|
|
|
|
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Date: 7/2/2001 4:50:00 PM
From Authorid: 35185
I think they did go to the moon. I have heard the hox theories but if you think about it, the government had a hard enough time trying to coverup Roswell. I don't think they would have done that, though anything is possible. Angelica99  |
Date: 7/2/2001 5:07:00 PM
From Authorid: 35510
I don't know if they did or they didn't,I don't think that they have enough proof either way~cariosus  |
| Date: 7/2/2001 5:07:00 PM From Authorid: 38580 Well i heard that they astronauts dont go to the moon from my science teacher. and my science teacher is really smart. Have you ever noticed how all the landing sites look the same? Like the back ground always looks the same no matter where they are on the moon!!!! But the thing im wondering about is how they got the flag up there to start with? If they neevr went then how did the flag get there. Because i can look in my telescope and see the flag through the telescope so someone or something had to have gotten that flag up there. But what did? xoxo~ Lemon Chill |
|
Date: 7/2/2001 5:08:00 PM
From Authorid: 35510
Are you serious abotu being able to see the flag,I mean you can make out that its an actual flag?~cariosus |
Date: 7/2/2001 5:14:00 PM
From Authorid: 37150
I wondered about that 2. i dunno, but i think the astronauts did land, i mean, how could the gov't pull off a hoax like that? i mean eventually the truth would've been revealed & soooo many ppl would have been very upset. if u ever fig. the answer, plz post.~*~*Mayuka*~*~  |
|
Date: 7/2/2001 5:15:00 PM
From Authorid: 28623
Why wouldn't they have really gone to the moon I mean do you have any idea how much the hole making and launching of the aircraft cost? I cant see why they would spend all that money just to go up and then come right back down. Maybe the reason part of the movie look a little bogus was because it was made a long time ago and well less face it almost all older movies sucked and the scenery always looked unnatural, even if it was real. ~Corvus~  |
Date: 7/2/2001 5:20:00 PM
From Authorid: 32806
You would need a huge telescope to see the flag on the moon. The only people with the technology to do it is NASA. I see a program here in England just last week and it was pretty convincing that the moon landing was a hoax. How could they do it? Very easily when they are in control of all the pictures and sound. A few examples of the evidence. 1) No crater at the landing site. As the module would have had to use a rocket to slow its ascent there would be a crater underneath it...2) When the module relaunched there was no rocket trail as it took off from the moon..3) The shadows cast by rocks went in different directions and with only one source of light (the sun) all shadows cast should be parallel, so there was more than one source of light, they took no spotlights with them...4) In shots with the sun behind them the astronauts should be silhouettes but they could be clearly seen as if lit from infront. As was the module with the sun behind it, again it should be a black silhouette and yet you can read a sign on it quite clearly and see details of the craft that are facing away from the sun. 5) The pads/feet of the module should be covered in moon dust that would settle after the landing , they were spotless. 6) When you watch them walking around as if there is lower gravity you only have to double the playback speed and it looks like they are running under normal gravity.  Sagi 10  |
|
Date: 7/2/2001 5:30:00 PM
From Authorid: 35510
Most all the stuff you said sagi,an be explainable,if you go to this web site-> http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/ <-they do have lots of reasons why that stuff happened~cariosus |
|
Date: 7/2/2001 5:35:00 PM
From Authorid: 35510
But also if you go to -> http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html <- there is a picture on this web site that shows that neil armstrong had his sun visor raised while look directly at the sun which would have caused him to be blind instantly~cariosus |
Date: 7/2/2001 5:39:00 PM
From Authorid: 14197
I was watching some program on tv and they had some convincing evidence showing that it was all fake. With shadows pointing different ways, when there's only ONE light source.hmmmmm makes ya think  |
Date: 7/2/2001 6:01:00 PM
From Authorid: 27551
the easiest way to prove they went is to ask an australian working at parks at the time. just before the astronuats where due to land, they had to change radio recievers to receive the picture on earth, hence parks was in allignment and was the first place to receive the incoming pictures. If they faked the landing, then they are really good at faking radio signals, plus the fact that every ham radio operator around theworld was listening in on the conversation happening at the time. Yes they went, and yes they landed, and hopefully we will go again, you just never know. Tikarn  |
Date: 7/2/2001 6:05:00 PM
From Authorid: 11091
Lemon Chill, you kinda lost the debate when you falsified information. You can not see the flag through a telescope.  |
Date: 7/2/2001 6:07:00 PM
From Authorid: 31368
Another good point that show made (Encounter with the unexplained) was the cross hairs on the photos. The cross hairs are on the camera and are supposed to be cast over the picture at all times. Proving that a photo is real. The crosshairs in these photos are behind astronauts arms, behind shuttles and some arent even there. Another point was the flag that was flapping in the breeze even thought there is no atmosphere on the moon. Researchers have taken several pictures that were supposedly taken miles apart and laid them over each. The backgrounds are the exact same right down to a stone on the ground. There is a very good website about this theory and if I can find it I will put it here. ***Shelly***  |
Date: 7/2/2001 6:17:00 PM
From Authorid: 36994
uh..yeah they went to the moon...or again why would they fool us????well i believe they did..y,well because technology is taking its limits further......  |
Date: 7/2/2001 6:24:00 PM
From Authorid: 4883
Of course they did...It amazes me that people apply todays film and video capabilities to something done 32 years ago...Of course there are the moon rocks, the ham radio operators of the time can verify telemetry and the Landing sites all have retro reflectors that we use to this very day to bounce laser light from to give extremely accurate distance measurements with...Not to mention that if we hadn't landed there it was well within the soviets capability to verify and much in their favor to reveal... All the other things mentioned here can be easily explained but I am not going to re-invent the wheel... If you want all that explained go here... http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/ .... It explains it all quite well...  |
|
Date: 7/2/2001 6:34:00 PM
From Authorid: 31368
Here are a couple of sites. http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/photography.html http://www.dprins.demon.nl/moonhoax/exmoonhoax.html . One more thing that puzzles me is why hasn't anyone gone back. ***Shelly*** |
Date: 7/2/2001 7:15:00 PM
From Authorid: 38256
Ok first of all this is the argument that most of you used "there is only one light source" right? Wrong! There are many private sites that will explain this (not government sites either) search under moon hoax. Also as for the lack of stars in the pictures the photos had to be taken at such high speeds that the stars are not visable. All of the moon haoxers "theories" are explainable if you do your research. And the shows you talked about are extremely biast. and in response to Lemon Chill, my mom is a science teacher and she's really smart she says they did land on the moon and he could get fired for teaching you that. E-cutie86  |
|
Date: 7/2/2001 7:18:00 PM
From Authorid: 38256
P.S Shelly this is for you, they have gone back. |
Date: 7/2/2001 7:42:00 PM
From Authorid: 5886
In responce to Sagi 10... 1)The rocket didn't make a crator because there wasn't enough air pressure (since there isn't any air) to transfer the energy from the rocket to the dust. You put a fan on the moon, put it on high, face it toward the ground and not a speck will move. 2) Not sure about this one... but I'm guessing the trail was too dark to see against the dark backround. 3) If there were multiple light sources (i.e. spotlights), then there'd be double-shadows. The shadows appear to cross from the terrain, or shape of the rock casting them. The same thing happens on Earth too. 4) The Moon's surface is a bright grayish-white... ideal for reflecting light. Light from the moon would illuminate shadows... after all, you can read a newspaper at night when there's a full moon on Earth. 5) How can something "settle" when there is no air to hold it above the ground? Dust falls just as quick as a rock would. 6) If you were to run in those huge suits, you'd be falling every other step!  |
Date: 7/2/2001 9:18:00 PM
From Authorid: 27398
I believe that the astranauts did land on the moon, I just seem to think so. However, the government can actually hoax the thing. If you've been to one of those space exhibitions, there are stage shows that show the landing on the moon, they are simple to do, and they could easily use that for a hoax back then.  |
|
Date: 7/2/2001 10:12:00 PM
From Authorid: 21867
Yo, The footage we see of the landing is full of inaccuracies...little things such as the flag, footprints that AREN'T made by 'moon boots', sunvisor, movements, wiring of certain VITAL life support systems...all of this indicates that the footage delivered was hoaxed. Peace,  |
| Date: 7/3/2001 2:40:00 AM From Authorid: 21209 it was the space race with the ussr right? if america hadn`t got there, the ussr would have proved it by now....the 2 shadow thing is quite simple....the sun gives off light, and the earth reflects light just like the moon does for us.....i mean my dad who works as a proffeseur of physics has delt with moon rocks brought back by space probes...so there is the technology to get there... |
|
Date: 7/3/2001 12:29:00 PM
From Authorid: 31368
No one disagrees that there is technology to get to the moon. But have WE been there. Author 38256, Who went back and when? Seriously, I'm not being rude, I really want to know. One of the reasons these sites stated for thinking it was a hoax was that they have never gone back so I would be interested in any info otherwise. ***Shelly*** |
Date: 7/3/2001 7:35:00 PM
From Authorid: 30786
I think it really happened, and it doesn't hurt to dream about it. Don't crush my fantasies of going to the moon! *tear*  |
|
Date: 7/4/2001 5:19:00 AM
From Authorid: 27551
America went back several times, before it was decided that the moon had nothing to offer in way of information, however, they are having n other look at the moon, and possably another landing? still to get conformation on that though. Tikarn |
|
Date: 7/4/2001 5:45:00 AM
Do you realise how many people you are insulting when you say that we never went to the moon? Not only the astronauts, but also every single person involved in the Apollo program. How about the Apollo 13 astronauts? They were very close to being killed. Also Apollo 1 astronauts, what about their families? These 3 men died in the moon race. Are you saying that they died for nothing? Just go to http://www.badastronomy.com/ It has the answers to everyone of the bad hoax theories. The reason we haven't been back is basically because of the sheer cost. Right after Apollo 11, NASA's budget was severely cut. It basically has never got back to what it was then. The other reason is at the moment, there just isn't a viable reason to go. The background on the moon does not look the same, it just looks similar. If you go out into a desert here in Australia, take some photos, then go to a desert somewhere in the US, take some photos, they will look quite similar. But they are not the same. If you think NASA faked it then what was their reason for it? NASA had its budget cut so it couldn't have been about money. If it was to beat the USSR to the moon than they really didn't do that either, the US was the first and only to land humans there but the USSR landed probes there before the US. Before you blindly believe one way or another, just check facts with experts. You don't even have to say that its about the moon landings. Ask a professional photographer about exposure times, lens flare, and bleeding due to over-exposure. Don't mention anything about the moon, just ask if these things exist. They will tell you that they do. Then you can apply that information to NASA's photos. What about the flag appearing to flutter in the air on the moon. Wait, there is no air on the moon so the flag can't flutter, right? Wrong. What about Newton's first and third laws of motion? Hey, even if you don't want to believe Sir Isaac Newton, then how about this, the flags had metal rods sewn into the tops of them. One light source? Wrong again. The moon itself is a light source, if we can read in the light reflected by the full moon here on Earth, then don't you think that on the moon it would be very bright? So now we have two light sources on the moon, but wait, there's more! If you ring in the next 15 minutes you will receive a free, yes that's free, set of steak knives. Oh wait, I was talking about the moon wasn't I? The Earth is also a light source on the moon. That's 3 different light sources on the moon. But that's not even the point. Trust me, we've been to the moon and we will go back sometime in the future. I'm sorry for the length of my reply, I get carried away sometimes. |
Renasoft is the proud sponsor of the Unsolved Mystery Publications website.
See: www.rensoft.com Personal Site server, Power to build Personal Web Sites and Personal Web Pages
All stories are copyright protected and may not be reproduced in any form, except by specific written authorization
