No, obviously all of the tens of thousands of people who worked on the project for years, and their families and friends, and the subcontractors and their families and friends, the people who sold things to all of the above, and the military personell involved, and the stock market, bankers, were all completely fooled and, yes, it was faked by a few devious dastardly bad guys with movie cameras as the last minute.

Edit: I used rude and abusive language, I'm sorry, it's been a bad day.

[deleted]

You apparently is commiting the common physics mistake of assuming that fuel consumption and the such escalates linearly with distances in space, as it happens with a car in the surface of the Earth. Well, it doesn't. Once you reach escape velocity (which is just orbital velocity times 2ˆ1/2) you will go farther and farther from Earth and never come back, unless you change your velocity/direction again.

I think this thread is ended.

Once you reach escape velocity (which is just orbital velocity times 2ˆ1/2) you will go farther and farther from Earth and never come back, unless you change your velocity/direction again.

Assuming you have enough fuel to keep you at escape velocity.

You are sillier than a sack full of platypuses. Does the I.S.S. continually thrust to keep itself in orbit? Actually more to the point, if the moon doesn't continually thrust how come it hasn't fallen into the Earth yet?

The ISS and the moon are in earth's orbit. The Apollo capsules went from Earth orbit to lunar orbit. This requires a massive amount of fuel - fuel the Apollo capsules didn't have.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Lots of stuff has gone far, far further than the moon, just because people haven't doesn't mean anything that I can think of.

Quite a few unmanned devices went to (some of them just smacking into it, OK) and around the moon years before the Apollo program, by both the USA and the USSR.

It's a question of physics, find something(s) that can hold enough fuel and direct it's combustion products in the right direction and there you go.

Are you saying that a Saturn 5 and the lesser parts of the system couldn't have gone to the moon? Given the rest of the stuff that did?

[deleted]

Enlighten me on how Russia, which had a network for space tracking and a network of spies inside of the U.S., would be fooled by a staged mission that (if I understand correctly the theory) never left Earth orbit.

Hey cool! I have a bachelor's degree as well! No one I know with a bachelor's degree is a fucking gullible idiot!

I have bachelors also have a bachelors degree and took astronomy, and I think you are wrong. This is why appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.

Degrees don't amount to anything but a piece of paper and jobs. Nothing taught in traditional school should be taken for face value, much of it all is lies. Remember that those in control control history

So a huge engineering effort involving tens of thousands of people that took many years and insane amounts of money to make things that could propel people to the moon and bring them back, and then not actually use it and just have a few guys with movie cameras make unconvincing movies?

As far as your statement that people haven't left earth orbit since 1972 that's probably because there's no need to... going to the moon was the point of going to the moon, it didn't accomplish much scientifically nor was it really intended to, it was PR on a grand scale.

I've already apologized for my rude comment. As noted I feel stupid sometimes and I too have a bachelor's degree.

lol...

Once you're out of earths orbit, it's relatively easy to just sort of cruise. Is this stuff really convincing to you, or do you just want to believe in a conspiracy?

Once you're out of earths orbit, it's relatively easy to just sort of cruise.

No it isn't, as there's this massive planet called the earth pulling at the spaceship with a force inversely proportional to the square of its distance. A spaceship after reaching escape velocity must still spend fuel in order to keep up this escape velocity. This idea that one can just "free fall" to the moon is a common misconception.

Stupid comment is stupid and you should feel stupid

I do feel stupid, like I said, I'm just glad for the people who are stupider than I am.

At least you don't, you know, think the Moon landing was a hoax or anything. Right guys?

No, I don't, but I'm not going to continue to be rude to our friends here in /r/conspiracy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xECUrlnXCqk

I'll have to add that to my collection right after Instant Rimshot.

My grandpa was an engineer for the NASA Apollo program. Any conspiracy that says we did not land on the moon would have to explain why he would maintain a perfectly consistent life long lie to his entire family including his wife, all his children, and grandchildren.

You people are fucking idiots.

Nice try old man pretending to be your own nephew!

Don't take our doubts on the moon landings as a slur against your grandfather. He was fooled along with many others in the 'program'. Looks like you inherited his gullibility.

....you people are all a bunch of loons.

Is Dan Golden a loon too? The NASA chief openly admitted that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, until they can overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He managed to say this without any mention, or reference to the Apollo missions 35 years ago.

The moon is in earth orbit though.

Mythbusters have actually pinged a signal off man made equipment on the lunar surface. I believe humans have been on the moon.

In all fairness, there is some validity to the suspicion. I have heard that NASA did some "work" on a sound stage with Kubrick. Also, there are engineers on record stating that the radiation is too strong in space for humans in those "thin walled" vessels to survive.

