Calling all Conspiracy Theorists

Duncan · Post by **Duncan** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 12:16 pm

Yeah, but damage levels would depend on speed of the rocket as it came down, force applied by the rocket, proximity to the serface when the rocket was initially fired up until it was shut down, physical make up of the surface.

As you point out there are lots of unknowns (to us at least) from what I know and can deduce I can construct senario which would allow the module to land without creating a crater. I think it would be more difficult to say that there would have to be a crater. This is not very good grounds to base a theory that there were no moon landings.

charlieannear · Post by **charlieannear** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:09 pm

Besides, the moon landings did happen.
Like CB said.
And like Duncan supports.
Definitely.
So there.

And if anyone has any so called 'evidence' to suggest otherwise, I'm not listening. It depresses me.

The power cuts happened too, and does anyone think that there's a cover up as to the real cause of them?

Lets see if there are any more...

Greenday · Post by **Greenday** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:21 pm

Just to pick up on your point CB about so many people being involved with the whole program, who's not to say they all do believe it and that a small group faked the photo's and footage "for the good of America", if i worked on a program and then saw the results of my work on video footage and photo's i'd believe it too.
But surely if all that was made up by a group it would only need 10 or so people o make the footage then play it back over a video stream in place of the real transmission, the rocket could then orbit the earth for the time it should take them and return to earth, no one would be any the wiser except that small group in the know as it were.
Have you seen Armstrongs last practice landing of the moon module on earth before the trip?

CB · Post by CB » Wed Sep 03, 2003 8:46 pm

The first "Mercury 7" astronauts, including Glenn and Shepherd and the "Next Twelve" including Armstrong and Conrad were picked using the most rigourous selection processes. They were all military test pilots (except Armstrong who was a civilian test pilot). The vast majority were decorated war heroes having had combat experience in World War II. The majority of them were very religous, in keeping with the times. Most were married and most had families. They had to dedicate themselves to the study of all subjects necessary to undertake arduous missions into space and ultimately land on the moon. This involved extensive periods away from their families and a few marriages broke up as a result. After the moon landings the twelve men who walked on the moon, plus the six men who remained in the command modules during the landings, plus Lovell, Swigert and Haise (the unfortunate Apollo 13 astronauts) went on to become after dinner speakers and lecturers talking about their experiences. Some have "dined out" on the moon missions for nearly 30 years now, some, including Armstrong, shy away from the fame and publicity.
I cannot understand how people can think these inherently honourable men, religous, well educated, military men don't forget, have been "lying" all these years and were involved in "pulling the wool" over the worlds eyes. It is just laughable. Especially as they are doddery old men now - do you think they need to place themselves in the public eye to continue lying? No. They do it because they are very proud of their achievements and want to educate each subsequent generation about the importance of a manned space program.
A lot of people wonder why we didn't go back to the moon. The answer is simple...Government cost cutting in the 1970's, the corruption of the Nixon Government, plus the fact it is a very risky expensive venture to go all the way to the moon, which is essentially a barron wasteland. There is more scientific knowledge to be gleaned from working in Earths orbit as the shuttle missions, Mir and now the I.S.S have proved. Not as romantic as rockets to the moon perhaps, but more valuable.

Mr_AWOL · Post by **Mr_AWOL** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:01 am

Have you seen Armstrongs last practice landing of the moon module on earth before the trip?

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Greenday · Post by **Greenday** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:02 pm

Have you seen Armstrongs last practice landing of the moon module on earth before the trip?

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

The US governement have probably banned it now as it gives to much away about how unstable the thing was to try and land, in the last test flight Armstrong couldn't keep free fall control for more than about 3-5 seconds before the thing spiraled out of control and Armstrong had to inject, so if he could land it on earth where he had a huge amount of practice how could he land it perfectly in an environment he had no previous experience in??????

charlieannear · Post by **charlieannear** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:16 pm

CB is definitely right on this. It definitely did happen, and that's final. :x

Greenday: Shut up, shut up shut up.

Or, how about this. The moon landings did happen and if you are so set about believing in moon landing based conspiracies, try this one on for size.
Tests carried out following the 1969 moon landings found that the moon is comprised of priceless materials/has an abondoned but functional alien base on it/is a living organism like that giant fungus in America and the big conspiracy is that have secretly been going back there ever since to harvest the materials/research the alien technology/get high.
Or, how about this one: There is a flipping huge asteroid heading right for us and they have spent the last 30 years turning the moon into a giant Noah's Ark, but can't tell anyone due to the mass panic and anarchy that would ensue. :rolleyes:

Mr_AWOL · Post by **Mr_AWOL** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:17 pm

and Armstrong had to inject,

Yeah - and how would he have bought heroin ON THE MOON? EH?

Mr_AWOL · Post by **Mr_AWOL** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:25 pm

Tests carried out following the 1969 moon landings found that the moon is comprised of priceless materials

HA! Proof that they NEVER landed on the moon if they think that! EVERYONE knows the moon is made of CHEESE!

charlieannear · Post by **charlieannear** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:36 pm

Greenday · Post by **Greenday** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 1:08 pm

and Armstrong had to inject,
Yeah - and how would he have bought heroin ON THE MOON? EH?

OOPS, eject even, my spelling is going to get me into so much trouble on day

Julia · Post by **Julia** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 1:12 pm

OOPS, eject even, my spelling is going to get me into so much trouble on day

Ha imagine when I was on msn and wanted to type..
hang on 4 a sec. Instead I accidentally missed the "a" and put a x where the c shoulda been!

Greenday · Post by **Greenday** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 1:14 pm

So how did they land perfectly on the moon with no practice in that environment when he crash on earth with all the time to practise?????

Guess that if the moon was made of cheese though they could have just crashed straight into it with too many problems apart from the cheese melting to the bottom of the rockets

charlieannear · Post by **charlieannear** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 1:16 pm

Lander was much easier to operate in an environment with reduced gravity and thinner atmosphere.
Perhaps.

Anyway, I asked you to stop it!! :rolleyes:

Greenday · Post by **Greenday** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 1:17 pm

OOPS, eject even, my spelling is going to get me into so much trouble on day
Ha imagine when I was on msn and wanted to type..
hang on 4 a sec. Instead I accidentally missed the "a" and put a x where the c shoulda been!

I would hang on as long as it takes then