• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Did the Russians Track the Apollo 11 Landing on the Moon?

B

bardo34

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
22
some nutter keeps telling me the apollo missions were hoaxed.i have been trying to tell him, i think it was last year or 2006 ?,that on bbc or ch4,they showed footage of russia tracking the apollo missions on a huge screen as apollo went to the moon.can anyone tell me what this documentary was called ,just so i can rest my case.
the footage was shown for the first time as it was top secret footage that has now been declassified,which shows the apollo missions been tracked.
 
"We "saw", As Americans Sat down on the Moon... "
E.Molotov specially For " News of astronautics "

Whether article of the participant of events of 30-years prescription of E.P.Molotova offered to readers throws light on unknown pages of " lunar race " and finally closes a ridiculous question " there Were Americans on the Moon? "
Click to expand...

Details of the Russian tracking of Apollo here - http://www.bautforum.com/archive/index.php/t-20447.html - but you're never going to convince your nutter, as this simply proves that the Russians were in on the conspiracy too.
 
Or, that moon hoax activists have been making things hot for Them, and They manufactured this additional evidence from an apparently objective source as a clincher; or that someone in the former Soviet Union is making money off of hoaxing footage he knows people will pay money for as historic, or -

Learn to recognize when someone holds an unfalsifiable belief, and walk away as soon as the discussion ceases to be fun for you. You can learn a lot about a number of things in these discussions, but you can't change another's belief and you'll only put yourself through the wringer for nothing if you try.
 
bardo34 said:
some nutter keeps telling me the apollo missions were hoaxed....
Click to expand...
Direct them towards our very own, 35-page Moon Landing - Hoaxed? thread. If they still have the will to live after that, see if they have changed their opinions at all (I'm happy to admit that I changed my mind in the course of that one.)
PeniG said:
Learn to recognize when someone holds an unfalsifiable belief, and walk away as soon as the discussion ceases to be fun for you. You can learn a lot about a number of things in these discussions, but you can't change another's belief and you'll only put yourself through the wringer for nothing if you try.
Click to expand...
How very true.
 
Or you could find out something that he really believes in and keep annoying him about how its a pile of shite and he is just plain wrong. But you have got to make sure that when your annoying him that you don't get all technical on him, instead you just keep making vague accusations and wild claims you can't prove. Kind of like what he is doing to you at the moment. I always find that this is a very satisfying way of dealing with people like that. It can also be a lot of fun. Come to think of it are you sure he is not just doing this to annoy you?
 
Have you seen the film The Dish?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0205873/

It's based on the true story of some Australians who pointed their aerial at the moon in order to relay the moon landing transmissions. This alone surely proves that something/someone was on the moon sending the transmissions...
 
Mythopoeika said:
Have you seen the film The Dish?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0205873/

It's based on the true story of some Australians who pointed their aerial at the moon in order to relay the moon landing transmissions. This alone surely proves that something/someone was on the moon sending the transmissions...
Click to expand...

There were also Western European telemetry clubs who measured and recorded the astronauts' blood pressure readings, respiration rates and so on right along with NASA. They lost contact with the craft as it passed behind the Moon, picking it up again as it came back around, again right along with NASA.

Some hoax!
 
I was a university student doing Physics when the moon landings took place. Our department was one of those that got a piece of moon rock to study. I helped carry out the tests and at one point held it in my hand (inside a plastic container). The thermoluminesce/radiation tests we carried out left no doubt that this rock had lain on an airless cosmic body for millions of years, not on the Earth's surface - and before you ask, no it was not a meteorite. We did go to the moon!
 
This is also evidence - why fake a speech that was never made, and archive it?

First Moon landing: what Richard Nixon would have said had the mission failed
A speech prepared for US President Richard Nixon to read if the first Moon landing had ended in failure has been unearthed from archives.
By Murray Wardrop
Last Updated: 7:18AM BST 20 Apr 2009

As Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon on July 21, 1969, his immortal words "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" became synonymous with the scale of the achievement.

However, in the event that astronauts Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin been stranded on the Moon, Nixon would have delivered a far more chilling address to the nation.

After calling their widows, he would have told the watching millions: "Fate has ordained that the men who went to the Moon to explore in peace will stay on the Moon to rest in peace.

"These brave men know there is no hope for their recovery but they also know that there is hope for mankind in their sacrifice.

"These two men are laying down their lives in mankind's most noble goal: the search for truth and understanding.

"They will be mourned by their families and friends; they will be mourned by their nation; they will be mourned by the people of the world; they will be mourned by a Mother Earth that dared send two of her sons into the unknown.

"In their exploration, they stirred the people of the world to feel as one; in their sacrifice, they bind more tightly the brotherhood of man."

The words are contained in a typed document entitled "In the event of Moon disaster" which was consigned to an archive until now – almost 40 years since the historic mission.

It is dated July 18, 1969 – two days before the landing was due – and was prepared by Nixon's speech writer, Bill Safire, and sent to White House chief of staff Harry Haldeman.

However, following the success of the mission, it was laid aside in Nixon's private papers in America's national archives.

It reveals that Nixon would have added: "In ancient days, men looked at stars and saw their heroes in the constellations.

"In modern times, we do much the same but our heroes are epic men of flesh and blood. Others will follow and surely find their way home. Man's search will not be denied but these men were the first and they will remain the foremost in our hearts."

In an allusion to Rupert Brooke's First World War poem The Soldier, his concluding lines were to be: "For every human being who looks up at the Moon in the nights to come will know that there is some corner of another world that is forever mankind."

Once the speech had been delivered, Mission Control would have closed communications and a clergyman would have conducted a burial service.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandte ... ailed.html
 
That's really fascinating!

Maybe in an alternate universe that speech was the one that was read :)
 
Is anyone thinking Capricorn One after reading that?
 
PeniG said:
Or, that moon hoax activists have been making things hot for Them, and They manufactured this additional evidence from an apparently objective source as a clincher; or that someone in the former Soviet Union is making money off of hoaxing footage he knows people will pay money for as historic, or -

Learn to recognize when someone holds an unfalsifiable belief, and walk away as soon as the discussion ceases to be fun for you. You can learn a lot about a number of things in these discussions, but you can't change another's belief and you'll only put yourself through the wringer for nothing if you try.
Click to expand...

Yep of course its a hoax, the moon is made of cheese as any fulle knowes.
All modern technology is stollen from aliens and the royal family are shape shifting reptiles, oh and the earth is flat as well.
 
KarlD said:
...

Yep of course its a hoax, the moon is made of cheese as any fulle knowes.
All modern technology is stollen from aliens and the royal family are shape shifting reptiles, oh and the earth is flat as well.
Click to expand...
It may save you a lot of unnecessary embarrassment, if you actually read some of the relevant Threads on these subjects, first.

We also enjoy a good laugh at the expense of others. :madeyes:
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
KarlD said:
...

Yep of course its a hoax, the moon is made of cheese as any fulle knowes.
All modern technology is stollen from aliens and the royal family are shape shifting reptiles, oh and the earth is flat as well.
Click to expand...
It may save you a lot of unnecessary embarrassment, if you actually read some of the relevant Threads on these subjects, first.

We also enjoy a good laugh at the expense of others. :madeyes:
Click to expand...

Wot? no I believe all these things I read it in a book by the light of my ever lasting light bulb that the man doesn't want you to know about which is powered by my zero point energy generator.
 
It seems to me, as a complete ignoramus, that the only area of doubt about the moon landings comes from the much-examined still photos taken on the 'surface'. They appear to be just too perfect?! But NASA & the US govt had enormous pressure on them both in terms of propaganda & cost justification? Maybe we can attribute them to just flawed-human decision making that nobody could've predicted would've undermined the mission years later.
 
shruggy63 said:
It seems to me, as a complete ignoramus, that the only area of doubt about the moon landings comes from the much-examined still photos taken on the 'surface'. They appear to be just too perfect?! But NASA & the US govt had enormous pressure on them both in terms of propaganda & cost justification? Maybe we can attribute them to just flawed-human decision making that nobody could've predicted would've undermined the mission years later.
Click to expand...
Oh FFS!!!

Read the other threads here, or watch this:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 625462.ece

(At least you admit you're a complete ignoramus - but there's no reason to remain so - most of UK's national newspapers have pages and pages of info on this 40 year old event. Just search!)
 
Wow, thanks for the welcome Rynner2! All I'm saying is that some of the B&W still photos were just a bit too good. Perfectly framed despite being taken by blokes in space helmets with 35mm cameras & the filmstock being unaffected by radiation. I was trying to suggest that any falsification of evidence will lead to an explosion of speculation.
And if you swear at me again I'll 'effin haunt you forever ;)
 
He didn't swear at you - and TBH the apparent abruptness is probably because this one comes round so regularly, and as Ryn pointed out we have a massive thread that deals with all of these issues in great detail. I've reacted similarly myself, in the past.

That said, you're new, so I'll let you off :). Just check out the big Moon Landing Conspiracy thread, then if you've further questions fire away.
 
shruggy63 said:
Wow, thanks for the welcome Rynner2! All I'm saying is that some of the B&W still photos were just a bit too good. Perfectly framed despite being taken by blokes in space helmets with 35mm cameras & the filmstock being unaffected by radiation. I was trying to suggest that any falsification of evidence will lead to an explosion of speculation.
And if you swear at me again I'll 'effin haunt you forever ;)
Click to expand...
Actually, the Moon missions were equipped with state of the art photographic equipment, including, very high quality, specially modified, 'square 6×6 (56mm x 56mm) format' Hasselblads, with the finest Carl Zeiss optics. Just because they relied on chemicals and mechanicals, doesn't mean that they were inferior to modern digital cameras. Also, hardly ever a cloudy day on the Moon.

http://www.patricktaylor.com/hasselblad-500
http://history.nasa.gov/apollo_photo.html

Never forget, there wasn't just one Moon mission to fake, but about six successful ones.

If Rynner seems somewhat exasperated, don't forget, some of us were actually around at the time.

There will be no hauntings.

P_M
 
The surface photos weren't just a set of unplanned snapshots. The astronauts were extensively trained in photographic techniques because it was part of their assigned duties (as collectors of scientific data).

As already mentioned, they were provided with camera equipment providing clarity and detail digital photographers still can't match 40 years later.

In addition, there was a detailed planned 'script' for the kinds of photographs to be taken (commander on the surface; illustration of activities they were assigned to perform; etc.). For example -the famous photo of the bootprint in the dust wasn't an 'artsy shot' - it was a prescribed closeup to provide data on the properties of the lunar surface dust.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top