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

    • Microsoft releases PowerToys v0.100.1, fixes a bug that made remapped keys misbehave by Ivan Jenic Microsoft just released PowerToys v0.100.1, a patch update that addresses several stability and behavior issues found in v0.100.0. The v0.100.0 patch was a significant update for PowerToys, as it introduced all sorts of new features and additions, such as a rebuilt Shortcut Guide, a Command Palette Extension Gallery, webcam overlay support in ZoomIt, and more. However, the v0.100.0 version also introduced some bugs and stability issues. And now, Microsoft is addressing these issues in the new patch. The most impactful fix in this release perhaps is in Keyboard Manager, where remapped modifier keys were being delivered as system-key events, causing unexpected behavior in apps. The clearest example of this was Alt-to-Backspace remaps, deleting whole words instead of a single character. So, if you thought there was an issue with your keyboard, Microsoft just confirmed that it was PowerToys. Beyond the Keyboard Manager fix, v0.100.1 also addresses several other issues. It fixes a bug with Power Display that was preventing monitors from waking from standby correctly. Additionally, the new update patches Quick Access crashes on launch, and resolves a Shortcut Guide crash that occurred when switching between sidebar sections. Here’s the full changelog: Color Picker Fixed a bug where the main Color Picker window could appear inside the zoomed-in picker view Command Palette Fixed Run history initialization in AOT builds Fixed a bug where the Performance Monitor dock item could show ??? after restart Fixed the Hibernate command using the Sleep icon Limited the "pin to dock" dialog to displays where the dock is enabled Keyboard Manager Fixed modifier keys remapped to non-modifier keys being delivered as system-key events, which caused unexpected behavior in apps such as Alt-to-Backspace deleting whole words Power Display Fixed a bug where selecting On in the monitor power-state control did not wake a monitor from standby Fixed built-in display detection and brightness control on dual-GPU laptops where the internal panel is driven by the discrete GPU PowerToys Run Fixed VS Code Workspaces discovery after VS Code moved recently opened workspace data to shared storage Quick Access Fixed Quick Access flyout crashes caused by unhandled XAML exceptions during launch or page navigation Shortcut Guide Fixed a crash when navigating between Shortcut Guide sidebar sections Fixed number-key rendering in shortcut manifests and added a Postman shortcut manifest Updated bundled shortcut manifests to use the literal number-key token so number keys render correctly across apps ZoomIt Fixed a race condition in audio initialization for ZoomIt video recording You can download PowerToys v0.100.1 from the official GitHub releases page.
    • OBS Studio 32.2.0 Beta 2 by Razvan Serea OBS Studio is software designed for capturing, compositing, encoding, recording, and streaming video content, efficiently. It is the re-write of the widely used Open Broadcaster Software, to allow even more features and multi-platform support. OBS Studio supports multiple sources, including media files, games, web pages, application windows, webcams, your desktop, microphone and more. OBS Studio Features: High performance real time video/audio capturing and mixing, with unlimited scenes you can switch between seamlessly via custom transitions. Live streaming to Twitch, YouTube, Periscope, Mixer, GoodGame, DailyMotion, Hitbox, VK and any other RTMP server Filters for video sources such as image masking, color correction, chroma/color keying, and more. x264, H.264 and AAC for your live streams and video recordings Intel Quick Sync Video (QSV) and NVIDIA NVENC support Intuitive audio mixer with per-source filters such as noise gate, noise suppression, and gain. Take full control with VST plugin support. GPU-based game capture for high performance game streaming Unlimited number of scenes and sources Number of different and customizable transitions for when you switch between scenes Hotkeys for almost any action such as start or stop your stream or recording, push-to-talk, fast mute of any audio source, show or hide any video source, switch between scenes,and much more Live preview of any changes on your scenes and sources using Studio Mode before pushing them to your stream where your viewers will see those changes DirectShow capture device support (webcams, capture cards, etc) Powerful and easy to use configuration options. Add new Sources, duplicate existing ones, and adjust their properties effortlessly. Streamlined Settings panel for quickly configuring your broadcasts and recordings. Switch between different profiles with ease. Light and dark themes available to fit your environment. …and many other features. For free. At all. OBS Studio 32.2.0 Beta 2 changelog: Beta 2 Changes Fixed a CI deployment issue. There are no application changes since Beta 1. 32.2 New Features Replaced add source dropdown with new dialog [Warchamp7] Improved FPS selector UX [jcm93] Added missing file support for filters [exeldro] Added ability for plugins to set custom icons for new source types [cg2121] Included .webp files when adding a directory to Image Slide Show source [TarunCore] Added copy paste functions to frontend API [exeldro] Added filter to compose SDR into HDR [jpark37] Added delete as a hotkey to delete sources on macOS [PatTheMav] Added dynamic bitrate support to multitrack video [lexano-ivs] 32.2 Changes Forced Intel-based installations to update to Apple Silicon version on macOS [PatTheMav] This change means that OBS Studio versions built for Intel-based Macs but running on Apple Silicon Macs will automatically update to OBS Studio built for Apple Silicon Macs. If an installation was using third-party plugins, those plugins will no longer load until replaced with Apple Silicon versions. Fixed audio mixer state getting out of sync when changing settings via websockets or plugins [Warchamp7] Added theming for checked QToolButtons [glikely] Improved OpenGL performance slightly on low-end machines [kkartaltepe] Set minimum size for color source to 1 pixel [exeldro] Added minimum width to spinboxes [Warchamp7] Disallowed overwriting the crash handler [sebastian-s-beckmann] Applied process mitigation policies for Windows [notr1ch] Adjusted description of multitrack video [jhnbwrs] Changed new capture devices to use fallback frame rate by default [PatTheMav] Improved DLL loading behavior on Windows [notr1ch] Limited multitrack video config to Custom service [PatTheMav] 32.2 Bug Fixes Fixed OAuth and dock state save corruption [PatTheMav] Fixed group bounds not resizing when removing items [howellrl] Fixed canvas mixes not being restored after video reset [dsaedtler] Fixed some erroneous crashes during shutdown [Warchamp7] Fixed display capture sometimes capturing black after a duplicator failure [ThrowTop] Fixed color of controls dock output buttons in System theme [shiina424] Fixed virtual camera reset failures [stephematician] Fixed potential crash when user discards changes in the settings window [suogesi] Fixed incorrect return value in virtualcam filter [xtfo] Fixed source toolbar buttons not working after dragging a source into a group [Warchamp7] Fixed properties hint icon spacing [Warchamp7] Fixed potential crash when a video device reconnects on macOS [jcm93] Fixed an issue where PipeWire could fail on NVIDIA GPUs [hoshinolina] Fixed obs_canvas_get_video_info returning incorrect framerate [dsaedtler] 32.2 Deprecations Deprecated obs_properties_add_button [sebastian-s-beckmann] Download: OBS Studio 32.2.0 Beta 2 | Portable | ARM64 | ~200.0 MB (Open Source) View: OBS Studio Homepage | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Is a fast food restaurant a good metric to compare against?
    • Grand Theft Auto VI pricing revealed alongside Ultimate Edition and pre-loading details by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Last week, Rockstar revealed Grand Theft Auto VI pre-orders will be starting soon, and just a day ahead of that, now the studio has announced the official pricing for the highly anticipated game. This has been a hotly debated topic among fans and industry veterans for a long time, considering the game is expected to be the biggest entertainment product launch ever. The confirmed pricing for the Grand Theft Auto VI standard edition is $79.99, which Rockstar says gives access to the "single-player experience set in the biggest, most immersive evolution of the series yet." This follows what most of our readers thought would happen with the pricing too. At the same time, a $99.99 Grand Theft Auto VI: Ultimate Edition has been confirmed as well, which lands with "an exclusive collection of premium vehicles, weapons, apparel, and action threaded across all aspects of Jason and Lucia’s story." Pre-ordering will also give fans extra bonuses, including a Vintage Vice City Pack of cosmetic items as well as a free month of GTA+. Head to the official website of the game here to check out all the cosmetic rewards the Ultimate Edition and pre-orders bring. Interestingly, the studio does not mention Grand Theft Auto VI multiplayer at all in today's announcement. Perhaps this will arrive later, following the campaign launch, or the studio is keeping that reveal for a later date. Digital pre-orders for Grand Theft Auto VI will begin on June 25, 2026, at midnight local time across regions for Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5. The title is slated to launch on November 19 on those same platforms. Pre-loading for Grand Theft Auto VI will kick off on November 12, giving players a week to get the game ready on their consoles. As for the physical edition, Take-Two has confirmed that this will be available without a disc, with the box only containing a download code inside. This will be purchasable starting November 12, giving players who take this route time to pre-load the title as well.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      OHI Accounting earned a badge
      One Year In
    • First Post
      Almohandis earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      DaviKar went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      472
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      121
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Xenon
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!