Join 3,572 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


NASA Challenges Moon Hoax Conspiracy
November 7, 2002 10:25 AM   Subscribe

NASA Challenges Moon Hoax Conspiracy After decades of almost ignoring claims that the Apollo missions were hoaxed, NASA commissioned aerospace writer James Olberg to write an official rebuttle. Perhaps a bit more reasonable than the NASA Stooge, the book is aimed at the general public.
posted by KirkJobSluder (33 comments total)

 
They should just get Buzz Aldrin to smack those fools down.
posted by RylandDotNet at 10:42 AM on November 7, 2002


rebuttle?
posted by Fabulon7 at 10:49 AM on November 7, 2002


Hey, maybe a book refuting creationism will convince fundamentalist morons that... nevermind.
posted by 2sheets at 11:07 AM on November 7, 2002


Philip Plait has some rebuttals on his Bad Astronomy site.
posted by liam at 11:12 AM on November 7, 2002


I think this is a good step by NASA scientist and all in all an easy issue to tackle. After all - who among us really thinks that we DIDN'T go to the moon?

It's fun to joke about conspiracy -- but people do take this issue to far. Buzz was right to bust that guy in the chop.

Further, I wish more scientist would step forward and get their hands dirty in the press and in front of the public when challenging anti-science creeps like the Fundies and anti-environment buggers like the Bush Administration.
posted by wfrgms at 11:25 AM on November 7, 2002


The Jehovah Witnesses are almost guaranteed to change their stance now.

Good job NASA!!

I suppose it's about the only extra project they can afford since Dubya cut their budget last year. Well, that and using Legos to simulate the space station they would have built.

Trying to reason with Fundies is a losing proposition.....
posted by nofundy at 11:51 AM on November 7, 2002


The moon landings were a hoax!
I have thoroughly researched it, and I have found that the footage of the moon landings was filmed in a sound stage on Mars.
posted by CrunchyFrog at 12:12 PM on November 7, 2002


Because the conspiracy theorists are going to care about facts?
posted by callmejay at 12:14 PM on November 7, 2002


It's hard not to be skeptical about the moon landing after some of the evidence that has been presented. Personally I believe that our country would never lie to us about something like this just to beat the Russians! I'll just wait until 2005 when China lands on the moon. If they don't find footprints and a flag (mysteriously waving in the wind) then I'll call shenanigans.
posted by Degaz at 12:15 PM on November 7, 2002


Next someone's going to say that the Moon Trees are a hoax. (Hey, by the way, have you seen one?)
posted by me3dia at 12:56 PM on November 7, 2002


When you're standing in front of the (unused spare) Lunar Lander at the Air and Space Museum, it is hard to supress some feelings of doubt that a thing identical to this actually flew to and landed on the Moon. It looks like something some kids might have put together in the backyard out of old pipes, sheet metal, aluminum foil, tape and baling wire. As time goes by, in the minds of observers it will gradually be identified more with the older stuff in that museum, the early planes that it's hard to believe actually flew.
posted by beagle at 12:58 PM on November 7, 2002


If they don't find footprints and a flag (mysteriously waving in the wind) then I'll call shenanigans.

If they do find a flag waving in the wind, then I'll call shenanigans.
posted by DakotaPaul at 12:59 PM on November 7, 2002


So, are scientists also faking this?

A mirror left on the Moon 30 years go by Apollo 11 astronauts is still producing good science. From Earth, researchers bounce pulses of laser light off the device, determining distance based on the round-trip travel time. Hitting the mirror with a beam that's a mile wide when it reaches the Moon is tricky: Scientists say its like using a rifle to hit a moving dime two miles away. Among other findings, the process has revealed a small but constant change in the shape of the Earth, owing to land masses shifting after being compressed by the glaciers in the last Ice Age. It has also noted an ever-increasing distance, as our only natural satellite moves away from us.
posted by tippiedog at 1:22 PM on November 7, 2002


beagle: I'm no rocket scientist, well actually I am, but the Lunar Lander probably looks feeble but remember, the moon's gravity is 1/6 that of Earth's. It doesn't have to be heavy duty to do it's job. Plus, weight is one of the most major factors going into a launch. The lighter the better. Same concept as the space shuttles robotic arm. Down on Earth it couldn't even pick itself up, but in space it can move tons.
posted by Ron at 1:27 PM on November 7, 2002


The Jehovah Witnesses are almost guaranteed to change their stance now.

Do Jehovah's Witnesses doubt the moon landing? If so, this must be a new position. I was raised as one and it never came up as an issue.
posted by obfusciatrist at 1:39 PM on November 7, 2002


When you're standing in front of the (unused spare) Lunar Lander at the Air and Space Museum, it is hard to supress some feelings of doubt that a thing identical to this actually flew to and landed on the Moon

That might be because it didn't. The Lunar Lander was cargo until the Command Module was first in Moon orbit. Here's a thorough diagram and explaination.
posted by normy at 1:53 PM on November 7, 2002


the moon shot kennedy!
i would supply a link but the internet's in on the cover-up!
quit bugging my phone! um..
posted by Peter H at 2:04 PM on November 7, 2002


Hey, maybe a book questioning evolution written by an evolutionist will convince narrow minded secularlists that there are fundamental problems with the theory of evolution... Oh, nevermind.
posted by squidman at 2:34 PM on November 7, 2002


normy, what a flashback! I had that chart (or one like it) on my bedroom wall as a kid. (Was it in a National Geographic?) A facinating view of the lunar journey for a young imagination.
posted by HTuttle at 2:42 PM on November 7, 2002


It is interesting begin born after the moon-walk, but of course I think it's true... It's what I've always been told happened, I like having this new rebuttal/analysis by NASA, perhaps I can learn a little bit more about it.
posted by jdhodges at 3:24 PM on November 7, 2002


Pfff. It's not the moon landings that we should be worrying about, it's the fact that the Moon is a Ridiculous Liberal Myth.

I quote: 'When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon."'
posted by Captain_Tenille at 3:50 PM on November 7, 2002


Doh. I butchered the link.

The Moon is a Ridiculous Liberal Myth
posted by Captain_Tenille at 3:51 PM on November 7, 2002


normy, that diagram is beautiful. Particularly the font! Any idea what the font is? Looks like little paste-up letters.
posted by Nelson at 4:15 PM on November 7, 2002


Squidman, that's something that you god-boys can't grasp.
Those of us who really want to learn and continue to advance civilization welcome any legitimate research that challenges conventional thought. That's how people learn to fly, cure diseases, and other things that fundies have burned people at the stake for in the past.
posted by 2sheets at 5:14 PM on November 7, 2002


If they do find a flag waving in the wind, then I'll call shenanigans.

Despite the lack of wind, didn't the flag also fall over? Does anyone know if it ever get put back up?

That's proof enough for me that it wasn't a hoax.
posted by jdiaz at 6:48 PM on November 7, 2002


I'm not absolutely sure jdiaz, but given the distances between the six landing sites, I doubt the flag-- which got blown over when the upper half of Apollo 11 blasted off-- ever got righted.

RylandDotNet is right: Less patience, more Buzz punchin'.
posted by tyro urge at 7:23 PM on November 7, 2002


Hey, they’re called “lunatics” for a reason…

Nelson: The font looks like Futura.
posted by Down10 at 11:41 PM on November 7, 2002


Thanks for the link Captain_Tenille! Hilarious!!
posted by nofundy at 5:43 AM on November 8, 2002


I still think that the best evidence against a hoax is that they haven't landed anywhere else yet. Don't you think that, if it were done on a soundstage, they would have (at least) landed people on Mars by now?
posted by originalname37 at 6:37 AM on November 8, 2002


I believe the flag was stiffened with wire sewn into it so that it would stand up for patriotic photos.

By the way, does anyone know where you can buy a poster of the great chart that normy posted? I looked at the NASM and Smithsonian sites to no avail. I had very similar diagrams in a book when I was a kid, and I'd love to put one on the wall.
posted by Songdog at 6:54 AM on November 8, 2002


All I know about that chart is what's on those pages, I'm afraid. I also remembered seeing such diagrams as a child and found this one by googling. Looking at the close-ups, there's a few crease marks, so I suspect it was scanned from an old poster.

I'd definitely buy a poster of this, or similar, if anyone does know where to find one.
posted by normy at 7:34 AM on November 8, 2002


72 year old faker Buzz Aldrin recently punched Bart Sibrel, a conspiracy theorist who believes that NASA faked the moon landing. You can see the video here
posted by stunned at 9:19 AM on November 8, 2002


Seems they've changed their mind.

" ... making the Oberg book an official Nasa publication, the agency was actually giving a certain credibility to the hoax theory.
posted by grahamwell at 11:05 AM on November 8, 2002


« Older Michael McNevin...   |   As Romanian factory workers pr... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments