Originally posted by Einion
Yes, absolute proof right there (IF they bother to look at it). 841lb by the way.Originally posted by steelcult
Having said that, the one thing I have never seen any of the \"We\'ve never been to the moon/It was all staged\" loons discuss or even look at are the 200+ pounds of Lunar Rock and Soil that were brought back by the Apollo program.
The one by Fox?Originally posted by Jazz is for losers
I don\'t believe any of the other famous conspiracy theories (JFK, 911 etc etc), but I was convinced by the well known documentary about Apollo being a fake.
Which points are convincing for you?Originally posted by Jazz is for losers
I have seen some stuff refuting this, but I didn\'t find it nearly as convincing (which is not the same as actual research, of course).
Shadows at different angles? Crosshairs disappearing behind objects in the photos? No stars in the photos? White objects clearly visible in deep shadow? The hills appearing to be unchanged in different photos?
lolOriginally posted by Dragonsreach
Trouble is Einion that you\'ve asked \"Believe there were moon landings?\"
But your mistake is that you didn\'t ask by Whom.
Watch the skies
Serious answer? One reason is because they\'re dry. Very very dry.Originally posted by MPJ
And you can prove those rocks came from the lunar surface how?
As Steelcult says, really the burden of proof is on the doubters, not the other way around.
Einion
Originally posted by Einion
Then why didn\'t you say you were playing devil\'s advocate?Originally posted by MPJ
All this being said, I am quite sure we did land on the moon and we do in fact have moon rocks.
Yeah? Well wait until you realize how much medical data we got from the Nazi\'s experiments.Originally posted by gary
I would go with the people who say yes, I mean this wasn\'t some cold war conspiracy to one up the Russians this had been one mans dream from before the war. And that point is why I can\'t see how any one can take pride in the moon landing, I mean Wernher Von Braun the father of the US space program was among the worst of the nazi war criminals.
For the rockets to be developed to put man on the moon cost over 20,000 lives at Mittelwerk the site of the v rocket development. Then instead of being punished for war crimes the Americans in operation overcast allowed Wernher and his team to carry on work in America for NASA.
I know i\'ve gone of point a lot but I think who cares if man landed on the moon to me the bigger point is why was a waffen-ss officer who used concentration camp slave labour not punished, answer because he could put the Americans on the moon faster than the Russians to me the moon landing will allways be clouded by that shame.
Originally posted by mud duck
Of course we were grabing up Nazi\'s, we had to get them before the Russias got them all. Like a twisted verison of Pokeman.
The problem with most conspiracy theorists is the \"faith\" nature of their arguments. Their theories have become like a radical religion to them. They can\'t be reasoned out of them, because any evidence to the contrary is generally claimed to be just more proof of the cover-up\'s pervasiveness (if not the questioner\'s personal complicity in it).Originally posted by MPJ
In all seriousness though, I do think a certain level of skepticism is quite healthy and good for society. It\'s unfortunate (or is it inevitable) that most skeptics we see or hear from are cracked in the head, they often seem perfectly normal until they open their mouthes and start talking.
Sadly, for all their ruthlessness, the Nazi doctors were not good scientists. From what I understand, many of their sick experiments were not carried out with the kind of scientific rigor that would be expected for publication even at the time, and their usefulness is compromised as a result. This is not to say they were not scientists at all, for many of them were well-respected academics and doctors before the war - members of the educated elite, not just a bunch of sadistic brownshirts in lab coats.Originally posted by MPJ
Sadly we can\'t change what has already been done (medical experiment line...) but wouldn\'t ignoring useful data be just as much of a crime as the way the data was gained in the first place?
Letting more people suffer because other people suffered just doesn\'t make sense either.
Actually there is ejecta, just not much of it. Good explanation for this too - not much thrust (one sixth gravity remember, moving slowly at that point in the descent), plus it\'s spread over quite a wide area. Also, vacuum means the gasses from a rocket disperse really quickly compared to the way they\'re constrained by an atmosphere into a column; and there\'s no air to keep the dust afloat, so it settles very quickly - hence no dust cloud. You can see the same effect in the rooster-tails from the rover (which incidentally couldn\'t have been faked unless they made an entire studio a pressure vessel).Originally posted by Jazz is for losers
I can\'t remember all the exact points, but there were several that really made me think. The unreal appearance of the landing unit descending sticks out. No dust whatsoever.
When they find a way of making money out of it, they will.Originally posted by gary
Anyway the space race is old news what interests me is whats beneath our oceans, I wish goverments would invest the cash into that research.
Originally posted by Einion
Actually there is ejecta, just not much of it. Good explanation for this too - not much thrust (one sixth gravity remember, moving slowly at that point in the descent), plus it\'s spread over quite a wide area. Also, vacuum means the gasses from a rocket disperse really quickly compared to the way they\'re constrained by an atmosphere into a column; and there\'s no air to keep the dust afloat, so it settles very quickly - hence no dust cloud. You can see the same effect in the rooster-tails from the rover (which incidentally couldn\'t have been faked unless they made an entire studio a pressure vessel).Originally posted by Jazz is for losers
I can\'t remember all the exact points, but there were several that really made me think. The unreal appearance of the landing unit descending sticks out. No dust whatsoever.
This is a great example of something where our layman\'s understanding of the way things \'should be\' just doesn\'t prepare us for the unusual conditions in lower gravity, vacuum etc. That\'s one reason conditions in space and within spacecraft are so seldom done correctly in movies.
Einion