Does the Moon exist?

One of the interesting things about the moon landing is that when you discuss it with people it becomes an automatic sheep filter. People who think for themselves are receptive and curious to the concept that it may have been faked -- even though it is of no consequence -- by contrast those who are under heavy ideological or peer pressure programing react violently to the idea.

 

[Shin]

One of the interesting things about the moon landing is that when you discuss it with people it becomes an automatic sheep filter. People who think for themselves are receptive and curious to the concept that it may have been faked -- even though it is of no consequence -- by contrast those who are under heavy ideological or peer pressure programing react violently to the idea.

Quite true, and interesting as well.

Things is, there is proof of people traveling to the moon, landing on the moon, and returning to Earth either safely or not. There have been astronauts lost in certain missions to other 'sites' as well.

To me, I don't see how it is possible to argue that the moon doesn't exist with the proof that is available, unless you've attempted to travel there yourself. Otherwise, you're just handing out arguments without evidence to back it.

Hm. :\

 

To me, I don't see how it is possible to argue that the moon doesn't exist with the proof that is available, unless you've attempted to travel there yourself. Otherwise, you're just handing out arguments without evidence to back it.

Hm. :\

I didn't take the original thread subject seriously either. The moon definitely exists, most of its surface has been mapped by satellites and you can see it through a telescope or with the naked eye.

 

[Grave]

The moon does exist. If you want to take a look at it go ahead and check out Google Moon. As Sythe also stated, you can see it through a telescope and even without one at night.

However, a lot of people argue that we did not really land on the moon. Those who doubt it always bring up shadow angles and such in the pictures, and state that they are false. This has been proven wrong many times, and one of the most interesting shows to prove it was Mythbusters.

Oh, and the answer to your question: There are no stars because those pictures were taken in daylight on the moon. This makes it very difficult to see the stars.

Source:

This is perhaps the favorite argument of the TMLWF crowd. "There are no stars to be seen in any of the NASA Moon photographs." It is also one of the most easily countered arguments. The lunar photographs show no stars in them because they were exposed for the daylight lit lunar scenes! This badly underexposes any stars in the sky. Try setting up a manual camera (the autoexposure cameras won't easily allow you to do this) for a typical daylight exposure - use the "sunny 16" rule where you set the f-stop of your camera to f/16 and then set the exposure length to the recipricol of the ASA film speed - if you use ASA 100 film, use 1/100 of a second (or 1/125 which is more typically available). Then take a picture of the sky at night. To be sure you're simulating the lunar situation, be sure to light up a foreground object with full daytime lighting so that the printing process will be sure to expose that part of the image properly and not super stretch the dark sky. You won't find a star image there either.

Similarly, the astronauts eyes are adapted to the daylight scenes around them so they didn't see stars in the sky either. As an experiment to verify this affect, go from a brightly lit room to a dark location just outside and see if you see any stars when you first look up at the sky. Stars were seen, however, when the conditions were right and the crew was dark adapted.

One other point - the dark area near the area labeled 3 above the lit part of the lunar surface in this image is in fact the dark side of the moon, not the sky.

 

[zeldja]

I've never heard of "Mythbusters" But don't you think it's their job to debunk conspiricies...

 

[zeldja]

I've never heard of "Mythbusters" But don't you think it's their job to debunk conspiricies...

 

[D4nny k0s u]

not sure if anyone noticed these but

you see those lines i circled, there pretty hard to see but they are there .
what are they?

 

[2percent]

not sure if anyone noticed these but

you see those lines i circled, there pretty hard to see but they are there .
what are they?

Those are lines on the picture, I believe to make sure the image is center.

I found the website in the OP to be extremely hilarious. If the moon is really a hologram made by the government, how do we have texts and paintings predating the Middle Ages depicting the moon?

 

[toxicsock]

Theres More near the bottom

 

[toxicsock]

Yeah there was a mythbuster episode proving its real check on that.

 

[SwiftSeller]

1. those are lines on the camera frame.

2. does the moon exist? really? wow.. no the government pulls it up there i with a big helicopter (with ET's help of course...) each night, hangs it on the north star (again with the help of ET) for about 30 minutes, then slowly lowers it down. OH and they do the same with the sun, cept Posidion helps them with that because he can keep the helicopter cool so it doesnt burn up.

Seriously dude, this section is for intelligent conversations. The moon exists....

 

[SwiftSeller]

Don't close SFA threads because you don't agree with the topic. It's a valid topic for SFA.

The major problem with the moon landings, which is yet to be well explained, is: Why hasn't anyone else put a human being on the moon? Why only NASA, and why 40 years ago, when technology was so rubbish that chances of survival were estimated at something like less than 1/10th of one percent.

Everyone got robots to the moon, including the soviets. So there is no reason there wouldn't be stuff on the moon, even a lander and a flag perhaps. The question remains: against insurmountable odds, that no one else has managed to overcome in 40 years of trying; Using infinitely inferior technology, how did NASA send people to the moon 6 times without major mishap? And why haven't they returned since?

<3 Sythe. You take the words right outta my mouth. Marry me lol.
Why havent we gone back to the moon. See my thread on "Moon landings a hoax?"

http://sythe.org/showthread.php?t=593867

 

[Xjaa]

This image was posted by Daily:

I find it funny that 'the moon has no atmosphere' yet there are no stars in that picture. Seems like they forgot to paint them on.

I am almost certain that a linear burn of the sky would show the boxes used to edit out those stars.

 

[Try and run]

This is a stupid topic, the moon clearly exists anyone could look up at night and tell you that. They already admitted that the tape that is out now is a fake. They "lost" the original, so think what you may.

 

[[FeaR]]

Yeah, I look at it every night.

 

[yakooza]

My point is that nothing can be proven to someone who doesn't have an open mind. The thread shows that, while rational arguments can be presented, they can be discarded irrationally because rationality is subject to asinine interpretation.

Its rather the opposite. It takes someone with an open mind not to be gullible.

The guy who made the website is rather quite smart. He has lot of mislead ideas as I would think, but still intelligent.

 

[lacuna]

yea it does, wth am i seeing the in the sky every night? lol it does

 

[wtp]

When doesn't the moon have an atmosphere.

 

[H'ween Hell]

Don't close SFA threads because you don't agree with the topic. It's a valid topic for SFA.

The major problem with the moon landings, which is yet to be well explained, is: Why hasn't anyone else put a human being on the moon? Why only NASA, and why 40 years ago, when technology was so rubbish that chances of survival were estimated at something like less than 1/10th of one percent.

Everyone got robots to the moon, including the soviets. So there is no reason there wouldn't be stuff on the moon, even a lander and a flag perhaps. The question remains: against insurmountable odds, that no one else has managed to overcome in 40 years of trying; Using infinitely inferior technology, how did NASA send people to the moon 6 times without major mishap? And why haven't they returned since?

I thought of this when I read some posts. They had, as you said, extremely inferior technology and arrived on the moon several times without disaster occurring. We have extremely improved technology, and we haven't been back since? What's the deal with that? Imagine the possibilities with the enhanced equipment we have today!

 

[yellan13]

Yeah... what is that thing in the sky that moves around and around? And there is NO way to explain how there are documents of the moon dating back to SO LONG AGO that there would be no reason to call the moon a hoax. The tourist trips to the moon are another proof that the moon exists.