Did US Astronaut land on the moon for real?

[james_s]

I believe that the landing happened, but I am prepared to accept if it is proved it didn't.

So prove that it didn't, or quit blathering nonsense. There is an insurmountable pile of evidence clearly showing that it happened, it's not a matter of belief, it's just obvious and the only people claiming it didn't are nutjobs who see "evidence" of their wacky belief everywhere. There's as much proof that men walked on the moon as there is proof that we have sent rovers to Mars, or divers to the deep sea, or satellites into low earth orbit. What more is there to even discuss on the matter? Many thousands of people were involved in the effort which was one of the most monumental projects in the history of the nation. Hundreds of companies designed and built equipment, there is mountains of documentation, thousands of artifacts surviving from the missions, various bits of hardware from the rockets still orbiting the earth, images of some of the landing sites that remain on the moon along with a retroreflector placed there by the astronauts. Thousands of civilians watched the launches in person, millions watched the earlier flights live on TV. There is an absolutely massive amount of evidence that it all happened exactly as claimed and if someone managed to fake that I would find the faking a far more impressive feat than actually going there.

Any claims to it being fake constitute extraordinary claims, and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, of which nothing of the sort has been presented. All I see here is someone who wasn't alive when the moon missions took place, going on and on about a fictional movie as if that movie produced as entertainment is some sort of documentary or is in any way useful in learning about the actual events.

[CatalinaWOW]

Good summary of the information for.  One important piece that you did not mention is the tracking of radio and telemetry by many amateurs in many nation's.  About the only way I can think of to fake those signals is to perform a lunar mission.  Just as hard as doing it for real.

[bsfeechannel]

So prove that it didn't,

I'm not interested in proving anything. I'm interested in discussing what the OP proposed: the apparent non viability of landing two people on the moon in 1969.

or quit blathering nonsense.

Is this censorship?

There's as much proof that men walked on the moon as there is proof that we have sent rovers to Mars, or divers to the deep sea, or satellites into low earth orbit. What more is there to even discuss on the matter? Many thousands of people were involved in the effort which was one of the most monumental projects in the history of the nation. Hundreds of companies designed and built equipment, there is mountains of documentation, thousands of artifacts surviving from the missions, various bits of hardware from the rockets still orbiting the earth, images of some of the landing sites that remain on the moon along with a retroreflector placed there by the astronauts. Thousands of civilians watched the launches in person, millions watched the earlier flights live on TV.

The amount of junk we've been dumping into space is a proof that two people set foot on the moon in 1969?

There is an absolutely massive amount of evidence that it all happened exactly as claimed and if someone managed to fake that I would find the faking a far more impressive feat than actually going there.

Much more impressive, cheaper and safer.

Any claims to it being fake constitute extraordinary claims, and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, of which nothing of the sort has been presented.

If we were trying to prove something, we would go for the evidence. But we just want to discuss the aforementioned issues. Is that against the ethos of the forum? Is this kind of discussion a taboo among the members?

All I see here is someone who wasn't alive when the moon missions took place

I saw it live. Twenty years later I've been to the Kennedy Space Center on vacation. Its recorded in VHS. Do you wanna see the footage?

We were bombarded with news and articles on magazines, newspapers, books, tv, radio for years on end. I especially remember the high res photos like the one showed by the OP.

We expected that soon we'd be traveling to space, the moon, Mars, Venus, Jupiter, but the years came and went and the space age came to an end, until trips to the moon became a joke:

, going on and on about a fictional movie as if that movie produced as entertainment is some sort of documentary or is in any way useful in learning about the actual events.

The film raised questions, can't we discuss them?

[tggzzz]

So prove that it didn't,

I'm not interested in proving anything. I'm interested in discussing what the OP proposed: the apparent non viability of landing two people on the moon in 1969.

or quit blathering nonsense.

Is this censorship?

1) you are blathering nonsense.

