Conspiracy theories

[boojangles]

Should it not b the other way around Hardy-Proof that people actually HAVE landed on the Moon.Because I certainly have never seen any proof.

[Main Street]

Anyway why should Pints have to prove his beliefs?

I can just picture 1/2m catholics going to church tomorrow getting very angry at being asked to prove all the nonsense they believe in.

[haranguerer]

You've hit the nail on the head Main St!
We all go '...those feckin eejits, thinking the world was flat...', while we proclaim to believe that the wine turns in to the actual blood of christ, and the bread into his body, at the moment of consecration. (Doesn't that also make us cannibals?) They're gonna have some laugh at us in years to come!

(hope God cant get round the anonymous nature of this board)

[Hardy]

Should it not b the other way around Hardy-Proof that people actually HAVE landed on the Moon.Because I certainly have never seen any proof.

If you're saying you don't believe men have walked on the moon, you might tell us why. Which part of the documentary record do you doubt and why? And what is your evidence that it has been faked? NASA has provided the documentary evidence. If you don't accept it, can you say why? And to say it could have been faked is not sufficient. You'd need to show some evidence that it was.

Main Street - the churches have, since the beginning, refused the responsibility of proving their claims. They invented the concept of "faith" - i.e. belief without proof. Therefore religious beliefs lie outside the realm of rational debate and my claim that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the creator of the universe would be as valid as any priest's opinion about God when it comes to debate based on reason.

[Hardy]

Give all your earthly possessions to me and devote your life to worship of Tagliatelle. Your reward will be life after death. I promise. Take your chances.

[Hardy]

Prodism is just another heresy against the true pasta faith. I'm the representative on earth of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Today I also made myself infallible. You should submit prayers for approval before publishing them. But I commend your piety.

[pintsofguinness]

Hardy if you have a look through the web you will find several sites that will bring you through the abnormalities in the pictures and in the video footage. You'll also find sites that will try and provide answers for it - read them and make up your own mind, it's far too extensive for me to go through here. 

No shadows where there should be
Strange shadows
Flags fluttering when they shouldnt be
Someone writing "C" on rocks - just like they do on movie sets to demonstrate the centre of a set
Amazing film in cameras that can witstand any heat
Astronauts that are immune to radiation

Not to mention the incredible run of good fortune NASA had considering their previous failures and the fact that the Russians were miles ahead of them int he space race. 

[The Real Laoislad]

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23feb_2.htm

[Main Street]

the churches have, since the beginning, refused the responsibility of proving their claims. They invented the concept of "faith" - i.e. belief without proof. Therefore religious beliefs lie outside the realm of rational debate and my claim that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the creator of the universe would be as valid as any priest's opinion about God when it comes to debate based on reason.

Same thing Hardy.
It's people willingness to believe in something, a blind faith.
Just because the proponents of a religious belief system give an amnesty for belief without proof, does not make it less absurd.
There is  a willingness by people to believe in something that calls for the suspension of rationality.
Rational thought would lead a person to investigate, not the belief in God, but the belief in the destructive dogma surrounding it.


I don't know about all of the Moon landings, the big one questioned is the first one where the proof is lacking. Where the offered proof has been ridiculed by photographers detailed examination of that evidence.
If you accept that the first moon landing happened then it's a belief system. You believe something where the proof that has been offered does not pass scrutiny.

I don't have a belief system about it, why should I?
It might have happened it might not have happened.

[Gnevin]

Hardy if you have a look through the web you will find several sites that will bring you through the abnormalities in the pictures and in the video footage. You'll also find sites that will try and provide answers for it - read them and make up your own mind, it's far too extensive for me to go through here. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_accusations#Photographs_and_films
1) We know man can enter space
2) We know man made objects can survive in space
3) The journey from the moon or the earth is relative  easy , ie once you've escaped earth gravity its simple a matter of pointing at the moon and go
4) We know man can survive in space for at least 9 months
5) We know the gravity of the moon is extremely small such that no where near the force is needed to escape it's gravity as is required to on earth.

So why is it so hard to believe we went to the moon. Yet you can believe that during height of the cold war the soviets ,didn't get one sniff of this massive cover up ? The soviets where so convinced by this massive cover up they gave up on their moon ambition's all together . The soviets who managed infiltrate  the US government, the soviets who

[doire na raithe]

Without a doubt in my mind i believe the qualifiers draws in the football championship are fixed

I don't think they are fixed now but I too am convinced that they were fixed for a couple of years when they were first introduced.

[pintsofguinness]

3) The journey from the moon or the earth is relative  easy , ie once you've escaped earth gravity its simple a matter of pointing at the moon and go

That's simplistic!

If it was so easy to do the Russians - who had already managed to send man to space (before the americans) and who had already had successful unmanned missions to the Moon would have done it before NASA.   
If it was so easy - with all the advances in technology why do NASA feel that it will take to 2018 to go there again?

[AFS]

3) The journey from the moon or the earth is relative  easy , ie once you've escaped earth gravity its simple a matter of pointing at the moon and go

That's simplistic!

If it was so easy to do the Russians - who had already managed to send man to space (before the americans) and who had already had successful unmanned missions to the Moon would have done it before NASA.   
If it was so easy - with all the advances in technology why do NASA feel that it will take to 2018 to go there again?

Because there's no point. Manned lunar missions cost billions and provide limited scientific results. Mars is the big target now.

[Gnevin]

3) The journey from the moon or the earth is relative  easy , ie once you've escaped earth gravity its simple a matter of pointing at the moon and go

That's simplistic!

If it was so easy to do the Russians - who had already managed to send man to space (before the americans) and who had already had successful unmanned missions to the Moon would have done it before NASA.   
If it was so easy - with all the advances in technology why do NASA feel that it will take to 2018 to go there again?

I said relative(ly) easy. how many probes have been lost mid voyage? Few i know of most are lost on Lauch/Re entry

NASA are aiming for Mars so they are having to design a whole new  system of spacecraft .   New rockets, new landers,new everything (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Constellation)  . I noticed of the 5 points i listed you can't refute them and your clutching at straws here

[Hardy]

Reminds me - anyone watch the shuttle/space station going over the last few nights? It's strangely impressive, given that it's just a light moving across the sky. I missed the first night, which I hear was spectacular because it was just after launch and you could see the jettisoned fuel tank and the shuttle separately.

I checked this morning and it was due to be visible for about 4 minutes from 23:14 tonight, but that's now disappeared from the website ( http://www.heavens-above.com/) and they only have tomorrow night's times, but I assume tonight stands as well. It moves across the sky from roughly Northwest to Southeast.

Or maybe it's just a Hollywood hoax, with lasers and projectors and stuff.