Did we land on the Moon?  

289 members have voted

  1. 1. Did we land on the Moon?

    • No Way, and we aint gonna!
      71
    • You Bet! We did for sure...
      173
    • The Chinese will be first on the Moon
      45


Recommended Posts

it happened b/c it's a hoax too... it brings a sense of unity to the country when everyone is worried about them... and it makes us look like we kiss ass b/c fixed the impossible. ego boost. cold war influence.

and you believe what the govt tells us... no actual proof. the govt also denies the existence of Area 51.. but it's there...

First, you have to pull some proof out of your a** to prove its a hoax

i get so tired of all this runny puppy poo about the moon landing being a fake! :angry:

yeah, but have you ever actually researched anything about it? or the motives behind it? the history etc? IF we did go, then can we at least agree that the videos and pictures are fake? cause they just dont make sense at all.

also, notice that every picture is nearly professional looking. the fact is... they had a camera attached to the middle of their chest w/ no view finder.. how in the world did they get those perfect looking shots all the time if all you can do is *guess* and shoot.

why anounce anything, we went

several times. Russia sent a probe at the same time as apollo 11 and several after, but never men, we had been first they saw no point.

what makes it so hard to believe? Thats what i want to know.

whys it so hard to believe that theres a possibility that it's all a lie? the evidence sure is piling up.

if you think of the live footage when we landed... who can prove that it's real? the govt and nasa are telling us that it's live.. is anyone watching it live? it's not like the today show or something... easily could have been faked and aired "live" all over the world.

if you think of the live footage when we landed... who can prove that it's real?  the govt and nasa are telling us that it's live.. is anyone watching it live?  it's not like the today show or something... easily could have been faked and aired "live" all over the world.

Thats nothing but speculation. You actually have to prove it fake, not the other way around !!!!

You have to dig a little deeper

YOU ARE MORON. we have been to the moon, they invented this thing called a "telescope" and you use it look at that is far away, such as THE MOON! You can see where we landed on the moon with a telescope. And the best part, you can get telescopes everywhere. They are cheap. You can even get telescopes that can be guided with a computer to find objects in the sky such as THE MOON, and where AMERICA has landed on it.

why are the pictures so perfect? they took a lot of them and only kept the good ones? what what what? no wonder we are the ONLY country to put a man on a moon.

YOU ARE MORON. we have been to the moon, they invented this thing called a "telescope" and you use it look at that is far away, such as THE MOON! You can see where we landed on the moon with a telescope. And the best part, you can get telescopes everywhere. They are cheap. You can even get telescopes that can be guided with a computer to find objects in the sky such as THE MOON, and where AMERICA has landed on it.

why are the pictures so perfect? they took a lot of them and only kept the good ones? what what what? no wonder we are the ONLY country to put a man on a moon.

It was on some video that we do not have telescopes powerful enough to see that much detail, but rather when a future satellite passes around the moon and takes pictures of the supposed landing site will we truly know.

Suppose the rover sitting on Mars taking highly detailed photos right now is a hoax, too, as are all those fancy satellites that handle global TV, weather, security/spy-related things, and so on.

If anything, there's a bigger "conspiracy" regarding why the U.S. looks to be possibly pursuing new manned missions to the moon and Mars despite questionable scientific rationale to do so.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/01/09/b...pace/index.html

It was on some video that we do not have telescopes powerful enough to see that much detail, but rather when a future satellite passes around the moon and takes pictures of the supposed landing site will we truly know.

Im pretty sure they already have satelites orbitting the moon, but maybe they are not photo capable

What the f-k is this sh-t?! Some retards who wouldn't believe they have peed their pants although it's feels all wet, warm and fuzzy and has that smell all over... You don WANT to believe that what it's all about. This is not about waving evidence in your face because you wouldn't acknowledge it whatever I were to say or show you. No scientific discovery/venture in history of man has gathered as much data as the moonlanding. But sure that's probably just to make it easier to "convince" us it really happened right? I mean just saying a thing like we wouldn't surivive the van allen belts trying to sound like some know it all... And because of that thought inside your head you're a firm non-believer when you could have looked up the answer in a minute over the internet (yes the thing you're "using" when posting here!)?! Get a grip for f-ks sake. Like someone said you're going through them *fast* and radiation is all about concentration (over time). I won't try to give more evidence or convince anyone since some people just don't want to believe anything whatever you try to do - were I to show you your dirty diaper you'd probably tell me "the government took a crap in it not me"...

I guess this issue will surface and rear its ugly head with every new generation born, just because they weren't *there* themselves...