I'm simply playing devils advocate by stating all material will reflect a laser (except a black hole), that's why you see the laser dot. I certainly don't think this is the case though.

Not all material will coherently reflect a laser so that you could bounce it off the moon and back to earth and detect it. The device left on the moon had to be a special kind of mirror called a retroreflector so that it could return a coherent signal over such distances.

Because reality shows never lie.

So the government controls Mythbusters now?

Look into the credit card episode that wasn't allowed to be aired.

What does that have to do with the government?

This is such a trainwreck, I can't look away...

After watching 'Apollo Zero', I was sceptic myself. But looking into matters further , (also google for 'Apollo Zero debunked') I found out there was a plausible explanation for every single point brought up by Apollo Zero. They were not able to reproduce the 'moon walk' on earth, radiation belt is about 400 or 600km wide, spaceship is going a couple of thousand km's per hour so it stayed in the belt only a few seconds.

Furthermore, keep in mind NASA sent men on the moon six time, that is Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17. Do you really believe they would have gone to the trouble of faking all of those missions?

I have an open-mind on this, but have come to pretty much accept man did go play on the moon after all.

Now, this is not to say there is no conspiracy on the matter. There are still some weird stuff that is hard to explain about the moon. Why do we not have many decent color pictures? Why so few high resolution images? Why do the ones available have smudges on them? Why perpetuate the myth the moon is a big grey rock when the Russians discovered water and an atmosphere in the 1970's?

In my opinion there is something fishy about the moon data we have publicly available.

See this video on the matter. Type 'moon coverup' in google for more speculations and different theories people have put out on this.

Keep an open-mind, no matter how convincing some of these theories may sound, do ask questions as you did up above, and always be prepared to reconsider your view.

Cheers!

Yes, we went to the moon.

I can see with my own eyes the gear that was left by the landings, and so can you.

also, japanese orbital surveys show that the sets would have to have been exact replicas of somewhere that nobody had ever been before. even for Kubrick that's a stretch.

I watched Apollo Zero last night. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX-laeKljTo

I have to admit it is a long trip to the moon and back. Personally I can't wait till we send an unmanned probe to the moon to take high resolution pictures of the landing sites.

Okay here you go

Japan did a few years ago, HD in low orbit. There are no pics and lots of censorship.

Why no google moon?.

Thanks for the information. I did not know that. Do you have any good links?

On mobile. Should be lots of info online, no?

Doubtful

I'm sorry I just had to stop after the first quote. I know I can't take a high-ground because i'm simply to lazy to read the entire article but here are some other quotes for you.

You posting a list of incorrect predictions is worthless. Show me some math that contradicts Von Braun's claims.

He didn't do any math... all he did was assert a claim. I can't verify or disprove his math because there was none provided.

It's called physics. Take a class. It's apparent that you're in dire need of some education.

And if then, after taking the class, you then have a dispute with the physics required to get a rocket to the moon, write a paper, submit it to a reputable scientific journal, have it peer reviewed and accept your Nobel Prize for altering the course of physics in it's entirety.

Or is peer review a conspiracy, as well?

“It is commonly believed that man will fly directly from the earth to the moon, but to do this, we would require a vehicle of such gigantic proportions that it would prove an economic impossibility. It would have to develop sufficient speed to penetrate the atmosphere and overcome the earth’s gravity and, having traveled all the way to the moon, it must still have enough fuel to land safely and make the return trip to earth. Furthermore, in order to give the expedition a margin of safety, we would not use one ship alone, but a minimum of three … each rocket ship would be taller than New York’s Empire State Building [almost ¼ mile high] and weigh about ten times the tonnage of the Queen Mary, or some 800,000 tons.”

Wernher von Braun, the father of the Apollo space program, writing in Conquest of the Moon

I've said nothing about physics so far. Get butthurt at the father of American rocketry instead

It's almost as if technology improved from 1953 when von Braun wrote that.

More to the point, von Braun was the chief architect of the Saturn V. You know, the rocket that launched the Apollo missions into space.

Right, which is why von Braun saying the trip to the moon will be downright impossible carries so much weight.

What marvelous technological achievements were made in between 1953 and 1969 that made space travel so much easier than von Braun predicted?

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyl1LsB7Xr8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo5w0pm24ic

Thanks for posting these. This is one conspiracy that has me going back and forth between both sides, the CT's and the debunkers both make good points.

I particularly enjoyed the write-up on davesweb.com, thanks again.

Here is an article by NASA, explaining that in order to safely explore the moon, they need to figure out how to protect our astronauts from radiation. Of course, they don't mention at all how the astronauts from the 60's/70's survived this deadly, deadly radiation.

You do realize you could keep a pound of plutonium in your bed room, and as long as you didn't eat, drink, or inhale any of it you would be find right? Not all radiation is deadly, otherwise you would be rolling in pain because of the light from the computer screen.

