Did Men Really Walk On The Moon?

[The Liturgist]

Who says it's not possible to do today? The problem is building ships that protect life are very expensive. The way they did things in the 60s would have to be all upgraded but what is the motivation and reason to send men to the moon now?

Indeed the way things was done in the 60s has been upgraded; we have the spacecraft now, SLS, which is derived from the Project Orion / Constellation program initiated in the Bush administration, which Obama cancelled, and then resurrected but with a more boring name “Space Launch System” because politics I guess?, and that hardware has completed and unmanned circum-lunar flight, and the first manned Artemis mission is in final preprations; it should happen this next year (2024).

And there is also Starship from SpaceX, which is still in the prototype stage; it has yet to reach orbit but they are making progress in that at least in their second launch they didn’t blow up the launch pad, and also they successfully staged (there was a successful separation between the first stage and the Starship vehicle itself). Given that SpaceX has a proven record of delivering very reliable and extremely reusable spacecraft, including the Crew Dragon spacecraft which first flew to the ISS in 2020, and the Dragon unmanned cargo ferry which flew a few years earlier, and the Falcon and Falcon Heavy rockets, which are reusable, and which land on automated recovery platforms in the ocean, a huge advance in reusability, truly impressive, i think Starship will probably make it into production, unless Elon Musk were to become absorbed in a criminal scandal of epic proportions enough to where the government would allow its most dependable provider of space launch services to fail, which seems unlikely (even if they went after Musk personally, he is arguably not essential to SpaceX and is probably holding them back at this point, for example, if I recall, it was his idea to not build a more heavily reinforced launch pad for the Starship mission last spring, which resulted in devastation, as he underestimated the effect that turning on lighting so many powerful rocket engines would cause in terms of acoustic effects, heat damage and so on; the first launch pad was obliterated.

 

[JacksBratt]

Does anybody really think that God would ever let us get loose into the cosmos like Star Trek or something? No way.

I didnt vote on the poll. I didnt see a choice for my view which is,

No, but some of the other space missions have been real.

I think God would let us loose... if we could do it.

However, if we ever did, what would we do? You really think that people are going to live on the moon? Mars? Seriously, we don't have the funds, the technology, to move the material even to the moon.

One mistake..... all dead..... end of exploration.

That is if we had even ever gone before.... Not a chance.

 

[JacksBratt]

We don't currently have that technology, no. We once had the technology, now we don't. We don't currently have any Saturn 5-power rockets lying around, for instance.

In the early 80s, when I was on the staff of the Strategic Air Command office that managed the SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft, it was rather grating to realize we no longer had the technology to build any more copies of an aircraft that had originally been build in the early 60s. The planes we had then would be all we'd ever have because all the original tooling had been destroyed, all the original engineers were retired or dead. It would have taken another decade to re-engineer and re-tool...and re-learn a lot of lessons.

We know such a thing is possible, but we'd have to re-engineer it all over again...kind of like the way we had to re-invent concrete after forgetting how the Romans did it.

Edit: Something similar happened when the conservation-minded US government in the 70s mandated low-volume toilets. The then-current toilets had been designed to flush cleanly with 5 gallons of water. That was not a matter of just volume, but also weight. Over the course of the first half of the 20th century, toilet bowl designers had developed optimum venturi designs that depended on both the volume and weight of the water as it flushed.

But the first low-volume toilets in the 70s flushed terribly because they merely put low-volume tanks on top of the traditional venturis. It was so bad that for several years there was a hot black market of Canadian toilets, because Canada had not yet passed a similar law. But the old designers were all dead, so it took over 20 years to re-engineer new venturis that flush well with a low volume of water.

So, in all politeness and seriousness, you don't think that we have superior technological skills and knowledge to re-engineer things from the 60's, 70's, 80's?

With "AI" now, it is no longer a question of having the "technology" as in the knowledge and ability.

We don't have the "technology" as in the physical components that we had back then..

BUT... the knowledge, tools, physical capabilities, computer strength, metallurgy, fabrication technology and testing ability.... We should be able to do what we did in the 60's without even a blink.

I can't believe that all of the testing and trial and error is not written down somewhere... Or... by shear volume of people in the field... many things just become common knowledge.

Just like the auto industry.. many of the things that were knew technolgy and still had bugs in it or not fully perfected...... are copy paste run of the mill standard accepted normal devices and options.

IMO... they never went... and they are stalling now until they have something that can partially apease the people...

 

[JacksBratt]

Many reasons I believe why man went to the Moon. One is numbers who went were Christians or some became Christians years later and I've heard their testimonies. I just don't believe these people were lying.

It's pretty easy to control what people say... especially if you are in the government, NASA or any high security type line of work...

You simply tell them that if they say anything.... We know where your mother lives... you children... your brother... your wife..... etc.

Then, if someone squawks.... you paint them as becoming suddenly mentally ill or frame them on something..... discredit them and take out someone that they hold near and dear in their heart.

Do that to one or two.... then present every other person with the knowledge of what they did to "Fred" when he opened his yap.

Even the most hard core Godly man will not risk someone that dear to them for something that is easily laughed off as being nonsense.. like "I'm telling you.. we never went to the moon" ....

 

[Divide]

I think God would let us loose... if we could do it.

However, if we ever did, what would we do? You really think that people are going to live on the moon? Mars? Seriously, we don't have the funds, the technology, to move the material even to the moon.

One mistake..... all dead..... end of exploration.

That is if we had even ever gone before.... Not a chance.

They might really try it. They want to bring us along as workers, lol. Go mine mars and make us rich boy!

I dont think we could do it. Because would this be in our present world which is under attack by God's enemies? They are trying to destroy mankind, so instead of building starships, they will build death rays.

And if we lived in a world without sin or corruptness, then we probably wont need a space program because people will probably be able to travel to distant planets by their own thoughts. Maybe.

 

[JacksBratt]

They might really try it. They want to bring us along as workers, lol. Go mine mars and make us rich boy!

I dont think we could do it. Because would this be in our present world which is under attack by God's enemies? They are trying to destroy mankind, so instead of building starships, they will build death rays.

And if we lived in a world without sin or corruptness, then we probably wont need a space program because people will probably be able to travel to distant planets by their own thoughts. Maybe.

I know, very well, an amature stock car racer. I have got to know a lot of them at the tracks around here. These machines are highly tuned, highly technical, and they work withing tolerances that I would never have imagined. They are tinkering, and fine tuning all week.

Still, with high performance parts, engines, fuel, mechanics and expertice.... they fail.... a lot.

From tie rods, brake fade due to heat, fuel pressure loss, overheating, tire failure, timing issues, linkage slop, melting wires, fires, or any other number of simple unpredictable issues.....

My point is that even the most well engineered, high end designs and material... things break.

Now, people are trying to tell me that we went to the moon.... and back... in the most harsh environment with the most drastic temperature variants and pressure differentials...over thousands of miles with the most explosive launch vehicles.... what was it six time? With only one failure that managed to get back to earth safely? In a basically a tin can with a computer less than a childs "leap frog" toy laptop.

That alone is enough to put question to the whole moon landing "story".

 

[RDKirk]

So, in all politeness and seriousness, you don't think that we have superior technological skills and knowledge to re-engineer things from the 60's, 70's, 80's?

With "AI" now, it is no longer a question of having the "technology" as in the knowledge and ability.

We don't have the "technology" as in the physical components that we had back then..

BUT... the knowledge, tools, physical capabilities, computer strength, metallurgy, fabrication technology and testing ability.... We should be able to do what we did in the 60's without even a blink.

I can't believe that all of the testing and trial and error is not written down somewhere... Or... by shear volume of people in the field... many things just become common knowledge.

Just like the auto industry.. many of the things that were knew technolgy and still had bugs in it or not fully perfected...... are copy paste run of the mill standard accepted normal devices and options.

IMO... they never went... and they are stalling now until they have something that can partially apease the people...

You'd be surprised what has been lost. Nobody is going to comb through reams of old computer printouts. They'll just do it all over again from scratch. The past only proves that it's possible, not the way to do it again.

 

[RDKirk]

It's pretty easy to control what people say... especially if you are in the government, NASA or any high security type line of work...

You simply tell them that if they say anything.... We know where your mother lives... you children... your brother... your wife..... etc.

Then, if someone squawks.... you paint them as becoming suddenly mentally ill or frame them on something..... discredit them and take out someone that they hold near and dear in their heart.

Do that to one or two.... then present every other person with the knowledge of what they did to "Fred" when he opened his yap.

Even the most hard core Godly man will not risk someone that dear to them for something that is easily laughed off as being nonsense.. like "I'm telling you.. we never went to the moon" ....

Loosen that aluminum foil cap a little.

 

[RDKirk]

I know, very well, an amature stock car racer. I have got to know a lot of them at the tracks around here. These machines are highly tuned, highly technical, and they work withing tolerances that I would never have imagined. They are tinkering, and fine tuning all week.

Still, with high performance parts, engines, fuel, mechanics and expertice.... they fail.... a lot.

From tie rods, brake fade due to heat, fuel pressure loss, overheating, tire failure, timing issues, linkage slop, melting wires, fires, or any other number of simple unpredictable issues.....

My point is that even the most well engineered, high end designs and material... things break.

Now, people are trying to tell me that we went to the moon.... and back... in the most harsh environment with the most drastic temperature variants and pressure differentials...over thousands of miles with the most explosive launch vehicles.... what was it six time? With only one failure that managed to get back to earth safely? In a basically a tin can with a computer less than a childs "leap frog" toy laptop.

That alone is enough to put question to the whole moon landing "story".

So how long has your personal computer run without burning up? Old school transistors were pretty reliable. Test everything thoroughly, make everything essential redundant. Design for the non-heat of space [Edit: Electronics do better under that particular condition anyway] and shield from the sun to mitigate temperature differences...not an impossible engineering problem in vacuum. The greatest pressure difference is less than 15 pounds per square inch...exploring the depths of the sea is much more difficult. Remember that the SR-71 was designed in the 1950s controlled by a computer programmed by a big disk of magnetic tape, and is still holds the record for cruising at MACH 3.2+

 

[Gene2memE]

We don't have the "technology" as in the physical components that we had back then..

BUT... the knowledge, tools, physical capabilities, computer strength, metallurgy, fabrication technology and testing ability.... We should be able to do what we did in the 60's without even a blink.

It's not just a matter of 'technology', it's a matter of money, infrastructure and objectives.

NASA's budget from 1962 to 1969 was between 2.3% and 4.5% of total US federal spending. Right now it's a little under 0.5%.

About 45% of NASA's current $24 billion budget is spent directly on spaceflight and R&D for remote and manned spaceflight - roughly $11 billion per year. Compare that to the 1962-1969 period. NASA's budgets then averaged $56 billion per year and anywhere from 60% to 75% was spent on manned spaceflight. That's about $33 to $41 billion per year

Give NASA three to four times their current budget for manned spaceflight and watch how quickly things change.

NASA spend $49.9 billion across the SLS (rocket) and Orion (capsule) programmes over an 18 year period. But these aren't just meant to take men to the moon. These are being designed and built with the potential to take take men to Mars.

Consider this - the distance between Earth and the moon is roughly 385,000 km. The distance between earth and Mars is 225,000,000 km.

If earth to the moon was the same distance as a single step, then the earth to Mars is about a quarter mile.

 

[The Liturgist]

Now, people are trying to tell me that we went to the moon.... and back... in the most harsh environment with the most drastic temperature variants and pressure differentials...over thousands of miles with the most explosive launch vehicles.... what was it six time? With only one failure that managed to get back to earth safely? In a basically a tin can with a computer less than a childs "leap frog" toy laptop.

Yes, we did do it, and it was extremely dangerous, but quite possible.

Speaking of the computer, you are probably incorrect concerning the compute resources of the Apollo Guidance Computer. While it is true that it did not have a lot of memory, it was a real time system of the sort I program for a living, and a particularly robust one at that, indeed one of the best real time systems ever programmed. It was pure artistry on the part of the MIT computer lab, and it is fair to say the Lunar mission would have been impossible without that system.

The reality is that computer systems do not need massive amounts of memory to get amazing amounts of work done; the first airline reservations systems and ballistic missile control systems came online in the form of IBM SAGE for missile control and Sabre, for American Airlines, at the end of the 1950s (SAGE stands for Semi Automatic Ground Environment, and Sabre is derived from Semi Automatic Business Environment Research). Sabre, running on primitive hardware, accomplishes what airline reservation systems continue to accomplish to this day, in some cases running code dating back to the 1960s. Actually businesses still run some COBOL and other legacy code originally written for the IBM System/360 or the business machines it was designed to be compatible with, and other early mainframes from the 1960s, specifically those of Burroughs and Sperry-Rand.

It is also worth noting that UNIX first became operational in 1969 on a Digital PDP-7 not dramatically larger or more powerful than the Apollo Guidance Computer.

When you work in embedded systems, you actually realize just how bloated and excessive modern computers are. Bill Gates was actually correct when he said that 640K is all the memory anyone (by which he presumably meant any PC or any individual user) would ever need (emphasis on the word need).

 

[The Liturgist]

So how long has your personal computer run without burning up? Old school transistors were pretty reliable. Test everything thoroughly, make everything essential redundant. Design for the cold and shield from the sun to mitigate temperature differences...not an impossible engineering problem in vacuum. The greatest pressure difference is less than 15 pounds per square inch...exploring the depths of the sea is much more difficult. Remember that the SR-71 was designed in the 1950s controlled by a computer programmed by a big disk of magnetic tape, and is still holds the record for cruising at MACH 3.2+

Well if people are going to deny that spaceflight and the Lunar missions are a hoax, as I see it they might as well claim the SR-71 was a hoax; consistency requires them to say that about the X-15 which was a true spacecraft, but the A-12 Oxcart and the SR-71 were one might say too close for comfort as far as moon landing and space flight denial is concerned. Also consider that much of the moon landing hoax community overlaps with the flat Earth community, which insists that things which actually do exist, such as non-stop flights between the Southern continents, do not exist, despite clear records of these services operating non-stop on routes such as PER-CPT and CPT-EZE, and EZE-SYD and EZE-MEL and the possibility of booking a charter flight over the south pole on EZE-MEL. (BUenos Aires - Melbourne)

 

[Bobber]

Yes, we did do it, and it was extremely dangerous, but quite possible.

Speaking of the computer, you are probably incorrect concerning the compute resources of the Apollo Guidance Computer. While it is true that it did not have a lot of memory, it was a real time system of the sort I program for a living, and a particularly robust one at that, indeed one of the best real time systems ever programmed. It was pure artistry on the part of the MIT computer lab, and it is fair to say the Lunar mission would have been impossible without that system.

The reality is that computer systems do not need massive amounts of memory to get amazing amounts of work done; the first airline reservations systems and ballistic missile control systems came online in the form of IBM SAGE for missile control and Sabre, for American Airlines, at the end of the 1950s (SAGE stands for Semi Automatic Ground Environment, and Sabre is derived from Semi Automatic Business Environment Research). Sabre, running on primitive hardware, accomplishes what airline reservation systems continue to accomplish to this day, in some cases running code dating back to the 1960s. Actually businesses still run some COBOL and other legacy code originally written for the IBM System/360 or the business machines it was designed to be compatible with, and other early mainframes from the 1960s, specifically those of Burroughs and Sperry-Rand.

It is also worth noting that UNIX first became operational in 1969 on a Digital PDP-7 not dramatically larger or more powerful than the Apollo Guidance Computer.

When you work in embedded systems, you actually realize just how bloated and excessive modern computers are. Bill Gates was actually correct when he said that 640K is all the memory anyone (by which he presumably meant any PC or any individual user) would ever need (emphasis on the word need).

Interesting post.

 

[Bobber]

It's not just a matter of 'technology', it's a matter of money, infrastructure and objectives.

NASA's budget from 1962 to 1969 was between 2.3% and 4.5% of total US federal spending. Right now it's a little under 0.5%.

About 45% of NASA's current $24 billion budget is spent directly on spaceflight and R&D for remote and manned spaceflight - roughly $11 billion per year. Compare that to the 1962-1969 period. NASA's budgets then averaged $56 billion per year and anywhere from 60% to 75% was spent on manned spaceflight. That's about $33 to $41 billion per year

Give NASA three to four times their current budget for manned spaceflight and watch how quickly things change.

NASA spend $49.9 billion across the SLS (rocket) and Orion (capsule) programmes over an 18 year period. But these aren't just meant to take men to the moon. These are being designed and built with the potential to take take men to Mars.

Consider this - the distance between Earth and the moon is roughly 385,000 km. The distance between earth and Mars is 225,000,000 km.

If earth to the moon was the same distance as a single step, then the earth to Mars is about a quarter mile.

Makes me wonder if man we ever really decide to go to Mars. (outside of robotic ships) I know we've got the theology to do it but by gosh it is so very far . What would the phycological effects on men doing this? No matter how much one trains for this I think it's an unknown. Old ships in the old world crossing the oceans were gone for years.....but they were always able to be in the fresh air. You get men out their on Mars and they mentally snap.....how can you help them. Humanity would have a hard to forgiving themselves for sending them out.

 

[Bobber]

Even the most hard core Godly man will not risk someone that dear to them for something that is easily laughed off as being nonsense.. like "I'm telling you.. we never went to the moon" ....

Still I don't believe these godly men would be lying about it. If it were like you say there's no way they'd seek a stage and have as part of their testimony that they walked on the Moon. They'd veer away from public stages all together.

 

[Bobber]

Another reason among many that I believe men went to the Moon. Here's another one......So what about Apollo 13? So what are we to believe about that. That the scammers thought they'd pull of a hilarious joke and make it seem like a ship on the way to the Moon had a big problem? So you had Apollo 11, 12, 14,15,16, and 17 land on the Moon with men. That's six times. Why in the world would you seek to scam something 6 times.....and 7 if you count Apollo 13. If you're going to do a scam you'd do it maybe once or twice....but 7 times? It would be counter productive to try to pull something like that off. We can therefore conclude I believe that men did what they said that they did. They did land on the Moon at least 6 times and Apollo 13 was a dangerous reality too.

 

[RDKirk]

Another reason among many that I believe men went to the Moon. Here's another one......So what about Apollo 13? So what are we to believe about that. That the scammers thought they'd pull of a hilarious joke and make it seem like a ship on the way to the Moon had a big problem? So you had Apollo 11, 12, 14,15,16, and 17 land on the Moon with men. That's six times. Why in the world would you seek to scam something 6 times.....and 7 if you count Apollo 13. If you're going to do a scam you'd do it maybe once or twice....but 7 times? It would be counter productive to try to pull something like that off. We can therefore conclude I believe that men did what they said that they did. They did land on the Moon at least 6 times and Apollo 13 was a dangerous reality too.

And why scam a screw-up?

 

[prodromos]

And why scam a screw-up?

There was an actors guild strike and they couldn't access their lunar studio

 

[Divide]

And why scam a screw-up?

Because it worth billions of dollars to them? Just a thought.

Wo dont even really know that Apollo 11 had problems and did all that stuff that was broadcast. Oh they could have had a big problem, but who knows where there were at? The could have been having problems in low orbit with their secret mission to point a hbble telescope at us from up there or something.

Uh-oh, our men are danger. If we save them we're heros and will ask for more money since we're so good...

Or

If they dot get saved then we need more money to figure out how to do it right so people wont die.

Either way they win.

Do you understand how much money 1 billion dollars is?

Imagine someone gave you a million dollars and told you to spend $1,000 every day and come back when you ran out of money. You would return, with no money left, in three years. If someone then gave you a billion dollars and you spent $1,000 each day, you would be spending for about 2,740 years before you went broke.

So it could be about the money.

 

[The Liturgist]

Makes me wonder if man we ever really decide to go to Mars. (outside of robotic ships) I know we've got the theology to do it but by gosh it is so very far . What would the phycological effects on men doing this? No matter how much one trains for this I think it's an unknown. Old ships in the old world crossing the oceans were gone for years.....but they were always able to be in the fresh air. You get men out their on Mars and they mentally snap.....how can you help them. Humanity would have a hard to forgiving themselves for sending them out.

The only way to find out is to try and there are people willing to take the risk, and the benefits of a human colony on Mars would be extreme. It also offers the opportunity to create a new Christian state where we can be free to practice our religion, much like what North America offered, once we have the habitat technology perfected. There is substantial water at the poles, but it is difficult to land a spacecraft there.