well the soviet never disputed the Apollo 11 landing, why would the Soviet work with Nasa to keep secrect and lose the space race?

also there is up to 400,000 people that are involve in the Apollo project, no one have come out the expose this is fake, how can Nasa be so successful in covering up the truth with so many people involve. it very hard to keep a secret with such a large organization, like the Israel nuclear program even as they try hard to cover it up there is so many leak on the program that many are quite sure that Israel have up to 80 nuclear warhead.

also the moon rock collected by the mission have been verified by lab test and been verified as moon rock.

Could someone explain about the flag having a wavy thing even though there isnt any air on the moon? I read before that the picture taken with the flag, it was as though the flag was at earth.

I still cant believe that people still find moon landing controversy so exciting.

When looking back at the videos of moon landing. It seems so impressive that the late 60s technology can actually put a person on the moon.
I'm still 50-50 whether to believe it or not.
Serious..

its true kot...

1940's already invented a atomic bomb.
War time (whether world war or cold war) was actually a good catalyst for technology advancement, sadly to say.

Before the moon landing, human kind already knew how to send statellite to space and orbiting for spying etc.

For the sake of humanity and exploration, I want to believe that the Moon landing is true and I do believe that its true.
The facts just overweights the myths.

Unmanned probes can collect rocks too

I read The Star paper a fortnight ago (can't remember which day exactly) and NASA did provide explanations for all possible questions hurled to them. But of course we can's be sure how far it is true. How hard is it for NASA to create some cock and bull story to convince people when they can cheat (if they ever cheat) the whole world for so many years before this debate comes to rise?

which ummanned mission can collect up to 100kg of moon rock? the ummanned luna probes only send by a few hundred gram of rock.

and it is highly impossible to do a series of secret launch to the moon to collect moon rock with the world not knowning about that.

This post has been edited by robertngo: Aug 6 2009, 12:09 AM

I don't know the part of Russia, and will never know.
For one, they might not even have the abilities to track&trace the locations of NASA's rocket at that time.
It was 1969 and they only have about <5 satelites up there?
With most of them orbiting earth, and with the technology at that time?
I doubt they can do that.

How sure of you that the rock is > 100kg?
Media and news do not ALWAYS report the truth.
Especially news from US@.
That being said, you concur that you believe in everything that the media and US has said?
Because I don't.



And it is exclusively because of that, that I am here, doubting the 1969 moon landing.
If I were to believe in them, I won't be here saying this.

LOL yea. The lander module didn't seem to have a place to carry a 100kg rock. 100kg rock is quite huge

This post has been edited by prolog: Aug 11 2009, 09:43 AM

I smell bullshit on the Apollo moon landings. I smell too much bullshit.

For example, recent news has it that NASA is going to digitally "re-master" footage of the moon landings. Because the original ones had been erased or taped over in a colossal lack of foresight by the agency. Supposedly.

My opinion: YEAH RIGHT.

Does anybody here know the meaning of the word "ret-con"? Comic book fans will be familiar with it for sure.

This post has been edited by Dickson Poon: Aug 11 2009, 12:07 PM

he dint land on moon . he dint touch the surface with his skin

The flag was said to have a wire mesh to make it look stiff and to extend itself like that. Of course having a limp flag wouldn't look impressive at all.

the flags waved because the astronaut moved it when setting the flag, vacuum = no = air friction = longer time for the flag to stop waving.

the astronaut had left the flag, but it was still waving.

This post has been edited by mindkiller6610: Aug 12 2009, 12:46 PM

I can't believe that people are still trying to authenticate this issue.... THEY DID LAND ON THE MOON!!
If you actually watched what CNN, NASA, & Mythbusters released, you will not doubt it.

opps, my mistake, it is 100 lb not 100kg, they can carry an entire rover to the moon, do you think they have capacity to bring back to rock, the lunar rover weight 210 kg. . and the moon rock have been send to labs all over the world and no one denied it was not from the moon. even the Russian verify it against their own moon rock collected by luna unmanned mission.

---

Added on August 12, 2009, 2:32 pmat the time Soviet have the capability to remote control a rover on the surface of the moon, they have lauch satelite to the moon. also at the same time of the Apollo3 11 landing the Soviet have lauch a luna mission to attempt landing a rover on moon in a last ditch attempt to upstage NASA by returning with moon rock before the Apollo mission return, but their mission failed

This post has been edited by robertngo: Aug 12 2009, 02:35 PM

I read the national geographic article. I thought it was horrible.

First of all, were the photos used in there also the originals? I would bet not. I would bet that the photos in there were edited and touched up to look good... but also to cover up any signs or artefacts that would have caused speculation in the first place, or "paint" these artefacts to appear to have been caused by something else.

The article also gives nothing but plausible explanations to counter over-simplified hoax claims. Do you know the meaning of a plausible explanation? It's one of those things that make you think "it could be, but who is to say it might not?".

Take a look at this: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...res/photo8.html



It could be, but who is to say it might not?



It could be, but who is to say it might not? ACTUALLY.... this attempt to debunk the moon landing hoaxes lies closer to the heart of the matter than the other paragraphs which seek to dismiss them as matters of "scientific" minutae.

A lot of photography professionals who've examined the originals do say that the photographs are too picture perfect, appear to have been created specifically for mass consumption, and do reveal that they have been shot in a controlled environment like a studio.

Did they have automatic cameras at the time? Did the astronauts have the time to adjust aperture and shutter speed settings in order to get such well composed and iconic photographs while on the moon?

I think that a lot of people who don't believe that the moon landings could be a hoax simply have invested themselves too much in the idea that it is real, or that "there is no way to know for sure". They cannot even bring themselves to acknowledge that they can be LIED to in such a manner, in fact they REFUSE to believe it, and thus they will do everything they can to preserve and maintain their peace of mind. The simplest way is of course, outright rejection and derision.

---

Added on August 14, 2009, 10:05 pmhttp://www.clavius.org/envrad.html

^ Now we have a webpage specifically created to debunk the hoax claims... all of which have been summarised to single lines of contention.

I could go further and explain and argue, but it would be better for me to ask a question, instead.

I want to ask the readers here: Do you know how the international press works?

How do agencies like AFP, Associated Press and Reuters decide what stories to bring to you, and how they are to be PRESENTED to you?

Do you know how the mass media works... as well as who decides how they work?

---

Added on August 14, 2009, 10:42 pmI feel like writing an article about the Iraq war and what it taught me about the media and propaganda and how it's helped me to interpret current events.

I also feel like writing an article on HOW to cover up a conspiracy, drawing on patterns that I have observed from almost all "unsolved mysteries" that have had more and more pieces added to the puzzle over time.

The question is.... is anybody even interested in knowing?

The second concern of mine is: isn't it true that the people who already have the ability to perceive, have already done so and are well on their way to understanding more?

Meaning that the people who don't have that ability are in fact wilfully keeping themselves that way?

This post has been edited by Dickson Poon: Aug 14 2009, 10:43 PM

Eh...Apollo not just landing once right? Few time if not mistaken. Till apollo 13 have problem. With this few time, woudin't people will suspect it at that time? Or the US enemy will not suspect anything and said something?

This post has been edited by ozak: Aug 15 2009, 10:25 AM