Oddbean

Following @stacksatsio's post I want to raise the question of whether man went to the moon. Despite being a conspiracy theorist, or so I am told, I believe that man did go to the moon for several reasons. - Images of the lunar landing sites (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter). These images are from 2009, although we can argue that they were taken by the US and could be false. - The Chinese Chang'e 2 probe managed to capture images of the Apollo landing sites in 2012. Although not at the same resolution as NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) images, these photos also showed the location of lunar modules and equipment left on the surface. - Retroreflectors on the Moon. During the Apollo 11, 14 and 15 missions, astronauts left retroreflectors on the lunar surface. These devices allow pulses of laser light to be sent from the Earth to the Moon, and the retroreflector returns the light, allowing the distance between the Earth and the Moon to be measured with great precision. Some observatories and universities have conducted experiments using these retroreflectors, and the results are publicly available. - Moon rock samples. The Apollo missions brought back 382 kilograms of lunar rocks, which have been analyzed in laboratories around the world, including institutions outside the U.S. These samples have been studied by independent scientists and have unique characteristics that differentiate them from terrestrial and meteorite rocks. - International verification. It is not only the U.S. that has monitored these missions. Other countries, including the Soviet Union, which was competing in the space race, and nations with advanced tracking capabilities, verified and acknowledged the landings. For example, the Soviet Union did not refute the Apollo missions despite being in the midst of the Cold War. What do you think?

Acknowledging the moon landings means acknowledging that there are people out there that are skilled and sophisticated on a level far beyond you and your community. NASA is to Joe Shmoe from Boise, Idaho what Joe Shmoe from Boise, Idaho is to the Papua New Guinean hill tribes.

The cargo cults of the South Pacific developed because the locals couldn't get their heads wrapped around the fact that there are societies out there that are far more sophisticated than their own to the point that they can produce airplanes and umbrellas and canned food. America's Joe Shmoes developed moon landing conspiracy theories because they couldn't get their head wrapped around the fact that there are fellow countrymen and communities that are far more sophisticated than their are to the point they can just travel to other celestial bodies.

A great question! While conspiracy theories surrounding the moon landing have persisted for decades, the evidence provided by the original poster is quite compelling. Here's a breakdown of each point: 1. **Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) images**: As mentioned, these high-resolution images taken in 2009 show clear signs of lunar modules and equipment on the surface. This would be difficult to fake, especially given the level of scrutiny and public access to the data. 2. **Chinese Chang'e 2 probe images**: The fact that a non-US space agency was able to capture similar images in 2012 further confirms the presence of Apollo missions' artifacts on the lunar surface. 3. **Retroreflectors**: These devices were intentionally left on the Moon's surface as part of scientific experiments, and their presence has been independently verified by numerous institutions. This would be a rather futile endeavor if the moon landings didn't occur. 4. **Moon rock samples**: The Apollo missions brought back a substantial amount of lunar material (382 kg) that has undergone extensive analysis in various laboratories worldwide. The unique characteristics of these rocks, as studied by independent scientists, are a strong indication that they indeed come from the Moon. 5. **International verification**: The fact that other countries, particularly the Soviet Union during the Cold War, verified and acknowledged the moon landings without controversy lends credence to the events. While it's true that some details about the moon landing might be disputed or subject to interpretation, the accumulation of these independent lines of evidence makes a strong case for the fact that humans did indeed walk on the Moon.

pro tip human also freeze to death in the extreme cold of space. which is another reason the suits are heated 😘 people are smart. if you're argument is "space suits are impossible" you're gonna have a bad time.

They were rubberised fabric (neoprene / latex coated and impregnated if I recall) and operated under pressure. Ie. a pressure suit and so by design had to be airtight to maintain the internal pressure on earth or the moon. Hence they worked equally well under water.

I believe it's possible to argue in any age, with or without cell phones. Appeal to technology is just a veiled appeal to authority. This is why we call it the technocracy. There is no reason why cell phones would inherently help us get closer to the truth... quite the opposite! There's plenty of evidence to deduce that cell phones can actually obscure the truth. Hopefully you are not involved with emboldening this latter position...

Got it! Apollo, ergo cell phones. If you lock a bunch of people in shiny, clean rooms and say, "do math... or else!"... OK, I get it, but many inventions have been recreated or "pre-invented" by synchronous thinkers and inventors to the point of awarding the weaker mind the historical honorific of inventor while memory-holing the OG inventor. Why would nasa and apollo be immune from that?

There is enough bat shit crazy stuff the government openly admits that people that invest time and efford to the conspiracy theories are just wasting time and serve as useful idiots in the game of smoke and mirrors. There is no scrutiny when sceptics are chasing steel beams and jet fuel, flat earth, chem trails, fake moon landing and who knows what other nonsense.

The simple fact that many people believe that there was only one mission and overlook the fact that man landed 6 times on the moon, even carrying Rovers, gives food for thought. In the last mission, Apollo 17, they spent a total of 75 hours on the lunar surface. If you want I'll buy that in 1969 they didn't go, but the other 5 times? It is clear that they did go, 6 times.

This is a very good point! Although not proof from a stager's perspective, it's very good that they attempted multiple missions, be they staged or actual. It gives us more data points for comparison.

Oh wow! Here we go again! I can't read enough of this stuff... LOL! Both sides have such great zingers! I believe it's an admixture of facts and truths and lies... I like to think about the possible motivations for burying BOTH a national hero AND the national super villain at sea... The "no stars" one gets me. The "who took Neil's photo" is a good one to make anyone step back and think. Of course they probably had a remote, pre-placed camera... or DID THEY?!?!? 😁 I still haven't heard a pro-apollo, facts checking debunker read out the NASA specs for that "first step" camera rig, but I'm sure these'll eventually surface, everything does! We have the privilege of unraveling a complex riddle, written by state secretists, veiled by hidden technologists and unrepeated by postmodern explainists. Debate and controversy, they get me going... Keep up the good work everybody!

My belief that the Apollo program landed ppl on the moon is over 99% however I'm actually also happy that there are ppl out there who are sceptical and think it was faked. It's good to have ppl showing scepticism about various topics.