Did man really walk on the moon in 1969 or was it staged?

Question

I'd just like your opinions please


Thanks!

What convinces you?

Answer 1

I have an open mind on the subject. Maybe, maybe not.

If they did land on the moon they took some serious risks in trying to beat the Russians. The Apollo missions were downright dangerous and it could very easily have all gone pear-shaped as with Apollo 13. Therefore, I believe that although America has been to the moon, the feat usually attributed to Neil Armstrong, probably belongs to someone else on a later mission.

You have to remember that Russia was way ahead of the USA in the space-race during the 1960s, and that If Apollo 11 had gone belly-up and the astronauts had been killed, that would have given the USSR the edge in the space race for good. America needed Apollo 11 to succeed, so what better way than to stage it, scare the Russians away from the moon and quietly land for real later without the glare of publicity. I wouldn't be surprised if the Apollo 11 "landing" was staged simply because America wasn't ready in 1969 - couldn't meet Kennedy's pledge, so they devised a cover-up until they were ready and could guarantee the mission would succeed. They were keen to beat the Russians, for sure, but they weren't reckless - the public would never have stood for it.

Answer 2

The very concept that they might pretend the moon landings, with the eyes of the completed worldwide on them, and now, 40 years later, the only people who've found out the certainty approximately this momentous feat are a retired chippie, a settlement action picture maker (and area time taxi motive force!) and a dozen or so social retards making you-tube movies of their bedrooms, whilst the scientific community have been thoroughly taken in by utilizing all of it, even all the geologists who've studied the rock samples, is purely stupid interior the severe. it would have taken 1000's, if no longer hundreds of persons to pretend the moonlandings, there is not any way this might have remained a secret for long.

Answer 3

I'm not convinced one way or another, but I do question the moon landing. I question the decision to send a man to the moon, a fruitless effort which would've cost a ton of money, while we must've been spending a fortune on the cold war.
I also wonder why Buzz Aldrin punched the guy who asked him to swear on the Bible that he landed on the moon.

As for why they would go through all the trouble to stage it, I ask why go through the trouble to land on the moon? Whatever the answer to that question is, add to that the fact that faking it is cheaper.

EDIT: I also wonder why they would just take it on blind faith that they are able to land on the moon successfully without first sending several probes to do massive studies that weren't done, and which still haven't been done to this day. One really important study would be to find out the impact rate of meteorites, yet they still don't know what the impact rate of meteorites is. Sending astronauts to the moon would've been like sending them to stand a shooting gallery for all anybody knew.

Answer 4

Well, I'm ancient and I was .....7 years old in 1969 and all I can remember about it was watching it in school and for some reason burst out laughing because for some weird reason my seven year old mind thought the astronauts suits looked funny. (blush) (and I got in trouble for it.) Yes, I'm pretty sure it was the real deal. If they could get away with such spiffy special effects in the late 60's, this country would've advanced much more than it has now!

Answer 5

The laser they shine at a specific place on the moon every day reflects back to earth *how exactly* if astronauts didn't leave a piece of kit on the moon?

Answer 6

I think it was fabricated. (a) Armstrong couldn't control the lander on earth, yet he flew and landed it with perfect accuracy on the "moon". (b) They only took fixed cameras with them, yet when the lander jetisoned itself off the surface, the camera pans out. (c) when they are approaching the moon in the lander, you get a good view of the craters as if they are several miles above the surface, then within 2 seconds they landed and not a speck of dust flew up from such a fast decent. (d) they took no lighting equipment with them, yet even though the lander steps were in complete darkness, you could see every detail of Armstrong making his descent. (e) who stepped onto the moon first to set up the camera?

Answer 7

I just heard of this controversy and I'd like to think they really did, but I need to look into it more. I just don't see why they would go through all the trouble to stage it.

Answer 8

Of course man had walked on the moon.
People that say he didn't are just jealous of Neil Armstrong or they don't know a diddly about anything. LOL!!!

Answer 9

I'm sure that they did. What convinces me; mainly because it would be harder to fake for all this time than do it in the first place. That and common sense.

Answer 10

I remember watching it on TV...I was too young to be impressed. I'd like to think it's true...but the horizon bothers me...why did it look like it was 200 yards away?