Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuxr99
how do we know which ones are real?
anyway, the biggest thing that makes me think that the moon landing was fake, is the fact that technology back then was very weak. the basic calculator was not even invented yet, but they still managed to send a man 250,000 miles in basically a tin can. it doesn't really matter that much to me if it happened or not, but i just don't believe it.
actually, they could just point the Hubble telescope at the moon and see the flag that is there. if they can see billions of light years away, surely they could see a flag on the moon. (if it's there)
|
There is a piece of equipment left behind from the moon landing that is still being used today. Lasers are beamed up to it and when bounced back, it measures the distance - or change of - the earth to the moon.
Thats not a very scientific explanation, I know
It still astonishes me that there are people who still refuse to believe that the moon landings didnt take place. Not one person has ever come forward and put his hands up to being part of the conspiricy. Not one. Even the Russians have always accepted it.
The net is full of sites "explaining" why it could never have happened. Every one of those explanations has been debunked as the application of appallingly bad science.
The moon landing of Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins was not the only manned landing. I think there were 5 others. Were they fakes too ? I believe it ended purely for financial reasons. It marked the start of the space station, so something had to give.
How or why would any fake landing be of any use, knowing that one day in the future it would be found out. Talk about kicking yourself up the arse. A huge an uneccessary embarassment
As for the Hubble telescope, I'm not a scientist so I wouldnt be able to explain the technicalities but thats not what it was designed for. I'm sure there would be resolution problems in focusing on an object so close when it was designed to see billions and billions of miles away.