2) you are being silly asking if this is censorship. That is the kind of argument raised by people who are more or less subtly trolling - as a means of trying to continue the conversation by deflecting it down pointless alleys.

, going on and on about a fictional movie as if that movie produced as entertainment is some sort of documentary or is in any way useful in learning about the actual events.

The film raised questions, can't we discuss them?

Of course you can, but - like all other forums - this forum has a particular bias. This forum is very open to people who ask well-meaning but ignorant questions, and who listen to the responses. But away-with-the-faeries propositions are called such, and it becomes tiresome when people continue to advocate them beyond reason.

I'm sure you can find a "conspiracy-theories-r-us" forum which will welcome and support such nonsense.

[bsfeechannel]

Of course you can, but - like all other forums - this forum has a particular bias. This forum is very open to people who ask well-meaning but ignorant questions, and who listen to the responses. But away-with-the-faeries propositions are called such, and it becomes tiresome when people continue to advocate them beyond reason.

I'm sure you can find a "conspiracy-theories-r-us" forum which will welcome and support such nonsense.

I understand. Well-meaning ignorant questions. No conspiracies. So two people somehow landed on the moon in 1969. That's an unquestionable truth. Can we discuss what were the safety measures taken in case the LM didn't land exactly vertically? I mean, let's suppose it toppled on landing. How could the astronauts be rescued? Was there a backup space ship? I am sure such a question was raised by the engineers who designed the LM.

[tggzzz]

Of course you can, but - like all other forums - this forum has a particular bias. This forum is very open to people who ask well-meaning but ignorant questions, and who listen to the responses. But away-with-the-faeries propositions are called such, and it becomes tiresome when people continue to advocate them beyond reason.

I'm sure you can find a "conspiracy-theories-r-us" forum which will welcome and support such nonsense.

I understand. Well-meaning ignorant questions. No conspiracies. So two people somehow landed on the moon in 1969. That's an unquestionable truth. Can we discuss what were the safety measures taken in case the LM didn't land exactly vertically? I mean, let's suppose it toppled on landing. How could the astronauts be rescued? Was there a backup space ship? I am sure such a question was raised by the engineers who designed the LM.

Those appear to be no more than random questions thought up on the spur of the moment. The answers are everythimg practical, no, no, yes.

A well-meaning question implies that some basic research has been done. There's no indication you have bothered to do that.

Use google to find the real and definitive answers to your questions. Unless of course, all you want is to continue uninformed speculation with people.

To misquote a contemporary film, "I'm sorry bsfeechannel, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore".

[bsfeechannel]

Use google to find the real and definitive answers to your questions.

After all, why do we need a forum?

[tggzzz]

Use google to find the real and definitive answers to your questions.

After all, why do we need a forum?

For discussion of topics and questions that cannot be trivially found on this website. Or maybe, to ask a question that usenet greybeards will remember fondly, you think "what time is it?" is a good question. Hint: about 35 years ago that was used to stop people asking questions they could easily answer themselves.

Unfounded conspiracy theories can be discussed on many other forums and websites.

[fsr]

no one was capable of repeating the feat, not even the US, after 50 years, with all the immense advancements in technology that we had since then. All the details related to the construction of the spacecrafts that landed on the moon and the flight plans are classified, preventing any peer review

I find it shocking that after all this disscusion, you still don't know that there were several manned missions to the moon. So, what's the point of further discussion?

So much secrecy...  https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11
Oh. Look: a retrospective on the flight to the moon. Interesting: https://history.nasa.gov/Apollomon/Apollo.html
More interesting Apollo information: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html

[HighVoltage]

As I said earlier in the thread, this is an ongoing discussion between me and my scientific / engineering friends here in Germany.

And yes, there is plenty of evidence that the USA put an Astronaut on the moon in 1969.
(I was alive and watched it with my dad in Germany)
But the reason, why we have this discussion in the first place is that there are scientific inconsistencies and those can not be discussed away.

We might never find out the truth.

[apis]

The film raised questions, can't we discuss them?

