Did we ever land on the moon?
953851
Oh, not AGAIN !  \nNo we didn't - unless there are several strong light sources there to be able to cast shadows in about five directions at once..........
979631
First off... if they really did land on the moon... how in the world and why in the world would they lose the original footage of the moon landing. Wouldn't that footage have been a coveted prize from our early space exploration???  Of course it would have... NASA losing that footage so that it can no longer be tested or viewed should be a big hint for those who still believe the moon landing to be true.  The footage of Neil Armstrong's historic moment is one of the most important artifacts of the 20th century.  Therefore, who would benefit from losing the footage???  and more importantly, what would they gain??? \n\nSecond, consider the fact that they could not land back onto Earth after they returned from the lunar mission... however, they expect us to believe that they could land on the moon and then take back off from the moon... BUT... they would then have to land in the ocean when they returned. If we didn't have the technology to LAND back on Earth... how in world could we have done everything else that they stated they did. Sadly, our technology was definitely in its infancy stage in 1969 and hasn't even progressed enough at this time to undertake a lunar mission.  Notice how NASA is hoping for a lunar mission by 2018... why the long wait?  I personally think that they are being forced to wait since "the average Joe" now has the technology and capabilities to view and evaluate the whole mission from start to finish... and therefore, they can't fake anything.
1112503
Actually, no, we haven't done it since the original six landings.  The last one was Apollo 17 in 1972, and since then, we haven't sent a manned mission back to the moon.
1092704
Of course, we landed on the moon. C'mon, there would have had to been a massive conspiracy of hundreds of people employed at NASA and involved in the effort including hundreds of manufacturers and suppliers. There is no real debate.\nGo back? For what. It is a dead planet and we have learned what we need to know. The only reason to go back would to be to mine for valuable minerals which would be way to expensive at this point in time.
20395
none *in* the moon, but 12 have landed *on* the moon.\n\nsee link below for pix of the famous 12.
45110
Dr. Jack Schm itt and Eugene Cernan left the moon at 21:33 UTC on December 17, 1972. They were the last two astronauts to visit the lunar surface. Dr. Schm itt was the first scientist-astronaut to land on the Moon, and is a geologist.\n \n\nCernan was actually the last man to step off of the Moon. From the NASA journal:\n"Cernan: Bob, this is Gene, and I'm on the surface; and, as I take man's last step from the surface, back home for some time to come - but we believe not too long into the future - I'd like to just (say) what I believe history will record. That America's challenge of today has forged man's destiny of tomorrow. And, as we leave the Moon at Taurus- Littrow, we leave as we came and, God willing, as we shall return, with peace and hope for all mankind. "Godspeed the crew of Apollo 17.""\n\nHere is the NASA lunar surface journal for the Apollo 17 mission:\nhttp://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17.html\n\nGene Cernan wrote a book about the experience titled "The Last Man on the Moon":\nhttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0312199066/qid=1127812744/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-3854888-7269644?n=507846%7CThe&s=books&v=glance
495153
"Moon Hoax" proponents claim that the Moon landings of Apollo 11 on July 20, 1969 and subsequent missions never happened, but were instead staged and pre-filmed on Earth. The idea grew significantly in popularity after the release of the movie Capricorn One (1978), which portrays a NASA attempt to fake a landing on Mars, implausibly using a Lunar Module, designed to land on the airless Moon, on a planet with an atmosphere.\n\nIt is possible that a brief sequence in the James Bond movie Diamonds Are Forever (1971) which appears to show a Moon landing being simulated, may coincide with some of the first suggestions of the landings being faked. British playwright Desmond Lowden wrote a play called The News-Benders in 1967 in which all major technological advances since 1945 were shown to have been simulated; the play was televised in January 1968 and showed a Moon landing faked with models.\n\nThe now-defunct Flat Earth Society lodged one of the earliest complaints about the veracity of the Apollo missions (Schadewald 1980) (also see the external link to the Flat Earth Society). They claimed the various "earthrise" photos from Apollo 8, with the Moon in the foreground and the Earth in the background, were fakes. The primary basis of their claim was that it did not square with their belief that the Earth is flat (Newsweek 1969).\n\nIn his book A Man on the Moon, Andrew Chaikin mentions that at the time of Apollo 8's lunar orbit mission in December 1968, such conspiratorial stories were in circulation as rumoured facts. The first published attempt to establish such claims as factual was Bill Kaysing's self-published book We Never Went to the Moon in 1974 (Plait 2002:157), although perhaps the best known is NASA Mooned America by Ralph Rene.\n\nHoax skeptics claim that the Moon landing hoax accusations are conspiracy theories — claims that conspirators in the possession of secret knowledge are misleading the public in pursuit of a hidden agenda. In the Moon Hoax's case the hidden agenda is the United States of America's eagerness to land on the moon before their space race rivals, the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.), who had beaten them into orbit by launching Yuri Gagarin into space in 1961, and achieved several other "firsts" in space exploration.\n\nTo know more about Issues and controversies please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations
547217
Good grief -- I've only been visiting this site for a month, and this is about the fifteenth time someone has asked this same ludicrous question.\n\nYes, we landed on the moon. \nYes, we went back several times. \nYes, we left things on the moon that can still be seen today. \nYes, we left a flag on the moon -- but it wasn't flapping in the breeze in the famous photo: its momentum after being unfurled has kept it moving in the absence of anything to slow it down.\n\nYes, we brought back samples of dust and rocks that have been studied for nearly 40 years. And there's nothing like them anywhere on Earth.\n\nNo, we haven't gone back since the landings because there are no economically viable reasons to do so in this modern era of cost-effectiveness and the bottom line driving science. But just because we haven't been back doesn't mean we were never there in the first place.\n\nThe U.S. was in a major competition with the Soviets to prove our scientific superiority. If we'd never landed on the moon, and it was all a sham, do you think the thousands of NASA employees would be able to keep the secret? Do you think every other nation in the world would remain complicit in the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated"?\n\nIsn't there a FAQ on Yahoo Answers that could put this baby to rest??  I can't believe that people still think this was some kind of hoax!
587514
Cassini itself did not land. However, it was carrying the probe Huygens, which landed on Titan.
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.
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
370625
China has Started a manned Space programme and has said it's aim is to land on the Moon.\n\nSo the Yanks will Try to get get there first.\n\nBut their Space programme is still not up and running properly since the Columbia disaster.
402650
I do not believe we have gone to the moon.. \nThe reason for this, purely is that technology back in the 60s-70s was not capable of making it to the moon. \n\nHell even today to go to the moon would be tough.. Sure we could get there, but to land, do the things that they claim they did back then (play golf, place the flag in the ground etc) and then to get back in that tiny little space capsule and make it back all the way to earth with enough air is outrageous. Not to mention all the radiation they would of encountered passing through the asteroid belt. According to NASA I think I read they are going to attempt another man mission to the moon in 2018. Why that long? Because they still have lots of kinks to work out and would not be able to fake it this time.\n\nIf you do a google or yahoo search on this subject you will see countless of articles on why man has not gone to the moon.. Just my two cents.
231373
No. There were "probes" some of which could be considered "robotic", sent to the moon, however none of them are functioning, and at least one robot, sent by USSR, crash landed. There are European probes, and Japanese probes, that are supposed to be sent, but don't believe it till you see it. Out of the things sent to the moon, one thing still functioning, is a mirror left behind, which is used to bounce a laser off of, and gives an exact measurement of the distance between the earth and the moon.
645192
No, there's nothing really to see on the moon, and the environment is a bit harsh to do much of anything without a spacesuit.\n\nMaybe in a few hundred years, we will have more advanced technology that lets us visit other places more easily.
252263
Yes it is  well documented that we did.\nIt really would have been impossible to fake. and even more impossible to conceal a hoax of that magnitude for this long.\n\nThere is a vast deal of technology that came from the space  program .\nThe Apollo spacecraft was seen during its trans-Lunar coast by observers on Earth. Amateur astronomers were able to sight the spacecraft, exactly where they should have been, during the trans-Lunar coast and amateur radio operators were able to listen-in on the command module in Lunar orbit. The explosion of Apollo 13 was caught on video tape by an amateur astronomer. Russia and radio telescope observatories not owned or controlled by the USA also tracked the Apollo spacecrafts and transmissions.
278952
The space shuttle went to the Moon???? Har, har, har.....! Right off the bat, your lack of knowledge about the manned lunar landings is glaringly evident.\n\n"...no way we could have past through the suns radiation belt..."\nGee whiz, with your vast education and expertise as an astrophysicist you must surely be right. Actually, you don't have the first clue about this subject. Get your head out of the sand and get the facts from genuine scientific experts at these sites -->\nhttp://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/waw/mad19.html\nhttp://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/books/apollo/s2ch3.htm\n\nThe only flight hardware that returned to the surface of Earth were the command modules. Where are they? See this website --> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apolloloc.html\n\nFinally, before persisting with this idiotic notion about the lunar landings all being faked, just ask yourself a couple of questions --\n(1)rock and soil samples returned from the Moon were passed out to research groups around the world. After examination and scientific testing, all confirmed that the material was non-terrestrial (that means not of Earth) and met all the pre-conceived theories of what lunar material would be like;\n(2)of the thousands upon thousands of personnel directly involved in the manned lunar missions, not one has come forward with a word about the whole thing being faked\n\nInstead of running around hollering that everything was faked, take a look at some genuine information that quickly buries the "facts" proving a scam occurred at this website -->http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html\n\nThe only thing more incredible than the actual lunar landings is that so many numbskulls have been duped by the blather about it all being faked.