I think moon landing is fake. They said the evidence is the reflector/mirrors on the moon which can be used to

Question

measure the distance of moon from Earth. But we don't have this device on the sun, and we still know its distance from Earth. Btw, the Russians also have mirrors on the moon. And there is no russian ever set foot on moon

Grayure: "It would probably have been easier to fake a landing on Mars than on the Moon, because "live" TV pictures would have been completely impossible, and only slow scan pictures would be feasible - much easier to fake, and also even better as a way of criticising the Soviet Union."

Answer: Well, the point is SHOWING UP achievement that never existed. They think that can convince people more with live TV

Answer 1

We do not have this device on the sun, that is true. However, we cannot determine the distance to the sun down to the millimeter.

Also another piece of evidence that the moon landings happened is the radio transmissions from the moon when the astronauts went there. It would have been pretty easy to triangulate and determine the point of origin of these transmissions. A few radio stations around the planet could have pulled this off easily. The Russians would have been wanting the landings to fail or be fake. They would have scrutinzed all of the available data. Checking the source of the transmissions would have probably been one of the first things they checked. However, no one came forward and declared that the transmissions came from someplace other than the moon.

Also, there is no one coming forward from the conspiracy to say it was fake. There would have to have been thousands of people involved to be able to pull this off. The astronauts, the people in mission control, the people putting together the sound stages and doing the special effects, the people organizing the whole thing. It would have been a very large number of people. However, they are not coming forward and talking of it being a hoax. In fact, they are pretty adamant that it was not a hoax. Think about it. The government at the time of the moon landings could not cover up the Watergate scandal. Why do you believe that they could cover up a moon landing hoax?

Next up, the technology was not there to be able to pull this off. Today we can fake all sorts of stuff and make it seem like people are walking on planets and moons and stuff. We have fancy computers that can get the job done. However, it still looks fake. Look at the movies from the moon. Imagine the set that would have been needed to pull off something like that. Imagine the lighting and the types of cameras to pull off these effects. Try to find a movie from the 70's or perhaps the 80's that can match this stuff from the moon. Also, remember that the moon is a near vaccuum. You do not see dust suspended in the air. However, when they were on the rover, you do see them kicking a lot of it up in the air but it all comes straight down. None of it hangs in the air. That can only happen in a near vaccuum. So, this sound set would also have to be very, very airtight.

Another thing is the video of the astronaut dropping the hammer and the feather at the same time. They both fall at the same rate and hit the ground at the same time. Just like physics predicts. However, this experiment can only happen in a vacuum. If there was air then the feather would fall at a slower rate due to air resistance. However, it did not. That means that it was dropped in a vacuum. More evidence that the stuff was not filmed on a sound stage.

You can believe the moon landings were a hoax but do not expect anyone else to believe it with you. There just is no proof that there was a hoax.

Answer 2

About ten years after the Moon landings, there was a belief floating around that the Russians had secretly landed on the Moon and it had been hushed up by the West to save embarrassment. I don't believe that for a second, and presumably you don't either. More recently, the belief that the Moon landings were faked has become more popular. I don't believe this either. To me, the two theories sound quite similar.

If the Moon landings were faked to establish US superiority over the Soviet Union, why did they not go on to fake a Mars mission? At the time, plans were announced to send people there in 1979, but nothing materialised. It would probably have been easier to fake a landing on Mars than on the Moon, because "live" TV pictures would have been completely impossible, and only slow scan pictures would be feasible - much easier to fake, and also even better as a way of criticising the Soviet Union.

At the time of the lunar landings, there was a general distrust of authority, yet i don't know anyone who questioned them at the time. This means that all those people who trusted governments about as far as they could throw them, nevertheless believed that people did land on the Moon.

Answer 3

Although my wife's father performed fuel calculations for the original Apollo landing, I'll spare you that speech. Instead, I will encourage you to watch two programs. The first show is called Conspiracy Moon Landing that it currently showing on the National Geographic Channel and it pretty much obliterates all of the popular conspiracy theories.

I would also encourage you to watch a movie called Capricorn One. Made it 1978, it is a fictional story about a fake mission to Mars. Although it is a science fiction story, it is a good example of how utterly impossible it would be to fake a moon landing for any length of time.

12 men walked on the moon from 1969 to 1972 and we have neither the resources nor the technology to pull off that big of a hoax for so long. Hundreds of thousands of people have worked on the space program. It would be far easier to put someone on the moon than to try and fake it and keep it secret for nearly 40 years.

The landings came at a time when our space program was ultra competitive with the former Soviet Union. Remember how big of a deal it was when Sputnik was put into orbit? They had the technology to monitor our moon shots and transmissions. Don't you think they would have called us out if they had evidence that it was all fake?

Perhaps the most definitive proof of our trip to the moon is what we left behind. For the last 35+ years, scientists have been beaming lasers to the moon and measuring the return times. How are they doing this? The beams are reflected back by equipment left on the moon on at 3 different locations.

Case closed.

Answer 4

Regardless of whether you think such measurements are important, they are being done all the time, in several Universities around the world. They bounce laser beams off the mirrors and time the return flash. That can't be done without a mirror. The Russians are using the mirrors the US placed there.

The hoax accusations are bunk. They capitalize on the uncritical and ill-informed gullibility of the public. All supposed "proofs" that we didn't go, have been thoroughly debunked. I don't just mean someone's say-so. Go see for yourself and decide who to believe after reading the facts. That rude, insulting, two-bit, hack journalist Sibrel, or the history books and the thousands of talented and dedicated people who made it all happen.

http://www.clavius.org/

You know, A.Mercer, as many times as I would have loved using that video, it's disappointing. It would be one of the best proofs of all IF you could tell for sure that the darn thing was a feather!

Juicy, sorry. Not true. No telescope can resolve any of the stuff that was left on the moon. Not even Hubble.

Answer 5

you have been staring on the incorrect movies then. it somewhat is a hundred% particular the six Apollo landings between 1969 and 1972 have been actual. human beings make the blunders of comparing a $a million,000 computing gadget on the instant to a million greenback mainframe that crammed a room in 1969 and had a techniques much less computing ability and say that proves technologies has stepped forward sufficient to make it less demanding to pass to the Moon on the instant. From this they bounce to the top that if it nevertheless too high priced and puzzling on the instant it would desire to have been impossible then. What they might desire to do is examine a $20,000 automobile on the instant that receives an identical MPG and has an identical precise velocity as a automobile costing $3,000 in 1969 and then comprehend that merely desktops (and all electronics technologies) has enjoyed marvelous advances jointly as autos (and all transportation technologies inclusive of rockets) have not. So it somewhat is merely as high priced and puzzling on the instant because it became into in 1969 and nevertheless no longer nicely worth to cost to maintain doing it. it somewhat is likewise why this way of excellent form of great robotic missions to planets have flown on the grounds that then. through fact the small, mild weight, and fairly in a position robotic area craft we are in a position to construct with stepped forward electronics technologies could be definitely despatched lots farther away than the Moon with the standard inefficient and severe priced rockets we are nevertheless utilising.

Answer 6

Why do you think its fake? We have all kinds of satellites orbiting in space which shows we have tremendous capabilities for space travel, etc. The first moon landing was on July 20, 1969 just 8 days after my first child was born. It was real. If you could have seen the astronauts when they returned, you would know without a doubt that they were not faking their enthusiasm. Much of the new technology and products that we have today resulted from the space program.

Answer 7

I don't understand why it's so hard to believe. We've accomplished much more complicated feats. Do you also believe there are no rovers on Mars? What about Voyager I, which was launched in '77, and is now a 30-year old system that is still sending data back to us from almost 10 billion miles away? The moon landing is only one of many great things nasa has done, things which no one will dispute. But they dispute the moon landing. It is silly.

Answer 8

Disputing history is no excuse for not learning it. The distance to the moon can be measured using lasers to the nearest 1/2 inch by bouncing the light from the retro-prisms that were left on the moon, but the distance to the sun is estimated using celestial observations and is only accurate to within about 200 miles.

It's depressing to think that there are that many people who can't grasp the fact that the Apollo missions actually happened. It makes our society seem useless to consist of so many idiots.

Answer 9

Do you seriously want me to believe that the U.S. guvmint could keep a secret that big for so long? This would include silencing the 50,000 people who worked on the Apollo project plus all their families. It would have to include fooling every professional and competent amateur astronomer. This is a government that couldn't even keep Watergate a secret and only 8 people knew about that! C,mon, wake up and be reasonable. You conspiracy theorists all have one thing in common... a blatant and total lack of basic knowledge.

Answer 10

Reflectors or no, how about the lunar lander?

With a fairly high-end telescope, under the right conditions, you can actually see the vehicle they left behind on the surface.

Now, you might say "They could have launched and landed that on autmoatic, with no humans onboard" But wouldn't that have been harder to do with the technology of 1969 than just sending a couple guys in a fancy tin can with a bottle rocket and a parachute?

Better yet, instead of dis-proving the landing, how about PROVING that it was fake. There must have been someone in the hundreds of cast and crew needed for the filming who has let somethign slip in the last forty years.