Astroengine.com - Latest Comments in The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

Moonhoaxidiot — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 21:50:16 -0000

If you believe we didn't go to the moon, you are stupid.

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

famous caps — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 07:33:07 -0000

Baseball cap
pattern and style, is this a few years you have been like baseball cap and
reform this year, oh!

This site to
recommend the most effective medicine reducing weight, we provide a lot of most
successful weight-loss products, after a customer high praise, hope to meet to
friends needs

slimming capsule

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

gucci caps — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:13:18 -0000

www.edhatstore.com
shopping nets with sincere service for your sales, 24 hours in this website.
Sales hotline

baseball hats

Green natural
medicine reducing weight, let you experience slimming more natural thin body
experience

slimming capsule

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

ca caps — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 23:59:23 -0000

The company
one-stop supply, if you have any questions, please consult us online customer
service, it can give you a satisfactory answer, and hat are famous brand

baseball hats

This web site to
introduce slimming methods, all quick are very popular, drug, satisfies you
trust to purchase the weight requirements

slimming capsule

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

steve — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 04:37:17 -0000

There's evidence for and against manned moon landings. From what i've looked at there's as much evidence against as for. But until NASA, a government agency, comes clean with truthful answers rather than avoiding many issues, they will at the least "seem" to become more and more disreputable.

The apollo 11 press conference avoids any mention of traveling to and landing on the moon. Instead the following two statements are made by Neil Armstrong...

#1
"The saturn gave us one magnificent ride. Both into earth orbit, and on a trajectory to the moon"

Why add these three words "on a trajectory"? Why not simply say... "The saturn gave us one magnificent ride. Both into earth orbit, and to the moon"?

Every day while riding around town I tend to get into a "trajectory" towards China Australia Russia and many other far away countries, but i never get there.
If i got on my bicycle and rode off one day to return after a week or so, and my neighbor asked were i went? I would not be lying if i said i went "on a trajectory" to China.

#2
"Our, our memory of that actually differs little from the reports that you have all heard from the, previous saturn 5 flights, and those, the previous flights served us well in preparation for this flight in the boost as well as the subsequent phases."

Why would a trip to the moon seem to differ little from a trip into earth orbit? Even during the first few hours before and after leaving earths orbit there should be very apparent differences than all the previous flights. For one there would be a lot more work to do, there would be the excitement of finally embarking on the journey(they refer to it as an adventure) However the astronauts show no excitement during this press conference.
The landing on the moon is called "the subsequent phases"
When my neighbor comes back from a fishing trip he's excited about the trip regardless the amount of fish he caught. He was excited to be out of the city and floating in an environment we don't see up close very often.

Why are the radiation levels now the most important thing for nasa to determine before another trip?
If there were no ill effects from the previous 6 apollo missions why bother with it today?
Where was this scientific concern back then?
Where was the scientific curiosity regarding the radiation?
After the initial rush to get there wore off there should have been time for this during later apollo missions.

Google the apollo11 press conference and see what you think.

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

steve — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 04:27:48 -0000

the russians left reflectors on the moon without a manned mission.

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

martin_english — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 08:42:27 -0000

One thing I've never heard the hoaxers explain is the Laser Ranging Retroreflectors that were left behind by all successful landings. The LRRR has been used in various experiments, such as precisely determining the distance from the Earth to the Moon (to within 15 centimeters), learning about the internal motion of the Earth and the Moon, and testing Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity.

The LRRRs deployed by Apollo 11, 14, and 15 are still being used in experiments today. In fact, in March 2005 a team from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory announced that they confirmed Einstein’s Strong Equivalence Principle to double the previous possible precision by using laser range measurements to the LRRR.

http://www.martin-english.c...

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

johann0 — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:23:24 -0000

How can a narrow minded dimwit ever be referred to as a skeptic? To be a true skeptic one has to analyse all the pros and cons, while applying a good dose of logic and common sense. Supporters of the moon landing hoax therefore fall short of earning the skeptic title.
The logically minded "believers" are the true skeptics.

I think the "skeptic's" conspiracy theories are an insult to the astronauts, the tens of thousands of people who made the moon landings possible and most of all, sound intelligence.

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

Ricardo Orsini De Castro Amara — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:18:00 -0000

This hoax shall be destroyed in a few days

Yesterday Apollo landing sites were shown in images sent by LRO, and the Apollo stuff, Lunar modules, equipment and astronaut tracks on the ground were exposed.

LRO imaged apollo 14 landing site and showed the lunar module:
http://eternosaprendizes.co...

Regards,
ROCA

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

Jamerz3294 — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:45:00 -0000

Poor old addled Granma think the Moon Landings were faked, and Big Time Wrestling is real?! You could say that I cut my teeth on the Mercury models that I glued together as a child, then on to Gemini and Apollo. NASA and I were both born in the same year, and when I was growing up, there was never any kind of doubt about the Space Program. It was as real the apple tree in your front yard. But now enter the Conspirators, and others of that ilk, that feel the louder they scream, the "righter" they are. Amazing how they can take a tiny scrap of supposed information, and twist it into some sort of grand, evil, vast conspiracy? I prefer to use Occam's Razor, and point out the obvious. Something about arguing with a fool only makes two fools arguing?

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

gfish — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:42:58 -0000

Wow, you totally have us all Apollo believers there. I'm sure the fact that the engineers knew that the astronauts would have no viewfinders and only manual aperture controls and designed the cameras do take extremely high quality pictures, giving them to astronauts for practice for months on end until they knew the cameras inside out, has nothing to do with how well the pictures came out.

Also, that "a picture every 15 seconds" figure is a little suspect. Apollo 11 was on the Moon for 30 hours so if they took pictures every 15 seconds, they should have roughly 7,200 pictures. And they would've been doing nothing else but taking pictures since it would take at least a few seconds to take each one.

So really, why don't you do some basic math and oh... maybe stop making things up? Just a suggestion.

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

astroengine — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:34:52 -0000

Yawn. Oh yeah, I was asleep. Thanks for pointing that out dude.

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

theskivs — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 09:00:44 -0000

was a hoax dude---You really believe it wasnt a letter c written on a moon rock but a hair???Co-incidence----The fact that the astronauts took thousands of pictures (a picture evrer 15 seconds) in such a short-time with amazing quality, even though they had manual aperture controls and no viewfinder!!! Wake up dude

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

realitysurfer — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:33:09 -0000

I made a film called DID WE GO?
I was paid $65,000 from the State of Ohio to try and prove we really landed on the moon.

I traveled all over OHIO trying to get Neil to talk...he will not talk to anyone.

Here is link to my film on youtube. It opens with me on WLW-AM Radio in Ohio, trying to reach out to Neil

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

please share this link

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

Jason A. — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:22:56 -0000

The same thing happens when global warming deniers get called skeptics. For some reason it's common to associate 'skeptic' with 'cynic'.

Re: The Guardian Tackles the Moon Landing Hoax… Badly

Shaun Moss — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 06:55:57 -0000

I feel the same Ian. When "regular" people find out you're a space enthusiast, it's often one of the first questions that come up - did we really go? Each time I hear that, it hurts. Even though I don't really want to, I patiently explain that, for the moon landings to have been a hoax would have required an enormous amount of effort, requiring not only the (ongoing) collusion of hundreds of NASA staff, but the fooling of deep space telescope operators in Australia who tracked Apollo 11, the faking of huge amounts of data, the production of numerous books and videos since, plus ongoing presentations being given by Apollo astronauts about their experiences. It would have been immensely easier and cheaper to have suffered whatever the penalty would have been of not going

But anyway, I know I'm preaching to the choir. Just wanted to let you know - it bugs me too.