tOfficial Moon Landing Conspiracy Thread

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Uther Pendragon

Simple. Conspiracy theorists are adamant about it because they are either:

A: Stupid
B: Losers with nothing better to do than to try and argue points counter to what overwhelming evidence and common sense say other wise.

Any other questions.

Typical. Ignore, stereotype, insult, "baaa" like a sheep.

Nice deflection and way to bring it strong.

[Uther Pendragon]

[quote=t0mmyboy83;3220244]

Originally Posted by Uther Pendragon

Here's my evidence that the flat earth society is ful of ****:

Oh man you're so smart. If only you were in that class, you could have set everyone straight.

True, but I wouldn't have been in your class. I took honors classes in HS, not the remedial level crap you obviously took were teachers wasted time by trying to argue theories, whether in all seriousness or as an "exercise", that have been disproven for centuries.

[greenfever]

Originally Posted by Uther Pendragon

Simple. Conspiracy theorists are adamant about it because they are either:

A: Stupid
B: Losers with nothing better to do than to try and argue points counter to what overwhelming evidence and common sense say other wise.

Any other questions.

My question is do you think if you gave NASA 1 year that they could do a moon mission now?

If you had to wager everything you had on a successful mission or failure, which would you put your money on?

If you don't think it could happen now, how in the hell could it have happened 35 years ago?

The wind, the stars, all that stuff isn't what bugs me. Its that we didn't have any real technology at that point but we pulled off the gretest feat in the world's history on the first try.

[Uther Pendragon]

Originally Posted by MSU CIO

Typical. Ignore, stereotype, insult, "baaa" like a sheep.

Nice deflection and way to bring it strong.

You're right. I don't see how it is possible to argue against the word of a bunch of losers who have no affliation with each other than against the words of the thousands of engineers, scientists, mechanics, astronauts and others who combined to make the Apollo program happen.

Call me a sheep if you want for the "loser" card, its true though. Occam's razor my friend.

Sorry I lack the ability to bring it strong like you do in saying an event that is documented historical fact never happened.

[Mitch.Rapp]

Originally Posted by MSU CIO

My father in law was an MP in the Strategic Air Command at Minot ND in the late 60's... He took all of his secrets regarding our nuclear program to the grave. Until he died last summer and we found his release papers, my mother in law thought he was a typewriter repair man for the air force. Really, he was guarding the worlds largest collection of ICBMs. 30+ years of marriage and he never spoke the word "nuclear" to her, she didn't even know what was at Minot until we told her.

After the Air Force he was given a life long job at the EPA labs in Ann Arbor (a gift?) where many other former AF SAC guards work(ed)... odd indeed. They are all now dying or have died of cancer. Again, odd.

The gov't keeps those who know "things" quiet through FEAR. Those with top level clearances sign contracts regarding these matters and these contracts are considered by the signee to be their own death warrant from what I am told. Or, if you do speak out, they will just call you crazy unless it was say... Buzz Aldrin himself, but why would he do it? He is a 'hero'.

They also work on a "need to know", compartmentalized basis... Only those at the very pinnacle know the whole story, everyone else is "just doing their job" and probably being tricked also.

I was an SP at Malmstrom AFB, Mt., in the late 80's, I did exactly what your father-in-law did, and so I feel that I am extremely qualified to state that this post is B.S. on so many levels.

[Uther Pendragon]

Originally Posted by greenfever

My question is do you think if you gave NASA 1 year that they could do a moon mission now?

If you had to wager everything you had on a successful mission or failure, which would you put your money on?

If you don't think it could happen now, how in the hell could it have happened 35 years ago?

The wind, the stars, all that stuff isn't what bugs me. Its that we didn't have any real technology at that point but we pulled off the gretest feat in the world's history on the first try.

Uh go read your history books please. It took nearly a decade to put together all the necessary elements for Apollo 11 to land. They didn't just say, "Well its 1968 so lets shoot for 1969 as a landing date"

So no I don't think they could do it in a year today since they'd be starting over, but could they do it in 4 or 5, absolutely. There is this issue called "funding" though, NASA hasn't perfected the art of growing their money trees yet.

[Uther Pendragon]

Originally Posted by greenfever

My question is do you think if you gave NASA 1 year that they could do a moon mission now?

If you had to wager everything you had on a successful mission or failure, which would you put your money on?

If you don't think it could happen now, how in the hell could it have happened 35 years ago?

The wind, the stars, all that stuff isn't what bugs me. Its that we didn't have any real technology at that point but we pulled off the gretest feat in the world's history on the first try.

BTW we'd only been sailing naval vessels under nuclear power nearly 15 years in 1969 and the fastest plane ever built, to this day, the SR-71 was built in the 60's.

Explain to me how we had no "real" technology again.

[greenfever]

Originally Posted by Uther Pendragon

Uh go read your history books please. It took nearly a decade to put together all the necessary elements for Apollo 11 to land. They didn't just say, "Well its 1968 so lets shoot for 1969 as a landing date"

So no I don't think they could do it in a year today since they'd be starting over, but could they do it in 4 or 5, absolutely. There is this issue called "funding" though, NASA hasn't perfected the art of growing their money trees yet.

Well apparently the technology has already been mastered, right? Why would they be starting over? Has the moon relocated?

Could it be done today? 5 years? 11 years?

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Mitch.Rapp

I was an SP at Malmstrom AFB, Mt., in the late 80's, I did exactly what your father-in-law did, and so I feel that I am extremely qualified to state that this post is B.S. on so many levels.

On what levels?

[gomersbro]

Originally Posted by greenfever

Well apparently the technology has already been mastered, right? Why would they be starting over? Has the moon relocated?

Could it be done today? 5 years? 11 years?

Yes it could be done today. But the INFRASTRUCTURE isn't in place today. It will take years to built and test these things. We don't even have a vehicle that could get us there. We spend billons (perhaps trillions in todays dollars) to get us there. Unfortuantely the Nixon administration and others allowed the infrastructure to disolve. Now they have to start over. Will take years to build.

Plus we can't use the old blueprints because where are we going to get that many vacuum tubes?

[Bleachers]

Originally Posted by MSU CIO

"Taking into account the total mission duration time, the number of orbits each mission did, and the amount of time spent on the Moon, why do the journey times to and from the Moon vastly differ from as little as 81 Hrs to as much as 152 Hrs? For crying out load it takes the space shuttle 66 Hrs to reach the ISS which is only 185 miles above Earth."

Good point CIO. But you are forgetting that it is uphill to the moon and downhill back to earth. That is why the flight times back and forth are different.

[Vince of 231]

Originally Posted by greenfever

That being said I guess I don't see why, on our first try we blasted off, slowed down in a foreign atmosphere, got out, played golf, and broadcast it perfectly for the whole world from thousand of miles away, on the first try. Then they got in, took off somehow, and flew right back to mother earth. Sure why not.

People got excited after that. They wanted to go back, people thought we could live on the moon. People said lets go again. The government, feeling the pressure, did what governments do. They scared the hell out of everyone with the Apollo 13 mission. Now nobody was in a hurry to go back.

35 years later if you had to lay your life's savings on a successful moon landing would you do it? There hasn't been a shuttle mission without a major F up in the last 20 years. NASA can't even dock at a space station today but they could go 10 times as far in a tin cup 30 years ago. OK.

Did it happen, probably. Is there probable cause why people wouldn't trust the government, yes. There you go. Some ramblings from a guy thyat has his doubts. I don't think I'm a crazy loner. I'm just a guy that looks at the technology and says

Have you heard of Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee? (Hint: Tonight is the 40th anniversary of their deaths.) They all died on the pad in January 1967 in the first Apollo. The Apollo program was shut down for 18 months (sound familiar?) after that accident to find and correct the causes.

In October 1968, they launched Apollo 7 (not sure of the numbering, but 1 was the fatal craft and numbers 2 thru 6 may have been unmanned test vehicles) into earth orbit to test the system for the first time in manned orbit. Apollo 8 in December did a similar test flight, but with a trip into and out of lunar orbit. ( No LM on either of these flights; if the Apollo 13 accident had happened to Apollo 8, those guys would never have been able to get back.) Apollo 9 in March 1969 flew the Command Module and LM in earth orbit; Apollo 10 in May did a full dress-rehearsal of the lunar trip with everything(lunar orbit, separation and return rendevous, return) except the actual landing on the moon's surface.

So, no, it wasn't on "the first try", and it wasn't without accidents and deaths along the way.

[Mitch.Rapp]

Originally Posted by MSU CIO

On what levels?

you make the job your father in law did out to be some part of an elite, top secret force. And if he did portay it as that, he was lying to your whole family. The largest career field in the USAF is what I and your father in law did, their is nothing elite or top secret about it. The ICBM missle sites and LCF (launch control facilities) are placed throughout the west, in plain sight, right next to farmers wheat fields and their cattle's grazing lands. I have kept in touch thru veterans org. with many many former coworkers, sorry, not a suspicious case of cancer yet. As an MP, your father in law didn't come within 50 feet of a ICBM warhead. These things are nested dozens of feet below ground in hardened silo's protected by concrete blast door many many feet thick.

Alot of former MP/SP's get jobs with the DOE , because , they have vast experience.

The highest security clearance that is required to be an SP is "secret", and that is only because of SP's having to work with cryptographic codes, which they use to authenticate their security status to the LCF.

Again, sorry if your father in law misrepresented himself to your family, but it is a common problem amongst veterans. Any other questions or clarifications, let me know

[FightingWhite]

Originally Posted by Mitch.Rapp

you make the job your father in law did out to be some part of an elite, top secret force. And if he did portay it as that, he was lying to your whole family. The largest career field in the USAF is what I and your father in law did, their is nothing elite or top secret about it. The ICBM missle sites and LCF (launch control facilities) are placed throughout the west, in plain sight, right next to farmers wheat fields and their cattle's grazing lands. I have kept in touch thru veterans org. with many many former coworkers, sorry, not a suspicious case of cancer yet. As an MP, your father in law didn't come within 50 feet of a ICBM warhead. These things are nested dozens of feet below ground in hardened silo's protected by concrete blast door many many feet thick.

Alot of former MP/SP's get jobs with the DOE , because , they have vast experience.

The highest security clearance that is required to be an SP is "secret", and that is only because of SP's having to work with cryptographic codes, which they use to authenticate their security status to the LCF.

Again, sorry if your father in law misrepresented himself to your family, but it is a common problem amongst veterans. Any other questions or clarifications, let me know

you were there 20 years later ... a different era, if you will. things change. also, you didn't read the post you replied to very closely or carefully. And finally, you come across like a real tool.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Mitch.Rapp

you make the job your father in law did out to be some part of an elite, top secret force.

Sorry, if that is how it cam off. Two seperate things in those paragraphs. He was just instructed to "shut up" about what he saw and did and he complied. I believe he was also "rewarded" with his EPA position. He had a "secret" clearance.

Originally Posted by Mitch.Rapp

And if he did portay it as that, he was lying to your whole family. The largest career field in the USAF is what I and your father in law did, their is nothing elite or top secret about it. The ICBM missle sites and LCF (launch control facilities) are placed throughout the west, in plain sight, right next to farmers wheat fields and their cattle's grazing lands.

He NEVER talked about it. What we know is from his discharge papers and from his brother.

Things were a little different in the 60's when Minot had constant, nuclear armed bombers flying in and out 24x7. Do a little research on Minot in the mid-sixties. Many people were told to hush about a lot of really odd activity at the base.

Originally Posted by Mitch.Rapp

I have kept in touch thru veterans org. with many many former coworkers, sorry, not a suspicious case of cancer yet. As an MP, your father in law didn't come within 50 feet of a ICBM warhead. These things are nested dozens of feet below ground in hardened silo's protected by concrete blast door many many feet thick.

could be from the EPA National Lab job, but the rates are high and you are a couple of decades younger...

Originally Posted by Mitch.Rapp

Alot of former MP/SP's get jobs with the DOE , because , they have vast experience.

The highest security clearance that is required to be an SP is "secret", and that is only because of SP's having to work with cryptographic codes, which they use to authenticate their security status to the LCF.

This may be true, but this is the national engine emissions lab... not quite MP style work. He was essentially retrained as an engineer on the job.

Originally Posted by Mitch.Rapp

Again, sorry if your father in law misrepresented himself to your family, but it is a common problem amongst veterans. Any other questions or clarifications, let me know

He never talked about it with our family except his brother. I guess he eventually switched from MP to some other role because of the mental stress. His brother will not tell me any more about it.

I need no clarifications, but thanks.

[FightingWhite]

a couple questions I've had about the moon landing were:

1) how did they broadcast the footage back to earth in 1969 and what filmed the footage?

2) why didn't they continue to go back? at some point the stopped.

Plus, how does a tin can fly that far, that fast for that long? And how did the tin can and the humans inside survive the radiation belts?

It's a hoax! A great hoax, yes. Definitely warranted and it did its job. But I just don't believe it happened.

As far as all of the people at NASA being fooled (i.e. the people in the control room). They were watching the same footage as the American public. The number of people in on the conspiracy was not nearly as big as most would think.

Just my opinion ...

[chachi]

Originally Posted by FightingWhite

As far as all of the people at NASA being fooled (i.e. the people in the control room). They were watching the same footage as the American public. The number of people in on the conspiracy was not nearly as big as most would think.

Since "Launch Control" and everyone else involved in getting the mission 'ready' actually did their jobs, only "Mission Control" needed to be in on it or be fooled. This is NOT a large group of people. The missions did actually launch, they just never left low earth orbit. Once the vehicle was separated from the booster, control was handed to Mission Control, they controlled communications and all output of audio, video, data, etc.

[MidtownSpartan]

Originally Posted by FightingWhite

a couple questions I've had about the moon landing were:

1) how did they broadcast the footage back to earth in 1969 and what filmed the footage?

2) why didn't they continue to go back? at some point the stopped.

Plus, how does a tin can fly that far, that fast for that long? And how did the tin can and the humans inside survive the radiation belts?

It's a hoax! A great hoax, yes. Definitely warranted and it did its job. But I just don't believe it happened.

As far as all of the people at NASA being fooled (i.e. the people in the control room). They were watching the same footage as the American public. The number of people in on the conspiracy was not nearly as big as most would think.

Just my opinion ...

OK, here is my problem with this stuff. You say you have questions about how it was pulled off. That is a perfectly understandable response. But instead of saying "I don't know how this could happen, so it must be a hoax", why not spend a few minutes researching how it was actually done. Try this

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

If you read through all of that and still don't believe we went to the moon, that's your right. But I just don't understand this attitude that something doesn't seem possible so it must not be. At least try and find out if there are answers to your questions.

How about the dozens of scientists all over the world, who had no relation to NASA, who studied the pounds and pounds of rocks that were brought back and verified that they could have come from no place but the moon? I don't understand how that could be pulled off, and no one has offered me any convincing argument of how it was.

[Spartacus81]

Originally Posted by greenfever

I think if you were alive at that time and saw it you probably really believe it. Just like the people that think JFK was killed by the single gunman with the magic bullet.

I don't mean to hijack this thread from one conspiracy to the next. But the whole idea that there would have had to been a "magic bullet" for the single gunman theory to be correct is absolutely ridiculous. Usually it's cited by people who's main source on the Kennedy assassination is that ridiculous and fictional Oliver Stone movie

[chachi]

Originally Posted by MidtownSpartan

How about the dozens of scientists all over the world, who had no relation to NASA, who studied the pounds and pounds of rocks that were brought back and verified that they could have come from no place but the moon? I don't understand how that could be pulled off, and no one has offered me any convincing argument of how it was.

How would they know what a moon rock looked like if they had never seen one?

Here is your answer to one way you could pull it off... http://www.geocities.com/apolloreality/

[Mitch.Rapp]

Originally Posted by MSU CIO

Sorry, if that is how it cam off. Two seperate things in those paragraphs. He was just instructed to "shut up" about what he saw and did and he complied. I believe he was also "rewarded" with his EPA position. He had a "secret" clearance.


He NEVER talked about it. What we know is from his discharge papers and from his brother.

Things were a little different in the 60's when Minot had constant, nuclear armed bombers flying in and out 24x7. Do a little research on Minot in the mid-sixties. Many people were told to hush about a lot of really odd activity at the base.



could be from the EPA National Lab job, but the rates are high and you are a couple of decades younger...



This may be true, but this is the national engine emissions lab... not quite MP style work. He was essentially retrained as an engineer on the job.



He never talked about it with our family except his brother. I guess he eventually switched from MP to some other role because of the mental stress. His brother will not tell me any more about it.

I need no clarifications, bu