(first post and confused how this site works... duh)

But glad to have found you all because the gobbledygook sites spewing rhetoric and opinions with too much energy focusing on photo analysis (no pun intended) used to create a hoax and then debunk it (to me) is a complete waste of time.

I have enjoyed reading every post here and impressed at the really intelligent points raised, far more intelligent than me... however, would like to see more scientific data and facts to support the truth that man on the moon is not a hoax and would like to share two absolute definitive answers:

1. seq bay pendulum swing analysis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kojsf...eature=related

2. Lunar Lazar Ranger left on the moon to reflect a Lazar sent from earth 249 times a year since 1969...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqlo_spATEM&eurl=
skip to 6:20

Unscannable posted a compelling point that is new to me about how Apollo 12 brought back a movie camera left on the moon... nice! Here is a list of man made debris left on the moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ts_on_the_Moon

Which brings me to the MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION:

Has anyone seen a recent photo from a subsequent unmanned moon visit or satellite that shows the moon buggy was in fact left behind. To me, this would be some good evidence.

I can't find one and would appreciate anyone that can... thanks.

(and forgive me if I have violated your rules here as I am not familiar with how this site works and appears that I may have posted the same thing more than once and can not find either post... so, okeedoke?)

I'm not a moon-missions expert, but I don't think any of the subsequent un-manned missions have been in the same area as the landings, and none of the obiting imagers have good enough resolution to image them (though wasn't a recent/upcoming Japanese probe suppose to have that capability?).

I could have sworn I saw a image recently that shows one of the landing sites, and the things left behind, aswell as the disturbance in the regolith from take-off/landing. I'm sure someone here knows of it, and chances aren't bad that they've beat me to posting it. Let me hit "submit" and see... [eta: no, they're slow today]

[eta2: I'm not sure that there have been many un-manned craft landed on the moon since the Apollo missions; the webpage I'm looking at doesn't show any from the US, and just a few from the USSR]

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"In order to increase awareness of the homeless, security have been given binoculars."

No gentle landings that I know of, but there have been some deliberate crash landings.

An earth bound telescope would not have the resolution needed, and any other source, like a NASA probe, would be scoffed at by the nay sayers. They want to believe that we didn't go. Just like some would rather cling to a small pixelated image from the 70s that looks like a face, rather than accept the huge images we have now.

There's also the small matter of the several nations (other than the U.S.) who tracked the lunar missions to the moon & back. You'd think if any one of them 'tracked' our missions to a studio in Hollywood, they'd have said something. Not sure how the woo-woo's debunk that particular tidbit, perhaps they say those nations that tracked the missions were in on the 'hoax'?

They don't. They just come up with something like, "Oh, so I suppose you approve of Von Braun's involvement with the Nazis," or any number of non-sequiturs.

I had this thrown at me when I raised that very point on a YouTube discussion. The same poster went on to accuse me of being a shill and of approving of America's mistreatment of native people. (I find it amusing the way HBs assume I'm a patriotic American. I've never even been to America!)

I left the HB ranting impotently.

Was this the picture showing the regolith disturbance?

__________________
"One does not require alien ruins in order to absorb a profound sense of wonder and mystery from the moon. That our civilization had actually visited it is miracle enough." Jason Roberts

An earth-bound telescope would also be scoffed at by the naysayers, since they wouldn't have much more likelihood of getting to look through the eyepiece of one of those than they would of one that's mounted on a space probe.

I'm with redshifter. I think the strongest single piece of evidence that the moon landing was not a hoax is that the USSR, then in a fierce propaganda war with the USA, would have had every reason in the world to expose the hoax if they found any credible evidence that the landings did not happen. However, it would seem that one's willingness to believe they did happen is more closely correlated with scientific literacy than with political affiliation: a whole army of Soviet aerospace engineers seems to have completely failed to make any of the kind of noise we hear from folks like Bart Sibrel.

I was going to say, "do you think the Russians are that smart to come up with a conspiracy theory," (God, hope you are not Russian). And then reading further, I think that is exactly what you said!

I have to admit, I felt like a dork when I signed up for this bulletin thing (first time user of bulletin things) and very uncomfortable using it since I don't know the protocols here... but glad to be part of this and amazed that there are actually other people out there that are reading and communicating with each other... aha! another conspiracy theory

I think I saw the video you are speaking of Apollo 17 fly over previous landing spot but didn't really show any debris
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mFkJv7sXwA

Didn't want to mention it because I figured it would only lend amo to the conspiracy theorists because there appeared to be a booger on the camera lens and I don't think we want to go there!

But yes, we are getting close... will probably have to leave it to the good old Japanese again. Then NASA will be asking congress for a bail out because they couldn't compete with the Japanese (like the car companies, just in case you don't get the analogy).

Welcome to the forums, k9trek. Make sure you check out the rules and stay relaxed, and you'll be just fine.

__________________
Spread the Love!

That is alot of photo analysis going on there, but I am sure it is compelling if my eyesight was better because it all looks like space pimples on an assteroid to me.

Shill... lol... You ain't one of them Russians are ye... they are the ones who started these conspiracy theories dontcha know? You betcha! Cuz I can see em from me front porch dontcha know while using a one eyed binocular on the back of my iron dawg's snow machine, and also, as in as well as, opposed to perhaps... (Sarah Palin)

You know you have made a compelling point when your opponent compares you to a Nazi.

thanks BertL... it is difficult to remain relaxed... is there a rule on here about how many times one can post? I have to admit, this is kind of fun, but afraid I am over welcoming my stay here. Any tips on how to overcome my feeling of being a dorky nerd?

Welcome, k9trek!

There are rules against spamming, but as long as you're actually replying coherently and contributing to the discussion, you shouldn't have any trouble posting as much as you like.

As for relaxing, you'll probably find yourself calming down over time. Practice, familiarity, the novelty wearing off, and all that.

When I find myself getting too agitated, I usually log out, get up, and take a walk. Something to clear my head.

No, post away. There are rules about politeness and avoiding discussions on politics and religion. And there are some special rules for the Conspriacy Theory (CT) and Against the Mainstream (ATM) sections, with regard to evidence and answering direct questions.

Oh, and welcome to BAUT.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

OH!
That's how to deal with that!

The Rules are easily available, reading them is a really good idea, they are different from many forums and are quite strictly enforced. Though to answer your question no there isn't a rule about how many times you can post.

As for how to stop feeling like a dorky nerd remember that we are all space/science nerds here, after all we spend our free time posting and reading this board

__________________
"Any Sufficiently Analyzed Magic is Indistinguishable from SCIENCE!" -Agatha Heterodyne

"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it." -Florence Ambrose

Now that I have read the rules and can see where I may have crossed a line or two and sincerely hope nobody was offended. Thank you for your kind communication.

I dont think you crossed any lines, as such. Chill out, relax. This is a great place to be, to participate in, to read and to learn.

__________________
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

Not on any posts of yours that I have read so far. The fact that you have read the rules and apologised on the off chance that you may have transgressed them already has you ahead of the game!

Welcome to the BAUT. I hope you enjoy it!

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

"Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful." - Ian Faith

This would involve, at best, a very fuzzy photograph that the naysayers would claim was faked, as opposed to the thousands of still and video footage shot of the lunary rovers, the astronauts, and their landing crafts, which, the naysayers claim is faked...

I strongly believe some believe so strongly that we never went to the Moon that if we sent them there to see for themselves, suited them up, let them walk around, take pictures, they would claim it was a NASA mind trick, that they were simply fed these experiences while they rested quietly in tank of goo.

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.

Sadly, neither of these pieces of evidence will be taken as evidence by people who are convinced the landings were faked.

In the case of the SEQ Bay pendulum, most conspiracy theorists will claim the film was sped up, or that something was done to slow the pendulum down - after all, they could easily claim the poor resolution of the video would hide such a device.

In the case of the laser rangers, the usual claim is that they were placed by unmanned spacecraft.

Again, conspiracy theorists claim that unmanned spacecraft placed this material on the Moon.

Not yet, to my knowledge. NASA's Lunar Reconnaisance Orbiter's cameras should have the resolution to spot them, if I remember correctly.

For me, the incontrovertible proof that we went to the Moon is in the Moon rocks and core samples we have here on Earth. There's too much material for it to have been collected by sample return missions (6 Apollo missions brought back 1000 times as much material as 3 unmanned Soviet missions); the rocks show weathering appropriate to the Moon rather than passage through the Earth's atmosphere, so they weren't collected from Antarctica; their crystaline structure required too much cooling time for them to have been made by scientists; and core samples more than a metre long are too long for unmanned spacecraft to have returned to the Earth.

Luna 21/Lunokhod 2, Luna 24. Possibly Luna 23 as well.

Let me also add my welcome to our community, k9trek. I agree with the others: having read the rules and demonstrated a concern for following them, you're ahead of the game compared to some new posters. So, I think a little relaxation is in order.

I do have a suggestion, though...not to be taken as an official "suggestion" from a moderator, new one that I am. It's a piece of advice I received early on at another forum I frequent that I've tried to live by here and it's served me pretty well:

Read more, post less.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to discourage you from posting your questions and contributions...not at all...nosireebob. It's just my opinion that reading the posts of others (a lot) will go a long way toward giving you a feel for how things are and are not done on this board. Me, I still try to keep my reading-to-posting ratio pretty high...and considering how long I've been a member, I think my post count supports that.

__________________
Brett
Peters Creek, Alaska
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

What is telling is that the HB's can never offer any evidence of the design, construction, operation, launch or travel of these unmanned spacecraft.

Somehow the mere suggestion of them is "enough" (to them) to show all Apollo fake.



For me, the most telling evidence for Apollo is the shear mind boggling scale of the thing (esp. going back to Mercury/Gemini).

You can find such amazingly minute detail about Apollo, if you look and read enough.

To imagine that all of it was somehow made up or scripted just to support the hoax is unbelievable.

The HB's counter this with "compartmentalisation" - that the engineers working on it didn't know it was going to be faked, so some of it was real - but then they can't show where the line is; what was real and what was faked, nor why it had to be. Did Apollo get to LEO but no further? Did they orbit the Moon but not really land? ...? What was faked, and why?

Yeah, that mind numbingly huge thing was faked, yet they used shiny wires on the crew "zero-G trapeze" and put the rovers in place with cranes instead of driving them into position.

Sure.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

I think that apart from silence from the USSR, who would have made a fuss. The biggest hurdle to me is the amount of work required to fake it. To me it appears that there are more insurmountable hurdles in making it appear that it came from the moon that would have been picked up by any switched on watcher. Especially in the political climate of the time. Back to the USSR not piping up. Also, have there been any death bed admissions of a fake?

So, for the conspiracy theorist. I would like to see and hear how it was faked from day one. Not cherry picked snippets of the larger picture when the rest of the project backs it up. Lets see a combined start to finish that stands up to scrutiny.

Careful, even those have been invented (although this example has nothing to do with the moonlandings)..

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

Those are some really good rebuttals to what I thought were rock solid (proof) and a bit of doubt was placed in my mind but talked down to believer reality by:
1. the shear scope of the project
2. meter long core sample and 1000 more material than unmanned missions
3. Rogelith Theory (ouch!)
4. other countries tracking space movements with no mention of ct

Please allow me to embellish upon the scope of these missions... I have in my possession a seven cd rom collection of the history of space travel... SEVEN CD's!! Shouldn't that be adequate proof to the naysayers that it is too big to fake? (and as I type that, the voice of Steven Colbert is reverberating through my head)

Thanks for the pointers
1. relax
2. take a walk, clear the head
3. Read more, post less
4. enjoy being a dorky nerd
5. (I can see the next pointer coming... be concisely brief when posting)

Some questions, please:
1. cb = conspiracy believers, ct = conspiracy theorists but what is the abbreviation for those of us who believe man on the moon is true?

2. Is it possible for a country to launch a small unmanned mission without the rest of of the world knowing about it? And was it possible back then? (you can see where I am going with this, preempting the ct, that "they" "secretly" launched unmanned missions to place materials on the moon. Or in other words... how small would a module need to be to go undetected?

For a moderator or administrator...
1. do you / can you track the ratio of users who visit the site to those who create an account to those who return.

2. if so, how many posts does "the average" (like there are actually average people here... several northern quadrants above par (Beldar Conehead) user/participant post to establish a "senior user?" Or how does one become a senior user?

3. I noticed some people have thousands of posts... over what time period?

4. Is there a statistics page that shows similar data?

Humbly and truly sincere.

ps... I can see too, how my attempts to be funny can grow quite trite, give me a chance for the novelty to wear off I can see this is a much more serious discussion than what I thought I was in for... and for what it is worth, I like that.

Ah, I was curious if there were for Apollo. You see, the other thing I think with the people involved was the professionalism and dedication. Pride in what they were doing would prevent such a thing?

Sorry if this introduces the morbid. Just an idea that I have been mulling over for a while.