You non-believers should see a program that aired here in Sweden (where I live). It was about the world championships in soccer that (very much) took place in Sweden 1958 and that it all was a hoax. Some guys tried in this "documentary" to show and convince us that the championship never happened. All very authentic with swedish sport celebrities appearing and all. You know what? Some people actually started questioning the *fact* (I don't know how many thousand people watched it *live*) that it ever happened! What they didn't think of was that the program was a hoax in it self which was produced and aired just to show that all is not what it looks like (yeah, I know it goes both ways regarding this issue - conspiracy-/anti-conspiracy wise). But if people are *that* easliy manipulated you really begin to wonder...

You know what? If the us government will say in 50 years that "it was all a hoax" i'd have a problem buying *that* but sure in the end i'd have to eat my words. Like someone said the russians would be all over any evidence that would point in the direction of a "moonhoax". Makes me remember a pre-show of Ali G that'll air soon here when he's asking, is it, Buzz Aldrin what he thinks of those people who believe that the moon isn't there (at all and yeah that's meant to be a joke).

Get some sleep or please try to at least be little less biased when looking for "facts" next time. There's a very large forest in front of you, only I suspect you don't see any trees in there...

Edited by bluemusic
i think it was cinematic and that the US did not land on the moon for obviouse reasons mentioned in the first post. there are many evidence about the flags shadow and other things.

http://users.commkey.net/Braeunig/space/hoax.htm

will explain scientifically why all those claims are false, read it, and dont comment until you have read it.

Those who are in disbelief are very ignorant, if you learn anything in school reading the stuff on the above link will prove that we did land, and if you dont understand why this guy knows what he is talking about, you really shouldn't be debating this issue.

... and to the guy who posted before me, if you are going to start off a 3 paragraph post with a sentence of cursing and bad grammer dont expect anyone who you are trying to get a point across to to read past that first sentence...

Chadwick08:

Yes, you're totally correct about that although I'm guessing that if I'd check my grammar a hundred times over there'd still be mistakes in there - it could also be that I'm not that good at english (doesn't explain the cursing though I guess but I am *fed up* with this issue to say the least...). I just feel that both sides (those who know/believe and those who think otherwise) have been beating dead horses for an awful long time now... The saddest thing is though, besides rash guys like myself (...), that some are *still* questioning that a moon landing ever took place and that it will be questioned many times over in the future.

yes you can see where we landed on the moon....It is very possible, BECAUSE I HAVE DONE IT!.....bluemusic is right, you people are just ignorant. I bet in a few month you be spouting off at the mouth with something about Canada not really existing, or something equally as ignorant. By the way Canada does exist and I recognize it as a country. I've been there, lovely country....

Well most Americans believe any **** that they're told, personally I don't think man has been to the Moon and this is just another way of showing how the US is all powerful, and they?re scared the Chinese are going take over their super power status (Russian Space Race all over again).

yes you can see where we landed on the moon....It is very possible, BECAUSE I HAVE DONE IT!.....bluemusic is right, you people are just ignorant. I bet in a few month you be spouting off at the mouth with something about Canada not really existing, or something equally as ignorant. By the way Canada does exist and I recognize it as a country. I've been there, lovely country....

I didn't think keeping an open mind was being ignorant, oh that?s right, if we don?t think like an American then we're all against you and want to blow you up (resistance is futile).

I heard that the americans did not land on the moon in 1969, and that it was all a hoax, they just took pictures and made it seem like they landed on the moon. They had a special on tv about it, showing the pictures and how you can see people being super imposed(adam sandler goat voice:"whats super imposed"), you can see crossharis under people but on top of other things. also how the flags shadows was way off from where it should have been at that time. I actually beleive we didnt land on the moon. To my knowledge we havent even sent ne one back since then. ohh well i guess i might be easily influenced, but i dont think that we landed on the moon. :whistle:

I got your back buddy. ;) Don't let anyone tell you not to think for yourself. It's a gut thing.

Piccolo was my personal favorite, though.

post-92-1074125081.jpg

It's an interesting thing, considering the moon missions like this.

In the 60's and 70's there was a great deal of interest in beating the Russians to the moon; after-all, the Americans were lagging quite badly in the space race... the Russians had the first satellite, the first dog in space, the first man in space, the first probes on the moon, the first woman in space, etc. I would not put it outside the realms of possibility that the moon landings were faked solely for the purposes of beating the Russians.

There's a lot that lends credence to the possibility of a hoax:

- Anomalous pictures... and there are A LOT... Many pictures clearly have been touched up or perhaps even completely faked (likely for publicity shots; NASA has already admitted that there were a lot of collages for dramatic effect).

- The level of technology involved; a modern Gameboy has more computational power than was in use on the ground and in the spacecraft. Granted, the system was a custom job that was task-specific but it was so very simple.

- I think the best evidence the US did not go to the moon is that the Russians never did it. Russia has always been much better in space than the US that I find it hard to believe they would just give up. They would have tried a one-upmanship in the true spirit of the Cold War.

That being said, there's an awful lot of evidence to suggest that the US DID go to the moon, probably the best evidence being that literally THOUSANDS of people were involved in the space programme, many of them civilians. For so many people to have never revealed such a grand hoax in all this time would be nearly impossible.

Personally, I'm not absolutely convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the US did go to the moon; I wouldn't be in the least surprised if it came out that there had been a hoax. Nor would I be surprised if there was incontrovertible evidence that they DID go to the moon. Basically, I'm in the camp that believes they probably did go but with embers of doubt that have occasionally been fanned.

Edited by Kestrel
more than half the guys here who think the americans didnt land on the moon arent even american at all

lol so true! the control room staff etc and other employee's, there are hundreds of people, but since my uncle was actually in the control room when it landed..its kind of hard to not believe him, and the photo's he took with friends there...some people still believed the world was flat for hundreds of years and "most" of us know its not, oh well :(

lol so true! the control room staff etc and other employee's, there are hundreds of people, but since my uncle was actually in the control room when it landed..its kind of hard to not believe him, and the photo's he took with friends there...some people still believed the world was flat for hundreds of years and "most" of us know its not, oh well :(

How do we know your telling the truth :p

Kestrel:

Pictures being touched up for publicity stunts isn't exactly evidence against a moon landing. That has been done since who knows when... You think that blonde girl you're watching photos of over the internet *really* has such a perfect body? Still, you believe in her existence? (In fact most pictures taken of stellar objects have faked colors. For example a picture taken of say a "colorful" nebula or, especially, a planetary nebula - a very different object despite its name - *has* to be faked since the colors emmitted due to the radiation in most cases isn't possible to see with the human eye, but that's another story...) The photos which are not "faked" for publicity reasons and have been questioned have all been explained to my (very limited) knowledge...?

Saying that a modern gameboy had more computational power than the equipment used in the expedition (which is all true) and by that draw the conclusion that said expedition has a low possablilty with such "lo-tech" (I'm guessing that's what you're getting at) is not only ignorant, it's just plain stupid. Especially considering the times we're living in now with computers habitating in nearly every electronic piece of equipment there is. The almighty 486 I had as a teenager is now superceeded by most, if not all - at least the newer ones, pda's out there. You know the claim that "nobody will never ever need more than 640k of RAM" (yes, *kilobytes*)? Nowadays you can barely run the OS itself without 128 MB as a bare minimum... They got things to work back then with for some people seemingly stone age technology that was available at the time, end of discussion. But then I guess nothing worked during those "dark ages of computing" or...?

About the russians never getting there as an evidence against the whole thing... Do you even *know* what happen during the last stages of the moon race? In short; you americans (nasa and the government that is) panicked and did something about being second in place in the space/moon race. Got to be billions of essays covering the moon race out there. Try to find one and read it, you might learn something.

Do you all think your computer run on some magic power just because you don't know all the physics behind it? The one or two companies in south east asia manufacturing ram-memory for other companies probably have their magicians all over their product. There are so few companies manufacturing memory modules for the rest of the world and I sure don't have any insight in their production so it's probably some magic mumbo jumbo going on there. Or wait... You don't think so either, do you? Even though most people can't account fo the inner workings of their computer down to, say, electron level we have accepted it as fact that it does work and does it all by the laws of physics we humans know. Something that to me seems far more complicated than explaining a moon landing (even though that also, ironically, involves alot of physics...). If you are questioning because you simply don't know better, then why don't you try to educate yourself about what you don't understand (like the mentioned van Allen belts) and *then* re-evaluate your standing? Information is cheap nowadays, *if* you chose to believe it and that's really another task when browsing the internet - finding the *correct* information (well, correct to some people in-correct to others...). Evidence, evidence, evidence, schmevidence. I only know that the best evidence for alien existence is that they have *not* payed us a visit...

That being said, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I hope it stays that way, though I stand by my opinion that it's ignorant in many ways. It still seems, though, as if it's not a matter of showing evidence since you would eventually have to ask yourself if you believe what either side is showing you. It's still all boils down to if you *want* to believe it happened or not.

Btw, even the Hubble telescope needs an object of about 125 m in diameter to be able to resolve it at the distance the moon so that's a no go as far as being able to see the moon lander goes. Stellar objects are *big*. ;)

Volkswagen couldn't have put it better:

VW Ad - Pic

Edited by bluemusic
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AI is the beginning, wait until real robots replace more jobs, specifically jobs that require physical work.
    • AI is indeed eliminating jobs, and Oracle just proved it by Hamid Ganji There’s no question that AI has become the hottest trend in workplaces, and every company is trying to adopt AI-driven solutions across its operations. While some industry leaders repeatedly say AI won’t lead to massive layoffs, recent data suggest that AI is actually one of the main reasons some companies are reducing their workforce. According to Oracle’s annual regulatory filing, the company has laid off about 21,000 employees, or 13% of its workforce, amid increasing AI adoption. “The adoption and deployment of AI technologies across our operations have resulted, and may continue to result, in reductions to our workforce,” Oracle said in the filing. The software giant now has approximately 141,000 full-time employees, a notable decrease from 162,000 during the same period last year. Restructuring expenses, including severance payments, cost Oracle $1.84 billion in fiscal 2026. Additionally, around 49,000 Oracle employees were based in the U.S., while approximately 92,000 were employed internationally. Like many other companies, Oracle has fully embraced AI and concentrated much of its efforts on the technology. The company is also a key participant in the United States’ $500 billion Stargate Project, which aims to build multiple AI data centers across the country. When it comes to AI adoption and its impact on the workforce, opinions remain divided. NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang, whose company has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of the AI boom, recently said in an interview that attributing job cuts to AI is a “lazy” narrative. “The narrative that connects AI to job loss, for many of the CEOs that are doing it – it is just too lazy. AI has just arrived, how is it possible they're already losing jobs?” Huang said. However, statistics and recent reports tell a different story. According to Layoffs.fyi, 196 tech companies have laid off about 119,800 employees so far this year. Reducing staff and replacing roles with AI agents could become one of the most significant trends in the job market in the years ahead.
    • Zoom Workplace 7.1.0.41345 by Razvan Serea Zoom Workplace for Windows is a reliable video conferencing tool that makes it easy to connect and collaborate. With features like messaging, file sharing, and app integrations, it’s designed to streamline teamwork. You’ll get high-quality audio and video, strong security with end-to-end encryption, and an intuitive interface—all of which help remote teams and businesses stay productive and connected. Zoom Workplace key features: High-Definition Video & Audio: Provides clear, reliable communication for virtual meetings. End-to-End Encryption: Ensures secure communication with strong data protection. Multi-Factor Authentication: Adds an extra layer of security for user accounts. Integration with Productivity Apps: Supports seamless integration with Microsoft Office, Google Workspace, and more. File Sharing: Easily share files during meetings for efficient collaboration. Real-Time Messaging: Enables team chat for ongoing communication. Collaborative Whiteboarding: Allows teams to brainstorm and collaborate visually. Webinar Support: Host large webinars with interactive features. Administrative Controls: Manage user permissions, meeting settings, and security features. Cloud Storage: Automatically stores meetings and files in the cloud for easy access. Cross-Platform Support: Available on Windows, macOS, and mobile devices. Meeting features: Virtual Backgrounds: Customize your background for meetings to maintain privacy or enhance professionalism. Touch Up My Appearance: Automatically smoothens skin tone for a more polished video appearance. Breakout Rooms: Divide meetings into smaller sessions for group discussions or workshops. Live Transcription: Automatically generate real-time captions during meetings for accessibility. Zoom Apps: Integrate third-party applications directly into Zoom for enhanced functionality. Meeting Reactions: Participants can use emojis for quick, non-verbal feedback during meetings. Polling: Conduct live polls during meetings to gather instant feedback from participants. Attention Tracking: Monitors participant attention during meetings to ensure engagement. Closed Captioning: Enable manual or automatic captions for a more inclusive experience. Webinar Replay: Record and share webinars with analytics for audience engagement. Download: Zoom 64-bit | 145.0 MB (Free, paid upgrade available) Links: Zoom Website | Zoom ARM64 | Zoom Installers | Release Notes Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • UK funds £60M AI labs to challenge US tech dominance with open-source models by Paul Hill The UK government has awarded £60 million to Oxford University and University College London to help keep the country in the AI race by focusing on open-source, low-hardware alternatives. This is in stark contrast to the expensive, closed-source, and high-hardware-requirement models being created in the United States and elsewhere. The money will be shared among two new academic research labs over six years to help them redesign the fundamental mathematics and architectures of AI to help the UK reduce its reliance on a handful of US tech firms. Commenting on the development, AI Minister Kanishka Narayan said: Initially, the government planned to fund just one lab with a £40 million investment, but with this update, two labs will now get access to a larger pool of funds. The labs are expected to invest in the top AI researchers at every career stage, with £2 million per lab being set aside for hiring at least ten doctoral students. The government hopes that this will grow the UK’s talent in the field of AI. The labs are also expected to work closely with the leaders in British AI research, such as the Alan Turing Institute and UKRI’s AI research hubs. This will allow the various teams to collaborate and create new solutions faster than they could alone. This development is pretty interesting for a number of reasons, chiefly that it could create a long-term challenge for US tech firms if these labs successfully scale these open-source architectures that bypass the proprietary ecosystems. It could also give British businesses and public sector organizations access to AI features without paying high licensing fees to foreign providers or needing to invest in specialized server infrastructure.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
    • First Post
      mike_rumble earned a badge
      First Post
    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      464
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      97
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      89
    5. 5
      neufuse
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!