Ok, I see. So they simply promised too much.

I can see why the majority of posters on this thread are getting so excited. The pictures seem to prove that without a doubt the Apollo missions weren't faked.

Regardless, why can't we go to the moon today. Why is it 2024 (or whatever date they have now) and why does it require a whole host of new technologies(VASIMIR plasma engine). I can understand wanting new and improved technology when you get to the moon. A better lander, better digging tools, better on site-realtime analysis. .....BUT.....The getting there, should be just the same as it was in the 60's/70's.

So... just to add a little fuel to the fire, I'm calling the Apollo mission a HOAX.

Peace

"Only puny secrets need protection... Big secrets are protected by public incredulity" Marshall Mcluhan

Originally posted by TheRealDonPedros
Regardless, why can't we go to the moon today.

It costs a ton of money we don't have, at least not all at once. In fact, we're going to need to essentially rebuild some of the infrastructure we lost when we converted to the shuttle. For example, we're going to need to rebuild the launch pads to accept a much taller rocket than the shuttle.

why does it require a whole host of new technologies(VASIMIR plasma engine).

It doesn't. VASIMR is not going to be involved in the constellation project, at least not till we plan a manned mars mission, at which time it might be tested in a manned moon mission first. Currently the earth departure stage will use a J-2X engine, derived directly from Apollo.

So... just to add a little fuel to the fire, I'm calling the Apollo mission a HOAX.

Flame baiting? I won't flame you, but I will shoot down any misinformation you wish to distribute here regarding project Constellation. I will also point out how even you said this evidence shows without a doubt that apollo is true.

I hate to kill the buzz... but it's the JAXA photographs that look fake to me, like a backdrop for a video game before the designers started to get the hook of good graphics.

But then, I've never been to the moon, I can hardly say which is more accurate.

I've always thought how strange it is that NASA scientists are crawling over scrap yards looking for old Apollo bits and pieces because they can't remember how they accomplished the moon landings!!!! "WHAT!"
Surely all the science and mechanics were written down somewhere? Why is that they have to go back to the drawing board when it comes to sending men to the moon?
"I smell something fishy. .. and I'm not talking about the contents of my locals apple crumble!"

Originally posted by asmeone2
I hate to kill the buzz... but it's the JAXA photographs that look fake to me, like a backdrop for a video game before the designers started to get the hook of good graphics.

But then, I've never been to the moon, I can hardly say which is more accurate.

Are you talking about the images on the first page in the first post? Those are computerized renderings of the stereoscopic data that Selene gathered from orbit and textured with Selene's photography of the area. That's why it looks rendered, it is, but it's derived directly from the mission's data. It was done in this case to verify the apollo images taken from the ground, which it does.