Did the NASA moon landings really happen ?

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Following the recent (and incredibly hijacked) thread on all things conspiracy, spacey and cheesy HERE, let's see what you Guys think really happened ...

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

It's actually quite interesting, and we have to put ourselves back in that era.

Nowadays, it is unlikely that such a thing could be accomplished (by which I mean a hoax). Now everyone wants to get in hello magazine, and there would be plenty of disgruntled employees/blackmailers waiting to have their say.

The odd thing about the moon landings is the fact that there is not a single comment anywhere from someone who would know. Not a disloyal technician, pissed at his government pension. Of course, all the considerable resources of Russian intelligence would have been trying to find out what the US were up to. It seems hard to believe that they would not have been able to find a weak spot. And if they did, surely they would have wanted a good laugh about it. Nothing but speculation.
Of course back then, in the middle of the cold war and the space race, a secret was a secret.

By the way, Darth Vader is Luke's father.
If the moon landings were a hoax, then that's just drama, like watching Eastenders. What is more sinister is the government/military machine that can silence those who may be tempted to speak...

 

One thing that strikes me is the information that is coming from NASA in recent years, now that people are starting to think twice about this. For example, in the last year or so, a NASA spokesman explained the fact that the US flag, famously planted by Armstrong, which appeared outstretched, clearly in the absence of any wind (hardly surprising in 1/10th the atmosphere of Earth) was doing so because they included a metal rod just in case there was no wind. So like, why take a flag that ain't gonna flutter ?

There are too many discrepancies about the whole thing (that hopefully this discussion will bring up) and given the US paranoia in the midst of the Cold War, defeat in any race against the USSR was not an option, therefore anything to avoid that defeat was an option.

 

So they sent guys up there, but they weren't sure if they were going to encounter wind or not...

 

Here is a good link that has helped restore my belief in the Apollo missions.

It addresses Bart's top ten reasons why it was a hoax.

http://24.73.239.154:8081/moonshot/debunkpg2.htm

 

Might just be the connection I'm using atm (it's heavily filtered) but I can't seem to get that link to work Blue.

 

an interesting read, i would still have to say that i still belive that did land on the moon.

 

Same here Modey. I'm at work, and they dont like urls with IPs - will try from home later (not that I'm gonna change my mind ... )

 

i used to be absolutely convinced that the pics were real, but in the last year or so have definitely swung the other way.

not just the flag or anything but the quality of the pics, ie near professional quality and more importantly the light sources in almost all of them.

skillfully catching shadows on the side facing the sun? genius!

 

Neck and neck so far Guys - thrilling stuff. Interesting to see some of the voters who went one way or t'other - I noticed a few surprise entries in either camp !!!

Any more takers ?

 

I've changed my mind.

I spoke in detail with a man who came to read the meter.
He was well turned out for a gas man in his smart black suit, but he was polite enough despite forgetting to take off his sunglasses indoors.
I can't remember his name, or exactly what it was that he said, but he seemed very well informed about the moon landings.

I thinks it's most likely that they did happen, but I also think that a lot of the film and the photos were fake.
Think about it.

The political pressure to win the space race at the time could have been enough to fake the landing.
They may even have got away with it.
But to fake it again? To keep faking flights that were in fact low orbit tours?
That would mean that the entire NASA empire is based on an onging hoax.

Can you see it?
'Guys, you have been selected as astonauts and American heroes. What we actually want you to do is sit in this shed and stay really quiet.'

So they gambled and sent them, and they made it. They didn't blow up on the pad, cook, get irradiated or lost and they actually got there.
The whole world would have been waiting to see pictures of what the moon looked like.

As the consiracy site says, how did they use the cameras with thick gloves on? How did they aim them? Why weren't they in shadow? Solar radiation would have damaged the film.
Maybe all those things are true.

So when they got back, amidst all the excitement, NASA could hardly say 'Um, yes, we did get there honest, but the photos really suck'.
The poeple wanted to see clear photos of astonauts standing by the American flag.
How would that look on the front page of the paper, a grainy picture of a guy on the moon, standing in shadow with the top of his head cut off?

So the people got what they wanted, and I suspect that at the time most people weren't looking for holes in it.
They all wanted to believe.