I would like to think th moon landings did happen and always roll my eyes but got watching it and started to wonder when they talked about the cross hairs or the pictures that were different locations but weren't.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar...ing_experiment

 

Tell me Robsy, what empircal evidence, and by that I mean personal to you, and obviously evidence based, experience do you have that the world is round

It looks flat to me, i have seen no personal evidence of the earths "roundness" and if it was round, surely people would fall off "the bottom"

What's your view

 

Actually there really are people who believe the earth is flat

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7540427.stm

 

The earth is round , well it looks round when you see it from the moon !

 

The earth is flat supported on a turtles back!

 

Ive got a couple of Saturn V's i picked up cheap on the bay a few years back,

I'll fuel one up and pop up there during the week lol ,

I reckon that if i hook a big enough tow rope to the thing, i should get it back ok.


Then lets see if the ****** drifts lol


Mart

 

There are people that believe in a higher being. Madness.

 

Yep, I believe in Madness. Baggy Trousers was their best hit

 

I have no reason to doubt that the moon landings did occur.

Les

 

If its in the sport it has to be true.

 

Showing my age here, but I remember discussing that one, 231 OCU groundcrew crewroom, RAF Wyton

IIRC it has a statement about scientists couldn't figure how a B17 could carry enough fuel to fly all the way there

I think another paper pointed put that it would only require enough fuel to fly 3/4 of the way, then it would fall the rest of the way pmsl

 

I remember discussing the possibility of it happening in 231 OCU crewroom at Bassingbourn!

And then much later on 231 OCU at Cottesmore followed by at Marham!

Les

 

Phew, glad I'm not the only one. I thought I was going mad

 

That makes you MUCH older than me, and you would have known much more about the B17 too lol

 

The Van Allen belts are dangerous, but the claims made by the conspiracy theorists are rubbish. The type of radiation is high energy protons and electron, and metal is not a good defense for this type of radiation, but rather polyethylane, or things like the fibrous lining of the command module.

Also, the belts only sit at certain latitudes above and below the equator, the trajectory of the Apollo missions took them through the very egdes, and not for particularly long.

As for being exposed to others sources, even the ISS can be exposed to high energy bursts, but the protection means the astronauts remain unharmed.

The evidence we went to the moon is compelling, the evidence it was a hoax is quite laughable to be honest.

Geezer

 

I'm not 2 concerned about if they did or not
But anyone who has watched ED White's first E.V.A. Into the unknown is a remarkable piece of footage & truly shows the capability & courage of man . RIP

 

I suppose you're right. Afterall Mr. Spoon went to Button Moon every week without fail. So it must be possible.

 

The thing I love about conspiracy theorists (particularly the lunar ones) is how they will attack multiple points of something in the hope that they can get something to half stick. The nonsense about Van Allen belts, shadows, lack of stars in the sky, heat on the moon surface. Seriously which angle do you want us to side with you on?

When they think they're onto something they'll then keep attacking that angle, but will switch between different lines of non sequitur according to how they're doing.

There is no single bit of evidence that supports the lunar conspiracies, merely lots of half baked ideas from people who WANT to believe it didn't happen. There is so much information on tap from so many different sources that don't conflict I really cannot understand why anyone would continue to argue in favour of a huge multinational conspiracy.

If this bunch want a real conspiracy theory to get their teeth into they should get onto Subaru with their chocolate 2.5 pistons!

 

They have some valid points though , but they can't accept the explanations .

The flag blowing in the "breeze"
The well lit items in the shadows.
The various angles of shadows with only one light source.

 

Ok if the moon landing was a hoax, what kind of environment do you need to create in order for the moon rover's wheels or the astronauts feet not to kick up clouds of dust (moon dust is as fine as talcum powder) as it was moving over the lunar landscape. All the dust kicked up immediately fell back to the surface. If there was air and a breeze blowing why is this dust not carried away?

 

Plus how did they manage to get it back to earth and market it as a novelty confection

 

There is no breeze.

 

What about that flag blowing in the "breeze"?

 

Don't think cheese can be classed as a confectionery.

 

I think you're taking me the wrong way , I just stated the theories that some come up with , and the fact there are perfectly normal answers that they don't accept.

I thought they had fair points until I seen Mythbusters.

 

I knew where you were coming form.

 

I had a argument with an idiot you asked "how come their is a picture/film of Armstrong descending the ladder of the module, to step onto the moon"

The implication being that it was all filmed on a giant film set

The simple answer is that the module had an external camera,

I mean if they could manage to get a man to the moon, then they could probably manage to fit a camera to the outside of the lunar module

 

So, we did factually land on the moon. OK.

What happened to Osama's body, though? Anyone?

I've recently heard that Obama is keeping him alive the White House, and he has become his secret agent/best pal. Not sure if it's true.

 

^
Crazy man / after a slot to the head & entry through eye socket ( I don't think so )
Besides the dirty **** is at the bottom of the PEURTO RICO Trench
That's 8648 metres to you/ me