主题:质疑登月的人。有没有系统的看过NASA的解释？（1）

我有的时候对KDS感觉有点悲哀的地方是：无论是辩论问题的正方还是反方，水平都很低。大家都在低水平的讨论，讨论不出结果，就开始谩骂。

关于登月的质疑，国外的主流媒体早就熄火了。因为NASA开过记者招待会，全面的回应过各种疑问（那些认为NASA一直保持沉默的火星人请自动飞开）。以下是我记忆中的一些回应。希望那些质疑登月的人能够明白：信息落后和愚昧其实差得并不远。

质疑1：据计算，阳光与月面间的入射角只有6度到7度，几乎紧贴地平线。但是阿波罗11那张美国国旗插上月球的照片显示，阳光入射角大约有近30度，显然不合逻辑。（NASA回应，登月点在山谷里，所以阳光的入射点和计算中的假设是不一样的，另外，这个计算的人本身也算错了，NASA出示过详细的计算过程，相信没有问题）

质疑2：月球上重力是地球的六分之一，应该轻易地比地球上跳得高六倍，远六倍。可是从录像上看，宇航员跳离地面还不到一米远。（NASA回应：质疑的人显然忘记了宇航员的还背着很重的装备，另外跳得太高落下来时容易摔倒）

质疑3：旗帜无风抖动（NASA回应：为了帮助旗帜展开，旗杆其实是L形的，而看到的抖动，是由于插旗杆的时候的震动导致，恰恰因为月球上没有空气，所以抖动可以没有阻碍得一直持续下去，从而造成旗帜飘扬的效果）

打字好累啊。等会再发2吧，如果论坛上还有真正喜欢科学的人的话…………

这个人很有个性，没有签名。

引用： 据说NASA没有正式的澄清过,一直是保持沉默的.

你果然很配合你的名字

这个人很有个性，没有签名。

go on

这个家伙很懒，什么也没留下......

呵呵。白痴贴顶的人一个接一个。好贴倒是没人看了……

这个人很有个性，没有签名。

现在kds很多都是职校小朋友，说话没水平正常啊，原谅他们吧！

我爱中国共产党,中国共产党万岁!

我等嫦娥n号

rockett_zhu@hotmail.com

The Moon Landing Hoax Click to hear this article read aloud
March 30, 2001

Buzz Aldrin on the Moon
Astronaut Buzz Aldrin on the Moon in 1969.

Did we actually send humans to the Moon in the 1960's? Of course we did! But some people are claiming that NASA lied about the Apollo program, that we faked the landings. Actually, it would have been harder to fake the whole thing than to do it! But many people are confused about it, and have asked NASA to clear it up.

The current confusion began with a TV program called "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?" aired on February 15th, and again on March 21st, 2001. The program interviewed people who doubted NASA had the technology to make it to the Moon. They felt that the USA was so eager to win the "Space Race" against the Soviet Union, NASA acted out the Apollo space program in movie studios! They claimed astronaut Neil Armstrong's historic first steps on the Moon, planting the American flag, the bouncy Moon Buggy rides, and even Astronaut Al Shepard's golf shot, were all fake.

But not only did they claim NASA faked the whole thing, but that we did it very poorly! The so-called "experts" on Conspiracy Theory pointed out a number of things they thought were "errors." Well, let's look at a couple of them:

Stars in the Lunar Sky

Photo of the Earth over the limb of the Moon
View of the half-Earth above the lunar horizon.

Pictures of astronauts sent from the Moon don't include stars in the dark lunar sky. How could that be? Did NASA's film makers forget to turn on the stars? Most people who take photos know the answer: it's hard to take a picture of something very bright and something else very dim on the same photo. Ever watch a TV program or movie with outdoor night scenes? Unless the movie producers fake stars in the sky, or use special cameras, you just don't see stars. The cameras are adjusted for the actors, and the stars in the background are too dim to see.

Photo of astronauts planting US flag on the Moon
Astronaut Buzz Aldrin on the Moon in 1969.

A Waving Flag
Everyone has seen the video of astronauts planting a US flag on the Moon. You can see the flag flexing and rippling. How can that be? There's no breeze on the Moon. But then, there's no atmosphere, either. When the astronauts planted the flagpole they twisted it back and forth to sink it into the lunar soil. On the Earth, that would have made the flag "wave" for a few seconds, then stop. But that'***ecause the flag pushes against air as it flaps, and the air slows it down. On the Moon, there was no air to stop the flag's motion, so it continued, just as Newton's First Law of physics says it should. So of course the cloth flag waved and rippled beneath the metal rod holding it out.

clipart of space moleNewton's First Law:
Any body at rest tends to stay at rest, and any body in motion tends to stay in motion, unless acted on by an external force.

The TV show had plenty of other "proofs" not based on fact. All of them are easy to refute. But perhaps the best answer to claims of a "Moon Hoax" is just plain common sense.

For instance, Russia, China, East Germany and other cold-war enemies of the USA closely monitored the lunar missions. It was easy to tell whether the Apollo radio signals were coming from the direction of the Moon, and whether the time delays in conversation matched the distance the signals had to travel. If anything had seemed wrong, surely these unfriendly countries would have loudly shouted to the world that the USA was pulling a hoax! Yet none of them ever questioned NASA's accomplishment. When even your enemy gives you credit for something, it's pretty convincing!

There is also the issue of Moon rocks. Apollo astronaut***rought 841 pounds of Moon rocks home to Earth, a unique treasure trove that has taught us a great deal about the Moon.

Photos of moon rocks
Top: a large moon rock nicknamed "Big Muley," weighing 11.7 kg. This rock was the largest returned to Earth by Apollo astronauts.

Bottom: A close-up view showing tiny craters caused by micrometeoroids, an effect not seen in any rocks of Earth because tiny meteoroid***urn up in the Earth's atmosphere.

"Moon rocks are truly unique, and differ from Earth rocks in many ways," says Dr. David McKay of NASA's Johnson Space Center, one of the people who run the Lunar Sample Laboratory Facility where most of the Moon rocks are stored. "Several museums, such as the Smithsonian and others, let the public touch and examine rocks from the Moon," says David.

Dr. McKay says that faking a Moon rock to fool scientists around the world would be next to impos***le. "It would be far easier to just go to the Moon and get one!" he says.

"There's a big stack of scientific books in my office, full of research papers about Apollo Moon rocks " added McKay. "Researchers in hundreds of labs have examined Apollo Moon samples -- and not one of them has ever challenged where the rocks came from! These are not NASA people, either -- but are scientists in dozens of countries to whom we loaned Moon rock samples -- and they have no reason to cooperate in any hoax."

There are so many other common sense reasons to believe NASA truly sent men to the Moon. The integrity of the twelve astronauts who walked on the Moon, nine of whom are still living, is one. The vast number of NASA employees, who are, after all, just regular people doing a job, who would have had to conspire, lie, and maintain the lie for over 30 years is another.

The Conspiracy Theory program is fun to watch, but be sure to maintain your skepticism! The hardworking, ingenious Americans who got us to the Moon should be honored for their contributions and their pioneering spirit. Even though the torch ha***een handed on to a younger generation of engineers, we are all proud of NASA's legacy.

Editors: Gil Knier & Becky Bray

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/News/2001/News-MoonLanding.asp

我要打扮得花枝招展
戴上小丑的面具走遍大地
任人笑骂，叫人欢喜
因为我是人民，我无所畏惧！

但是一直有很多传言说月球背面的照片里有规则的图形，推断是外星人基地，NASA有没有解释？
毕竟现在很多关于月球的照片都是正面，而永远背朝地球的月球背面照披露的寥寥无几。

email:xie0106@sina.com，或站内短信联系  

先不说真的假的 这些问题只要是一个做过1年销售的人都能说的头头是道 像真的一样 呵呵

何况是NASA说的

风吹落最后一片叶 我的心也飘着雪 爱只能往回忆里堆叠

不确认.

这个家伙很懒，什么也没留下......

你让我确信了登月是假的，在此之前我还不能肯定！

这个家伙很懒，什么也没留下......

引用： 保持一个怀疑的精神有什么不对?要是没有质疑精神,大家现在还在认为太阳围着地球转,地球是世界的中心呢.

