Comments (26) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

   That’s pretty much true.

   Now the loudest group are the ones saying we never actually went to the moon.

   Ranking right up there with the groups that say global warming isn’t happening, tobacco is good for you, evolution is a myth, etc., etc..

2. 

   cabrobst said, 4 months ago

   Add those who say it was faked. All the arm dragging neanderthal caveman types, you know, Republicans.

3. 

   DonVanni said, 4 months ago

   If the Apollo didn’t happen, then how was NASA able to keep it a secret from The RUSSIANS?????? The Soviet Union MUST have been tracking Apollo 11 and the rest of the Apollo missions! If they had exposed Apollo as a fraud it would have been the greatest propaganda coup IN HISTORY!!! The Russians would have WON the Cold War!!!

   Mythbusters recently did an episode in which they busted the myths that Apollo 11 was a hoax.

4. 

   HOWGOZIT said, 4 months ago

   Brobst–show us all where Republicans say it was a fake please.

5. 

   motivemagus said, 4 months ago

   This cartoon hurts. Dammit, we need to get back up there, soon, and stay up there. Other countries are working on it.
   cabrobst, it isn’t the Republicans who say it was faked, certainly not the mainstream ones. It’s a tin-hat theory.
   And the Mythbusters episode is even available on DVD if people want it, as well as various bits on the web. They did a really nice job.

6. 

   fritzoid said, 4 months ago

   If we go back, what is there to DO there? Is there anything we can do on a moon base that we can’t do just as effectively (and a whole lot cheaper) from an orbital platform?

7. 

   ChukLitl said, 4 months ago

   But, you can’t mine space. With mining & production facilities on the Moon, it could be cheaper to launch space-craft from there, due to the lower lift required.

8. 

   dtroutma said, 4 months ago

   Tremendous technology has come from the program. Manned space flight is inspirational, but very expensive, survival, complex. While I’d like, emotionally to see a human on Mars, I’d rather see the money spent on “humanity”, and survival here on earth.

9. 

   churchillwasright said, 4 months ago

   This cartoon is ridiculous.If every bit of popular technology that the U.S. Space Program influenced, or directly or indirectly funded were forced to carry a NASA logo, I doubt anyone would consider it a “small step”.

10. 

    Norman said, 4 months ago

    All you rocket scientists: How do you go through the Van Allen Radiation belt with NO shielding????? Flag is waving well for an airless environment, how come no blast crater under the lander. Grissom was a critic and he and two others got cooked to shut them up. Funny the Russians never bothered and the were just as capable as we were… they knew it wasn’t possible.

    Yes my tin hat works.

11. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    Norml, have you ever tried Google?

    They went through the Van Allen belt so fast it wasn’t an issue.

    The appearance of the flag is due to the struts holding it up.

    Due to the low gravity, the thrust from the lander wasn’t strong enough to make a crater.

12. 

    lightartsteacher said, 4 months ago

    normljones, I can’t believe you are real.

13. 

    Robert Peters said, 4 months ago

    @ normljones:

    The Russians did have their own big moon rocket on the launch pad when ours landed on the Moon.

    Checkered flag of the Space Race. Time to turn their efforts to more pragmatic pursuits in low Earth orbit.

    Considering that the Space Race was the greatest propaganda battle of the Cold War, it’s unimaginable that the Russians would have let us get away with such a hoax when all they would have had to do was expose it to turn the tables on us.

    And you forgot to ask why there was no dust on the landing pad “feet” of the lander. Because dust would have had to have been airborne to swirl back to there instead of being blown straight out and falling back in a very dissipated, basically imperceptible donut shape around the landing site.

    And that flag that appeared to be waving, look closer and you’ll see that the guy messing with it was flipping it back and forth.

14. 

    motivemagus said, 4 months ago

    norml - you should watch the Mythbusters episode on this. These are two guys with 30 years’ special effects experience working decades later than the moon landing trying to duplicate the effects. Couldn’t be done. Faking low gravity, particularly, was not possible. They also disproved the “flag waved with no wind” myth using a vacuum chamber. Check it out. It may not convince you, but it may cause you to come up with some better criticisms.
    churchill - good point. Have you read Heinlein’s “Spinoff”? He goes into a list of the developments that paid for the space program fourteen times over by some estimates.
    dtroutma - understandable, but wrong. We learn vast amounts by going into space, not to mention the many lives saved through things we now take for granted, like weather satellites and communications satellites. One thing we will learn in space is how to maintain a balanced ecology when you don’t have the Earth backing you up!
    And as Chuk said, you can mine the Moon - there are many rare earth metals up there that could make a big difference to new technologies.
    Besides, at the very least we might need a backup plan if we screw things up down here!

15. 

    nomad2112 said, 4 months ago

    I wonder if the Hubble can see the landers and the rover from here.

16. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    Undoubtedly, but it’s got more interesting things to look at.

17. 

    Adora68 said, 4 months ago

    I know that we went to the moon, so I’m not questioning that fact.

    What puzzles me is everyone quoting Mythbusters as if they were the be-all and end-all of scientific proof. Mythbusters is a fun, entertaining show that does an okay job with science, but it’s far from definitive. Some of the tactics they’ve used to “bust” theories have been downright specious.

18. 

    DrCanuck said, 4 months ago

    Well, hey; if it’s on television, it MUST be true….

    (or Youtube.)

19. 

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    Mythbusters does a good job of showing something in a way the average person can understand. I knew many of the myths they have “busted” were already scientific impossibilities but they gave a visual and simple explanation. I also admit a guy fondness for explosions.

20. 

    motivemagus said, 4 months ago

    Gladius made the point well, Adora, but I would add that the issue here is right in their sweet spot. The claim is that the moon landing was simulated using special effects. The Mythbusters are well-known special effects gurus. In this case it isn’t the science expertise, it’s their core expertise!

21. 

    Nelly55 said, 4 months ago

    “nomad2112 said, about 11 hours ago

    I wonder if the Hubble can see the landers and the rover from here. ”

    you might try checking the NASA website. The LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) that is currently orbiting the moon has sent back pictures of all of the Apollo landing sites

    http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html

22. 

    Right_On said, 4 months ago

    nomad, Hubble can’t see the items becasue it it too close. I believe I read that somewhere.

23. 

    PlainBill said, 4 months ago

    nomad2112 said, about 12 hours ago

    I wonder if the Hubble can see the landers and the rover from here.

    The question has been asked before. Interestingly enough, it can’t. The telescope wasn’t designed to focus on object that close. However, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has taken pictures of them.

24. 

    dtroutma said, 4 months ago

    The orbiter in fact has taken a neat picture of the Apollo 14 lander in which you can still see the footprints of the astronauts. I don’t think they’ve found Shepard’s golf ball yet.

25. 

    nomad2112 said, 4 months ago

    All, don’t think that I have any doubts about the moon landings. I thought some pictures may shut these Apollo doubters up. Then I guess they would just assume that all evidence is faked.

    Thanks for the info and the links to the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

26. 

    motivemagus said, 4 months ago

    Ditto, thanks, loved the pictures of the actual landing sites.