... this was 35 years ago tomorrow!!! I was a youngster in Alice Springs, listening to my Transistor radio, before dawn, to hear the words "Tranquility base here, Eagle has landed" [image]http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo11/lores/as11_40_5902.jpg[/image] For those that think some of us have lived thru a couple of ice ages... think about the things you missed out on!!!
Missed the TV... Alice Springs had no TV in those days but my dad's boss in Sydney had it all taped on an ancient B&W Sony reel to reel video recorder and then sent it to Alice. Dad & his colleagues then took this around to all the schools so we all got to see the landing and moon walk!! The other neat thing because of the US involvement in a couple of establishments there at the time they sent out the official NASA 16mm colour movies of each flight a couple of weeks after the fact for the schools, so in many ways we got better view of each mission than most of Australia
Well think about things You are gonna miss!! Like Michael Jackson in space doin his moonwalk. With his frozen stiff legs.
It is even harder to believe....>> ...that they actually went. I think Apollo 13 was actually the first attempt (and it failed). Kennedys boast, that America would have men on the moon, before 1970 (and more importantly, before the Russians) backfired. How come, with much advanced technology, there is not regular manned landings. Militarilary, to have a base on the moon would be very strategic, and lets face it, that is what fuels the space race! Many respected science writers and journalists, along with scientists, are now questioning as to whether they actually landed on the moon, or it was filmed in a movie studio. Carefull analasis of the video and still photos, allegedly taken, have shown some rather embarassing slip ups. But the most damming evidence, is that a spacecraft, with 6mm thick steel walls, and no radiation sheilding, could have passed through the Van-Allen Radiation Belt TWICE with no apparent effect on the Astronouts (the radiation should have killed them before they reached the moon). I watched the landing on TV (Black & white) when I was 19. The reason I remember the time so well, because it actually bought a lump to my throat at the time, and it was the day after I had left work, because of a lottery called conscription, and the need for cannon fodder, in a dump of a country, referred to as The Funny Farm. Worlds greatest Skeptic... GT:s
Agree with you 100% I dont know how the hell the astronaughts survived the radiation. Not even NASA has come up with a good excuse for that oneAnd the pictures they took..... What a joke lol!
Actual Moon-landings are suspect!!! Just in the Photo that Stealth has posted:1. the two mainshadows are NOT parallel, as they should be if the Sun was the only light-source. Seems to be shadows cast by a much closer source2. In the absence of an atmosphere, there is only light and dark. The subdued lighting we see in shadow on Earth is due almost entirely to refraction of the light path through the air, with a small percentage due to reflection. So why do we see so much detail on the shaded side of the astronaut? The cameras they used were not equiped with flash facilities!3. The bright area behind the astronaut looks very much like that due to an overhead light-source, yet clearly the main lighting is somewhere off to the upper right.4. Why is there NO DUST on the foot of the Lunar lander? The pics that were shown at the time clearly show the amount of "lunar" soil displaced by the landers rocket motor, and one would expect that some of it would have collected in the bowl shaped foot!There are probably other anomalies in this photo but many of the others taken are much worse.On the other hand, having watched the whole thing live, it was a very exciting time, real or not!Cheers, Doug (Space Sceptic)
Apollo 11 was the first to land on the moon> there were subsequent landings, about 5 or so i think. Apollo 13 was meant to land on the moon but failed, as we all know.
Other major flaws in the photos Dont have them in front of me, but from what I can rememberPictures are clearly cut and pasted in some of them. Some pictures 'overlap' the crosshairs in the picture. Seem strange?On one of them, one of the bigger rocks had a very distinct letter 'C'. A stage prop perhaps?Backgrounds were reused in different picture shots. 2 different shots at different locations had the EXACT same background and horizon as the other which was supposed to be much further away and somewhere else on the moon. How is that possible?But the main thing is, they never would have survived the trip due to the radiation. Yet they made it, had a bit of fun, came back without even a suntan!! 8D
Get a telescope... ...and simply have a look. You can still see the equipment they left behind!There's more too, the flag for example looked like it was blowing in the wind. Bur seriously, just have a peek with a telescope and that should convince you.Cheers,
I'm a sceptic about a lot of things, but >>> I like to believe the moon landings (all of them) happened. I don't pretend to understand the implications of Van Allen Belts or what light does when there's no atmosphere 'cos I ain't been in those environments. I'll take my memories of that scratchy black and white footage, all the paraphernalia that NASA sent to me when I wanted to be an astronaut, and some of the most magnificent colour photography I've seen to my grave (in about 50 years thanks), quite happily believing it all happened. I think the memories of John White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee deserve that.Now if Neil Armstrong or Buzz Aldrin come out and states it was all faked; or if Michael Collins says he didn't mind flying the lunar orbit module (in the studio!) 'cos the others didn't step on the moon anyway, or if I buy a ticket to the moon in 2035 and find it's nothing like those images, then I just might change my mind.Till then, this is one conspiracy theory I continue to give no credence to.
No Russians ever landed on the moon. They did beat the Yanks by being the first to orbit the Earth (Yuri Gagarin). Having visited the NASA Space Centre at Houston, Texas in March 1980, and having been staggered by the obvious billions of dollars of expenditure at that site, I have one question if this could be shown as a hoax. WHY:?) :?) :?) I've heard all the guff about "one-uping the Ruskies", but employing hundreds of thousands of American & foreign personell, and building an untold number of fully functional Space Vehicles, not to mention the ground support equipment and infrastructure, just to say "up yours", is too stupid for words, even on this forum.8-} 8-} 8-} I agree with Egg, get a telescope ( if you don't have an inherent distrust of such black magic ) and take a look for yourself. Of course, you could always ask Oni, but maybe he's part of this conspiracy too. No wonder UDP's are too technical to understand. BTW, the next meeting of the Flat Earth Society will be held shortly, just as soon as we complete the 2 metre high "rabbit-proof" fence around the perimeter of the horizon. Don't want any of the "bunnies" falling off, do we:?) :?) }D
Left arm is illuminated.. by reflection.. .. of raw sunlight from the near pure white of the Spacesuit torso section!!Shadows not parellel... the 'Blad cameras they used had quite wide angle lenses and that would have that effect on lines near to camera..Oh never mind....
Not so much to "one-up but more an excuse to justify the development of the technology which went along with the concept and which could then be applied to the military. Same as the Russian Bear was portrayed as the bogieman and the justification for developing "Star-Wars" technology (no Jedi, not the movie). I have often thought that the portrayal of "Earthrise" over the Lunar horizon was the most convincing evidence of moon landings, because the technology of the day was not capable of generating an image of the earth in such detail, but there are just so many things which point to the opposite... ie landings faked!
How about... ...the earth in the reflection of his visor? I believe they had 75mm or 90mm film for their Hassleblads (sp?)... no way they could have forged these images back then.Of course it happened. Just get a decent telescope and check out the Sea of Tranquility, they even left their vehicles up there.But hey, don't ever let the facts get in the way of a good story.
