Did NASA just admit they never put Man on The Moon? [Video]

The highlighted statement is just a point of fact, we DO need to protect the astronauts and equipment before we send them. The fact that we chose to go whatever the risks were was both brave and a tad stupid but they did and unless anyone has cast iron PROOF that we never went then I'll leave it as we did..

Off topic, Mods, seems BOTH login buttons to the right below the thread subject bar no longer work, it was just one a year plus ago but now two....Ask someone to sort it out please

a reply to: TheCrowMan

the shuttle does not have enough propellant to leave Earth orbit and travel to the moon.

and astronauts aboard the ISS will also claim they can see the same thing you are describing about buzz aldrin..

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Well, do you believe they have never sent sensitive electronics to any of the planets? They seem to send unmanned probes to other planets all the time and the electronics usually still function.

unmanned probes also do not carry the risk of safeguarding humans should the electronics fail..

a reply to: TheCrowMan

I think Buzz Aldrin said he even saw the radiation flying through him! Back in the day that was fine, just like breaking up Asbestos.

Yes he did, and they even had experiments to catch what he was seeing.

astrobob.areavoices.com...

Why didn't we park a shuttle in orbit, attached to space station. Big rocket with fuel cell and 4 astonaugts replenishes the shuttle, quick trip around the moon.

Except it wasn't built to just take a trip around the moon.

Anyone who believes that we landed on the Moon in 1969... or ever for that matter...is just the kind of sheeple the government loves. Well done Uncle Sam, well done.

originally posted by: planetyeck
Anyone who believes that we landed on the Moon in 1969... or ever for that matter...is just the kind of sheeple the government loves. Well done Uncle Sam, well done.

Ever you say? So how did they get those retro reflectors up there?

How about the rocks and soil that was brought back? Did you know that the Russians returned almost identical soil samples too?

What about the ham radio operators who eavesdropped on radio transmissions from the moon's surface?

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of Space.

It's an accurate statement of fact and doesn't negate the other fact that people have been sent through that region of space. VAB radiation is a challenge that's waiting for a more elegant solution than increased shielding which demands increased payloads and higher costs.

Just getting a payload into orbit is a constant challenge and fraught with failures even though we continue to do so.

Challenge isn't a synonym for 'impossible.'

You are missing to point of the key word. "Solve". If they need to solve this challenge, it is because they have not yet been able to. Which essentially does make me wonder about historical claims of already having done so with Apollo.

Buy why would NASA admit this so candidly? Perhaps their writer and editor didn't pick up on this loose use of words. Thus leading the fake Apollo believers to run with this claim. And who could blame them? They aren't very clear as to why this needs to be solved now (are these just NEW challenges?) and there is zero reference to their historical success's of Apollo where they obviously would have faced the same challenges.

originally posted by: Chadwickus

originally posted by: planetyeck
Anyone who believes that we landed on the Moon in 1969... or ever for that matter...is just the kind of sheeple the government loves. Well done Uncle Sam, well done.

Ever you say? So how did they get those retro reflectors up there?

How about the rocks and soil that was brought back? Did you know that the Russians returned almost identical soil samples too?

What about the ham radio operators who eavesdropped on radio transmissions from the moon's surface?

1. No one can setup this laser reflection themselves to verify those reflectors are really on the Moon. You must believe the results from MIT and Paris Observatory Lunar Analysis Center. Only a handfull of people have done this experiment and should we these people? Source. Yes, I know you saw an episode of the Big Bang Theory where they did the experiement on top of their apartment building in the middle of LA, well that was just fiction and in real life you need lasers the size of a building far away from any light pollution to do the experiment.

2. What Moon rocks? Many have supposedly gone missing or been supposedly stolen while others have turned out being nothing more than petrified wood, and it is not like I will ever be given the oppertunity to test if those remaining are real as those are "to valueable" and locked away somewhere; you will just have to trust NASA on that. Those that have been tested have turned out to be identical to terrestial basalts. And then you have Wernher von Braun that went to Antarctica a couple of years before Apollo 11 to pick up rocks supposedly from metorites that came from the Moon, now why did he do that you may wonder...



-MM

a reply to: Sparkymedic

They didn't solve it with Apollo, they worked around it. They found a workable solution that allowed them to get past the obstacle, and they used it.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Just Googled "stolen and missing moon rocks" did we?

Almost all of those "rocks" are shavings from other rocks that were brought back by Apollo. Some are the size of a grain of rice, some are slightly larger.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yes you are correct. Anyone with a question can go to the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC and see just how thick the capsule that held the returning astronauts actually is. From personal experience I'd say roughly ten inches thick.

to: MerkabaMeditation

There are countless diagrams of the position of the VAB online. They appear as two balloons extended out from the equator with areas at both the north and south pole regions where transiting them would be a very short and quick journey. Mathematics beyond my ken helped the engineers to tackle this problem.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

not like I will ever be given the oppertunity to test if those remaining are real

What tests would you conduct?

Those that have been tested have turned out to be identical to terrestial basalts.

False. Here is just one source (Florida State University). There are many more:
micro.magnet.fsu.edu...

And then you have Wernher von Braun that went to Antarctica a couple of years before Apollo 11 to pick up rocks supposedly from metorites that came from the Moon

What makes you think he went to Antarctica to collect meteorites? It wasn't until 1969 that it became known that it's a really good place to look for them. You think he picked up 850 pounds of lunar meteorites one trip? You think lunar meteorites have the same external characteristics as the returned lunar material?

www.marmet-meteorites.com...

originally posted by: Chadwickus

originally posted by: planetyeck
Anyone who believes that we landed on the Moon in 1969... or ever for that matter...is just the kind of sheeple the government loves. Well done Uncle Sam, well done.

Ever you say? So how did they get those retro reflectors up there?

How about the rocks and soil that was brought back? Did you know that the Russians returned almost identical soil samples too?

What about the ham radio operators who eavesdropped on radio transmissions from the moon's surface?

LoL are you saying the Russians made it to the moon now ?

Flat out, why is it so important for people to believe that they know everything about this mission, or any of the missions.

When it is clear that the public is NEVER informed on these topics, to any great extent.

Are you claiming that HAM radio operators were able to tell where the signals were coming from, on the surface of the moon?

How many more decades will it be before the technology in my phone is allowed to be sent to the moon ??

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Sparkymedic

They didn't solve it with Apollo, they worked around it. They found a workable solution that allowed them to get past the obstacle, and they used it.

So what is wrong with this workable solution now, must be one of those overthinking problems where it gets more difficult over time.

a reply to: ParasuvO

What part of "500 days in space" did you miss? Or "different trajectory to get to Mars"? Going to the moon is one thing. Going to Mars is a totally different thing requiring new technology, and new solutions.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
Are you claiming that HAM radio operators were able to tell where the signals were coming from, on the surface of the moon?

It's called triangulation. Ham radio operators were able to triangulate the signals coming from Apollo as being from a location near the moon. You can't pinpoint an exact location down to coordinates, but you can get a pretty close location.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

THis might burst your bubble.

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Dalkinion2

Too bad old Bart is a liar, stalker, and doesn't know what he's talking about.

www.studiosapien.com...

originally posted by: Zaphod58

originally posted by: ParasuvO
Are you claiming that HAM radio operators were able to tell where the signals were coming from, on the surface of the moon?

It's called triangulation. Ham radio operators were able to triangulate the signals coming from Apollo as being from a location near the moon. You can't pinpoint an exact location down to coordinates, but you can get a pretty close location.

I'm sorry, but that is about as likely to me as those alledged inflight mobile phone calls from the airplanes at 9/11.

-MM