They say No

They say yes

what do you say?

what do you say?

i say it was faked.

I'd say it was faked too, how come there's no poll in this one?

I don't think it was faked..........if you break-down any event into minute details you could say it was faked......and as for that letter c on the rock ?so what? wold the us govt go to all the trouble of faking a moon landing only to let some guy carve his girlfriends initial on a prop

Of course they would,remember at the time of space travel/moon landings they were in competition with the Russians where billions of dollars were involved,so they couldn't be seen as a failure.


It was faked.

its true

it must be
or my claim to fame, of touching some moon rock would be dispelled

it is as true or not true as the crash of the boing in the pentagon...

this threads gonna open up a whole can of worms!

like scorp says they had to beat the russians in the space race, and the russians were ahead until the US suddenly landed on the moon, stopping the russians dead in their tracks.

And also diverted the public attention from other domestic scandals.

ok will change this to a poll

tis a poll now

i say faked, the evidence against seems more belivaable than that saying its true

and the sun is made out of beef no ? .............

I don't know .... I've never really studied this topic much ... although I have heard it being spoken about a lot before !

hmmmmmmmmm, your a man of the law, go look at the evidence, its not Miss Marple stuff you know

a man of the law ......... what makes u say that ? lol ....

It's one of those conspiracy theories ....... like the fact that UFO's landed on earth .... oh boy, I feel this could lead to another thread .........

ive looked at all the evidence and they were real.

its all rubbish about the flag fluttering and all that stuff, all the conspiracies have simple explainable answers.


the only one ive found that is a coverup is the 9/11 attack on the pentagon, theres no way it was a jumbo jet thats for sure

I think it was faked too, they just didnt have the technolgy, and tin foil, wouldnt have protected them from that nasty vananderson belt,
i believe that it could be done now. but what i find most interesting is all the "outspoken" astronaughts that died in horrific "simulator" fires and explosions!!!! how the hell does a simulator explode????

I understand why people think they're fake but its hard to ignore the mirror they left on the surface that gets used by all kinds of scientists. They regularly bounce lasers off it to monitor and calculate all kinds of distance and position experiments. ( By they I mean all kinds of research groups not just NASA)

I've seen a couple of documentories on this and I believe it to be FAKE!

if it was faked - do you not think that the Russians would have killed themselves proving that?

do you think they simply went "Dammski comrade - those dratted Americans have beaten us to the moon!", and then went for a drink.



do you mean the Vietnam war?

it never distracted people from the vietnam war.





that not an argument mate - thats just your beliefs.

what makes the "fake" evidence more compelling than the "real" evidence?




The guy who "discovered" the van allen belts has himself said that this claims are false.

the deaths of people involved in the project are not too surprising. There must have been tens of thousands of people involved in this project.

1 - the deaths of some of them is not too unusual
2 - do you think all of these people were kept in on such a huge secret?

If its true then why haven't they been back.

If it was that easy then surly they could get a man to mars.....but they cant even do that.

anyone seen capricorn 1? the movie about making the moonlanding movie? very good i think
and the mirror on the moon. well i guess that could have been set there by a probe

Or could of been dropped by someone in makeup.

well they have to look they're best.

a case of "been there done that", said the atmosphere wasnt all that

isnt mars too hot ? or is it too cold ?

With all the so called technical know-how surly they could get a man up there.













or can they

Been there done that doesn't cut it for me as they cant know everything from a couple of samples of rock or some coloured sand........you can get that from the isle of wight.

dont think there is much emphasis on the human getting there as they have robots and machines that can do the same job, without the risk of life, supposidly they have allready done it, (but thats another story to be doubted)

cant see that there is much more to find out, if they were to discover oil on the moon it would be impossible to get it back, if you think about it, that they havent discovered the possibiltys of everyplace on earth yet

If there was oil up there they would find a way to get it back.

Anyway it wouldn't belong to us coz the yanks would claim it was theirs.



Still fake though,no-one has been to the moon for a walkabout.

There was a doc about this recently, one undisputable piece of evidence that they went was that an experiment they left there in 69 is still running and sending back data via an indepenant company.

The doc also did an experiment about other facts like the way the flag was waving in an non-air environment, was that the whole flag moved due to the movement of the pole rather than the air moving the flag.

I'd say that we have been to the moon.

Another thing is because of the race and the cold war the Russkies would know if they were lying and expose them. Its common thought that if we needed to live on the moon right now all the tech stuff exists. The only thing holding us back is there isn't enough of an advantage to doing so yet and therefore no real driving force to do so.

A total of 840 pounds of rocks and dust were brought back by the astronauts. The thousands of scientists around the world who have studied the Apollo samples agree: They could not have come from Earth.

Unlike Earth rocks, the lunar samples are totally devoid of water, even within their crystal structures. Their chemical compositions, in particular the ratio of iron and manganese, set them apart from any of Earth’s native rocks. They are extraordinarily ancient, some almost as old as the solar system. Perhaps, most importantly, their surfaces show the effects of bombardment by high-speed micrometeorites and subatomic particles from the solar wind—neither of which can affect terrestrial rocks because our atmosphere screens them out. These so-called "zap pits" would have also been wiped out had the rocks fallen to Earth as lunar meteorites; the tremendous heat generated by their high-velocity passage through our atmosphere would have erased any such surface features. The Apollo samples must have been brought back from the Moon

I alway was led to belive the moon was created from a chuck of earth blasted outt from an impact during the earths creation

so wouldnt it be made from the same stuff as earth?

and :

the race was between the usa and russia

russia had allready beaten the usa to have the first person in space
usa then landed on the moon

they then had effectively won

but they then repeated sending men up
over 5 more missions another ten men went up

why would they do that if they had faked the first
they had nothing to win anymore

and.........why has it taken over 30 years to question the event

ive got a whole load of stuff relating to this in a binder somewhere, will have to dig it out and post some snippets.

"The World's Greatest Conspiracys" programme shows that the pictures were faked, if not the whole trip.

There are two pictures which are supposed to be a couple of kilometres apart, yet the programme superimposed one picture on the other and the only differences were the props in the foreground.

Without any atmosphere, the flag appears to flutter.

Cross hairs supposedly etched onto the camera's optics show some were obscured by the props in the photos.

Also the shadows in the pictures are divergent when the only source of light was the Sun which is 93m miles away. Also pictures show the astronauts well lit even in shadows.

Also the rocket motors were too quiet on descent.

There was no dust on the LIM foot pads and no crater where the rocket motors would have been blasting.

The programme clams that the Russians never went to the Moon because the radiation outside the Earth's magnetic field is lethal.

The profits from this would have been huge.

[quote=flotsam,Feb 7 2005, 12:19 AM]
"The World's Greatest Conspiracys"


the clue is in the title of the programme methinks, a program with a name like this is always going to look for any reason to call into question the moon landings or anything connected to it. Just think many people are making a good living and selling lots of books by calling into question anything the us govt does.

My opinion is:

The first moon landing was faked - the americans were so worried about the Russians getting there first, they didnt actually land in the first case.

However, the subsequent landings were actually true..

I also think the Apollo 13 disaster was faked too - people had lost interest in NASA space exploration, and im sorry, but the actual story played out like a hollywood movie (almost as much as the hollywood movie), it just strikes me as a wonderful way to regain interest, and also an excuse to shut down a very expensive process of landing people on the moon...

my 2 pence worth....

The landings took place but the photos were faked........

When they got back they discovered the pictures from the chest cameras were so poor that they couldn't be released. Therefore they recreated photos for the media. Not convinced???? Then just compare the initial terrible quality video of the first step with the subsequent glorious shots of the astronauts bouncing about the place....

video and photography are two different types of media anyway so you cant compare quality between the two.

The moon doesnt really exist, its just a light bulb in a space ship which we all live in some aliens petri dish as a school experiment

Definately fake .... well i reckon anyway

Too much evidence is pointing to a fake :

1) Van Allen Belt and non protective space suits.
2) Film in bog standard Hassleblad cameras still in pristine condition.
3) Photos allegedly taken miles apart showing same rock formation.
4) Lighting irregularities.
5) The list goes on.....................

defintately fakeD!