• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Memory Lane The Moon Landings

True or not?

  • Yes we went to the moon.

    Votes: 29 90.6%
  • No it was all faked.

    Votes: 3 9.4%

  • Total voters
    32
Changes in composition caused by massive overheating of the rock during re-entry I imagine

Ah yes that's right. some scientists tell us to go through areas like the Van Allen Radiation belt you would need to be behind 6 ft of lead.

Others say temperatures would reach 4,000c.....Hotter than a thermic lance, which can cut through any man made material or metal.

Now i'm sure we have all seen the photos of the Eagle on the moon.....The gold tinsel wrapped around the legs impressed me the most.

That's the bizarre thing about scientist. If you believe scientist A then you have to denounce scientist B.....and C.

Not that it matters because as history proves with every theory......In 50 years time 90% will be debunked and superseded by something else.
 
Billions was spent on building a massive rocket, environmental systems, space suits, training, lunar rovers, lunar module etc the list goes on and to not actually go there? We know the rocket took off everyone saw it. We know the command/lunar module went round the moon as it was tracked by different countries. But do some people suggest it didn't then land, and then it was filmed in a studio!
 
Billions was spent on building a massive rocket, environmental systems, space suits, training, lunar rovers, lunar module etc the list goes on and to not actually go there? We know the rocket took off everyone saw it. We know the command/lunar module went round the moon as it was tracked by different countries. But do some people suggest it didn't then land, and then it was filmed in a studio!

Your right NASA have spent Billions, in fact Trillions.....Some claim its cover to develop various weapons etc
 
Ah yes that's right. some scientists tell us to go through areas like the Van Allen Radiation belt you would need to be behind 6 ft of lead.

Others say temperatures would reach 4,000c.....Hotter than a thermic lance, which can cut through any man made material or metal.

Now i'm sure we have all seen the photos of the Eagle on the moon.....The gold tinsel wrapped around the legs impressed me the most.

That's the bizarre thing about scientist. If you believe scientist A then you have to denounce scientist B.....and C.

Not that it matters because as history proves with every theory......In 50 years time 90% will be debunked and superseded by something else.

The Apollo missions marked the first event where humans traveled through the Van Allen belts, which was one of several radiation hazards known by mission planners.[32] The astronauts had low exposure in the Van Allen belts due to the short period of time spent flying through them. Apollo flight trajectories bypassed the inner belts completely, passing through the thinner areas of the outer belts
 
The Apollo missions marked the first event where humans traveled through the Van Allen belts, which was one of several radiation hazards known by mission planners.[32] The astronauts had low exposure in the Van Allen belts due to the short period of time spent flying through them. Apollo flight trajectories bypassed the inner belts completely, passing through the thinner areas of the outer belts

So what your saying is any meteorite could enter earths atmosphere undamaged and cause confusion amongst scientists.

Thanks MK I'll use that one in future debates.
 
So what your saying is any meteorite could enter earths atmosphere undamaged and cause confusion amongst scientists.

Thanks MK I'll use that one in future debates.

Not at all. It's that part of the conspiracy theory handbook? Bending the facts to fit your agenda?
 
Not at all. It's that part of the conspiracy theory handbook? Bending the facts to fit your agenda?

I didn't think you would be able to answer that one...

This thread Isn't going the way you planned. I know whats coming next. As 'gate keeper' (look up the military studies) especially and I never believed this at first, who make the best gate keepers and why.

Its always predictable how you will react to reasoned debate.
 
It's like Canute screaming at the sea isn't it? You believe (or not) what you want Rigsby, the rest of us can revel in what was a truly remarkable bit of humanity.
 
as history proves with every theory......In 50 years time 90% will be debunked and superseded by something else.

Not true.

Some theories (e.g Newton's laws of motion and gravitation ) turn out to be approximations but they are still very good approximations at the macro scale.

I studied Physics at university and a lot of the stuff we learned was over a century old.
 
Last edited:
So what your saying is any meteorite could enter earths atmosphere undamaged and cause confusion amongst scientists.

Thanks MK I'll use that one in future debates.

I think that would be impossible. I don’t think anything could enter our atmosphere without some form of heat damage.
 
