Whats the real reason we haven't been back to the Moon?

Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:22 pm » by **Flecktarn**

because they been found out ,,if they went then with crap tec ,,,why not go back with modern tec ,,,,they cant ,,,,,and with google earth we all know what nevada desert looks like now :nwo:

Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:27 pm » by **Aquarius**

hackjames wrote:
oxize wrote:Van Allen Belt..

Sorry, what now? Are you bringing it up in the context of the claimed space vehicle's inadequate shielding?

I think he was. It sounds like you have knowledge that the VH belt was not an issue as they have developed shielding against the radiation. Can you confirm, I'm just curious.

Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:35 pm » by **Savwafair2012**

good post sav.

.

Wait What??? a Complement from YOU JET!!!

Are you feeling okay?
:think:

I read some place that the Apollo mission's passed thru the VA radiation belt at its thinnest portion (above the Artic) and that the actual time it took the space capsule to pass thru it was relatively quick, the amount of radiation was very minimal. Almost like defrosting something in the Microwave very low level's

Mon Oct 18, 2010 8:52 pm » by **Mizzy**

stophaarp wrote:
mizzy wrote:Interesting, I always thought the reason NASA never returned because of other reasons. Money. Plus the fact they already won the space race. Also that there is nothing else to research there because all it is, is a chunk of rock. haha

Already won the space race? What, does space end at the moon?

Also, I highly doubt any celestial body is just a chunk of rock. =P ( besides, the moon is made of cheese! lol)

I meant the space race with the soviet union. :hmmm:

Mon Oct 18, 2010 9:01 pm » by **Stophaarp**

mizzy wrote:
stophaarp wrote:
mizzy wrote:Interesting, I always thought the reason NASA never returned because of other reasons. Money. Plus the fact they already won the space race. Also that there is nothing else to research there because all it is, is a chunk of rock. haha

Already won the space race? What, does space end at the moon?

Also, I highly doubt any celestial body is just a chunk of rock. =P ( besides, the moon is made of cheese! lol)

I meant the space race with the soviet union.

haha Yeah I know. I was just being an ass. I always hated the concept of space race... There's no finish line, no end to space that we can see.. merely getting into our immediate space isn't in my mind a win at all... in my mind atleast.

Mon Oct 18, 2010 9:04 pm » by **Aquarius**

Maybe we never left. What about the shuttle that was supposed to crash into the moon to discover water that had already been discovered. That was blatantly a supply shuttle of some sort.

Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:29 pm » by **Hackjames**

aquarius wrote:
hackjames wrote:
oxize wrote:Van Allen Belt..

Sorry, what now? Are you bringing it up in the context of the claimed space vehicle's inadequate shielding?

I think he was. It sounds like you have knowledge that the VH belt was not an issue as they have developed shielding against the radiation. Can you confirm, I'm just curious.

No, sorry, not claiming any knowledge, just clarifying.

I have read/watched a bit about it. I don't trust NASA for some of the reasons posted all over this site, but this in particular seems irrelevant to me. If they went, there's nothing to say that they would have necessarily died (we still don't know a great deal about this effect, as noted by others), and if they didn't go it doesn't mean that we've not gone since because of this effect.

That's all just based on my understanding of it, of course. Anything could be true as far as I'm concerned, though I would probably guess that the moon landing didn't happen, or that it did happen but that's not what we saw. The conditions concerning the broadcast itself are what first caught my attention, and there are many anomalies that have been given little or no attention from NASA to date.

Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:33 pm » by **Boondox681**

they never went to begin with.
and yes,because of the radiation belts+other

Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:35 pm » by **Hackjames**

boondox681 wrote:they never went to begin with.
and yes,because of the radiation belts+other

Well, thanks for clearing that up. Could you explain what source/sources led you to believe that?

Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:35 pm » by **Aquarius**

Sorry, what now? Are you bringing it up in the context of the claimed space vehicle's inadequate shielding?

I think he was. It sounds like you have knowledge that the VH belt was not an issue as they have developed shielding against the radiation. Can you confirm, I'm just curious.

No, sorry, not claiming any knowledge, just clarifying.

I have read/watched a bit about it. I don't trust NASA for some of the reasons posted all over this site, but this in particular seems irrelevant to me. If they went, there's nothing to say that they would have necessarily died (we still don't know a great deal about this effect, as noted by others), and if they didn't go it doesn't mean that we've not gone since because of this effect.

That's all just based on my understanding of it, of course. Anything could be true as far as I'm concerned, though I would probably guess that the moon landing didn't happen, or that it did happen but that's not what we saw. The conditions concerning the broadcast itself are what first caught my attention, and there are many anomalies that have been given little or no attention from NASA to date.

The reason for my curiosity is simply down to the fact that the Russians were handing the US it's ass on a plate when it came to space exploration, and the only way that NASA could save face was to put a man on the moon. The Russians claimed that it was because of this radiation belt that they hit a wall when attempting to get a man to the moon. Now there is massive debate as to whether anyone actually reached the moon from earth.

However I do believe that the moon is inhabited. By whom or what I do not know. Nazis probably. :nwo: