Do you believe some Apollo astronauts saw et's and their machines on the moon?
463712
One thing that makes me mad is all the STUPID people who make fun of the moon landings etc. Some MORONS actually believe they never took place, based on ridiculous assumptions that they have read on the Internet, rather than something their own tiny, ridiculously distorted intellect  could even begin to comprehend. Fortunately for some stupid, slack jawed lack-wits, this forum precludes me from actually telling the inbred intellectually challenged crossbreeds what I actually think of them.  For those brave enough to face the TRUTH that man did walk on the moon etc  go here http://www.clavius.org   I MEAN YOU 'PIXIE'  FFS are you so totally stupid as to not believe in Satellites etc. You should be locked away in the asylum for the clinically untreatable morons who believe any fact that they are told without question. As for the Van Allen belt.. ha ha ha ha.I am sick of explaining why that is not a show stopper, but very few people have the intelligence to understand, then again they are usually the gullible ones taken in by the conspiracy theory and incapable of autonomous thought.\n\nOh, and another thing! PIXIE, when you grow up, learn to spell. You do yourself and your fellow idiots no favours by spouting unsubstantiated rubbish, but also spelling what you write incorrectly!  YOU MORON  (Unless you are under 7 years of age then I apologise as you would know no better)
1077212
It wasn't faked. I agree, the technology involved was bare bones but still capable. Here are some quotes that help counter some of the conspiracy theories:\n\nIn some photos, the crosshairs appear to be behind objects, rather than in front of them where they should be, as if the photos were altered.\n\n        * In photography, the light white color (the object behind the crosshair) makes the black object (the crosshair) invisible due to saturation effects in the film emulsion. The film particles that ought to have been black were exposed by light from the adjacent brightly lit particles. Ironically, this saturation effect would not happen if the crosshairs were drawn on in post, and so is evidence of genuine photos. Attempting to alter photos that already have crosshairs would make the compositing process far more difficult.\n\nThe quality of the photographs is implausibly high.\n\n        * The astronauts were trained in the use of their gear, and shots and poses were planned in advance as part of the mission. NASA selected only the best photographs for release to the public, and some of the photos were cropped to improve their composition. There are many badly exposed, badly focused and poorly composed images amongst the thousands of photos that were taken by the Apollo Astronauts. Many can be seen at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. Photos were taken on high-quality Hasselblad cameras with Zeiss lenses, using 70 mm medium format film.\n\nThere are no stars in any of the photos, and astronauts never report seeing any stars from the capsule windows. \n\n         *Stars are also never seen in Space Shuttle, Mir, International Space Station Earth observation photos, or even sporting events that take place at night. The sun in the Earth/Moon area shines as brightly as on a clear noon day on Earth, so cameras used for imaging these things are set for daylight exposure, with quick shutter speeds in order to prevent overexposing the film. The dim light of the stars simply does not have a chance to expose the film.\n\nhe color and angle of shadows and light are inconsistent.\n\n        * Shadows on the Moon are complicated because there are several light sources: the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon itself. \n\n The Moon's surface during the daytime is so hot that camera film would have melted.\n\n        * There is no atmosphere to efficiently couple lunar surface heat to devices such as cameras not in direct contact with it. In a vacuum, only radiation remains as a heat transfer mechanism. \n\nThe launch rocket produced no visible flame.\n\n        * Hydrazine (a fuel) and dinitrogen tetroxide (an oxidizer) were the Lunar Module propellants, chosen for their reliability; they ignite hypergolically –upon contact– without a spark. Hypergolic propellants happen to produce a nearly transparent exhaust. Hypergolic fuels are also used by several space launchers: the core of the American Titan, the Russian Proton, the European Ariane 1 through 4 and the Chinese Long March, and the transparency of their plumes is apparent in many launch photos.\n\nThe flag placed on the surface by the astronauts flapped despite there being no wind on the Moon.\n\n        * The astronauts were moving the flag into position, causing motion. Since there is no air on the Moon to provide friction, these movements caused a long-lasting undulating movement seen in the flag. There was a rod extending from the top of the flagpole to hold the flag out for proper display. The fabric's rippled appearance was due to its having been folded during flight and gave it an appearance which could be mistaken for motion in a still photograph.\n\nThese are only a few quotes. They all seem much more convincing then the arguments the conspiracy theorists present.
15143
I'm not sure. I believe it is real though. Wish I had some solid proof to back it up. Perhaps we wont know for sure untill civilians are able to land freely on the moon and see for themselves. Until that happens fully, we just have to rely on faith.
823638
Although my wife's father performed fuel calculations for the original Apollo landing, I'll spare you that speech. Instead, I will encourage you to watch two programs. The first show is called Conspiracy Moon Landing that it currently showing on the National Geographic Channel and it pretty much obliterates all of the popular conspiracy theories.\n\nI would also encourage you to watch a movie called Capricorn One. Made it 1978, it is a fictional story about a fake mission to Mars. Although it is a science fiction story, it is a good example of how utterly impossible it would be to fake a moon landing for any length of time.\n\n12 men walked on the moon from 1969 to 1972 and we have neither the resources nor the technology to pull off that big of a hoax for so long. Hundreds of thousands of people have worked on the space program. It would be far easier to put someone on the moon than to try and fake it and keep it secret for nearly 40 years. \n\nThe landings came at a time when our space program was ultra competitive with the former Soviet Union. Remember how big of a deal it was when Sputnik was put into orbit? They had the technology to monitor our moon shots and transmissions. Don't you think they would have called us out if they had evidence that it was all fake? \n\nPerhaps the most definitive proof of our trip to the moon is what we left behind. For the last 35+ years, scientists have been beaming lasers to the moon and measuring the return times. How are they doing this? The beams are reflected back by equipment left on the moon on at 3 different locations.\n\nCase closed.
176672
"Was the Apollo moon landing a hoax?"\nThe article starts out,\n"Yes, they walked on the moon. And yes, some people insist they did not--that it was all a huge conspiracy. "\nhttp://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mmoonhoax.html
451361
i do not beleive any man has ever landed on the moon and there are telescopes powerful enough to see the landing site but even if pics of that came about they would be faked too there is a belt of radioactive gas between the moon and the earth witch no man in a spaceship could pass ecsept neil armstrong of corse yeah right wheva u believe or not it doesnt matter the moon is a useless rock
1098156
I can tell you that I worked with some people who were down in Florida for the Apollo 13 launch, and they saw a very big machine take off up into the sky a few miles away from them!  Pretty hard to fake that!\n\nPeople who defend arguments that the moon landings were faked are being silly.  But what I find outrageous is that media people encourage these folks because they simply love to air any form of controversy that can be cooked up, no matter how nonsensical.  I guess it brings in more viewers.  But it is doing great harm by making some folks believers in what should be recognized as nonsense.
814259
No. I saw the film. \n\nIt is possible that I just imagined seeing this film, but this is just a conspiracy by those who believe that the moon is made of cheese.
132360
The moon landings were real and there is overwhelming evidence for that fact. The "evidence" the hoax side always presents are truly laughable for those that have a little more knowledge in their brains than those that obsess about that Fox tv mokumentary. \nThey say that when the flag moves in some footage it is "proof" that it did so because it was blowing in the studio. What one can clearly see is the flag moving because an astronaut is moving it. \nAlso the absence of stars in the photos are supposed to be "proof" it is a fake. Anyone with a little knowledge of how a camera works can tell you why there are no stars. The moon is pretty bright. Right? In fact on the surface of the moon the sun shines twice as bright as it does on earth during the brightest of days. Now imagine standing in such intense light. If they had set their cameras to expose the, by comparison, extremely faint stars instead of the surface of the moon the film in the cameras would have recieved so much light the film would have melted, ruining the cameras. The purpose of the Apollo missions were to take pictures of the moon. Not the stars. We can take pictures of them from earth. Also stars would have been the easiest thing in the world to fake it the landing had been a fake. With a $25 billion budget you would think NASA could have afforded a script supervisor...\nI could go on and on and on but I have answered this question so many times. I wish people could just stop asking it. The only ones that claim the landings were fake are those that are really bored and have way too much time on their hands.
408969
I think the Apollo budget was used for "black projects"...secret aircraft, secret bases etc.\n\nThe astronauts were in earth orbit the whole time and mission control were looking at pre-programmed readings so they were not even aware of what was going on. That is why it was easy to keep this a secret all of these years. Only a handful of top people new what was going on. The lunar rocks were collected at the poles (meteorites), and lunar video was shot in the Nevada dessert at night where much of the Apollo budget went to their military base.\n\nThe moon has been scanned/photographed with radar, so has mars and we can see those images/grids of the planet's surface. I recall even seeing one of the robotic landers and it's tread marks in the sand from a mars satellite image!\n\nI would think the lunar satellite images would definitely be taken and shown to all of us of the Apollo landing site since it's such a big historical achievement?\nWhere are those images?
49774
it think it is a hoax... "The astronauts have kept out of the public eye", something happend. they were on their way to the moon, but i don't believe they have been on it! if you look around, read about it, it will become more clear. the pictures they have made don't match the actual event... i think they have been made in a hollywood studio. there has been pictures with some major mistakes, like the shadowing, footprints etc. everybody got his own opinion, and this is mine: it's a hoax.
706563
Of course they went. In 1969 it would have been harder to fake then actually have gone.\nI'm sick of that flag waving on the moon rubbish it did not and never waved in the wind there is no atmosphere on the moon so how can there be wind,numbnuts.\nGo back to your sheep taffy.
889877
all questions about the six apollo lunar landings being fake are non-sense.  nasa got a huge amount of evidence to prove that twelve americans have stepped onto lunar soil, and there is no evidence at all that says they didn't.\n\nthere are six american flags on the moon.  each one has a sleeve across the top.  the flagpole is hinged, and the hinged  part goes thru the sleeve at the top of the flag.  the flags did not wave.  the flags sometimes swung from these rods when the astronauts put the flags on the moon because they moved them from side to side at times and the flags lagged behind some and had to catch up with the rods.\n\nhttp://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5874HR.jpg\n\nhere is a photograph of the flag at the apollo 11 landing site.  you can clearly see the rod in the sleeve across the top of the flag.
1058333
My wife's father did perform fuel calculations for the original Apollo landing, but I will spare you that speach. Instead, I will encourage you to watch two programs. The first show is called Conspiracy Moon Landing that it currently showing on the National Geographic Channel and it pretty much obliterates all of the popular conspiracy theories.\n\nThe I would also encourage you to watch a movie called Capricon One. Made it 1978, it is a fictional movie about a fake mission to mars. Although it is a science fiction story, it is a good example of how utterly impossible it would be to fake a moon landing for any length of time.\n\n12 men walked on the moon from 1969 to 1972 and we simply don't have the resources nor technology to pull off that big of a hoax for so long. Hundreds of thousands of people have worked on the space program. It would be far easier to put someone on the moon than to try and fake it and keep it secret for nearly 40 years.\n\nThe landings came at a time when our space program was ultra competitive with the former Soviet Union. Remember how big of a deal it was when Sputnik was put into orbit? They had the technology to monitor our moon shots and transmissions. Don't you they they would have called is out if they have evidence that it was all fake?\n\nPerhaps the most definitive proof of our trip to the moon is what we left behind. For the last 30+ years, scientist have been beaming lasers to the moon and meansuring the return times. How are they doing this? Because the beams are reflected back by equipment left on the moon on in onto 1 but 3 different locations.\n\nCase closed.
1165624
Very Fascinating  Query indeed...Even scientists are looking for its answer...Their existence has been detected several times but it has never been confirmed...Even Armstrong saw them on the Moon...A few years back, Mexican Air Force had detected some Unidentified Flying Objects(UFOs) that could only be seen with the help of an Infra Red equipment...but they couldn't exactly explain what the flying objects were...eventually this matter went into cold storage...SETI has been trying to detect Aliens on the darker side of the moon...the side which can't be seen from earth...special and powerful modern equipments are also being utilised for this purpose...Well lets hope that their are Aliens........and they do not hate us..
78332
There's always been heavy debate as to whether or not we've actually been to the moon, etc. and there is actual evidence that we haven't. maybe what you're seeing is a farce, maybe it's just some scientific anomaly. Who outside of the space program can say for sure?
441964
You know I was just thinking about this yesterday.\nIf you recall the footage of the lunar lander…it was pretty small. Remember the astronauts climbing down the ladder?\nWell what about the lunar car buggy? That was pretty large.\nWhere was it stored?\nHow did they take it out of the lander?\nHas anyone seen footage of them taking it out of the lander?