Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it is dubious at best to rely on the Soviet Union's response (or lack thereof) to the Apollo missions as evidence in support of the official story. Maybe they would have liked to rub NASA's nose in it and maybe they'd decided to play poker face and keep it in their back pocket. We can't know. Just exactly how they would have gone about debunking the Moon landings in a compelling way is also a little tricky. There was no internet back then.
Yes. How did humans every disseminate information before the internet?
They would have called a press conference and presented their evidence. You know, like they did every time they had a chance to embarrass the West. For example - the U-2 incident. Soviet air defense show down Gary Powers and waited for the United States to lie. Not knowing that the Soviets had the plane (or, substantial pieces of it, as well as the alive-and-talking Powers) the U.S. put out a cover story that it was a weather plane that had gone missing. As soon as they did, Khrushchev pounced, exposing the lie/cover-up. Why would he have 'put it in his pocket'? That makes no sense. None. Zero. Even more daft is the fantasy that a decade-long program and the moon mission - not just an ad hoc lie to cover a national security mission gone awry but a deliberate and sustained effort to deceive - would have seen the Soviets just shrugging and deciding not to say anything. That would have been exponentially more damaging. Yet in order to prop up your baseless conspiracy, you just declare that they pretended not to notice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanAdventurer
They probably weren't going take out a 30 minute spot on NBC during primetime to explain it to everyone, which would never be allowed by any state-controlled media anyway, nor were they going to drop leaflets out of an airplane over US airspace.
What on Earth are you babbling about? The 'state-controlled media'? You mean the same media that eagerly published the Pentagon Papers, that exposed Watergate and brought down a President, that managed to keep a lid on Project Azorian (the covert raising of a Soviet nuclear submarine from the bottom of the ocean) for no more than a month?
This is to say nothing of the immense propaganda value abroad. Just a year after the chaos in France, the never-ending agitation of leftist groups in Italy, the non-aligned nations, the Arab countries? It would have been gold for Brezhnev. And the best explanation you can come up with is "Well, gee, maybe they just decided not to say anything, who knows?".
God...
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanAdventurer
At best it becomes NASA's word against theirs, and NASA had one of the grandest pieces of propaganda in history on it's side (whether you believe it true or not). So you can see that in certain cases...possibly this one, it might have made more sense just to keep their mouths shut and not let on what you know or suspect. They were probably planning something. Their own manned expedition perhaps, but we know they make no claims of that ever happening.
'perhaps'?
You think you know so much about the behavior of the Soviets, yet you're utterly clueless that they were desperately trying to beat the U.S. to the moon. Google 'N1' for starters (that was the Soviet equivalent of the Saturn V, meant to put cosmonauts on the moon). That right there tells you how the Soviets would have instantly jumped at any chance to quash the propaganda victory of Apollo 11, and the American missions to the moon were more than anything a Cold War dick-measuring contest. And the only way you can salvage your ridiculous conspiracy theory is to insist that the Soviets, who got totally beat, just decided to be complicit in the supposed American fakery?
Oh, and how do we know about the Soviet moon program? Mostly from the opening of archives after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Those same archives should have been full of information about the supposedly faked moon landings - of the Soviets discovery of the faking, of the internal debates about what to do with the information. And? Nothing. The archives teemed with embarrassing information, which was not destroyed. Why no information about the 'faked' moon landings? Why didn't a single ex-Soviet official come forward in 1991, after the dissolution of the USSR, and talk about how the Apollo program was faked and the Soviets knew it? Because it wasn't. We put men on the moon and the Soviets knew it.
You seem to know little to nothing about the Soviet lunar program. It was not a “perhaps”, it was a major competition which lasted until 1969.
I suggest you read up as it will be of interest as well as instructive.
Also, if you’re not old enough to remember the Cold War you wouldn’t remember how the Soviets rubbed the USA’s noses in any failure. There is NO way they would keep a US fraud secret in the 60’s.
I don't know much about the Soviet Moon program, so I might do that. They never claimed to have went so there is not much controversy there. I find it hard to believe that they never went because they "couldn't figure it out" though, given their technical prowess in related fields and relative experience in space. It doesn't ring true IMO. What I meant by "perhaps" is that they I assume wanted to get there themselves and "win" the space race by somehow proving that the US has lied about their manned missions. But they realized at some point it wasn't going to happen and the best they would ever be able to do was their word against NASA's. The whole world already believed NASA went to the Moon and there was no practical way they could go about proving otherwise.
Yes. How did humans every disseminate information before the internet?
They would have called a press conference and presented their evidence. You know, like they did every time they had a chance to embarrass the West. For example - the U-2 incident. Soviet air defense show down Gary Powers and waited for the United States to lie. Not knowing that the Soviets had the plane (or, substantial pieces of it, as well as the alive-and-talking Powers) the U.S. put out a cover story that it was a weather plane that had gone missing. As soon as they did, Khrushchev pounced, exposing the lie/cover-up. Why would he have 'put it in his pocket'? That makes no sense. None. Zero. Even more daft is the fantasy that a decade-long program and the moon mission - not just an ad hoc lie to cover a national security mission gone awry but a deliberate and sustained effort to deceive - would have seen the Soviets just shrugging and deciding not to say anything. That would have been exponentially more damaging. Yet in order to prop up your baseless conspiracy, you just declare that they pretended not to notice.
