|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:17 pm
Yes ONly questioning the first apollo landing in the 60's.
Although I have seen some video's stating we've never been to the moon.
I can ask what the guy in the second video asks..
"Where's the proof?" and I agree, that being the first to land on the moon, should be something we are proud of and I can see where he's comming from when he asks, "where are all the photo's" "where are all the Journals, archieves..." and such.
They should be made public and something everyone can have access to - like in a museum...
but there are none.
a video footage is just that, a video..and really you can't be 100% sure that what you see is real. Heck you can't be 100% sure of anything these days.
Did you see the "documentary" that I posted?
What do you think about that?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:23 pm
Have you ever seen the movie,
2001: A Space Oddessy?
That movie was directed by: Stanley Kubrick's the same guy who they claim created the "moonlanding" in the 60's.
xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:32 pm
I did watch the video. It was certainly enough to make me question things (I can easily see our country getting some footage ready for PR in case things didn't pan out).
So the situation then becomes some people's word against some other peoples word.
And then you have some peoples interpretation of evidence vs. some other peoples interpretation of it.
It is pretty much impossible to every be 100% sure about anything especially in science and philosophy (see the movie the Matrix for more about how you can't really KNOW anything 100%)
So about the best you can do is look at the evidence we do have and make the best interpretation you can yourself, or decide who you trust the most and make a decision based on faith.
If you read my post about the the dust it was an attempt to take a look at some evidence that both sides agree upon but interpret differently. I have a degree in physics so it is something I feel pretty comforable making judgments on. (not asking you to take my word for it hence the links even the guy who is trying to say the moon landing was a hoax agrees on what physics says dust particles should do, even if he got whose theory it was that describes that motion wrong). I took out a stopwatch and timed how long the the dust kicked up the rover appeared to take to reach the apex of the parabolic arc and then how long it took to get down (here is the best point for contention since it hard to make out with the film quality), and it appears to be behaving exactly as you would expect in an airless enviroment, which even today would be almost impossible to set up on a set (you would need CG). This is enough to convince me that at least that footage is genuine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:46 pm
Jad-Hoven I did watch the video. It was certainly enough to make me question things (I can easily see our country getting some footage ready for PR in case things didn't pan out). So the situation then becomes some people's word against some other peoples word. And then you have some peoples interpretation of evidence vs. some other peoples interpretation of it. It is pretty much impossible to every be 100% sure about anything especially in science and philosophy (see the movie the Matrix for more about how you can't really KNOW anything 100%) So about the best you can do is look at the evidence we do have and make the best interpretation you can yourself, or decide who you trust the most and make a decision based on faith. Quote: If you read my post about the the dust it was an attempt to take a look at some evidence that both sides agree upon but interpret differently. I have a degree in physics so it is something I feel pretty comforable making judgments on. (not asking you to take my word for it hence the links even the guy who is trying to say the moon landing was a hoax agrees on what physics says dust particles should do, even if he got whose theory it was that describes that motion wrong). I took out a stopwatch and timed how long the the dust kicked up the rover appeared to take to reach the apex of the parabolic arc and then how long it took to get down (here is the best point for contention since it hard to make out with the film quality), and it appears to be behaving exactly as you would expect in an airless enviroment, which even today would be almost impossible to set up on a set (you would need CG). This is enough to convince me that at least that footage is genuine.
I'm not good at physics.
sweatdrop
The one guy in the second video claims the arc wasn't made, that the dust hit the air and stoped...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:04 pm
If I had to think that the moon landing didn't happen I would have to reorganize my whole belief structure...and I am just not up for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:08 pm
kitten22481 If I had to think that the moon landing didn't happen I would have to reorganize my whole belief structure...and I am just not up for that.
I know isn't it just a crazy possibility though.
XP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:11 pm
Emily`s_Gone_Mad kitten22481 If I had to think that the moon landing didn't happen I would have to reorganize my whole belief structure...and I am just not up for that.
I know isn't it just a crazy possibility though.
XPI have 2 kids to deal with and the possibility of this just hurts my brain lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:08 pm
I also Have a good point, If it was fake, wouldn't NASA Be smart enough to make sure there wasn't wind in the scene? confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:49 pm
sun_charm I also Have a good point, If it was fake, wouldn't NASA Be smart enough to make sure there wasn't wind in the scene? confused if thats the case, wouldnt nasa be smart enough to hire people using a better pshyc test? that way we wouldnt have shootings at nasa? i swear, i have had part time jobs with stricter polices on getting hired than nasa has. one time i had to talk to a consouler and take 2 test each 100 question long about my personality. so that my friend is not a good statement.can shadows be projected in space? i never understood the shadow thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:37 pm
I'm not sure I follow here.
I'm not good at physics.
sweatdrop
The one guy in the second video claims the arc wasn't made, that the dust hit the air and stoped...?
Yes but the key is to look at the tape rather than listen to what people have to say. My argument was basically that what the guy says happens (the arc wasn't made) does in fact happen if you look closly at the video, and don't let the optical illusion formed when the dust disperses distract you.
The basic idea (agreed on by skeptics and believers) is that then an object goes up gravity will slowly slow and then accelerate it at the same pace as it falls (so something will be moving as quickly when it hits the ground as when it first takes off of it).
This may sound complicated if you don't have a technical background, but all it really means is that stuff moves like a baseball (so find a baseball experiment around, through it straight up, then at a few other angles and you have the basics of it.) The harder you through a baseball the faster it is moving when you let go, the higher it goes, and the faster it is moving when it comes back down (accelerated back up to the speed you threw it at). Because of the size and density of a baseball air resistance doesn't do very much to effect its path, but with dust air will slow it down, (get some dust or very loose dirt and throw it in the air it will come down slowing than a rock and won't follow the same path). Air has a big influence on how dust falls, play around with some and you get a pretty good idea how. Now hit mute and watch the video of the lunar rover kicking up dust (very fine by the looks of it) and watch how it moves. If it moves like a dust billowing in the wind then the skeptics have pretty good evidence, if it moves like a baseball major points for it being legitimate (virtually impossible to fake with existing technology). The limiting factors are the quality of the tape, and the fact that the dust disperses (goes in all different direction making it harder to track a given particle). This way you can look at the video and decide for yourself rather than relying on someone elses interpretation of things.
I believe that by applying logic move forward reach a consensus. The problem of course is that like everyone else I have a lot of deeply held preconcieved notions, and that can always color observation. So look at the tape, how does it look like the dust particles are moving to you. The way you are used to seeing dust move, or more like a baseball (albiet a much slower one do to the decreased gravity).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 7:25 am
Well I did look at the video...but I didn't really notice the dust arching.
I saw it rise and fall...rather quickly.
And I don't have a technical background so it is a bit difficult to follow...
I droped my phyiscs class last semester.
sweatdrop stressed
I'll check it out again..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:05 am
Anyone saying we never landed on the moon needs to be banned from this guild.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:19 am
Of course we landed on the moon. mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:39 am
VoijaRisa Anyone saying we never landed on the moon needs to be banned from this guild.
I don't think anyone has said we NEVER landed on the moon....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:14 pm
Emily`s_Gone_Mad lol
I don't think anyone has said we NEVER landed on the moon.... Did I read the poll wrong then? Because it looked to me like 5 people did! whee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
