crocodile deathroll

It would of been a lot easier to cover up Watergate

seesaw

Lol probably.

mecca777

True. The "Moon landing hoax" thing fails to hold water when you observe the fact that the Nixon administration couldn't cover up a burglary in Washington DC.

Yet they supposedly initiated a hoax which has been perpetuated by every subsequent administration, with the tacit assistance of every qualified technician, scientist or astronaut at every space agency in the world (who must all surely know that trips to the moon are impossible), even the Russians during the Cold War? And only a few unqualified paranoid weirdos with AOL webpages know the AFWUL TRUHT?

I snort, sir, I snort.

openeyes

For what it's worth, a woman at work who's in her late twenties saw that Fox special and was convinced by it. I didn't have a chance to discuss it at length, but I've concluded that something about the special appealed to her and her life will go on just fine without thinking about it further. It seems to me that our world has gotten so complex that keeping things simple has become a coping strategy for some people, so if your first answer feels ok, just stick with it! According to my son, one of my nephews (aged 12) also thinks it was a hoax, I'm sure due to seeing the same show. What is with the producers of such a show? Do they really think it's a hoax or are they having a real good laugh? I suppose if they presented a balanced story, people wouldn't bother watching, since sensationalism excites us more.

B34RZ0R

I gave significant pause to the idea of them actually landing on the moon after watching the special that spawned this topic. Like why was the flag waving on the moon?.. is there really wind on the moon? I guess I do have this question though.

If our interest in the moon has not lessened, why do we not continue to go back?
Just a thought...
Be Well
*Bear*

Abacus

Money. The moon missions cost lots and lots of money.

B34RZ0R

So does studying the mating habbits of Dung Beatles and the quality of semen in men of differant localities of the US!! (page recently linked to on google news > health)
<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/11/11/sperm.quality.ap/" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/11/11/sperm.quality.ap/</a>

I would think that the monitary value would not be outweighed by the possible/inevitable benefits of furthering our work on the moon. (just another thought)
Be Well
*Bear*

Godless Dave

Space travel, especially sending people to the moon, costs a lot more than the studies you mentioned. Also the potential benefits are not very clear. The main motivation in 1969 was to show we were more technologically advanced than the Soviet Union. That motivation no longer exists. There aren't any natural resources on the moon valuable enough to justify the expense of extracting and sending them to earth, at this time anyway. Other space projects, military and commercial satellites, do provide a significant return for the money - look at how popular GPS gadgets are, and how dependent the worldwide media and telecommunication industries are on satellite technology.

The main reasons to go to the moon now are for scientific research into the nature of the moon itself, and because it's cool. Those are both pretty compelling to me but there are a lot of demands on our tax dollars.

I think in the future we'll find the moon more useful. It provides a ready-built orbiting platform for astronomy or for launching spacecraft further into space; it's made of rock and iron that could be made into construction materials for more space construction; one side always faces the earth, which could be useful for communications. I think it will be a long time though.

Babylon Sister

Not a joke:

My ex-husband's grandmother refused to believe that men had landed on the moon because it was too small for anyone to stand on.

(it ran in the family. hence the prefix ex.)

Arrowman

Another small point: One of the justifications for the "hoax" viewpoint is that the Americans found the technological challenges insurmountable, so they faked it.

This is not a very credible argument, IMHO, when one considers that actually the moon landings were not a particularly challenging exercise in terms of technology. Without minimising the efforts (and bravery) of those involved, it is worth pointing out that the moon landings were more a major project management and engineering exercise than a particularly advanced technological leap.

Indeed. After all, while we may expect Americans to lie, it is ridiculous to suggest that non-Americans would lie