Were the moon landings faked?

That's the thing. The Apollo project is NOT hoaxable. There were hundreds of thousands of people involved. So either every one of them is in on the hoax, and not a single one has said a word about it, or they are also all in the dark. If they are in the dark, they spent many years of their lives building equipment designed to go to the moon, so why wouldn't they simply use it to go to the moon? There still remains a massive paper trail of blueprints, mission reports, flight plans, and other data from the project. Outside of the paper trail, the 6 flights brought back over 800 pounds of moon rock, and any geologist in the world will tell you that the samples come from the moon, and there is no possible way for them to be manufactured on Earth. Thousands of people watched the launch live, hundreds saw the TLI burns with their own eyes, anyone with a telescope and a knowledge of where the spacecraft was could see the urine dumps, and hundreds watched the capsules parachute into the ocean. These people weren't just in the United States, the Soviets were watching with great interest also, and would surely have blown the secret if they found out. There are thousands of photographs, thousands of hours of audio, and hundreds of hours of video which document the program. Theres the testimony of 24 men who went to the moon, the 12 who walked on it, the hundreds of flight controllers who were watching live telemetry from the spacecraft, the engineers who confirmed the data was or was not correct, etc. The clavius website is run by an aerospace engineer, and each point he writes is debated and approved on the bulletin board there, as well as on the Bad Astronomy Bulletin Board, by other engineers, and many people who know a whole lot about the program. I stand by my statement of earlier, and I decline to say which category you fall in, frankly I'm not sure yet. As for aulis, I have thoroughly read the site, and they spew the same arguments as everyone else, which make no sense logically nor scientifically.

You would have been able to find the webmaster's name if you had clicked on the link titled "ABOUT THE AUTHOR" (Big clue to where to find his name). It contains his bio and his qualifications. I guess the reason "some people" can't grasp the fact that we went to the moon "skimmed through" all the evedence. If you TAKE THE TIME TO READ all the evedence you will be able to understand it.

The conspiracy theorists are conspiring against me.

Wamies writes:

"In that case, whoever runs the site (i skimmed through it, and i couldn't find a name of the web owner) uses the oldest trick in the book."

I am the author of Clavius.org, and I have read Bennett and Percy's book. Please show which quotes I have taken out of context.

"I would like to have some info on the researchers there."

Send your real name and address to webmaster@clavius.o rg and I will send you my resume and those of our contributors. The site now has my name on it. At the time you read it, I was getting threats. That has been resolved.

"I read some sort of a "trust me I have a phd" info about this person."

No. What you read was specifically the *opposite* -- that you shouldn't trust me just because I say I have degrees and experience, but because you can test these things out yourself.

"Whoever runs the site put alot of vested interest in the Dark Moon..."

I discuss all the authors.

The site is a bit heavy on Bennett and Percy because they abruptly stopped responding to my questions and deleted all my discussion from their web site. I created the site to reproduce the debates I had with them. They were invited to defend their arguments in "Conspiracy Moon Landing" but declined the invitation.

What I find suspicious are authors who publish serious accusations, decline to respond to their critics (even suppressing criticism), and answer all questions with, "You must buy all of our materials first."

"...you made this very telling statement earlier about 'people that believe in the hoax theory either don't look into it deep enough..."

But then you yourself say, "Like I said before, I don't know where I stand on the issue. I haven't researched it enough." This is exactly what was said. You haven't researched it enough, therefore you are one of the people who hasn't looked into it deeply. I have. I have spent more than five years investigating these various conspiracy theories, and I can tell you with full confidence that they are riddled with inaccuracy, deception, and very poor reasoning.

The real hoax is that these authors are just trying to get your money.

"FOX had the special program discussing the NASA inconsistencies. The program was called, 'Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon'..."

No. Fox's program was entitled "Conspiracy: Did We Land on the Moon?" The other film, "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon" is by Bart Sibrel, and was never broadcast on Fox, although Sibrel contributed to the Fox program.

Heads seriously rolled at Fox over what was largely an unchallenged advertisement for the conspiracy theories. Fox News (which is actually a separate company) even had experts on refuting it. Part of Fox Entertainment's "penance" for having broadcast that piece of rubbish is that they now distribute Mark Gray's excellent series of unedited Apollo footage.

"NASA director for the media Brian Welch had no response to leading researcher's questions..."

Gee, a program produced by people favoring one particular theory doesn't paint a flattering picture of their opponents. What a shocker! Did it occur to you that Welch came across as dismissive because that's what the program's producer wanted to have happen?

I spoke to Brian O'Leary, the pre-Apollo astronaut interviewed for the program, about his contribution. He said that he gave the producers a half-hour interview in which he affirmed several times he believed the moon landings were real. But the producers used only the few seconds that sounded like he might have doubts. The LM expert (his name eludes me momentarily) threatened legal action against the producers for misrepresenting his comments.

Does this sound like a trustworthy film?

"I know that the whole moon mission is very hoaxable."

Irrelevant. Arguing that it's not impossible is not anywhere close to showing it was actually done that way. It was also very achievable, and there is a ton of evidence to show it was achieved. That's all the evidence your authors are struggling to explain away.

"And NASA does have a credibility problem on many issues of the past and present."

Not nearly as many as your authors, who are blatantly lying about who they are and what they know. And they run and hide from critics.

Why won't Bennett and Percy debate me? Why won't Ralph Rene debate me? Why do they confine their remarks to lay audiences who don't have the knowledge to see through their crap?

Bottom line is that the U.S. made 6 moon landings from 1969-1972. I could fathom faking one - possibly two, but not six missions. Too many NASA administrators, astronauts, scientists and engineers would have to be "kept quiet" and that's just impossible on such a large scale -- again, 6 missions! Unfortunately, yes, America wastes billions of taxpayer dollars on frivolous, repetitive space missions rather than use the money for things on earth such as medical care for the elderly & disabled, reinforcing the levees in New Orleans, fixing potholes nationwide, creating jobs & housing for the homeless, and...oh, maybe having bomber squadrons drop large dry ice blocks over tropical storms in their infancy before they develop into hurricanes. Don't knock it until you try it and at least give it a test run. It could save lives and it would at least be money well spent for a "giant leap for mankind."

[deleted]