Did US Astronaut land on the moon for real?

[bsfeechannel]

Everyone involved understood the risks and just accepted them.

If they accepted the risks, it never happened.

It only happened if they ignored them.

[bsfeechannel]

I watched a film called pearl harbour that was full of romance and the actual pearl harbour bit was 10 minutes of crap CGI so I guess that never happened either and america just wanted an excuse to go to war with Japan......

I knew it!

[bsfeechannel]

Why would the scientific community worldwide (including the russians) be a part of some crazy conspiracy to make us believe that the NASA landed on the moon, if it were false? The russians would had been very interested in uncovering such a scam.

The moon landing deniers have an interesting explanation for that.

By the pace of the achievements, the US might have come to the conclusion that sooner or later the Soviets would be able to conquer the moon. Or that they had plans to do it.

When it became clear to the Soviets that it would be very difficult to send someone there, the US took the opportunity to prepare the hoax.

Now the Soviets could not disprove the US. If they tried to send a man to the moon for real, they knew that it would have an enormous pontential for disaster. If they said they tried and that they concluded not to be possible, they would give much more credence to the US who "proved" it possible.

The Soviets had no choice but to keep quiet and let the thing speak for itself, i.e., wait until someone started to notice inconsistencies about the claim.

Ironically the dissented voices came, and keep coming, exactly from the US.

Man, if that theory were true, I would like to congratulate the genius in the US government who thought that out.

[james_s]

The moon landing deniers have an interesting explanation for that.

Of course they do, and if they don't, they will quickly come up with an explanation.

They *believe* it was faked, so they will ignore any data that does not support their existing belief while latching onto anything that even remotely does support it, it's an extreme case of confirmation bias. There is no possible way to convince somebody to change their belief by using logic because it's not logical in the first place, it is effectively a religious belief, almost certainly using the same part of the brain. I'm quite confident that if you took 1,000 deniers to the moon in person and showed them the Apollo landing sites with their own eyes, 100% of them would spin up some new conspiracy and claim it was all planted, or they were drugged or hypnotized or that the whole visit was fake and they themselves weren't really taken to the moon but to some secret military base somewhere. You can't win against an irrational belief.

[bsfeechannel]

I have reasons to believe that the US really tried to send people to the moon, there was nothing fake about that. I think what the movie wants to convey is that, if somehow it becomes clear that the part about the landing was staged, it was done for a noble reason: not to expose the astronauts to an unnecessary martyrdom, not to expose such a significant celestial body to a tragic event, and to reassure to their allies that the West was on par with the Soviets regarding to technological power. Since the West won both the space race and the Cold War, whether the landing is fake or not is now irrelevant.

The movie "First Man" is brilliant because it puts you in the position of those who are going to decide to land them there or not. You, the viewer, are not the astronaut, you are the President, the congressperson, the director of the space agency, the high rank advisor.

Its a cerebral movie of the kind Aristotle would like to see: one that makes you entertain a thought without necessarily accepting it.

[tggzzz]

I have reasons to believe the world really is flat.

The movie "Discworld" is brilliant because it shows you what happens at the edge of the world.

[bd139]

Monty python covered it perfectly too:

[fsr]

WTF, man!! Every one of the Astronauts, Cosmonauts, etc that entered a rocket are risking their lives, because they're using very complex equipment, using immense amounts of energy, to go to one of the most hostile environments to life. The only thing keeping them alive is good science/engineering. The bests minds, giving their best efforts. And still, things can go wrong, and people die. Do you remember that things have gone wrong and people has died, right?
Some years ago, the first woman in space, at age 76 said that she would gladly accept a one-way ticket to mars: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/17/mars-one-way-ticket
So yes, there are, and ever has been people that will gladly put their lives into risk to go where no one has gone before.

[vtwin@cox.net]

This whole thread reminds me of this (horrible) movie from my childhood:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capricorn_One

[Messtechniker]

It does not really matter, if you believe this man-on-the-moon is true or not.
It is the tremendous spinn-off of the enormous effort making this either
reality or phantastically faking it which really matters.

[Electro Detective]

If any of the astronaughts are operating a chain of cheese shops and or wholesale business on earth and raking in serious cash 

there's your answer...just follow the money... 

[bsfeechannel]

WTF, man!! Every one of the Astronauts, Cosmonauts, etc that entered a rocket are risking their lives, because they're using very complex equipment, using immense amounts of energy, to go to one of the most hostile environments to life. The only thing keeping them alive is good science/engineering. The bests minds, giving their best efforts. And still, things can go wrong, and people die. Do you remember that things have gone wrong and people has died, right?
Some years ago, the first woman in space, at age 76 said that she would gladly accept a one-way ticket to mars: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/17/mars-one-way-ticket
So yes, there are, and ever has been people that will gladly put their lives into risk to go where no one has gone before.

Try to change your perspective. Instead of looking at the space program with the eyes of an astronaut, engineer or scientist, try to look at it with the eyes of those in charge. You have to analyze the political risks involved.

If it is peremptorily proved that they set foot on the moon, fine. That will only confirm what we have believed for the last 50 years.

But if doubt remains, that won't be the end of the world. It wouldn't reduce the importance of the event, given the circumstances.

That's what the movie invites you to think.

[olkipukki]

Since the West won both the space race ....

 

Never heard about Apollo-Soyuz?   

[bsfeechannel]

Never heard about Apollo-Soyuz?   

Did you live in the West in 1969?

[bson]

In case you haven't seen this yet.

https://youtu.be/SIR9SdlIbDE

[vk6zgo]

 

well it's OK the yanks thought they were a flock of birds. Yes Tora! Tora! Tora! was a well made film. I believe it was a made as two halves and edited together, they had a Japan unit and an America unit that worked on their own sections of the film and then it was brought together into one story.

I'm not sure you got my point, it was that Microwave comms networks didn't exist in 1941.
This happens quite often in movies, like contrails in the sky over a Roman epic, or the sillouhette of a combine harvester on a hilltop behind a Western movie.

Re the "flock of birds" --- the story I read was a bit more believable.
The RADAR guy's Boss said the echoes were that of a flight of B17s expected to arrive that morning.

They didn't really have much faith in RADAR, ---- It was newfangled, & it was invented by "Limeys"!

[fsr]

WTF, man!! Every one of the Astronauts, Cosmonauts, etc that entered a rocket are risking their lives, because they're using very complex equipment, using immense amounts of energy, to go to one of the most hostile environments to life. The only thing keeping them alive is good science/engineering. The bests minds, giving their best efforts. And still, things can go wrong, and people die. Do you remember that things have gone wrong and people has died, right?
Some years ago, the first woman in space, at age 76 said that she would gladly accept a one-way ticket to mars: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/17/mars-one-way-ticket
So yes, there are, and ever has been people that will gladly put their lives into risk to go where no one has gone before.

Try to change your perspective. Instead of looking at the space program with the eyes of an astronaut, engineer or scientist, try to look at it with the eyes of those in charge. You have to analyze the political risks involved.

If it is peremptorily proved that they set foot on the moon, fine. That will only confirm what we have believed for the last 50 years.

But if doubt remains, that won't be the end of the world. It wouldn't reduce the importance of the event, given the circumstances.

That's what the movie invites you to think.

This thread if filled with evidence. If you choose to ignore it, that's your problem. The moon landing is a fact.
Tell me: how do you fake the videos of the hammer and the plume falling at the same time, or the moon's car throwing dust around that creates no cloud? And was is that hard for the russians to tell if the astronaut's transmissions were coming from the moon? No CGI at that time, you know? Even the landing computer had magnetic core RAM and hand-wired ROM. Ancient tech.
The ones in charge continued the moon program after the 3 crew members died burned inside the Apollo 1 capsule on a test on the ground.
And people continue to die in the space program. Do you remember the challenger? The columbia? Recently the soyuz failed when one of the 4 boosters failed to separate and hit the main rocket, and they had to abort the mission, initiating an emergency ballistic descent. Fortunately (and thanks to good emergency systems), they were rescued with no injuries.
Even going to the IIS means that you're exposed to increased radiation. Not the most healthy thing in the world, but they accept the risks.
Everyone knows that the manned space program involves a lot of risks. Everyone that goes to space accepts that risk. The public knows that. The politics know that.

Here, take a look at this list spaceflight-related accidents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents

[vk6zgo]

WTF, man!! Every one of the Astronauts, Cosmonauts, etc that entered a rocket are risking their lives, because they're using very complex equipment, using immense amounts of energy, to go to one of the most hostile environments to life. The only thing keeping them alive is good science/engineering. The bests minds, giving their best efforts. And still, things can go wrong, and people die. Do you remember that things have gone wrong and people has died, right?
Some years ago, the first woman in space, at age 76 said that she would gladly accept a one-way ticket to mars: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/17/mars-one-way-ticket
So yes, there are, and ever has been people that will gladly put their lives into risk to go where no one has gone before.

Try to change your perspective. Instead of looking at the space program with the eyes of an astronaut, engineer or scientist, try to look at it with the eyes of those in charge. You have to analyze the political risks involved.

If it is peremptorily proved that they set foot on the moon, fine. That will only confirm what we have believed for the last 50 years.

But if doubt remains, that won't be the end of the world. It wouldn't reduce the importance of the event, given the circumstances.

That's what the movie invites you to think.

