The cow jumped over the moon (at least someone made it)

So my blog today doesn’t have any flying cows, but actually this does come pretty close.  I realize I’m going to take a lot of flak for this but that’s fine, I can’t wait to hear what you all have to say.  Okay, here goes.  I DON’T BELIEVE MAN HAS EVER GONE TO THE MOON!

This week the moon landings were in question again as more photographs showed variations in the flag positions.  Once again NASA had to scramble for an answer. To me this is all a bunch of baloney.  I don’t believe that we were ever in green cheese country. Other non believers spout conspiracy theories, the USA’s need to win the space race, for me it’s all about mechanics.

In 1980 a space shuttle landed on a runway on its return from space. It was the first time that a US space vehicle had landed on solid ground, ever.  Before that all missions ended by the space capsule (Not much more than a souped up soup can) parachuting into the ocean.  It was dangerous, primitive, not very convenient, but it was the best they could come up with.

So how do you expect me to believe that eleven years before our magical landing on a runway we somehow landed on the moon?  In 1969 it supposively happened.  We’ve all seen the videos.  Golfing on the moon, jumping  around in low gravity, even a dune buggy.  Phooey!

To believe that, you’d have to believe that the astronauts were able to orbit the moon, detach from their rocket, land in a virtually unknown environment, do their experiments and have their fun, then be able to fly back to earth.  And once they got home they had to parachute into the ocean cause they still hadn’t figured out a better way to land here…

That would be like me saying I’ve never been to city of Toronto before.  But I’ve decided to drive there even though the brakes aren’t working in my car. Still, I’m going to make it there, see all the sights without any problems, then crash into my house when I get back home cause I can’t stop.  Sound crazy?  No crazier than landing on the moon in 1969.

There’s always been one other thing that bothers me.  During the space race in the 1950’s and 60’s, the USA was always second.  Russia beat them at everything.  First sattelite, first man in orbit, the list goes on.  Then all of a sudden the USA makes it to the moon first and Russia doesn’t go at all?  Wonder why?  Probably because IT WASN’T  POSSIBLE!  There you have it, that’s what I think.  Let me know how you feel about it.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to The cow jumped over the moon (at least someone made it)

  1. I agree with ya, something about their story always seemed a little off!

  2. Diane says:

    When they are offering site seeing trips to the moon and I send my sister and she returns with a piece of moon rock then I will believe it. Until then I will have a little skepticism with my morning news.

  3. your favorite daughter says:

    dad..dont hate on the us cos they’ve made more accomplishements then you 😉 hahaha.

  4. trololololololol just look at the moon rock the brought back….

    • Fred says:

      They have some moon rock at the Tidbinbilla tracking station outside of canberra. Amazing.

      • hitthelites says:

        It’s probably asteroid, or maybe volcanic. Would you even know the difference? Judging by the majority of comments you’ve sent, I could probably singe a piece of shale with a propane torch, tell you it’s from Saturn and sell it to you.

  5. Dave says:

    WHAT A GREAT LOAD OF RUBBISH YOU HAVE. WHY DID YOU START THIS BLOG???? I think you’re an idiot. You’re a conspiracy theorist who listens to others and believes what they say without delving into it once degree. The sad part about it is you infect others with this ridiculous ideas. If they faked the Moon landings my friend WHY DID THEY DO IT SIX TIMES??? Not only do you ignore,or not know about, recent facts that have come to light – You haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about! The Moon landings did take place and recently an orbiting satellite called Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) have photographed the landing sites, the landers are still there you can make them out, the tracks made by the lunar buggy are easy to see. The Russians didn’t make it because you dill their Moon rocket exploded on the pad weeks before Apollo 11 destroying their complex…. it’s a matter of historical record. Check the newspapers of the time. You know what, in 1901 a man made a public statement, ” I don’t think the mystery of flight will be solved for 100 years.” That man was Wilbur Wright… two years later his brother flew the fist plane. Google: LRO, Moon landing images ..and see for your self you moron!

    • hitthelites says:

      Sounds like you’ve been to the moon a few times. What’s it like? Any green cheese? Seriously, I don’t fall for everything the government “says” happened, and it’s going to take a lot more than some photographs to change my mind. It wasn’t that long ago that George W screamed to the heavens that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Over 100 000 dead civilians later, oops, no weapons….

      I was always curious how good ol’ George managed to get himself re-elected, but I guess with card-carrying pro-government believers like yourself, it must’ve been easy. It’s a good thing not everyone thinks like you, otherwise we’d still believe that the earth is flat, just cause monarchies back in the day said so. Moron? Idiot? Maybe you better look in the mirror pal.

      • Fred says:

        You’re an idiot. Dave is an astronomer, you didn’t graduate primary school. I’ll take his opinion over yours anyday.

        Look up past episodes of teh mythbusters to find that you and any other conspiracy theorist are stupid fools.

        However, the moron who owns this blog has achieved his aim and is gigling like a little girl right now. She got everyone to bite!

      • Fred says:

        You did see those photos of the Apollo remains that the Russians took last year, didn’t you? Oh, that’s right you can’t handle the truth!

      • hitthelites says:

        I’ve also seen photos of little green men. Faked…

  6. marc says:

    Wst the big deal about 6 times? it was 1969…they coulda said they did it 60 times, most people were so naive they wouldve believed it. nowadays we know better. at least some of us…

  7. ed says:

    maybe dave is an astronaut..or an alien! can u take us on yer ship commander?

    • hitthelites says:

      I’m not sure what Dave is, asides from vulgar. He’s sent me a few more replies, but I’m not posting them as they’re just too crass for this site. He did say “Iraq has openly stated it has had nuclear capability, observers have verified that..” That’s Iran, genius…you must have done the observing yourself. And he also said, “You should be shut down and I’m going to see what i can do to make that happen.” Great…If you weren’t stuck in 1969 you might know that a blog is for expressing your thoughts and opinions. I can post here whatever I like. In the future folks, anyone wishing to post comments, please watch your language. Kids do read this blog, and if you’ve have to use profanities to get your point across, it’s not worth hearing. Thanks.

      • Fred says:

        The only vulgar thing here is your ignorance.
        When your thoughts and opinions are so off kilter then stupidity and lies need to be stopped.

  8. hitthelites says:

    Reblogged this on Telling it like it is and commented:

    There’s been so much ruckus on this blog for the last little bit, I thought I should repost it. Keep those comments coming!

  9. chris says:

    Dave should watch the news.Yesterday nasa released a report saying they knew the challenger could not return to earth,but chose not to tell anyone.wonder why?

  10. Dave says:

    You are all being fooled by this fool. Get onto a decent blog that ‘tells it like it is’ with real facts and real truth.To answer Chris…matey, read the story on all major news pages at the moment. They made the decision not to inform the crew they were in mortal danger to save then the horror and pain of staying in space till the oxygen ran out and they became asphyxiated. Doesn’t that seem more logical and humane than your ‘conspiracy’ angle.

    Back to the dill who runs this… you with-hold my comments claiming they are “vulgar” – Well, read vulgarity as frustration because people who push the tripe you do go to all measures to hide any criticism coming their way. It’s no wonder a writer who tackles you gets a bit heavy in his replies. You only hide these comments because it’s aimed at you and we can’t have that can we? What sort of blog is it that you only print replies if they agree with you and your stone age mentalities?

    I give you REAL evidence and you give back what… ridicule, ignorance of what I supplied you and posts to your followers making out I’m some sort of nuisance intent on running you down for no reason whatsoever. Why are you holding my postings back? What are you afraid of? It tells me you’re frightened that you may be wrong. I am satisfied now that all I have said here is correct and that my original criticism of your ideologies was right. You are nothing but an uninformed muckraker with a swelled head and a merry band of followers with an equal aspect. I’m a science writer and broadcaster with a world-wide profile and I run a website that has subscribers in 30 countries. I’m a specialist science lecturer and educator working in the astro/space community.

    I find it so SAD to see writings like you have here that belittle and degrade the work of hundreds of thousands of good people to build an industry and break the barriers into a new frontier. I’ve been to the US and toured the space program from the inside out so you can now understand I’m not just an armchair theorist like you. spent I have been personally invited to spend time in his own home with the second man on the Moon, Buzz Aldrin. If I see this not put up on your page I’ll know you are a fake AND afraid of the truth! Sadly the others who read your pages won’t know will they? BUT YOU WILL

    • hitthelites says:

      First of all, I refuse to post comments that use profanity. And judging by the majority of the ones you’ve sent me, calling yourself a writer is a stretch at best. You can talk about all the photos and proof you want. In the end, you can’t and haven’t proven anything except the fact that you actually think people went to the moon, just like I don’t. Except you’re acting like a little kid who’s spoiled and had too much sugar. I’m going to approve a bunch of comments against my better judgement, cause they all came from people who are posting cause you asked them too. That’s about as spoiled and petty as you can get. Go back to your telescope, Dave and this time take the rose colored lense off the end of it. By the way, genius. My blog is read in over a 100 countries. You’ve got some catching up to do.

  11. John says:

    Well Jason, I am more than happy for you to prove to me that the landings never occurred.
    Firstly you must leave all rhetoric at the door.
    The proof starts here……

  12. Darren says:

    The moon landings were very real. USSR & USA were deep in the cold war at the time the USA landed on the moon. It is referred to as the space race. Between 1957 and 1975, the Cold War rivalry between USSR & USA focused on attaining firsts in space exploration.

    I’m not meaning to be rude, just laying out the mood between the two nations and the tensions involved.

    Now, lets look at radio signals. Amateur radio enthusiasts bounce their radio signals off the moon to talk with fellow amateur radio users on the other side of the Earth. I’m not dumbing this down, just keeping it simple. Radio signals have a source, or point of origin that is detectable. Now, if I transmit a signal “I am from mars” from my backyard antenna, Parks radio telescope picks it up (it wouldn’t, but lets pretend) and can easily discriminate between Earth source and outer space source. Similar to in the military at critical times “keeping radio silence” as the enemy can quickly detect the signals origin and attack.

    Looking at the tension between USSR & USA in 1969 at the time of the landing, and being easily able to discriminate between celestial and terrestrial radio sources, do you really think the Russians would let a “Red Hot” opportunity to call the USA frauds and liars???
    The tension between USSR & USA was very real, and so was the moon landing.

    • hitthelites says:

      I like your comment sir. thanks for posting it. You make a good point, but the truth is if the Russians were to call the USA frauds and liars, would anyone in North America believed them at the height of the cold war? I doubt it. Over 40 years later, people still believe it happened although it can’t be proven.

      • Darren says:

        Thanks hitthelites, and with your reply I have another suggestion. You said
        “but the truth is if the Russians were to call the USA frauds and liars, would anyone in North America believed them at the height of the cold war? I doubt it.”

        I’m not sure on that. But that was say roughly 35 years ago. I’m sure the Russians were monitoring the craft (when the Earth was facing the direction of the craft) all the way from the Earth to the Moon (3 days), monitoring all the radio communications, then when the craft was on the moon, again the Russians would have been listening to see if the USA were unsuccessful, and putting the Russians back in the space race.

        I’m very confident the Russians at the time would have publicly (at least internally in Russia) at least sprouted out the moon landing was a fake, and continued their race to the moon.

        The craft was monitored by Earth stations all the way from the Earth to the Moon, the whole journey to the moon, the landing, the exploration, and the return journey home. Parks radio telescope (AU-New South Wales) was one of many radio telescopes used by NASA around the Earth to communicate with the craft. The tracking station was not just in the USA. It was a global effort. Tens of thousands of people, numerous radio telescopes around the globe were involved with just the journey to and from the Moon, and I can not imaging after 43 years not one person has come forward with information it was a fake, or any person involved with the “set production” (similar to the movie Capricorn one).

        If the Moon landing was a fake, media would pay millions for this information. In my opinion, the media is very powerful, a little too powerful.

        The Russians would certainly now be saying the landing in 1969 was a fake and openly calling the USA frauds. They might not make a song and dance, but they would be saying it was a hoax for sure.

        Here is an interesting site you may be interested in:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

        Don’t get me wrong, I like a good conspiracy story, but we have to check its validity.

        There is also a group that believes the Moon is a hologram, projected from various government installations throughout the world.
        http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

        This is crazy, there is “rock solid” (sorry for the pun, rocks were brought back from the moon and studied by independent scientists (to confirm results) and these rocks do not have atmospheric damage from entry into atmosphere) evidence the moon landing was real. I’m sure in centuries to come, when we colonize the moon the vehicles, foot steps, experiments will be preserved in shrines. Imagine walking down your busy mall and seeing statues that you really have no idea what they commemorate. I’m sure it will be the same in the main mall on the moon 500 years from now, a teenager will be sitting on a bench waiting for his mates and look at a glass cover shrine with a foot step mark, and a plaque, and think “what’s the big deal with a foot step!

      • hitthelites says:

        Thanks for your comment Darren

      • Jon says:

        “people still believe it happened although it can’t be proven”

        What would you accept as adequate proof?

      • hitthelites says:

        Certainly not pictures and stories about rocks. Seen to many fakes, heard too many lies from the government. Unless you’ve been to the moon yourself, it’s all second hand news…

  13. Robert Brand says:

    Hi all. I was 17 when I wired up the TV systems in Sydney for Apollo 1. It was Paddington at the old OTC building. We switched the video from Parkes and Tidbinbilla and media converted it to NTSC and then PAL. The feed was initially for 8 minuted from Tidbinbilla and then Parkes for the rest of the moon walk. Both sites were manned by Australians and my friends.They both had their dishes pointed at the moon and video that was perfectly in Synch. The Parkes dish was not initially used for the first footprints from Armstrong because there was a terrible windstorm and the NASA guys thought it may lose track. SImply it was impossible to connect the two sites for video as Telecom had no video links to do this. The US would have had to have had a transmitter on the moon. Oddly enough it would have been more difficult to achieve that than actually to go there.

    At the age of 61 years old, I am now the Director of Spacecraft Communications, Navigation and Data for Team Stellar and we are looking to have a Rover on the moon by the end of next year. We hope to get close enough to an Apollo landing site to film the site the way that they left it. It would be very easy to prove whether they went there or not with HD TV from our Rover.

    I look forward to either proving or disproving this stuff for all time.

  14. Robert Brand says:

    Chris, Dave actually wrote about that story a day or so ago. Yes, they (NASA) knew. They never said that they didn’t know that there was a possibility (and it was only the possibility). They did not know 100% that it would breakup.
    http://www.davidreneke.com/when-apollo-died-what-of-apollo-18-19-and-20-discovery-news/

    Dave is across this stuff. You ask why? Read the story. They released the info 10 years later because it was distressing at the time, but there were only two option in reality. Stay in orbit and die or land and risk it. Do not be upset that someone can see the same story and interpret it differently. The question comes down to whether you should tell them and make their last days miserable…

    Back on topic. I seriously would like to prove things on the moon one way or another. I suggest that you get behind Team Stellar and help us prove whether it happened or not. A great opportunity for all. I would love to be part of the group that either proved there was a great conspiracy or that it was real. I’ll go either way on this. I hate lies and if I was fooled back then, I need to know. Personally, the technical stuff would have been too hard to fake in my humble opinion, but help us get a rover there to help prove this one way or another.

  15. Robert Brand says:

    Like I said, I am not worried if they went or not. I would just like to correct a technical matter. If I was planning a human flight to the moon, it would be landing via a capsule, not like a shuttle. That technology only makes sense in low earth orbit. The weight of the vehicle makes it impossible to send to the moon. It would be a low tech system that worked. Weight is the killer. I am part of a team planning a one way flight to the moon and we have a number of engineers that are working with me for the navigation and risk assessment. Weight is king. Everything revolves around this unless you want to launch multiple payloads into orbit and hook them up. In the case of a shuttle-like return vehicle, you would need lots more fuel.

    The low tech lunar module had walls so thin that they were little more than thick tin foil with the pressure held in by something like chicken wire on the outside. Low tech is often best. By the way I have an award from NASA for support of the first shuttle. I have some insight into this stuff and a lot of space knowledge. Happy to help you prove this one way or another. Just needed to explain that movies like deep impact where shuttles went towards the asteroid were rubbish. Those monsters could never get out of low earth orbit. Hubble was about as high as they could manage…

  16. Robert Brand says:

    I am not sure of your age, but the reason that the Russian lost the race (whether they landed or not) was money. Over the 10 years of planning, the US gutted their tax dollar and in one year 4.5% was fed to NASA to beat the Russians. The Russians could not match that. They were trying to go to the moon and had a program, but once the US beat them, they did not bother. They did however send a last minute robotic lander that they hoped would return a sample before Apollo 11 returned from the moon. It crashed and failed.

