Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So, did we go to the moon or not?

---

Maybe a better question to ask would be why would we claim we went if we didn't/couldn't? What purpose does the hoax have? There certainly wasn't any money to be made from it or political clout. We claimed it was the greatest accomplishment of mankind, but it was really our accomplishment, after all it is our flag that sits on the moon and no one others. Certainly had this been a hoax the Soviets then-the '80s would have called us on it, or certainly the CCP today. Why would any nation go along with the hoax at the time or not call us on it now?

---

That's a valid question. But I think the assumptions are wrong. I seem to recall a term 'space race.' Apollo turned NASA into an industry unto itself that continues to this day. All one has to do is look at old budgets. And who would argue that NASA's pursuits don't serve a dual purpose that includes national security? The MIC's areospace pursuits were now front and center and essentially given a blank check following a problematic program toward space vehicles on overrun budgets that were still never quite enough (x-15). There was also the propaganda aspect to placate the emergence of very big government that at the same time of friendly moon walkers waving to the camera, was dealing with an unpopular war, civil rights clashes, and a growing culture of dissent.

So it had to have a definite positive outcome. It had to be faked. For Pete's sake Armstrong still couldn't nail the landing in simulators right up to the launch. The live training platform couldn't even fly. Aldrin hadn't even trained on landing simulators. Armstrong said it was 50/50 chance they'd ever come back - just a few days before the launch! One only need look at the disaster in Iraq to see what lengths government will go to make the appearance of success.

Moral scruples? Dishonesty is a precondition to play in that league of big money and big politics. One only need look at the exemplary lives of Kissinger, Nixon, and Von Braun to see that objection comes up short. That they couldn't or wouldn't lie about such an event, or that they didn't have the means to is nonsensical.

The Soviets would never call the bluff - they would be laughing stock against a reality matrix from which the whole world watched in their own homes. And why would they? - to invalidate their own military/space and ideological pursuits?

It's also invalid the conclusion that is put forth that 'we won, so the Soviets stood down' on putting a man on the moon. Is there nothing to be gained by rivaling one's opponent beyond getting there first? It certainly didn't play out that way in Project Mercury. Odd I think.

From a standpoint of national security, military and political hegemony; industrial capital interests; government stability, from a standpoint to limit the influence on the world by the Soviets and therefore from a standpoint of democracy and cultural freedom, and from a standpoint of humanity (vs. sending off astronots on a far from ready rendevous with death), the most reasonable thesis is that they faked it.

It is totally unreasonable that the powers that shaped this international race and domestic goal with many factors at stake would hedge on a failing relay or a bad computer code (which they were full of and the offical record supports).

---

Nice try, and it would be more convincing had everything you pointed to all happened in say late '67-'68. Unfortunately you either have your historical events mixed together, or read a revisionist history book that mixed them up for you.

For starters the race to space was over and the Soviets won in '57 w/Sputnik I, and again in '61 w/Sputnik II, it was really a race of one. The race to the moon, like the race to space was a race of one competitor, and therefore not a race. JFK declared going to the moon vital to the U.S Standing in the world, and as way to trump the Soviets. The Soviets didn't stand down after we went to the moon they knew they couldn't get there long before '69. With the events of the Cuban missile crisis in '62, the Soviets were well aware that their guidance systems were woefully in adequate for Nukes, let alone sending a Cosmonaut to the Moon. Sure they could have tried im teh 70's and '80's. but nothing would be gained from being teh seconds one here. Can you name the second person to make it to the top of Everest w/o using Google, or was second to Phelps in the Olympics? As the saying goes second place is the first loser and nobody remembers losers. The Soviets had far more to gain politically by exposing the moon landing as a hoax than by going along with it. If it had been a hoax, the SALT I/II talks of the 70's and the START I/II talks of the '80's would have gone much differently. There is absolutely no reason for the Soviets to agree to the terms w/in those treaties, if they were sitting on the info that the greatest accomplishment of mankind(by their political/economic/military enemy) was faked. Every time the U.S. or NATO had an issue with what the Soviets were doing, they would have threatened to release the info, forcing the West to shut-up. Furthermore, the Soviets didn't have anything to be gained domestically by going along with the hoax. The USSR was a closed society in the '60's they could have told their people they made it to the Moon first, and no one would have been the wiser. There was simpy nothing to be accomplished by going to the moon themselves, or going along w/the hoax. The only reason why the CCP is even considering going is because they are trying to define themselves by what the U.S. has achieved, and since we went to the Moon, so must they.

Nothing would be achieved economically by faking the Moon landing. There wasn't an issue w/budget cuts during the '60's, as we have had since the '80's. America was still riding high on the post war economy, and the effects of Europe and Japan's economic engines coming online wouldn't be felt until the '70's. Did some private companies benefit from NASA's budget then, sure just as they do now, but there would be no reason for them to claim they could if they couldn't. They didn't need the hoax to keep the money coming in, all they had to do was ask for it.

Politically there wasn't anything to be gained from a faked landing. Yes Vietnam was an issue, but it wasn't as unpopular as the media/liberals have portrayed it to be for the last 30+yrs after all it was JFK and LBJ(both Dem's) who had been running Vietnam up until Nixon was sworn in in Jan. '69. Kent State incident nd the protest that followed all happened after 'July of '69. The ethnic unrest you refer to took place primarily in the mid-60's, not too mention that sending 3 white guys to the moon wouldn't have done anything to resolve the black/white issues even had the Watts riots taken place in '69 rather than '65. Also Nixon didn't owe anything to the legacy of JFK or LBJ, and fact would have had far more to gain by exposing the hoax than going along with it.

The Military also didn't have have anything to be gained from the hoax either, they had their own budget. While NASA launched sats for the military, the moon served no purpose to them, which again is why the Soviets didn't try to get there after we did.

The dangers of going to the Moon wouldn't have swayed any of the astronauts, from taking the risk, most of them were test pilots(a complete breed of their own). Also all the simulator training in the world(at that time) wouldn't have made a bit of difference landing in almost zero gravity for the first time. Did the Wright Brothers know how to land a plane when they first took flight? Did the first guy that jumped out of an airplane w/a parachute know how it was going work before doing it? Humans do stupid untested things all the time, it is only now do to the "Nanny" state we live in that these types of risks seem outlandish. Even after Challenger and Columbia(uh oh, both start w/C maybe another conspiracy?) most Astronauts would have gone up the next day had NASA not grounded the program. So even a 1% chance of surviving a trip to the moon would have been more than enough for them to want to go.

Is it totally unreasonable to think that any government agency/official/private company might not think of a hoax as grand as the Moon landing, no of course not, people think of grand hoaxes all the time. What is unreasonable is to think that given the complexity of such a hoax, the thousands of people involved/needed over the last 40 yrs to pull it off is, especially when there was absolutely nothing to be gained from it then, nor now.

--------------------
More than tread lightly. Leave it like you were never there, nor anyone else.
'90 X-cab 4.88's 33 BFG AT's, rr ARB, Headers, Ignition upgrade, cold air induction.
'91 X-cab 5.29's 315's BFG MT's, rr ARB, custom bumper and flatbed

Post Extras