|
|
Post by xinacrisp on Jan 25, 2010 18:44:28 GMT -4
ok this is my first post in this forum so here's a little introduction, im 22 years old and i am from Portugal, i know very little about physics, radiation and so on. This subject just became an interest to me like 3 or 4 days ago when i was seeing some YT videos that claimed a hoax, so i searched about it and did some reading about it on sites made by HB's, i consider myself an open minded person so i eventually came across this forum and after some reading i now find myself in the same place i started at has an AB, the only HB theory that i still have doubts is the Van Allen belt one. I dont think AB's are more enlightnend than HB's and vice versa, i don't want to start a war thread between AB's and HB's cause in my opinian its just pointless cause one side says imagery from NASA are doubtful and photoshopped and the other side says its the HB's imagery that has been tweaked. My idea uppon starting this thread is a completly different one, most of you will call me crasy or insane or whatever, but im not claiming anything and ask all of you to keep discussion at a polite level, i just want your simple and humble opinion on this matter, so on to the subject. I believe that man did land on the moon on that day, but this question is still on my mind, why did man never return to the moon since the apollo missions, the theory that there are or were alliens on the moon is a possibility for me (this is where i think some will say im crazy) and could be the reason for both american apollo and russian luna missions to end, well have that said lets start a healthy discussion and once again i say IM NOT CLAIMING ANITHYNG.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 25, 2010 18:55:29 GMT -4
Welcome to the board xinacrisp.
The Apollo program ended because no one wanted to pay for them anymore, the public weren't interested any more, and at the time there didn't seem to be any reason to go again. After all, the U.S. did land on the moon six times. What would the motivation be to keep sending missions there? They are very expensive so you need a lot of incentive to keep going year after year.
BTW they didn't have anything like photoshop in the early seventies!
I think the first thing I would suggest is that you spend an hour or so perusing past threads. Most of your concerns have been addressed many times here.
|
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jan 25, 2010 19:02:49 GMT -4
ok this is my first post in this forum Welcome. We've had quite a few discussions here about the Van Allen Belt. What doubts or questions do you have about it? I would say that the ABs have far more knowledgeable people on our side, but there are no doubt people on both sides that don't know enough about Apollo to make good arguments. Mostly because it's really expensive and there isn't enough political support. Sure, anything is possible I guess, but it's really far-fetched. |
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 25, 2010 19:06:28 GMT -4
There is a difference - knowledge and truth IS enlightening...
If you believe that man did land on the moon, how can you have doubts about the hazards of the Van Allan belts?
|
|
|
|
Post by xinacrisp on Jan 25, 2010 19:38:52 GMT -4
If you believe that man did land on the moon, how can you have doubts about the hazards of the Van Allan belts?
Well i know the radiation (and we all know that radiation is a dangerous thing) but is it really harmfull like some HB's claim it to be??
also i know that it isnt equally distributed around the earth so the exit and entry points are crucial to the succes of the missions, so let me rephrase what i said to "the Van Allen belt is the only claim that the HB's have that could be plausible" now that sounds better ^^
but there are no doubt people on both sides that don't know enough about Apollo to make good arguments
i consider my self to be one of those people and that is the main reason why i joined the forum
Sure, anything is possible I guess, but it's really far-fetched
i have to agree on that mostly cause the videos i saw are not very conclusive
knowledge and truth IS enlightening...
Nothing to add on that one, nice point
i know i could just search the web for answers but it is just more funnier to discuss this with other people and share opinions as long as it is done in a healthy way
ill do some search on the alliens thing and will update if i find anything worth mension
|
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jan 25, 2010 19:49:12 GMT -4
I believe that man did land on the moon on that day, but this question is still on my mind, why did man never return to the moon since the apollo missions, the theory that there are or were alliens on the moon is a possibility for me (this is where i think some will say im crazy) and could be the reason for both american apollo and russian luna missions to end, well have that said lets start a healthy discussion and once again i say IM NOT CLAIMING ANITHYNG. Welcome, Xinacrisp.  It sounds like you're suggesting that these aliens would be a reason for stopping manned (Apollo) and unmanned (Luna) missions to the Moon. The problem with that theory is that unmanned missions haven't stopped. Several unmanned spacecraft from different countries have orbited or landed on the Moon in recent years, such as Clementine, SMART 1, Change'1, SELENE, Chandrayaan 1, and the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/clementine.htmlwww.esa.int/esaMI/SMART-1/index.htmlwww.universetoday.com/2009/03/01/change-1-bites-the-moon-dust/www.jaxa.jp/projects/sat/selene/index_e.htmlwww.isro.org/satellites/chandrayaan-1.aspxwww.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/main/index.htmlNone of these missions has found any signs of aliens on the Moon. I guess someone could argue that all these different space agencies are covering up the discovery of aliens, but that's very unlikely in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Jan 25, 2010 19:55:04 GMT -4
It's the Van Allen belt. |
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 25, 2010 20:02:01 GMT -4
It's the Van Allen belt. (hides his head in shame...)  EDIT: should I do some kind of penance or somethin' ? |
|
|
|
Post by seemoe on Jan 25, 2010 21:36:12 GMT -4
one mission to the moon today would cost over 40 billion dorra. NASA's budget is about 17 billion/year
|
|
|
|
Post by chew on Jan 26, 2010 0:19:57 GMT -4
It's the Van Allen belt. (hides his head in shame...) EDIT: should I do some kind of penance or somethin' ? Sing "Everybody wants some" 5 times. |
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Jan 26, 2010 3:21:14 GMT -4
ok this is my first post in this forum so here's a little introduction, im 22 years old and i am from Portugal... Welcome xinacrisp! First off, let me say that you english is excellent - Better than many native-speakers I've seen. I spent a couple of days in Portugal, once upon a time. It is a lovely place with many friendly people. That open-mindedness and desire to do more research is refreshing. Too many people see just one site or video and assume that it is the "truth" and don't want to hear any more. As you say, you found sites that say the Apollo landings were faked, and sites that say the Apollo astronauts found aliens on the Moon. It's funny how many people believe both of these things, even though they are mutually contradicting. I very highly recommend you read this recent thread. Yes, it is 23 pages long, but is full of fascinating information and useful illustrations. It should answer your questions and doubts. It was a sad time to be alive. I was a boy then, with dreams of being an astronaut, living on a moon base and travelling to the planets. For 10 years the space program was a symbol of a brighter future. Each year brought greater achievements as we pushed back the limits of what was possible. Through ingenuity, perserverance and hard work, whatever we imagined seemed attainable. Then things changed. Political blunders like Vietnam, Watergate cost people their faith in the government. The slaying of great and inspiring leaders - such as John & Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King dampened our idealism. People became cynical. People started believing that the future would be worse, not better; and the whole idea of "progress" became suspect. Ironically, of course, the reality of progress never slowed down. Each year brings new uses for technology, new medical treatments and new milestones in social equality. Yet somehow it all gets taken for granted. Cynicism prevails and people convince themselves that things are getting worse. Bold symbols and accomplishment - such as human space travel - are perceived as extravagant waste in such a time. I do not mean to offend, but a question I have heard many people ask, over the years since Apollo, is whether the United States is "going the way of Portugal?" Once, you own country had a Golden Age of Exploration, but your ancestors turned their backs on this legacy. Perhaps we Americans have lost our drive... A quote from an American science fiction TV show comes to mind: "See, in the last few years, we've stumbled... And when you stumble a lot, you...you start looking at your feet. You know, we have to make people lift their eyes back to the horizon and see the line of ancestors behind us saying, "Make my life have meaning." And to our inheritors before us saying, "Create the world we will live in." We're not just...holding jobs and having dinner. We're in the process of building the future. That's what [it] is all about. Only by making people understand that can we hope to create a better world for ourselves, and our posterity." |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 26, 2010 9:14:11 GMT -4
ok this is my first post in this forum so here's a little introduction, im 22 years old and i am from Portugal, Welcome to the forum. That quality you share with many HBs. The fact that you acknowledge it sets you apart, however. I disagree. I also, frankly, dislike the 'AB' term, since the B stands for believer. To me that implies some level of blind faith, and I have no such thing when it comes to the empirically verifiable world of science and technology that Apollo involves. Again, I disagree. In most cases I think the HBs are using the genuine imagery, they just don't have the understanding to interpret it correctly. Only in some cases have I ever accused HBs of selectively editing the imagery they present in their arguments, and in every case I can show they have done it by presenting the original image. We generally only 'accuse' HBs of tweaking the imagery when it is quite clear that is exactly what they have done. HBs claim the imagery has been tweaked usually simply when the image doesn't actually support their arguments, so they appeal to some imaginary 'original' that would support their conclusion, but they can never actually present it. That is required conduct in this forum, so you have nothing to worry about on that score. Because the money was cut. Going to the Moon was presented as a way to beat the Russians in the space race. NASA was actually building it as if it was the beginning of manned exploration of the whole solar system. The facilities were built to be used far more than they ever actually were. Unfortunately the US government and public saw the landing before the Russians as the whole goal. To NASA, Apollo 11 was the beginning. To the taxpayers and US congress, it was the end. The only reason further missions went ahead was because they were already bought and paid for, as they were not sure that Apollo 11 would be successful. Then I have to ask for your evidence that there are or were aliens on the Moon. The Moon was very extensively mapped in the years leading up to Apollo, and has been even more extensively mapped now. Where are these aliens and what did they do to stop Apollo? And why did they wait so long to do it? |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 26, 2010 9:16:12 GMT -4
Well i know the radiation (and we all know that radiation is a dangerous thing) but is it really harmfull like some HB's claim it to be?? Yes, but not so much if you happen to be inside a spacecraft. Most HBs don't even know the first thing about radiation, except that it is dangerous in some way. They know very little about shielding methods. We have literally had to hand-hold one HB through a complete tutorial on radiation on this very board only a few months ago. He suddenly went quiet when he ran out of arguments. No acknowledgement that we might have been right. He just left. |
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Jan 26, 2010 9:21:07 GMT -4
Lack of money and lack of political will.
There are some HBs who claim it is because we don't have the technology to go now (so couldn't have had the technology in the 60s).
There are a couple of examples that get used to show that this is nonsense. We used to have supersonic passenger flights across the Atlantic, now we don't. (That was a money problem, the concorde basically didn't make enough profit to cover safety upgrades/replacement when needed.)
The other example is the Trieste, the manned sub that went to the bottom of the marianna trench in 1960. We haven't sent another manned mission down there in nearly 50 years, does that mean the original mission was a fake, or that there were aliens down there?
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jan 26, 2010 11:06:24 GMT -4
...but this question is still on my mind, why did man never return to the moon since the apollo missions.... Welcome to the board. Following the Apollo era NASA dedicated its maned space activity to the Space Shuttle. In order to be successful, it needed the cooperation of the industrial contractors that were required to build, operate and maintain the new vehicle. These companies were reluctant to to make the huge upfront investment in this system if they thought NASA might back out and return to the use of the proven and reliable Apollo launch system. One of the ways NASA proved their commitment to the Shuttle was the destruction of the tools needed to build Apollo. This does not mean hand tools and such but expensive specially made industrial tools and machines that are required to manufacture the Apollo components. Following that event, the US was left without the ability to build rockets that could go to the moon, a mission which the Shuttle cannot fulfill. To go back to the moon, as we are slowly working on now, requires building a new launch and landing system. The current Aries system builds on Apollo in many ways, a testament to sound engineering that went into Apollo, but varies in many ways due to mission differences, political constraints, and incorporates modern manufacturing practices and materials. |
|
