Did Man really walk on the moon ????
05 December 2000, 05:13 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of those stories seems to be doing the rounds.....
Did man really walk on the Moon or was it the ultimate camera trick,
asks David Milne? The great 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. "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. It 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. The story lifts off in 1961 with Russia firing Yuri
Gagarin into space, leaving a panicked America trailing in the space
race. At 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. Between 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. But 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 through 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. By 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:
* The cameras had no white meters or view ponders. So the astronauts
achieved this feat without being able to see what they were doing. *
Their film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic
radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless.
* They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in
pressurized clubs. It should have been almost impossible without the use
of their fingers.
Award 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:
* The 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.
* The American flag and the words "United States" are always brightly
lit, even when everything around is in shadow.
* Not one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both
were shot at the same time.
* The pictures are so perfect each one would have taken a slick
advertising agency hours to put them together. But the astronauts
managed it repeatedly.
David Persey believes the mistakes were deliberate, left there by
"whistle blowers", who were keen for the truth to one day get out. If
Persey is right and the pictures are fake, then we've only NASA's word
that man ever went to the Moon. And, asks Rene, why would anyone fake
pictures of an event that actually happened? The questions don't stop
there. Outer space is awash with deadly radiation that emanates from
solar flares firing out from the sun. Standard astronauts orbiting Earth
in near space, like those who recently fixed the Hubble telescope, are
protected by the Earth's Van Allen belt. But the Moon is 240,000 miles
distant, way outside this safe band. And, during the Apollo flights,
astronomical data shows there were no less than 1,485 such flares.
John Mauldin, a physicist who works for NASA, once said shielding at
least two meters thick would be needed. Yet the walls of the Lunar
Landers, which took astronauts from the spaceship to the moons surface
were, said NASA, "about the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil". How
could that stop this deadly radiation? And if the astronauts were
protected by their space suits, why didn't rescue workers use such
protective gear at the Chernobyl meltdown, which released only a
fraction of the dose Astronauts would encounter? Not one Apollo
astronaut ever contracted cancer - not even the Apollo 16 crew who were
on their way to the Moon when a big flare started. "They should have
been fried," says Rene. Furthermore, every Apollo mission before number
11 (the first to the Moon) was plagued with around 20,000 defects
a-piece. Yet, with the exception of Apollo 13, NASA claims there wasn't
one major technical problem on any of their Moon missions. Just one
effect could have blown the whole thing. "The odds against these are so
unlikely that God must have been the co-pilot," says Rene.
Several years after NASA claimed its first Moon landing, Buzz Aldrin
"the second man on the Moon" - was asked at a banquet what it felt like
to step on to the lunar surface. Aldrin staggered to his feet and left
the room crying uncontrollably. It would not be the last time he did
this. "It strikes me he's suffering from trying to live out a very big
lie," says Rene. Aldrin may also fear for his life. Virgil Grissom, a
NASA astronaut who baited the Apollo program, was due to pilot Apollo 1
as part of the landings build up. In January 1967, he hung a lemon on
his Apollo capsule (in the US, unroadworthy cars are called lemons) and
told his wife Betty: "If there is ever a serious accident in the space
program, it's likely to be me." Nobody knows what fuelled his fears, but
by the end of the month he and his two co-pilots were dead, burnt to
death during a test run when their capsule, pumped full of high pressure
pure oxygen, exploded. Scientists couldn't believe NASA's carelessness -
even chemistry students in high school know high pressure oxygen is
extremely explosive. In fact, before the first manned Apollo fight even
cleared the launch pad, a total of 11 would-be astronauts were dead.
