If they had faked it, they certainly went all out on the setup. Building a giant transporter to carry a giant rocket carrying three of the USA's best pilots, then proceeding to blast them out of Earth's atmosphere in front of half the world' population. All for a few grainy shots of guy on a ladder shot in a basement. That's dedication.
The Universe: The Moon on History Channel right now 
You can look at evidence on both sides of the moon landings conspiracy for as long as you like. The fact is that if they hadn't happened Russia, who themselves tracked Apollo 11 would have blown it out of the water. I can think of no reason why they shouldn't benefit from exposing the US as fraudsters in the middle of the cold war. Perhaps you can?
And everyone of those technicians you see on footage of Cape Canaverel is a high qualified liar, who's kept it up for nearly 40 years for no good reason.
The science and the photographs are immaterial it's the human side that's unbelievable.
Yowser this is a hornet's nest, eh? Sorry, people.
As to secrets always getting out, there are holds you can put over a person that will force him (out of patriotism, duty, or threats) to keep silent. a misplaced laptop on a train, someone falls on the sword, no big shake. But a truth that can destroy your nation, your family, your life, is rather different. Plus it assumes that thousands of people would be in the know, which doesn't have to be the case. And there are ways to convince even astronauts that they really did go to the moon.
Agreed with you on most things, Soots. Magna Carta, Holocaust, etc, we believe them because of indisputable proofs (such as the existence of a Magna Carta) but I don't think belief in one conspiracy means you're a total nut job who will then willingly disbelieve the Holocaust. I think holding far right or left politics is far more important in disbelieving the Holocaust, than whether you harbour doubts about a moon landing. And aren't the really dangerous people of this world the ones with power over war, economy, nuclear arsenals, rather than powerless huddles of Internet geeks?
As to a scary dark world being a comfort, I think people who live life believing everything's OK and who aren't interested in anything other than Emmerdale and Jordan are the real cowards, hiding from global issues. As far as they're concerned, the Holocaust, Magna Carta, the fate of the Third World, everything of import is of no consequence as long as TV keeps broadcasting pap.
My scary dark world is far from a comfort. It inspires me to fight for equality in whatever form I can manage, rather than compels me to hide from it. Sounds strange coming from a loner mouse but it's true.
As to believing in the moon landings being a vote for equality and freedom: Surely there's no notion inherently worthwhile believing in if it's wrong? Or maybe there is a good lie (and I'm talking big issues not dresses and bum sizes), I'm not sure. But it is an interesting idea.
Sorry, Tim, misunderstanding. I thought you said the moon's gravity was too weak to have any effect on us (astronomicaly), so when you mentioned animals are affected by the moon (and they certainly aren't aware of the moon and calendars) then I wondered aloud that the moon must clearly be exerting an effect. Otherwise you have a situation where animals are being affected by something which has no affect. But I misunderstood. As is my norm.
Quote: SlagA @ July 18 2009, 6:28 PM BSTYowser this is a hornet's nest, eh? Sorry, people.
As to secrets always getting out, there are holds you can put over a person that will force him (out of patriotism, duty, or threats) to keep silent.
Bollocks the Rosenbergs went to the chair over nuclear secrets, a Russian journalist was murdered in Chechnya just a week ago. People of concionse or greed will always leak.
Quote: SlagA @ July 18 2009, 6:28 PM BSTPlus it assumes that thousands of people would be in the know, which doesn't have to be the case. And there are ways to convince even astronauts that they really did go to the moon.
Double bollocks there is no proof that the Mkultura, North Korean brain washing have ever made a full mode shift in peoples thinking. You can just about convince people what they already sort of believe in.
And when did the fibs come in? Did they build a full size rocket and hide it in a skip? Were the people who build the computers in on it?
For what it's worth if some one gave me a file of indisputable evidence the moon landing was faked I'd probably shred it.
It's cultural significance is far more important than the events. As is the belief that we can change and influence the world around us.
The belief that there all politicians are corrupt, most of history is a lie and that we are victims of an all powerful conspiracy is lethal.
Fight the enemy you can see, who cares about the invisible enemy?
And check out how many lefty supposedly clever people are turning up at Iranian debates on Holocaust veracity. The moon landing silliness is like being slightly pregnant.
Partly playing Devil's advocate and partly interested in the answers. As Sooty says, there are far bigger issues in the world.
Re: the technology gap. The Russians got the first satellite, animal, man, woman, and space station into orbit despite a technology gap not existing. When the Americans got to the moon, the russian launch date was set for just a month later.
Quote: Balf @ July 18 2009, 3:46 PM BSTIf they had faked it, they went all out on the setup. Building a transporter to carry a giant rocket carrying the USA's best pilots, then blasting them out of Earth's atmosphere in front of the world.
