Did Man Set Foot On The Moon In The 60s, 70,s Or Ever?

Quote:

I'm not sceptical, I just don't believe the 69 took place. It's not because I want or don't want to - It's because it didn't take place.

And that is how pseudo-science is done. Start with the answer and try to work your way back, ignoring all the facts that work against you. I've read the reasons why people believe we didn't land on the moon and they don't hold water. The science behind their errors is not even particularly hard. They are very similar to the arguments against evolution - scientific sounding and complete enough to withstand a cursory glance, but pretty empty when examined in the light. Just the argument that thousands of people in a dozen countries, some not particularly fond of the US, would have to have been in on it should be enough for you to lean towards the moon landing being legit. Consider this: thousands watched a rocket take off (live, not on TV). You can see objects orbiting the earth by eye or with a set of binoculars. (Sputnik was visible to the eye.) A landing capsule fell to Earth, also capable of being seen by eye when it entered the atmosphere. So where did the rocket go? How did the capsule get into space so that it could be seen flaming into the atmosphere? If it was staged ahead of time, how come no one noticed it? How extreme a story do you need to concoct so that you can ignore the simple story that the moon landing happened?

First the orbit period for anything orbiting the earth at 600 miles is a great deal less then the moon at 230 thousands so the results is that your radio signal from the ship would every few hours be on the other side of the earth from the moon and that might give even ham radio people a clue that the ship is not near the moon!!!

No one with any understanding of physics is going to buy into the idea that a ship orbiting the earth at 600 miles can pretend to be anywhere near the moon.

The flaw is that is would be visible there.

mark noble wrote:

Hi Engineer!

I have NO doubt Apollo 11 took off with all three astronauts aboard, and I believe it sat approximately 350 to 600 miles above the earth for the duration of alleged event.

What is my next flaw?

You know this also states that those trained professionals are nothing more than liars? Seriously? These men were highly trained, not after they entered the astronaut program but before it. They all had college degrees and high academic achievements and military training. You mean to tell me that they chose to lie about going to the moon? For what? Money? Fame? Seriously? You know Buzz Aldrin punched a guy in the face for yelling at him about not going to the moon. I doubt a person in Buzz's position would punch someone if it all were just a lie. Who defends a lie that much to punch a guy in the face for it? But I can definitely see how obnoxious and annoying it is to have some asshole walk up to you and tell you, where you had not gone. I would punch the guy too just like you need to be punched to wake up.

They could have orbited a manned mission at 600 miles, and sent an unmanned probe with a repeater to the moon, then broadcast to the repeater using a directional antenna.

It toooootally makes sense.

mark noble wrote:

I have NO doubt Apollo 11 took off with all three astronauts aboard, and I believe it sat approximately 350 to 600 miles above the earth for the duration of alleged event.

The radio communications between Apollo 11 and ground control were out there for everyone to monitor. So if you believe Apollo 11 sat approximately 350 to 600 miles above the Earth, you're believing that the Soviets either didn't intercept NASA's radio traffic with the vessel, or didn't notice it was coming from low orbit, or were too tender-hearted to exploit one of the greatest propaganda opportunities of their generation. If you sincerely believe this is more realistic than the Moon landing having happened, be my guest.

Why argue with Mark Noble on this statement?

Quote:

....I believe it sat approximately 350 to 600 miles above the earth

Does this sound to you like he means Apollo was in geosynchronous orbit? Or does his "it sat" mean the capsule was hovering in some unrelated inertial frame of reference? Did we really discover antigravity 40+ years ago and told nobody?

Oh? Let see that would add roughly two more seconds of delay in commuication between the ground and the ship or more when the ship in on the other side of the earh. Something a little hard to hide.

Everything was scripted, anyway. The astronauts just spoke at their cues, like they'd been trained to do.

Right my friend and once more to those who are not aware that you are kidding not even with the technology we now how would faking it not be a billion times harder task then just going there in the first place.

With 1960s to 1950s technology it could not had been done at all and we did indeed landed on the moon.

There is an emotional need to believed in nonsense and the internet is a tool to allow such nonsense to spread.

One wonder when someone is researching this time period in a future where they themselves had visited the Apollo landing sites and is looking at the endless postings on this silly subject what they will conclused.

What I love is Mark opinion that someone who post a few short Youto videos that have no firm background of where it come from should be given the same weight as tens of thousands of men and women all over the world who took part in the moon landing project or who monitor it for unfriendly governments or the ten of thousands of films and rocks and data downloads that the project generated.

He seem to have a strong emotional need to think that the Apollos landings did not happen as there is no logic reason to question those landings.

Did you personally witness the moon landing, or do you simply accept it to be true?

mark noble wrote:

Did you personally witness the moon landing, or do you simply accept it to be true?

I have seen the evidence of it and witnessed it on TV and I accept it. I did not see dinosaurs, but I believed they once existed. I believe I was born (instead of instantaneously appearing) even though I do not remember it.

same question to you, as I gave to Engineer?

And - Did you personally track apollo 11 with a telescope or radio?

Hi Bill!

Show me your evidence - If you have any?

Kind regards!

I am not disputing that there is E.T rock on earth. But...Big BUT, can you prove it was taken, BY A HUMAN HAND, from the surface of the moon in 1969, ABSOLUTELY, with no margin for error, Yes or No?
Kindest of regards

I want of of those for my bathroom wall.

I don't believe there were any robo-ships. I believe the samples could have come from anywhere on earth - such as the Antarctic