conspiracy the moon

[thered]

Am i really expected to believe that this lunar module could hurtle through meteors,gravitational pull and radiation

cant believe its a real pic from nasa AS11-40-5922


were off to button moon

seriously wtf ???? cardboard tinfoil and gaffa tape by the look of it

http://www.history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5922.jpg

[firemouth]

Am i really expected to believe that this lunar module could hurtle through meteors,gravitational pull and radiation

cant believe its a real pic from nasa AS11-40-5922


were off to button moon

seriously wtf ???? cardboard tinfoil and gaffa tape by the look of it

http://www.history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5922.jpg

There may be a lot of meteors out there, but out there is very very big, so NO it aint got a hope of surviving a strike. but none of them got hit, so there you go.

as for gravitational pull. you can move a 20,000 tonne space ship with only a can of hair spray (equal and opposite, and all that) slowly, granted, but it can still move it. so no problem there.

radiation? well unless they got caught in path of a Coronal mass ejection. you need little more than a thin film of lead, or its equivalent. if you are worried about the Van Allen belt, don't be. none of the Astronauts we in the LEM when they made their short trip through them. ( I love Van Allens comment when asked if the story's of danger to Astronauts, when they pass through the belts. All he did was laugh. says it all really)

as for "cardboard tin foil and gaffa tape" have you ever seen one of these things? they may look "Heath Robinson" in a photo, but they are far from it!

[nara]

...and your example of Van Allen himself laughing at the Van Allen Belt nonsense that gets trotted out on wacko websites is always worthwhile, but therein lies a dilemma.

Are these debates/discussions really worthwhile? I'm beginning to wonder.

The fact that conspiracy theorists are willing to accept "facts" that are based on a similarly profound ignorance/misunderstanding of the basic science involved, speaks volumes.

These people might be misguided, but they're (mostly) harmless. Everybody needs a hobby.

[GastonJ]

might as well do this as well im getting in to it


was the moon landing a big scam we've all heard the tales whats your view


personally i think its all a big con

I can confirm that the moon has not landed anywhere and is still in it's orbit where it belongs. Had it landed I'm sure we'd have known about it quite quickly, not least because the US would have claimed it as another state of the US, no matter where it landed, and claimed mineral rights. Feel free to check when it gets dark, look up and it will still be there. So no it hasn't landed anywhere at all

As for the US landing a lunar module on the moon, I remember watching it on television as a kid, yeah why not. If anyone has proof that they never please feel free to post the proof, not some rumor that you heard from your neighbours, son's girflriends, daughters, best friend at school, brothers, cousins grandmother who made lunar modules out of washing up up bottles and filmed the whole thing on their bbq.

[thered]

Not convinced at all tbh, seeing that lunar module close up with its panels hanging off convinces me less. A massive meteor burns to a pebble on re entry yet some bacofoil, curtain pole and selotape is sturdy enough. I was not alive when it happened and i find it hard to believe we have not been back in 40 years. The excuses that we have no need too now cos we seen it doesnt really wash

I also find it strange that if a hairdryer can move the module how come there is no dust on the modules feet surely there was plenty of it moving about on landing, yes i have heard the nasa explanation but i dont buy it. i seen video of them bouncing about there is dust, aldrin also mentioned on landing it was kicking a lot of dust

also this picture below for instance looks like its been dropped by a crane, why footprints but no tyre tracks? dont make sense. Basic science maybe not good but why put wheels on a rover if it floats over the ground????

http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo15/hires/as15-88-11901.jpg

[GastonJ]

Well it did only weigh 72 kilos on the moon and it was dropped in place by pulleys, unfolded and locked together. The Russians would have been watching their every move when they landed, and it's very very unlikely that they would have kept quiet - more so given the political climate at the time, and that the Americans had beaten them in a race (the only sort of race Americans win, against themselves - like the so called "Worlds Series really). As more countries send probes etc I'm sure they'd also shout if nothing was found to indicate that the US had been there.

View from above.



Interesting link

http://www.space.com/18905-moon-spacecraft-dumping-ground-infographic.html

I'll stop editing my posts now

[nara]

I was not alive when it happened.

That explains a lot. People of your generation often talk of "The Moon Landing"
They get a bit confused when you tell them there were six.

(I'm sure you knew that, but it's indicative of the lack of research done by those who didn't experience the blanket real time coverage of the Apollo Program.)

"At the height of the Apollo project almost half a million people were working on it. Yet in over thirty years, not one of these half million people has come forward to say he was part of the conspiracy and provide incontestable evidence for it.

Loyalties change. Nobody fired during the Apollo project tried to retaliate against his former employer by revealing the dirty little secret.

The hundreds of thousands of people who worked on the Apollo project are ****tered across the world now, most of them enjoying retirement. Where is the evidence of the fantastic wealth resulting from their payoffs? Where are the mansions, the sports cars? In order for a payoff to be an incentive, it must be considerably more than what the payee would otherwise receive. It has to be appealing enough to squelch hundreds of thousands of consciences. And you have to be able to spend your reward, otherwise it's no incentive."

clavius.org

[thered]

That explains a lot. People of your generation often talk of "The Moon Landing"
They get a bit confused when you tell them there were six.

(I'm sure you knew that, but it's indicative of the lack of research done by those who didn't experience the blanket real time coverage of the Apollo Program.)

"At the height of the Apollo project almost half a million people were working on it. Yet in over thirty years, not one of these half million people has come forward to say he was part of the conspiracy and provide incontestable evidence for it.

Loyalties change. Nobody fired during the Apollo project tried to retaliate against his former employer by revealing the dirty little secret.

The hundreds of thousands of people who worked on the Apollo project are ****tered across the world now, most of them enjoying retirement. Where is the evidence of the fantastic wealth resulting from their payoffs? Where are the mansions, the sports cars? In order for a payoff to be an incentive, it must be considerably more than what the payee would otherwise receive. It has to be appealing enough to squelch hundreds of thousands of consciences. And you have to be able to spend your reward, otherwise it's no incentive."

clavius.org

I agree partly with you tbh but when you think about it the only people who really know could be less than ten tbh. How many were making a panel for "appollo" In any business the workers just get told by the person above whats happening. What they tell them could be anything. Of the X amount of people how many actually can actually be privvy to where it actually was and what was going on?

40 odd years ago and no return, to me that is remarkable, there are people even saying we dont have the gear to do it now, i dont know i only know what is the official line as does everyone else. From what i can gather, they may have went but im not sure they actually landed. Or maybe they did land and come back, but there is a few pictures dont seem right, maybe they went and maybe some pictures were faked. I read somewhere its declassified in 2026 when all are dead. Most myths are supposedly busted but some seem a little far fetched tbh. To me it doesnt add up, whether they went or not i dont think we have the full picture

@ gaston, there is dust on the treads of those wheels, yet no tracks. I seen a pic somewhere cant find it now with the rover still packed before unloading yet tyre tracks were on moon

I also watched a video the other day when armstrong landed, he spoke of the landing feet been 2 inches deep in moon dust. Yet all the pictures show no dust on feet

for me some things are a bit odd, maybe they went maybe they touched up or made up a few pictures. Not sure i will ever be convinced. Unless we go again, but is the reason we dont because they will now get caught out

Or because as they say they seen everything? In a few hours of roving over a few trips

[GastonJ]

Well the Chinese are there roving around with a remote control droid. Do you think they'd miss an opportunity to shout from teh rooftops if they didn't find any sign that the Americans where there in the lat 60's onward?

On that note the Chinese want to mine the moon and bring anything worth money back to Earth. Not content with plundering this planet they want to extract the wealth of the moon. This is all well and good for greed however the moon has a massive impact on the climate of the Earth, tides and weather etc - are they really so greedy that they would do such a thing? At least they'll be able to sell more waterproof boots for those that are affected. I'm secretly hoping that the moon lands on China if they impact it's orbit in any way

[thered]

Well the Chinese are there roving around with a remote control droid. Do you think they'd miss an opportunity to shout from teh rooftops if they didn't find any sign that the Americans where there in the lat 60's onward?

Is this serious post??

You expect them to bump into flag cos a droids on moon??


its a bit like dropping me in the rain forest to find a toothpick somebody left in the 60's


odd over 40 years later its a droid, why no men?

[nara]

odd over 40 years later its a droid, why no men?

You really need to think that one through.

[thered]

You really need to think that one through.

I thought and not seeing point

40 years on and nobody set foot, why? They claim they seen all they need, yet China looking now apparantly and Japan have a pipe dream to turn Moon into a solar panel to solve world energy problems

[912secured]

H3 a major gas we have atmosphere over millions of years done naturally. And heavy water.

[Frogger]

Heres what sealed my decision on the "Moon Landing"


Moon Rock given to Holland by Neil Armstrong & Buzz Aldrin is FAKE



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html

A moon rock given to the Dutch prime minister by Apollo 11 astronauts in 1969 has turned out to be a fake.


Curators at Amsterdam's Rijksmuseum, where the rock has attracted tens of thousands of visitors each year, discovered that the "lunar rock", valued at ?308,000, was in fact petrified wood.

Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation, said the museum would continue to keep the stone as a curiosity.

"It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered," she said. "We can laugh about it."

The rock was given to Willem Drees, a former Dutch leader, during a global tour by Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin following their moon mission 50 years ago.

J. William Middendorf, the former American ambas****r to the Netherlands, made the presentation to Mr Drees and the rock was then donated to the Rijksmuseum after his death in 1988.

"I do remember that Drees was very interested in the little piece of stone. But that it's not real, I don't know anything about that," Mr Middendorf said.
Nasa gave moon rocks to more than 100 countries following lunar missions in 1969 and the 1970s.
The United States Embassy in The Hague is carrying out an investigation into the affair.
Researchers Amsterdam's Free University were able to tell at a glance that the rock was unlikely to be from the moon, a conclusion that was borne out by tests.
"It's a nondescript, pretty-much-worthless stone," said Frank Beunk, a geologist involved in the investigation.

[Frogger]

The oldest rocks collected from the Moon are far older than any found on Earth. Some moon rocks are said to date back 4.5 billion years and that makes them a billion years older than any found on this planet. Harvard’s astronomy journal, Sky and Telescope, reported that the 1973 Lunar Conference was told how one moon rock was dated at 5.3 billion years old. This would make it nearly a billion years older than the predicted age of Earth.


An Artificial Satellite of the Earth?
The origin of the Moon is one of the most complicated problems of cosmogony. So far there have been basically three hypotheses under discussion.


Hypothesis 1. The Moon was once a part of the Earth and broke away from it. This has now been refuted by the evidence.


Hypothesis 2. The Moon was formed independently from the same cloud of dust and gas as the Earth, and immediately became the Earth’s natural satellite.


But then why is there such a big difference between the specific gravity of the Moon (3.33 grammes per cubic centimetre) and that of the Earth (5.5 gr.)? Furthermore, according to the latest information (a-nalysis of samples brought back by the U.S. Apollo astronauts) lunar rock is not of the same composition as the Earth’s.


Hypothesis 3. The Moon came into being separately, and, moreover, far from the Earth (perhaps even outside the Solar system).


This would mean that the moon would not have to be fashioned from the same “clay” as our own planet. Sailing through the Universe, the Moon came into Earth’s proximity, and by a complex interplay of forces of gravity was brought within a geocentric orbit, very close to circular. But a catch of this kind is virtually impossible.


In fact, scientists studying the origin of the Universe today have no acceptable theory to explain how the Earth-Moon system came into being.


