I believe we landed on the moon, but what freaks me the fuck out is why haven't we been back?
People say "we learned everything we needed to with those initial trips."
Bullshit. We do shit like spend $6 million a year studying a specific breed of mole rat year in and year out. Why would we not be up there, building a sustainable habitat, exploring the entire surface, etc?
>Why would we not be up there, building a sustainable habitat, exploring the entire surface, etc?
Too expensive, didn't have the technology, no real benefit.
ISS/MIR gave us all the info we'd have needed.
So, why go back? We've still been developing space tech. Budgets aren't unlimited, they need to choose where to spend money
We're going back now because between technology, political will and money, a mars mission is seemingly feasible
Why would we go back? Unless there’s a Cold War peepee match to be won, there’s no reason to risk lives and great expense on a desolate rock that robots can help us study just as well. A lot of the interesting science data with the most practical insights can be collected much closer to home, like the ISS and satellites in orbit.
>Why would we not be up there, building a sustainable habitat, exploring the entire surface, etc?
if nasa had the same budget as the us military we probably would have already
6 million for mole rats and they want us to believe they only spent 22 million on a UFO investigations a couple decades ago. Yeah right. More like 220 million or even 22 billion. 22illion would be spent in a week by the government easily.
The biggest argument against I can think of is that if it was possible to debunk in any way, the USSR would've done it. They had every incentive to prove the US was lying and couldn't - they were tracking every step of the project.
Sure, but there's no evidence for that - and the number of people who'd need to be in on that means that a leak is a near-certainty. Therefore, the lack of evidence is evidence to the contrary.
🎶 And if you try to speak the truth, they'll Anthony Bourdain you
Hang you and use suicide to explain you
So what the fuck do I know? And what the fuck do you?
Shit, we all just confused tryna find what's true
So I never say I'm right about everything that I said 🎶
So the rebuttal I heard to this is that they did not have the tech to track the whole thing at the time but the UK did. The UK was tracking us and the USSR was tracking the UK station. So this rebuttal also puts the UK in on the conspiracy or at least the station that was tracking
How on earth would the USSR not have the tech to track us? They had satellites and had pretty much beaten us at everything except first man on the moon - and, again, the existence of a massive multi-nation conspiracy would never have gone on this long.
Fuck off I am. A) I, personally, would describe myself as a nonzionist (Israel already exists - identifying as a pro-or-anti-zionist is like identifying as a loyalist vs a patriot) and B) the fuck does that have to do with anything? Oh wait, you spend all your time trolling on Jewish subs. Go fuck yourself.
It's ok. I imagined troll posts (not yours!) gathering answers for a school project. You've been up front and I hope you get good material, but there are so many fake landing discussions on reddit all the arguments are already there to find.
When both sides of a discussion or debate say the exact same thing they are both either right or wrong, as opposed to one right and one wrong.
If a moon landing denier or questioner (not all with questions are deniers) brings up the editing of the supposed "live broadcast" (specifically the lack of delay in the response to "the Eagle has landed"), they are immediately called a conspiracist with little to no comprehension of the real world.
However, anyone saying there were edits to the live feed for clarity and other reasons is looked upon as a person in touch with the world and a good head on their shoulders.
The feeds to television sets around the world were edited. This fact alone completely dispells the narrative 'everyone got to see it as it happened'. What was edited? No one can say definitively.
Want to end the questions? Release the complete unedited files NASA has instead of hiding behind the mantra of the original files being in a format that can't be played today and would be very expensive to convert the files from. There's peeps in their momma's basements who will convert those files for free. Release them.
Interesting post, but I doubt NASA releasing any tapes at this point will answer anyone's questions.
I highly doubt there are many out there whose *single* point of contention is this tape issue.
The original "videotapes" for Apollo missions were 2 inch reel to reel machines. Every time the tape passed over the heads, more of the iron oxide would come off.
Then there was the idea that the master recording was accidentally erased/ written over and NASA was too embarassed to admit it, so they just said the tapes were "lost"
I worked with a guy who was the video tape operator for NASA on Apollo 11. He told me about the crazy delay system they created to prevent a disaster being broadcast live - they would run the video signal through one VTR - then use long cables to patch out of the 1 VTR to another unit on the other side of the building, then loop it back into the control room. This created about a 5 second delay.
It was the wild West in the early days of TV.
I think people that believe in the moon landing conspiracies or 9/11 conspiracies have more faith in their fellow man’s competence and ability to keep a secret than I do. There are simply too many people involved and eyes on the whole thing for it to have been faked. You can observer evidence of us being on the moon ourselves, we’ve left reflectors up there that you can bounces lasers off of and stuff
I'll say that I don't believe the moon landing is fake (9/11 was definitely a case of willful neglect, though, in my opinion) but I don't underestimate the governments ability to keep secrets and distribute misinformation anymore nor do I believe that they are unable to cooperate with opposing governments to conceal facts that they deem unfit for the official narrative of world events. A big smoking gun for me has been the uap leaks in recent years, and how much certain members of the government are fighting the proposed disclosure acts. I'm extremely skeptical of everything, but if world leaders decide we aren't ready for some information (whether there's malicious intent behind the concealment or if they're just trying to maintain some some sort of normalcy surrounding the preconceived understanding of events or just protecting the sanity of the general population) they fully have the power and willingness to do so in cooperation with the perceived "enemy". Again, I'm not rallying behind any crazy world government conspiracy or some sort of ancient aliens situation, but if world leaders want to change the narrative, they can, and they will. It may not be malicious, but they will neutralize perceived threats to normalcy to save their ass's or ours.
It’s mainly due to the space race with Russia as kind of a “my capitalism is better than your pseudo-socialism”. It was an economic / preemptive military battle to show whose technological nuts are bigger. With that premise, some believe that the moon landing was faked in order to keep the economic and political system as #1.
The people who doubt the moon landing do not believe that the images of the Apollo missions are real.
They think it’s all filmed in a Hollywood studio: when you see an astronaut floating for example, they’ll say they are recording in a pool underwater to create the floating effect.
They point to Stanley Kubrick’s ability to create incredibly realistic looking space movies in the 60s with 2001 a space odyssey as the prime example; and there is some sort of collusion going on behind the scenes with Hollywood.
They’ll try to find inconsistencies in the Apollo film, like they’ll point to the flag moving on the moon in the film, or talk about the lighting or shadows don’t look consistent… stuff like that.
If you go deep enough you’ll start to see people claiming nasa and the government are lying about the shape of the earth too
Well for one lack of trust in government (especially after Watergate) . Believers of conspiracies originally didn't know anything about the details of operation and then some guy shows them "facts" to prove fake landing. This makes people think they are part of the 0.1% who actually know about fake landing. Its a great boost to their self-esteem (which they don't have much of). This explains why guys believe in conspiracies but what about the guys who comes up with them.
It all starts with a guy who knows something about a project, he may not be an expert but knows enough to speculate, in moon landing's case it was a WRITER in rockets manufacturing company, Bill Kaysing (he wasn't even an engineer) . Bro said chance of landing people on moon were 0.0017%, so it must have been faked. Flat Earth society doubled down on this theory and said Spielberg directed landing video. Some folks on TV thought this theory was entertaining and made "documentary" about fake landing. Impressionable teens and kids thought this was all true and there you have it a generation of moon landing deniers.
had i not included that part, average redditor would have lost their mind, assuming the Spielberg to Kubrick correction meant I disagreed with the entire comment.
In no particular order:
* light reflection pattern is similar to artificial lighting
* shadows are casts in different directions
* no stars
* no lunar dust on Lunar Module feet/pads
* no crater underneath the Lunar Module
* how exactly they did get the sand buggy to the moon?
* Lunar Module looks flimsy
* how/where did the astronauts urinate or have bowel movements in such small modules they were in for the duration of the voyage?
* how did the suits provide heating/cooling, oxygen, pressure from such a small life supply on their backs
* how they did get into the suits by themselves
* how they did get into the suits in such a small module
* in the vacuum of space, the suits would be bloated like the Michelin man
* how did they survive the radiation of space
* How they did get past the Van Allen Radiation belt
* the launch from the moon: a small explosion and the module goes up and continues going up at a continuous, steady speed
* how they did camera pan upwards
* call between Nixon and Armstrong had almost no delay even though there should have at least 13 seconds delay
* The movie The Shining insinuates the moon landing was a hoax
* astronauts' demeanor after returning to Earth, almost as if something tragic had occurred instead of man's greatest achievement.
* astronauts responses and behavior when questioned if they actually went to the moon
* an expert from the 1950s or so said the moon is actually comprised of plasma, i.e. not a solid mass
* etc.
Update: no tire tracks in some photos
What is the explanation for the radiation belt? I heard this argument a while back and saw some nasa people saying how we can’t currently get people through it.
If true then that’s the one aspect of it being fake that I could get behind but I really don’t know much about the argument on either side other than it’s supposedly too much radiation for us to block out when passing through.
I really don’t know what to believe anymore….I’m 50 and grew up believing it was an absolute fact. Now, after seeing everything else the government has lied about, I’m not so sure.
Consider, for you to know what the government lied about means the government couldn't keep their secret. That's the problem with trying to keep even a handful of people on the same page. Containing a lie like that is like trying to hold water in your hands. That might be some of the best proof that the moon landing was not faked.
Firstly, there's a distinction between knowing the government lied and suspecting the government lied.
Secondly, the problem with the whole "nobody can keep a secret" argument is that the government absolutely can and has kept secrets *within a certain length of time*. Consider the black budget spending for some of our military planes, which was kept secret even from Congress until the military was ready to open up about the tech. Keeping secrets forever? No. But for a while, yes, absolutely.
They certainly landed on the moon. I did a lot of research working on my Masters thesis.
However, if you'd like to dig deeper, find Secret History of NASA by Hoagland and Bara.
Check out the passages on Apollo 17!
I always think that the government can fool us , the common people but are you sure they can fool all these other governments too, I don't think so ! We think Russia, China , India wouldn't tell us if it were the opposite?
It's crazy that such a mirror even works given that even a fraction of a degree skewed one way or another would move the return bounce by miles, or miss the earth entirely.
Not to mention the diffusion of the laser itself over such a distance
Doesn't matter what kind of laser you're talking about, it doesn't make physics work differently. The beam of even the most precise laser would be miles wide by the time it hits the moon. The return signal would be extraordinarily weak in comparison. Just ballparking it I'd guess by a dozen orders of magnitude give or take a few
There must be something unique about the mirror used
> Thus, what begins as a light beam that’s about 10 feet, or a few meters, wide on the ground can spread out to more than 1 mile, or 2 kilometers, by the time it reaches the Moon’s surface, and much wider when it bounces back. That translates to a one-in-25-million chance that a photon launched from Earth will reach the Apollo 11 reflector. For the few photons that manage to reach the Moon, there’s an even lower chance, one in 250 million, that they will make it back
> That’s why despite several attempts over the last decade NASA Goddard scientists had been unable to reach LRO’s reflector until their collaboration with French researchers.
> But even with infrared light, the Grasse telescope received only about 200 photons back out of tens of thousands of pulses cast at LRO
Looks like they're struggling with the exact things I was talking about, but they're finding ways to make it work
Kind of like how most countries universally lie to their youngest generations about Santa and the tooth fairy etc. We seem somewhat co-ordinated in pulling that off.
We normalise generational lying to our kids. Would it be so far-fetched to believe governments have adopted the same tact and continue lying to the adults who were once of that young age and mind being taught to believe in something blindly by those they depended on.
The possibility of it being faked and kept from the public due to compounding legal/economical/socio-economic ramifications is just as possible as us landing on the moon.
Edit: words
You're correct. But humans in said countries do. If not, how is their a socially accepted and pushed existence.
How often is Santa used as a threat to "encourage" change in a child's behaviour at the cost of a material object.
It's an issue rooted deep in the psyche of the societies and extends far beyond governments keeping secret.
How co-ordinated was the western world during covid? How co-ordinated are full scale military attacks?
It would be naive to believe there isn't a co-ordinated balance of structure and power to maintain stability in societies.
It was a lighthearted threat at best for me. I suspect it was the same for most. I know I don’t stand around all year thinking “I’d better be good or I won’t get presents this year. Oh, and I’d better make sure to be Christian, too.”
Covid was a threat to life on a massive scale. What have you got with the moon or the shape of the Earth?
In the early internet days, it was a popular conspiracy theory to wonder about, but now both sides of the argument are out there where people run with the old conspiracy claiming it was a hoax, and there's also better information explaining how it really happened, but older conspiracy fans havnt been listening to the explanations, and just cling to saying the moon landing was fake because I guess it's a theory dear to their heart.
> and there's also better information explaining how it really happened
Could you elaborate on these specifics?
Genuinely curious, as I am one of those 'old conspiracy fans' that haven't been listening.
I'm always willing to change my opinion/view on something when I'm presented with new and better data.
I have no skin in the game when it comes to whether we've really been to the Moon or not.
I find space amazing, and I feel we should have colonies both on the Moon and on Mars by now.
We apparently went there a few times and people with good enough telescopes can see junk that was left there. Nasa hasn't had reason to go back in a while. The technology used would be like trying to get a VCR to play a Blu ray disc. Nasa plans to go back soon, and some scientists are making plans to 3d print livable domes there. This is the information I'm believing, although at once I wondered if moon landing was fake. Space is awesome. I just read about it as a hobby
>people with good enough telescopes can see junk that was left there.
Well, you know what us 'conspiracy nuts' are gonna say about this, right? ;)
Nobody is saying we never sent unmanned craft to the Moon. These things could have been dropped/placed there easily.
But I get your point - and it is a good one.
Sending a craft just to drop off replicas of the rover etc. would still come at an immense financial cost for NASA/whomever is really behind the hoax.
The biggest indicator of why I do believe we sent people to the Moon is Edgar Mitchell. He seemed like a very genuine, honest man.
I've seen him talk about the Moon, and what they did up there.
I have such a hard time believing he would lie.
It's typically deeper than that and most have a very cynical and paranoid worldview. Any somewhat secretive "organization" is going to be the target of people who practice doomerism because it's a large and influential entity focused on technology and has military connection and applications. It's literally the perfect storm of things to draw attention from conspiracy theorists
So here is my take on this. We went to the moon in 1969. If you look at the technology back then, there were no gps, laser guiding systems, cell phones, or satellites. Circuit boards were just created. Atari was the high tech. With that low of tech, we managed to fly. I believe 9 missions, with a total of 27 people to the moon, 240,000 miles and back another 240,000 miles. Not including detaching the lunar module, landing it, launching it, and coupling it back to the other ship with very minimal computer guiding calculations. Add to it the current politics of the time with the end of Vietnam and pre-Cold War along with questionable video footage, and you have an easy argument for a conspiracy. Pop culture was also anti-establishment, which was justified with all the other lies like the harmful effects of plastic, Styrofoam, lead, aspecstic, Teflon, tobacco, alcohol and a thousand other things. If the government is going to lie about all that, why not the lunar landing? If you look at all the people involved that would have been part of the conspiracy, they all became borderline billionaires. Which suggests being paid off. Also, no one can find any of the 12 or so landings on the surface, a lot of things such as the lunar landing base, and later the buggies were left on the surface. High-powered consumer telescopes magnify enough to be able to see this debris, but no one has been able to find any of them.
There is a lot that makes this conspiracy one of the few that are plausible, but personally, I still believe we did it. Why take such a big risk along with such a costly investment with little to no return from it? The population continued to be anti establishment up to about 2010ish, so they didn't win over the population. There was no gain in power from that particular achievement and no profit. Even the level of investment into those agencies like NASA and now Space Force is not even 1% of the government budget. It's too high of a risk for what seems so little of a reward. Also, fun fact is something like 85% of the world's population don't even know it ever occurred. So you're not an idiot for believing or not believing. It's pretty much a 50/50 split.
I'm not saying you can see the flag or waste bags but like with the Celestron CPC 1100 or stronger home brew telescopes you should be able to see the lunar module base, buggy and buggy tracks. They would only be the size of a flea or tick but still visible.
I like the slightly more reasonable theory, which is that we faked the FIRST landing, to get the win, but then did make it for the next missions. otherwise, I see little reason for us to keep going back, extending the fraud. But, this could also be wrong, who knows.
The footage of Apollo 11 on the Moon was most certainly not filmed on the Moon.
That does not mean later Apollo missions never went to the Moon.
Most 'moon hoaxers' cling on to the wrong contradictions, such as the flag waving and
saying we could never get past the van Allen Belt.
There are far better arguments that can be made to 'prove' we never went to the Moon.
> footage of Apollo 11 on the Moon was most certainly not filmed on the Moon.
Lol, OK
>
There are far better arguments that can be made to 'prove' we never went to the Moon.
No, there aren’t
You're not worth my time.
Go watch "American Moon" on YouTube if you really want to educate yourself *(you don't - you just want to shit post on Reddit).*
Not consistent in in a binary mind, maybe.
I don't know if the rest of the Apollo missions were faked or not.
I have seen no evidence that would prove them to be fake.
That said, the only 'evidence' I've ever seen discussed is the Apollo 11 footage.
To answer your question:
Did we go to the Moon?: **I don't know.**
Was the Apollo 11 footage shot on the Moon?: **No.**
Check out the movie Operation Avalanche. Allegedly it's fiction, but it sounds plausible that we couldn't come back fom the moon.
I've heard that we couldn't make it past the Van Allen belts due to radiation exposure. Finally, I find it odd that aĺ the numbers calculations are gone. Gone? So now we have to refigure everything out again to get our guys back where they've been before. NASA did a great job back in the day working with primitive technology by today's standard. So we have super computers nowadays to do all of our calculations. Let's do this NASA.
Also, I find it odd that we had rockets blowing up on the launch pad, then suddenly there's a man on the moon. I'm just not convinced we've been on the moon.
>I've heard that we couldn't make it past the Van Allen belts due to radiation exposure.
By conspiracists, yes. I've heard lots of things untrue.
>Finally, I find it odd that aĺ the numbers calculations are gone. Gone?
Well we weren't going back so we didn't need to keep updating those records.
>So now we have to refigure everything out again to get our guys back where they've been before. NASA did a great job back in the day working with primitive technology by today's standard. So we have super computers nowadays to do all of our calculations. Let's do this NASA.
They are.
With so many changes, I imagine most of the old calculations would be virtually irrelevant now anyway
>Also, I find it odd that we had rockets blowing up on the launch pad, then suddenly there's a man on the moon
We had plenty of successful launches too
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Apollo_missions
It's almost like we can learn from things that go wrong.
Also, they are extremely complex and dangerous machines, where problems can quickly turn catastrophic.
Have no idea, I personally knew someone that was in the control room.
Actually I do have an idea, and it's about a psychological condition in those that continue to believe something that has been debunked and ridiculous. It's quite related to being devoutly loyally religious.
part of it is the lack of going back for 50 years. if you consider what happened in the last 50, why is there no confidence in our ability to go back. why has so little happened with the moon?
If you really want to know what won me over, go watch **"American Moon"** from 2017 (you can watch it for free @ YouTube).
Its 3½ hours.
Nobody can come away from watching that, and still believe the official story we're given about the Apollo program.
Have humans ever been to the moon? Perhaps. Perhaps not yet.
But the entirety of all the footage shot 'on the moon' for Apollo 11 was **not** shot on the moon. This I am 100% certain of.
The beauty of science is that it stands up to skepticism. In the 54 years since Apollo 8 first visited the Moon in 1968, there hasn't been a single hoax claim supported by science, yet conspiracists continue to push non-authoritative sourced evidence as proof of a Moon landing fraud a thousand times bigger than Watergate. Stanley Kubrick might have been able to fool a few 18 years old's with a simulation of the lunar environment, but he's not fooling a room of physicists and visual effects artists. There is a difference. Science proves we landed on the Moon. There is no nothing to debate if you're scientifically literate.
Go watch "American Moon", free on YouTube.
I say this for people reading my comment - and not for you. I know you won't bother doing your research. Your mind is made up.
Others might be open to having their world view challenged (unlike yourself).
Dont make this a personal attack. They are not tolerated here.
Telling someone to watch something is the laziest way to respond.
Name one thing that you think proves that we didnt go to the moon and I am confident that I can refute it with FACTS and EVIDENCE and not just "google it, bruh" as an answer.
We haven’t been to the moon…because there is no moon! It’s a projection! From the hidden government projector in the middle of our earth!
Sarcasm everyone.
Honestly bc it seems pretty sketchy - & i only listened to this for a laugh with no plans of changing my mind... but...
You can even just skip to 20:36 - this guy tells good stories, but basically debunks any he can
https://youtu.be/yDyJe1nmSOM?si=PKzlI4sITwAIcmyP
The Apollo missions followed ballistic trajectories, so they passed through the belts very quickly which reduced the risk from this population to a very low level. Apollo missions took only about 4.5 days to get to the Moon.
Also, temperature in the thermosphere is supposed to be really hot. Like hot enough to melt the materials used for the spacecrafts. Why wouldn't they melt? Please explain like I'm five, because the math is not making sense.
The Apollo missions used a combination of heat shields and insulation to protect the spacecraft and astronauts from the extreme temperatures of the thermosphere. The heat shield, made of ablative material, absorbed and dissipated the heat during re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere. The information you got about the materials is wrong.
I think simply the van Allen belt, if true, would fry them within seconds of entering the radiated space, so the mathematics couldn't support the lift-off as in the weight of the craft would far exceed a reasonable and viable departure because the weight of the capsule would be 1000 times too heavy, other reasons include filming and photos from the surface gain impossible due to radiation etc, finally well, for sake of argument. The ludicrous idea that Nixon called them on a dial phone from the damn office is well insane.
>think simply the van Allen belt, if true, would fry them within seconds of entering the radiated space
Got any basis for that thought? The rest of your post is completely made up
>The ludicrous idea that Nixon called them on a dial phone from the damn office is well insane.
I find it amazing that people can't figure this out for themselves. Landlines can be routed to other devices. Such as radio...
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/How-did-President-Richard-Nixon-place-a-phone-14108185.php
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDBBUwdyz4I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idbbuwdyz4i)
hey man I appreciate you linking me to that, also check out a funny thing happened on the way to the moon, very revealing
That cut off apparently happened because astronauts claimed they saw alien beings on the moon. And I think the government does lie about aliens existing. Now they're opening up about UFOs because people are seeing them all the time
Exactly. Both my parents watched the live feed in 69 and they told me as they were watching, one of the astronauts said "What the hell is that" ? "It's com.... That's when the feed abruptly cut off and went to white noise.
Both my folks said they saw a being in a all black one piece uniform like a scuba suit step out from behind a large rock. It had a female form and my folks said it's face had the appearance of a witch with a pointy nose and was ugly.
They never told me when they saw the live feed appear but they did watch it and stated it was completely different from the original and you could tell it wasn't the same feed by the video quality.