科学的精神是大胆质疑，小心求证，而不是大胆扯淡，强词夺理

我要打扮得花枝招展
戴上小丑的面具走遍大地
任人笑骂，叫人欢喜
因为我是人民，我无所畏惧！

似乎只有两个人,但却有张他俩同时出现的照片,要么是自动摄像机拍的?

朝拜御姐，暮推罗莉。春引熟女，冬诱人妻

引用： 引用： 保持一个怀疑的精神有什么不对?要是没有质疑精神,大家现在还在认为太阳围着地球转,地球是世界的中心呢. 科学的精神是大胆质疑，小心求证，而不是大胆扯淡，强词夺理

扯个P蛋,就回了句NASA没正式公开答复怀疑者的一个回复,就踩到你们尾巴拉?
本来LZ的解释就是CCTV里的国内专家的答疑而已.

天上神仙，
<br>
九天下凡。
<br>
当众变幻，
<br>
我自失态。

19楼的。不正面回答问题而去扯一些精神，权利什么的，是政客诡辩的常用手法。另外，不是我瞧不起你，置疑并不是什么人都有资格的。
加上20楼的，如果你们有怀疑。那么请说出详尽的分析和怀疑，以理服人。如果只是在那大叫：我就是要怀疑，这是我的权利。那么夸奖你们一句白痴实在算是过奖了。

这个人很有个性，没有签名。

影子长短不一,说明有不同光源

朝拜御姐，暮推罗莉。春引熟女，冬诱人妻

引用： 引用： 似乎只有两个人,但却有张他俩同时出现的照片,要么是自动摄像机拍的? 如果这个问题成立的话，NASA会这么苯放出这张照片吗？

不是说了么,是装在飞船上的相机拍的

We Solved EveryThing For You!
http://www.WeSolved.com

那时候可是冷战高峰啊，苏联人怎么不跳出来狠狠出出美国人的丑啊，他们的专家可比kds水平高的多啊

这个家伙很懒，什么也没留下......

引用： 太阳边的金星？有一些星光即使在地球上用低感光度照片短曝光时间拍摄高亮度前景都照样清晰可见。

那是因为在地球上有空气，光线柔和了很多，但是月球上不同。这是摄影专家的解释。
嘉蓝你也许很喜欢科学，但是考虑问题的时候希望能更全面一点。

这个人很有个性，没有签名。

引用： 扯个P蛋,就回了句NASA没正式公开答复怀疑者的一个回复,就踩到你们尾巴拉? 本来LZ的解释就是CCTV里的国内专家的答疑而已.

原来26F看不懂12F贴的NASA官方解释

hoareu@163.com

相机拍星星，我是有发言权的。
NASA的照片绝对不应该有星星，她们要拍摄的是运动物体，曝光时间是很快的，而要拍摄到星星，在没有超大口径望远镜的情况下，起码10秒以上的曝光才能看到的。

_---_
|/ /
| . . |____
( ( oo))___()
/ ~~~EE
(__ H_~)_
msn: oo7@kali.com.cn

引用： 虽然我是NASA竞争者单位的,但是他们的技术一致是我们顶礼膜拜的

_---_
|/ /
| . . |____
( ( oo))___()
/ ~~~EE
(__ H_~)_
msn: oo7@kali.com.cn

引用： 我信谁的好？

你自己看那张所谓影子长度不一的照片，两个人为什么只有两个影子呢？只能说现场只有一个光源。
置于其他有多光源的照片，自然可以用反射的理论来解释。

_---_
|/ /
| . . |____
( ( oo))___()
/ ~~~EE
(__ H_~)_
msn: oo7@kali.com.cn

引用： 相机拍星星，我是有发言权的。 NASA的照片绝对不应该有星星，她们要拍摄的是运动物体，曝光时间是很快的，而要拍摄到星星，在没有超大口径望远镜的情况下，起码10秒以上的曝光才能看到的。

不要和半夜拿着机械相机拍夜景的人说这种话。

&amp;nbsp;

引用： 不要和半夜拿着机械相机拍夜景的人说这种话。

有什么问题？别装神秘，如果有问题尽管指正。

_---_
|/ /
| . . |____
( ( oo))___()
/ ~~~EE
(__ H_~)_
msn: oo7@kali.com.cn