I was just about to ask, if they really did go to the moon, then where is all the cheese...

[MrW0lf]

As I said earlier in the thread, this is an ongoing discussion between me and my scientific / engineering friends here in Germany.

Here someone points to various engineering related conundrums:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKbFPgUlYZufEraOs8rFktQ/videos

[6PTsocket]

For starts, Columbus was not Italian. There was a documentary researching this subject. There were no records of such a family in his alleged home town. His humble origens are refuted by his writings that suggest a well schooled Spanish education. His brother married into the Portugese nobility. In that era, peasant stock did not get into the highest of the upper classes on merit. There is not a shred of proof connecting Columbus to Italy.
The reason nobody went back to the Moon is because it was an incredibly expensive venture staged at a time when the USSR seemed to be way ahead in the space race at the height of the cold war. Landing  on the Moon was way to restore US pride and credibility. Everybody likes a good conspiracy story from space aliens to Elvis is still alive, to Hitler survived to airplanes did not brig down the twin towers to LHO did not shoot Kennedy. I worked on the Lunar Module program. We went to the Moon.

At 02:56 UTC July 21, 1969.

After watching First Man:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1213641/

I was disappointed to see some lack of enginnering details and a lot romance in it. I was expectiong something like the Martian with much more "realistic" technical discussions.
Anyway I started to think about the technical problems they needed to solve/manage, and the more I think the more I got pushed in the "never happened" bucket.

When an Italian like me, with spanish money, discovered America we returned to that land more and more. Do they never went back to the moon? Not even once?

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.

PS: Am I becoming like a flat earth guy? 

PPS: Any good book I can read on this topic?

This pictures still just fascinate me:

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[bsfeechannel]

After all, why do we need a forum?

For discussion of topics and questions that cannot be trivially found on this website.

  What a relief! Because you know, if the forums stop discussing, how can Google find the information it needs to index?

I find it shocking that after all this disscusion, you still don't know that there were several manned missions to the moon.

Holy crap, really!? When I've been to the Kennedy Space Center they concealed that information from me. Those bastards! You see? It's all a hoax.

But the reason, why we have this discussion in the first place is that there are scientific inconsistencies and those can not be discussed away.

You can only do it privately. Discussing it on a public forum is taboo. I hope this thread can help mitigate a little bit of that.

We might never find out the truth.

Maybe that's the (provisional) truth.

[vk6zgo]

As I said earlier in the thread, this is an ongoing discussion between me and my scientific / engineering friends here in Germany.

And yes, there is plenty of evidence that the USA put an Astronaut on the moon in 1969.
(I was alive and watched it with my dad in Germany)
But the reason, why we have this discussion in the first place is that there are scientific inconsistencies and those can not be discussed away.

We might never find out the truth.

Come on, it doesn't work that way!
The people on this site are EEs & Technicians, & yes, the odd scientist , medico & so on.

We are not easily terrified by "scientific inconsistencies" .

Hit us with your science, we can take it!

[vk6zgo]

As I said earlier in the thread, this is an ongoing discussion between me and my scientific / engineering friends here in Germany.

Here someone points to various engineering related conundrums:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKbFPgUlYZufEraOs8rFktQ/videos

Yeah!
This guys calls himself " Aerospace Engineer"--- If he is that, then I'm the Pope!
Just more silly conspiracy theory crap!

[forrestc]

But think about the odds. What if something went wrong and they got stranded there, without any possibility of rescue? Do you think the US would risk turning the moon forever into a tomb? Into the place of a tragic historical event?

I think you might be missing a big point about the culture of the US.   

We are a country of risk-takers.   And it used to be that it was expected that lives would be lost in the pursuit of progress  (nowadays, it's not expected, but we still understand that sometimes it happens in the pursuit of progress).   We lost 3 astronauts in the Apollo 1 fire, and it only strengthened the desire to go to the moon.   We lost the crews of Challenger and Columbia.  And throughout it all, it only caused a harder push to do things better and persevere.

To get a glimpse of this, please read Nixon's prepared speech another poster linked to:  https://www.space.com/26604-apollo-11-failure-nixon-speech.html   

This shows the attitude which is prevalent in the US.   

One other way to think about this is to replace the word 'Tomb' with 'Monument' in your question. That is:  "Do you think the US would risk turning the moon forever into a monument?"  This is probably closer to what most Americans would have thought about the moon if it had ended up being the final resting spot of one or more Astronauts.

[brabus]

(...) I worked on the Lunar Module program. We went to the Moon (...)

Thank you for posting here. I think I have a million questions for you. 
I would absolutely love to hear a proper Podcast on the topic, describing things such as the technical challenges, the project management of such a unique event, the unforeseen issues you had to face, etc.

Maybe Dave is interested as well?

[donotdespisethesnake]

The manned mission to the Moon was expected to be very difficult, that was the reason Kennedy chose it as something that could beat the Soviets while giving the US time to catch up.

At the (more or less) same time he (Kennedy) suggested join cooperation with Soviets for a moon expedition

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4209/ch2-4.htm

You've misinterpreted that. The proposal for cooperation came from the Soviets, after their own manned Moon mission was abandoned. Obviously, the USA had to consider the proposal, they would have quite liked to nosy around Soviet facilities, but ultimately after having found sufficient "technical reasons" they rejected the proposal.

The goal of the USA was to demonstrate their superiority, cooperation was never on the cards until much later. The US said they went to the Moon for all mankind, but they made sure to plant a US flag there.

[donotdespisethesnake]

Most crazy beliefs are a symptom of psychiatric illness.

Not really. Billions of people believe in a supernatural being they call "God". That is clearly crazy. Usually people use the term "crazy" to mean an irrational belief not shared by the rest of the population. If everyone shares a crazy belief, that is defined as "normal". In fact, there is a correlation between belief in religion and belief in conspiracy theories.

Humans are basically highly prone to irrational beliefs. There might be some evolutionary reasons behind that, for example, a rustling in the bushes could just be the wind, but it might also be a tiger.

The only interesting thing about Moon landing denial is that it shows how stupid humans are, when we can't agree on something that is undeniably true. If even recent events are denied, we probably can't trust any reports of current or historic events.

[MrW0lf]

Not really. Billions of people believe in a supernatural being they call "God". That is clearly crazy. Usually people use the term "crazy" to mean an irrational belief not shared by the rest of the population.

So Cooper and Aldrin are crazy and irrational? I doubt that even most rabid flat earthers would imply something like that.

[Mr. Scram]

So Cooper and Aldrin are crazy and irrational? I doubt that even most rabid flat earthers would imply something like that.

So you're saying believing in something for which there is no proof is not crazy or at least irrational?

[MrW0lf]

So you're saying believing in something for which there is no proof is not crazy or at least irrational?

http://www.msana.com/religion.asp

Freemasonry /.../ requires of its members a belief in God as part of the obligation of every responsible adult

[Mr. Scram]

http://www.msana.com/religion.asp

Freemasonry /.../ requires of its members a belief in God as part of the obligation of every responsible adult

So you were saying that believing in something for which there is no proof is crazy or at least irrational. I'm glad we agree.

[olkipukki]

The manned mission to the Moon was expected to be very difficult, that was the reason Kennedy chose it as something that could beat the Soviets while giving the US time to catch up.

At the (more or less) same time he (Kennedy) suggested join cooperation with Soviets for a moon expedition

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4209/ch2-4.htm

You've misinterpreted that. The proposal for cooperation came from the Soviets, after their own manned Moon mission was abandoned.

Well, here is another link... did I misinterpret this again?
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/john-f-kennedy-and-nasa

At his June 3-4, 1961 summit meeting in Vienna with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, Kennedy suggested, “Why don’t we do it together?”

IMHO, Soviet Moon program was on a way to collapse after Khrushchev "retired" (1964) and Korolev - passed away (1966)...