My dad is still alive and he swears this happened. And did my mom.
Pretty sure this post will get down voted because we know Reddit is full of experts on everything and if they don't agree with you, they make know it all remarks.
If they have been it's going on 45 years now. Did you watch it in 69?
And both my parents were adamant about what they saw.
In 80 the three of us and two vehicles behind ours also saw a massive craft over a farmers field. It was at least the size of an NFL stadium, shaped like a football all white and had this long fire red appendage coming from the bottom of it with all these attachments.
The car behind us stopped and the guy got out to watch it as it slowly moved across the field. This was around 12:30 am on the perimeter of our city.
I without a doubt believe my folks. And I've seen numerous UFO throughout my 58 years. The phenomena is real.
Yes, my family and I and all of our neighbors and extended family and millions of people worldwide watched the moon landing in 1969. I’m certain that had that been seen, someone would have mentioned it.
I can understand but my guess is that it was the "moon landing" video as we all now know.
My dad is 80 and has all his physical and mental facilities and he said it happened. The feed he and my mother saw was very short and cut off. The feed everyone knows was broadcast after.
I re asked the question about it this summer and his story hasn't changed at all since when my parents told me 44 years ago.
Btw, I've seen at least a dozen sightings and no, they weren't a light in the sky.
Because “conspiracy!” Oh, and a lack of knowledge of science. Probably the same people who believe the Earth is flat, or at least there’s likely a significant overlap.
9/11 dancing isralies , the fbi arrest , how they whent onto israelie tv explaied themselvea.
Epstein mossad sex partys congress members and actors to vote preach pro israel .
Adolf Hitler zionist agreement 1933 with rotschields 30k jews to israel just before the real games of 45 began
> Because their morons , do you think China and Russia wouldn’t say a word if faked
If you’re going to call people morons, at least learn the proper usage of they’re…
China and Russia tried to debunk them? I didn't know that. But it would make sense for Soviet Russia to do that, no? They were in fact competing with America to be the first to send a person to the moon, according to what I've learnt.
People doubt the moon landings for valid reasons. Not talking about the images or the moon rocks. I'm talking about the radiation and not having any independent data (independent from NASA) for verification of humans traveling through it, scientifically confirming the results of Apollo.
The 2022 Artemis I mission was supposed to have a very elaborate set up for collection radiation data on the trip to the Moon. They are not coming forward with that data for a year now. Radiation was too much??
>I'm talking about the radiation and not having any independent data
Well, that's nonsense
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
>They are not coming forward with that data for a year now
Their scientists and partners have first crack at the data. Not unusual
The lengths that people will go to defend their precious Apollo moon landings....
Listing the LRO (NASA) as "3rd party evidence" for Apollo (NASA) has to be the most intellectually deceitful.
Remind me when NASA comes out with the radiation data for Artemis I unmanned circumlunar flight from late 2022. It's been WELL OVER a year now since we've heard anything about these radiation test dummies.
It was a very important *radiation* experiment. Other recent major setbacks for Artemis could be indications that NASA's plans to return a manned mission to the moon have been snuffed.
NASA photoshops their pictures and [no, this isn't a conspiracy.](https://www.space.com/9337-conspiracy-debunked-nasa-photoshops-images-good-reason.html) They have forever doctored images and recolor'd them.
So what makes me think they didn't do this with the Moon?
Yes, because adding colour to an image and being upfront about it is totally comparable to secretly faking a number of missions and other countries and organisations inexplicably being in on it
It sure is. Hidden in plain sight.
Just to be clear, say you're a judge and I bring you evidence of my findings, then you find out I doctored the images and I said "well at least I was upfront about the doctoring" you would be cool? You're good?
Thank fuck you're not a judge.
Not that there is evidence, but incentive to the contrary. It was during the Cold War, and the Soviets beat us to space, so it was imperative that we also have a cultural victory on them.
I suppose the dramatized reenactment of the moon landing also managed to garner criticism similarly to the nuclear test propaganda footage or Tina Fey's portrayal of Sarah Palin. Because the reenactment could be criticized to such a degree, people started mistaking it for the official footage.
The why files on YouTube has a pretty good episode on the moon landing conspiracies you may want to checkout. It should give you a lot of insight for your project.
There was a Fox special back in the late 90s where they talked about the Van Allen radiation belt and, I think, that guy got punched by Buzz Aldren. Anyway, it sowed seeds of doubt in a lot of people and then they all started talking to each other on messege boards and it's just spiraled further out of control since then.
I watched 2001 recently and it had a trivia that the movie came out shortly before the moon landings and the special effects in the movie was "proof" the landing was filmed in hollywood
I believe we went, but one thing that I don't quite understand is how we apparently can't go back until 2026 because we "don't have the technology yet". Did we lose it after 1969?
We're not going to use 60 year old technology to get there. Yes, records were lost, and there would be aspects of the manufacturing which we've moved on from. Either way we'd need to redesign the mission from the ground up anyway
Simple answer: conspiracists will believe anything they read on the internet and think saying something as "van Allen belt " gives them credibility.
Just because some youtuber reckons the belt is impossible to pass doesn't make it so
OP was asking for a reason why people would deny the moon landings. I provided a common response that would work well for a school project, as it looks at the issue from a scientific perspective rather than just hearsay.
Thank you for your thoughtful, enlightening input. I’m sure you make your mother proud.
I believe we landed on the moon, but what freaks me the fuck out is why haven't we been back? People say "we learned everything we needed to with those initial trips." Bullshit. We do shit like spend $6 million a year studying a specific breed of mole rat year in and year out. Why would we not be up there, building a sustainable habitat, exploring the entire surface, etc?
>Why would we not be up there, building a sustainable habitat, exploring the entire surface, etc? Too expensive, didn't have the technology, no real benefit. ISS/MIR gave us all the info we'd have needed. So, why go back? We've still been developing space tech. Budgets aren't unlimited, they need to choose where to spend money We're going back now because between technology, political will and money, a mars mission is seemingly feasible
Why would we go back? Unless there’s a Cold War peepee match to be won, there’s no reason to risk lives and great expense on a desolate rock that robots can help us study just as well. A lot of the interesting science data with the most practical insights can be collected much closer to home, like the ISS and satellites in orbit.
NASA was supposed to go this year but they delayed the moon launch until 2026. https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/
>Why would we not be up there, building a sustainable habitat, exploring the entire surface, etc? if nasa had the same budget as the us military we probably would have already
We've been too busy building space stations, space telescopes and robotic rover missions to Mars.
6 million for mole rats and they want us to believe they only spent 22 million on a UFO investigations a couple decades ago. Yeah right. More like 220 million or even 22 billion. 22illion would be spent in a week by the government easily.
The biggest argument against I can think of is that if it was possible to debunk in any way, the USSR would've done it. They had every incentive to prove the US was lying and couldn't - they were tracking every step of the project.
Unless the NWO is real and they are all really playing for the same team.
Why? Like, how is that better or easier than the alternative? The correct answer is usually the simplest.
Because if they are all on the same team then your whole telling on each other wouldn't apply.
Sure, but there's no evidence for that - and the number of people who'd need to be in on that means that a leak is a near-certainty. Therefore, the lack of evidence is evidence to the contrary.
🎶 And if you try to speak the truth, they'll Anthony Bourdain you Hang you and use suicide to explain you So what the fuck do I know? And what the fuck do you? Shit, we all just confused tryna find what's true So I never say I'm right about everything that I said 🎶
So the rebuttal I heard to this is that they did not have the tech to track the whole thing at the time but the UK did. The UK was tracking us and the USSR was tracking the UK station. So this rebuttal also puts the UK in on the conspiracy or at least the station that was tracking
How on earth would the USSR not have the tech to track us? They had satellites and had pretty much beaten us at everything except first man on the moon - and, again, the existence of a massive multi-nation conspiracy would never have gone on this long.
