Moon Landing Hoax? - Judge Yourself

Slightly related but I'm curious, seeing as this thread is involving the lunar escape my question is this, flame aside , when the module 'took off' what was the 'G-Forces' the astronauts inside had to withstand?, I mean the take off itself was a bit drastic, 0-whatever really quickly, does anyone know?

Just that when you watch clips of astronauts leaving Earth in their rockets and shuttles attached to rockets , it takes off really slowly as it powers its way through gravity and shakes a LOT and knowing the moon's gravity is substantially less than Earths the take off seems awfully fast to my untrained eyes..

Like 'spurt - kapow' and their on their way up, no slow acceleration like on the way there.

[edit on 14/12/09 by DataWraith]

reply to post by heineken


What's with the attitude mate?

It seems you're starting to make a habit of starting threads, then getting your back up when someone disagrees with you.

Tell me, how much research have you actually done on the moon landings?
Be honest here too, because I get a feeling that your knowledge is limited to youtube videos loaded with pseudo-science, lies and deceit.

If this is the case, I recommend you do some actual research for yourself, those that have, have no doubt man went to the moon many times.

It will also stop you looking like a stubborn, arrogant child.

reply to post by Chadwickus


what the matter with you following me up mate...who the heck are you


you do your own research...i presume your research is done in the lion's den right...but at least answer this first..

When did you know there was water on the moon...date and source

When did you know there is organic material on the monn...date and source


ok pal..start from there

reply to post by heineken


Sir/Ma'am

No where did the person who pointed out the 'blast' ever claim there was flames.

All they were pointing out was there was a visible 'blast' at that point in the video. Since I am no expert on this matter I can speculate that due to the 'blast', moon dust plumed up thus giving some type of visual to that there was an external force driving the module upwards back into space.

We believe what we want. Some come with an open mind, gathering data. Others come with open questions only to reinforce their closed minds.

If you are truly trying to find knowledge on this and have the desire to see what others have pointed out, why have you gone on the attack and become hostile in return?

Originally posted by heineken
i just wanna know if its true man went on the moon

Yes. We did.

I cannot for the life of me understand why the moan hoax attracts so many believers when it is one of the worst put together conspiracy theories in history and the claims have been refuted time and time again using both common sense and science.

What, praytell, would the benefit of faking the moon landing be? To have something to rub in the face of the Russians? If the moon landing were faked wouldn't Russian scientists have smelled a rat? Russian scientists would be going ape if they even so much as suspected a hoax. And what about the countless other moon scientists around the world, didn't hear a word out of them after the Apollo landings other than perhaps excitement at the scientific achievement.

And what about the hundreds and hundreds of people involved in the design, manufacture and launch of the Saturn V, Lunar Module, and other equipment? Are we to believe they all did their jobs believing we were going to the moon and designed equipment they believed could get us there only to launch it into space without any astronauts inside it and later be fooled by footage shot on a studio lot?

Are we to believe NASA faked hours of recordings, transcripts, trajectory data, etc for DECADES just to keep us under the illusion that we went to that pretty pale rock in the sky? What would the benefit be? The number of people in on the conspiracy would be in the thousands and in the end it would be more expensive, time consuming and risky to fake it than to actually do it.

Flames in the upper atmosphere versus the take off of the lunar module has already been explained in this thread. But if the science doesn't convince you take a look at everything I just wrote and think real hard about which is more likely.

i do not have any atitude...if its sound like that its because English is not my 1st language...

im relax at my own office this morning listen to nice music drinking a lot of water and waiting to go back home..so no attitude..sry if it looks different

Originally posted by heineken

AAAAAAAAAA..now there are the flames

so first...

NO FLAMES BECAUSE NO OXYGEN

than

NO FLAMES BECAUSE OF THE FUEL USED

than

LITLLE FLAMES ARE NEEDED BECAUSE OF THE GRAVITY ON THE MOON

will you believe your spouse if he/she changed his/her excuse so often??

neither i will believe you sorry

1. Take a chill pill and lose the attitude or I'm outa here.

2. Never at any point in my post did I refer to a "Flame". It is clearly typed, in plain English, the word "Blast". Here it is again in case you missed it the first time....

Originally posted by Kryties
Look at the 11-12 second mark and you will see your blast. Don't forget that the Moon has very little gravity compared to Earth and therefore does not need as much thrust to lift-off and enter orbit....

I think we went to the Moon, I'm just not entirely sure that we were told everything that they found there.

Clear?

[edit on 14/12/2009 by Kryties]

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


i think you have to open a little bit your mind...

dont you think russians have something to hide too??

dont you think that if the russians knew it was true they would have gone to mars instead??

reply to post by heineken


My mind is plenty open but only so open as to accept truth that has been proven or to disregard things that have been proven to be untrue.

I'm sure the Russians had plenty of secrets they were hiding from us. Do you think they were in on the conspiracy? If so that would put the number of people in on the hoax at a dangerously risky number. I think if the Russians had even the smallest inkling we'd deceived the world and faked the whole thing that they'd have been up in arms about it within days.

I don't think the Russians have the ability or technology to go to Mars today, let alone decades ago and I don't think they would have tried to fake it.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


there r rumours that yuri left the rocket prior departure..just to be sure he remains alife

reply to post by heineken


Water and organic material on the moon has been known for a good 30 years, maybe more, I don't remember when I first found out though.

Now let me ask you another question, since you failed to answer my other question.
If man didn't go to the moon, how does one explain rocks and soil samples brought back by the Americans are virtually identical to the samples brought back by the Russians? Or the similarity between these samples with lunar meteorites?

[edit on 14/12/09 by Chadwickus]

reply to post by Chadwickus


regarding the rocks they said they were too earthlike...

for me they could have easily put them through radiaition bla bla to make them look special can they?

But seriously...you didnt know about the organic matter on the moon...no one did....since today we found life nowhere...and we will find it on the moon..and on mars...and on europa....and on Titan...and when Kepler is back..we will find it everywhere

also regarding water on the moon...why was the fuss all about then that Indian found water on the moon...please...you didnt know either sorry



[edit on 14-12-2009 by heineken]

Originally posted by heineken
reply to post by Titen-Sxull

 

there r rumours that yuri left the rocket prior departure..just to be sure he remains alife

He never landed in it, he ejected before it hit the ground

reply to post by heineken


Maybe I should have a bit clearer, when I said organic matter, I'm talking about minerals in the moon samples.

With that said, I have no idea what you're talking about, are you suggesting that we didn't know that there was water on the moon until recently?

reply to post by Chadwickus


maybe you can help us by providing links when we knew there is water on the moon and organic matter...thank you

reply to post by heineken


Maybe you can go help yourself, by finding out for yourself.

reply to post by Chadwickus



as if i know from when you knew....you knew..you post

you came forward saying you knew about the water and about organic matter ...did you?...we deserve some proof



[edit on 14-12-2009 by heineken]

reply to post by heineken


Read this, and get back to us. Clearly you need it.

OK, so I was about to hit the reply button to get back in on this conversation....but then I saw this:

Originally posted by heineken

nOoB...

as if i know from when you knew....you knew..you post

It has become quite obvious now that you had no other intention in creating this thread but to mock and insult those that disagree with you.

I will not be party to this. Good day to you. Im out.

[edit on 14/12/2009 by Kryties]

reply to post by davesidious



thank you for the link...as i can see it pure BS...here we go..

In July 2008, small amounts of water were found in the interior of volcanic pearls from the Moon (brought to Earth in 1971 by the Apollo 15 astronauts)

so it took them from 1971 to 2008...aha...

the following line...

On September 24, 2009, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) reported that their first lunar mission, Chandrayaan-1 using NASA's Moon Mineralogy Mapper, found evidence of large quantities of water on the Moon's surface, and that water is still presently being formed

shall i comment further