Moon Landing: Fake or Real?

[Rampant.A.I.]

So.... considering I'm across the Atlantic Ocean and all I have access is the media, ... a few questions on the credibility of the whole thing do arise... :P

Did it really happen?
Were there ever the twin towers?
Was the whole thing a hoax? Filmed with hundreds of extras in some Hollywood studio?
Are the twin towers still in there?
Is there independent footage of the event? (2001.... hmmm... can't remember exactly, but phones were starting to get cameras)

Did Al-Qaeda really claim the attack?
Was Al-Qaeda funded and armed by the US?
Did the US supply weapons to the Afghanistan talibans before 9-11? If yes, why would they destroy two buildings in the US?

That thing in the pentagon... is there footage of the "event"?
Footage after the event?
What sort of line of sight does a casual civilian have of the pentagon building itself? Any Independent footage available?

I've seen the media reports.... always sketchy...
I've seen one conspiracy theorist's site.... even sketchier...
I don't know what to think, guys, you who are closer to the thing, provide evidence of what happened, please.
I was sort of hoping for something like this with your replies to the "professor", but I saw nothing of the sort... just some angry people trying to kick him out, or something... why is that? If you guys are so sure of what happened, then you can provide evidence or a link to where that evidence is... right?

So you just watched Loose Change, and are unaware the film has been thoroughly debunked?

I have friends who cleared Al Qaeda occupied buildings where they were hollowing out babies to fill with explosives. If you don't think a terrorist strike was possible, and think the same government that couldn't cover up watergate or the fact that the president got a BJ from an intern is capable of a conspiracy to kill American civilians involving hundreds of thousands of co-conspirators, not one of whom have done forward, you're out of your mind.

[thesummerqueen]

I'm hoping he's trolling and not actively being that google-stupid.

[professor]

Poc, thanks for a reasonable post from yourself.

Whenever evidence does not agree with the story, something is wrong.

One thing you can do is "Follow the money". Or "Who benefits"?

In the case of the fake moon landing, it is the Defense contractors who worked for NASA and the politicians and bankers whose participation brought gain for themselves. Huge gains.
Gains that people kill for.
For 911, the ensuing war brought similar gains to the same type of people.
There are so many anomalies with the event that warrant investigation.
The system will absolutely not do it and anyone who does is detracted.

I ask, "Why this loyalty to the official line"?
You and I are the victimized part of the population, NOT the ones benefiting.
I could understand loyalty if you were raking in millions as a result of an event.
But that is not the case is it?

[Jackalope]

I'm hoping he's trolling and not actively being that google-stupid.

I would prepare to be disappointed.

[Rampant.A.I.]

Poc, thanks for a reasonable post from yourself.

Whenever evidence does not agree with the story, something is wrong.

One thing you can do is "Follow the money". Or "Who benefits"?

In the case of the fake moon landing, it is the Defense contractors who worked for NASA and the politicians and bankers whose participation brought gain for themselves. Huge gains.
Gains that people kill for.

Ever been to hear Buzz Aldrin speak?

You'd probably have a lot to talk about. He's a little senile, and thinks he saw a UFO in space. Which you think are part of a pact with demons who fly saucers, or something to that effect.

[Brakeman]

Poc, thanks for a reasonable post from yourself.

Whenever evidence does not agree with the story, something is wrong.

One thing you can do is "Follow the money". Or "Who benefits"?

In the case of the fake moon landing, it is the Defense contractors who worked for NASA and the politicians and bankers whose participation brought gain for themselves. Huge gains.
Gains that people kill for.
For 911, the ensuing war brought similar gains to the same type of people.
There are so many anomalies with the event that warrant investigation.
The system will absolutely not do it and anyone who does is detracted.

I ask, "Why this loyalty to the official line"?
You and I are the victimized part of the population, NOT the ones benefiting.
I could understand loyalty if you were raking in millions as a result of an event.
But that is not the case is it?

Personally, I enjoy reading about wild conspiracy theories. They are very good training for analytical thought. There are so many traps to logical sequencing that can lead one down the wrong path. I like them like some people like crosswords or Sudoku puzzles.

Like a magician that only shows the audience the misleading part of the illusion, some people use world events to spin stories that further their own agenda. Yet Sometimes conspiracy theorist are actually right! And almost invariably, time tells the tell. Secrets eventually get out.

In the moon landing, time is very telling. The engineers and astronauts that participated in the first landings did not die or disappear behind assumed names. They continued their work. The companies that participated then are still in business now and the technology used in those landings did not disappear, it was reused extensively and built upon to become the technology that we have today. Our cell phones with their microprocessors, gps, and positional sensors are evidence that those technologies had beginnings. Those beginnings were from these men in this program. These men had names and their companies were well known. The men and women in the space program continued to work week by week innovating and improving technology and it's use.

While it may be somewhat reasonable to argue that a particular event in the space program may not have occurred on a particular time or place when the evidence is questionable, but the evidence that technology builds upon itself and that tech companies and scientists use accomplishments as stepping stones cannot be in doubt.

We know, independent of other evidence, that the moon landing or something equally as technologically difficult, occurred in the late sixties and you are using the proof everyday, even as you type your replies.

Moon landing hoaxers never claim that it was really Apollo 12 that was the first as opposed to 11, no they claim that all of the technology is fake, which is totally laughable considering our technological word of today.

What particular technological challenge do you think was too insurmountable? The breathing apparatus? The rocket engine? The taste of tang?

[Jackalope]

What particular technological challenge do you think was too insurmountable? The breathing apparatus? The rocket engine? The taste of tang?

Unless I'm completely missing what the conspiracists claim, it's not likely that it's any of those things.

Do they claim that we didn't get to earth orbit? EVA? Rendezvous and return safely to earth? Travel to and orbit the moon, returning the astronauts to earth?

No. The claims, as I have read them, are all concerned with the actual lunar landings - which means that what has to be in doubt is the ability of NASA to land the LEM on the moon, perform the lunar excursions, and then return the LEM from the surface to lunar orbit. By Apollo 11, they had done literally everything else.

Literally all of the other problems had been demonstrably solved. What remained was not, as far as I am aware, any more difficult.

[popeyespappy]

What particular technological challenge do you think was too insurmountable? The breathing apparatus? The rocket engine? The taste of tang?

Space toilets.

[Jackalope]

What particular technological challenge do you think was too insurmountable? The breathing apparatus? The rocket engine? The taste of tang?

Space toilets.

Problem solved.

[popeyespappy]

That particular technology is post Apollo.