If you watch "Superman", you will "believe a man can fly!"

[nctnico]

If it was faked, how has the secret been kept for nearly 50 years?  Thousands of people would have been involved in the conspiracy including the media and we know they can't keep a secret.  Somebody would have written a book just before they died!

The first landing was the greatest technological achievement of all time.  Here it is, nearly 50 years later, and no country has come close to recreating it.

We made 6 landings and 12 astronauts have walked on the surface.

And to top that all off you have a guy like Trump as a president.  In 50 years people will say that no country has come close to recreating it.

[cdev]

This is what we get for having governments that habitually lie to people. Even the most amazing and positive truths are being questioned.

Yes, mankind went to the moon. And a former co-worker's friend and running partner died in space.

[vk6zgo]

This whole thread reminds me of this (horrible) movie from my childhood:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capricorn_One

"Capricorn One" was not about a Moon shot, though, it was about a much more ambitious  thing-- A Mars Landing.
As we have discussed on another thread, Mars is one hell of a long way away, & the whole thrust of the story is of a Space Agency overreaching itself under political pressure.

At the time, in the wake of Watergate, making the "Guvment" or its agencies the "baddie" played well with audiences.

Funny thing, I never heard a thing about "moon hoaxes" until some years after that movie started appearing on TV, which was quite a few years later than when I saw it first.

It almost seems like some "Good old boy", sitting half asleep in front of his TV, suddenly sat up, kicked his hound dawg off his lap, & exclaimed "Dagnabit! That must be how those citified dipshits at NASA faked that there Moon landing!"

[bsfeechannel]

This thread if filled with evidence. If you choose to ignore it, that's your problem. The moon landing is a fact.

I don't have a problem. We're not trying to prove whether it is a fact or not.

If the OP asked "please show me the evidence that those guys landed on the moon because I want to believe", those posts would count.

Instead, he said, and I quote, "In my heart I believe a man was walking on the moon, but my brain is still not 100% convinced. It seems technically impossible. Please help."

He started to question the evidence itself. Which is an absolutely healthy intellectual exercise.

So, posting "evidence" in this case is like preaching the gospel to a convert. That won't end the issue, even if he says he is now 100% convinced.

[bsfeechannel]

This is what we get for having governments that habitually lie to people. Even the most amazing and positive truths are being questioned.

An amazing and positive truth would be to find a government that does not habitually lie to people. But that would be highly questionable.

[VK3DRB]

Most crazy beliefs are a symptom of psychiatric illness. People can believe whatever crap they want to, including man did not land on the moon or the earth is flat. But Illuminati belief can result in this... https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-13/james-gargasoulas-found-guilty-of-murder/10491490.

I know two of Illuminati believers. One is convinced man did not land on the moon and it was all staged by the Illuminati, who is now out to kill 90% of the world's population. He fled to a remote few acres so he can survive when the Illuminati launches an all out attack on the city of Melbourne in 2019. He used to be an engineer, but now does menial work because he believes the engineering profession is controlled by the Illuminati. The other Illuminati believer is a drifter on the dole and told me all millionaires are bastards working for the Illuminati. The fact is neither of them are employable. Both need psychiatric care, but because they have not committed a crime, there is nothing anyone can do. Not surprisingly neither have many, if any, friends because of their incessant preaching about the Illuminati.

Anyone who preaches man did not walk on the moon or preaches the Illuminati (the two often go hand-in-hand), should do himself a favour and seek psychiatric help.

[vk6zgo]

This thread if filled with evidence. If you choose to ignore it, that's your problem. The moon landing is a fact.

I don't have a problem. We're not trying to prove whether it is a fact or not.

If the OP asked "please show me the evidence that those guys landed on the moon because I want to believe", those posts would count.

Instead, he said, and I quote, "In my heart I believe a man was walking on the moon, but my brain is still not 100% convinced. It seems technically impossible. Please help."

He started to question the evidence itself. Which is an absolutely healthy intellectual exercise.

So, posting "evidence" in this case is like preaching the gospel to a convert. That won't end the issue, even if he says he is now 100% convinced.

Questioning the evidence itself is where madness lies.

For instance, there is a creature lying on the floor in my bedroom eating a pigs ear.
All the evidence points to her being a dog---- crazy little waggy tail, cold snotty nose, silly lop ears, fur, feet she delights in putting places she shouldn't.

But maybe she isn't a dog, maybe a really funny looking cat?, or an alien creature masquerading as a dog?
The biggy, is I saw her born, & am pretty sure her parents are dogs, so that convinces me.

However, not being a biochemist, I can't look at her DNA to positively prove she is a dog.
Sometimes, though, you just have to accept the evidence, as it isn't as silly as the alternative explanation.