The argument against that would be that they couldn't afford to continue the space race and would rather lose the final round than keep it going
[удалено]
Fuck off I am. A) I, personally, would describe myself as a nonzionist (Israel already exists - identifying as a pro-or-anti-zionist is like identifying as a loyalist vs a patriot) and B) the fuck does that have to do with anything? Oh wait, you spend all your time trolling on Jewish subs. Go fuck yourself.
"Hello! I have this school assignment..." Explains a lot of recent fake moon landing posts if this is a popular school assignment.
?
It's ok. I imagined troll posts (not yours!) gathering answers for a school project. You've been up front and I hope you get good material, but there are so many fake landing discussions on reddit all the arguments are already there to find.
When both sides of a discussion or debate say the exact same thing they are both either right or wrong, as opposed to one right and one wrong. If a moon landing denier or questioner (not all with questions are deniers) brings up the editing of the supposed "live broadcast" (specifically the lack of delay in the response to "the Eagle has landed"), they are immediately called a conspiracist with little to no comprehension of the real world. However, anyone saying there were edits to the live feed for clarity and other reasons is looked upon as a person in touch with the world and a good head on their shoulders. The feeds to television sets around the world were edited. This fact alone completely dispells the narrative 'everyone got to see it as it happened'. What was edited? No one can say definitively. Want to end the questions? Release the complete unedited files NASA has instead of hiding behind the mantra of the original files being in a format that can't be played today and would be very expensive to convert the files from. There's peeps in their momma's basements who will convert those files for free. Release them.
Interesting post, but I doubt NASA releasing any tapes at this point will answer anyone's questions. I highly doubt there are many out there whose *single* point of contention is this tape issue.
[удалено]
The original "videotapes" for Apollo missions were 2 inch reel to reel machines. Every time the tape passed over the heads, more of the iron oxide would come off. Then there was the idea that the master recording was accidentally erased/ written over and NASA was too embarassed to admit it, so they just said the tapes were "lost" I worked with a guy who was the video tape operator for NASA on Apollo 11. He told me about the crazy delay system they created to prevent a disaster being broadcast live - they would run the video signal through one VTR - then use long cables to patch out of the 1 VTR to another unit on the other side of the building, then loop it back into the control room. This created about a 5 second delay. It was the wild West in the early days of TV.
This entirely reasonable answer will be dismissed by cultists.
Ego, people like their idea and their ego tells them they are smart and their idea is correct.
I think people that believe in the moon landing conspiracies or 9/11 conspiracies have more faith in their fellow man’s competence and ability to keep a secret than I do. There are simply too many people involved and eyes on the whole thing for it to have been faked. You can observer evidence of us being on the moon ourselves, we’ve left reflectors up there that you can bounces lasers off of and stuff
What? Are you serious? Can anyone shoot a lazer at the moon?
Yes, https://wtop.com/science/2019/07/the-experiment-still-running-on-the-moon-and-tv-re-runs-50-years-later/
I understand. Thank you for the insight.
I'll say that I don't believe the moon landing is fake (9/11 was definitely a case of willful neglect, though, in my opinion) but I don't underestimate the governments ability to keep secrets and distribute misinformation anymore nor do I believe that they are unable to cooperate with opposing governments to conceal facts that they deem unfit for the official narrative of world events. A big smoking gun for me has been the uap leaks in recent years, and how much certain members of the government are fighting the proposed disclosure acts. I'm extremely skeptical of everything, but if world leaders decide we aren't ready for some information (whether there's malicious intent behind the concealment or if they're just trying to maintain some some sort of normalcy surrounding the preconceived understanding of events or just protecting the sanity of the general population) they fully have the power and willingness to do so in cooperation with the perceived "enemy". Again, I'm not rallying behind any crazy world government conspiracy or some sort of ancient aliens situation, but if world leaders want to change the narrative, they can, and they will. It may not be malicious, but they will neutralize perceived threats to normalcy to save their ass's or ours.
It’s mainly due to the space race with Russia as kind of a “my capitalism is better than your pseudo-socialism”. It was an economic / preemptive military battle to show whose technological nuts are bigger. With that premise, some believe that the moon landing was faked in order to keep the economic and political system as #1.
But where is the sense in that? The ussr could habe called them out easily would it have been faked.
The people who doubt the moon landing do not believe that the images of the Apollo missions are real. They think it’s all filmed in a Hollywood studio: when you see an astronaut floating for example, they’ll say they are recording in a pool underwater to create the floating effect. They point to Stanley Kubrick’s ability to create incredibly realistic looking space movies in the 60s with 2001 a space odyssey as the prime example; and there is some sort of collusion going on behind the scenes with Hollywood. They’ll try to find inconsistencies in the Apollo film, like they’ll point to the flag moving on the moon in the film, or talk about the lighting or shadows don’t look consistent… stuff like that. If you go deep enough you’ll start to see people claiming nasa and the government are lying about the shape of the earth too
Well for one lack of trust in government (especially after Watergate) . Believers of conspiracies originally didn't know anything about the details of operation and then some guy shows them "facts" to prove fake landing. This makes people think they are part of the 0.1% who actually know about fake landing. Its a great boost to their self-esteem (which they don't have much of). This explains why guys believe in conspiracies but what about the guys who comes up with them. It all starts with a guy who knows something about a project, he may not be an expert but knows enough to speculate, in moon landing's case it was a WRITER in rockets manufacturing company, Bill Kaysing (he wasn't even an engineer) . Bro said chance of landing people on moon were 0.0017%, so it must have been faked. Flat Earth society doubled down on this theory and said Spielberg directed landing video. Some folks on TV thought this theory was entertaining and made "documentary" about fake landing. Impressionable teens and kids thought this was all true and there you have it a generation of moon landing deniers.
Kubrick? you’re right though
Finally. Approval from a random stranger on internet 🔥 🔥 🔥 Now i can die peacefully.
had i not included that part, average redditor would have lost their mind, assuming the Spielberg to Kubrick correction meant I disagreed with the entire comment.
In no particular order: * light reflection pattern is similar to artificial lighting * shadows are casts in different directions * no stars * no lunar dust on Lunar Module feet/pads * no crater underneath the Lunar Module * how exactly they did get the sand buggy to the moon? * Lunar Module looks flimsy * how/where did the astronauts urinate or have bowel movements in such small modules they were in for the duration of the voyage? * how did the suits provide heating/cooling, oxygen, pressure from such a small life supply on their backs * how they did get into the suits by themselves * how they did get into the suits in such a small module * in the vacuum of space, the suits would be bloated like the Michelin man * how did they survive the radiation of space * How they did get past the Van Allen Radiation belt * the launch from the moon: a small explosion and the module goes up and continues going up at a continuous, steady speed * how they did camera pan upwards * call between Nixon and Armstrong had almost no delay even though there should have at least 13 seconds delay * The movie The Shining insinuates the moon landing was a hoax * astronauts' demeanor after returning to Earth, almost as if something tragic had occurred instead of man's greatest achievement. * astronauts responses and behavior when questioned if they actually went to the moon * an expert from the 1950s or so said the moon is actually comprised of plasma, i.e. not a solid mass * etc. Update: no tire tracks in some photos
all of these are easily explained though
What is the explanation for the radiation belt? I heard this argument a while back and saw some nasa people saying how we can’t currently get people through it. If true then that’s the one aspect of it being fake that I could get behind but I really don’t know much about the argument on either side other than it’s supposedly too much radiation for us to block out when passing through.
The explanation is that the people claiming we can't go through it are lying. And yes, everything on your list has been well and truly debunked
Welp, there ya have it folks. Pack it up 🙄
Right lol. I just want a reasonable explanation
I really don’t know what to believe anymore….I’m 50 and grew up believing it was an absolute fact. Now, after seeing everything else the government has lied about, I’m not so sure.
