Well, yea, if you believe it was all a hoax, they can. Don't you know that scientists are brainwashed, no matter what side they're on?

Shhhhhh. All scientists are suspect because....well...they know stuff.

Wow. One doesn't have to spend a lot of time on this board before he realizes the tautological nature of the typical conspiracy theorist's argument.

Apples to oranges... Assassinations are in no way equivalent to large scale engineering projects.

Assuming for the sake of arguement that there was some sort of coverup involved with the assassination of JFK, just what exactly would would be the magnitude of it? How many people would really need to be involved? Maybe a dozen. How many people would need to be involved with a Moon Hoax conspiracy? Hundreds or thousands or even hundreds of thousands.

Assassinations are expected to cover their tracks and destory evidence and to create as little evidence as possible in the first place. Engineering projects like Apollo are expected to produce and accumulate massive amounts of documentation. An assassination is meant to be concealed from as many people as possible. Apollo was meant to be shown to the world.


Sorry, I just don't see how these two things are in any way comparable.

Hogwash, you obviously know nothing about the Soviet Program. The N-1 test on July 3rd 1969 was a total failure, and the LK wasn't even tested as an unmanned flight until Nov of 1970, over a year after Apollo 11.

The Soviets did just that, it's easy to tell them from the Apollo ones because they aren't aligned properly. The Apollo ones are perfectly aligned.

Bollocks. Lunites are quite different to the Lunar samples for a number of resons including their time in space and pssage through the atmsphere. Not only that but they range from different places about the moon and nearly none from the Apollo landing areas. Not only that but the first Lunite was found in 1979 and ifdentified in 1981 because it was like the Apollo and Soviet return samples. Add to that the luar dirt and core samples up to 8' in length. How do you get them from lunites? You know nothing about the subjet so your speculation is worthless.

There are no humans in them either, and we don't have sample returns from Mars.

You obviously don't have a clue about the Apollo missions. Go and learn about them and then come back and we'll discuss them.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

Well Denis,

I don't think the moon is a hoax. If it were, what is that thing I see at night. I'm sorry, couldn't resist the lame joke. In the first discussion about the Apollo Moon Landings I read, I thought the arguements by the conspiracy theorists were quite strong. However, I couldn't be more wrong.

Both the way the conspiracy theorists was discussing (I sense a see of ignorance and lies) and the ways his claims were debunked (woah, simple yet effective and true) made me turn from the dark side to, well, the other side.

In other words: yes, Neil Armstrong really did walk on the moon, as well as the others.

I hope this clears things out for you; I see others have given you links as well. Please follow them and read their information open-minded though criticizing.

Oh - and to Moonrock: please, pre-study your claims because you sound like the typical "I-don't-know-anything-about-it-but-I-think-it-didn't-happen"-theorist.

EDIT: This happens to be my first post though I have been in several discussions elsewhere.

Welcome to the Forum, BertL

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

Google it. Perhaps you missed the Russian announcement a few years ago admitting that other cosmoonauts had been the first in space but had died on re-entry.

And your own beloved NASA employed Werner Von Braun who was a known Nazi, who used the slave labour of thousands of captured prisoners to work on rockets in Germany which your Government knew all about and covered it up. How gullible are you?

Conspiracy theories in such cases as the JFK assassination start because normal thinking people can see that something isnt quite right with the official explanation of events. Just because a Government releases an explanation that the common man can pick apart and provide evidence to the contrary does not mean that we should take the official explanation as Gospel.

So we have to go to the Moon to get rock fragments do we? Ever heard of meteorites?

Hmm, doesnt look like you have free speech from over this side of the pond. What about the rigged voting in your elections a few years back in Florida? Free speech eh?

To me, this moon-hoax, brought nothing but positive things. I did a lot of reading and studying, and in doing so, I discovered how amazing the apollo project was. What a wonderful peace of history! What great things people can do when they set their minds on a positive course! Without the hoax it maybe wouldn't never have got my attention and worse I never would have learned about the Bad Atronomer and this fantastic forum.
I like to take the opportunity now to say thank you to all the HB people, who made this possible and wish them a very happy new year. And to everyone else as well.

__________________
Not because it is easy, but because it is hard...

There is no way to happiness,
happiness is the way.

Well lets start up looking at that cover up by realising that the footage seen by the rest of the World was filmed straight from the screens at Houston. So the original source could not be found out from that now could it. Also just thousands of people were involved in this project does not mean that it was real. The only people who needed to be fooled were those in the control room (unless they were in on it already). Why would those who were involved in producing the parts for the Apollo be any wiser if they see the rocket lift off? All you know is that the astronauts board the rocket and it lifts off - a few days later a capsule lands in the sea. In the meantime everything else is covered by film footage that could be bogus.

So the yanks got lucky.

And now please quote the alleged amount of rocks handpicked by the astronauts? Was it around 26lbs out of 800lbs collected? And the Russians also have lunar samples collected from their unmanned missions, so as I said, you dont necessarily need any human involvement to collect a few rocks. Rocks have been collected from the deepest oceans and we cant visit them either - so whats your explanation for that Sherlock?

I think this was one of the most difficult and dangerous parts of the trip. Why people believe this to be for real and cannot believe in the other things? Maybe because it goes beyond their world and beyond their imagination.

__________________
Not because it is easy, but because it is hard...

There is no way to happiness,
happiness is the way.

Just consider that since the Apollo missions man have only travelled 400 miles from Earth when compared to the distance of 28 Earth widths which is the distance to travel to the Moon and it will take 15 years to go back even though its been done 6 times already. All done incidently in a rocket that Von Braun himself said in his own book would have to be the size of the Empire State Building to be successful.

You really need to study the Apollo missions before you attempt to discuss "hoax ideas"...for instance...

"A few rocks". Are you unaware of the numerous Lunar core tube samples returned by the Apollo missions? Your contention that it was just a "few rocks" does not withstand even "slight" investigation.

Please leave the "attitude" at the door...

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

The typical HB response, don't answer the question and then throw out new questions to side track and deflect the issue.

First answer my question, how could hundreds of trained people look at the moon rocks and conclude that they are real?

Besides rock fragments, the Apollo astronauts brought back coring samples, complete rocks, Surveyor parts, photographs, collected solar wind and sure there are other things I'm probably forgetting.


Ever heard of heat transfer? All meteorites have melted outer surfaces, the moon rocks do not. Chemically, meteorites are different from moon rocks.

You ought to put this in quotes and give Bart Sibrel the credit.

I'm sure if you gave NASA 4-5% of the federal budget like it got in the 1960s we'd have plenty of moon bases.

Thomas, I couldn't agree with you more. The HB crowd really got me interested in the moon landings again.

Thomas you said

"What a wonderful peace of history!"

Did you mean piece, like a piece of pie?

or

Did you mean peace, like no war?

Because I think either way works great

I think I meant: "What a great piece of peace!"

A nice big chunck of peace, I love it.

__________________
Not because it is easy, but because it is hard...

There is no way to happiness,
happiness is the way.

You might want to lose the attitude, you'll get banned very quickly.

I'd say almost everyone here knows about Von Braun's history. It was not a secret by any means. Unless you consider 'secret' to mean 'appears in Cornelius Ryan books'.

NASA was not big on saying "Look at our Nazi scientist!", that does not mean there was a cover up.

No conspiracy theories start because people think something is inadequete to the event, or they feel insignifigant and try to tear down the accomplishments of others.

In the JFK, people want a conspiracy because the little waif Oswald shot and killed the most powerful man in the free world. That doesn't balance, but add in the mafia, or the Masons, or the CIA, or the Militray Indutrial Complex (TM) and all is better in the world.

Moon Hoax claimants just want to tear down the accomplishments of others. Vandals.

However, to date, nobody has come up with a shred of evidence that definatively points to a conspiracy. Or as John McAdams puts it: The ratio of people who complaint about the Warren Report to those who have actually read it is on the order of 1000 to 1.

Why? Doesnt this board like the truth?

There have been quite a few Apollo programs here in the UK over the past few months, 'The Space Race' being one of them. It illustrated how NASA decided not to let Von Brauns history available to the public for quite some time. No matter what the circumstances NASA took to get man to the Moon, you shouldnt discredit well known facts about how they accomplished it, whether you agree with the statement or not.

And Im not saying that theres no Moon rocks, Im saying that you dont need man to go and get them. The Russians proved that. Core samples - we can get core samples here on earth with machinery remotely operated.

Quoting from the rules of this board...

Moonrock. you really need to read the board rules...and follow them...

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

The Russian probe returned, with great difficulty, about 101 and 30 grams of lunar soil. Several of the probes failed to return samples.

Keep in mind the Apollo missions returned 382 KILOGRAMS or rocks, soil and core samples.

The robotic machinery required to pick up a rock in the 60's/70's would have been humungous. Soil is comparitively easy to scoop.

Note that the robots we send to Mars right now have no ability to lift rocks, they can scrape at them, but thats about it.

Let that sink in.

The key words you use here are "on earth". Doing something on the moon is wee bit harder. An automated core driller capable of creating the coring the samples would have overwhelmed the Saturn 5's lifting capabilities. That is before you add int he machinery needed to remove the sample from the core and carefully set it in place for return (which would have been quite a feat for 60's robotics)

What about the tracking stations ALL over the world following the missions? a good deal of them managed by people who were not even citizens of the US, how could they be fooled? Not to mention the Ham Radio operators (again from all over the world) that actually monitored the transmissions from both the Astronauts and Mission Control, and let's not forget the Soviets themselves, the lowest point in US-USSR relations was during the early 60s, not to mention that for both sides the Space Race had very high connotations both in the political and military arena, had there been anything fishy on the US space program, the Soviets would have had a field day.