Also they are talking about staying for extended periods of time, and the only thing I can find that is of any danger is solar flares. Which are not constant. I feel you have a poor grasp of radiation, and how it works.

http://xkcd.com/radiation/

this is a chart of lots of different radiation doses. look specifically at the total dose from inside the fukushima exclusion zone (40mSv) vs minimum yearly dose linked to increase in cancer risk (100mSv).

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/27jan_solarflares/

also here, you can see mention of the fact that being caught outside during a solar flare would have caused a few days of radiation sickness. Dangers to astronauts on the moon would start to manifest after spending several days on the moon.

[deleted]

That dovetails into my theory that the Cold War was a gigantic hoax designed too usurp resources for a secret US/USSR space program.

It's the only explanation.

them most compelling evidence IMO

What I always found dodgy was the dust still under the lunar lander after it landed softly due to all that thrust. In an article I read about moon dust the other day on some pro-Apollo website, it said the dust was microscopic, like caking sugar was the words it used. And it said it would hang in the atmosphere of low gravity for a long time. Well hel-fucking-lo...it didn't even move from under the LM and if it did and they allowed it to settle before show time, none of that shit landed on the pads of the LM. Fucking amazing shit that Moondust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn5enJlqKak

the dust has no atmosphere to collide with, thus it will not act like the dust on earth. So it will continue along its path until it hits something. It will not hover because it had a directly vertical force applied to it, so it will be physically moved towards the outward direction. Proof of concept pour salt or sugar on your table, and blow in the center. Notice none will return towards the center, but will only move radially outward from the point of force.

Also yes, it would have taken them several minutes after landing to get out of the capsule.

Also, I haven't seen any footage that could possibly show detailed enough footage of anything you just claimed.

Also, I haven't seen any footage that could possibly show detailed enough footage of anything you just claimed.

The claim was:

it didn't even move from under the LM and if it did and they allowed it to settle before show time, none of that shit landed on the pads of the LM.

Here is a nice photo of Buzz Aldrin in front of a lunar module.

This photo shows the pads settled into dust, you can also see Aldrin's footprints in the dust, but there is no dust at all actually on the pads of the lunar lander, which was the claim.

So you've never seen any images of the LM with dust underneath? And none of the LM's pads with no dust on them?

The Moon surface is an industrial vacuum with no appreciable atmosphere. Dust particles fall like stones in that.

Recently we found that occasionally static electricity can raise some of the finer particles from the ground, but that kind of force wouldn't be produced by the lander jets.

So the astroNOTS can kick the dust up with boots and golf carts but the thrust of a lunar lander will not. Bollocks.

astroNOTS

Really?

How did the cameras film survive the massive Gamma radiation? And how did the moving parts inside the cameras operate in such a wide temperature range?

Survive the radiation?--Led casing or equivalent. Operate at wide temp range?-Whale oil.

Calculate how high you would be able to jump in 1/6th earths gravity, its much higher than they were jumping around in the footage, even with suits on.

.... they had a couple dozen/hundred pounds on them, and full body suits that retarded their motion. Seriously go put on about 3-6 layers and then a parka, ski bibs, and boots and see if you can jump.

edit: nipping this at the bud

True, though in the vacuum of space, i would think that those suits would provide zero ability to walk around. It would be like wearing an inflated balloon.

they really didn't walk if you watch them its really goofy bouncing. If you watch a lot of the videos you can tell how goofy and unaccustomed to the different gravity and no atmosphere they are. It is hard to spot, but there are a bunch of near tumbles they had, but saved themselves at the last second.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efzYblYVUFk&feature=fvwrel

That pretty much shows they just had enough flexibility to bend the knee and calves.

How about the gloves inflated and performing all those tasks such as operating a camera?

Hell I don't have an answer for everything. I imagine they had an entire engineering team dedicated to fixing that exact problem. Worst comes to worst they just put really big buttons on it.

Never mind operating a camera...how about building the fucking lunar buggy? It didn't get up there whole that I fucking know! And the tyres were inflated and early pictures showed the valves on the tyres...that was until it was pointed out you could pump up tyres in a vacuum. Then those pics disappeared and the ones with wires on the tyres came out.

Landed on the moon...my fucking arse they did!

Why can't you pump tyres in a vacuum?

I got this... The lunar rover had inflatable tires which would have exploded if pre-inflated, and there was no air on the Moon to inflate them. Pro Apollo NUTTERS claim the rover had solid wire mesh tires. Yes the rover in the museum had these fitted in the mid 70's when they realized pneumatic tires could not have functioned on the Moon. NASA have had 35 years in which to clear up the plainly obvious mistakes within the Apollo program. Each time some one brings up a query NASA correct it and say nothing, ie, they cannot say why the anomaly was there in the first place. Anyway I have pictures of the rover supposedly on the Moon and it has the SAME tires AND tire valves as the one they used at KSC. In other words it is the SAME one. Early close up pictures of the rover on Internet have CHANGED since the blunder was exposed on this web site.

From this...http://breakfornews.com/offsitearchive/Apollo/apollofacts.htm

I don't think anyone would have ever thought the tyres were inflated by an astronaut with a foot pump. It wouldn't be hard to bring a canister of air to fill the tyres with once you got there. It's like saying scuba diving is fake because people can't breathe underwater - you bring your own air.

Can we see the pictures you have?

From this...[1] http://breakfornews.com/offsitearchive/Apollo/apollofacts.htm

FACT: Earth is 250,000 miles from the Moon, yet reflected sunlight from its surface is strong enough to illuminate the darkness on planet Earth. Anyone hovering above surface would be blinded by the light.

Are you sure that's not a joke site?

Couldn't agree more with you on that 'fact' about the brightness of the moon as the same applies to Earth! But as for the tyres I've seen a few places where they say they would explode if taken filled with air into a vacuum.

They most probably filled them there using a pressurised canister of air. There is no more reason you would fill a tyre until it exploded on the moon than you would on earth. You'd just need a LOT less air on the moon to get the same effective pressure.

If you inflated them to a pressure required for use on earth THEN took them to the moon, then I'm sure they would explode, but there's no good reason why they would do that - think of the space you'd save with deflated tyres.

Well I'm sure if your taking a 12 foot buggy to the Moon with all the batteries it needs etc your really gonna have to cut down on space, but how would they fill the tyres with them gloves? It's such a fidgety job...unless the boffins at NASA made a special tool for the job!

Yea, I got owned on that point, should've researched it a bit more haha. The thing that makes me question it above everything else, is the footage of the lander taking off, the thing looks like its made out of tinfoil, and taking off looks like a bad oldschool movie. Somehow it just doesnt seem legit that they made these perfect landings and takeoffs every single time when they couldnt do it in practice. You have to wonder what the odds of that are, questioning that seems fair imo.

I'd have to guess that they weren't in a high jump contest and may have been worried about breaking something.

Which would have been really bad, given that even with low gravity if they could have jumped as high as they possibly could, even discounting the lack of flexibility of the suit, they'd land with the same impact that they would on earth.

OK, actually the impact would be very slightly more, given the lack of air resistance on earth.

I'll believe America made it when Russia or China finally do and show evidence of the landing sites

What about the laser reflectors placed by the Apollo astronauts which are still in use by NASA today?

India found it

DOH! I guess this means it's true: India is in on It too!! >:[

Still not convinced

Here's a picture of the landing site Imgur

I love you.

Both Russia and China have already sent unmanned orbiters to the Moon.

I sat behind the wheel of a 1966 Oldsmobile Cutlass stationwagon and said to myself "we can build this and we can go almost 300,000 miles to the moon". then I sat behind the wheel of a 2010 Cadillac Escolade and said to myself "we can build this and we can NOT go 300 miles in space to the Van-Allin radiation belt".

TL;DR: NO.

Please, the radiation in the belts is composed of electrons and protons trapped in the Earth magnetic field. In short, alpha and beta particles, which can be easily barred by a metal sheet.

Of much higher concern was the exposure to cosmic rays after the Apollos left the magnetosphere. Biopsies from the astronauts tissues indeed presented "scars" caused by the passage of such heavy high-energy particles through their bodies, and those would be a concern in longer missions such as to Mars, possibly requiring additional protection to the spacecraft.

Please...

When/what was the last manned flight higher than 300 miles? Got a link?

I'm not presenting an argument that the van allen belt is dangerous, I's saying we in fact have not gone that high lately.

The last Hubble repair?

Also, it's not like anyone goes to the Van Allen Belt then just sort of hangs around in there. They're through it relatively quickly. It's still obviously not healthy for the astronauts though.

Still not convinced

DOH! I guess this means it's true: India is in on It too!! >:[

I don't think anyone would have ever thought the tyres were inflated by an astronaut with a foot pump. It wouldn't be hard to bring a canister of air to fill the tyres with once you got there. It's like saying scuba diving is fake because people can't breathe underwater - you bring your own air.

Can we see the pictures you have?

From this...[1] http://breakfornews.com/offsitearchive/Apollo/apollofacts.htm

FACT: Earth is 250,000 miles from the Moon, yet reflected sunlight from its surface is strong enough to illuminate the darkness on planet Earth. Anyone hovering above surface would be blinded by the light.

Are you sure that's not a joke site?