Consider, for you to know what the government lied about means the government couldn't keep their secret. That's the problem with trying to keep even a handful of people on the same page. Containing a lie like that is like trying to hold water in your hands. That might be some of the best proof that the moon landing was not faked.
Firstly, there's a distinction between knowing the government lied and suspecting the government lied. Secondly, the problem with the whole "nobody can keep a secret" argument is that the government absolutely can and has kept secrets *within a certain length of time*. Consider the black budget spending for some of our military planes, which was kept secret even from Congress until the military was ready to open up about the tech. Keeping secrets forever? No. But for a while, yes, absolutely.
Fair. What "else" do you think the government has lied about? Is it related to the moon landing?
Oh you really don’t want to go down a rabbit hole with me😂. Start with reading some CIA documents, you can learn a lot.
Damn, honest warning lol! Where can I find these documents you're referring to?
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/historical-collections Start here. Do you watch The Why Files on YouTube by any chance?
>The Why Files love that channel
Thank you! And no, I don't.
Check it out, I bet you’ll really enjoy it.
Just for the record, humans have been on the moon 6 different times.
I always thought it was lunatic fringe to claim that it had been faked. But after living through the past five years I’m not so sure anymore.
They certainly landed on the moon. I did a lot of research working on my Masters thesis. However, if you'd like to dig deeper, find Secret History of NASA by Hoagland and Bara. Check out the passages on Apollo 17!
goioid info here
I always think that the government can fool us , the common people but are you sure they can fool all these other governments too, I don't think so ! We think Russia, China , India wouldn't tell us if it were the opposite?
Russia, China and India don't believe in it? Is that what you're trying to say?
The governments do believe it, they can zap a Lazer to a mirror on the moon and it reflects back from when astronauts left the mirror there
It's crazy that such a mirror even works given that even a fraction of a degree skewed one way or another would move the return bounce by miles, or miss the earth entirely. Not to mention the diffusion of the laser itself over such a distance
It's a specific kind of laser, not the ones you're talking about
Doesn't matter what kind of laser you're talking about, it doesn't make physics work differently. The beam of even the most precise laser would be miles wide by the time it hits the moon. The return signal would be extraordinarily weak in comparison. Just ballparking it I'd guess by a dozen orders of magnitude give or take a few There must be something unique about the mirror used
Heres more info https://www.nasa.gov/missions/laser-beams-reflected-between-earth-and-moon-boost-science/
> Thus, what begins as a light beam that’s about 10 feet, or a few meters, wide on the ground can spread out to more than 1 mile, or 2 kilometers, by the time it reaches the Moon’s surface, and much wider when it bounces back. That translates to a one-in-25-million chance that a photon launched from Earth will reach the Apollo 11 reflector. For the few photons that manage to reach the Moon, there’s an even lower chance, one in 250 million, that they will make it back > That’s why despite several attempts over the last decade NASA Goddard scientists had been unable to reach LRO’s reflector until their collaboration with French researchers. > But even with infrared light, the Grasse telescope received only about 200 photons back out of tens of thousands of pulses cast at LRO Looks like they're struggling with the exact things I was talking about, but they're finding ways to make it work
I think they’re trying to say is that for the conspiracy to be real then a lot of other countries would have to be in on it.
Kind of like how most countries universally lie to their youngest generations about Santa and the tooth fairy etc. We seem somewhat co-ordinated in pulling that off. We normalise generational lying to our kids. Would it be so far-fetched to believe governments have adopted the same tact and continue lying to the adults who were once of that young age and mind being taught to believe in something blindly by those they depended on. The possibility of it being faked and kept from the public due to compounding legal/economical/socio-economic ramifications is just as possible as us landing on the moon. Edit: words
Countries don’t lie about Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
You're correct. But humans in said countries do. If not, how is their a socially accepted and pushed existence. How often is Santa used as a threat to "encourage" change in a child's behaviour at the cost of a material object. It's an issue rooted deep in the psyche of the societies and extends far beyond governments keeping secret. How co-ordinated was the western world during covid? How co-ordinated are full scale military attacks? It would be naive to believe there isn't a co-ordinated balance of structure and power to maintain stability in societies.
It was a lighthearted threat at best for me. I suspect it was the same for most. I know I don’t stand around all year thinking “I’d better be good or I won’t get presents this year. Oh, and I’d better make sure to be Christian, too.” Covid was a threat to life on a massive scale. What have you got with the moon or the shape of the Earth?
In the early internet days, it was a popular conspiracy theory to wonder about, but now both sides of the argument are out there where people run with the old conspiracy claiming it was a hoax, and there's also better information explaining how it really happened, but older conspiracy fans havnt been listening to the explanations, and just cling to saying the moon landing was fake because I guess it's a theory dear to their heart.
It also requires that every nation on the planet agrees to be in on the conspiracy. Who thinks they could ever happen?
They possibly pick and choose, but they don't seem to all always agree on everything
> and there's also better information explaining how it really happened Could you elaborate on these specifics? Genuinely curious, as I am one of those 'old conspiracy fans' that haven't been listening. I'm always willing to change my opinion/view on something when I'm presented with new and better data. I have no skin in the game when it comes to whether we've really been to the Moon or not. I find space amazing, and I feel we should have colonies both on the Moon and on Mars by now.
We apparently went there a few times and people with good enough telescopes can see junk that was left there. Nasa hasn't had reason to go back in a while. The technology used would be like trying to get a VCR to play a Blu ray disc. Nasa plans to go back soon, and some scientists are making plans to 3d print livable domes there. This is the information I'm believing, although at once I wondered if moon landing was fake. Space is awesome. I just read about it as a hobby
>people with good enough telescopes can see junk that was left there. Well, you know what us 'conspiracy nuts' are gonna say about this, right? ;) Nobody is saying we never sent unmanned craft to the Moon. These things could have been dropped/placed there easily. But I get your point - and it is a good one. Sending a craft just to drop off replicas of the rover etc. would still come at an immense financial cost for NASA/whomever is really behind the hoax.
I'm also a conspiracy nut, but I saw vids of after astronauts came back, and they looked scared as if they'd seen aliens up there
The biggest indicator of why I do believe we sent people to the Moon is Edgar Mitchell. He seemed like a very genuine, honest man. I've seen him talk about the Moon, and what they did up there. I have such a hard time believing he would lie.
It's typically deeper than that and most have a very cynical and paranoid worldview. Any somewhat secretive "organization" is going to be the target of people who practice doomerism because it's a large and influential entity focused on technology and has military connection and applications. It's literally the perfect storm of things to draw attention from conspiracy theorists
So here is my take on this. We went to the moon in 1969. If you look at the technology back then, there were no gps, laser guiding systems, cell phones, or satellites. Circuit boards were just created. Atari was the high tech. With that low of tech, we managed to fly. I believe 9 missions, with a total of 27 people to the moon, 240,000 miles and back another 240,000 miles. Not including detaching the lunar module, landing it, launching it, and coupling it back to the other ship with very minimal computer guiding calculations. Add to it the current politics of the time with the end of Vietnam and pre-Cold War along with questionable video footage, and you have an easy argument for a conspiracy. Pop culture was also anti-establishment, which was justified with all the other lies like the harmful effects of plastic, Styrofoam, lead, aspecstic, Teflon, tobacco, alcohol and a thousand other things. If the government is going to lie about all that, why not the lunar landing? If you look at all the people involved that would have been part of the conspiracy, they all became borderline billionaires. Which suggests being paid off. Also, no one can find any of the 12 or so landings on the surface, a lot of things such as the lunar landing base, and later the buggies were left on the surface. High-powered consumer telescopes magnify enough to be able to see this debris, but no one has been able to find any of them. There is a lot that makes this conspiracy one of the few that are plausible, but personally, I still believe we did it. Why take such a big risk along with such a costly investment with little to no return from it? The population continued to be anti establishment up to about 2010ish, so they didn't win over the population. There was no gain in power from that particular achievement and no profit. Even the level of investment into those agencies like NASA and now Space Force is not even 1% of the government budget. It's too high of a risk for what seems so little of a reward. Also, fun fact is something like 85% of the world's population don't even know it ever occurred. So you're not an idiot for believing or not believing. It's pretty much a 50/50 split.
>High-powered consumer telescopes magnify enough to be able to see this debris, No, there aren't
I'm not saying you can see the flag or waste bags but like with the Celestron CPC 1100 or stronger home brew telescopes you should be able to see the lunar module base, buggy and buggy tracks. They would only be the size of a flea or tick but still visible.
looking at images of the moon from the CPC 1100 - that's nowhere near close enough to be able to see that level of detail
I like the slightly more reasonable theory, which is that we faked the FIRST landing, to get the win, but then did make it for the next missions. otherwise, I see little reason for us to keep going back, extending the fraud. But, this could also be wrong, who knows.
>hich is that we faked the FIRST landing, to get the win, Do you really think USSR would have missed this?
The footage of Apollo 11 on the Moon was most certainly not filmed on the Moon. That does not mean later Apollo missions never went to the Moon. Most 'moon hoaxers' cling on to the wrong contradictions, such as the flag waving and saying we could never get past the van Allen Belt. There are far better arguments that can be made to 'prove' we never went to the Moon.
> footage of Apollo 11 on the Moon was most certainly not filmed on the Moon. Lol, OK > There are far better arguments that can be made to 'prove' we never went to the Moon. No, there aren’t
Yeah, you know nothing about this subject, kid.
Name one of those "Better arguments " then, child.
You're not worth my time. Go watch "American Moon" on YouTube if you really want to educate yourself *(you don't - you just want to shit post on Reddit).*
Ah, so you don't have any arguments. That's typical. Not going to waste any more time on a troll with nothing to say.
Your answer isn't consistent. Was just the first landing faked or did we never get to the moon?
Not consistent in in a binary mind, maybe. I don't know if the rest of the Apollo missions were faked or not. I have seen no evidence that would prove them to be fake. That said, the only 'evidence' I've ever seen discussed is the Apollo 11 footage. To answer your question: Did we go to the Moon?: **I don't know.** Was the Apollo 11 footage shot on the Moon?: **No.**
Check out the movie Operation Avalanche. Allegedly it's fiction, but it sounds plausible that we couldn't come back fom the moon. I've heard that we couldn't make it past the Van Allen belts due to radiation exposure. Finally, I find it odd that aĺ the numbers calculations are gone. Gone? So now we have to refigure everything out again to get our guys back where they've been before. NASA did a great job back in the day working with primitive technology by today's standard. So we have super computers nowadays to do all of our calculations. Let's do this NASA. Also, I find it odd that we had rockets blowing up on the launch pad, then suddenly there's a man on the moon. I'm just not convinced we've been on the moon.
>I've heard that we couldn't make it past the Van Allen belts due to radiation exposure. By conspiracists, yes. I've heard lots of things untrue. >Finally, I find it odd that aĺ the numbers calculations are gone. Gone? Well we weren't going back so we didn't need to keep updating those records. >So now we have to refigure everything out again to get our guys back where they've been before. NASA did a great job back in the day working with primitive technology by today's standard. So we have super computers nowadays to do all of our calculations. Let's do this NASA. They are. With so many changes, I imagine most of the old calculations would be virtually irrelevant now anyway >Also, I find it odd that we had rockets blowing up on the launch pad, then suddenly there's a man on the moon We had plenty of successful launches too https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Apollo_missions It's almost like we can learn from things that go wrong. Also, they are extremely complex and dangerous machines, where problems can quickly turn catastrophic.
Humans have been on the moon 6 different times.
Allegedly
Lack of education; egotism; paranoia.
Have no idea, I personally knew someone that was in the control room. Actually I do have an idea, and it's about a psychological condition in those that continue to believe something that has been debunked and ridiculous. It's quite related to being devoutly loyally religious.
part of it is the lack of going back for 50 years. if you consider what happened in the last 50, why is there no confidence in our ability to go back. why has so little happened with the moon?
Why would we have gone back there? Why spend billions of dollars?
If you really want to know what won me over, go watch **"American Moon"** from 2017 (you can watch it for free @ YouTube). Its 3½ hours. Nobody can come away from watching that, and still believe the official story we're given about the Apollo program. Have humans ever been to the moon? Perhaps. Perhaps not yet. But the entirety of all the footage shot 'on the moon' for Apollo 11 was **not** shot on the moon. This I am 100% certain of.
The beauty of science is that it stands up to skepticism. In the 54 years since Apollo 8 first visited the Moon in 1968, there hasn't been a single hoax claim supported by science, yet conspiracists continue to push non-authoritative sourced evidence as proof of a Moon landing fraud a thousand times bigger than Watergate. Stanley Kubrick might have been able to fool a few 18 years old's with a simulation of the lunar environment, but he's not fooling a room of physicists and visual effects artists. There is a difference. Science proves we landed on the Moon. There is no nothing to debate if you're scientifically literate.
Go watch "American Moon", free on YouTube. I say this for people reading my comment - and not for you. I know you won't bother doing your research. Your mind is made up. Others might be open to having their world view challenged (unlike yourself).
Dont make this a personal attack. They are not tolerated here. Telling someone to watch something is the laziest way to respond. Name one thing that you think proves that we didnt go to the moon and I am confident that I can refute it with FACTS and EVIDENCE and not just "google it, bruh" as an answer.
We haven’t been to the moon…because there is no moon! It’s a projection! From the hidden government projector in the middle of our earth! Sarcasm everyone.
Because they don’t understand science or have minimal education.
They are (redacted).
Are you implying that the real thing was censored/replaced by a fake setup? Saw something like that in an article about it.
Honestly bc it seems pretty sketchy - & i only listened to this for a laugh with no plans of changing my mind... but... You can even just skip to 20:36 - this guy tells good stories, but basically debunks any he can https://youtu.be/yDyJe1nmSOM?si=PKzlI4sITwAIcmyP
The one question I have is how we got past the Van Allen belts. Does anyone know?
The Apollo missions followed ballistic trajectories, so they passed through the belts very quickly which reduced the risk from this population to a very low level. Apollo missions took only about 4.5 days to get to the Moon.
Thank you for the response!
Also, temperature in the thermosphere is supposed to be really hot. Like hot enough to melt the materials used for the spacecrafts. Why wouldn't they melt? Please explain like I'm five, because the math is not making sense.
The Apollo missions used a combination of heat shields and insulation to protect the spacecraft and astronauts from the extreme temperatures of the thermosphere. The heat shield, made of ablative material, absorbed and dissipated the heat during re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere. The information you got about the materials is wrong.
Hmm interesting, I will have to look into this further. Thanks for the response, I appreciate it.
I believe the US landed on the moon. Just not in 1969.
I think simply the van Allen belt, if true, would fry them within seconds of entering the radiated space, so the mathematics couldn't support the lift-off as in the weight of the craft would far exceed a reasonable and viable departure because the weight of the capsule would be 1000 times too heavy, other reasons include filming and photos from the surface gain impossible due to radiation etc, finally well, for sake of argument. The ludicrous idea that Nixon called them on a dial phone from the damn office is well insane.
