Moon Landing

[Plasma Snake[D]]

I would expect the flag to behave in a never before seen way. In the video it looked like it was propped up by wire and corn starch.

[Chris]

Thats cause it was propped up with a wire.

5. The flag placed on the surface by the astronauts flapped despite there being no wind on the Moon. Bart Sibrel said "The wind was probably caused by intense air-conditioning used to cool the astronauts in their lightened, un-circulated space suits. The cooling systems in the backpacks would have been removed to lighten the load not designed for Earth’s six times heavier gravity, otherwise they might have fallen over". The astronauts were moving the flag into position, causing motion. Since there is no air on the Moon to provide friction, these movements caused a long-lasting undulating movement seen in the flag. There was a rod extending from the top of the flagpole to hold the flag out for proper display. The fabric's rippled appearance was due to its having been folded during flight and gave it an appearance which could be mistaken for motion in a still photograph. The top supporting rod of the flag was telescopic and the crew of Apollo 11 found they could not fully extend it. Later crews did not fully extend this rod because they liked how it made the flag appear. A viewing of the videotape made during the Moonwalk shows that shortly after the astronauts remove their hands from the flag/flagpole, it stops moving and remains motionless. At one point the flag is in view for well over thirty minutes and it remains completely motionless throughout that period (and all similar periods). (See inertia.) See the photographs below.

Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah, but these missions involve machines that dont require as much nurturing in order to survive as humans do. PLus they dont need to come back in order to share information.

Um, what do you mean? these missions are even more complicated than a simple moon and back trip. You have New Horizons getting several gravity assists. going over 3 billion miles. The moon is only 240 thousand miles.
New Horizons Web Site


finally, this should put the hoaxers to rest for good. No one of the hoaxers ever question this.

Apollos 11, 14 and 15 erected laser reflectors on the lunar surface. Laser beams are routinely fired at these reflectors through telescopes at McDonald Observatory in Texas and near Grasse in southern France. Timings of these reflected beams are used to measure the Earth-Moon distance to an accuracy of one inch. To explain the existence of these reflectors the hoax advocates have no choice but to claim they were placed on the Moon by robotic landers; a huge undertaking for which there is no supporting evidence. The simple answer: the Apollo astronauts placed them there.

The Moon Hoax Debate

The first laser ranging retroreflector was positioned on the Moon in 1969 by the Apollo 11 astronauts. By beaming laser pulses at the reflector from Earth, scientists have been able to determine the round-trip travel time that gives the distance between the two bodies at any time to an accuracy of about 3 centimeters. The laser reflector consists of 100 fused silica half-cubes, called corner cubes, mounted in a 46-centimeter square aluminum panel. Each corner cube is 3.8 centimeters in diameter. Corner cubes reflect a beam of light directly back toward the point of origin.

NASA - Accuracy of Eclipse Predictions

[Jack]

Cool, I didn't know all that.

Can't explain that one.

Three letters...LSD.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Chris Thats cause it was propped up with a wire.

A horizontal rod, actually. Otherwise it would have hung down like a wet rag.

finally, this should put the hoaxers to rest for good. No one of the hoaxers ever question this. The Moon Hoax Debate

I've tried to tell people about that a hundred times. If we never went there how in hell could we have mounted reflectors on the lunar surface? You just can't keep a good CT down I suppose.

[Chris]

nope.

[Plasma Snake[D]]

I dont know. I just think that somehow bungee cords were involved.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: PatrickHenry GM, I hold a lot of controversial views. Some would label me a CT loonie...But what is the compelling evidence for a no_moon_landing theory? Most of my controversial views have stacks of evidence...

I have heard a couple of truly astounding questions, that if answered, would completely strip my skepticism on this away on this topic. Oddly, the official NASA spokesperson provided to field questions on this subject for the television event had zero answers to these questions.


1) How does air conditioning work in a vacuum? In order for heat to transfer from one medium to another, there has to be another medium there. I don't think the sparse conditions at the lunar surface has enough atmosphere for the heat to transfer out of the ship via "air conditioning", like the offficial story states.


We know that they rotated the ship on it's journey through space to regulate the temperature, but what about when the ship landed, and they could no longer rotate the ( hot side ) surface out of the Sun? How did they regulate the temperature of the landing module in the vacuum of space when it was sitting on the surface of the Moon?


( Having a brain fart, will attempt to reply later, when the "air" clears.

[another day]

And why is it that we havent gone back ever since then?

Um...THERE HAVE BEEN 6 MOON LANDINGS. Come on people...They spanned from 1969 to 1972. Apollos 11 to 17 were all manned missions to the moon - successful ones. I have no idea why this is such a little known thing! People focused so much on the first one and totally forgot/ignored the others.

The moon hoax crap is just that...Theres a great site that debunks all the common arguments.

Besides, even if they were faked, which they weren't, NASA could easily send people to the moon nowadays and I'm sure they would want to do that had they actually never been there.

[Plasma Snake[D]]

I worded it way wrong. I meant we havent been back since that era.

[Chris]

We are going back :rolleyes:

Moon Mineralogy Mapper -
NASA - NASA's Future: The Vision for Space Exploration

if it was truly a hoax then I wonder if the "jig" is going to be up when we land there in the near future.

You guys are grasping at straws

and RE: the landing problems:

NASA - Wide Awake on the Sea of Tranquillity

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Milton Bradley I have heard a couple of truly astounding questions, that if answered, would completely strip my skepticism on this away on this topic. Oddly, the official NASA spokesperson provided to field questions on this subject for the television event had zero answers to these questions. 1) How does air conditioning work in a vacuum? In order for heat to transfer from one medium to another, there has to be another medium there. I don't think the sparse conditions at the lunar surface has enough atmosphere for the heat to transfer out of the ship via "air conditioning", like the offficial story states.

The space suits were cooled the same way the shuttle cools itself. Have you noticed the pictures of the shuttle always show it with its bay doors open? That's to keep it cool. Heat can radiate into space the same way the Sun warms the Earth. Heat travels from the Sun, through 93,000,000 miles of vaccuum and still warms the whole planet. If that can happen its easy to see how space suits transfer heat to space.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Scribbler1 The space suits were cooled the same way the shuttle cools itself. Have you noticed the pictures of the shuttle always show it with its bay doors open? That's to keep it cool. Heat can radiate into space the same way the Sun warms the Earth. Heat travels from the Sun, through 93,000,000 miles of vaccuum and still warms the whole planet. If that can happen its easy to see how space suits transfer heat to space.

Not the suits my good man, the module.


NASA is on record admitting that they had to rotate the vehicle to keep the side in direct sunlight from having complications. ( The difference in temperature from light to dark sides is like 350 degrees F. ) Thats why they rotated it on it's journey, ah, see, but when it landed it sat upright, and there was no way of dealing with the inevitable sunlight schedule dictated by the landers position on the orb.


So, how do you climate control a small, thin, flimsy aluminum can in the vast, cold emptyness of space? ( Remembering the entire volume of the spacecraft was emptied into space every time they opened the door. )


Even the official NASA spokesman left the crowd with a "er, um, well, let me get back to you on that".


Not saying it can't be done, but could it be done in 1969 on the first attempt?

[Compugasm]

Every "damn odd" theory has been credibly explain in layperson understanding. If they had the technology to get there, then it's possible to fake it too. But short of time-traveling back to 1969, and going to the moon yourself, I'm not sure what else could possibly be accepted as proof.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Not the suits my good man, the module.

My error, but the conditions are the same.

So, how do you climate control a small, thin, flimsy aluminum can in the vast, cold emptyness of space? ( Remembering the entire volume of the spacecraft was emptied into space every time they opened the door. ) Even the official NASA spokesman left the crowd with a "er, um, well, let me get back to you on that". Not saying it can't be done, but could it be done in 1969 on the first attempt?

Apparently they may have underestimated the necessity for cooling. As far as the heat goes, the spacecraft had onboard heaters. That's why the Apollo 13 crew damn near froze when they had to shut down their systems to conserve power. I would assume the trip back would have exposed them to sunlight as well as the trip TO the Moon.

[Jagged]

Please, stop talking about the inability for the spokesperson to say anything. Its the weakest argument ever, of all the things one could question, one shouldnt be "well, that dude that works for NASA couldnt answer all these questions." I bet he was there for political questions and reasons, and wasn't planning on having the ability to answer various questions just so people dont think its a hoax. Thats absurd, if they actually sent people to the moon and i was in NASA, i wouldn't care at all about people who claim its fake.

Additionally, there were probably hundreds of physicists and other designers working on the moon projects. One person, especially a mere spokesperson who probably didnt take a highschool physics class probably didnt know anything about the inner workings of the spaceships anyways.

[Scribbler1]

Whether you intended to make this point or not, you have hit on something significant.

Additionally, there were probably hundreds of physicists and other designers working on the moon projects.

Thousands, actually. Probably tens of thousands. The work force of NASA in 1968 was about 50,000 people. You would think of ALL those people involved with the agency, SOMEBODY would have come forward and said the thing was a fake. But instead you have some desert rat in a trailer saying the project was phony because he thought the astronaut's gloves were so bulky they couldn't have snapped those pictures.

[Chris]

Quote by: Compugasm Every "damn odd" theory has been credibly explain in layperson understanding. If they had the technology to get there, then it's possible to fake it too. But short of time-traveling back to 1969, and going to the moon yourself, I'm not sure what else could possibly be accepted as proof.

And short of people stopping for a second and using their brains.

McDonald Observatory
McDonald Laser Ranging System

The McDonald Laser Ranging Station (MLRS) is a dedicated laser ranging station capable of measuring round trip light travel times to a constellation of artificial earth satellites and lunar retro-reflectors to a precision of about 1 centimeter and time of laser firing to about 35 picoseconds. Data from this station as well as 30-40 similar satellite-capable systems and one other regularly contributing lunar-capable system around the world are used for a variety of scientific pursuits including study of the earth's gravitational field, plate tectonics, earth's orientation in space, high precision time transfer, relativity, lunar and solar system dynamics, and providing high precision orbits for GPS and ocean top mapping missions.

Triple Laser Ranging Collocation Experiment At The Grasse Observatory, France
http://cddis.nasa.gov/lw13/docs/pape...nicolas_1m.pdf

[gallo]

Quote by: Nono Anyone who knows modern aircraft and peeks in the window at the control panel of the Apollo craft on display at the Smithsonian will immediately grasp how damn lucky they were to make it at all, as Scribbler suggests. They knew what they were doing, they just had precious few resources to deal with anything going wrong (see Apollo 13). As for conspiracy theories, why bother? What they accomplished is not at all implausible, and they did it. They also brought back plenty of rocks that would have been impossible to fake. Now that would have been an interesting conspiracy.

All true.

If you are reading this then you probably have a computer that is much faster, with much more memory, and much more disk space than anything used on the lunar orbital vehicle or the LEM, not to mention the computers used at mission control. Some years after the initial lunar landing I visited the Johnson Space Center mission control center, and there, at each and every station was a 486 computer, not much different from what I had, touted as an upgrade from previous systems. So they each did their computations and threw them out onto the network where they were available for other stations. At that time, I was using the same sort of system for accounting data.

Indeed it was all cutting edge. But the programming was pristine and the humans performed without notable error.

[gallo]

Quote by: Scribbler1 But instead you have some desert rat in a trailer saying the project was phony because he thought the astronaut's gloves were so bulky they couldn't have snapped those pictures.

But it was a really, really big button. It had been tested and found to work before the launch.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: gallo But it was a really, really big button. It had been tested and found to work before the launch.

Go tell that to the guy in the desert who never considered that the Hasselblad might be MODIFIED.