Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Brassnecks question=I know his name was Armstrong but how did he stick the pole of the flag through the solid rock of the moon.
Nasa said the lunar module landed on a place of solid rock with a little covering of moon dust.as the guys stick the pole into the solid rock their boots are only a few inches deep in the dust,so did Neil live up to name and with brut force drive the pole of the flag through solid rock.nobody ever asked this question so perhaps there is a simple explanation but I could not drive a pole through solid rock with my hands,but I guess I could do it in the area 51 soft ground.
Nasa said the lunar module landed on a place of solid rock with a little covering of moon dust.as the guys stick the pole into the solid rock their boots are only a few inches deep in the dust,so did Neil live up to name and with brut force drive the pole of the flag through solid rock.nobody ever asked this question so perhaps there is a simple explanation but I could not drive a pole through solid rock with my hands,but I guess I could do it in the area 51 soft ground.
Show More
he stuck it in a traffic cone left by a martian.
Just watched the footage, the other bloke hammers one of those spiky flag holder things in the ground
but they had to go through solid rock.the spiky flag holder must be good.did he use a sledgehammer or a hand hammer.
nasa now say that the flag fell after they left the moon.
Did they ever go there ???
I'd like to think so ...but the Juries still out for me...
I'd like to think so ...but the Juries still out for me...
If they didn't why has nobody squealed. So many involved with it.
Nov 16, 2016 -- 1:25PM, bigmo wrote:
If they didn't why has nobody squealed. So many involved with it.
...and all of them American, the biggest nation of show-offs and general loud-mouths ever.
You really think they could have kept this under wraps for this long?
Russia calls investigation into whether US moon landings happened.
The increasingly tense relationship between the United States and Russia might be about to face a new challenge: a Russian investigation into American moon landings.
In an op-ed published by Russian newspaper Izvestia, Vladimir Markin, a spokesman for the government's official Investigative Committee, argued that such an investigation could reveal new insights into the historical space journeys.
According to a translation by the Moscow Times, Markin would support an inquiry into the disappearance of original footage from the first moon landing in 1969 and the whereabouts of lunar rock, which was brought back to Earth during several missions.
“We are not contending that they did not fly [to the moon], and simply made a film about it. But all of these scientific — or perhaps cultural — artifacts are part of the legacy of humanity, and their disappearance without a trace is our common loss. An investigation will reveal what happened,”
- The Independent
The increasingly tense relationship between the United States and Russia might be about to face a new challenge: a Russian investigation into American moon landings.
In an op-ed published by Russian newspaper Izvestia, Vladimir Markin, a spokesman for the government's official Investigative Committee, argued that such an investigation could reveal new insights into the historical space journeys.
According to a translation by the Moscow Times, Markin would support an inquiry into the disappearance of original footage from the first moon landing in 1969 and the whereabouts of lunar rock, which was brought back to Earth during several missions.
“We are not contending that they did not fly [to the moon], and simply made a film about it. But all of these scientific — or perhaps cultural — artifacts are part of the legacy of humanity, and their disappearance without a trace is our common loss. An investigation will reveal what happened,”
- The Independent
No I don't I'm convinced someone would have blabbed by now.
I agree bigmo. To think that thousands of peep have kept quiet for so long is laughable.
russia can send a rocket to the moon and photograph sites of landings
not difficult
not difficult
http://pigeonsnest.co.uk/stuff/nasa-fakes-moon-landing.html
i saw o j simpson on mars too !
they pretended that was faked though
they pretended that was faked though
It would have been almost as difficult to fake it as actually land, I think they did land myself...
What about the other moon missions?
What about the other moon missions?
Excuse me, but I happen to own a good bit of land on the moon and have the deeds to prove it.
Aldrin parked the lunar module up in a restricted zone and it was towed away which is why it is no longer visible
The parking charge for NASA is now 27 Martian Zongs, excluding penalties for non-payment, however, I'll knock 10 Zongs off if they pay up within 14 days.... that's my pension plan
Aldrin parked the lunar module up in a restricted zone and it was towed away which is why it is no longer visible
The parking charge for NASA is now 27 Martian Zongs, excluding penalties for non-payment, however, I'll knock 10 Zongs off if they pay up within 14 days.... that's my pension plan
"No I don't I'm convinced someone would have blabbed by now"
A bit difficult to blab when you're looking down the barrel of a gun.
A bit difficult to blab when you're looking down the barrel of a gun.
Science proves that NASA faked the moon landings - Moon landing Hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7pzg9xpAOE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7pzg9xpAOE
America did land on the moon, they were the most advanced nation technologically ever, however Russia's Gagarin was not the first man in space. Russia simply didn't have the capability and in their closed society it was possible to cover up the truth. Gagarin was becoming too famous and threatened to defect to the west and reveal the truth. He died in 1967, apparently in a plane crash.
Do you recall when Russia`s Concordski made its first appearance at the Paris air show in the 1970s.
Almost a replica of Concorde and using stolen technology from the west.
It arrived with great publicity and fanfare from Russia (they didn`t seem to have any shame that they had stolen the ideas from the West)
It blew up on its maiden appearance, in front of hundreds of potential buyers and the worlds press.
Almost a replica of Concorde and using stolen technology from the west.
It arrived with great publicity and fanfare from Russia (they didn`t seem to have any shame that they had stolen the ideas from the West)
It blew up on its maiden appearance, in front of hundreds of potential buyers and the worlds press.
i think it was flying for a few years before one blew up in paris
and i think it was used as part of their space program after it was retired
when an improved version blew up too
tupolov tu 144
pretty sure it was a decent card to have in top trumps !!!
and i think it was used as part of their space program after it was retired
when an improved version blew up too
tupolov tu 144
pretty sure it was a decent card to have in top trumps !!!
The Tupolev didn't actually 'blow up', but broke up in mid air at the top of its climb about 2 minutes after take off from the Paris Air Show. It fell in bits to the ground and had already almost completely disintegrated long before it actually impacted with the ground.
Rockinron
Science proves that NASA faked the moon landings - Moon landing Hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7pzg9xpAOE
Ron thousands of conspiracy theories out there and all claiming science on their side.
Because someone states something and calls it a fact doesn't make it so.
I've seen the vids saying they can prove this a fake and the vids proving these claims to be false.
Think of how many people were involved. Do you really think they would remain quiet.
Science proves that NASA faked the moon landings - Moon landing Hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7pzg9xpAOE
Ron thousands of conspiracy theories out there and all claiming science on their side.
Because someone states something and calls it a fact doesn't make it so.
I've seen the vids saying they can prove this a fake and the vids proving these claims to be false.
Think of how many people were involved. Do you really think they would remain quiet.
Moon landing- like I say for me the Juries still out !
"The Tupolev didn't actually 'blow up', but broke up in mid air" ...
I remeber seeing it live on TV ...shocking.
From what I remember ...
the Russian Pilot was "showing off" put the aircraft outside of it's safe "flight envelope" and as you say - the aircraft just broke up in mid air.
I remeber seeing it live on TV ...shocking.
From what I remember ...
the Russian Pilot was "showing off" put the aircraft outside of it's safe "flight envelope" and as you say - the aircraft just broke up in mid air.
anybody who thinks they landing on the moon are nuts,it was back in 69 impossible!
You do realise they managed to fly in 1908? Now if we have managed to achieve something like that in the last 40 years let me know.
The furthest man has been is the Apollo 13 mission. They went around the back of the moon. 250 000 miles from Earth.
That was 46 years ago.
What remains odd to me is that man has never been back or even further which is the norm in exploration.
I accept the cost as a percentage of Govt's budgets was horrendous but the success of the missions proves no updated technology would be needed.. Just use a similar crate that they went in previously.
That was 46 years ago.
What remains odd to me is that man has never been back or even further which is the norm in exploration.
I accept the cost as a percentage of Govt's budgets was horrendous but the success of the missions proves no updated technology would be needed.. Just use a similar crate that they went in previously.
watch this then, if you really want an explanation. It's only 4 minutes long
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyPIRheeOig
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyPIRheeOig
Was the Flag made in CHINA ?
Moon dust an issue? on several fronts - the moon has no defence against UV light, therefore no rocks should exist. the light should reduce them all to powder. Yet they are there. also the meteorite dust that falls onto the moon should be very, very deep. Yet it's only a few inches? They don't even know why we have it? the distance is perfect for eclipses within the last 5 thousand years? same time as recorded history? All too convenient? Another FKin coincidence.
Moon dust an issue? on several fronts - the moon has no defence against UV light, therefore no rocks should exist. the light should reduce them all to powder. Yet they are there. also the meteorite dust that falls onto the moon should be very, very deep. Yet it's only a few inches? They don't even know why we have it? the distance is perfect for eclipses within the last 5 thousand years? same time as recorded history? All too convenient? Another FKin coincidence.
Nov 19, 2016 -- 5:56PM, zorrostrikes wrote:
Was the Flag made in CHINA ? Moon dust an issue? on several fronts - the moon has no defence against UV light, therefore no rocks should exist. the light should reduce them all to powder. Yet they are there. also the meteorite dust that falls onto the moon should be very, very deep. Yet it's only a few inches? They don't even know why we have it? the distance is perfect for eclipses within the last 5 thousand years? same time as recorded history? All too convenient? Another FKin coincidence.
As someone who is a keen amateur astronomer, and followed space history for many, many years, this is very interesting. Could you supply some reputable links for these claims ?
Talking of China, they had a lunar rover earlier this year sending back colour pictures. Turns out that in colour, the moon looks the same as it does in black and white -- grey rocks and dust.
nope - i'm not an entertainer, you can google it. you have a computer i'm sure of that.
but - meteorites strike the earth's atmosphere every day, our atmosphere burns them up. the moon has no defences against the minute dust, no atmosphere. It does have some gravity a sixth so it should all adhere to it. But it's missing? Quite a mystery.
The American flag that was planted on the moon in 1969 has now been bleached completely white because of the UV rays.
Nov 19, 2016 -- 6:33PM, zorrostrikes wrote:
but - meteorites strike the earth's atmosphere every day, our atmosphere burns them up. the moon has no defences against the minute dust, no atmosphere. It does have some gravity a sixth so it should all adhere to it. But it's missing? Quite a mystery.
oh, ok. I thought you might have some figures that would correlate the meteoroid strikes against the depth of Lunar regolith, which I though was more than just a few inches in many places.
Regarding the UV breakdown of rocks, do you have any figures about the exposure of Mercury to UV versus the Moon and why Mercury has not broken down ?
i refer you to the work of Professor Hawkworth BSC. PHK. LDF.
his work is quite comprehensive. most insightful.
Mercury is quite small... I'm melting, I'm melting...
his work is quite comprehensive. most insightful.
Mercury is quite small... I'm melting, I'm melting...
Mercury is a bit bigger than the Moon, but and awful lot closer to the Sun. Does than not mean UV concentration would be higher ?
5000 years 
what does that do to the speed of light ?
what does that do to the speed of light ?
Degs - not a great video I'm afraid.
She reckons we haven't been back because there's no political need to do so.
In this era of incredible communications/media, the opportunity to film a Moon expedition is surely one not to ignore.
I come back to my original point about explorers venturing further than before. Not returning to where we went in 1970 is like going to the South Pole and not returning for 46 years. Makes no sense.
She reckons we haven't been back because there's no political need to do so.
In this era of incredible communications/media, the opportunity to film a Moon expedition is surely one not to ignore.
I come back to my original point about explorers venturing further than before. Not returning to where we went in 1970 is like going to the South Pole and not returning for 46 years. Makes no sense.
So who is going to stump up 100 Billion dollars to fund a return ? The Soviets gave up in 1976. The US was committed to funding the Shuttle and the ISS. In actual fact, the US is now developing the Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion capsule which mayenable a return at some point.
The key is understanding why the US went in the first place. It was to demonstrate superiority over the Soviets, nothing more. Any science was just a bonus. They didn't even send a dedicated scientist until the last Apollo mission.
The key is understanding why the US went in the first place. It was to demonstrate superiority over the Soviets, nothing more. Any science was just a bonus. They didn't even send a dedicated scientist until the last Apollo mission.
terry mccann
anybody who thinks they landing on the moon are nuts,it was back in 69 impossible!
Hard to disagree with such a compelling argument.
anybody who thinks they landing on the moon are nuts,it was back in 69 impossible!
Hard to disagree with such a compelling argument.
Injera
I come back to my original point about explorers venturing further than before. Not returning to where we went in 1970 is like going to the South Pole and not returning for 46 years. Makes no sense.
A couple of issues with that Injera.
Firstly the costs involved are vastly different and the cash for a further manned moon mission would need to be justified.
And that leads to my second point, what could be learned that we already don't know.
The cash available is now being spent on unmanned missions further out in space.
I come back to my original point about explorers venturing further than before. Not returning to where we went in 1970 is like going to the South Pole and not returning for 46 years. Makes no sense.
A couple of issues with that Injera.
Firstly the costs involved are vastly different and the cash for a further manned moon mission would need to be justified.
And that leads to my second point, what could be learned that we already don't know.
The cash available is now being spent on unmanned missions further out in space.
This video should be compulsory viewing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU
The conspiracy theorists have it backwards -- they say it was impossible to go the moon in 1969 -- the video explains we did not have the technology to *fake* going to the moon in 1969.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU
The conspiracy theorists have it backwards -- they say it was impossible to go the moon in 1969 -- the video explains we did not have the technology to *fake* going to the moon in 1969.
akabula - point taken. Would it be incredibly expensive to copy the technology they used in 1970 though?
Presumably NASA still have much of it.
The ISS is 200 odd miles away and a trip there is staggering. Blows my mind how they get there, dock etc.
The moon is 200 000 miles away. The logistics of getting there, then landing in a separate shuttle, returning to the Apollo and getting home seem incredible.
Presumably NASA still have much of it.
The ISS is 200 odd miles away and a trip there is staggering. Blows my mind how they get there, dock etc.
The moon is 200 000 miles away. The logistics of getting there, then landing in a separate shuttle, returning to the Apollo and getting home seem incredible.
I think it's fair to say that no other country in the world could have done it except America, who would disagree with that?
ah well akabula I was just waiting for somebody to ask lol.anyway for staters back in 69 they didn't know about the magnetic field somewhere between here and the moon, so dangerous is it,the poor brave men would have been v v sick or indeed died due to radiation because their space suits held no protection,so guess what? they all come right as rain!?
The Americans knew about the van Allen belt and did experiments in the 1950s to allow them to travel through this on a certain course, the space shuttle spent much longer periods of time in this radiation, not so dangerous because it is proton particles, but so far the shuttle pilots are unharmed.
thought their suits had thirty layers of protection including lead. and the crafts too have some sort of shielding? sprayed on?
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539