Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

Taibak · Feb 15, 2004, 10:04 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,)
Now, I haven't done all that much research on this topic yet and I think I probably should have done some before I actually made this topic, but I think I have a pretty ok point.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

No offense, but it's a pretty weak argument.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,)
I have just finished watching a TV programme where they showed pictures of the "man walking on the moon"... and I looked up my OWN little picture of that and found that what they were saying isi n fact correct. The pictures that were taken, have little crosses marked on them in certain places. Now, these crosses should appear IN FRONT of the actual image itself.. however, in about three different photo's there seems to be a jumble of these crosses that actually appear behind the image, suggesting that the images are fake.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Not necessarily. The Apollo astronauts were taking photos of a bright white and grey landscape (the Moon) that was well lit by the Sun. As such, the photos were overexposed a bit, causing the white bits (mountains, rocks, etc.) to bleed over the crosshairs. This is photography 101 - try it yourself sometime by taking a slightly overexpsed photo of something covered in snow using a camera with crosshairs on the lens. You'll see the same effect.

Also, think about where the crosshairs would have to have been if they were in the background of a fake Lunar landscape. The hoaxers would have had to paint the crosshairs on the back of the set and repaint them every time the photographed the set from a different angle. Why would they have bothered? Even from a theatrical point of view this doesn't make sense. No set designer in the world would be stupid enough to put an obviously fake background element in a set that was designed to be as realistic as possible. There is just no rational reason to have had crosshairs in the background at all - *even if it was a hoax.*

Incidentally, if you're talking about that Fox special about the Moon hoax, you might want to look closely at their use of the movie Capricorn 1 as evidence. Apollo 11 landed in 1969. Capricorn 1 was released in 1978. Apollo inspired the movie, *not* the other way around, like the Fox special implies.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,)
Also.. I know from my own studies that space is a dangerous place, and that well.. it is near impossible for any man made object to get through the "sky" - so to speak-... I mean, even ROCKs cannot get throughour sky without falling to peices, and it is obvious that there is something amiss here, cuz... <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Lots of things do.

Thousands of satellites are in orbit. Hundreds of space probes have been launched. Of the dozens of shuttle missions that have been flown, only one (Columbia on its final flight) ran into atmospheric problems. The heavily damaged Apollo 13 made it through the atmosphere no problem.

If you don't believe those arguments, how else do you explain Meteor Crater in Arizona? Not only do we have a honkin' big hole in the ground that's 100% consistent with a meteor impact, we've found the rock that made it.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,)
they have got someone on the moon once... why can't they do it again? <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Money and politics. The Apollo Program was started for purely political reasons. The United States was badly behind the Sovier Union in the space race President Kennedy wanted to beat the Soviets to the Moon. Apollo 11 did just that. By Apollo 13, people were already wondering why the government was still spending huge sums of money on a race that was already won. By the time Apollo 18 was ready to launch, there was no political support in the U.S. to keep spending millions on Apollo. As such, President Nixon cancelled Apollo 18 and all subsequent flights. We're talking about millions of dollars that could just as easily go to tax cuts, welfare, the military, subsidised industry, or new innovative space projects (Skylab and the shuttle come to mind).

Since then, no space agency has had the money or the will to return. For evidence, all you need to see it the lukewarm reaction President Bush got for his proposed Moon missions. Heck, his proposed missions to Mars haven't garnered much attention. Then again, the Chinese and Indians are both planning missions to the Moon, so someone *is* in fact planning to go back.

To put this argument in perspective, I went to Florida in the spring of 1997. I haven't been back since. To suggest that I haven't wanted to go back to Florida during the past seven years proves that it's impossible to go to Florida is silly.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,)
I think that everything surrounding that is just a little off center and... some of the things I have read have been very different and I think it's just a little strange thats all. Could someone have a look at this, cuz from my point of view, I think the whole thing is a bit of a SHAM. I guess, that's governments for you though. :) xoxo<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Except there's a lot more to it then that. What about the 641 pounds of rock the Apollo astronauts brought back with them? No geologist on the planet would mistake them for Earth rocks. What about the anecdotal evidence from *millions* of people who watched the Apollo 11 landing live - many of whom commented on how alien the landscape looked and how oddly things moved in it. What about the dust being kicked up by the wheels on the rovers? All of it moves in a perfectly parabolic arc - something that's only possible in conditions unattainable on Earth, a perfect vacuum. What about the thousands of pages of documentation - most of which should be readily attainable under the Freedom of Information Act? Any historian will tell you that that many self- and mutually-consistent documents is quite good evidence that something happened. How do you explain the reflectors on the Moon that scientists bounce laser beams off regularly? The returned signals are far too good to have bounced off a reflector that wasn't placed by hand.

Finally, what about the sheer difficulty in keeping a conspiracy *this big* under wraps. Over 360,000 people worked on the Apollo project in some form or another. It would be absolutely impossible to keep all of them silent for almost 40 years now. Neither money nor intimidation would be 100% successful, and yet, to the best of my knowledge, not one person involved in the project has come forward to blow the whistle on the hoax. How do you explain that?

Incidentally, check out www.badastronomy.com. It thoroughly dissects the Fox special and the arguments therein.

Feb 15, 2004, 10:04 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Taibak Sedimentary Rock Posts: 2	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,) Now, I haven't done all that much research on this topic yet and I think I probably should have done some before I actually made this topic, but I think I have a pretty ok point.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No offense, but it's a pretty weak argument. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,) I have just finished watching a TV programme where they showed pictures of the "man walking on the moon"... and I looked up my OWN little picture of that and found that what they were saying isi n fact correct. The pictures that were taken, have little crosses marked on them in certain places. Now, these crosses should appear IN FRONT of the actual image itself.. however, in about three different photo's there seems to be a jumble of these crosses that actually appear behind the image, suggesting that the images are fake.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Not necessarily. The Apollo astronauts were taking photos of a bright white and grey landscape (the Moon) that was well lit by the Sun. As such, the photos were overexposed a bit, causing the white bits (mountains, rocks, etc.) to bleed over the crosshairs. This is photography 101 - try it yourself sometime by taking a slightly overexpsed photo of something covered in snow using a camera with crosshairs on the lens. You'll see the same effect. Also, think about where the crosshairs would have to have been if they were in the background of a fake Lunar landscape. The hoaxers would have had to paint the crosshairs on the back of the set and repaint them every time the photographed the set from a different angle. Why would they have bothered? Even from a theatrical point of view this doesn't make sense. No set designer in the world would be stupid enough to put an obviously fake background element in a set that was designed to be as realistic as possible. There is just no rational reason to have had crosshairs in the background at all - even if it was a hoax. Incidentally, if you're talking about that Fox special about the Moon hoax, you might want to look closely at their use of the movie Capricorn 1 as evidence. Apollo 11 landed in 1969. Capricorn 1 was released in 1978. Apollo inspired the movie, not the other way around, like the Fox special implies. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,) Also.. I know from my own studies that space is a dangerous place, and that well.. it is near impossible for any man made object to get through the "sky" - so to speak-... I mean, even ROCKs cannot get throughour sky without falling to peices, and it is obvious that there is something amiss here, cuz... <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Lots of things do. Thousands of satellites are in orbit. Hundreds of space probes have been launched. Of the dozens of shuttle missions that have been flown, only one (Columbia on its final flight) ran into atmospheric problems. The heavily damaged Apollo 13 made it through the atmosphere no problem. If you don't believe those arguments, how else do you explain Meteor Crater in Arizona? Not only do we have a honkin' big hole in the ground that's 100% consistent with a meteor impact, we've found the rock that made it. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,) they have got someone on the moon once... why can't they do it again? <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Money and politics. The Apollo Program was started for purely political reasons. The United States was badly behind the Sovier Union in the space race President Kennedy wanted to beat the Soviets to the Moon. Apollo 11 did just that. By Apollo 13, people were already wondering why the government was still spending huge sums of money on a race that was already won. By the time Apollo 18 was ready to launch, there was no political support in the U.S. to keep spending millions on Apollo. As such, President Nixon cancelled Apollo 18 and all subsequent flights. We're talking about millions of dollars that could just as easily go to tax cuts, welfare, the military, subsidised industry, or new innovative space projects (Skylab and the shuttle come to mind). Since then, no space agency has had the money or the will to return. For evidence, all you need to see it the lukewarm reaction President Bush got for his proposed Moon missions. Heck, his proposed missions to Mars haven't garnered much attention. Then again, the Chinese and Indians are both planning missions to the Moon, so someone is in fact planning to go back. To put this argument in perspective, I went to Florida in the spring of 1997. I haven't been back since. To suggest that I haven't wanted to go back to Florida during the past seven years proves that it's impossible to go to Florida is silly. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Sassi,) I think that everything surrounding that is just a little off center and... some of the things I have read have been very different and I think it's just a little strange thats all. Could someone have a look at this, cuz from my point of view, I think the whole thing is a bit of a SHAM. I guess, that's governments for you though. :) xoxo<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Except there's a lot more to it then that. What about the 641 pounds of rock the Apollo astronauts brought back with them? No geologist on the planet would mistake them for Earth rocks. What about the anecdotal evidence from millions of people who watched the Apollo 11 landing live - many of whom commented on how alien the landscape looked and how oddly things moved in it. What about the dust being kicked up by the wheels on the rovers? All of it moves in a perfectly parabolic arc - something that's only possible in conditions unattainable on Earth, a perfect vacuum. What about the thousands of pages of documentation - most of which should be readily attainable under the Freedom of Information Act? Any historian will tell you that that many self- and mutually-consistent documents is quite good evidence that something happened. How do you explain the reflectors on the Moon that scientists bounce laser beams off regularly? The returned signals are far too good to have bounced off a reflector that wasn't placed by hand. Finally, what about the sheer difficulty in keeping a conspiracy this big under wraps. Over 360,000 people worked on the Apollo project in some form or another. It would be absolutely impossible to keep all of them silent for almost 40 years now. Neither money nor intimidation would be 100% successful, and yet, to the best of my knowledge, not one person involved in the project has come forward to blow the whistle on the hoax. How do you explain that? Incidentally, check out www.badastronomy.com. It thoroughly dissects the Fox special and the arguments therein.