landing of apollo 11 on moon, is it true or a mere lies?
485788
This is the second time I have seem this question in as many weeks. Whats going on! Is history evaporating? First the Holocaust didn't happen, now one of mans (no sexism intended) greatest achievements maybe didn't really happen???!?!?!?!?\n\nI guess for some people, the only way to make them believe in the Apollo program is to bring them along, otherwise forget it...
727779
Did man really walk on the Moon ??? \n      \n   \nWeb Krishna.org \n \n\n\nDid man really walk on the Moon or was it the ultimate camera trick, asks David Milne? The greater lunar lie. In the early hours of May 16, 1990, after a week spent watching old video footage of man on the Moon, a thought was turning into an obsession in the mind of Ralph Rene. David Milne (04-07-06)\n\n"How can the flag be fluttering," the 47 year old American kept asking himself, "when there's no wind on the atmosphere free Moon?" That moment was to be the beginning of an incredible Space odyssey for the self-taught engineer from New Jersey. He started investigating the Apollo Moon landings, scouring every NASA film, photo and report with a growing sense of wonder, until finally reaching an awesome conclusion: America had never put a man on the Moon. The giant leap for mankind was fake. \n\nIt is of course the conspiracy theory to end all conspiracy theories. But Rene has now put all his findings into a startling book entitled NASA Mooned America. Published by himself, it's being sold by mail order - and is a compelling read. \n\nThe story lifts off in 1961 with Russia firing Yuri Gagarin into space, leaving a panicked America trailing in the space race. \n\nAt an emergency meeting of Congress, President Kennedy proposed the ultimate face saver, put a man on the Moon. With an impassioned speech he secured the plan an unbelievable 40 billion dollars. And so, says Rene (and a growing number of astro-physicists are beginning to agree with him), the great Moon hoax was born. \n\nBetween 1969 and 1972, seven Apollo ships headed to the Moon. Six claim to have made it, with the ill fated Apollo 13--whose oxygen tanks apparently exploded halfway--being the only casualties. \n\nBut with the exception of the known rocks, which could have been easily mocked up in a lab, the photographs and film footage are the only proof that the Eagle ever landed. And Rene believes they're fake. For a start, he says, the TV footage was hopeless. The world tuned in to watch what looked like two blurred white ghosts gambol threw rocks and dust. Part of the reason for the low quality was that, strangely, NASA provided no direct link up. So networks actually had to film "man's greatest achievement" from a TV screen in Houston--a deliberate ploy, says Rene, so that nobody could properly examine it. \n\nBy contrast, the still photos were stunning. Yet that's just the problem. The astronauts took thousands of pictures, each one perfectly exposed and sharply focused. Not one was badly composed or even blurred. As Rene points out, that's not all: \n\nThe cameras had no white meters or view finders. So the astronauts achieved this feet without being able to see what they were doing. \nThere film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless. \nThey managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in pressurized clubs. It should have been almost impossible to bend their fingers. . \nAward winning British photographer David Persey is convinced the pictures are fake. His astonishing findings are explained alongside the pictures on these pages, but the basic points are as follows: \n\nThe shadows could only have been created with multiple light sources and, in particular, powerful spotlights. But the only light source on the Moon was the sun. \nThe American flag and the words "United States" are always brightly lit, even when everything around is in shadow. \nNot one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both were shot at the same time. \nThe pictures are so perfect, each one would have taken a slick advertising agency hours to put them together. But the astronauts managed it repeatedly. \nDavid Persey believes the mistakes were deliberate, left there by "whistle blowers", who were keen for the truth to on
262978
c don't u think it's even to think a bi that the moon landings are faked\nhow can a country do that\ncommon one day another country will definitely land on the moon and they will definitely find out whether the Americans had actually landed on the moon \nOK if that's no enough proof OK i will give u more a strong proof\nwhat about all those instruments that were actually set up by the Americans in the moon\nwe still receive signals from those machines and they give us a lot of info about many thing that's happening in moon\n\nc this whole story was just something that Media brought about for there existence\nmany became famous from all this\nall this notion was brough about by those guys without even thinking a little bit\nand as for the waving flag\ncommon man the spacecraft was still working the air from it could have made it to wave to & fro\nare u satisfied
531032
Why do morons insist on making something out of absolutely nothing?!  OF COURSE WE LANDED ON THE MOON!  Do you think all those incredible images from space were a hoax as well?!  Ask Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and all the men who have been on the moon to show you their private photos and to share their recollections!  Must we continue to perpetuate these ignorant and unfounded stories of hoaxes??!!  Take a deep breath, switch to decaf, and join the REAL world!!  ANY of our satellites can pinpoint EXACTLY where each of the remnants of our Apollo landing equipment is, and all the flags and instruments that were left behind!!  For God's sake, people: remove the poles that have long been residing in your rear ends, as well as the remnants of retardation that were left behind in your brains!!!
237817
Well, you are right in one thing!\n\nWE didn´t land on the moon. \nNeil Armstrong did, and the other poor astronaut that for landing second on the moon got to never be remembered.\n\nWhat´s with the WE? \n\nBut getting serious with your question, there are some conspiracy theories about it.\nThey say that the USA knew of the Soviets plans to go the moon, and since we where in the middle of the Cold War, oppinion and image WAS EVERYTHING, so the USA mounted a Fake stage of the moon, launched a rocket and claim to be the first ones in the moon.\n\nThere has never been any evidence of the moon landing not ever taking place.
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.
238713
Men landed on moon during the times of space age race between Russia and USA. If it were a fraud, Russia would have been on top of it to bring it up. So, I guess it was confirmed that man really did land on moon and got rock samples back to earth. So i think it really happened. It can't be fraud. Ofcourse there is this talk about pictures taken by astronauts in moon that looks fake and all...but there are equally positive proofs of video and pictures taken on moon too. If you ask me, i think it is real.
501984
you know in the 50´s or so Orson Welles did a radio show about the martians landing ,and every body believed that as well.just goes to show how gullable the Americans are,\n\nHas any one from the government or nasa come forward and attacked the allegations that the moon landing was false.\nno they havent so that tells you already.\n\nWe had a visitor from Nasa here last week where i am and he also thought that it was a big joke.\n\nI mean the flag was waving where there is no wind,no stars where there should have been millions,no flying dust or a crater beneath the rocket where the dust is supposed to be 1 metre deep\ntin tin was more realistic ,but it was still a good movie
1017971
I know it's a hoax because they filmed it in my backyard.  My parents had a place that had craters and a lot of white cheese and NASA asked us if they could use it for the astronaut's training...we agreed and then we found out that the astronauts were falling in the craters and putting flags in them and eating the cheese and saying they were on the moon.  We had to move away due to the embarrasment to our family and we were in hiding for many years.  It's only now I can tell you this because it's been over 30 yrs but if you don't hear from me anymore, it will be because NASA came back.  To verify my story, just ask Al Gore..he made global warming with a big window fan and now he is trying to blow it everywhere.
371858
I am a big project Apollo fan and have done a lot of reading into this over the years (including the conspiracies). Armstrong has never talked openly about the moonlandings in public and most of what is reported from him has been hearsay. One thing I did read is that he was meant to say 'That's one small step for A man, one giant....'. I read also that the lunar ladder to the surface had to be modified after the landing as it was too short.
1047407
Of course not.  There is no evidence what so ever to support this fact.  One conspiracy theory I've heard is that in the photo of the moon landing, you can see a prop marked with the letter C in the foreground.  According to proponents of this theory, the C is the type of mark used in theatre to organize props.\n\nUnfortunately, the so called c is obviously just a shadow on a rock.  And in prop work, the props are not marked with letters.\n\nThe moon landing was an important event in US history from a Cold War satnpoint.  At this period, the US and the USSR were competing in many arenas, of which the space program was just one.  Faking the moon landing would never have worked.  The USSR would not have fallen for it.\n\nAlso, about the flag "waving:"  The flag on the moon is made of metal formed into the shape of a moving flag.  It does not move, it simply appears to stand up as in wind.
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.
324293
I wonder how many people out there are too lazy to do some real research and read the scientific facts proving that man has landed on and partially explored the Moon. Here's a good place to start: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html  On this website each and every "fact" claiming that the Moon landings were all faked are ripped to shreds.\n\nMy favorite "fact" is about the 'waving' flag on the airless Moon. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand how the flag can be made to appear to be waving. Duh!\n\nNobody from the Faked Moon Landing bunch has ever answered my question about several hundred pounds of rock and soil brought back that research groups AROUND THE WORLD unanimously agreed was non-terrestrial.\n\nGod should be spelled B-I-G B-A-N-G\nPBrax@netscape.com
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.
473093
I don't know(we don't know) if it really did land on moon or was it the biggest fool's day prank. But we are certainly required to give an answer when we are asked in examination papers.We cannot(unfortunately) answer with a question- hmmm.........so you really think it did land???\n(I wonder if Sherlock Holmes can help)
96954
Yes, they walked on the moon. And yes, some people insist they did not--that it was all a huge conspiracy. You seem shocked at this, but remember, there are still folks maintaining that the Earth is flat or only 6,000 years old. (In fact, the flat-Earthers are one of the groups claiming the moon landing is a hoax--after all, the astronauts took photos showing a round Earth, and they know that isn't true, so it must be a hoax!) You don't actually expect evidence to convince people like this, do you? Any piece of evidence that we could present would simply be, to them, a part of the conspiracy. A good conspiracist can incorporate any piece of information into the big conspiracy without even blinking. \n\nThere have been several books written to promote this claim, and more articles. There was even a movie with a similar plot, Capricorn One, starring O.J. Simpson, among others (1977). The difference was that in the movie, the fake landing was for Mars, not the moon. One group of flat-Earthers actually claims O.J. was framed by the government for exposing the fake moon landings through his part in this movie! As Peter Huston, the writer and skeptic who mentioned this to me, deadpanned, "Apparently, the government moves slowly on framing its enemies."\n\nBob Mulford, of the Inquiring Skeptics of Upper New York, wrote a short article for the group's newsletter, The WHY-Files, discussing a recent book claiming the whole thing was a hoax. Apparently a reviewer in a technical magazine aimed at radio astronomers actually gave the book a more-or-less positive review! He noted that the reviewer bought into one of the author's arguments, saying it was obviously a hoax because the photos brought back by the astronauts showed their footprints in the moon's soil. The author claimed (and the reviewer apparently agreed) that dry sand doesn't leave footprints, and since we all know there is no water on the moon, that proves these photographs must have been faked on a movie set here on Earth. \n\nMulford points out in his article that the Moon's surface is not covered with beach sand. He notes: "On the earth, sand comes from rocks ground to small pieces by the ocean, or from rocks that were weathered by freezing water. In fact, a little thought shows we should not expect the Moon to be like an desert on the Earth. The astronauts reported that the Moon was covered by an extremely fine soil which compacted easily. They likened it to talcum powder. This soil was produced by a rain of micrometeorites that the Earth's surface is protected from by our atmosphere. It is easy to do an experiment that shows that this type of surface would leave nice footprints. I didn't have any talcum powder, but I did recently produce a large pile of fine dust from sanding spackling compound used to patch a plaster wall. It leaves nice footprints." Mulford adds: "Incidentally, if the Moon walks actually were a hoax carried out in an earthly landscape that looked like the Moon, it would have been done in a dry desert and we wouldn't see footprints in the photos." In other words, the author of that book provided evidence against himself rather than proving the moon landing was a hoax! \n\nIn 1994, the Fortean Times had an article calling the moon landing into question. The article began, "The idea that we went to the Moon--and that we were successful in our Apollo endeavours--is so firmly embedded in the cultural lives of most people on this planet, that to voice the opinion that this might be untrue smacks of paranoia." I can't argue with that! The article goes on to claim, "In actual fact, mankind has no proof at all that we ever set foot on the Moon, other than the photographs that NASA has elected to publish." Which is simply untrue. We have the photos, the video, the audio, the testimony of all the men and women who worked on the various projects, the samples brought back, e
946455
Now listen, I remember 1969, and how the Americans were getting so much more world kudos with their space activities than the Russians, and how  p*ssed-off the Russians were that they couldn't keep up.  So if the moon landings were faked, how come the Russians with all their technical resources and enormous motivation to expose a hoax didn't detect it?  Or what amazing new analytical methods are the modern conspiracy theorists using, that the Russians didn't have?\n\nAnd I also remember the earlier Manhattan Project and the hydrogen bomb program.  Despite the huge secrecy, Russia managed to get useful technical information on these projects, both from its own planted agents and from voluntary informants who believed that all scientific knowledge should be shared.  Now try to convince me, or anyone else, that the much more public Apollo Project was so watertight that the Russians never found out it was a fake.