Having thoughts about the possibility of USA's first moon landing and the conspiracy theories of whether they did in fact achieve what they claimed, I have two queries. One from either side of the fence.
Firstly, if the moon has little to no gravity, why did the sand that the Astronauts kicked up, when kicking rocks, immediately fall straight back down, onto the surface. Also, how did they manage to drop the sand samples from a spade into the bag ? Would that not have been a bit more tricky ?
Secondly, the first mission to land took over 8 days and I watched the take-off( which was truly awe inspiring for the times) and the landing, so if they didn't go to the moon, where the heck where they for that length of time ?
Conflicting thought, but it would be interesting to know yours.
[youtube]NFLRAVpIB4I[/youtube]
Last edited by granny; 22nd Oct 201512:33pm.
Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect. ~Chief Seattle
Secondly, the first mission to land took over 8 days and I watched the take-off( which was truly awe inspiring for the times) and the landing, so if they didn't go to the moon, where the heck where they for that length of time ?
They could of been at Area 51
things that I didn't get
1. who took the picture of the landing
2.the American flag waving and fluttering
3. had NASA really landed us on the moon, there would be a blast crater underneath the lunar module to mark its landing. On any video footage or photograph of the landings, no crater is visible, almost as though the module was simply placed there. The surface of the moon is covered in fine lunar dust, and even this doesn’t seem to have been displaced in photographic evidence.
4. After photographs of the moon landings were released, theorists were quick to notice a mysterious object (shown above) in the reflection of an astronaut’s helmet from the Apollo 12 mission. The object appears to be hanging from a rope or wire and has no reason to be there at all, leading some to suggest it is an overhead spotlight typically found in film studios.
The resemblance is questionable, given the poor quality of the photograph, but the mystery remains as to why something is being suspended in mid-air (or rather lack of air) on the moon. The lunar module in other photos appears to have no extension from it that matches the photo, so the object still remains totally unexplained
5. lack of stars One compelling argument for the moon landing hoax is the total lack of stars in any of the photographic/video evidence. There are no clouds on the moon, so stars are perpetually visible and significantly brighter than what we see through the filter of Earth’s atmosphere.
The argument here is that NASA would have found it impossible to map out the exact locations of all stars for the hoax without being rumbled, and therefore left them out – intentionally falling back on an excuse that the quality of the photographs washes them out (an excuse they did actually give).
Some photographs are high-quality, however, and yet still no stars are shown. Certainly eerie, considering you can take pictures of stars from Earth in much lower quality and still see them.
The lack of stars are easy to explain - no atmosphere on the moon to limit the sun, the surface is very very bright, camera exposure has to be really clamped down.
To me one of the most questionable things was how carelessly they were moving around and doing things, the Americans wouldn't have wanted the embarrassment of suit failure during a moonwalk.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
Were they all fake ? Just some of them ? If so, how do we tell the difference between the fake and real ones ?
We may now have more advanced technology but the cost of the Apollo programme was enormous to the US. "Back in 1973, the total cost of the Apollo program reported to Congress was $25.4 billion": http://tinyurl.com/qbheoev
That's a lot of money to bring back some rocks and dust. And frankly, what's the point ? Pretty boring is the moon. The US just wanted to prove to the USSR that they could beat them to it.
Virtually the whole point of space programs are for colonisation to ensure the continuity of the human race in the event of existence on earth being wiped out.
Along the way there are other short term objectives, some rational and some not so.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
They'll have to find a way to protect us from radiation first.
Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect. ~Chief Seattle
Another compelling argument is that the Moon's gravity is one sixth that of Earth's. If you've seen footage of the Moon walks speeded up x2 they look like they are moving normally.
Well we will know for sure when the Russians or the Chinese get there. I wonder if that's why the Americans suddenly announced they are 'going back'?
Just for fun I recommend watching the film Capricorn One. Not only is a great movie, but it raises interesting parallels with the Moon landing conspiracy theories. BTW it was made in 1979. The Americans announced at the start of the Apollo programme that as well as going to the Moon they would be on Mars by 1980.
Just on another track I think NASA have already found evidence of life on Mars, they just haven't told anyone yet. You heard it here first folks!
Another compelling argument is that the Moon's gravity is one sixth that of Earth's. If you've seen footage of the Moon walks speeded up x2 they look like they are moving normally.
But have you seen them speeded up at X6 and checked the vertical motion speeds look correct!
If gravity is 1/6th then the acceleration due to gravity will also be 1/6th.
IMHO there is almost bound to be life of some sort on any planet that has a liquid. There is also a chance that life can exist if there is a gas present, we are too inward thinking assuming that all life has to be carbon or sulphur based, there are many other chemical cycles that could sustain a continuum.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
I think you will find that the Moon has plenty of gravity (albeit less than Earth), otherwise the moon walkers and their LEM (and their dust!) would have all gone floating off into space!!
And did you see their famous Moon walk, how they half-jumped to get along? Try doing that, in a space suit, on earth!
Virtually the whole point of space programs are for colonisation to ensure the continuity of the human race in the event of existence on earth being wiped out.
Along the way there are other short term objectives, some rational and some not so.
Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect. ~Chief Seattle
Ha, I'd love to live underground, the world is too noisy a place for me, that's partly why I go to bed at 6am - enjoying the relative peace of the night so I can focus things.
But no, I'm not a prepper - yet!
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
