Moon landing. Real or Fake?

[Gard]

OK, I think SOME of you guys are just "taking the piss" on this, some are really drinking the koolaid....I'm going to leave it at this:

Use Occams' Razor - which is the least convoluted answer?

Did hundreds of thousands of individuals band together to hoax the entire world into believing that we landed on the moon - and take into account all of the necessary things to accomplish this: large multi-stage rockets, LARGE soundstages that can be kept in total vacuum, spoofiing tracking stations manned by non-US personnel (Siding Spring, Aus, for example, not to mention that all of the signals were broadcast "in the clear" to anyone with a sensitive enough radio receiver, say for example those in the USSR that would have been THRILLED to be able to prove it a hoax! ) into believing they were receiving signals that managed to appear and disappear over the horizon precisely to align with the position of the moon (this would have been the most difficult to achieve), and hundreds and thousands of other small, seemingly insignificant bits of information that would have needed to be present to fill out the story?

Or, did it all actually happen as we remember it (those of us that were there)? We really did it.

Guess where the cut of the razor goes here?



Finally, here are a few fun links:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/apollohoax.html
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/moonhoax.asp

 

[ModulusFan]

Since most of you missed my huge chunk of sarcasm, I will leave you with this.

PS, I did thoroughly enjoy some of you taking the bait.

 

[allexcosta]

Did hundreds of thousands of individuals band together to hoax the entire world into believing that we landed on the moon.

How many people are necessary to hoax the entire world into this?

 

[Brad Johnson]

Exactly. Conspiracies are hard enough to contain when they're small and minor. Maintaining silence among many thousands for several decades would be quite impossible, and I'd expect that any who broke that silence would have some actual evidence to offer.

If they lived long enough. I do understand that no one ever gets killed over secrets.

 

[Brad Johnson]

How many people are necessary to hoax the entire world into this?

We have concrete proof of everything that happened regarding that. Anyone who doesn't buy into ever piece of it must be a moron.

That's how anti-conspiracy theory works. You're stupid if you allow doubt.


It's funny that many people doen't see they latch onto their proof just as hard as others latch onto their doubt. Black or white, either/or.

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

If they lived long enough. I do understand that no one ever gets killed over secrets.

Maybe that's why the murder rate in the US is so much higher than in most other industrialized nations, with all those aerospace people to kill off.

 

[ModulusFan]

Brad, what do you know about chemtrails?

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

There's nothing wrong with doubt, just lack of evidence.

 

[Brad Johnson]

OK, I think SOME of you guys are just "taking the piss" on this, some are really drinking the koolaid....I'm going to leave it at this:

Use Occams' Razor - which is the least convoluted answer?

Did hundreds of thousands of individuals band together to hoax the entire world into believing that we landed on the moon - and take into account all of the necessary things to accomplish this: large multi-stage rockets, LARGE soundstages that can be kept in total vacuum, spoofiing tracking stations manned by non-US personnel (Siding Spring, Aus, for example, not to mention that all of the signals were broadcast "in the clear" to anyone with a sensitive enough radio receiver, say for example those in the USSR that would have been THRILLED to be able to prove it a hoax! ) into believing they were receiving signals that managed to appear and disappear over the horizon precisely to align with the position of the moon (this would have been the most difficult to achieve), and hundreds and thousands of other small, seemingly insignificant bits of information that would have needed to be present to fill out the story?

Or, did it all actually happen as we remember it (those of us that were there)? We really did it.

Guess where the cut of the razor goes here?



Finally, here are a few fun links:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/apollohoax.html
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/moonhoax.asp

It's impossible that anything could've happened any other way than you remember it... that is your preemise, right?

I saw things that didn't happen as I was told and just because I remembered it didn't make it true.

I'm not saying the landings didn't happen. I do find some of the counterpoints to be no less weak than what others are being ostracized over. Why not apply the same skepticism to the points you think you're making.

And I enjoy Occam's razor being dragged out as some sort of proof, other than knowledge of what it's supposed to mean. Isn't the very premise based on what you don't know as an absolute? Yet people somehow twist it to mean the simplest answer is always the correct one. It's about probability, not actual proof. Or maybe I just don't get it.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Maybe that's why the murder rate in the US is so much higher than in most other industrialized nations, with all those aerospace people to kill off.

Not just them... there's Ted Kennedy's auto mechanic, weather balloon hobbyists, Britney's limo driver, Pentagon janitors... there's a whole host of 'em.

 

[senorblues]

So we went in 1969 in primitive rockets and computers (we couldn't even land the things, they had to fall in the ocean) but we were able to go all the way to the moon and even have a little moon go cart to tool around in and broadcast live TV back to earth.
Now, it's gonna take us 10 years to figure out how to do it again.
Duh, I dunno.

 

[zazz]

the wise man will say that he does not know!

 

[Brad Johnson]

Brad, what do you know about chemtrails?

Outside of you just asking me about it and me googling it, nothing. But in the spirit of the thread I'll go ahead and pre-emptively say that anyone who believes it is a moron. After all, it's a conspiracy.

 

[Brad Johnson]

the wise man will say that he does not know!

uh oh.

 

[Brad Johnson]

There's nothing wrong with doubt, just lack of evidence.

We've been given a list of astronauts in this thread as evidence. After all, they're astronauts, therefore above reproach. And told that extremely valuable (if not priceless) tapes were "lost". Hell, maybe someone sold them.

Yay, another plot.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Since most of you missed my huge chunk of sarcasm, I will leave you with this.

PS, I did thoroughly enjoy some of you taking the bait.

Why would one assume they missed it instead of simply didn't take the bait?



These threads are fun. So much certainty in an uncertain world.

 

[nortonrider]

So, we can see a 3 ft. rover driving around on Mars,
but we don't have the technology to see a car sized object on the moon?

 

[Brad Johnson]

So, we can see a 3 ft. rover driving around on Mars,
but we don't have the technology to see a car sized object on the moon?

I'm sure there's a logical explanation for that. The logical explanation is...?


_______________________________


And no, I'm not implying there isn't one, I haven't researched this and I'm genuinely curious what that explanation is. Can we see the Mars rover?

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

We've been given a list of astronauts in this thread as evidence. After all, they're astronauts, therefore above reproach. And told that extremely valuable (if not priceless) tapes were "lost". Hell, maybe someone sold them.

There seems pretty ample evidence that the Apollo moon landings did occur. If they were faked, OTOH, I would expect there to be aome evidence to that effect as well, even if there was a conspiracy of many thousands of people in on it.

 

[popinfresh]

Finally, nortonrider, see some of my previous posts with LRO photos. As for a telescope that could resolve those items from earth or NEO, not possible, nothing has that kind of resolution. Just because Hubble can "see" stars at thousands of light years, or galaxies at billions of light years overlooks the fact that these are IMMENSE objects that are emitting radiation (light, x-ray, infrared, etc) on their own. You're expecting something that is simply reflective, and is very small - remember the LEM is no where near as big as you think it is, it's literally about 3 meters across, max, the lunar rover is no larger than an overgrown go-kart. Imagine trying to build a telescope that would allow you to read the fine print on your cellphone contract on a music stand in Los Angeles when you are sitting in NYC. Not gonna happen.

I'm not a yey or nay sayer on the matter. I believe we have landed on the moon, but there are a few strange matters to do with it.

As for that part of your post. If I can zoom in and see my house and car using free software such as google earth, and we can see in pretty damn good detail things one mars, surely there's something powerful enough to see the evidence on the moon in more detail, no?