    Beside some inside technical knowledge, I have relied on the hatred of the Russians to prove that the US never went to the moon. They monitored the signals from the moon easily enough – they had to have come from there as their dishes would have picked that up immediately. The dishes are so fine that you can actually see the area of the moon that the transmissions are originating from. You can also track the modules on their travels via the pointing accuracy of the dishes and the transmissions and data from the craft. Russia would have been watch-dogging these guys like crazy, so I have strongly relied on the fact that they never raised a “red” flag as proof that it was real. Now this meant that they had to have had active spacecraft in flight to land and send back the fake transmissions. I saw no way around this so I have always believed that it was real and there was no way to fake this stuff. The focus on those dishes is tight. Tighter than the width of the moon by far. You can track the craft moving around the moon easily.

    To me there is no way that this part could have been faked without the Russians crying foul as it happened in real time. Dishes everywhere were tracking the Apollo flight and the doomed Russian robotic flight. To my mind, Russia’s silence was the biggest proof of how real this was. If someone can explain the error here, I’d appreciate it, but I just can’t see it. To my mind, it would take a bigger mission to fake it than to go there. Like I said – I am a scientist and I swap on what is considered true based on the scientific method. I need to be convinced of how the tracking issue mentioned above can be faked because it is huge. Happy to hear from anyone that can help me here. My job is big dishes, so I am very much across this side of things and happy to point to proof of the accuracy of this stuff. They are used in radio astronomy and can map distant systems with fine detail.

    http://www.rferl.org/content/Soviet_Cosmonauts_Recall_Failed_Bid_To_Beat_US_To_Moon/1779784.html

  17. hitthelites says:

    In a way it’s nice to have a flood of comments all at once, but it’s sad at the same time that a boorish, petty man like Dave would go to such lengths. You had to call in your friends to the sandbox, Dave? How triste…. Really, if I was such a crackpot, you wouldn’t have given this blog a second look, but the truth is, I make a pretty damn good point. If NASA had to land their capsules here in the ocean with a parachute in 1969, why should anyone believe they could land on the moon, play golf, fly back to earth, and then crash land in the ocean with their primitive equipment. I would assume if they could land on the moon and take off again, the least they could’ve done would be land in the parking lot at the space station. But that wasn’t possible….If you, the reader believe man landed on the moon, that’s great. And if you don’t believe, that’s great too. That’s what makes it all interesting, difference of opinions. It’s just too bad some people (Dave) can’t handle it when someone challenges his narrow way of thinking. Have a great Sunday people!

  18. chris says:

    The fact that NASA had concerns about the shuttle not surviving re-entry and didn’t tell the astronauts wasn’t my point,(this was probably the right thing to do)it was the fact that they played stupid with the public for 10 years(this is why there are conspiracy theories).Personally I sit on the fence on the issue of landing on the moon,but I like to hear good arguements for both sides.Robert the facts that you laid out are good ones and could easily make me a believer.Dave and Fred,the fact the you both know how to use a computer and can dish out insults doesn’t do anything to help your case(I can show you gov. issue pics and news clippings too)and as far as meeting Buzz Aldrin is concerned,WOW! I once sat in airport with former WWE wrestling legend Jake”the snake”Roberts and he told me all about the preceeding nights events,who won,who lost,but last time I checked professional wrestling is fake,eventhough he seemed quite sincere.Maybe its because he worked for a billion dollar industry and had a huge paycheck on the line.Remember this,just because I have an opinion doesn’t make me an ignoramus or a”dill”or what ever condecending remarks you two can come up with(if the good peopla at NASA had that narrow-minded kind of thinking,we’d all be strapping firecrackers too kitchen chairs and hoping for the best)try winning me over with solid,simple facts nothing more nothing less.

  19. hitthelites says:

    Bahahaha! If I only had some firecrackers. I agree with Chris. Show me some solid facts and I’ll be interested. Photos and videos are useless, too much fakes and forgeries out there. Just look at the pics I posted on the original blog…

    • Jon says:

      Rocks, over 400 kg of rocks. Chemically completely distinct from any rock Earth, and older to boot, containing unique minerals, shocked by multiple giant impacts, impregnated by thousands of years of expsoure to the solar wind, covered in micrometeorite impact pits, coated with impact class. Each sample was photographed on the on the Moon before it was collected,. The samples have all be catalogued and been studied by hundreds of scientists from all over the world for over 50 years, sometimes using instruments that were not even invented in the 70s, without the slightest doubt being cast on their authenticity.
      The samples from Apollo match what we have learned of the Moon from independent sources. These incuding lunar sample return missions for the former USSR and remotely sensed data by spacecraft from India, China, the USSR and ESA, as well as the US, Soviet rovers, US and Soviet landers.
      The onus of proof is on those who claim this is a fake to come up with evidence that it is fake. Where are the terrestrial rocks that match these compositions? If they were made in the lab, where, how and by whom? Actual documentary evidence, not opinion.

  20. ed says:

    i think dave found a telescope on sale and decided he was a man of space. i think he’s a klingon….

  21. Robert Brand says:

    There were no photo manipulation packages out there at the time of Apollo 11 through to 17. There were barely computers. I played with some of the big ones. The only manipulation was optical. Pictures published at the time are as real as can be where “faked” or not in a studio. I have awards in 3D photography and used CAD 3D systems when they first came on line. I saw that there were in fact images where 3D photos could be derived similar to the shuffle technique where you move from side to side and take a left image and then a right image. In fact some of the astronauts actually used this technique to bring home some 3D in color. I pieced together a show with 70 3D images from all the lunar trips. In some images you can see to infinity. Now that is hard to do in a studio – should I say impossible and the massively precise software that could easily have done this was not even near to being invented. The photos were released to the public very soon after the missions without time to play around with them. Basically the 3D photos are a key to absolute proof of the missions. It would have been hard to fake 2D, but 3D is a massive leap that has no equal in the proof of the moon landings. Simple research on even the most advanced computer technologies will prove that photo applications were not even on the horizon and were not possible. None the less trying to fake this stuff would result in the most incredible cock-ups of all time. A few pixels here or there and it would show up like a great dane backing into you face.

    I guess that I have done my best to look for errors in the most extreme of places and can’t find them.

    As for landing in the car park, there is a difference. The moon has no atmosphere and the earth is full of it. the earth is also bigger so gravity really sees that capsule hammering into the earth at tens of thousands of kilometers an hour. The capsule is heavier than the Lunar module and has to slow with a heat shield before the drogue chutes and the large parachutes deploy. Even with the parachutes, the US chose a water landing system to slow that last impact. The Russians used small rockets that have to fire at the last second – literally. If they don’t, the risk of damage to the human body and possibly death is high. The window for landing on earth is small, but not the size of a car park. You have to hit is with accurate navigation and you could be hundreds of kilometers off. Russia has a large area of virtually nothing, the US does not.

    The latest deep space capsule – Orion – in design will also have a heat shield. The answer is simple. Cost. The shuttle ended up being incredibly costly per flight once the risks were truly known. Capsules are smaller and cheaper and being at the top of the rocket, they don’t get hit by falling debris.

    I urge you to find out about the 3D aspects of the photography. They are amazing photos and with the 3D component and color, it is like you are actually there with them. 3D is criticized for lacking art as it presents reality. Get the image the slightest bit wrong and it sticks out. I can’t fault any of the incidental 3D or the purpose taken 3D. Remember that the unplanned incidental 3D would show the fake stuff right away if it had been on a set or in a studio. These are photos that they would not have intended to go together or people would even have thought of checking.at the time.

    I know many will just ignore what I have said without thorough research. I have come to appreciate that. If it is too hard, they don’t bother – they stick with the fake rock or the wind stuff and that is easily pushed aside by either. I seriously urge anyone that wants the truth to go and research the images. I will even make an anaglyph show of the 3D available if anyone is interested. I get a little tired of people tossing internet hand grenades in, stating something and then dropping it when some proof would make them reconsider.. As I said, give me proof and I will change my viewpoint. I have provided some proof in the tracking and I cannot believe that Russia would have just shut up. They would have called it whether they were believed or not. They would have gone of the public record and not just whimpered like sheep. They would have also gone to the moon to find the relay station and show the world. They didn’t.

    I urge you all to look at the two points I have outlined as they are huge in my mind and check them very closely and tell me the hole in the proof. I am ready to change sides because I arbor stuff that is untrue. Proof is key and king in my book and I have searched for both sides here..

  22. John says:

    I’m still waiting…To be taken seriously on this subject (or any other) the burden of proof is on you.
    You have put forward a proposal, but now is the time to present your evidence.

  23. Dave says:

    ed your comment explains a lot about you. 🙂

  24. hitthelites says:

    Well there you have it. Good points and some foolishness. While I don’t doubt the sincerity of the believers, I’m still not convinced. Visions of the USA with all their facts and figures about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Not to mention Y2K and a lot of other hoaxes. I’ll be willing to admit man was on the moon when it can be proven without a doubt. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen it yet…

  25. Darren says:

    You can not fake the radio signals origin. It would have been harder to fake it, then to simply go. The Russians would be all over a hoax landing, definitely internally in Russia back then & now, and definitely now the cold war is over.

    Tens of thousands of people were involved in the moon landing, all from different cultures, races, countries and with different moral standards. Not one has come forward giving an alternative story. Look at Lance Armstrong and his cheating/fake performance. People by nature cant keep their mouth shut with fraud and cheats!

    In 1770 Captain James Cook first sets foot in New South Wales at Botany Bay. I’m sure there were people back in England saying the Botany Bay landing was a hoax!

    With my limited experience in radio communications, and Russian motivation to win the space race, I’m 100% sure the landing happened many times over with each mission. I truly cant imagine the USSR sitting back accepting defeat from an enemy who fakes things to look the best.

    In my opinion, the only way for you to believe the landing was real is for you to go to the moon before anyone else, now, so you can see the bits and pieces of human engineering on the ground.

  26. chris says:

    Robert,thank-you for your comments,I really enjoyed them and have found them interesting and informative,you are a man of science and are worth listening to.Dave and Fred whenever you two leave a comment the lyrics from Brad Paisley’s “So much cooler online” come to mind,”I get home from work and my mom fixes me a snack,then I head down to my basement bedroom and fire up the Mac!”You guys are so much cooler online!lol!

  27. Robert Brand says:

    Like I said, if you want the truth get behind or flight to the moon and a visit to one of the old sites of Apollo. Oddly enough if the Apollo sites are fake, NASA is not placing restrictions on visiting any of them. That speaks volumes to me. If they were fake and the truth would be out there in a year or so, you would think that they would be worried. They are not and they are offering assistance in visiting the sites. The welcome mat is at the doorway. It does not seem that they have anything to hide. Given the pictures from many nations’ lunar orbiting spacecraft of the old sites, it is hardly likely that they are fake. NASA continues to insist that the sites are real and I guess that my group or others will be the “auditors”. One would think that if NASA was about to own up to a fraud for a lie from the 60s-70s that they would not be presenting growing evidence and compounding an old lie with new lies. As for the technology of the day, it was rough and the fact that Apollo 13 blew up on the way to the moon and the Apollo 1 crew died a nasty death in a fire on the pad is proof of the shortcuts made in getting them there. There are a couple of reasons that we have not gone back. The first is the nearly 5% of the tax dollar needed to fund this over 10 tears for the US and crew safety. It would not be allowed to risk life like this again.

    Many of the Apollo era astronauts are my personal friends and every flight was a high risk. They thought only half of them would return.They did better despite a lightning strike taking out the power on one launch (14 I think) and pure luck that someone knew an obscure switch in the command module that would reset the command module instruments. The lightning strike was unplanned and visible to those on the ground. It would have been impossible to fake the cockpit drama if they had not been on top of that rocket.

    Here is the CBS report at the time:

    Here is a re-enactment to make it clear (documentary):

    It could not have been forecast or scripted. They were on the craft. The lightning traveled down the hot exhaust gases and hit twice. They were lucky that the guidance systems were in each stage and not the command module. This was because different companies built each stage and each was autonomous on the first two stages. None the less these guys were aboard, 100%. The only question remains, did they land? Not whether they went to the moon. We know the craft went there and live broadcasts of the guys came from the capsule – the TV stuff was my domain.

    The technology worked – just. If more had died, we may have been more willing to accept the deal. As no one died on the actual flights, then we find it hard to accept that it all worked – at least enough to not kill anyone in flight. Pure luck!

    I guess I must ask the question, does anyone here believe that we did not at least go around the moon? That technology would be easier for most to accept. Rockets and fuel would be the only extra stuff needed on the whole. No big deal on the technology. That was what the service module was – a big rocket and fuel tank. On later flights they added a special science experiment that required the astronauts to do a spacewalk to retrieve the film. More difficult stuff to add to the mission faking! In general I can’t see them wanting to make faking the mission more difficult by a huge factor by doing this!

    The Lunar module is surely the only real thing in question here. It went to the moon. That is obvious from the Apollo 12 movies broadcast live from space and tracked by the Russians and many other countries and amateur radio operators including Australia. They showed the interior during the broadcast during the flight to the moon and in full weightlessness.

    I guess that there is zero way of proving this stuff to you, but I hope that if you have a large number of readers, they may read what I am writing and consider the facts and decide that it was hard, but did happen. Support for those about to send private rockets should be a given by those that want to see the US embarrassed, but they should be prepared to find that they may need to do an about turn.

    Just because governments may hide the truth or even lie on some matters, does not mean they do it on everything.

    I leave you with one small thought. If NASA and the Russians had not done the things that they say they did, would my group and some others be building a mission to go to the moon for between $20M and $30M. Technology grows on earlier discoveries and without real knowledge of the lunar surface, we could not create this mission or even plan it. Team Stellar is the group.
    http://teamstellar.org

    I am Australian, not a US citizen and most of the other team Stellar people are from Eastern Europe. I have no allegiance to the US or NASA. I love space and have worked on tracking Voyager 1 (Uranus and Neptune encounters) and ESA’s Giotto probe as it passed into the coma of Halleys comet. I was stationed at the Parkes Radio Telescope that tracked very precisely the Apollo missions including Apollo 11. I know where the dish was pointing to collect the radio signals and they could not have been a spacecraft in earth orbit. We could even see the doppler shift (look it up) due to the craft accelerating through the solar system. They were real, they still are. Parkes regularly tracks the Voyager spacecraft. they are so far away that the data link has slowed to 1.2kb per second. That happens with distance. They are out there.

    If the US was fooling us I will bring it to the world stage. I hate lies and more than anything I would hate being fooled. I took down a fraudulent person a few years ago that lied about doing a space TV show. I do not flinch even when the threat of legal action looms high. I have a track record of finding the truth even at personal cost. Keep watching. if you are interested in space stuff and what I am doing:

    http://wotzup.com

    cheers all.

  28. Robert Brand says:

    If you live in Australia or want to listen, I will be on radio on Wednesday night 7PM Sydney / Melbourne time. We will be discussing the apathy of the general public on space matters and how it effects perception of capability. You can listen on the Internet or download the podcast later. I don’t blame people for thinking it did not happen, I blame the governments for allowing a poor perception of space and capability. The shuttle did not appear – it was built on Apollo technology and the X15 launched and other programs. Even the Australian government is about to release a space policy paper and instead of calling it “Space” whatever, it is being called “satellite” whatever. We are embarrassed about our capability even though Australia cobbled together a rocket from spare parts and launched a satellite back in 1967 – one of the first countries!

    http://www.facebook.com/events/254820304651856/?ref=3

  29. Robert Brand says:

    I won’t try and convince you further. We are close, but I you know that once a person takes a position it is a hard ask to cross that last bridge to change an opinion. It is whether the Lunar Module was capable that seems to be the sticking point. It basically had the same guidance system as the command module and that saved their lives on Apollo 13.and it was just a basic rocket or two. It was in fact the simplest of the vehicles. Let me say it would be simpler to land a couple of guy on the moon than to land a massive video relay station on the moon and synchronize it with the whole show – dishes and all with the world watching. Hard to try and fake the whole thing and get it right without looking like a bunch of liars. The British had a great comedy sketch that I will leave you with…

    Of course it does not pay to fake stuff:
    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2013/02/iran-new-stealth-fighter-jet-fake/61781/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s