Man on the moon
supersonic
Posts: 82,708
40 years ago this week (or last week). Did they go? Could they have done it really?!
[/i]
[/i]
0
Comments
-
Yes, they went.
/topic0 -
You are obviously missing the none converging shadows in that pic ;-)0
-
Proof
somewhere"Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
Parktools :?:SheldonBrown0 -
yes they went, yes a lot of the pix have been doctored by the NASA airbrushing department but I believe in those cases they were tidied up for PR public consumption reasons.0
-
Hercule Q wrote:right thats one conspericy down next is the loch ness monster
Loch Ness Monster never went to the moon.0 -
yeah space is one big giant vacuum so how are they breathing without that goldfish bowl like helmet on there noggin0
-
I remember watching it on TV until I fell asleep. In those days there was very little hype and bs and if somebody said they'd done something, they had.0
-
Cat With No Tail wrote:Hercule Q wrote:right thats one conspericy down next is the loch ness monster
Loch Ness Monster never went to the moon.
I think they didn't done it. If they did land on the moon why they don't go again now,
and give us a live colourfull coverage. That will stop this debate forever.0 -
Xtreem wrote:Cat With No Tail wrote:Hercule Q wrote:right thats one conspericy down next is the loch ness monster
Loch Ness Monster never went to the moon.
I think they didn't done it. If they did land on the moon why they don't go again now,
and give us a live colourfull coverage. That will stop this debate forever.
I would imagine it's probably in no small part due to the fact that they cant be bothered spending billions of dollars just to prove some tin foil hat conspiricists wrong.
I do think they landed on the moon, I believe that they walked on the moon and did all the other things they said they did.
However, I do think NASA had some other pics made up. wether that was just to save face in case the landing didnt go as planned, or because the pics the Astronauts took were rubbish or the cameras didnt work or just because they wanted it to look more exciting than just some blokes stood on a grey rock. I think that these pics, over the last 40 years, have found their way into the public forum (as these things do).0 -
Clangers were there years before anyway
0 -
lol @ the clangers
Here's some theories and counter theories.
http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/Scott Scale Custom
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v496/ ... C09729.jpg
Kona Coilair 2007 Dark Peak Destroyer
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v496/ ... C09727.jpg
"BOCD - If it aint perfect it aint good enough"0 -
explain to me where their helmets were when this picture was taken, surely they would have suffocated due to the lack of oxygen on the moon????
Personally think its another conspiracy and do not believe they landed on the moon. More likely landed on a desolate piece of desert in nevada or texas.supersonic wrote:40 years ago this week (or last week). Did they go? Could they have done it really?!
[/i]2009 Trek 3900 disc https://www.flickr.com/photos/125245570 ... 613755884/
2014 Cube Peloton Pro https://www.flickr.com/photos/125245570 ... 613364814/0 -
Xtreem wrote:If they did land on the moon why they don't go again now,
and give us a live colourfull coverage. That will stop this debate forever.
As for the moon landings "If you look for a conspiracy, you will find one. Always."You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
xSTRATHYx wrote:explain to me where their helmets were when this picture was taken, surely they would have suffocated due to the lack of oxygen on the moon????
Personally think its another conspiracy and do not believe they landed on the moon. More likely landed on a desolate piece of desert in nevada or texas.supersonic wrote:40 years ago this week (or last week). Did they go? Could they have done it really?!
[/i]0 -
Cat With No Tail wrote:Hercule Q wrote:right thats one conspericy down next is the loch ness monster
Loch Ness Monster never went to the moon.
:PIt takes as much courage to have tried and failed as it does to have tried and succeeded.
Join us on UK-MTB we won't bite, but bring cake!
Blender Cube AMS Pro0 -
Daz555 wrote:Xtreem wrote:If they did land on the moon why they don't go again now,
and give us a live colourfull coverage. That will stop this debate forever.
As for the moon landings "If you look for a conspiracy, you will find one. Always."
And before, I did believed they landed on the moon, but because of the Internet now,
I'm not so sure about that.
Btw, there is no point of landing a man on Mars.0 -
Has no-one seen the mythbusters moon landing special then, I take it?
They finished the show with indisputable proof.0 -
Daz555 wrote:As for the moon landings "If you look for a conspiracy, you will find one. Always."
Enduring and persistent conspiracy "theories" arise and gain momentum when serious questions go unanswered. NASA, like any other large governmental institution, continually shoot themselves in the foot by their own lack of communication and willingness to use airbrushing techniques on raw footage so accusations of foul play can and always will be levelled at them, rightly or wrongly.0 -
thekickingmule wrote:Cat With No Tail wrote:Hercule Q wrote:right thats one conspericy down next is the loch ness monster
Loch Ness Monster never went to the moon.
:P
and thats why noones found him in loch ness, he's on the moon!
we're getting good at this conspiracy cracking0 -
I wholeheartedly believe they went to the moon - the arguments I have seen against are circular, and weak at best. Slight anomalies do not 'prove' that they did not go - and all of them can be reasonably explained.0
-
sonic - are you writing a column for NASA today or something lol
hence the "sitting on fence comment"supersonic wrote:I wholeheartedly believe they went to the moon - the arguments I have seen against are circular, and weak at best. Slight anomalies do not 'prove' that they did not go - and all of them can be reasonably explained.2009 Trek 3900 disc https://www.flickr.com/photos/125245570 ... 613755884/
2014 Cube Peloton Pro https://www.flickr.com/photos/125245570 ... 613364814/0 -
supersonic wrote:I wholeheartedly believe they went to the moon - the arguments I have seen against are circular, and weak at best. Slight anomalies do not 'prove' that they did not go - and all of them can be reasonably explained.0
-
blister pus wrote:supersonic wrote:I wholeheartedly believe they went to the moon - the arguments I have seen against are circular, and weak at best. Slight anomalies do not 'prove' that they did not go - and all of them can be reasonably explained.
Yehhhh!Pictures are better than words because some words are big and hard to understand.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34335188@N07/3336802663/0 -
In some cases, but a lack of readily available explaination does not disprove they want to the moon.0
-
Actually, most of the "anomalies" can be explained away rather easily by a property of light called "radiance".
You don't need any clever degrees or letters after your name to test it out for yourselves either, just a large dark room, and a single light source.
Seriously, did NO-ONE see the mythbusters special?0 -
I might have - and have seen similar progs. They are on Youtube now I think.0
-
yeehaamcgee wrote:Actually, most of the "anomalies" can be explained away rather easily by a property of light called "radiance".
You don't need any clever degrees or letters after your name to test it out for yourselves either, just a large dark room, and a single light source.
Seriously, did NO-ONE see the mythbusters special?
no - what was the indisputable proof?0