-7
$\begingroup$

I really want to know whether NASA's Moon mission really was a hoax, or if it is a fact. Since there are many points and scenarios which proves it as being filmed in a film studio with controlled conditions and not exactly on from moon's surface.

  1. I also personally believe that we can not send human beyond "Van Allen Radiation Belt".

  2. Also mission was announced in 1961 and in just 8-9 years we were able to send humans to the Moon.(really, I think is not possible with today's technology as well. It will at least take 10-15 years to actually do it today).

  3. The ISS is orbiting at a few hundred km, and still it has lot of risk factors involved. Crew members are really had near death experiences while carrying out maintenance.

  4. And we are able to go to 370,300 km away from earth and safely return back (what ! ! ! really not possible considering today's technology as well-at least for humans). So are these Moon missions a hoax, or a forced lie ? I don't want to consider any political aspect here (like between the US and Russia etc.) I just want to know whether humans were on the Moon or not ?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's clearly a hoax. $\endgroup$
    – Andy
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 9:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Andy I am not sure what that is supposed to mean, but I join you. $\endgroup$
    – SE - stop firing the good guys
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 9:57
  • $\begingroup$ Anyone who actually wants to know the answer just look at: skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/1128/… (or any number of other places on the internet or in print) $\endgroup$
    – Andy
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 9:59
  • $\begingroup$ @Andy yes you can close it. But i wonder why not this has been properly investigated yet.Also i think you belong to/live in US and it is completely accepted that you vote for closing it(since it goes against your countries propaganda).But that's why i cleared it up to not involve any political aspect here like cold war and all.I just want to know whether we were on moon or not.If yes then why its not been tried after that till now? $\endgroup$
    – user11735
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 9:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ First off, closing this as off-topic was the right thing to do. This question does not belong here. Secondly, the US truly did land men on the Moon, multiple times. To think otherwise is just stupid. Thirdly, the best evidence that we did so comes from the Soviet Union. At that time, the Soviet Union and the US were essentially at war, and both had spies everywhere. Those Soviet spies would have found signs that the Apollo program was not real. They didn't. The Soviet Union monitored the communications from the Apollo vehicles. Those communications could not be hoaxes; they were real. $\endgroup$
    – David Hammen
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 15:32

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

While "was the Moon landing a hoax?" is starting to be a tiresome genre, the points you make is somewhat legitimate. I am not going to address the issue in general, (Best to go here if you want that) as others have done that better before. But here you go for your issues specifically:

  1. "Van Allen Radiation Belt"

Yes, it exists, and the radiation is about 10000 times more intense than on Earth. But in a transfer orbit towards the Moon, they where only inside it for a few hours. Sure, that still corresponds to a few years of radiation on Earth, but as you may be aware of, that is not enough to kill you.

  1. Not enough time?

The decision in 1961 to send humans to the Moon did not come all of a sudden. It is not like all the technology required had to be invented after that. For instance, the Soviet Luna 3 probe had already performed a flyby of the Moon, taking the first images of the far side. From there, it is pretty much just scaling things up, and make a suitable landing craft. (That is still expensive, though.)

  1. Risk

Who said there was no risk involved? Out of the seven missions intended to land on the Moon, one of them, the Apollo 13, barely managed to return after an explosion on board. That is a (although the sample size is small) 14% risk of failure, much higher than any of the missions to the ISS. Also, the space station has operated for years, in contrast to the just over a week Apollo missions.

  1. Distance

In space, there is nothing to stop you if you have velocity in one direction. Therefore, you can literary travel for ever, with only a modest amount of speed. Therefore, distance is not a good way to measure difficulty. What really matters is how much change in velocity you need. The ISS travels at about 7800 m/s, and a transfer orbit towards the Moon is only 40% more than that.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

As @Hohmannfan pointed out, but in addition, there is solid proof that humans have landed on the moon, with several major incidents with the various Apollo missions.

One of the missions put a reasonably large retro-reflector array on the surface of the moon to reflect back lasers with the purpose of measuring the moon's distance to the earth, accurate to within millimetres. That alone I consider to be the biggest most undeniable piece of evidence.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ That's actually poor evidence... because the (then) Soviet Union landed their own reflector array, it's attached to one of the completely un-crewed Lunokhod rovers. I'm not disagreeing, I'm just warning you that this is one of the arguments the conspiracist types will use against you if you ever meet one :) $\endgroup$
    – Andy
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 10:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Andy shakes head of course they would, ruining all of the good science and man hours of effort! Too bad Neil Armstrong isn't around any more to beat the sense into people. $\endgroup$
    – Tanenthor
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 10:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Neil was probably far too calm and level headed to get into a fist fight. Buzz, on the other hand... news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2272321.stm $\endgroup$
    – Andy
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 11:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Huh, I must have remembered incorrectly, I always thought that was Neil, but there you go $\endgroup$
    – Tanenthor
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 12:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Tanenthor I don;t think Neil Armstrong was quite the type - I had the thrill of a lifetime to meet him 5 years ago. Buzz Aldrin on the other hand youtube.com/watch?v=wptn5RE2I-k $\endgroup$
    – ProfRob
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 21:48

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .