Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nasa challenges Moon hoax claims
BBC News Online ^ | 11/07/02 | Dr. David Whitehouse

Posted on 11/07/2002 1:36:35 PM PST by GeneD

For years there have been rumours that the Apollo lunar landings were faked, staged on a movie set to convince the world that the US had beaten the Soviets to the Moon.

And, despite evidence to the contrary, the belief that the "one small step for man" was a sham continues to spread.

Now, having tried to stay above the rumours, the US space agency (Nasa) has finally got fed up with the conspiracy theorists and asked James Oberg, a leading aerospace writer, to produce a book that it hopes will settle the issue.

But will it work, or will it just add a certain credibility to the hoax theory?

Flags that ripple on the airless Moon, discrepancies in the part numbers of lunar lander components, shadows that point in the wrong direction, the lack of stars seen in the sky - these are all "facts" that have fuelled the conspiracy theory.

It is claimed that the six Apollo landings took place in a hangar on a secret military base.

Over the years, every one of the lines of evidence has been discredited but the rumours refuse to go away.

In September, Buzz Aldrin, the second man to walk on the Moon, punched a man in the face after he had confronted the former astronaut at a Beverly Hills hotel.

Bart Sibrel - who has made a film questioning the Apollo Moon missions - had demanded that Mr Aldrin, 72, swear on the Bible that he had in fact walked on the Moon.

Prosecutors declined to file assault charges against Mr Aldrin.

Truth out there

Tackling the conspiracy theory head-on in an official book was the idea of Nasa's former chief historian Roger Launius.

He says that hardcore conspiracy theorists are not the book's main audience, as they will never be convinced of the truth.

Instead, it will be aimed at the general public and especially teachers, giving them the science to answer questions in class.

Doubters will no doubt dismiss the new book as just another attempt by the establishment to cover up the truth.

Nasa says the rippling flag is easily explained by the fact that the astronauts twisted it as they planted it in the soil.

The stars are not visible in the lunar sky because of the bright landscape and the light from the Earth drowning them out.

In a few years a definite answer could be possible.

A private company, Transorbital, will place a private high-resolution satellite into orbit around the Moon. It should have the power to see the Apollo hardware left on the surface.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: apolloprogram; bartsibrel; buzzaldrin; conspiracytheories; lunarlandings; moon; nasa; transorbital
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
To: Alta Mura
Quite simply it is cost and benefit. Having been there six times at six different areas of the Moon and taken all the rock and soil samples that we could - it is just not worth it to go back. We wouldn't learn anything new and the technology and political will doesn't exist for permnanent lunar facility (the cost of resupply would be astronomical.)

And another freeper was right as well. Though mineral rich and ripe for mining- it is simply not economically feasible to exploit the moon currently. It currently costs about $10,000 to put one pound of payload in space. The amount of equipment, material, supply, and fuel needed to even put a small base on the moon capable of supporting 3 people full time is just not viable economically.

But as research into certain carbon compounds that are a tenth the weight of the strongest steels and metals and hundreds of times stronger continues - perhaps one day we will be able to design spacecraft the size of football stadiums that weigh as much as just one space shuttle- and the cost of putting substantial amounts of men and material into space will drop to economically viable levels.

21 posted on 11/07/2002 2:06:23 PM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
there are still wackos out there who believe the Earth is flat.

Yeah, and they're still teaching that in the Islamic Madrasses. LOL!

22 posted on 11/07/2002 2:09:17 PM PST by EggsAckley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lucas1
Allright, what about this one. THIS IS PROOF I TELL YA! CONCLUSIVE PROOF!! /sarcasm

Photographic Analysis - realplayer

23 posted on 11/07/2002 2:10:44 PM PST by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
Did Tom Hanks really fly around the moon? Curious minds need to know.
24 posted on 11/07/2002 2:11:22 PM PST by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GunRunner
Whoops. Bad link. Try it again.

Photographic Analysis

25 posted on 11/07/2002 2:11:54 PM PST by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Alta Mura
Because the Poverty Pimps want ALL of the MONEY!
26 posted on 11/07/2002 2:12:44 PM PST by Falcon4.0
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
If NASA really wants to settle this once and for all, all they need to do is aim the Hubble telescope to the Sea of Tranquility and focus in on the decarded lower lunar module and the flag. Great that they would rather piss more tax payer money away on something that could be either proved or debuncked with a simple turn of a space telescope.
27 posted on 11/07/2002 2:12:48 PM PST by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
Ha. None of the local fruitcakes would be convinced by a NASA picture.
28 posted on 11/07/2002 2:16:18 PM PST by KayEyeDoubleDee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bommer; RadioAstronomer
Could you answer this again please.
29 posted on 11/07/2002 2:18:18 PM PST by ASA Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
Nothing would convince them- these are clinacally sick people. It ain't about empircal evidence at all. Belief that the lunar landings were staged is a fanatical cult like belief impervious to facts and reality.
30 posted on 11/07/2002 2:21:11 PM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: clueless idiot
Yes, like maybe 30 or 40 years from now. At that time maybe the moon will have something we need and can't easily get on earth.
31 posted on 11/07/2002 2:21:18 PM PST by MrNeutron1962
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
   The moon is made of spam.

... or so Hormel would have us believe.

32 posted on 11/07/2002 2:25:28 PM PST by Mike-o-Matic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mike-o-Matic
LOL!!
33 posted on 11/07/2002 2:27:17 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
"If NASA really wants to settle this once and for all, all they need to do is aim the Hubble telescope to the Sea of Tranquility "

I don't think the Hubble can resolve objects that small at that distance. However, I understand that the new four mirror scope in the Chilean Andes can. But, observing time and access being what it is, and having no real scientific reason to do it, I'm not holding my breath waiting for these conclusive photos. Most of us believe that we went there anyway, its just the "Face of Mars" crowd that doubts it. I doubt pictures from earth would satisfy them anyway.

34 posted on 11/07/2002 2:27:57 PM PST by MrNeutron1962
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MrNeutron1962
it doesn't seem to have anything we need Whaddya mean? Everyone knows the Moon is made of green cheese. We could lessen our dependence on French cheese by importing Moon cheese. Sell it wrapped in tin foil for the conspiracy theorists.
35 posted on 11/07/2002 2:30:05 PM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MrNeutron1962
just the "Face of Mars" crowd that doubts it

Even Hoagland, who popularized the Face, has no patience with those who doubt the moon landings.

36 posted on 11/07/2002 2:30:54 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Does it matter at all whether Buzz Aldrin and the others walked on the moon?

It does if you are using a computer. Especially a laptop or PDA.

The Moon shot made miniaturization mandatory. Otherwise Freepers would need to add onto their homes to house their 500Hrtz/10kb computers.

37 posted on 11/07/2002 2:33:24 PM PST by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
Your Tax Dollars at Work
38 posted on 11/07/2002 2:34:48 PM PST by u-89
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
People that believe the moon landings were fake, should be shot on the sets were the moon landings were faked.
39 posted on 11/07/2002 2:39:26 PM PST by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elbucko
Yeah, I know. Nevermind that the military was using computers then, too, and building stuff just as complex or more complex than Apollo.
40 posted on 11/07/2002 2:41:09 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson