Mankind to return to the moon?
#211
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Julio, i completely agree with you, but when you have somebody as supercilious as that marring things, sometimes threads just die from the negative energy. Let's hope he can keep his self-righteous preachings to himself from now on, and that the interesting discussion can continue.
Geezer, you're phrasing it like Olly did, and we could bat this over the net all day like a game of ping pong. I don't believe in God because there's no proof, i don't believe in the moon landings because there's no proof. In that sense and from that angle, they're identical, not just similar.
The strongest evidence for the moon landings is the integrity of the astronauts, the strongest evidence for the doubters is the political landscape at the time along with the cumulative doubt from all the things that have had to be refuted by the scientists.
Geezer, you're phrasing it like Olly did, and we could bat this over the net all day like a game of ping pong. I don't believe in God because there's no proof, i don't believe in the moon landings because there's no proof. In that sense and from that angle, they're identical, not just similar.
The strongest evidence for the moon landings is the integrity of the astronauts, the strongest evidence for the doubters is the political landscape at the time along with the cumulative doubt from all the things that have had to be refuted by the scientists.
#212
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sunny Ole Blackpool
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just find it amusing that I seem to see alot of people post on here in the vain of "Beat a man with your argument, not the strength of your arm."
And then become hipocrites by slating someone with abusive posts because they dont agree with that persons particular view/opinion.
For what its worth, I am also skeptical of the moon landings. For many reasons. I think we got there, I just think we were shown what we were supposed to see/hear.
There's a lot of things that cant be explained about the Moon. Its orbit for example. It needs maintaining to stay on its constant orbit. Whats maintaining it? No other planet/moon etc in our Solar system has anything remotely like the same near circular orbit as the Moon. Why is the moon over 1.3 BILLION years older than the Earth if all of the planets in our Solar System were created during the big bang in one instance? Why does the dust on the Moon have a completely different chemical composite to that of the rocks? Surley the dust is from the rocks? (erosion?)
These are just a few of the things that just dont seem to add up. And I agree with Tel that the political climate at the time heaped HUGE pressures on the US Gov to achieve this feat. Some say the Russians would have leaked the info had US faked the Lunar Landings. Co-incidence that the US sent the largest ever supply of food etc to the Russians following the Landing? Perhaps buying their slience?
Its a very interesting subject, and one that I think the majority of people just rule out as ridiculous without having any knowledge on the subject aside from what you saw, were told or saw in photographs.
And then become hipocrites by slating someone with abusive posts because they dont agree with that persons particular view/opinion.
For what its worth, I am also skeptical of the moon landings. For many reasons. I think we got there, I just think we were shown what we were supposed to see/hear.
There's a lot of things that cant be explained about the Moon. Its orbit for example. It needs maintaining to stay on its constant orbit. Whats maintaining it? No other planet/moon etc in our Solar system has anything remotely like the same near circular orbit as the Moon. Why is the moon over 1.3 BILLION years older than the Earth if all of the planets in our Solar System were created during the big bang in one instance? Why does the dust on the Moon have a completely different chemical composite to that of the rocks? Surley the dust is from the rocks? (erosion?)
These are just a few of the things that just dont seem to add up. And I agree with Tel that the political climate at the time heaped HUGE pressures on the US Gov to achieve this feat. Some say the Russians would have leaked the info had US faked the Lunar Landings. Co-incidence that the US sent the largest ever supply of food etc to the Russians following the Landing? Perhaps buying their slience?
Its a very interesting subject, and one that I think the majority of people just rule out as ridiculous without having any knowledge on the subject aside from what you saw, were told or saw in photographs.
#218
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd actually have been happier to discuss the subject of the thread, ie going to the moon in the 21st century. But then i don't think it will really affect anyone very much one way or another, unless i'm missing some great big long list of anticipated benefits?
#219
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#221
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For what its worth, I am also skeptical of the moon landings. For many reasons. I think we got there, I just think we were shown what we were supposed to see/hear.
There's a lot of things that cant be explained about the Moon. Its orbit for example. It needs maintaining to stay on its constant orbit. Whats maintaining it? No other planet/moon etc in our Solar system has anything remotely like the same near circular orbit as the Moon. Why is the moon over 1.3 BILLION years older than the Earth if all of the planets in our Solar System were created during the big bang in one instance? Why does the dust on the Moon have a completely different chemical composite to that of the rocks? Surley the dust is from the rocks? (erosion?)
These are just a few of the things that just dont seem to add up. And I agree with Tel that the political climate at the time heaped HUGE pressures on the US Gov to achieve this feat. Some say the Russians would have leaked the info had US faked the Lunar Landings. Co-incidence that the US sent the largest ever supply of food etc to the Russians following the Landing? Perhaps buying their slience?
Its a very interesting subject, and one that I think the majority of people just rule out as ridiculous without having any knowledge on the subject aside from what you saw, were told or saw in photographs.
There's a lot of things that cant be explained about the Moon. Its orbit for example. It needs maintaining to stay on its constant orbit. Whats maintaining it? No other planet/moon etc in our Solar system has anything remotely like the same near circular orbit as the Moon. Why is the moon over 1.3 BILLION years older than the Earth if all of the planets in our Solar System were created during the big bang in one instance? Why does the dust on the Moon have a completely different chemical composite to that of the rocks? Surley the dust is from the rocks? (erosion?)
These are just a few of the things that just dont seem to add up. And I agree with Tel that the political climate at the time heaped HUGE pressures on the US Gov to achieve this feat. Some say the Russians would have leaked the info had US faked the Lunar Landings. Co-incidence that the US sent the largest ever supply of food etc to the Russians following the Landing? Perhaps buying their slience?
Its a very interesting subject, and one that I think the majority of people just rule out as ridiculous without having any knowledge on the subject aside from what you saw, were told or saw in photographs.
As for it's age, I have not heard that one, but the moon & Earth were not created in the big bang, that was 14 billion years ago. AFAIK, the earth is younger than the moon by about 500 milion years, at 4.5 billion, so I don't really see what you are getting at there.
Without reviewing the a suitbale explanation, I would have thought that the dust constitutes elements of whatever hit the moon (i.e. meteorites, comets etc.) to make the dust. It doesn't seem implausible at all that the dust should have a different chemical make up (obviously some of it won't as it will be shattered moon rock).
But I don't see what your point is here, what doesn't add up? Are you saying you don't believe the moon is real? I don't really follow.
Geezer
Last edited by Geezer; 05 August 2008 at 04:16 PM.
#222
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geezer, you're phrasing it like Olly did, and we could bat this over the net all day like a game of ping pong. I don't believe in God because there's no proof, i don't believe in the moon landings because there's no proof. In that sense and from that angle, they're identical, not just similar.
The strongest evidence for the moon landings is the integrity of the astronauts, the strongest evidence for the doubters is the political landscape at the time along with the cumulative doubt from all the things that have had to be refuted by the scientists.
The strongest evidence for the moon landings is the integrity of the astronauts, the strongest evidence for the doubters is the political landscape at the time along with the cumulative doubt from all the things that have had to be refuted by the scientists.
There is no evidence for the existence of God.
There is plenty of evidence for the moon landings, but you dismiss it. Now I know you have said some people would argue that that there is evidence for God, and we choose to ignore it, but there isn't. The bible is historically incorrect and the things stated it in are in conflict with what can be proven as process governing life, plate tectonics etc etc. Ally to that the fact there are hundreds of other religions with equal claim (or lack of it ) and it all falls apart.
On the moon landings, there are a mountain of evidence, contemporary eye witness statement, most of whom are still alive. Some of the evidence is even available to examine yourself. That is a whole different ball game.
There is nothing you can do to prove the existence of a God. However, there is plenty of evidence for you to examine that whilst I accept cannot totally prove it, the only reasonable explanation is that man walked on the moon.
Your last statement sums it all up......
Things that have had to be refuted by the scientists. Not failed to, but have been, your own words. All of them have been.
Geezer
#223
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop stop stop. Don't take another step! I didn't read past this bit. There's no need. Believe me (trust me, if you like!), God believers would adamantly, categorically, unequivocally disagree with you about that statement. If you honestly think they don't think there is any evidence for the existence of God then everything else that follows is flawed.
#224
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: There on the stair
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a lot of things that cant be explained about the Moon. Its orbit for example. It needs maintaining to stay on its constant orbit. Whats maintaining it? No other planet/moon etc in our Solar system has anything remotely like the same near circular orbit as the Moon. Why is the moon over 1.3 BILLION years older than the Earth if all of the planets in our Solar System were created during the big bang in one instance? Why does the dust on the Moon have a completely different chemical composite to that of the rocks? Surley the dust is from the rocks? (erosion?)
The moons orbit is decaying slowly, I can't remember the exact figure but it's something like 2cm a year and way back in antiquity it was WAY larger in the sky than it is now.
The moon tidly locked to the Earth in that only one face points to the Earth at all times
It was formed by a moon sized object (read big ball of rock) smacking into the Earth and virtually annihilating it... the resulting spray of matter formed the moon and the Earth re-assembled (by virtue of the same process as before: Gravity)
All these facts and theories are freely available for research if you go look - or just spend some time watching the Discovery channel
#225
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop stop stop. Don't take another step! I didn't read past this bit. There's no need. Believe me (trust me, if you like!), God believers would adamantly, categorically, unequivocally disagree with you about that statement. If you honestly think they don't think there is any evidence for the existence of God then everything else that follows is flawed.
Geezer
#226
I still can't get my head round the concept of 'nothingness' pre universe.
Anyway,if they do go back to the moon and use it as a staging post or whatever for our futur planet hopping,I just hope it is like Space 1999.
I loved that program and I had one of those ships
Anyway,if they do go back to the moon and use it as a staging post or whatever for our futur planet hopping,I just hope it is like Space 1999.
I loved that program and I had one of those ships
#227
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geezer
#228
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: There on the stair
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea is that there was NO matter per se, just 'energy' and for some reason, the energy 'ruptured' and formed the universe in a rapid series of events (not single instant, it took time just not much of it) the energy became the matter that we know.
#229
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the refutations of the scientists. Yeah, the anomolies have been refuted. And if America had anything to keep quiet you'd bet your last damn dollar they'd be refuting anything which came remotely close to proving anything untoward. At the end of the day you're choosing to believe the version of events you've been told because it seems the most likely. That's fair enough. I'm waiting till the proof is there for all to see.
#230
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sunny Ole Blackpool
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Moon is around 1.3 billion years older than the earth. That's fact.
The comment about the dust being of a different material to the rocks is also fact. Now, I understand that the Moon has had a huge number of meteorites slam into it, but nowhere near enough to alter the dust which covers the entire surface. That's like saying the sand on our beach is made up from Meteorites and not rock/shell/coral erosion.
The point about no other planet having a orbit remotely similar to the moon is also true.
Bahhhh ya know, I'm not going on anymore. Have your opinion, I have mine. And that is that there is something strange about our supposed history of Lunar Exploration. I dont doubt we went there, but there's lots that simply dont add up.
The comment about the dust being of a different material to the rocks is also fact. Now, I understand that the Moon has had a huge number of meteorites slam into it, but nowhere near enough to alter the dust which covers the entire surface. That's like saying the sand on our beach is made up from Meteorites and not rock/shell/coral erosion.
The point about no other planet having a orbit remotely similar to the moon is also true.
Bahhhh ya know, I'm not going on anymore. Have your opinion, I have mine. And that is that there is something strange about our supposed history of Lunar Exploration. I dont doubt we went there, but there's lots that simply dont add up.
#231
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: There on the stair
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, and I'm not sure what you mean about the unusual orbit... it has a slightly elliptical orbit as you would expect, but as it is still so close to earth, it is only a small amount. this is perfectly normal for close orbiting moons of any planet, the further out you go the greater the ellipse as the gravitational tidal effect is lessened.
I really can't see what you're getting at, but it appears you're determined to believe something that is not true to simply fit your view.
Last edited by Kieran_Burns; 05 August 2008 at 05:33 PM.
#232
Scooby Regular
The Moon is around 1.3 billion years older than the earth. That's fact.
The comment about the dust being of a different material to the rocks is also fact. Now, I understand that the Moon has had a huge number of meteorites slam into it, but nowhere near enough to alter the dust which covers the entire surface. That's like saying the sand on our beach is made up from Meteorites and not rock/shell/coral erosion.
The point about no other planet having a orbit remotely similar to the moon is also true.
Bahhhh ya know, I'm not going on anymore. Have your opinion, I have mine. And that is that there is something strange about our supposed history of Lunar Exploration. I dont doubt we went there, but there's lots that simply dont add up.
The comment about the dust being of a different material to the rocks is also fact. Now, I understand that the Moon has had a huge number of meteorites slam into it, but nowhere near enough to alter the dust which covers the entire surface. That's like saying the sand on our beach is made up from Meteorites and not rock/shell/coral erosion.
The point about no other planet having a orbit remotely similar to the moon is also true.
Bahhhh ya know, I'm not going on anymore. Have your opinion, I have mine. And that is that there is something strange about our supposed history of Lunar Exploration. I dont doubt we went there, but there's lots that simply dont add up.
I watched a program the other night and there are a few things that need answering but it said the Japanese or Chinese are sending a probe shortly to take photos. Should be pretty obvious if it can't find any evidence and theres not really anything the US can give either country right now to keep them quiet or say "Oh look, theres the yanks little car they left behind" wink wink.
#233
Scooby Senior
Don't know about the non-believers, but from a sceptic's point of view i doubt it was only Apollo 11 that would have been involved. Wouldn't be surprised if some people think the later ones did happen, i could see why they would.
But do you think you're able to post without using derogatory words like belittling though? I don't mind discussing this, but that's just unnecessary isn't it? You prove it happened, you can tell me i'm belittling his efforts. Deal?
But do you think you're able to post without using derogatory words like belittling though? I don't mind discussing this, but that's just unnecessary isn't it? You prove it happened, you can tell me i'm belittling his efforts. Deal?
With the overwhelming evidence for the moon landings I believe its the sceptics job to prove it didn't happen, the ball is in your court (read your = non believers, not you in particular :s)
#234
Let me assure you that i would welcme a straight discussion with Telboy and if someone disagrees with my point of view I dont find that a reason to dislike him, we are all entitled to our opinions and this is a forum after all which is there so that we can express them.
I do find it a shame when I get an abusive thread back however for no good reason. I may state the straight facts as I see them but I avoid being abusive as far as possible.
In the first place I stated how I felt about the validity of the moon walks and the reasons which helped in my opinions. I then got an unecessarily pretty rude reponse which is what started all this off. My subsequent replies about the moon landings were not even addressed to him personally.
I don't see why I should be accused of being supercilious just for stating my own beliefs. Even if they are different to what someone else was saying. I am not going to metaphorically drop to one knee and say please excuse me for being so previous as to express my own beliefs but this is how I see it!
I also object as I was in another thread to be accused by him of telling lies about my background to the whole of Scoobynet even though he cannot produce any kind of evidence to back it up. Perhap's he would like to explain why he did that! And why should I not ask him that question?
I hope that is a little clearer to you Julio..
Les
#235
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well TelBoy, you should be able to eat crow in about 6 months time
[[ Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter ]]
[[ Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter ]]
#237
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More to the point, would you consider those images to be sufficient evidence that we did walk on the moon previously, or will it be hand waved away as more fake NASA footage produced to ensure the big lie isn't uncovered?
#238
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd accept them, definitely. Can't speak for all doubters, but i would. But i can't believe they'll go all that way and not take the opportunity to put the myths to bed, if that's what they are. We shall see.
#239
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll drop back in Feb and see where we're at!