Science has no idea where the Moon came from and how it was formed, and none of its theories stand up to scrutiny. One theory was that it was captured by the Earth’s magnetic field, but the science of that doesn’t add up. Another is that a body the size of Mars smashed into the Earth and a great chunk of the Earth broke off to form the Moon. This is known as the ‘Big Whack’ theory, but when the science of that didn’t stand up, either, someone postured the ‘Double Big Whack’ theory. This is that the ‘Mars’ planet smacked into the Earth and then came back for another go. Talk about desperate. The truth is that they have no idea where the Moon came from or how it came to be where it is.


Strange Mathematical Sync.

If you divide the circumference of the Sun by that of the Moon and multiply by 100 you get the circumference of the Earth. Divide the size of the Sun by the size of the Earth and multiply by 100 and you get the size of the Moon.


The Moon is 400 times smaller than the Sun, and at a solar eclipse it is 400 times closer to Earth. This makes the Moon appear from Earth to be the same size as the Sun – hence a total eclipse.


The Moon always shows the same side or ‘face’ to the Earth during the period when we can see it. We never see what is called the ‘dark’ or far side of the Moon from the Earth.


Earth rotates at a speed 400 times faster than the Moon, and turns 40,000 kilometres on its axis in a day to the Moon’s 400. Earth spins 366.259 times during one orbit of the Sun, and the polar circumference of the Earth is 366.175 times bigger than that of the Moon. The polar circumference of the Moon is 27.31 per cent the size of the earth and the Moon makes 27.396 turns per orbit of the Earth. Knight and Butler say that if you multiply the circumference of the Moon by that of the Earth, the result is 436,669,140 kilometres. If this number is divided by 100 it becomes 436,669 kilometres – the circumference of the Sun correct to 99.9 per cent.

================================================== ================================================== ===========
There are so many anomalies with the Moon. It has no magnetic field, and yet moon rocks are magnetised. It has the phenomenon known as ‘mascons’ (mass concentrations), which are large circular areas of unusually high density and a higher gravitational ‘pull’. Don Wilson, author of Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon, says it appears that mascons could be some kind of artificial construction. They are found in the vast plains on the Moon known as ‘maria’ that were once believed to be seas. About a third of the Moon facing the Earth is made up of these maria while there are few on the ‘dark side’, and no-one can explain why the two sides are so different.
moonsides.jpg <----CLICK FOR BIGGER PICTURE


================================================== ================================================== ==========


Irwin Shapiro,
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics


“The best possible explanation for the Moon is observational error – the Moon doesn’t exist.’


"The Moon is bigger than it should be, apparently older than it should be and much lighter in mass than it should be. It occupies an unlikely orbit and is so extraordinary that all existing explanations for its presence are fraught with difficulties are none of them could be considered remotely watertight."






Dr. Robin Brett,
NASA Scientist


"It seems much easier to explain the nonexistence of the moon than its existence."




Ken Johnson,
Supervisor of the Data and Photo Control department during the Apollo missions


"The Moon not only rang like a bell, but the whole Moon wobbled in such a precise way that it was almost as though it had gigantic hydraulic damper struts inside it."




Dr. Sean C Solomon,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology


"The Lunar Orbiter experiments had vastly improved knowledge of the Moon’s gravitational field and indicated the frightening possibility that the Moon might be hollow."


Dr. Gordon MacDonald,
NASA


"it would seem that the Moon is more like a hollow than a homogenous sphere’




Carl Sagan,
Cosmologist,


"A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object." <----Apparently it is, according to new evidence.

================================================== ================================================== ==========

I deduce from all this that we should perhaps focus on whats the true purpose of The Moon, given these facts, instead of did the USA really go there...........


The conspiracy seems like a distraction of sorts......


Just a thought...........Bizarre all the same dont ya think? What dya all think about these statements by NASA and Astrophysicists etc?