What on Earth are you babbling about? The 'state-controlled media'? You mean the same media that eagerly published the Pentagon Papers, that exposed Watergate and brought down a President, that managed to keep a lid on Project Azorian (the covert raising of a Soviet nuclear submarine from the bottom of the ocean) for no more than a month?
This is to say nothing of the immense propaganda value abroad. Just a year after the chaos in France, the never-ending agitation of leftist groups in Italy, the non-aligned nations, the Arab countries? It would have been gold for Brezhnev. And the best explanation you can come up with is "Well, gee, maybe they just decided not to say anything, who knows?".
God...
'perhaps'?
You think you know so much about the behavior of the Soviets, yet you're utterly clueless that they were desperately trying to beat the U.S. to the moon. Google 'N1' for starters (that was the Soviet equivalent of the Saturn V, meant to put cosmonauts on the moon). That right there tells you how the Soviets would have instantly jumped at any chance to quash the propaganda victory of Apollo 11, and the American missions to the moon were more than anything a Cold War dick-measuring contest. And the only way you can salvage your ridiculous conspiracy theory is to insist that the Soviets, who got totally beat, just decided to be complicit in the supposed American fakery?
Oh, and how do we know about the Soviet moon program? Mostly from the opening of archives after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Those same archives should have been full of information about the supposedly faked moon landings - of the Soviets discovery of the faking, of the internal debates about what to do with the information. And? Nothing. The archives teemed with embarrassing information, which was not destroyed. Why no information about the 'faked' moon landings? Why didn't a single ex-Soviet official come forward in 1991, after the dissolution of the USSR, and talk about how the Apollo program was faked and the Soviets knew it? Because it wasn't. We put men on the moon and the Soviets knew it.
It's not my conspiracy theory. (I wish I could take original credit for it) Even Bill Clinton doesn't believe men ever landed on the Moon. Now why would a former 2-term POTUS, who we can assume had the kind of access to info we could only dream about, ever think of throwing shade on mankind's supposed greatest achievement ever?
Khrushchev could readily prove the U.S. was lying about the spy plane. He could not prove they were lying about the Apollo missions.
There were six manned moon landings between 1969 and 1972.
Why don't we go back now? It's very expensive, and there's no compelling reason to make a short trip. We've been there, done that. Not going to find anything new and exciting on the moon in a brief visit. I don't think we'll go back until (if & when) there is a plan for people to stay on the moon for an extended time.
COINTELPRO, space race, and the Nixon Administration is over, so no more fake moon landings.
I don't know much about the Soviet Moon program, so I might do that. They never claimed to have went so there is not much controversy there. I find it hard to believe that they never went because they "couldn't figure it out" though, given their technical prowess in related fields and relative experience in space. It doesn't ring true IMO. What I meant by "perhaps" is that they I assume wanted to get there themselves and "win" the space race by somehow proving that the US has lied about their manned missions. But they realized at some point it wasn't going to happen and the best they would ever be able to do was their word against NASA's. The whole world already believed NASA went to the Moon and there was no practical way they could go about proving otherwise.
Please, please read about things before you spout off.
Read about the Lunokhod rover. The Luna program of probes. The failure of Soyuz 1. The death of “Chief Designer” Korolev which set back the N1 program greatly. Even with Korolev the N1 was overly complex, with 30 first stage engines compared to the Saturn V 5.
It's not my conspiracy theory. (I wish I could take original credit for it) Even Bill Clinton doesn't believe men ever landed on the Moon. Now why would a former 2-term POTUS, who we can assume had the kind of access to info we could only dream about, ever think of throwing shade on mankind's supposed greatest achievement ever?
Khrushchev could readily prove the U.S. was lying about the spy plane. He could not prove they were lying about the Apollo missions.
Bill Clinton did not say he didn’t believe people landed on the moon. He spoke with an old carpenter who didn’t believe it because people on TV could create anything. Bill then postured that after all his years in government it was true that so many things could be created for TV.
Again, your ignorance shows. Jodrell Bank and other radio observatories actually tracked the Apollo 11 mission, including the landing.
It's not my conspiracy theory. (I wish I could take original credit for it) Even Bill Clinton doesn't believe men ever landed on the Moon. Now why would a former 2-term POTUS, who we can assume had the kind of access to info we could only dream about, ever think of throwing shade on mankind's supposed greatest achievement ever?
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjames68
Bill Clinton did not say he didn’t believe people landed on the moon. He spoke with an old carpenter who didn’t believe it because people on TV could create anything. Bill then postured that after all his years in government it was true that so many things could be created for TV.
Did Bill Clinton say anything other than what is referred to above about the moon?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