The russians and yanks were sending up rockets regularly. The infrastructure was in place. The big leap was not getting things into orbit but landing safely on the moon in the Lunar Module's first test flight.
Every single manned lunar landing and take-off worked using 60s-70s technology. Apparently, of 25 unmanned landings on Mars only seven succeeded using later technology. There's an odd difference in success rates?
Quote: roscoff @ July 18 2009, 4:28 PM BSTif they hadn't happened Russia, who themselves tracked Apollo 11 would have blown it out of the water.
Sending an unmanned ship to orbit the moon is far less risky and easier than landing a crew and getting them back off.
Months before the first lunar mission, NASA launched the TETR-A satellite. The purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so Houston ground crews (the employees behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the moon landing. Maybe that satellite was used for a lot longer than we're led to believe?
Quote: sootyj @ July 18 2009, 7:05 PM BSTif some one gave me a file of indisputable evidence the moon landing was faked I'd shred it.
Truth shredded? You don't work for NASA or the government, eh? 
Quote: sootyj @ July 18 2009, 7:05 PM BSTIt's cultural significance is far more important than the events.
Agreed, a powerful and noble motive to initiate a hoax and maintain it. If you believed that.
Quote: sootyj @ July 18 2009, 7:05 PM BSTThe belief that most of history is a lie is lethal.
But you'd willingly shred the truth to perpetuate just such a historical lie?
I still focus on the people. JFK couldn't cover up that he was shag happy, drug addict with links to the Mafia and more dodgy operations than an undercover plastic surgeon. The US couldn't cover up Mi Lai or Operation Phoenix in the Vietnam war. And yet this administration managed to cover out the most perfect cover up the world has ever seen?
Enigma which was completely out of the public eye was an example of a well kept secret, but how long for 30-40 years?
Quote: SlagA @ July 18 2009, 7:24 PM BST
Agreed, a powerful and noble motive to initiate a hoax and maintain it. If you believed that.
But you'd willingly shred the truth to perpetuate just such a historical lie?
History is a confection of prejudice and observation. When something becomes fact it's more by an acruing of acceptance. Read a fascinating article on how Lincoln has been so reinterprated by historians there is no understanding of him as a real person.
The most amazing thing about all this to me is that in the 37 years since man last set foot on the moon, NASA are still using cameras about as powerful as my cameraphone.
Well okay - a slight exaggeration but come on people - those pictures are absolutely pathetic and about as newsworthy as the extra-large fox turd I found in my garden this morning.
For what it's worth I do believe we went to the moon. But those pictures prove nothing.
Ellie's gonna be mad.
You know it's sad just how close Britain came to being a major player in the Space race. Like so many things it's like we ran out of money, faith and confidence. I'm aiming to visit the UK rocket sites on the Isle of White and at Orford Ness this summer.
We coulda been a contender! We invented the blinking jet engine.
Quote: Lee Henman @ July 18 2009, 8:04 PM BSTThe most amazing thing about all this to me is that in the 37 years since man last set foot on the moon, NASA are still using cameras about as powerful as my cameraphone.
Well okay - a slight exaggeration but come on people - those pictures are absolutely pathetic and about as newsworthy as the extra-large fox turd I found in my garden this morning.
For what it's worth I do believe we went to the moon. But those pictures prove nothing.
Sure it was a fox?
But yeh the pictures are a bit crap.
And when I get a chance Woomera in Australia.
Quote: SlagA @ July 18 2009, 7:24 PM BSTSending an unmanned ship to orbit the moon is far less risky and easier than landing a crew and getting them back off.
Months before the first lunar mission, NASA launched the TETR-A satellite. The purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so Houston ground crews (the employees behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the moon landing. Maybe that satellite was used for a lot longer than we're led to believe?
I find it very hard to believe that the US could pull the wool over the Soviets eyes mission after mission after mission. Sorry Slagg A but I don't think your argument stands up on this one. It would have been easier to put a man on the moon than perpetuate this hoax. Why not stop at one? The risks of being found out increased with every mission. It just doesn't add up.
Agreed, Roscoff. And it's a good point. I'm just trying to show that there's enough room here to understand why some people are skeptical.
No there isn't political reeducation for all.
Punish ignorance with knowledge.
Quote: SlagA @ July 18 2009, 10:54 PM BSTAgreed, Roscoff. And it's a good point. I'm just trying to show that there's enough room here to understand why some people are skeptical.
I can understand totally why people are 'skeptical' about such things. Basically governments lie so why not lie about this. JFK's promise was an unlikely one to be able keep.