50 years since man landed on the Moon

supercity88 said:
Perhaps not. You believe what you see. If most people working on it believed it was true then it would be easy to hide. I struggle to understand how they managed to go to the moon despite every previous attempt being a failure. Russia were far more successful in their earlier attempts but the US had to win the race, politically. The growth of Hollywood means it would be an easy plan B to fake it. I do not believe they could successfully transmit footage back in that day and age. But they managed it. Why? Because it was all on tape. The world was conned and so were the majority of those working for NASA.
Click to expand...
Our very own Jodrell bank tracked the entire mission there and back. There's also a refector placed on the moon that they shine a laser at to measure the increasing distance. Please stop with this conspiracy bollocks.
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/experiments/lrr/
 
I always find the moon landing is a good way of showing up peoples natural stupidity and a complete lack of very basic scientific knowledge and at a push, common sense.

Van Allen belts, not enough fuel and no stars quite a highlight in this thread.

And don't even get me started on Flat Earthers....
 
KS55 said:
Back then, I had a programmable calculator. One of the programs was the one used by Armstrong to land the lunar module. There was just one control available to the pilot: "Burn", which allowed you to alter the speed of descent..
The output was : height, speed, and fuel. You had to land the module at a safe speed without using too much fuel.Much more difficult than it looked. In reality, I believe Armsrtrong was just a few seconds from the fuel limit. Go over, and there's no getting back.The mission's on board computing power would be dwarfed today by a single mobile phone.
Watched the landing with my gf. The picture quality was poor, but you could see enough.
The celebratory sex was better than the events on screen.
And less of the "old farts", please @crooky .
Click to expand...


To the moon and back with less computing power than a stylophone

th



Best film about the early days of the space program

 
Elbow beards said:
Our very own Jodrell bank tracked the entire mission there and back. There's also a refector placed on the moon that they shine a laser at to measure the increasing distance. Please stop with this conspiracy bollocks.
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/experiments/lrr/
Click to expand...


They tracked lots of missions for both the Americans and Russians at Jodrell Bank as neither country had the capability..... we were seen as 'Independent verification'
 
denislawsbackheel said:
You couldn’t make this shit up...
I don’t believe in powered flight.
I struggle to understand how the Wright brothers managed to get airborne despite every previous attempt being a failure.
Click to expand...

Every previous attempt was disastrous. Yet they suddenly nail it...right when politically they needed to. Funny that. Not a chance they went.
 
supercity88 said:
Perhaps not. You believe what you see. If most people working on it believed it was true then it would be easy to hide. I struggle to understand how they managed to go to the moon despite every previous attempt being a failure. Russia were far more successful in their earlier attempts but the US had to win the race, politically. The growth of Hollywood means it would be an easy plan B to fake it. I do not believe they could successfully transmit footage back in that day and age. But they managed it. Why? Because it was all on tape. The world was conned and so were the majority of those working for NASA.
Click to expand...
I think you've been conned into believing it didn't happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.