The next missions to the moon

*****ATTENTION ALL MEMBERS*****

We would like to remind you that we expect civility and decorum in all forums, topics, and discussions. Continuing to post in a manner not in accordance with the T&C's can and will result in post removals and/or posting bans. Please continue your discussions with an eye on the topic and not your fellow members. Please also remember to stay on topic and cease any and all attempts to derail the thread/discussion before you.

Thank you.

You Are Responsible For Your Own posts.

We Expect Civility & Decorum In All Topics.

Ad Hominem Attacks And You

Courtesy Is Mandatory

*** Do Not Reply To This Post ***

I wish that my body weren't so messed up or I'd join the Armed Forces just to become an astronaut. I'd love to just stand at Tranquility Base and stare at the Earth, much like I stand in the backyard and stare at Luna.

a reply to: NGC2736 goo.gl...

I have lost all interest in what NASA do because they offer absolutly nothing for outsiders looking in. We the general public have been kept in the dark by NASA. Anything of real interest can only come from the private sector, NASA do not want anyone knowing anything about anything at all ever because they are government stooges.

Sorry to apear as hostile towards NASA but they have never shared anything with the general public worth knowing.

They cant even post a picture of the moon without doctoring and cropping the life out of it.

No idiots were intentionally harmed during the writing of this post.

a reply to: mikeengland

NASA has PLENTY of information which is easy to find and access, unless you are someone like YOU with a preconceived attitude towards them usually based on conspiracy BS!

As for your comments on Moon images

a reply to: wmd_2008

There is a lot of BS on the internet. it's gotten a lot worse now everyone is connected. Sifting through endles reams of utter drivel is too much like hard work IMHO.

a reply to: wmd_2008

originally posted by: mikeengland
I have lost all interest in what NASA do because they offer absolutly nothing for outsiders looking in. We the general public have been kept in the dark by NASA. Anything of real interest can only come from the private sector, NASA do not want anyone knowing anything about anything at all ever because they are government stooges.

Sorry to apear as hostile towards NASA but they have never shared anything with the general public worth knowing.

They cant even post a picture of the moon without doctoring and cropping the life out of it.

No idiots were intentionally harmed during the writing of this post.

Really? Cassini? New horizons?

Yes...so boring.

a reply to: internos

According to some people, a moon base already exists for that purpose, as a rest/supply stop before departing to mars, which supposedly holds a decent size facility on the surface.
Either NASA has taken kindly to these peoples conspiracy theories, or it is true and they are trying to slowly break the ice to the people on earth.

a reply to: doctorrosenbaum

The lunar mapping system mapped.... the ...L U N A R surface. It did not take photos of stars.

a reply to: Apollo16UVCS201

lightsinthedark.com...

They did take some uv images from the Moon about 190 in total.

How will we ever get past the van allen belt?

originally posted by: Direeffects
How will we ever get past the van allen belt?

The Apollo missions went around the belts. The belts are doughnut-shaped, so they went out through the hole. Here's a couple of videos showing Apollo 11's trans-lunar injection (TLI) trajectory:



Mind you, the Van Allen Belts are not some "searing radiation hell" that some have made it out to be. If you spend a month flying around in the densest part of the belts, you will absorb a fatal dose. Trans-lunar (and trans-planetary) trajectories get you past the belts in an hour or two. The dose is measurable, but not a health threat. Modern electronic microprocessors are more vulnerable to Van Allen radiation. Spacecraft & satellites have to be adequately shielded - and they are. Many countries and businesses operate satellites that orbit near and through the belts.

Hope this helps.

Why would I pay $30 to see some old space suit on display when I already have my own back at the hotel?

India to send a Lander and Rover to the Moon

Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is all set for Chandrayaan 2 (Lunar 2) mission. This comes after the first mission, Chandrayaan 1, was able to detect water on Moon through NASA's M3 on board.

Here's the ISRO page:

ISRO

Other News Source from India:

Times of India

a reply to: medesi

I'm sure the hoax faithful are already claiming it's CGI.

a reply to: captainpudding

And as usual, the NASA faithful will be walking around with their heads up their jacksies.

a reply to: StevieC56

Ah yes, us idiots accepting documented scientific evidence over blind faith and long exposed lies. It's been nearly 50 years and the hoax crowd hasn't been able to come up with an argument that isn't "I don't understand it so it's fake"

a reply to: captainpudding

And where’s your proof?

The NASA worshippers on here seem to think that the onus is on the hoax believers to prove it was a hoax, backed up with hard evidence and facts. Well it works both ways and sadly, the only fact in this long drawn out debate is there is not one shred of irrefutable proof on either side of the argument.

The alleged laser reflectors don’t prove they went to the moon.
The alleged moon rocks don’t prove they went to the moon.
The plumes of dust from the Lunar Rover doesn’t prove they went to the moon.
The lack of stars don’t prove they didn’t go to the moon.
The waving flag doesn’t prove they didn’t go to the moon.
The Russians not disputing it doesn’t prove they went to the moon.
The photos and video footage don’t prove anything either way, although the photos of the landers with no sign of ground disturbance is pretty damning.
Maths and Science doesn’t prove anything either because the data the NWs use in their arguments mostly originates from NASA. Since we are arguing as to whether they are lying to us, they need to base their arguments on realistic stuff such as “well I think it looks right, so it must be true” because that’s all we’ve got.

The only real proof that this incredible fairy tale could have at least been possible, was either lost or destroyed, so we are told. So are NASA a bunch of incompetent clowns? Or just a bunch of lying toe rags? I say both.

You see, unlike some of you, I was around at the time, reading the newspapers, and when it was announced that Apollo 8 would be going to the moon, several countries expressed their disbelief saying it was a suicide mission, as it was such a massive jump from what they had allegedly achieved up to that point. And when did those poor astronauts allegedly go on this suicide mission? It was Christmas for crying out loud. I’ll bet their families were so proud and not in the least bit worried and they could always open their presents when they got home, NOT! The timing for the fakery was obviously deliberate, in an attempt to give that feel good factor to all those incredibly gullible Americans. It worked beautifully and the rest is history, albeit false history.

The biggest argument for me in favour of the hoax is the fact that not one other country has sent people through the belts, not even once. It’s not about money and it’s not because it’s already been done, which are the two most pathetic excuses I’ve come across. It can only be because it’s impossible as NASA are still allegedly trying to work out how to protect those delicate on board instruments before they dare send astronauts beyond LEO again. It’s a pity they lost the old technology, as surely one extra layer of tin foil would do the trick.

I know I’m wasting my time saying all this, as these people are so far gone with their deluded beliefs, brought about by indoctrination from a young age, that there is nothing any sane rational person can say that would wake them from their NASA induced coma.

So go on, give me what you NWs think is your irrefutable proof of those incredible events and I will gladly explain to you, why they are not (I think the term you use is “debunk”). Good luck.