Union because if you research the past they werent far in front of the Soviets and the only evidence of them beating the Soviets were through the apollo missions. Also why would they just hault after going to the moon and a few times afterwards ofcourse they do nothing for 30 years and then anounce now they want to go back in 2020? Seems strange to me that they would go back with men when they could just use robotics by then anyway at the rate there advancing I mean look at ASIMO he could lead the mission (kidding!). If you say its cause it costs a lot of money to go to the moon well thats not a matter when americas in debt and has been before the missions.

Please dont lecture me but I would like answers to why man needs to go back?

Answer 1

yep, man has been there...no one needs to go back, there is nothing there. Whats the point...

Answer 2

>>I have considered that maybe the reason NASA might of faked a moon landing was because of their fear of the Soviet Union<<

That’s quite often given as a reason for faking the lunar landings. Unfortunately it rather overlooks the fact that the Soviet Union publicly acknowledged the success of the Apollo missions at the time and since.

>>because if you research the past they werent far in front of the Soviets<<

Oh yes they were. The Russians got a series of firsts early on, but their program stagnated. During the ten manned Gemini flights of 1965-1966, NASA gathered hundreds of hours of manned space flight, practice in rendezvous techniques, spacewalks, and many other important achievements that would be needed to send men to the Moon. In those two years the Russians launched not one single cosmonaut into space. The next Russian space flight was Soyuz 1, which was a total disaster and led to the death of the cosmonaut.

>>Also why would they just hault after going to the moon and a few times afterwards<<

NASA is funded by the US taxpayer. Once the first manned landing was achieved the public decided the goal had been made, and there was nothing to go back to the Moon for. Funding was cut, and NASA could no longer afford to go to the Moon. Since then they have not been given the funds to do it, until recently.

>>If you say its cause it costs a lot of money to go to the moon well thats not a matter when americas in debt and has been before the missions.<<

Cost is the key issue, because of the way NASA is funded.

I really suggest some more in-depth research into the progress of the American space program. It follows a very logical progression from the first flight all the way to the final lunar landing. The amount of evidence to support Apollo is truly staggering, and with more research you quickly come to the conclusion that it simply could not have been faked.

>>Please dont lecture me but I would like answers to why man needs to go back?<<

Simple. We need to find ways to live on other planets, and to make use of them.

Answer 3

The US wanted to be first, but there was no dread that the USSR might do it first. The USSR had a huge program, and we knew that it could eventually succeed. The USSR's successes were very admirable.

But the US Gemini program had surpassed the USSR's program. The US had a clear lead when its astronauts were orbiting the Moon and returning safely.

There were six manned Moon landings--each very dangerous. NASA didn't want to stop. The public lost interest. Congress stopped funding.

Wanting to resume Moon missions is not anything new from NASA. It is something new from political leaders who don't want the US outdone by other countries' space accomplishments.

Much of the reason the missions were ended was because of people like you saying "Why go back?" & "Just send robots." Many kids now say "Why explore anything in space, when we can just invent it and have its virtual reality?"

Answer 4

There is no good evidence that the Apollo missions were frauds. There is good evidence that the conspiracy is with those who say they were frauds, and I regard them as at best a cult, at worst as a criminal group. There is plenty of evidence that those who say the Apollo landing did not happen are at best wrong and at worst deliberately lying to sell cheap and nasty TV shows and books.

The "evidence" brought forward by these fools and cheats has been thoroughly refuted.

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.

In addition the Russians and possibly several other countries were perfectly capable of tracking the spacecraft part of the way to the Moon by radar. If the Apollo spacecraft had merely orbited the Earth they could have been detected by radar or even the naked eye depending on the height of the orbit.

Not everyone who worked on Apollo was a US citizen, I know one Australian who was in on it and there were many more. Most of the staff of the ground stations in Australia were Australians, there were also ground stations in Spain. These hundreds of people owe no allegiance to the USA and it is not humanly possible that they would have kept a fraud quiet for 38 years.

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. So even a good back yard amateur could have detected that radio signals were coming from the Moon, or not. Thousands of people around the world could have done that in 1969.

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 three unmanned probes and published the analysis results. The American samples were consistent with the Russian ones.

In addition, the ages that were determined for these rocks were (and still are) older than all rocks found on Earth except for meteorites.

President Nixon. a Republican, began to cut NASA funding in 1968, the year before the first mission. Republicans traditionally do not like government spending. (The Apollo program was a Democratic project begun by President Kennedy.) Seven missions went ahead because the equipment had been built and the people had been employed and trained, but not all the 10 or 12 planned missions were launched. Without the money, manned missions were curtailed in the 1970s and since NASA had to pay for the development of the shuttle and the Hubble telescope, they could not afford more Moon missions. It was not that the USA could not afford to pay, it is that the government of the day refused to pay. No bucks, no Buck Rogers.

According to one of the Russians who worked on the Soviet Moon program in the 1960s, their project was years behind the American one. But when Armstrong and Aldrin landed in 1969 they were not discouraged. Later though an American mission landed within a few hundred yards of an unmanned probe sent beforehand, the Russians realised that they were further behind than they thought, since they could not hope to do that. Their program was closed and never re-opened. From then on they concentrated on a few manned orbital missions and sending robot probes to the planets, which is a lot cheaper.

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/.........

See also these YouTube clips

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ex7ukh3_xua...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=v2ufmzg-bis...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=khp82n-2lh0...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=exjofca4dfa...

Answer 5

First of all, the lunar landings are among the best documented events in human history. There's no doubt on the part of any astronomer or space scientist that they occurred. Hours of video, thousands of images, 800 kilograms of rocks, millions of witnesses. Fact. Period.

The Moon program was cancelled because the American public, who were paying the bill, lost interest in it. Don't believe the nonsense about there being nothing more to discover there. Astronomers and geologists were devastated when the program was cancelled. The sixth mission was the FIRST legitimate scientific expedition to the Moon, with a trained geologist on board; the first five were mainly engineering feasibility tests. Apollo 17 was to have been the first of a series of extended scientific expeditions to the Moon. Instead it was the last. Tragically short sighted on the part of America's politicians.

Instead we got the stupid shuttle and ISS, which have no scientific value whatsoever. The only legitimate scientific work done in space in the past thirty-five years has been by unmanned probes.

Answer 6

About the flag waving I say this:
Most would agree that NASAs' scientists are among the most brilliant people in the world. It is, therefore, natural to ask why anyone would assume that these men (and women, today) would be so ignorant as to ignore the fact that a flag would flutter being planted on Earth (on a windy day that is), but would not when being planted on the Moon because it has no atmosphere?
There is a simple answer to this question; they would not. NASA's scientists are, and were, aware that there is no atmosphere on the moon. As such, they were more than prepared for this fact when they sent a flag with Apollo 11 and made sure that the flag would be constructed in such as way that would allow onlookers to see all of the stars and stripes. On the Earth, flags are usually hung from a pole or rod. On the Moon the flag was hung in the same fashion, but with a second rod protruding parallel with the Moons surface from the first rod. It is from this rod that the flag hung, forcing it to stick straight out and be visible. For appearance purposes this rod was slightly shorter than the flag itself, giving it that rippled effect (that is, after all, how we are all use to viewing the flag). Furthermore, when NASAs' scientists sent Apollo 11 to the moon, they had public policy in mind. When it comes to viewing the flag on the moon, which would make for a better presentation: a limp, dreary flag, or a flag standing proud in its nation's namesake? I think the response is obvious. The fact is the U.S. flag appears to have ripples in it in photographs on the moon because NASAs' scientist intended it to.

Reasons to go back is to prepare for a permanent lunar base and train for Mars missions.

Answer 7

No offense, but at 15 years of age I doubt you're able to fully understand the combination of politics and public opinion.
If you re-read through your question, you answer part of it yourself. The Soviets would have been the first to cry foul if we had faked the Apollo Missions. They monitored the transmissions and ,thus, telemetry of all the Missions. They knew we went.
After we did it, and the populace's excitement for them wore off, politics came into play and funding got cut. No one thought it was important any longer. Majority may rule, but the majority is not always right.
Why should we go back now? There are quite a few feasible, just not cheap, ideas of getting lots and lots of energy from the Moon. From giant solar arrays on the Moon with microwave transmitters and then converters back to electrical energy here dirtside. Also, potential fusion reactors using isotopes only easily gathered and used on the Moon. Again though both these things would take billions if not trillions of dollars to bring about and no one wants to come up with that kind of investment, they only want immediate returns and profits. Thus, it's more cost effective [read cheaper] to find new sources of fossils fuels here and tear up our planet's interior.

Answer 8

Firstly, you're asking two questions. I'll assume the first is more important as you give the most explanation. Here are just a few reasons that people tend not to think of.

Faked "a moon landing"? As you say, that should be plural. There were six.

The clincher is that it could not have been faked. It would be impossible. Either hundreds of thousands of people ere in on it and would all have to remain silent up to their deathbeds, or only a few people "at the top" knew about it, and the hundreds of huge companies unknowingly built equipment that they knew could go to the moon anyway. It would have been easier not to fake.

For a more mundane reason, as someone pointed out a few days ago, Armstrong flubbed his line. If they'd been in a studio, they'd have done a second take, hmmm?

You sound intelligent and discerning. Read this, in bits:

http://www.clavius.org/

This one is more concise, and just as interesting:

http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm

Answer 9

12 men have walked on the moon. No doubt about it. Many hundreds of kilograms of moon rock was brought back from the 6 successful missions. Also hundreds of independent radio astronomers from all over the world both amateur and professional pointed their receivers to the moon (not local TV studio) and independently picked up the transmissions.

About robots..

Robots going to the Moon, Mars, where ever. Yes they are cheap in comparison to human spaceflight and they do have their uses but they are not as adaptable, flexible as a human. A robot on Mars for example can not explain what it is like to be there, eg 'My god this is an outstanding view, the colour of the sky and the mountains in the background is just awesome... I wish you could see it too'.

Answer 10

Dude I'm here to tell you. I was there. Well, okay, I watched the whole thing play out on TV. It happened.

"....Also why would they just hault after going to the moon and a few times afterwards ofcourse they do nothing for 30 years...."

It's real simple. The Cold War Ended, the USSR fell apart, and there was no longer a need to beat the Russians to everything. America lost interest and started whining about spending billions of dollars to visit a rock in the sky. We have countries to bomb, welfare programs to fatten up, ICBM's to build, and lots of lazy people in this country to support, so the space program ceased to be a priority.

Answer 11

If guy ever walked on the moon, why can not they take the Hubble telescope and seem at something they say they left there?? reason they have been in no way there? Yup ! No moon walk for our moon.