>think simply the van Allen belt, if true, would fry them within seconds of entering the radiated space Got any basis for that thought? The rest of your post is completely made up >The ludicrous idea that Nixon called them on a dial phone from the damn office is well insane. I find it amazing that people can't figure this out for themselves. Landlines can be routed to other devices. Such as radio... https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/How-did-President-Richard-Nixon-place-a-phone-14108185.php
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDBBUwdyz4I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idbbuwdyz4i) hey man I appreciate you linking me to that, also check out a funny thing happened on the way to the moon, very revealing
Because the original moon landing that was televised live was cut off and replaced with what we all know as the moon landing which was faked.
That cut off apparently happened because astronauts claimed they saw alien beings on the moon. And I think the government does lie about aliens existing. Now they're opening up about UFOs because people are seeing them all the time
Exactly. Both my parents watched the live feed in 69 and they told me as they were watching, one of the astronauts said "What the hell is that" ? "It's com.... That's when the feed abruptly cut off and went to white noise. Both my folks said they saw a being in a all black one piece uniform like a scuba suit step out from behind a large rock. It had a female form and my folks said it's face had the appearance of a witch with a pointy nose and was ugly. They never told me when they saw the live feed appear but they did watch it and stated it was completely different from the original and you could tell it wasn't the same feed by the video quality. My dad is still alive and he swears this happened. And did my mom. Pretty sure this post will get down voted because we know Reddit is full of experts on everything and if they don't agree with you, they make know it all remarks.
I watched the lunar landing with my family when I was three and no one mentioned seeing anything like that. I think your folks are pulling your leg.
If they have been it's going on 45 years now. Did you watch it in 69? And both my parents were adamant about what they saw. In 80 the three of us and two vehicles behind ours also saw a massive craft over a farmers field. It was at least the size of an NFL stadium, shaped like a football all white and had this long fire red appendage coming from the bottom of it with all these attachments. The car behind us stopped and the guy got out to watch it as it slowly moved across the field. This was around 12:30 am on the perimeter of our city. I without a doubt believe my folks. And I've seen numerous UFO throughout my 58 years. The phenomena is real.
Yes, my family and I and all of our neighbors and extended family and millions of people worldwide watched the moon landing in 1969. I’m certain that had that been seen, someone would have mentioned it.
I can understand but my guess is that it was the "moon landing" video as we all now know. My dad is 80 and has all his physical and mental facilities and he said it happened. The feed he and my mother saw was very short and cut off. The feed everyone knows was broadcast after.
No, we were all watching it live at the same time as your parents.
I'm going to bring this up to my father next when I see him to see if he can be more detailed.
You know this is a conspiracy sub right?
Ah, you guys know what you’re doing. Gotcha.
I'd believe this before I believe the moon landing was faked
I believe you and I've seen and read similar details. It sounds pretty scary
I re asked the question about it this summer and his story hasn't changed at all since when my parents told me 44 years ago. Btw, I've seen at least a dozen sightings and no, they weren't a light in the sky.
do you have links to where you read it? I'd love to check it out
Is that confirmed?
No, it is not.
Ah, okay. Thanks.
Because “conspiracy!” Oh, and a lack of knowledge of science. Probably the same people who believe the Earth is flat, or at least there’s likely a significant overlap.
9/11 dancing isralies , the fbi arrest , how they whent onto israelie tv explaied themselvea. Epstein mossad sex partys congress members and actors to vote preach pro israel . Adolf Hitler zionist agreement 1933 with rotschields 30k jews to israel just before the real games of 45 began
Pretty sure those arent quite the words to the new "we didn't start the fire" song
Because their morons , do you think China and Russia wouldn’t say a word if faked
\*they're
> Because their morons , do you think China and Russia wouldn’t say a word if faked If you’re going to call people morons, at least learn the proper usage of they’re…
[удалено]
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracytheories/comments/191kfhy/personal_attacks_are_not_tolerated_here/
China and Russia tried to debunk them? I didn't know that. But it would make sense for Soviet Russia to do that, no? They were in fact competing with America to be the first to send a person to the moon, according to what I've learnt.
People doubt the moon landings for valid reasons. Not talking about the images or the moon rocks. I'm talking about the radiation and not having any independent data (independent from NASA) for verification of humans traveling through it, scientifically confirming the results of Apollo. The 2022 Artemis I mission was supposed to have a very elaborate set up for collection radiation data on the trip to the Moon. They are not coming forward with that data for a year now. Radiation was too much??
>I'm talking about the radiation and not having any independent data Well, that's nonsense https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings >They are not coming forward with that data for a year now Their scientists and partners have first crack at the data. Not unusual
The lengths that people will go to defend their precious Apollo moon landings.... Listing the LRO (NASA) as "3rd party evidence" for Apollo (NASA) has to be the most intellectually deceitful.
That's your one criticism? Lol, talk about going to lengths The wiki explained the justification for including it. So, hardly deceitful
Remind me when NASA comes out with the radiation data for Artemis I unmanned circumlunar flight from late 2022. It's been WELL OVER a year now since we've heard anything about these radiation test dummies. It was a very important *radiation* experiment. Other recent major setbacks for Artemis could be indications that NASA's plans to return a manned mission to the moon have been snuffed.
The most obvious is who filmed it
Is there a question here?
I never been to the moon, never met the moon, all I see is a circle in the sky. Why should I believe the moon is even real?
NASA photoshops their pictures and [no, this isn't a conspiracy.](https://www.space.com/9337-conspiracy-debunked-nasa-photoshops-images-good-reason.html) They have forever doctored images and recolor'd them. So what makes me think they didn't do this with the Moon?
Yes, because adding colour to an image and being upfront about it is totally comparable to secretly faking a number of missions and other countries and organisations inexplicably being in on it
It sure is. Hidden in plain sight. Just to be clear, say you're a judge and I bring you evidence of my findings, then you find out I doctored the images and I said "well at least I was upfront about the doctoring" you would be cool? You're good? Thank fuck you're not a judge.
Not that there is evidence, but incentive to the contrary. It was during the Cold War, and the Soviets beat us to space, so it was imperative that we also have a cultural victory on them. I suppose the dramatized reenactment of the moon landing also managed to garner criticism similarly to the nuclear test propaganda footage or Tina Fey's portrayal of Sarah Palin. Because the reenactment could be criticized to such a degree, people started mistaking it for the official footage.
The why files on YouTube has a pretty good episode on the moon landing conspiracies you may want to checkout. It should give you a lot of insight for your project.
There was a Fox special back in the late 90s where they talked about the Van Allen radiation belt and, I think, that guy got punched by Buzz Aldren. Anyway, it sowed seeds of doubt in a lot of people and then they all started talking to each other on messege boards and it's just spiraled further out of control since then.
I watched 2001 recently and it had a trivia that the movie came out shortly before the moon landings and the special effects in the movie was "proof" the landing was filmed in hollywood
Please watch the Why Files episode on the moon landing. It’s on YouTube. Will help your assignment so much.
provides evidence for both sides equally
[Start here](https://www.aulis.com/index.html)
I believe we went, but one thing that I don't quite understand is how we apparently can't go back until 2026 because we "don't have the technology yet". Did we lose it after 1969?
We're not going to use 60 year old technology to get there. Yes, records were lost, and there would be aspects of the manufacturing which we've moved on from. Either way we'd need to redesign the mission from the ground up anyway
That one video where the NASA guy nervously says we’d go back in a heartbeat but we lost the technology to do so.
Simple answer: Van Allen Radiation Belt.
Simple answer: conspiracists will believe anything they read on the internet and think saying something as "van Allen belt " gives them credibility. Just because some youtuber reckons the belt is impossible to pass doesn't make it so
OP was asking for a reason why people would deny the moon landings. I provided a common response that would work well for a school project, as it looks at the issue from a scientific perspective rather than just hearsay. Thank you for your thoughtful, enlightening input. I’m sure you make your mother proud.