The obvious question would be, whats to stop anyone who finds a lunar meteorite claiming they brought it back from the moon.

Well, for starters a meteorite would have different properties, from what is recognised as lunar rock.

I think - and I will say that it’s been a while since I read this, so the details are a bit sketchy in my mind - when rocks form, a specific type of volcanic crystallisation occurs due to our atmosphere. This is significantly different to the crystallised composition of lunar rock.

By the way there is a very good 2 part documentary on Youtube called How big oil conquered the world. Well worth a watch by everyone. Its not full of conspiracy theories but you will learn a great deal.

One of the things covered is who funds 'scientific studies' and why. You might have a better understanding of how Volkswagen conned the world.....Or indeed how Celotex managed to sell highly flammable cladding for high rise buildings......And why nobody in Government or the media is highlighting this.

Great institutes that people have absolute blind faith in, like the Smithsonian have always been controlled.

I’ve got no doubt that this kind of thing goes on. Corporate America is one of the shadiest industries ever known to mankind.


I get what you’re saying, and I see how it could have been done - if they’d wanted to - but there just isn’t any shred of proof to successfully back it up. So we always end up back at square one, where all we’ve got to go on is conjecture & circumstantial evidence.

Yet on the flip side, the evidence to support the claim that they landed on the moon, is pretty conclusive.
 
Not true.

Some theories (e.g Newton's laws of motion and gravitation ) turn out to be approximations but they are still very good approximations at the macro scale.

I studied Physics at university and a lot of the stuff we learned was over a century old.

I did say 90%.

Newton gets the credit for those laws but they have obviously been around a lot longer. Clearly many ancient civilisations understood the laws of physics.

Seeing as you are some what of an expert perhaps you could explain why the 'official' story of how the WTC collapsed on 9/11 cant remotely in any way be possible because of the laws of momentum

Or why 15 floors of a building cant crush the 90 floors below because of law 3.
 
It's like Canute screaming at the sea isn't it? You believe (or not) what you want Rigsby, the rest of us can revel in what was a truly remarkable bit of humanity.

That's exactly what I am doing. :Thumbs up:
 
I was chatting with my Lizard People overlord the other day and he remarked on how many puny humans (his words although he actually tends to use telepathic communication, sometimes e-mail and the occasional post-it) seem to love conspiracy theories over evidence and analysis and love to take a superior attitude implying they are the clever ones the rest are fools. His view (I say "his" they are non-binary) is that all humans are fools but some should lay off the internet a bit.off to plant mysterious devices in apparently random places now, not sure why znnneyttmmmfsssesr oh that's why soz.peace, love and science based understanding to all.
 
Clearly many ancient civilisations understood the laws of physics.

They understood enough to build pyramids, bridges and seige weapons.

Newtonian physics is not a good enough approximation to build something like the GPS system.
 
Ah yes that's right. some scientists tell us to go through areas like the Van Allen Radiation belt you would need to be behind 6 ft of lead.

Others say temperatures would reach 4,000c.....Hotter than a thermic lance, which can cut through any man made material or metal.

Now i'm sure we have all seen the photos of the Eagle on the moon.....The gold tinsel wrapped around the legs impressed me the most.

That's the bizarre thing about scientist. If you believe scientist A then you have to denounce scientist B.....and C.

Not that it matters because as history proves with every theory......In 50 years time 90% will be debunked and superseded by something else.

The eagle went through the Earths atmosphere inside the launch rocket and never came back so whether its leg would stand up to re-entry is irrelevant
 
So what your saying is any meteorite could enter earths atmosphere undamaged and cause confusion amongst scientists.

Thanks MK I'll use that one in future debates.
So what your saying is any meteorite could enter earths atmosphere undamaged and cause confusion amongst scientists.

Thanks MK I'll use that one in future debates.

There is a difference between the radiation belt and the earths atmosphere , its the atmosphere with causes things to get a bit hot when objects go through it at thousands of MPH
 
There is a difference between the radiation belt and the earths atmosphere , its the atmosphere with causes things to get a bit hot when objects go through it at thousands of MPH

4,000c is certainly a bit hot. Unless of course you can find that lucky gap that MK pointed out.
 
Back
Top