I started this debate a few months back, but to no real avail. I really want to know what everyone thinks. I want to see what current schools are teaching aobut this event and if anyone has proof pertaining to either side.

ok then lemme "debate"
in my opinion it did not happend and its enough to think at the technology they had in that period and the understanding not to mention the computer's power was hundreds of times lower then now... my shitty laptop could compete.
and i dont wanna meantion all the evidence over and over again.. like shadows not perpendicular to each other (means there were more sources of light) and the magnetic field around the planet...

The understanding of the physics is not hard as you might think. To escape the gravitational field of the earth, you can use pretty much highschool physics to find out. (You would need to do E = mgh but take into account of the g decreasing as you go higher, with a bit of integration, you can find the exact energy required to escape earth's gravitational pull. i cant do it at the moment but i did it last year). As for swinging and picking projectory into the moon, that also can be done with again highschool physics.

As for technology, yes it was the most difficult part of the mission. But it was far from impossible. If you think about it, it was a rocket with a ship on top. What is so impossibly hard about that? Sure the rocket had to not explode and carry enough fuel to escape the gravity well of the earth, but then the rocket is ditched! The module then goes and lands, stays there and comes back to earth. I fail to see whats so technologically impossible about this, i mean it was 1965. Not the 1800s. By 1965, "modern" jets already exists. And the famous F14 tomcat (tom cruise top gun?) would have its first flight in 1970.

Actually now i think about it maybe it was the G = gm1m2/r^2 one.... hmm i forget.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7IoCYDaS-Q&feature=related

To me this is extreme proof hte Apollo 11 moon landing was a hoax. I do believe we may have made it there on a later mission, but the original landing was a hoax.



As far as the shadows, ex.... thats been disproved and you can even test that at home.

K ill comment as i go.

1.45 passing through the van allen belt. It is not lethal by any means. Any attempt to say it does is done by people that are not suited for discussion of this topic. And here i have proven this video false.
http://www.crystalinks.com/vanallenbelt.html
The belts are a hazard for artificial satellites and moderately dangerous for human beings and difficult and expensive to shield against.
Of course they had shields and of course they probably didn't park their craft there.

But i will watch the rest for fun! Oh and this music is freaking me out.

Ok this video itself seems extremely suspicious. We hear one part of the conversation, then the narrorator comes in. Why not show us the whole? Also whats wrong with the finger? i mean im pretty sure hes exaggerating when he said the camera right up against the window. And im sure you might need a finger (your hands) to position the camera. About the date thing, someone perhaps misdated? I would have taken this video seriously if i was shown the video and recording in its entirety, but without the context in which any of this is happening i cannot. For all i know the astronauts could have been screwing around up there.

The video footige was "mistakenly" released by nasa for a documentary. Their claim is that it was a "rehearsal" of what they "would" do when they got to that specific distance... but theres one problem. All the videos were stamped with the time and date from the atomic clock. To me, proving that moon landing of Apollo 11 was not possible.

As far as the Van Allen belt, I agree. Although radioactive... the time spent considering the possible exposure is not and would not be a factor.

Travel to the moon is very feasible... but it dint happen in june, 1969... IMO.

My opinion on this matter is that the US Government and NASA sent this out to the public, during the time of the Cold War, just to show the people that we beat the USSR in something. It was all competition back then, and the video is blatantly fake by the: lighting, people and if you watch he doesn't always move in time with what is "supposed" to happen. This is due to the debate that we have not landed on the moon yet. I feel strongly that we have NOT landed on the moon. It just so happens that we could back then and not now? Our technology has significantly increased since then; however, we could do it back then and not now? That is totally barbaric and we never did "land on the moon again," because there was "no way that it could happen." Why during the Cold War and not recent? That makes no sense and also strengthens the opinion on why not now...and back then? It's very blatant, as well, that it was just to beat the USSR at something.

July the reason that USA did it then but cannot be done now is due to the different design of the vehicles.

The lander was designed to land on the Moon, and still carry enough fuel to get off the moon and then survive entry into earth safely. While the current craft the space shuttle is NOT designed to land on the moon. If is designed to glide in and land on a strip. Not on the moon. Thus to go back to the moon again, obviously new vehicles needs to be designed (they woulnd't just use stuff from 40 years ago. And that is why USA cannot do so at the moment.

Speaking of USSR, my biggest concern with the conspiracy theory is that the whole goal was to beat the USSR. Now its not hard at all to monitor such crafts, and if the american government "lied" about the first landing at that specific date. You would think thousands of scientists, as well as spies and personnel from USSR would notice and make a big deal about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmVxSFnjYCA