Did we really got to the moon? : Othor Games

» Fri May 27, 2011 3:47 am

Answer this,if that many years ago we were able to go to the moon,why , after all that time we couldn't do it again?

The technology made huge progress ,yet we couldn't do it again.

The Russian and Americans went to the moon with the help of that "ancient" technology,and now when we are much more advanced....

I don't believe man was ever on the moon.

Discuss this matter here.

» Fri May 27, 2011 1:17 pm

Sure why not.

» Fri May 27, 2011 12:35 pm

Because Micro$oft said no one can go to the moon.

» Fri May 27, 2011 9:37 am

I think we have , just now there is more pressing matters at hand like the wars , possible global warming and economic troubles get in the way.

» Fri May 27, 2011 3:33 pm

Answer this,if that many years ago we were able to go to the moon,why , after all that time we couldn't do it again?

The technology made huge progress ,yet we couldn't do it again.

The Russian and Americans went to the moon with the help of that "ancient" technology,and now when we are much more advanced....

I don't believe man was ever on the moon.

Discuss this matter here.

That's nice, I guess.

You seem to insist that we can't go to the moon again. Perhaps you should consider rephrasing that to "we have no motivation to do it again." There's no dike-jousting to be had iwth the Soviets anymore, no national ego to massage. After going there just to say we could, there's really not much left to do on or with the moon. It's a dead hunk of ejected earthen proto-material. With some hidden water on it.

What exactly are you basing your opinion of "we can't go to the moon again" on? The fact that we haven't gone? Not engaging in an action is not evidence of inability to engage in said action.

» Fri May 27, 2011 8:10 am

Answer this,if that many years ago we were able to go to the moon,why , after all that time we couldn't do it again?

The technology made huge progress ,yet we couldn't do it again.

The Russian and Americans went to the moon with the help of that "ancient" technology,and now when we are much more advanced....

I don't believe man was ever on the moon.

Discuss this matter here.

Except it's not true; we DID go back to the moon, an additional five times after Apollo 11.

» Fri May 27, 2011 9:22 am

I have my doubts. I've researched it extensively and I have heard pros and cons from both sides. The easiest answer is we went. However the biggest reason to fake it would be that the Cold War was lighting up and we were already behind with the Russian launch of Spudnik. So we could have falsified information to make us seem more advanced. It is something that will NEVER be answered if we didn't so I choose not to really care. :shrug:

» Fri May 27, 2011 7:56 am

That's nice, I guess.

You seem to insist that we can't go to the moon again. Perhaps you should consider rephrasing that to "we have no motivation to do it again." There's no dike-jousting to be had iwth the Soviets anymore, no national ego to massage. After going there just to say we could, there's really not much left to do on or with the moon. It's a dead hunk of ejected earthen proto-material. With some hidden water on it.

Well "we" tried again and failed.

It was possible in 59' and 69' with that ancient tech,but when "we" tried again we failed.

» Fri May 27, 2011 12:36 am

Ah, I love the smell of wacky conspiracy theories in the morning.

We made several trips to the moon. If there was a good solid economic reason for doing more trips there, with the enormous expense, I am sure there would be more traffic to the moon. :shrug:

Well "we" tried again and failed.

It was possible in 59' and 69' with that ancient tech,but when "we" tried again we failed.

Might help if "we" knew "who" and what you were talking about. If you have some article or website you are getting your theories from, do tell.

» Thu May 26, 2011 11:07 pm

Well "we" tried again and failed.

It was possible in 59' and 69' with that ancient tech,but when "we" tried again we failed.

When have we tried again and failed? Source? I have not heard of anything regarding it.

And even if true, lots of plausible explanations for it. Lack of NASA funding, for one. Lack of national public interest, for another. It's not all the tech that gets one to the moon; it's the telemitry and calculations and manpower that configures all the proper tradjectories as well. Not to mention the lack of "sense of urgency mode" degrading work ethics and precision.

» Fri May 27, 2011 9:53 am

Alright here is another thing that bothers me. Going into space requires at least a minimal amount of radiation exposure. Okay, so how were they able to get all the photos that they did? Obviously film would have been destroyed. And on top of that, how did NONE of the astronauts suffer ANY issues with exposure to radiation? It's just odd.

» Fri May 27, 2011 12:30 am

We can,and have gone to the moon again.

I don't know why you insist we can't do it again..because we could,if there was a reason to waste millions and millions(or would it be in the billions?) on doing it again.

It's a rock,with some water in it..we don't need to waste money on going to it again.

» Fri May 27, 2011 9:26 am

Sigh. I think we landed on the moon, but why do you care whether we did or not? And where's your proofs we didn't?

» Fri May 27, 2011 1:43 pm

When have we tried again and failed? Source? I have not heard of anything regarding it.

And even if true, lots of plausible explanations for it. Lack of NASA funding, for one. Lack of national public interest, for another. It's not all the tech that gets one to the moon; it's the telemitry and calculations and manpower that configures all the proper tradjectories as well. Not to mention the lack of "sense of urgency mode" degrading work ethics and precision.

Apollo 13.

» Fri May 27, 2011 10:31 am

sigh... not this again...

yes we went to the moon...

YES we went 6 times...

and NO there is no REAL evidence we did not go to the moon

» Fri May 27, 2011 10:44 am

Alright here is another thing that bothers me. Going into space requires at least a minimal amount of radiation exposure. Okay, so how were they able to get all the photos that they did? Obviously film would have been destroyed. And on top of that, how did NONE of the astronauts suffer ANY issues with exposure to radiation? It's just odd.

This exactly, until someone explains that to me I can't put the whole "moon-landing conspiracy" behind me. (Just like Schnakers, I don't really care because it doesn't really effect me either way...)

» Fri May 27, 2011 12:56 am

Yay, gotta love conspiracy theories. Especially unoriginal ones.

» Fri May 27, 2011 4:36 am

When have we tried again and failed? Source? I have not heard of anything regarding it.

And even if true, lots of plausible explanations for it. Lack of NASA funding, for one.

They get about 17 billion a year, that is quite a bit. However they have a space station to maintain and launching a ship into space is quite expensive plus they have to pay all the employees so the money from what I assume is not there to go with that amount of money.

» Thu May 26, 2011 11:15 pm

Apollo 13.

Apollo 13 didn't make it because of the machine failing,just because something malfunctioned doesn't mean that it's impossible for us to get to the moon at all.

» Fri May 27, 2011 3:44 am

Apollo 13.

...and after Apollo 13 the US still sent people to the moon several times afterwards.

It's a really bad argument to say that since Apollo 13 failed, the OTHER landings must have been faked, because surely you must consider Apollo 13 to have been faked as well.

» Fri May 27, 2011 8:55 am

Yay, gotta love conspiracy theories. Especially unoriginal ones.

do not forget lame...

» Thu May 26, 2011 11:21 pm

...and after Apollo 13 the US still sent people to the moon several times afterwards.

It's a really bad argument to say that since Apollo 13 failed, the OTHER landings must have been faked, because surely you must consider Apollo 13 to have been faked as well.

I could go on about wired shadows on the photographs or how they even managed to take them with all that radiation around.
But i am too lazy to go that deep.

» Fri May 27, 2011 5:48 am

Dear christ, you're not one of nutjobs at the Flat Earth Society are you? Yes we went to the moon. Now stop with the conspiracies will ya? There is more than enough proof and very valid proof that we did so.

» Fri May 27, 2011 2:58 am

I feel it's worth pointing out that we did go to the moon but the footage was faked.

Spoiler

I believe the truth always lies halfway between the most extreme claims.

Hey you quoting this post in order to tell me how wrong I am, read this comic before embarrassing yourself. http://xkcd.com/690/

» Fri May 27, 2011 8:56 am

Apollo 13 is far from proof, considering the risks involved in the Apollo program, one accident "in action" is to be expected.

As to why we don't do it, here's why: In todays value, the Apollo program cost about $150 billion dollars. 150 billion dollars. Why spend that just proving that "we can".

Also, we don't actually have any new lunar landing technology, which means you'd have to develop that as well. There's no interest in the moon until we can build a base there. Until then, you won't bother developing the tech "just for fun".