[QUOTE=topic10;26078385]Could be fake. Russia was wining the space race in all aspects, first satellite in space, first animal, first human, how the hell didn't they managed to put someone on the moon before nasa?
Hell even when the apollo program started, nasa was still dealing with exploding rockets killing all astronauts inside. And the moon lander was so faulty, that they cold not even make it work on earth not a year before apollo 11. [b] In increased gravity and with atmosphere, gee I'm so surprised. A lot can happen in a year as well.[/b]
Watch the hole thing, there are somethings that mythbusters already busted, like waving flag and light source. But things like crossair over objects [B]Overexposure, bright light around a thin object makes the thin object disappear. Look again, every time the crosshairs seem to disappear, they are either over a bright object, or an object their own color.[/B] and 2X speed [B]How is this even relevant? Mythbusters tested this as well by the way[/B], and repeat usage of same background [B]If you are talking about when the LEM base is visible and when it's not, this is simply a matter of moving a little to the side, because the background is so far away the difference is negligible. If you are talking about where we see astronauts running down the same hill two times at supposedly different missions, this was admitted by NASA of being a naming error on the rolls of tape.[/B]. Are still quite stuning. [B]All are quite explainable.[/B]
By the way, the US government lied to the people before, Im not going on this deep, just this:
The Gulf of Tonkin incident, made the USA get involved in the Vietnam war, recent declassified documents state that this incident never even took place, just look it up. so yhea the government got the people support for war on false pretexts.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=topic10;26079029]People doubt the moon landing because of a lot of evidence that does not add up to what Nasa stated about the moon landing. It's normal for people to have questions they want a answer.
But if you do some research you will notice that nasa refused to answer most of the questions about the images and videos from the moon. Only in Myth Busters (a high rated TV show mind you) did you see some answers from nasa, but still, how can they refuse an explanation on how did they make the astronauts go through the Van Ellen Radiation Belt? [B]A radiation belt of mainly alpha and beta particles, and varying width. A satellite going through it in an elliptical orbit with a shielding of 3mm of aluminum will get a dose of 1500 REM per year. If we say the command module on the Saturn V rocket had a shielding of 3mm (it had more), that would be about 8-12 REM for the astronauts, which isn't even enough to make you get a headache. On top of this, they went through the short bit of the Van Allen belt, because NASA did actually know about it, so they probably got even less, and that's not even including the command module having more than 3mm of aluminum shielding it.[/B] So why all the secrecy on the part of nasa, if this was something that hapen without any doubt? [B]Because most of this shit is common sense.[/B]
It's this secrecy, that people refuse to accept, since this is suposed to be the greatest humankind achivement. We need to know the simple facts, that nasa refuses to answer. [B]I just answered the facts for you.[/B][/QUOTE]
[editline]16th November 2010[/editline]
Answers in bold.
[QUOTE=firestorm0;26091775]How else would the LRRR structure have gotten there? That shit is VERY fragile.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment[/url] (basically a giant one of these [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroreflector[/url])[/QUOTE]
It was the ailens, man :tinfoil:
OP is an idiot.
Moon landing was real.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.