Apollo Moon Landing - Hoax or Truth?

[Alpha]

So far our poll is showing that those who voted lean to believe that the moon landing did occur 40 years ago today.

Just a reminder to vote for those who haven't yet done so.

[Divinorumus]

Just a reminder to vote for those who haven't yet done so.

I tried to vote for those that haven't yet done so, but it says "You have already voted on this poll."

The original recordings of the first humans landing on the moon 40 years ago were erased and re-used ...

That's NASA for you!

[Nemo]

If I had committed a crime - stealing billions of dollars from the public - I would erase the tapes, too.

[Alpha]

If I had committed a crime - stealing billions of dollars from the public - I would erase the tapes, too.

...yeah I hear you Nemo, however seems by the poll results here so far, we seem to be in the minority.

That's o.k....I'm still waiting for someone to show me something that changes my mind on this issue, or at minimum make me consider it...I am truly open to that if my CBT is wrong

Someone here voted "other"...I'd really like to read what that opinion and CBT is about for whoever voted that, if you are willing and/or I would like to hear why those who voted "I don't know" feel the way they do.

I purposely put those options in the poll for just that

C'mon folks, tell us what you feel and why....even if it's just gut feel or well researched...doesn't matter either way.

[earthist]

That's o.k....I'm still waiting for someone to show me something that changes my mind on this issue, or at minimum make me consider it...I am truly open to that if my CBT is wrong

There have been many attempts to disprove the hoax arguments, Alpha. I have to ask just what's left that could posssibly change your mind or make you consider it? Is there something, anything, about which you have doubt or question? If your mind's made up, it's OK, but why ask for argument if that's the case?

Just wondering in case there might be something I could say that would actually matter. I'm under the impression that, after all the arguments already made, there's no real possibility of mind changing left. Am I wrong?

[Alpha]

There have been many attempts to disprove the hoax arguments, Alpha. I have to ask just what's left that could posssibly change your mind or make you consider it? Is there something, anything, about which you have doubt or question? If your mind's made up, it's OK, but why ask for argument if that's the case?

Just wondering in case there might be something I could say that would actually matter. I'm under the impression that, after all the arguments already made, there's no real possibility of mind changing left. Am I wrong?

As well as all the arguments made in disproving the hoax, there are seemingly equally as many questioning the claims and event.

There are three items that would make me revisit this issue; here again we get in to the area of "proof" .

1) Some substantiate or verification that life can withstand the radiation of the Van Allen Belt, specifically with the technology used at the time and in general.

2) Evidence and proof that man can actually not only send something to the moon and/or beyond, however for now let's just leave it at the moon , but also be able to retrieve that same item from the moon to earth. We seem to be able to launch things in to space quite well...I have not yet seen anything convincing that shows that we can get it back.

3) Both an explanation as to why so many photos have been tampered with, lost or erased by NASA as well as the ability for all to see the actual photos that were taken, if there are any.

You are correct though earthist in the sense that we will never really have any definitive, "provable" answers to this as well as so many other issues.

I guess our individual CBTs are all we have

[Delphine]

I believe they sent men into orbit but never left the protection of the magnetic field. Outside of this field would result in death by radiation. You would have to produce a magnetic field around the ship to deflect the cosmic rays traveling through space not to mention the Sun's radiation.

So no we never landed on the moon but orbited the earth for a week or so and movies were then transmitted to an orbiting satellite and back to earth to make it appear they spent time on the moon.

I vote with you BE. I finally gave up recently on all the excuses I can give them. And to think I sat and watched with such excitement.

[Alpha]

I believe they sent men into orbit but never left the protection of the magnetic field. Outside of this field would result in death by radiation. You would have to produce a magnetic field around the ship to deflect the cosmic rays traveling through space not to mention the Sun's radiation.

So no we never landed on the moon but orbited the earth for a week or so and movies were then transmitted to an orbiting satellite and back to earth to make it appear they spent time on the moon.

I hear you BE and that is my CBT as well, although I am open to anything that can make me rethink this...this article does not help...

NASA lost moon footage, but Hollywood restores it


NASA could put a man on the moon =#0066CC ! important]but didn't have the sense to keep the original video of the live TV transmission.

In an embarrassing acknowledgment, the space agency said Thursday that it must have erased the Apollo 11 moon footage years ago so that it could reuse the videotape.


But now Hollywood is coming to the rescue.


The studio wizards who restored "Casablanca" are digitally sharpening and cleaning up the ghostly, grainy footage of the [COLOR=#0066CC ! important]moon landing, making it even better than what TV viewers saw on July 20, 1969. They are doing it by working from four copies that NASA scrounged from around the world.


Article Continues

Guess Hollywood's footage will become "history" for generations to come. Has to make one wonder what hand they ...Hollywood had from the get go.



How could something so "valuable" be erased? How could they not have back up copies of one of mankind's greatest achievements....even we mere putz's back up our hard drives!!! What exactly did they erase or say they did?


They get millions of $$ for funding, yet their excuse and reason is that they erased it so they could reuse the tape?!?!?!?....for what...to save $$ ?!?!?!


Sorry, this has got to be the most lame, stupid, ridiculous and suspicious thing I have ever read in a long time....

[Nemo]

Good point, Alphs. The very idea that the most valuable footage in human history was 'erased by mistake' is just pure horseshit. That ALONE is very powerful evidence that somethin ain't right.

We are an entire culture produced by Hollywood smoke and mirrors. One hoax after another. OUr entire economy is a ponzy scheme for money lenders. One day the world will find out. I won't want to be here when that happens.

[earthist]

As well as all the arguments made in disproving the hoax, there are seemingly equally as many questioning the claims and event.

There are three items that would make me revisit this issue; here again we get in to the area of "proof" ..

Points well made, and I agree that we each have a right, and a need, to decide truth for ourselves. Ultimately, the question as to whether we went to the moon or not, doesn't matter (much) in the larger scheme of things. If we did go, it hasn't done much to make the world a better (or worse) place, IMO. (Which also makes a pretty good argument as to why we haven't gone back, IMO; too expensive and too risky for the minimal return we got.). If we didn't go, however, it's a pretty major betrayal, and that matters a lot. We both know that there have been some pretty major betrayals (9-11, for instance). It's devastating! So, why does the moon thing matter?

It matters in a couple of ways, to me, at least. One is that I think a lot of folks took some pretty huge risks to do it, and that dismissing their life's work as BS is also a pretty devastating thing. The second is that if we come to consider betrayals at this level as commonplace, then we build a level of distrust that cripples us as human beings. Put another way, the world is not a safe place by any measure, but making it seem more unsafe than it is makes it seem overwhelming. It leaves us with no (or VERY little) possibility of feeling responsible or effective as humans. If these brave risk takers wasted their lives due to us dismissing their efforts, then it becomes pretty couter-productive for me or you or anyone else to act bravely in the face of real threats.

1) Some substantiate or verification that life can withstand the radiation of the Van Allen Belt, specifically with the technology used at the time and in general .

Here are a couple of links to check out. In the first one, the author says:

You can't know anything for sure that you have not completely verified yourself, all you can do is take the word of people you trust. So who do you trust?
There is a lot of truth in this one, especially in principle. In practice, we can usually do quite a bit better, especially in the sciences; but the issue is not silly or unimportant, even so. The head of the government of South Africa, for example, is in serious doubt about whether the human immunodeficiency virus, HIV, causes AIDS, because he is (probably sincerely, I guess) in doubt about whom to trust; although there seems to be no serious scientific controversy about the issue. Millions of lives could be at stake as a result.

But he then goes on to make a pretty good case about the radiation rsks. From: http://www.wwheaton.com/waw/mad/mad19.html

This next one gets into considerably greater detail about it. One thing in particular that few people know about is that the risks were "tested" by the Gemini astronauts:

This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts.

Also, it duscusses the fact that metal shielding was not the best solution to the Van Allen type of radiation:

While such drastic measures are needed to shield against intense, high-frequency electromagnetic radiation, that is not the nature of the radiation in the Van Allen belts. In fact, because the Van Allen belts are composed of high-energy protons and high-energy electrons, metal shielding is actually counterproductive because of the Bremsstrahlung that would be induced.

From: http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html
Briefly, "Bremsstrahlung" is secondary radiation caused when one "stops" fast-moving particles and other particles subsequently get "activated."

Bremsstrahlung is a type of "secondary radiation", in that it is produced as a result of stopping (or slowing) the primary radiation (beta particles). In some cases, e.g. 32P, the Bremsstrahlung produced by shielding this radiation with the normally used dense materials (e.g. lead) is itself dangerous; in such cases, shielding must be accomplished with low density materials, e.g. Plexiglass (lucite), plastic, wood, or water [1]; because the rate of deceleration of the electron is slower, the radiation given off has a longer wavelength and is therefore less penetrating.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremsstrahlung

In short, yes, there was risk involved (which further serves to emphasize the bravery of the astronauts, IMO), but a lot of testing and planning went into minimizing that risk. They planned and calculated, they tested as much as possible, they went through relatively little of the "belts" (note that there are TWO of them), they went quickly, and still, they were concerned enough to use dosimiters to check. The "proof" that it worked is that they did it, but of course, that's the question we're discussing.

There is still a real risk of radiation in space, especially from solar flares, and it would definitely be foolish to park a space station in the middle of one of the Van Allen belts.

2) Evidence and proof that man can actually not only send something to the moon, but also be able to retrieve that same item from the moon to earth. We seem to be able to launch things in to space quite well...I have not yet seen anything convincing that shows that we can get it back.

We all know that nothing has been returned from the moon in all these years beyond the Apollo missions. Conveniently, for my purpose here at least, we have recently returned some comet dust.

One of the most imaginative NASA missions of recent years is the Stardust mission. Its main purpose: to gather dust and particles from comet P/Wild 2 and return them to Earth for study. Think about that for a second. We build a spacecraft, send it out past the orbit of Mars, a round trip of over seven years, to rendezvous with a comet only 4 km across, that itself is moving. The spacecraft flies through the comet's tail and uses super gel to collect specks of dust millions of years old, and then it returns to Earth. Wow!

If you visit the following link, it takes you to more links about the mission to comet Wild-2, including the rest of teh story above:
From: http://www.scienceiq.com/Facts/CometDust.cfm

3) Both an explanation as to why so many photos have been tampered with, lost or erased by NASA as well as the ability for all to see the actual photos that were taken, if there are any.

That one, I can't answer. The live coverage was watched and witnessed by many, though, so whatever was subsequently done, the originals were there at the start. The moon stuff we saw live could have been faked, I suppose. We had never seen pics from the moon so had no way to know. The ground coverage from Houston, is another matter, though. If it was faked, there were a couple of hundred actors there, performing live (no videotape back then!) who deserved academy awards, including Cronkite, by the way. Also note that these couple hundred folks repeated their performances several more times with the rest of the Apollo missions (including the Apollo-13 near disaster), and did it flawlessly. We're talking hours and hours of live coverage here. How long did it take to film a simple 2-hour thing like 2001, for instance? They did these "movies" (if that's what they were) every few months over 3 years.

Then there's the rocks and dust they brought back, and those pesky "mirrors" they left up there that have all been seen and tested for the last 40 years by people from all over the world. As far as I know, there are no reports of anthrax threats to any of the folks who have studied these things, and might contest the issues. (Aside: compare to the scientist-types who HAVE contested 9-11).

You are correct though earthist in the sense that we will never really have any definitive, "provable" answers to this as well as so many other issues.

I guess our individual CBTs are all we have

Right again, M'Lady. Questioning authority is more than important, it's VITAL, IMO. Trusting our fellow man is also vital, though. FWIW, I actually think that the PTB folks, most of them anyway, are just humans, too, and are doing the best they can within their own limited awareness. I said in the Cronkite thread that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and I meant it. A lot of "good" folks efforts have been co-opted and their valuable contributions have been twisted, for sure. Still, I think it's important not to discard the baby with the bathwater.

Paraphrasing Squid, 99.5% of folks are not conspirators, at least not intentionally and not knowingly. I would make an exception for the bankers and the lawyers, and even for the scientists who sell themselves willingly to the AMA and Big Pharma. The worship of money makes a pretty good criterion for telling the difference between the "trustworthy" and the "suspect," IMO. Qui Bono? Follow the money. The space folks, including the astronauts, have never capitalised on what they did (or didn't do if you don't believe). But even the "bad guys", IMO, have mostly been brainwashed in academia, and would not have become "bad guys" (and gals) without a LOT of "help." Keep in mind that everything "they" do will be visited on their children as well as ours. They mostly think they're "doing the right thing." We need to help them wake up more than to prosecute them. We're all in this together, and I think it's going to take all of us to get out.

Sorry for the philosophizing, but that's the real reason why I think questions like the moon "hoax" are important. JMO, FWIW.

[Alpha]

Thank you for all the time you took to get back to my questions earthist

I really appreciate your care and commitment to express your POV, your learning and your CBT

I agree that questions like the "moon hoax" are important....well said

I really don't have a problem trusting my fellow man..the many and one's I have had a privilege to know and see that they are trustworthy. What I have a problem with is trusting any organization...be it religious, political etc., as they usually have an agenda, something to gain and usually in the area of power, $$ and control.

Questioning authority is more than important, it's VITAL, IMO. Trusting our fellow man is also vital.................We need to help them wake up more than to prosecute them. We're all in this together, and I think it's going to take all of us to get out.

[Judee]

Some very, very excellent points/questions have been raised here, by more than one person. The issue personally leaves me with too many big question marks that NASA et al have never addressed! And as with Richard Nixon... Erasing tapes guys? Come on NASA!! Surely we aren't supposed to swallow that one are we?

[blackeyes]

I vote with you BE. I finally gave up recently on all the excuses I can give them. And to think I sat and watched with such excitement.

Me too. I was about 5 or 6 but I remember the feelings of everyone in the room. Wasn't the landing ironically and supposedly live in prime time so everyone could be home? Why won't any of the Apollo astro-nots simply put their hand on a bible and swear they went there? Arrg.
I propose a private one way mission to record and transmit live telemetry to measure the radiation levels straight out into the Van Allen radiation belts.