Apart from the three who were incinerated, seven died in plane crashes
and one in a car smash. Now this is a spectacular accident rate. "One
wonders if these 'accidents' weren't NASA's way of correcting mistakes,"
says Rene. "Of saying that some of these men didn't have the sort of
'right stuff' they were looking for." NASA won't respond to any of these
claims, their press office will only say that the Moon landings happened
and the pictures are real. But a NASA public affairs officer called
Julian Scheer once delighted 200 guests at a private party with footage
of astronauts apparently on a landscape. It had been made on a mission
film set and was identical to what NASA claimed was they real lunar
landscape. "The purpose of this film," Scheer told the enthralled group,
"is to indicate that you really can fake things on the ground, almost to
the point of deception." He then invited his audience to "come to your
own decision about whether or not man actually did walk on the Moon". A
sudden attack of honesty? You bet, says Rene, who claims the only real
thing about the Apollo missions were the lift offs. The astronauts
simply have to be on board, he says, in case the rocket exploded. "It
was the easiest way to ensure NASA wasn't left with three astronauts who
ought to be dead," he claims, adding that they came down a day or so
later, out of the public eye (global surveillance wasn't what it is now)
and into the safe hands of NASA officials, who whisked them off to
prepare for the big day a week later. And now NASA is planning another
giant step - project Outreach, a 1trillion dollar manned mission to
Mars. "Think what they'll be able to mock up with today's computer
graphics," says Rene chillingly. "Special effects was in its infancy in
the 60s. This time round we will have no way of determining the truth."
Space oddities:
* Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of
a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the
ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the
ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.
* A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Lander lifting off
the Moon. Who did the filming?
* One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about
to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been
lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon,
then who took the shot? (It was I Dave Aston)
* The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football.
The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but
were seen freely bending their joints.
* The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America
make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would
have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium
flares.
* Text from pictures in the article. Only two men walked on the Moon
during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor
has no camera. Who took the shot?
* The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line
in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the
lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow?
* And why is the flag fluttering?
Did man really walk on the Moon or was it the ultimate camera trick,
asks David Milne? The great 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. "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. It 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. The story lifts off in 1961 with Russia firing Yuri
Gagarin into space, leaving a panicked America trailing in the space
race. At 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. Between 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. But 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 through 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. By 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:
* The cameras had no white meters or view ponders. So the astronauts
achieved this feat without being able to see what they were doing. *
Their film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic
radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless.
* They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in
pressurized clubs. It should have been almost impossible without the use
of their fingers.
Award 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:
* The 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.
* The American flag and the words "United States" are always brightly
lit, even when everything around is in shadow.
* Not one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both
were shot at the same time.
* The pictures are so perfect each one would have taken a slick
advertising agency hours to put them together. But the astronauts
managed it repeatedly.
David Persey believes the mistakes were deliberate, left there by
"whistle blowers", who were keen for the truth to one day get out. If
Persey is right and the pictures are fake, then we've only NASA's word
that man ever went to the Moon. And, asks Rene, why would anyone fake
pictures of an event that actually happened? The questions don't stop
there. Outer space is awash with deadly radiation that emanates from
solar flares firing out from the sun. Standard astronauts orbiting Earth
in near space, like those who recently fixed the Hubble telescope, are
protected by the Earth's Van Allen belt. But the Moon is 240,000 miles
distant, way outside this safe band. And, during the Apollo flights,
astronomical data shows there were no less than 1,485 such flares.
John Mauldin, a physicist who works for NASA, once said shielding at
least two meters thick would be needed. Yet the walls of the Lunar
Landers, which took astronauts from the spaceship to the moons surface
were, said NASA, "about the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil". How
could that stop this deadly radiation? And if the astronauts were
protected by their space suits, why didn't rescue workers use such
protective gear at the Chernobyl meltdown, which released only a
fraction of the dose Astronauts would encounter? Not one Apollo
astronaut ever contracted cancer - not even the Apollo 16 crew who were
on their way to the Moon when a big flare started. "They should have
been fried," says Rene. Furthermore, every Apollo mission before number
11 (the first to the Moon) was plagued with around 20,000 defects
a-piece. Yet, with the exception of Apollo 13, NASA claims there wasn't
one major technical problem on any of their Moon missions. Just one
effect could have blown the whole thing. "The odds against these are so
unlikely that God must have been the co-pilot," says Rene.
Several years after NASA claimed its first Moon landing, Buzz Aldrin
"the second man on the Moon" - was asked at a banquet what it felt like
to step on to the lunar surface. Aldrin staggered to his feet and left
the room crying uncontrollably. It would not be the last time he did
this. "It strikes me he's suffering from trying to live out a very big
lie," says Rene. Aldrin may also fear for his life. Virgil Grissom, a
NASA astronaut who baited the Apollo program, was due to pilot Apollo 1
as part of the landings build up. In January 1967, he hung a lemon on
his Apollo capsule (in the US, unroadworthy cars are called lemons) and
told his wife Betty: "If there is ever a serious accident in the space
program, it's likely to be me." Nobody knows what fuelled his fears, but
by the end of the month he and his two co-pilots were dead, burnt to
death during a test run when their capsule, pumped full of high pressure
pure oxygen, exploded. Scientists couldn't believe NASA's carelessness -
even chemistry students in high school know high pressure oxygen is
extremely explosive. In fact, before the first manned Apollo fight even
cleared the launch pad, a total of 11 would-be astronauts were dead.
Apart from the three who were incinerated, seven died in plane crashes
and one in a car smash. Now this is a spectacular accident rate. "One
wonders if these 'accidents' weren't NASA's way of correcting mistakes,"
says Rene. "Of saying that some of these men didn't have the sort of
'right stuff' they were looking for." NASA won't respond to any of these
claims, their press office will only say that the Moon landings happened
and the pictures are real. But a NASA public affairs officer called
Julian Scheer once delighted 200 guests at a private party with footage
of astronauts apparently on a landscape. It had been made on a mission
film set and was identical to what NASA claimed was they real lunar
landscape. "The purpose of this film," Scheer told the enthralled group,
"is to indicate that you really can fake things on the ground, almost to
the point of deception." He then invited his audience to "come to your
own decision about whether or not man actually did walk on the Moon". A
sudden attack of honesty? You bet, says Rene, who claims the only real
thing about the Apollo missions were the lift offs. The astronauts
simply have to be on board, he says, in case the rocket exploded. "It
was the easiest way to ensure NASA wasn't left with three astronauts who
ought to be dead," he claims, adding that they came down a day or so
later, out of the public eye (global surveillance wasn't what it is now)
and into the safe hands of NASA officials, who whisked them off to
prepare for the big day a week later. And now NASA is planning another
giant step - project Outreach, a 1trillion dollar manned mission to
Mars. "Think what they'll be able to mock up with today's computer
graphics," says Rene chillingly. "Special effects was in its infancy in
the 60s. This time round we will have no way of determining the truth."
Space oddities:
* Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of
a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the
ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the
ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.
* A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Lander lifting off
the Moon. Who did the filming?
* One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about
to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been
lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon,
then who took the shot? (It was I Dave Aston)
* The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football.
The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but
were seen freely bending their joints.
* The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America
make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would
have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium
flares.
* Text from pictures in the article. Only two men walked on the Moon
during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor
has no camera. Who took the shot?
* The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line
in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the
lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow?
* And why is the flag fluttering?
05 December 2000, 05:58 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: The Great White North
Posts: 25,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This fasincates me, allways has.
Is it real or fake?
When we get round to this question, as one does in the pub, my big question is:
"Why have we never gone back to the moon?"
OK, 'been there, seen it, put up the flag' could be an argument, but rather than prat about with a space station, which is a good idea, why not build a moon based space station.
Surley the shuttle can get to the moon quicker than an Apollo rocket. OK, it'd need to stay in orbit and deploy a lander, but that's not too hard.
So why? is there something on the moon that they don't want us to see, or did something up there scare them away? (anyone remember Dark Skies!)
I know that cost is a factor, and shuttle launches cost a vast amount, but I would have thought that american pride would have been enough for them to go back.
It's the 21st century, should we not revisit one of the landmarks of the 20th century?
The other question I have is how can Neil and Buzz continue with a 'normal' life when they have set foot on another planet. This is something that none, well, maybe a few, of us will ever be able to do in our lifetimes, and yet they've not got stir crazy.
Oh, and is there really a darkside of the moon?
Is it real or fake?
When we get round to this question, as one does in the pub, my big question is:
"Why have we never gone back to the moon?"
OK, 'been there, seen it, put up the flag' could be an argument, but rather than prat about with a space station, which is a good idea, why not build a moon based space station.
Surley the shuttle can get to the moon quicker than an Apollo rocket. OK, it'd need to stay in orbit and deploy a lander, but that's not too hard.
So why? is there something on the moon that they don't want us to see, or did something up there scare them away? (anyone remember Dark Skies!)
I know that cost is a factor, and shuttle launches cost a vast amount, but I would have thought that american pride would have been enough for them to go back.
It's the 21st century, should we not revisit one of the landmarks of the 20th century?
The other question I have is how can Neil and Buzz continue with a 'normal' life when they have set foot on another planet. This is something that none, well, maybe a few, of us will ever be able to do in our lifetimes, and yet they've not got stir crazy.
Oh, and is there really a darkside of the moon?
05 December 2000, 06:41 PM
#4
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 5,763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well as a kid i took a great interest in all the Apollo missions, and i distinctly remember someone (at the time) saying that the "moon flag" had a spring in it to hold it up ('cos there is no air and weaker gravity).
Sounds like another "Captain Pugwash" style hoax!
mb
Sounds like another "Captain Pugwash" style hoax!
mb
06 December 2000, 09:00 AM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of these Americans are nutters!
The Apollo 16 lander lift-off was filmed by an automatic camera, as could have been any number of the moon walks. The upward pan was way to smooth for a person to have done it without a tripod etc.
What about the experiment where they dropped 2 things (can't remember what they were). On Earth the air resistance of one would have made it fall slower but on the moon they landed together. Not too easy to fake physics!
So NASA called the golf shot a slice. Could have been a joke? Or the use of a common golfing term. Don't know how they'd describe a slice in precise physical terms.
I thought photographic film was unaffected by radiation so far up the e/m spectrum which is why you can have your camera x-rayed at the airport and not lose your film. Cosmic rays are further up still. To do with wavelengths and film granularity I believe.
Buzz Aldrin living a lie? Maybe, but I know Neil Armstrong retired and went back to his farm in the midwest and shunned all publicity. It can't be easy being the most famous man on the planet. Lots of people are famous but shun their celebrity. Doesn't mean they didn't achieve whatever they did.
Also, I'm fairly sure that human beings can't actually survive in a pure oxygen environment so I'm not sure about the "capsule pumped full of high pressure oxygen" bit.
Not sure the flag was fluttering either. Granted it looked "creased" but that doesn't mean it was fluttering. Gravity on the moon being less than that on Earth could mean that the flag doesn't get pulled out straight when hanging.
I suspect the reason the US hasn't been back is because there's no reason to and because of the cost. In the 60s the overriding factor was to beat the USSR. That competitor no longer exists so why should they bother? I guess the International Space Station (soon to be visible from Earth) is a fake as well. Don't suppose this bloke also believes they're hiding aliens in Area 51 does he?
Have to say, it is quite enjoyable reading this sort of stuff. It's quite obviously the work of loons but it's fun nonetheless.
Sorry to ramble on but I love discussing this sort of thing...
The Apollo 16 lander lift-off was filmed by an automatic camera, as could have been any number of the moon walks. The upward pan was way to smooth for a person to have done it without a tripod etc.
What about the experiment where they dropped 2 things (can't remember what they were). On Earth the air resistance of one would have made it fall slower but on the moon they landed together. Not too easy to fake physics!
So NASA called the golf shot a slice. Could have been a joke? Or the use of a common golfing term. Don't know how they'd describe a slice in precise physical terms.
I thought photographic film was unaffected by radiation so far up the e/m spectrum which is why you can have your camera x-rayed at the airport and not lose your film. Cosmic rays are further up still. To do with wavelengths and film granularity I believe.
Buzz Aldrin living a lie? Maybe, but I know Neil Armstrong retired and went back to his farm in the midwest and shunned all publicity. It can't be easy being the most famous man on the planet. Lots of people are famous but shun their celebrity. Doesn't mean they didn't achieve whatever they did.
Also, I'm fairly sure that human beings can't actually survive in a pure oxygen environment so I'm not sure about the "capsule pumped full of high pressure oxygen" bit.
Not sure the flag was fluttering either. Granted it looked "creased" but that doesn't mean it was fluttering. Gravity on the moon being less than that on Earth could mean that the flag doesn't get pulled out straight when hanging.
I suspect the reason the US hasn't been back is because there's no reason to and because of the cost. In the 60s the overriding factor was to beat the USSR. That competitor no longer exists so why should they bother? I guess the International Space Station (soon to be visible from Earth) is a fake as well. Don't suppose this bloke also believes they're hiding aliens in Area 51 does he?
Have to say, it is quite enjoyable reading this sort of stuff. It's quite obviously the work of loons but it's fun nonetheless.
