Did we land on the moon?

[Tacenda]

I've always believed we landed on the moon. But lately I'm hearing from people that we really didn't and it was all fake. Like even with the people flying around the moon now, they are saying the lady hair sprayed her hair to stick up. My son and his wife are believing what is going around and I don't want them to be steered wrong. 

If any one has some real proof, I'd love to set them straight. There's something going around about an astronaut saying he didn't land on the moon, but what is shown is interviews he's had taken out of context and made to look like he's saying we didn't get on the moon, but I watched one of the interviews and he actually said that we haven't been on the moon afterwards. The astronauts name just escaped me, so I'll edit soon.

[Tony uk]

There was a film in the late 70's, Capricorn one. It was a story regarding what turned out to be a fake landing on the planet Mars. There was a studio used to film of the Mars landing. An entertaining film of its time, with popular actors.

[the narrator]

26 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

If any one has some real proof, I'd love to set them straight.

There is so much proof and common sense as there is. Sorry, but they are hopeless. Are they flat earther's too? They seem to go hand-in-hand now.

[bluebell]

There is no proof that will convince someone who thinks they know more than they actually do.  All the data points to us having landed on the moon, even the Russians agreed that we did and no one had a bigger stake in us faking it than them.  Men have died training for Apollo missions. Dozens of men have been on moon landing missions, some like Apollo 13 were supposed to go and almost died trying to get back home again.  What would the point of decades of this level of pretending be?

Even just reading the books these people have written should be enough to convince most people.  But the trouble is that facts are useless to people who deliberately won't accept them and instead focus on an ignorant understanding of science to form their worldview.

I saw a comment on a facebook picture of the earth put out by nasa where someone wanted to know why the photo wasn’t fuzzy if it was a real photo because the earth is spinning and moving objects are fuzzy in pictures.  We have just all gotten so dumb and fearful of being fooled as a society that we are very very easy to manipulate now.

Edited April 9 by bluebell

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, the narrator said:

There is so much proof and common sense as there is. Sorry, but they are hopeless. Are they flat earther's too? They seem to go hand-in-hand now.

I have a friend who doesn't believe we landed on the moon but does believe the earth is round so I feel like there's hope for him.  But he believes that aliens built the pyramids because humans couldn't ever do that so the hope is small.

[telnetd]

2 hours ago, Tony uk said:

There was a film in the late 70's, Capricorn one. It was a story regarding what turned out to be a fake landing on the planet Mars. There was a studio used to film of the Mars landing. An entertaining film of its time, with popular actors.

That was a fantastic movie.  It's shot as a drama/thriller.

[3DOP]

Yes. We landed on the moon. In that deecade. Not because it was easy, but because it was hodd. I miss the Kennedys.

I have very close people to me who are conspiracy whacked. No moon, chemtrails, Bilderbergers, Q, Alex Jones, no holocaust, Pizzagate, Second Vatican Council, Twin Towers, the Devil...oooh...wait...oooh. I believe in the "Burmple". That was our family's euphemism for the devil that the kids made up. 

Count me in, another conspiracy kook.

[3DOP]

Oh sheesh. Disregard the above. "That was the laudanum speaking". 

Thankfully, I am at 12% charge. Time to shut up as I earlier intended.

Edited April 9 by 3DOP

[Pyreaux]

I'm going to lay out some proofs.

Lunar Laser Ranging Retroreflector

We can get visible confirmation of things left on the moon from earth. During the Apollo 11, 14, and 15 missions, astronauts placed small arrays of corner-cube reflectors (high-tech mirrors) on the lunar surface.

Any scientist on Earth can aim a high-powered pulse of laser light at the exact coordinates of those reflectors. The mirrors are designed to reflect the light back exactly in the direction it came from. We can time exactly how long it takes for the light to travel to the Moon and back, 2.5 seconds, and we can calculate the distance between Earth and the Moon with incredible precision. They still do the experiment today, it has proven some pretty amazing things, like the fact that the Moon is slowly drifting away from Earth at a rate of about 3.8 centimeters per year.

India went to the Moon

In August 2023, India became the fourth country to successfully soft-land on the Moon with the Chandrayaan-3 mission. India would have no reason and every incentive not to follow along with a fake. India would be the first to call NASA out. It would be nearly impossible to keep a secret like that globally.

[MustardSeed]

It’s interesting. I had a dinner guest Monday who announced at dinner that he did not believe in the moon landing. I asked him if he was a flat earther (brilliant minds thinking alike here lol ) and he said no.

My reply was, I do believe we landed on the moon, but if it came to the point of proof it didn’t happen, I’d be so unsurprised. 

[webbles]

There was an moon race.  If the US had faked the landing, the USSR would have been able to figure that out and announced it to the world.  And China, which is currently trying to get to the moon, would probably love to point out that the US hasn't yet landed on it.  These 2 countries would have no reason to keep it quiet.

And if you look at the space movies in the 60s and 70s and 80s, none of them look like the moon landing.  The gravity, the way the people walk, the way lighting works, etc.  If Hollywood can't duplicate what was done, then that is a really good sign that the moon landing is real.

If you want to watch a good video that goes into all the evidence, checkout https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMHLvoWZfqQ.  It is over 2 hours long.  He delves into a ton of things that are usually used as evidence against the moon landing.

[let’s roll]

There’s a golf ball up there that would provide evidence…🙂.

Frankly, I have no problem believing there was a moon landing in 1969.  I do struggle with the characterization of another moon landing nearly 60 years later as some marvel of science.  There are some more practical reasons for going back that I think have been largely ignored, supplanted by lots of space gaga.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, let’s roll said:

space gaga 

Translation, please?

[let’s roll]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

Translation, please?

very enthusiastic and excited infatuation about someone or something.

"moviegoers went gaga over Harry Potter"

Edited April 10 by let’s roll

[3DOP]

Okay, this thread made me see a connection to a thread I started over in General Discussions about the Resurrection of Christ. I invite Social Hall to also critique my sudden burst of enthusiasm. Here or there if you like. Over there, I wrote:

"Some of you might have seen the thread over at the Social Hall about the new space launch, and the question that some have regarding whether we actually went to the Moon?

There is a parallel with disbelieving we went to the moon and disbelieving that Christ rose from the dead! I just thought of this.

Both require a conspiracy theory. 

Both involve large numbers of conspirators who aren't necessarily your spy/sleuth types who are practiced at the art of deception. And they never reveal the trick they played on the gullible.

Another thing that all conspiracy theories require is a motive. What do the conspirators have to gain?

I just realized that without opening a Bible that my beliefs are supported by the same reasoning for believing Christ's Resurrection as I do for believing in the Apollo Moon Landing.

To be sure, I also want to believe both are true. In the case of Christ, it becomes a matter of faith that God gave me the disposition (grace), to want the Resurrection to be true. With regards to the moon, its not faith. It is just an observance of human behavior and inability to see why the US government and technical collaborators from many different disciplines, would risk cooperating to make a hoax that not one would ever reveal. And I believe Pres. Kennedy's reasons for why we were going. And this among others, "Not because it is easy...". Heh." 

[The Nehor]

Yes, we did. Hiding it would involve a conspiracy of silence of hundreds of people. The most damning evidence against it being a hoax was the moon rocks that were brought back. These were not jealously horded and kept from the public eye. Universities and research groups studied them extensively.

[The Nehor]

23 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Yes. We landed on the moon. In that deecade. Not because it was easy, but because it was hodd. I miss the Kennedys.

[3DOP]

12 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Heheheh,. Hilarious. 

But it is easier to go to the moon though hodd, than to eat a bag of pine cones. I think America was ready to attack the moon and doubted that the commies would be beating us in the pinecone challenge! Thankfully, we seem to have guessed right. I wonder if those stupid bastards even thought of how pinecone eating could have saved Soviet communism. Or they might have just chickened out. THINK: Cuban Missile Crisis?

 

Edited April 10 by 3DOP

[rpn]

Well i watched the first moon landing.   They didint stick around long any of the four? times they went 69-72.   And just recently we got to see passing the moon in a new flight beyond.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, 3DOP said:

even thought of how pinecone eating could have saved Soviet communism.

Many parts are edible. 

[The Nehor]

On 4/10/2026 at 3:39 PM, 3DOP said:

Heheheh,. Hilarious. 

But it is easier to go to the moon though hodd, than to eat a bag of pine cones. I think America was ready to attack the moon and doubted that the commies would be beating us in the pinecone challenge! Thankfully, we seem to have guessed right. I wonder if those stupid bastards even thought of how pinecone eating could have saved Soviet communism. Or they might have just chickened out. THINK: Cuban Missile Crisis?

The joke about that comic is that someone then told Kennedy that the Soviets had already eaten a third of their bag of pinecones and Kennedy immediately started chowing down.

The space race was funny. The Soviets got a lot of the firsts like first satellite and first human in orbit. Then the USA got to the moon and declared it over and that we won. It was probably something of a relief to the Soviets who really couldn’t afford to keep going.

[longview]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The space race was funny. The Soviets got a lot of the firsts like first satellite and first human in orbit. Then the USA got to the moon and declared it over and that we won. It was probably something of a relief to the Soviets who really couldn’t afford to keep going.

True. The Soviets downplayed computer science. They used large staffs of mathematicians. The US had a huge advantage in computers for quickly calculating orbital mechanics and also for manufacturing and design.

[Tacenda]

On 4/9/2026 at 9:09 AM, Tony uk said:

There was a film in the late 70's, Capricorn one. It was a story regarding what turned out to be a fake landing on the planet Mars. There was a studio used to film of the Mars landing. An entertaining film of its time, with popular actors.

Thanks, I'll check it out! 

[Tacenda]

On 4/9/2026 at 9:11 AM, the narrator said:

There is so much proof and common sense as there is. Sorry, but they are hopeless. Are they flat earther's too? They seem to go hand-in-hand now.

For sure, I'm stumped. And when it's your own child saying this, it's even more frustrating.

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

For sure, I'm stumped. And when it's your own child saying this, it's even more frustrating.

Oh wow, sorry this is happening.  It is not concerning in itself since most things do not require the acceptance of this particular fact, but the problem is if they apply the same reasoning to other things.  I can see why it’s not just something you feel amused by, like an obsession with Lord of the Rings for example (because that is a sensible obsession).  
 

How invested are they in this?  Is it just the novelty perhaps?  They like to argue?

Edited April 23 by Calm