Why so Long since we have been to the Moon? Conspiracy or not??

Hi there,

my knowledge of the Moon missions is limited, but from what I know, there OFFICIALLY has not been a man on the moon since 1972.

that was 37 years ago!!

Look at the Technology advances since then! holy smoke. why is it that we have not officially been back?

why is it that we cant get there much faster and have not even colonised the moon yet?

37 years is such a long time. advances in technology with everything have taken huge leaps and bounds so surely it has with space exploration tech too??

IS THERE a secret agenda that we dont know about?

have man been back without us knowing?

is there a good reason no-one has been back?

why go back in 2020 as proposed by Nasa?

CAN anyone answer some of these questions for me and shed light on this? is it a conspiracy or not?

G.



[edit on 21-6-2009 by grantbeed]

Well, maybe the wool has been pulled over my eyes on this one but I can't really see a reason that would be worth the money. There's nothing on the moon. Some peoples moral and ethical issues aside, it would make a great dumping ground but that's about all I can think of. Unless you think of it's potential for use in planetary defense, but I can't see us getting into an interplanetary war any time soon.

I find it really hard to believe with some of the military aircraft I have seen that they do not have planes that are capable of space flight. So I would say we haven't gone to the moon in a rocket because that is an outdated and inefficient way to do it.

we couldnt go their in the 60's - 70's - 80's - 90's or in the new millenium... still to this date... I have yet seen ... a system of forcefields that would allow living matter to cross through the van allen radiation belts. now, since I do not have the schematic's of a craft that appears to have taken living matter through the belts... are Unidentified Flying Objects ... which we do have.... I am aware of a living engine .... that would be capible of such forcefields if it weren't disected. (second hand knowlege)

The US barely even had the technology to orbit the first human in space in 1962, what makes you, or anything, think that we made it to the moon in a meager 7 years? Landing of the moon was an insane feat in that time. Even today they claim it would cost billions or even trillions of dollars to reach the moon. With the US's economy collapse they dont have enough money to go there now of all times.

reply to post by BornPatriot

...a system of forcefields that would allow living matter to cross through the van allen radiation belts...

**sigh** Another common misconception promoted by hoaxers who profit from claiming a Moon "hoax".

Jerks like Bart Sibrel, et al, profit off of the uninformed. Sibrel knows better, but like Barnum and Bailey, he knows there's a sucker born every minute. Don't even get me started on idiots like Bill Kaysing and Ralph Rene'!!!

AS to the VAB, it takes just minutes to transit the radiation. There are areas in the Belts that are more intense than in others -- Apollo was plotted to travel through the thinnest portions. Yes, if an unprotected Human lingered in the AB for a month or more, then there would be health consequences.

Either think, research and learn, or listen to charlatans and remain ignorant. Your choice.

reply to post by grantbeed


For OP:

Look at the Technology advances since then! holy smoke. why is it that we have not officially been back?

Officially? The public (read as the US Congress) didn't have the stomach for spending the money. But, as you have asked below:

...why is it that we cant get there much faster and have not even colonised the moon yet?

Getting there faster with conventional rocketry would be possible IF you carried enough extra fuel for the deceleration necessary to achieve Lunar orbit. What I'm trying to point out is, if you accelerate to, say, three times the speed of Apollo en route, you have to decelerate to a reasonable velocity in order to not shoot past the Moon. Apollo used a sufficient speed to escape earth's gravity, then basically 'coast' until influenced by the Moon's gravity, to 'fall' in and fire short retro bursts to form an orbit.

37 years is such a long time. advances in technology with everything have taken huge leaps and bounds so surely it has with space exploration tech too??

You'd think so, wouldn't you? Well...if he comes around to comment, there is a member on ATS who has very particular opinions about this....which leads to your question:

IS THERE a secret agenda that we dont know about?

have man been back without us knowing?

THAT is the $64 Billion question Or, maybe $640 Billion....

reply to post by scghst1

With the US's economy collapse they dont have enough money to go there now of all times.

Oh, they'll find the money, don't worry!!

Over US$803 Billion already spent in Afghanistan and Iraq....money is not a problem.

reply to post by weedwhacker


It was proven, the space shuttle went deeper than it ever did, and the astronaults started getting white outs... and then they retreated to lower orbit... so you say hoax huh... your gonna need more than a word boss.... as I have things that all point to what I say is true... just search ATS for the proof... its way abundant and our current technology is crude and does not protect to the degree of need... like over 6' of lead just to get a living being through once... much less, they have to go through the belts twice and still remain un cooked....

[edit on 21-6-2009 by BornPatriot]

Scandinavians reached American soil in 1000AD (plus minus) and yet it took 5 centuries to repeat it, with clearly much much better technology.
Reasons are different, but the point is that "can" not always goes into "will". Potential energy not always goes into kinetic. Ying is not Y... Wait, it is different story. You understand what i meant.
There was a space race between two competing superpowers that could pump money into this flagship project. Both sides took immense risks, overlooked safety, costs and most important -scientific gains/per $ invested (except diapers super-technology - but it was earlier). Just think how many unmanned missions in Solar system could be launched using the same money. Presitge was on the line though and in superpowers game prestige is very very important.
Now look at it from current NASA point of view. There is no space race, so $ river dried out considerably. There is (almost) no public interest in space exploration - diapers are already invented so what else we need there?- thus chances for new large investments are zero. So they can send N manned missions to the moon answering X second-line important questions, or they could launched N*F missions to other places answering Y first-line important questions.
By the way, you notice new wave of interest in the Moon> This is what initiated this renaisance:

China on track for moon mission

news.bbc.co.uk...

an effort to launch lunar orbiting satellites will be supplanted in 2007 by a program aimed at accomplishing an unmanned lunar landing. A program to return unmanned space vehicles from the moon will begin in 2012 and last for five years, until the manned program gets underway" in 2017, with a manned Moon landing some time after that. [1]

en.wikipedia.org...
Yes, i know. Wiki. But i heard it somewhere else first.

reply to post by BornPatriot

It was proven, the space shuttle went deeper than it ever did, and the astronaults started getting white outs...

Source??

... and then they retreated to lower orbit...

Again, source? Which mission?

...so you say hoax huh...

I say Moon 'hoax' claimants are themselves perpetuating an enormous hoax, if not because of sheer stupidity, then because of greed.

... your gonna need more than a word boss....

OK, hang on...

...just search ATS for the proof...

OH, HA!!! I mean.....ha ha ha....no offense, sure we love ATS, yet it just is NOT a reference site for 'truth'. It denies ignorance...of many sorts. There are many, many valid conspiracies, and ATS is here to dig into those, but when obviously flawed reasoning is used, then THAT needs to be exposed, too.


Here's some iinformation:

en.wikipedia.org...

Inner belt

The inner Van Allen Belt extends from an altitude of 700–10,000 km (0.1 to 1.5 Earth radii) above the Earth's surface, and contains high concentrations of energetic protons with energies exceeding 100 MeV and electrons in the range of hundreds of keV, trapped by the strong (relative to the outer belts) magnetic fields in the region.

It is believed that protons of energies exceeding 50 MeV in the lower belts at lower altitudes are the result of the beta decay of neutrons created by cosmic ray collisions with nuclei of the upper atmosphere. The source of lower energy protons is believed to be proton diffusion due to changes in the magnetic field during geomagnetic storms.

Note I made 700 bold. Highest altitude mission for the Space Shuttle was to the Hubble...about 300 km.


Continuing:

Impact on space travel

Solar cells, integrated circuits, and sensors can be damaged by radiation. Geomagnetic storms occasionally damage electronic components on spacecraft. Miniaturization and digitization of electronics and logic circuits have made satellites more vulnerable to radiation, as incoming ions may be as large as the circuit's charge. Electronics on satellites must be hardened against radiation to operate reliably. The Hubble Space Telescope, among other satellites, often has its sensors turned off when passing through regions of intense radiation.

Missions beyond low earth orbit leave the protection of the geomagnetic field, and transit the Van Allen belts. Thus they may need to be shielded against exposure to cosmic rays, Van Allen radiation, or solar flares. The region between two to three earth radii lies between the two radiation belts and is sometimes referred to as the "safe zone".

A satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminium in an elliptic orbit passing through the radiation belt will receive about 2,500 rem (25 Sv) per year. Almost all radiation will be received while passing the inner belt.

Again, my bold.


EDIT:

Last paragraph above, see what a satellite in a permanent elliptical orbit passing through the Lower Belts receives in radiation dosage in a year!

Now, from: en.wikipedia.org...

(A comparison of the Three Mile Island accident, and radiation exposure effects on Humans)

...Eight millirem is about equal to a chest X-ray, and 100 millirem is about a third of the average background level of radiation received by US residents in a year.".[1] [2] To put this dose into context, while the average background radiation in the US is about 360 millirem per year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulates all workers' of any US nuclear power plant exposure to radiation to a total of 5000 millirem per year.

From tech.mit.edu...

(A milliRem is 1/1000th of a Rem. According to McGraw-Hill's Dictionary
of Scientific and Technical Terms, a Rem is a unit of ionizing radiation
equal to the amount that produces the same damage to humans as one
roentgen of high-voltage x-rays. The name is derived from "Roentgen
equivalent man." Wilhelm Roentgen discovered ionizing radiation in 1895
at about the same time that Pierre and Marie Curie discovered radium.)

SO, you can see that a satellite in orbit that crosses through the VAB during an entier year receives about 2500 Rem. It orbits about once every 90 minutes (average LEO).

Math: 2500Rem/year is about 6.8Rem/day, or 6800milliRem/day.

With me? OK....in an orbit, at speed, given a 90-minute orbital period, then the satellite crosses the VAB 32 times (twice each orbit)? OK? Sound fair, so far?

Now, that means that each crossing provides a dosage of 6800/32=212.5 milliRem each.

What was the recommended max dosage for a worker at a Nuclear Power Plant, again?

Knowledge is fun!!!



[edit on 6/21/0909 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by BornPatriot
we couldnt go their in the 60's - 70's - 80's - 90's or in the new millenium... still to this date... I have yet seen ... a system of forcefields that would allow living matter to cross through the van allen radiation belts. now, since I do not have the schematic's of a craft that appears to have taken living matter through the belts... are Unidentified Flying Objects ... which we do have.... I am aware of a living engine .... that would be capible of such forcefields if it weren't disected. (second hand knowlege)

Right on there BP---the moon hoax landings were one of the biggest scams in living history.
The Russians knew it could'nt happen because of the radiation belts .
It was just a one-upmanship tactic by the USA to try and show by any means that they were superior.
The moon footage was filmed at Dreamland. Certain parts of the footage when superimposed over an area of Area 51 match exactly.
They must think we are stupid !!

Some ATS do tend to go around in circles! One reason why the old, we didn't go to the moon, theories fall down is that Russia and China, to name but two of America's fiercest and most outspoken foes would have to have gone along with it. So would the staff of the radio telescopes all around the world who pointed their equipment into space and listened into the astronauts conversations. A cover up of this magnitude and size would be simply impossible, and implausible, to succesfully pull off.

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
Some ATS do tend to go around in circles! One reason why the old, we didn't go to the moon, theories fall down is that Russia and China, to name but two of America's fiercest and most outspoken foes would have to have gone along with it. So would the staff of the radio telescopes all around the world who pointed their equipment into space and listened into the astronauts conversations. A cover up of this magnitude and size would be simply impossible, and implausible, to succesfully pull off.

Oh it certainly was a massive cover-up alright !!
Why was there no stars in the sky when there should have been a blanket of them ??
How could the flag be waving when there's no wind on the moon??
Gus Grissom who was killed back in 67 in a very suspect launch pad fire aboard Apollo 1, was about to expose the whole programme as a charade.

reply to post by uk today

Oh it certainly was a massive cover-up alright !!

PROOF???

Why was there no stars in the sky when there should have been a blanket of them ??
How could the flag be waving when there's no wind on the moon??

OH...that's your so called 'proof'? **Face in Palm** Try looking around, right here at good ole' ATS to see why all of those claims are rubbish!!!

Gus Grissom who was killed back in 67 in a very suspect launch pad fire aboard Apollo 1, was about to expose the whole programme as a charade.

Oh, that one is the most vile of the 'conspiracy' nuts lies out there!!! It not only dishonors the memory of three (some say four, but that's for another argument) Human beings, it is flat out unsupported in any way, shape or form by the facts!!!!

Hint: IF 'they' wanted to knock off Gus, there were/are plenty of other ways.....

reply to post by weedwhacker


Did you know that all the astronauts were Freemasons ??
The Head of NASA during the Apollo programme is now the Sovereign Grand Commander of the 33rd Degree of Scottish Freemasons !!
Highly suspicious imo !!!

reply to post by uk today

Highly suspicious imo !!!

And, completely irrelevant and off-topic.

Next?

reply to post by weedwhacker

Well you may find it completely irrelevant but I don't.
The scottish Rite of Freemasonry flag is the united Nations flag ---the nations of the world circled by the laurel of Apollo !
What a co-incidence ??

reply to post by weedwhacker


Why I agree with much of what you say I have to admit at sharing huge doubts about what really happened to Apollo 1, mainly because Grissom, and his family, had been threatened and were being protected by secret service agents. I also think the death of Baron (I think that was his name), the guy who produced a five hundred page report slating NASA for it's safety short comings. He and his family died when a train hit them on a level crossing and Barons report suddenly and magically disappeared and has never been found!
I think we can be forgiven for being highly suspicious.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by scghst1

 

With the US's economy collapse they dont have enough money to go there now of all times.

Oh, they'll find the money, don't worry!!

Over US$803 Billion already spent in Afghanistan and Iraq....money is not a problem.

Really? You think that the taxpayers are going to let that much bleeping money go towards space? i dont think so.