Sorry to ramble on but I love discussing this sort of thing...
Trending Topics
06 December 2000, 09:01 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 13,735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always liked the Mr Gorsky story. 
It goes that Neil Armstrong said "Good luck Mr Gorsky" before stepping back into the Apollo lander. Nasa scientists had no clue what this meant, and Neil wouldn't tell.
Eventually, he let slip at a party that when he was a kid, he used to live next door to Mr and Mrs Gorsky.
One day, playing in the back yard, he overheard a cry from his neighbours' open bedroom window.
"You want oral sex? Hell, you'll get oral sex when the kid next door walks on the moon"...
It goes that Neil Armstrong said "Good luck Mr Gorsky" before stepping back into the Apollo lander. Nasa scientists had no clue what this meant, and Neil wouldn't tell.
Eventually, he let slip at a party that when he was a kid, he used to live next door to Mr and Mrs Gorsky.
One day, playing in the back yard, he overheard a cry from his neighbours' open bedroom window.
"You want oral sex? Hell, you'll get oral sex when the kid next door walks on the moon"...
06 December 2000, 10:15 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did they go? Well I'm pretty sure they did I'm afraid.
The race to the moon with the Russians was a crucial battle to both sides. Star City in Russia tracked all the lunar missions VERY carefully to make sure the Americans actually crossed the finish line. When it was clear the race was over the technical team in Star City's Mission Control threw a small private party in tribute to the winning team and conceded defeat.
Why haven't we been back? In the early 70's a lengthy debate took place on whether the 'next step' after Mr Armstrong's should be a lunar station or a space station. The chosen route was space and development commenced on Skylab and the Space Shuttle.
Who filmed the lunar blast off? The camera was on the front of the Lunar Rover and controlled remotely from Euston to follow the Astronauts progress when they were away from the Rover. It's last job was to film the lunar ascent.
Mirrors were also left on the moon on one of the missions to enable lasers to be reflected from Earth to monitor the lunar orbit track. These mirrors are still utilised today by the international Astronomy community.
There is no getting away from the fact that for almost every questionable aspect of the lunar missions there is an explanation. It's just a case of whether you want to take it into account.
As for the surface footage well I think both camps agree some of it is fake. Many reasons have been suggested and the one I tend to favour was that activities took place that were not for public consumption. However I have also heard that such a small proportion of the lunar photography came out that it was an embarrassment hence the additional footage.
IMHO, they went.
Otis.
The race to the moon with the Russians was a crucial battle to both sides. Star City in Russia tracked all the lunar missions VERY carefully to make sure the Americans actually crossed the finish line. When it was clear the race was over the technical team in Star City's Mission Control threw a small private party in tribute to the winning team and conceded defeat.
Why haven't we been back? In the early 70's a lengthy debate took place on whether the 'next step' after Mr Armstrong's should be a lunar station or a space station. The chosen route was space and development commenced on Skylab and the Space Shuttle.
Who filmed the lunar blast off? The camera was on the front of the Lunar Rover and controlled remotely from Euston to follow the Astronauts progress when they were away from the Rover. It's last job was to film the lunar ascent.
Mirrors were also left on the moon on one of the missions to enable lasers to be reflected from Earth to monitor the lunar orbit track. These mirrors are still utilised today by the international Astronomy community.
There is no getting away from the fact that for almost every questionable aspect of the lunar missions there is an explanation. It's just a case of whether you want to take it into account.
As for the surface footage well I think both camps agree some of it is fake. Many reasons have been suggested and the one I tend to favour was that activities took place that were not for public consumption. However I have also heard that such a small proportion of the lunar photography came out that it was an embarrassment hence the additional footage.
IMHO, they went.
Otis.
06 December 2000, 12:41 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2000
Location: MY00,MY01,RX-8, Alfa 147 & Focus ST :-)
Posts: 10,371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's an intersting one this. Bit like the 'who really shot JFK' debate. I suspect that you will never find out for sure.
It is hard to believe that they could fake something as big as this, but when you look at the website David has posted up, it does make you think...
Chris
It is hard to believe that they could fake something as big as this, but when you look at the website David has posted up, it does make you think...
Chris
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Wingnuttzz
Member's Gallery
30
26 April 2022 11:15 PM