• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Moon landing. Real or Fake?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have no idea, I wasn't there.

What I do find curious is that with the advances in space exploration, a space station etc, why has noone gone BACK for anything? I think because they're not exploring space as much as maintaining relations LOL.



Well, to put this in terms that might be a little more understandable as for why we haven't been back.

I once, eons ago, got off a plane in NY. The plan was to drive to Calif., my home state. Along the way, I was to be best man at a wedding in Scranton, PA, best man at a wedding in Gridley, Ill. Pickup a little brother in Okla. and deliver him for the summer to Pomona, Calif. Visit and old Msgt in Knoxville,Tenn. (steel guitar player who taught me my 4th chord!). But somehow before this all started, the idea was to be in Compton to see Johnny Otis at a club there on a specific date and time and meet a piano player (Jimmy Caves).

Lets shorten this up, I drove (or meandered) about 5,000 miles in two weeks to be in Compton. Great experience, but I haven't been back either.:rolleyes:
 

as if the 40 years of bouncing earth-bound lasers off the mirrors the apollo astronauts left on the surface was insufficient proof for anyone with above a 2nd grade IQ.

any folks not willing to believe that very provable evidence are not going to believe photographs from a satellite. they're also probably still thinking the earth is flat, the sun travels in a chariot around the planet and santa claus really does check his list twice.
 
The evidence for the moon landings being genuine is overwhelming and is all easily available for public scrutiny.

The assertions that they were fake are typical of any crackpot conspiracy theory - mostly criticisms that rely on illogical or scientifically untenable arguments or unsupported claims based on speculation or unverifiable anecdotes.

In particular, the moon landing deniers rely heavily on pointing out so called incongruities in the NASA videos but from a scientific standpoint these criticisms are just laughable because the only thing demonstrated is the deniers lack of understanding of how things work.
 
I just don't understand how they could've taped over the footage...

"Oh, this isn't that important. Erase it!"


It's almost as if they were covering something up... :ninja:

They used huge amounts of tape and they only had so much of it so it was necessary to reuse it. It was simply routine policy and a great amount of historic original material is gone and all we have are the copies.

If one is predisposed to believing the moon landings were fake then this is obviously "evidence" that supports that assertion.
 
They used huge amounts of tape and they only had so much of it so it was necessary to reuse it. It was simply routine policy and a great amount of historic original material is gone and all we have are the copies.

If one is predisposed to believing the moon landings were fake then this is obviously "evidence" that supports that assertion.

Nixon was president then, and you can't imagine how the tape was erased? Come on, think!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts