Printable View
Did anyone else watch this? The mythbusters tested many of the things that conspiracy theorists say are fraud about the moon landing. Every one of them they tested they proved was real, i found it very interesting. Here is a quick read on it.
http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-082608a.html
I saw it. I thought that most of it was real, but maybe they pushed a few thiings to make it look like it was really done. Like the photos. Those were fake for sure.
I saw it the other day. Pretty interesting.
Name one fake thing about the photos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
I just think maybe they hoaxed those results, I may be wrong.
Who are you talking about? NASA or Mythbusters? Are you saying NASA's moon photos were faked?Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
I think that the photos were hoaxed by NASA and the results taying that they were not hoaxes were hoaxed by the MythBusters
So? The moon-landing wasn't fake, they even left a mirror on the moon. But I guess a huge, 40-year-lasting hoax is way more easy to pull off, and cooler to talk about wearing your tin-foil-hats.
Ok. So what, specifically, about the photos screams "fake" to you? Are they too high quality, too many of them, visual artifacts, what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
Who is to say they didn't just say they got a reflection?Quote:
Originally Posted by Neruo
Yeah, they left a mirror up there. What do you mean, 'just say they got a reflection'? Anybody can confirm it if they're genuinely bothered. Which they're not.
If you have a sufficiently powerful laser and telescope, you can very easily test this. Just look up the location of the reflector on Google Moon or whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
And you still haven't answered my question.
I do not think that craters can alter the shaddows os the astronaunt or the rocks as much as is shown, and the moon's surface is not reflectione enough to luminate the astronanunt as much as he was.
Riiiiight.
Now the explanation for how the mirror got on the moon.
Please watch the following from the show. It covers your concerns exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
Photos, part I
Photos, part II
I just say the first one was faked. The rest landings were real.
Notice that the "real" photo has a better lit astronaunt, but less reflective surface, and the oppoite is true for the Mythbusters picture.
The fact that they could manage to create those images says that it could have been done. Even with less technology back then, there was a hell of alot of money at the ready.
But now you're shifting goal posts. You began by saying that the photos could only be done with multiple light sources, but now you're saying that since they showed it can be done with one light source, that somehow proves that they were faked? That makes no sense whatsoever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
Yeah. I loved this episode (Adam has such awesome friends, to give him a fake space suit), but I knew when the first commercials aired for it that people would be all "OMGZORz, thats proves the moon landing was fake!" It doesn't prove the moon landing was fake, it proved it could be real. To prove it could be real they also had to prove that it could be fake, but the point of the episode was to debunk the reasons the conspiracy theorists say it had to be fake, not to disprove that it was fake.
And, RiaD, the Mythbusters had grey/brown sand, an electric lamp, and a miniature astronaut. The moon had grey dust, the sun with no atmosphere, and a full-sized astronaut. Of course the astronaut would look brighter in the mon pics, even if Nasa was just using a sound stage with really high-powered lamps and grey dust and an actor in a spacesuit.
I am saying that in the insttance of the second picture.
The NASA picture has:
1 well lit astronaunt
1 medium lit moon surface
The Mythbusters photo has:
1 medium lit astronaunt
1 well lit moon surface
See what may be going on?
Jet7EL, you make a good point. You right, and that makes sense. But sorry, I still need to keep it open as a posibility that some results were faked.
Rioght. I'm not saying either examples (moon landing or mythbusters) were faked, or could not have been faked (although I don't really see how you could fake an intentional replica of a scene), just that the mythbusters had almost definitely tested it, and had come up with sensible evidence that it wasn't necessarily faked (Mythbusters I trust, Nasa, not so much). I'm not saying either way that they were faked or not, I just try to advocate whichever side of the conspiracy theory argument is being repressed in any given conversation.
And it does seem odd that the side of the landing pod was far more dim than the astronaut in the ML pic.
:\Quote:
I just say the first one was faked. The rest landings were real.
Motive?
So one oddly lit photo now counts as proof that the US government perpetrated the largest hoax in human history?Quote:
Originally Posted by JET73L
I don't understand why some people have such a hard time believing the moon missions were real. Are these the same people that believe the earth is flat?
Damnit, the people who say that the moon landing was real are the same people who say the Earth is round.
No, but you can prove the Earth is round. Not so much with the moon landing, but the same goes for the opposite (you can't prove it is real, you can't prove it is fake)
It's because they look at today's NASA and wonder how they could possibly pull it off. And it's true, today's NASA could not pull off Apollo in 9 years. Honestly, if we gave NASA a brand new Saturn 5 rocket, they would not know what to do with it. Because all their talent is gone, dead and buried. Now they're a bureaucracy.
I saw it, Man I love mythbusters.
I don't believe the landing was fake, Why would NASA need to lie about that?
And the mythbusters are to cool to lie about it either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewmandan
Eh, they found ice on mars, so they're doing SOME stuff.
True..But what if they aren't as m=smart as they were back when?Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcon
Or maybe they don't want to because we don't have that kind of money when the United States is in the poor shape with high bills and such.
Actually you can prove the moon landing is real. There were reflectors left behind on the moon, you can send a beam of light and have it reflected back to earth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
I am saying the first one was faked. Were they left there on the first trip?
The government found space aliens in orbit when they tried to go to the moon, and the space aliens put the reflectors there for them! (That sarcastic remark is not even the most ridiculous theory I've heard, even if you only count theories that believers in the conspiracy suggested)Quote:
Originally Posted by Scatterbrain
No. It barely counts as something that could possibly be considered as evidence. I'm guessing you are going to be a tabloid journalist when you grow up, waiting for something that can be turned around then blowing it out of proportion.Quote:
Originally Posted by drewmanda
So, anyway, my opinions:
moon landing probably happened
Moon landing may not have happened (but I expect it had)
Mythbusters intentionally proved that the moon landing could have happened
Mythbusters acidentally proved that the moon landing might not have happened
Anything I missed?
The first reflector was placed there during the apollo 11 mission.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality_is_a_Dream
Funny you should mention that. Because it was the Flat Earth Society that started this crazy moon landing hoax bullshit back in the 70s in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Forsaken
Hear that hoax claimers? You're taking your cues from people who think the earth is a flat disc supported by giant turtles all the way down to infinity. This doesn't give you cause for concern?
edit: But I feel it my duty to enter the caveat that Mythbusters is capable of doing BAD (read: WRONG) science on occasion. That 'can a plane take off on a conveyor belt' episode was the biggest load of shit I've ever seen, and was done purely for ratings. (The answer, is no it can't).
Didn't we discover that the Earth is not flat a long time ago...(Columbus.)
I believe Magellan was the one the proved it was round (he actually went all the way around), but the Flat Earth people have special maps that take his voyage into account and explain it using some convoluted path around the disk.Quote:
Originally Posted by EchoSun13
Oh..Well I should go read a history book..Ekk.
Actually we've known the Earth was a sphere since about 250 BC, and Pythagoras had theorised it was as early as 500 BC. The Egyptians and the Greeks were kicking ass and taking names in science before the Spanish and the English had even stopped eating each other.
Yes, I believe it was Eratosthenes that accurately measured the circumference of the Earth and the AU.
Mhm, the 'world is flat myth' is actually a myth in itself.
It's been known to be untrue for millenea.
I think that you can see the world is round by looking out to sea. If you can't see from the east ciast of America to Europe than THE WORLD IS FREAKING ROUND. Oh, and sorry about the moon landing shit, I am not sure if it is real or not, but it does make a fun discussion.
It's not round, it's just slightly curved.
Well, doesn't that mean that it is NOT FREAKING FLAT?
What if it's oval?????
That still means not flat.
But honestly I could see NASA faking the first moon landing in order to get more funds. I really doubt that they did, but it could have been faked. I think JET73L put it best. Mythbusters is not science, it's entertainment.
Yes, and it is just entertainment. Well put.
Mythbusters isn't a science, but no one actually gets science from Mythbusters, except those who are trying to prove the moon landings fake, apparently.
Actually, for anyone who cares, the Earth is an oblate spheroid (to a first approximation).
I think it's funny that someone who is so obviously not trained in any science is commenting at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by stonedape