July 20, 1969 - The First Manned Moon Landing

[Alejandro Rhodes]

The man step on the Moon Period.....!










and if any of you will ask why there aren't stars on the photo ,its because to take a shot in environment without atmosphere in an ultra white enviroment you need at least to close the diaphragm to less that 2mm other wise you would be burn the film tape ,Is the same reason you can't see the face of the astronauts for the special Kevlar filter
If you see with your naked eye the surface of the moon with the sun above you ,you would instantly get blind.

[Hagar]

and if any of you will ask why there aren't stars on the photo ,its because to take a shot in environment without atmosphere in an ultra white enviroment you need at least to close the diaphragm to less that 2mm other wise you would be burn the film tape ,Is the same reason you can't see the face of the astronauts for the special Kevlar filter

Yes Alex. We've seen all the arguments from both sides many times before. If it's true the proof is still up there somewhere.

[Brett_Henderson]

If it's true the proof is still up there somewhere.

If ?

[Hagar]

If it's true the proof is still up there somewhere.

If ?   :-?

I've always been sceptical that what we saw on TV was real. That was long before the popular conspiracy theories were published. However, the mission was being carefully monitored by scientists all over the World including the USSR. They obviously believed it so who am I to argue? As I said before, it's not important now.

Don't kid yourselves that this involved scientific exploration. It was a political exercise, plain & simple.

[Brett_Henderson]

If it's true the proof is still up there somewhere.

If ?

[Hagar]

I'm not in the mood to go over all this again. If you want to see a long & informed discussion on the subject search the forum records.

[Brett_Henderson]

If you want to see a long & informed discussion on the subject search the forum records.

I'm a 49 year old, aviation oriented American, with an engineering background..

[Alejandro Rhodes]

well is important ,we now know for sure 100% that the moon was shape by a huge impact of an object of 6.000Km diameter make a proto ring first made of dust due for the impact and due to the low gravitation of the earth this ring became an object ,and object of 3.476Km of diameter name Moon, I'm glad to know this ,that we have more than 1.000 of moon rocks and dust brought it from there..

and amateur astronomer  

[Dr.bob7]

[quote]YES Darrnm it ! ,the man went to the moon ,is easy ,READ STUDY PHISICS and see ,stop screwing this great moment in history ,WOULD BE MORE EXPENCIVE TO MAKE SUCH OF A BIG LIE AND KEEP IT TO THE MAN KIND, I really hate everytime I see things like this , Is like the Other tale No It wasn't a plane to hit the pentagon was a missile why you have to make thing so complicated?

JeZZ!

I aint American ,But Only God knows how much I admire and luv that country for things like this ,I mean for the landing on the moon in 1969, I was 5 years old ,and my whole family gather in front of the TV and saw it ,I remember it very clear ,in my southamerican country ...

aaaand for to be the reason why the 2nd world war finish and why we all aren't japanesse or German ...nessee

[H]

Agreed upon or not, we have a set date for a manned moon landing...
now, can we come up with the specific date for the first land mooning?

8-)

[masmith]

This has been locked before, got to like 24 pages... (I know I started it  :P)

Im with Hagar on this, I dont think this needs to be gone over again

[Ang2dogs]

And belive it or not It'll be 105 years 17 Dec. When two Bros named Wright got this whole thing started. 66 years later man was on the moon. What an amazing feat of history to witness!

[beaky]

and if any of you will ask why there aren't stars on the photo ,its because to take a shot in environment without atmosphere in an ultra white enviroment you need at least to close the diaphragm to less that 2mm other wise you would be burn the film tape ,Is the same reason you can't see the face of the astronauts for the special Kevlar filter

Yes Alex. We've seen all the arguments from both sides many times before. If it's true the proof is still up there somewhere.

I normally steer clear of this topic, but i'm bored, so i'll drop a thought in here regarding the possibility that all of the successful Apollo missions were faked to avoid the political effects of failure:

When the Apollo I crew was roasted alive on the pad during a pad-test accident, not only did NASA reveal this information to the world press the following day, Grissom, White and Chaffee made the cover of the next issue of Life, which featured a full story on the accident. The official report was released about a year later, only because every tiny detail had to be covered. there was never any attempt to cover up the tragedy or the shortcomings of the program.

Even if all NASA cared about was "claiming" the Moon before the soviets did, it was actually a more useful  propoganda move to make martyrs of these three astronauts, and harden the resolve of evryone involved to try harder. Covering it up would have been far more difficult, and it wouldn't have produced the galvanizing effect that the truth did.

When Apollo 13 was in trouble, the world was allowed to know almost immediately. NASA did not wait until they were either home safe or lost- keeping the entire world on tenterhooks was actually a brilliant publicity move; much smarter than the smothering secrecy of the Soviet space program. Had the crew of Apollo 13 died out there, there would not have been a fake landing broadcast; I'm pretty convinced of that.

As it turned out, despite the ridiculous cause of 13's problems, the recovery of that flight was probably the most brilliant space enterprise ever; more amazing, in a way, than landing on the moon and returning safely. Flight Director Gene Kranz once said that he was most proud of that mission, problems and all.


Of course, the conspiracy buffs might very well claim that Apollo I was sacrificed intentionally for propoganda purposes, and the Apollo 13 near-disaster was also a hoax... this refusal to accept any evidence of the veracity of the mission reports is like a sort of cult mythology; reason cannot prevail against it.  

[Hagar]

and if any of you will ask why there aren't stars on the photo ,its because to take a shot in environment without atmosphere in an ultra white enviroment you need at least to close the diaphragm to less that 2mm other wise you would be burn the film tape ,Is the same reason you can't see the face of the astronauts for the special Kevlar filter

Yes Alex. We've seen all the arguments from both sides many times before. If it's true the proof is still up there somewhere.

I normally steer clear of this topic, but i'm bored, so i'll drop a thought in here regarding the possibility that all of the successful Apollo missions were faked to avoid the political effects of failure:

I'm a tad bored too. If you've read any of my previous opinions on this subject you will know that I've only ever mentioned the Apollo 11 mission, not ALL the successful missions. Even then, I was suggesting that the film of the actual lunar landing could have been faked, not the whole mission. Us TV viewers would have been none the wiser. Note I never said they did not land, simply that the film we saw of the landing was not what was actually happening up there on the Moon.

My old friend Richie who posted this topic knows more on the history of space exploration than anyone I've ever met. If anyone deserves to be an astronaut it's him & I hope he achieves his ambitions one day. He agrees with me that this would not only have been possible but would have been done if it had been considered necessary. The stakes were too high to fail. You have to appreciate the political situation at the time to fully understand how important this was, not only to America but the whole Western world.

That's all I wish to say here but I wanted to put the matter straight. I'm only responding now as you quoted my earlier comment. If you wish to see the full discussion it's easy enough to find in the forum archives. In fact I rather enjoyed reading it all again.

[Brando14100]

The Mythbusters are going to be tackling this disscusion soon. I can't wait for it.

8-)