Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

WHY has nasa onoly been to the moon once?

nasa has been to the moon several times

I think its been 3 or 4

o lol then i thought so my science teachers a dumb ass then...

I think they must be

WHAT!? NASA has been to the moon 7 times. Or so I herd.

Don't blame this on your teacher, we know its you

there was one overall set of missions: apollo.

maybe you just misunderstood

Originally posted by Faceless
o lol then i thought so my science teachers a dumb ass then...

Before you call someone a dumb ass for being wrong, what do you call some one who is taught something, but doesn't bother to investigate it further before they try to have a discussion about it?

Are they also a dumb ass? Or just lazy?

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Are they also a dumb ass? Or just lazy?

Both

the theory that man never went to the moon is probably the only conspiracy that i think is true....because there are some hard scientific reasons that it wasn't possible using the technology available and still isn't possible

the main one being solar radiation shielding...the Russians caluculated that once completely out of the earths magnetic shielding and thus any protection from the sun...a human would need 7 feet thick lead to protect them from the radiation....to build a capsule with this much would be impossible to lift into orbit using the rocket power available.

the other main piece of evidence that i noticed is when the lander module takes off from the moons surface...the camera pans up and follows it...thus meaning there was someone working the camera...so did they leave someone behind or was it just filmed in a dingy hollywood studio?

the astronauts do not fly during solar flares and what you may mean by radiation may come from the van allen belt, which is usually cleared in a bout 25 minutes.
The truth is that it's very expensive, very dangerous (especially with current flawed shuttle designs and how unbelievably outdated NASA's systems are-they still use transistor circuitry), and not particularly necesary in terms of science. I mean we know most everything about the moon including it's probable origins and why it's so abnormally huge for a terrestrial planet. Anything else we may need to know can be found through unmanned probes which are less expensive and don't risk human lives.

I don't believe they went the moon in the first place but if I'm wrong and they did they probably just couldn't really find any substantial reason to go back.

"the camera pans up and follows it"

People who think tuis sort of thing is evidence of a hoax have a severe logic failure. Do peopl;e really think that NASA is THAT stupid, as to leave such a blatant problem if it was a hoax?

How the heck can a panning camera- which can be explained in a dozen ways, including that it was designed that way- be taken as direct evidence of a hoax?

And the radiation thing is a perpetuated myth. The Russians are sour because their programme never worked out, but it was nothing to do with radiation, just practicality with the physics of it.

But no, you do not receive a lethal radiation dose on the way to the moon.

So as said, the reason we haven't been back is damn simple- there is bugger all there. Trust me, Humans will find a way to get anywhere that is useful to them. Right now, the Moon is not.

Originally posted by jaden101
the theory that man never went to the moon is probably the only conspiracy that i think is true....because there are some hard scientific reasons that it wasn't possible using the technology available and still isn't possible

the main one being solar radiation shielding...the Russians caluculated that once completely out of the earths magnetic shielding and thus any protection from the sun...a human would need 7 feet thick lead to protect them from the radiation....to build a capsule with this much would be impossible to lift into orbit using the rocket power available.

the other main piece of evidence that i noticed is when the lander module takes off from the moons surface...the camera pans up and follows it...thus meaning there was someone working the camera...so did they leave someone behind or was it just filmed in a dingy hollywood studio?

But what about the waving flag.......

Originally posted by grey fox
But what about the waving flag.......

it wasn't waving...it had a horizontal support along the top of the flag

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5905HR.jpg

from here

http://www.sec.noaa.gov/primer/primer.html

the solar cycle is something like 11 years...we are currently in a solar minimum which means that flare and sunspot activity are at its lowest and thus at its safest levels

i think to say that the moon

john maudlin who was a physicist at NASA was the person who said that at least 2 metres of shielding would be required

there were also several other pieces of evidence put forward for the hoax theory...the landing module creating no dust updrafts while landing...many others regarding the footage taken including an astonishing claim by the australians

all of it is on this site...yes i'm aware it a conspiracy site and no i'm not turning into Deano...but its probably the only conspiracy where there us actual evidence put forward rather than total bullshit about lizards and stuff

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

Originally posted by Ushgarak
So as said, the reason we haven't been back is damn simple- there is bugger all there. Trust me, Humans will find a way to get anywhere that is useful to them. Right now, the Moon is not.

and that pretty much sums it up.
at the moment the moon is nothing more to us
than a giant useless rock. so why devote the
resources to accomplish what we've already accomplished?

Originally posted by PVS
and that pretty much sums it up.
at the moment the moon is nothing more to us
than a giant useless rock. so why devote the
resources to accomplish what we've already accomplished?

I don't know but Bush and NASA are planning a new set of missions there no? (think I heard stuff like that on the news a while ago)

Also haven't the chinese expressed their interest?

Originally posted by Fire
I don't know but Bush and NASA are planning a new set of missions there no? (think I heard stuff like that on the news a while ago)

Also haven't the chinese expressed their interest? NASA are planning a set of missions to mars for 2020 or something. There is no reason to go back to the moon, we know more about it than we do our own planet.

The whole shadow thing is complete bs. Its simply due to the moon having such a rough and uneven surface that the shadows are not parallel as they should be.

No stars in the background I hear you say lol. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of photography can easily put this one to rest. Any brightly lit foreground object must be photographed with a very short exposure time. Otherwise, the image will be badly overexposed. Any background pinpoint light sources like, say stars that are literally trillions of miles further away will not show up at all. Likewise, if the photographer wants to capture the background stars, he is going to have to use a very long exposure time, which means that the foreground will be totally washed out in one blob of overexposed light. It's really as simple as that.

Do I even have to address the camera thing, just sheer stupidity lol.

Oh but the Van Allen radiation belts I hear you say. Simple, all they had to do was send it through the belts at high speeds (25,000mph) avoiding long term exposure and keeping their dose down to just 1 rad which is below any harmful limit.

So instead of just saying oh but the radiation would kill them, do some research and rethink your opinion.

Because the aliens have leased the moon until 2020.

Euhm Magee, according to the NASA website they are going to the moon and apparantly they want to stay there

How We'll Get Back to the Moon

My apologies, didn't know they were planning on returning to the moon any time soon.

np man, but everyone in this thread seems to be obsessed with facts anywayz, Still think that moon colony stuff reads like something out of an old sci-fi comic

Yea it does sound quite interesting. But when you watch as much discovery channel as I do it doesn't seem quite so sci fi lol. All they need is a shit rake of plants, irigation and wat not, just imagine a space station on the moon.

Originally posted by PVS
there was one overall set of missions: apollo.

maybe you just misunderstood Apollo 13

I know it's possible, it's not that I just don't see the point of it, would you or anyone for that matter be willing to sit up there for months on end? I wouldn't that's for sure.

about the sci-fi it's just so typical for old sci-fi stuff to have a moon base.

Originally posted by Magee
NASA are planning a set of missions to mars for 2020 or something. There is no reason to go back to the moon, we know more about it than we do our own planet.

The whole shadow thing is complete bs. Its simply due to the moon having such a rough and uneven surface that the shadows are not parallel as they should be.

No stars in the background I hear you say lol. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of photography can easily put this one to rest. Any brightly lit foreground object must be photographed with a very short exposure time. Otherwise, the image will be badly overexposed. Any background pinpoint light sources like, say stars that are literally trillions of miles further away will not show up at all. Likewise, if the photographer wants to capture the background stars, he is going to have to use a very long exposure time, which means that the foreground will be totally washed out in one blob of overexposed light. It's really as simple as that.

Do I even have to address the camera thing, just sheer stupidity lol.

Oh but the Van Allen radiation belts I hear you say. Simple, all they had to do was send it through the belts at high speeds (25,000mph) avoiding long term exposure and keeping their dose down to just 1 rad which is below any harmful limit.

So instead of just saying oh but the radiation would kill them, do some research and rethink your opinion.

i can only presume that this is in response to my post rather than the one quoted...so given that you accuse me of stupidity then quote the wrong person...or give the wrong response to someone else...then i would say the rethink should be on your part

i can understand your arguments about the texture of the moons surface distorting shadows but they simply dont explain a 45 degree difference in direction as in some pics

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/Ap14shd.gif

and given that NASA confirmed that no artificial lighting was used on the landings...it leaves alot of issues

also if you had read my post...it wasn't me simply stating that the radiation would kill...it was a NASA physicist involved in the projects at the time

That's nonsense, Jaden- you can see angle deviations like that all the time in real life. Shadows do not work in the parallel lines the conspiracy theorists require ANYWHERE. You could put together an experiment to so such deviation in shadows in a few minutes using a few objects and a torch.

It is simple perspective. A shadow line travelling on a slope will appear to be going in a different diection to one not on a slope, and these things are not clearly distinguishable to the average onlooker.

Meanwhile, the best statistics on radiation we have- and readings taken at the time- show that there is no lethal dose involved in going to the moon.

A similar shadow deviation in a standard Earth photograph.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
A similar shadow deviation in a standard Earth photograph. Jesus, is that a Sasquatch in that photo?

Originally posted by jaden101
i can only presume that this is in response to my post rather than the one quoted...so given that you accuse me of stupidity then quote the wrong person...or give the wrong response to someone else...then i would say the rethink should be on your part

Sorry If i offended you, it wasn't really aimed at your post I was just replying to Fire then i got carried away with that bs conspiracy.

They've never been.

I am a lazy dumbass