What gets me is the inability to repeat this. Not that they actually went there, but why we haven't successfully gone back with more advanced tech available to us as there is today? The original crew of travelers had a Radio Shack parts bin thrown together and wrapped it up in a layer of tin foil and they made it there.
Cost-prohibitive today? More capital available to us than ever. Motivation? More people today than ever would love to see a successful human re-visitation of a celestial body -- not just an unmanned probe or vehicle. Priorities? Wouldn't you as a nation love to demonstrate your grasp on the cosmos by going there again?
I guess Artemis is attempting a manned re-visitation of the moon's surface, but it's just staggering to me how it took this long to repeat something that came out of an exponentially more rudimentary period of time. Something doesn't add up. I'm the most curious what sort of tech is being hidden from us, tbh.
More than HALF A CENTURY after the 1969 moon landing, we haven't been back and even the rare UNMANNED landings on the moon sometimes have problems.
Fifty-five years of scientific and tech progress have taken us from primitive computers the size of a small room to wristwatches with far more computing power and memory (not to mention graphics capability) than could be bought for any price in 1969. We've gone from bulky low-res CRTs to "retina" resolution LCDs and other flatscreens; from smog-belching cars to gasoline vehicles whose exhaust is often cleaner than the surrounding air.
But we just can't seem to put humans on the moon again.
Yep, exactly. And, since I'm a skeptic of many things, it helps when I explain it this way to people. It usually makes them go "hmm, yeah you have a good point" instead of saying "TEH MUUN LANDINGZ R FAEK", which can result in normies going "sure thing, nut job!".
More people are open to considering that there's definitely some technological suppression fuckery afoot. It just doesn't add up when you think about it.
No, and also, Go back to the drawing board with your stupid bullshit. The only thing that you are worldview depends on is dipshit ignorance. Oh, look at that, they claim to have measured x y and z. But what scientific experiment could have ever resulted in that! Oh! Nobody could imagine that! Therefore they were lying! And so it goes .
Why did we NOT go to the moon in 1969? Because we didn't go to the moon in 1979, 1989, 1999, 2009, 2019, etc. Technology improved but we apparently decided that going to the moon was pointless when we went there, bounced around, and stuck a flag in the regolith.
That's not how space exploration works. You don't do the manned mission first and then send probes and rovers later! Humanity must get off of this planet for its survival and for its future. We have killed and are still killing the planet in ways nobody dares mention, and yet there are no serious plans to get out of here and use our innovative spirit for peaceful pursuits rather than genociding each other over words and ideas.
Anyone who thinks we went to the moon in 1969 and yet stays blissfully ignorant of the fact that we (and nobody else) has even tried to go back until Trump said it, is a lunatic who is self-gaslighting.
The big conspiracy theory is not that the moon landing was faked. The big conspiracy FACT is that we didn't go there at all but everyone convinced themselves that the moon landing was totally legit.
"But look at the moon with a telescope and you can see the landing site!" - Easily faked with a simple lander and an autonomous rover like Curiosity.
In every timeline where humanity was not ruled by satanic pedophiles, we would be a multiplanetary species, if not a multistellar one.
There is no reason why we should have self-driving cars before we have a permanent moon base, except that we live in one of the worst possible timelines.
I should point out that, for Apollo, they did send the probes and landers first. Lunar Orbiter. Ranger. Surveyor. If you don't know these important and simple facts, you may be undereducated on the history of what happened.
It's painful to watch so much paranoid delusion. The answer to the question is exceedingly simple, but you don't want to hear it. Nobody in power wanted to go back. After the first few landings, the public became bored and tuned it out. Congress cut the space budget to a fraction of the Apollo level (it was a national crash program) and decided to continue with a Space Shuttle, planetary probes, a Space Station, and orbital telescopes. The Moon was a political dead letter. Everyone was oohing and ahhing over stunning pictures from the Hubble telescope.
Meanwhile other rocket technology was being developed by private industry, just fine. But who had the money to return? No one. All the moaners and the groaners have been silent up to this point---but right on time to complain that somebody else is not providing them the entertainment they think they rightly deserve. Therefore, it must be an evil plot that is preventing it.
The only thing that has prevented it is people sitting on their collective asses, waiting for their entitlement. They should look in the mirror and ask "What have I ever done to return us to the Moon."
Anyone who thinks we went to the moon in 1969 and yet stays blissfully ignorant of the fact that we (and nobody else) has even tried to go back until Trump said it, is a lunatic who is self-gaslighting.
What are you even talking about? We went to the moon dozens of times since:
Moon Landing Missions After 1985
China
Chang'e 3 (2013): The first Chinese mission to achieve a soft landing on the moon. It included a lander and the Yutu rover.
Chang'e 4 (2019): First mission to land on the far side of the moon, also included a lander and rover (Yutu-2).
Russia (Soviet Union)
Luna 24 (1976): Last successful Soviet lunar mission before the hiatus, included for context as there were no post-1985 Soviet/Russian landings until the Russian space program's recent activities aiming for lunar return.
United States
There have been no US missions that landed on the Moon after 1985 as of my last update. NASA's focus shifted towards Mars exploration and the International Space Station, though future Artemis missions aim to return humans to the Moon.
India
Chandrayaan-2 (2019): Included a lander (Vikram) and a rover (Pragyan); however, the lander crashed during the landing attempt, making it a partial success.
Israel
Beresheet (2019): A privately funded Israeli mission; it crashed during its landing attempt.
Note: As of my last update in April 2023, these are the notable missions post-1985 that aimed for or achieved a lunar landing. Future missions, such as those planned under NASA's Artemis program and by other countries, may soon expand this list.
Who wants to? Somebody has to cough up the dough and plan for mounting such an expedition. People seem to have more plans for their latest X-Box than for returning to the Moon.
I'm sorry but what is it you think is missing between a version of a manned mission to the moon and an unmanned mission to the moon? The only thing you need to provide for the astronauts is extra oxygen to be there to go out the door when it lands on the moon. This is not rocket science actually, the moon is actually really easy to reach. It's when you decide to send science experiments and other complex things to actually start analyzing the moon and determining which parts you want to claim and which parts have the highest levels of helium 3, do you even understand why we go to the moon in the first place?? This is why the mods here remove people that are retarded on site. Why would you go to the moon? Answer that question for me
One other point: You are either dramatically underselling the difficulty of putting HUMANS in space or are unaware of them.
Humans need more than oxygen (although that's a big damn deal, really: the tanks and the nearly bullet-proof containment required in space, along with designing with the fire danger in mind aren't trivial and add quite a bit of weight) -- humans also need bathroom facilities, they need food, they need radiation shielding, they need G-force consideration for launch and maneuvers, they need tools and suits and much more. And going to and from the moon, plus of course STAYING there for even a short but useful time, makes this all much more difficult than just lobbing someone up for a space ride or taking them to the space station.
Is it really "retarded" to wonder if we actually had the technology to go to the moon with the much cruder tech we had 55 years ago?
The highest G-Force in astronaut experiences is 7 G's during reentry which they do pretty easily no problems because they are lying down.
It's actually easier to send humans in space and they're in a lunar module. The module has to be completely sealed like a submarine so it's pretty easy to keep the astronauts alive. All systems have carbon dioxide scrubbers and oxygen emitters
I'm not retarded, catsfive. And I didn't say we didn't go to the moon, but there ARE details and other reasons that make me wonder . . . not that I'd expect the government to ever LIE to us, of course.
One reason I wonder about whether we've been getting the truth about the Apollo missions is that we DO send humans into space -- we had the whole Space Shuttle program and we've had at least two space stations (one of which came down in flames after a number of years), so there are reasons good enough (to some with the power and money to make it happen) to PUT people in space, but for MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY we haven't even attempted to put anyone on the Moon -- where a base would be exceptionally useful, according to many (and to common sense). Elon and others are working on going to Mars, for heaven's sake, but NOBODY has tried to put a human on the Moon in all the time since Apollo shut down?
Elon is working on going to the moon as well but he is letting that be the NASA Artemis mission which SpaceX will be a big participant in through secondary launches
Ever been to Craters of the Moon National Monument in Idaho? Very sobering terrain, from horizon to horizon. I visited it in the summer of 1969 or 1970 (hazy memory) and haven't returned for a second look. Gee, that is as long as we haven't returned to the Moon. Is it more important to return to the Moon, than it is to return to Craters of the Moon?
We did not stop going. It all became dark ops. This due to the results of the first landing and what was discovered "in the shadows" you might say. This will be revealed. We have in fact been to Mars as well. Time will show this to be true.
Of course you can consider this nothing more than my opinion since I can't prove it. But i you do a dive, you can find things that piece together.
This, it's all dark ops these days. Nasa are a public relations campaign.
I can't say with certainty we already went to Mars but with the technology they seem to have now in the black budget world, I do believe it's likely we also went to Mars.
What's really strange is that the lunar reconnaissance orbiter that is orbiting the Moon has imaged every inch of the lunar surface, we can see the Apollo 11 landing site for instance, the footage is publicly downloadable, and no one has seen any of these black sites
We're no longer in the Space Race with Russia. Being the first to do something space-wise doesn't really matter anymore. And going back surely doesn't mean anything now.
We still have plenty of moon dust and moon rocks from the first expedition for any research that anyone might want to do on it. Any further exploration can easily be done with robots.
So what are we going to do on the moon now? Take selfies? Go for a bouncy walk? There's just really no reason to send people to the moon now that we have things like rover robots. It's much cheaper and much more practical to send them than to send humans who waste time doing things like eating, sleeping, and scratching their asses.
What should actually be reversed as an argument is why we went to the moon first instead of conquering low earth orbit. We didn't have weather satellites at this time, communications satellites, internet in low Earth orbit, no space station, we weren't manufacturing anything in low Earth orbit. Why did we go to the moon first?
It's not about the tech, it's about the economics. The Whole reason the first moon landing happened was because there was huge value in the propaganda win of beating the Soviets.
There are questions surrounding the moon landings for sure but are we asking the right questions?
We were in a tit for tat battle with the Soviets. Once side would achieve a goal and the other would have to at least match it to prove to the world they were equally capable.
So why didnt the Soviets ever go to the moon?
And if we didnt, why didnt the Soviets broadcast our lies to the world?
Something happened and we never went back and the Soviets never even tried. What was it? Could have been as simple as political will and/or cash. But I find it difficult to believe the Soviets lacked either. They needed to save face.
I dont know what went down but I suspect when this movie is over we will get to find out.
Because JFK re-framed the space race as being first to the moon. When I was a baby people didn't call it "the space program" they called it "the moon race."
No. It was folded up easily into The Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) was ingeniously compacted for its trip aboard the Apollo Lunar Modules (LMs).
The buggy was stored under one of the legs on the LM like this:
The Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV), when stowed aboard the Lunar Module (LM) for its journey to the Moon, had the following dimensions:
Folded Length: 1.56 m (5.1 ft)
Folded Width: 0.99 m (3.25 ft)
Folded Height: 1.14 m (3.75 ft)
These compact measurements allowed the LRV to be efficiently packed within the LM's descent stage quadrant, ensuring that space was conserved for other critical mission components.
The breakdown:
Folded Configuration:
The LRV had a hinged chassis enabling it to fold into the LM's Quadrant 1.
Its wheels were designed to tuck in close to the chassis.
Securing Mechanism:
Stowed and restrained in the LM, the LRV was released after landing.
Astronauts initiated the pulley-based deployment process.
Deployment:
Deployment tapes with stored energy helped to methodically unfold the LRV.
Astronauts followed a sequence to extend and secure the vehicle's structure.
Unfolding Process:
The unfolding involved manual work to set up seats, footrests, and panels.
The design allowed easy handling despite the bulky space suits.
Final Setup:
Batteries and communications gear were mounted post-deployment.
It was then loaded with exploration tools and scientific equipment.
Remember. The moon only has 1/6th the Earth's gravity. The lunar rover was as brittle as a shopping cart, but it didn't need to do as much work. This design allowed the bulky rover to be transported efficiently to the Moon, where it greatly extended the astronauts' exploration capabilities.
So, what do you do when all of the "facts" that you "know" seem to contradict each other? Tear everything away until there is nothing left but a truth that you can stand on. Notice I didn't say "the" truth but "a" truth. That's what I had to do.
For me, knowing that the USSR, along with other countries that were watching, would have exposed the Apollo missions as frauds if they were in fact fake was a truth that I could stand on.
I also have friends here in Houston that bounce lasers off of the reflectors that we left behind on the moon every week.
All of the conflicting details expose the fact that there are people that want you and I to have doubts about this. Unfortunately for whatever narrative they are trying to establish, we don't trust anyone and we'll keep digging until we satisfy our curiosity.
The only question left for me on this subject isn't "did we go", it is why do they want us to have doubts about this and what do they want to conceal.
Good insight. Gold star. For those who understand what it took to go, there are no mysteries. But for those who are painfully ignorant of the science and engineering of how we went, it all seems mysterious. And it really is an object lesson in how "common sense" is a bogus concept when you really need to understand with uncommon sense.
You know what just screams out to me that is nuts about people that think, well, the government's lying to you about everything blah blah blah blah blah? It doesn't occur to you that the person that posted this on Twitter knows that they are misrepresenting this photo as being astronauts on the moon to try and get you to not look at the moon? There is a space race on the moon right now but it's between China and the United States to hopefully discover first on the moon the biggest and most valuable supplies of helium 3. That's why you're seeing all this moon activity right now
Correct. HE3 is the next gold rush so to speak and the moon has tons of it. I live in Houston and have family that work for various contractors that work for NASA and some of them think it was faked too. It's mind boggling, but then again, they weren't alive back then and they have no idea what a big deal the Apollo missions were. I opt not to argue, but point out that the Soviets would have ratted us out for absolute sure. That isn't a magic bullet, but it gives them something solid to consider while they're figuring it out. BTW, thanks to you and your team for keeping things so nice here in the pond. It's been cozy.
Because you don't "know for a fact." You simply don't know, you have an unanswered question, and you fill it in with imagination. That's not a path to knowledge.
Besides, listen to our National Anthem about how our flag was flying-the military officers upheld that tradition handily... Besides, I'm old enough to be like Pepperidge Farm, I Remember...
There are many reasons to doubt the moon landing. I haven’t believed it since 1988. 25% of people asked think it’s BS. (Probably higher now) I watched the eBay purchased footage restored by Retrofreak84 https://youtu.be/G0bhYZ9Vljg?si=rIHVzIgvt5neuASI
Literally bought an old reel from EBay and it was the 1969 moon footage that was shown on TV to the public. I especially loved the model they were using to explain what was happening on the moon and the view inside the life support system. If you listen closely to the “engineer” who is explaining he’s bullshitting keeps pointing to the same “part” and giving it different purposes.
I know many who’ve never even questioned NASA and they spend billions of our tax dollars. Anything we fund we should verify and audit. Please give some consideration to the other side if only to verify the accounting.
Houston. That camera that recorded them leaving had a spring that could be remotely trigged from Earth. It was a countdown, you know that, right? They knew when to trigger it 3... 2.. 1..
How did they transmit that video back to Houston? I don’t believe or disbelieve. Just asking questions. Sending video over the airwaves from hundreds of thousands of miles away back then is feasible? I wish they’d hook us up with some of that tech. I can’t send a text without being on Wi-Fi cause I have trees around my house and the tower is only a few miles away.
It's called radio. LIke when they were communicating with the astronauts. Or with the lunar probes that preceded them in the Apollo program. A ground controller at the Cape sent the signal for the camera to tilt up. He was watching the video feed.
The Moon is 1.5 light seconds away, and it's just a rock. I don't care if we went there or not... The average distance to Mars is 12.5 light minutes, and it's just another hunk of rock...
What gets me is the inability to repeat this. Not that they actually went there, but why we haven't successfully gone back with more advanced tech available to us as there is today? The original crew of travelers had a Radio Shack parts bin thrown together and wrapped it up in a layer of tin foil and they made it there.
Cost-prohibitive today? More capital available to us than ever. Motivation? More people today than ever would love to see a successful human re-visitation of a celestial body -- not just an unmanned probe or vehicle. Priorities? Wouldn't you as a nation love to demonstrate your grasp on the cosmos by going there again?
I guess Artemis is attempting a manned re-visitation of the moon's surface, but it's just staggering to me how it took this long to repeat something that came out of an exponentially more rudimentary period of time. Something doesn't add up. I'm the most curious what sort of tech is being hidden from us, tbh.
Great point, LordK.
More than HALF A CENTURY after the 1969 moon landing, we haven't been back and even the rare UNMANNED landings on the moon sometimes have problems.
Fifty-five years of scientific and tech progress have taken us from primitive computers the size of a small room to wristwatches with far more computing power and memory (not to mention graphics capability) than could be bought for any price in 1969. We've gone from bulky low-res CRTs to "retina" resolution LCDs and other flatscreens; from smog-belching cars to gasoline vehicles whose exhaust is often cleaner than the surrounding air.
But we just can't seem to put humans on the moon again.
Something is off here.
Yep, exactly. And, since I'm a skeptic of many things, it helps when I explain it this way to people. It usually makes them go "hmm, yeah you have a good point" instead of saying "TEH MUUN LANDINGZ R FAEK", which can result in normies going "sure thing, nut job!".
More people are open to considering that there's definitely some technological suppression fuckery afoot. It just doesn't add up when you think about it.
No, and also, Go back to the drawing board with your stupid bullshit. The only thing that you are worldview depends on is dipshit ignorance. Oh, look at that, they claim to have measured x y and z. But what scientific experiment could have ever resulted in that! Oh! Nobody could imagine that! Therefore they were lying! And so it goes .
Whatever
Oy vey! He does have a point!
Why did we NOT go to the moon in 1969? Because we didn't go to the moon in 1979, 1989, 1999, 2009, 2019, etc. Technology improved but we apparently decided that going to the moon was pointless when we went there, bounced around, and stuck a flag in the regolith.
That's not how space exploration works. You don't do the manned mission first and then send probes and rovers later! Humanity must get off of this planet for its survival and for its future. We have killed and are still killing the planet in ways nobody dares mention, and yet there are no serious plans to get out of here and use our innovative spirit for peaceful pursuits rather than genociding each other over words and ideas.
Anyone who thinks we went to the moon in 1969 and yet stays blissfully ignorant of the fact that we (and nobody else) has even tried to go back until Trump said it, is a lunatic who is self-gaslighting.
The big conspiracy theory is not that the moon landing was faked. The big conspiracy FACT is that we didn't go there at all but everyone convinced themselves that the moon landing was totally legit.
"But look at the moon with a telescope and you can see the landing site!" - Easily faked with a simple lander and an autonomous rover like Curiosity.
In every timeline where humanity was not ruled by satanic pedophiles, we would be a multiplanetary species, if not a multistellar one.
There is no reason why we should have self-driving cars before we have a permanent moon base, except that we live in one of the worst possible timelines.
I should point out that, for Apollo, they did send the probes and landers first. Lunar Orbiter. Ranger. Surveyor. If you don't know these important and simple facts, you may be undereducated on the history of what happened.
It's painful to watch so much paranoid delusion. The answer to the question is exceedingly simple, but you don't want to hear it. Nobody in power wanted to go back. After the first few landings, the public became bored and tuned it out. Congress cut the space budget to a fraction of the Apollo level (it was a national crash program) and decided to continue with a Space Shuttle, planetary probes, a Space Station, and orbital telescopes. The Moon was a political dead letter. Everyone was oohing and ahhing over stunning pictures from the Hubble telescope.
Meanwhile other rocket technology was being developed by private industry, just fine. But who had the money to return? No one. All the moaners and the groaners have been silent up to this point---but right on time to complain that somebody else is not providing them the entertainment they think they rightly deserve. Therefore, it must be an evil plot that is preventing it.
The only thing that has prevented it is people sitting on their collective asses, waiting for their entitlement. They should look in the mirror and ask "What have I ever done to return us to the Moon."
What are you even talking about? We went to the moon dozens of times since:
Moon Landing Missions After 1985
China
Russia (Soviet Union)
United States
India
Israel
Note: As of my last update in April 2023, these are the notable missions post-1985 that aimed for or achieved a lunar landing. Future missions, such as those planned under NASA's Artemis program and by other countries, may soon expand this list.
Who wants to? Somebody has to cough up the dough and plan for mounting such an expedition. People seem to have more plans for their latest X-Box than for returning to the Moon.
I can tell by your updoots that you’re not alone in your beliefs.
I'm sorry but what is it you think is missing between a version of a manned mission to the moon and an unmanned mission to the moon? The only thing you need to provide for the astronauts is extra oxygen to be there to go out the door when it lands on the moon. This is not rocket science actually, the moon is actually really easy to reach. It's when you decide to send science experiments and other complex things to actually start analyzing the moon and determining which parts you want to claim and which parts have the highest levels of helium 3, do you even understand why we go to the moon in the first place?? This is why the mods here remove people that are retarded on site. Why would you go to the moon? Answer that question for me
One other point: You are either dramatically underselling the difficulty of putting HUMANS in space or are unaware of them.
Humans need more than oxygen (although that's a big damn deal, really: the tanks and the nearly bullet-proof containment required in space, along with designing with the fire danger in mind aren't trivial and add quite a bit of weight) -- humans also need bathroom facilities, they need food, they need radiation shielding, they need G-force consideration for launch and maneuvers, they need tools and suits and much more. And going to and from the moon, plus of course STAYING there for even a short but useful time, makes this all much more difficult than just lobbing someone up for a space ride or taking them to the space station.
Is it really "retarded" to wonder if we actually had the technology to go to the moon with the much cruder tech we had 55 years ago?
Maybe we did, but I'm not convinced.
The highest G-Force in astronaut experiences is 7 G's during reentry which they do pretty easily no problems because they are lying down.
It's actually easier to send humans in space and they're in a lunar module. The module has to be completely sealed like a submarine so it's pretty easy to keep the astronauts alive. All systems have carbon dioxide scrubbers and oxygen emitters
I'm not retarded, catsfive. And I didn't say we didn't go to the moon, but there ARE details and other reasons that make me wonder . . . not that I'd expect the government to ever LIE to us, of course.
One reason I wonder about whether we've been getting the truth about the Apollo missions is that we DO send humans into space -- we had the whole Space Shuttle program and we've had at least two space stations (one of which came down in flames after a number of years), so there are reasons good enough (to some with the power and money to make it happen) to PUT people in space, but for MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY we haven't even attempted to put anyone on the Moon -- where a base would be exceptionally useful, according to many (and to common sense). Elon and others are working on going to Mars, for heaven's sake, but NOBODY has tried to put a human on the Moon in all the time since Apollo shut down?
That's not proof, but it isn't nothing, either.
Elon is working on going to the moon as well but he is letting that be the NASA Artemis mission which SpaceX will be a big participant in through secondary launches
Ever been to Craters of the Moon National Monument in Idaho? Very sobering terrain, from horizon to horizon. I visited it in the summer of 1969 or 1970 (hazy memory) and haven't returned for a second look. Gee, that is as long as we haven't returned to the Moon. Is it more important to return to the Moon, than it is to return to Craters of the Moon?
We did not stop going. It all became dark ops. This due to the results of the first landing and what was discovered "in the shadows" you might say. This will be revealed. We have in fact been to Mars as well. Time will show this to be true. Of course you can consider this nothing more than my opinion since I can't prove it. But i you do a dive, you can find things that piece together.
This, it's all dark ops these days. Nasa are a public relations campaign.
I can't say with certainty we already went to Mars but with the technology they seem to have now in the black budget world, I do believe it's likely we also went to Mars.
What's really strange is that the lunar reconnaissance orbiter that is orbiting the Moon has imaged every inch of the lunar surface, we can see the Apollo 11 landing site for instance, the footage is publicly downloadable, and no one has seen any of these black sites
What would we go back for?
We're no longer in the Space Race with Russia. Being the first to do something space-wise doesn't really matter anymore. And going back surely doesn't mean anything now.
We still have plenty of moon dust and moon rocks from the first expedition for any research that anyone might want to do on it. Any further exploration can easily be done with robots.
So what are we going to do on the moon now? Take selfies? Go for a bouncy walk? There's just really no reason to send people to the moon now that we have things like rover robots. It's much cheaper and much more practical to send them than to send humans who waste time doing things like eating, sleeping, and scratching their asses.
What should actually be reversed as an argument is why we went to the moon first instead of conquering low earth orbit. We didn't have weather satellites at this time, communications satellites, internet in low Earth orbit, no space station, we weren't manufacturing anything in low Earth orbit. Why did we go to the moon first?
It's not about the tech, it's about the economics. The Whole reason the first moon landing happened was because there was huge value in the propaganda win of beating the Soviets.
There are questions surrounding the moon landings for sure but are we asking the right questions?
We were in a tit for tat battle with the Soviets. Once side would achieve a goal and the other would have to at least match it to prove to the world they were equally capable.
So why didnt the Soviets ever go to the moon?
And if we didnt, why didnt the Soviets broadcast our lies to the world?
Something happened and we never went back and the Soviets never even tried. What was it? Could have been as simple as political will and/or cash. But I find it difficult to believe the Soviets lacked either. They needed to save face.
I dont know what went down but I suspect when this movie is over we will get to find out.
Because JFK re-framed the space race as being first to the moon. When I was a baby people didn't call it "the space program" they called it "the moon race."
Measure that buggy and then measure the lunar lander. Must have been crowded. Maybe the tires were on a roof rack.
No. It was folded up easily into The Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) was ingeniously compacted for its trip aboard the Apollo Lunar Modules (LMs).
The buggy was stored under one of the legs on the LM like this:
The Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV), when stowed aboard the Lunar Module (LM) for its journey to the Moon, had the following dimensions:
These compact measurements allowed the LRV to be efficiently packed within the LM's descent stage quadrant, ensuring that space was conserved for other critical mission components.
The breakdown:
Folded Configuration:
Securing Mechanism:
Deployment:
Unfolding Process:
Final Setup:
Remember. The moon only has 1/6th the Earth's gravity. The lunar rover was as brittle as a shopping cart, but it didn't need to do as much work. This design allowed the bulky rover to be transported efficiently to the Moon, where it greatly extended the astronauts' exploration capabilities.
how was the flag blowing in the wind on the moon?
It had a rod atop the flag holding it out in place. The flag's "flagpole" was basically a "7" with the flag flying underneath
It's covered here in this recently recovered 1969 video.
So, how does it work for you? You don't 'unnastan' something, and therefore, teh moon landingses were teh faked?
my logic is, if you know for a fact they faked at least 1 part of the moon landing, how do you know everything else is not fake?
it's like if you catch a witness in a lie in the courtroom. We know you lie about something, how can I trust anything?
So, what do you do when all of the "facts" that you "know" seem to contradict each other? Tear everything away until there is nothing left but a truth that you can stand on. Notice I didn't say "the" truth but "a" truth. That's what I had to do.
For me, knowing that the USSR, along with other countries that were watching, would have exposed the Apollo missions as frauds if they were in fact fake was a truth that I could stand on.
I also have friends here in Houston that bounce lasers off of the reflectors that we left behind on the moon every week.
All of the conflicting details expose the fact that there are people that want you and I to have doubts about this. Unfortunately for whatever narrative they are trying to establish, we don't trust anyone and we'll keep digging until we satisfy our curiosity.
The only question left for me on this subject isn't "did we go", it is why do they want us to have doubts about this and what do they want to conceal.
Good insight. Gold star. For those who understand what it took to go, there are no mysteries. But for those who are painfully ignorant of the science and engineering of how we went, it all seems mysterious. And it really is an object lesson in how "common sense" is a bogus concept when you really need to understand with uncommon sense.
I've been to that observatory in Texas and we did exactly that back when I worked at in television
You know what just screams out to me that is nuts about people that think, well, the government's lying to you about everything blah blah blah blah blah? It doesn't occur to you that the person that posted this on Twitter knows that they are misrepresenting this photo as being astronauts on the moon to try and get you to not look at the moon? There is a space race on the moon right now but it's between China and the United States to hopefully discover first on the moon the biggest and most valuable supplies of helium 3. That's why you're seeing all this moon activity right now
Correct. HE3 is the next gold rush so to speak and the moon has tons of it. I live in Houston and have family that work for various contractors that work for NASA and some of them think it was faked too. It's mind boggling, but then again, they weren't alive back then and they have no idea what a big deal the Apollo missions were. I opt not to argue, but point out that the Soviets would have ratted us out for absolute sure. That isn't a magic bullet, but it gives them something solid to consider while they're figuring it out. BTW, thanks to you and your team for keeping things so nice here in the pond. It's been cozy.
Because you don't "know for a fact." You simply don't know, you have an unanswered question, and you fill it in with imagination. That's not a path to knowledge.
Finally, a post showing understanding.
Besides, listen to our National Anthem about how our flag was flying-the military officers upheld that tradition handily... Besides, I'm old enough to be like Pepperidge Farm, I Remember...
No one could imagine they would practice here on Earth.
KWAZY KUPCAKES, right?
There are many reasons to doubt the moon landing. I haven’t believed it since 1988. 25% of people asked think it’s BS. (Probably higher now) I watched the eBay purchased footage restored by Retrofreak84 https://youtu.be/G0bhYZ9Vljg?si=rIHVzIgvt5neuASI
Literally bought an old reel from EBay and it was the 1969 moon footage that was shown on TV to the public. I especially loved the model they were using to explain what was happening on the moon and the view inside the life support system. If you listen closely to the “engineer” who is explaining he’s bullshitting keeps pointing to the same “part” and giving it different purposes.
I know many who’ve never even questioned NASA and they spend billions of our tax dollars. Anything we fund we should verify and audit. Please give some consideration to the other side if only to verify the accounting.
Who was controlling the camera on the moon as they took off? Did someone leave Matt Damon behind again to grow potatoes out of his shit?
Houston. That camera that recorded them leaving had a spring that could be remotely trigged from Earth. It was a countdown, you know that, right? They knew when to trigger it 3... 2.. 1..
How did they transmit that video back to Houston? I don’t believe or disbelieve. Just asking questions. Sending video over the airwaves from hundreds of thousands of miles away back then is feasible? I wish they’d hook us up with some of that tech. I can’t send a text without being on Wi-Fi cause I have trees around my house and the tower is only a few miles away.
I guess you never heard of the concept of remote control. The camera was tilted on command from the people on Earth monitoring the mission.
How did they get their remote to work from like 260,000 miles away?
It's called radio. LIke when they were communicating with the astronauts. Or with the lunar probes that preceded them in the Apollo program. A ground controller at the Cape sent the signal for the camera to tilt up. He was watching the video feed.
The Moon is 1.5 light seconds away, and it's just a rock. I don't care if we went there or not... The average distance to Mars is 12.5 light minutes, and it's just another hunk of rock...
This is correct. Fastest transmission time to Mars: 3 minutes and 3 seconds. Slowest is 22 minutes and 24 seconds
We aren't going to the stars anytime soon...