Sorry, I am afraid your arguments are not convincing at all.

__________________
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi

But we have visited the deepest ocean floor, in 1960. Have you ever heard of the Trieste?

Did you know that Von Braun’s book was written in 1953? Von Braun was talking about the direct-ascent approach to landing on the Moon – the lunar orbit rendezvous method had not yet been conceived. He was also considering manufacturing techniques that were less efficient then would latter become available in the 1960s.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

Not at all, we like the truth here. It's not even that you folks dispensing the truth never have any evidence, we don't mind that because we trust you. But it's that you truth dispensers don't seem to agree with each other, that's the problem. Hard as it may be to believe, at least some of you truth dispensers must be blowing smoke...

LOL moonrock face it. The evidence of the lunar landings is SO vast, so complex, and witnessed by so many people as to be a virtual sure thing.

Your arguments are nothing that hasn't been dredged up thousands of times before to these folks. Patiently they explain, and re-explain, and explain again only to start anew every time somebody comes on this board thinking they have figured out the 'plot'.

To ANY intelligent person who takes the time to actually listen to the evidence and to actually learn about the nuts and bolts of the Apollo program, the evidence is virtually incontrovertible. IMO, only people with ulterior motives or preconceived ideologically biased ideas can manage question what the rest of us understand is a crowning achievement of mankind--an example of what we as a species, not just the United States, can achieve if we set our minds to it.

The surfaces of meteorites bear the scars of their passage through the Earth's atmosphere- signs of having been heated to temperatures which objects at rest on the moon never experience.

Rocks collected on the surface of the moon, OTOH, bear the scars of existence on the lunar surface- lots and lots of micrometeoroid "zap pits" which show them to have spent their existence on the surface of a body with no atmosphere to prevent these tiny impactors from reaching the surface, and which would be effaced by melting if the rock passed through the Earth's atmosphere as a meteorite instead of in the storage compartments of an Apollo CM.

The notion that a collection of several hundred kg of lunar samples, including specimens which were photographed in situ before being collected, samples selected for their interest to geologists and core-drilled samples could be assembled from lunar meteorites and that this collection would stand up to decades of scientific investigation is simply absurd.

Somehow TPTB still don't seem to have managed to suppress either media coverage or public discussion of things which are embarrassing to said PTB, notably the arguments over the very contested elections which you claim are evidence of our lack of freedom of speech.

To gauge the degree of press freedom around the time of the Apollo program, you might find it worthwhile to look into such things as the coverage of the Watergate scandal, the Pentagon Papers and press and public discussion of government policies such as the war in Vietnam. If you need to know how successfully the gummint suppressed news of the wrongdoing of politicians back in the Nixon era, ask Gerald Ford how he came to be President.

In any case, your argument is a red herring. Whatever one might happen to think of Dubya (or Nixon, or Johnson, etc., etc.) is irrelevant to evaluating the evidence of the authenticity of the Apollo landings. Snide innuendos are not a substitute for rational, directed argument.

__________________
Please enjoy your trip through this door.

Also, if the astronauts did lift off, but didn't land on the Moon, where did they go?

Don't even say "in orbit around the Earth," because that's been shot down too many times, much like everything else in the HB's bag-o'-tricks.

We know that the radio transmissions came from the Moon and points along their trip toward it. If they were broadcasting from their module in Earth orbit, people would know. If they were broadcasting to an unmanned, relay probe that was sent to the Moon in their place, people would know. In the first case, telemetry would be the smoking gun. In both cases, regular periods of radio blackout (as the manned module loses line-of-sight with either the receiving stations on Earth, or the unmanned, relay probe) would be the smoking gun. No such evidences exist.

Please... explain to us, in something more solid than the previous waste that's been spread around, and without the endless stream of rhetorical questions, how the Apollo missions could've been faked.

It's always, "if, if, if" with you people, isn't it? As if, somehow, merely claiming possibility is enough to prove actuality.

Someone: "I could date a supermodel if I wasn't a computer geek and had a chiseled body."
CT/HB: "Awesome! *high five* You da man!"

No doubt you'll attempt to claim that possibilities should be considered, and no one here would disagree, because these possibilities have been considered, countless times over the past 30 years. They remain alive, not because they're so compelling, but because of ignorance, willful or otherwise.

HB proponents are in the business of manufacturing ignorance. Truth is free, but... somehow... ignorance sells.

But it doesn't sell that well. As any bad salesperson will tell you, it's never a defective product, but always defective customers.

True, but this idea that "gut instinct" and personal belief is a suitable replacement for intelligence, education, and research has to come from somewhere.

A chicken-and-the-egg perhaps...

Although, yeah... the solution isn't to shut down the snake-oil salespeople, but to educate their customers. It's definitely a problem when the customers feel that having their beliefs and suspicions confirmed is the only thing necessary to qualify the information as "truth"...

How do you fight that?