Apollo Moon Landings

**N01** · 12-11-2008 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by shweedart

its all very well they can see reflectors or whatever but if they can send little space robots up to mars why not to the moon? It's mostly the radiation side that baffles me

I'm confused, and just trying to clarify what you are saying.

do you think that they have sent robots or machinery to mars?

but not to the moon?

**shweedart** · 12-13-2008 05:01 PM

Nope, Just that could it be possible to have got the robots/machinery to the moon WITH the reflectors

**anonymouswhitefemale** · 12-14-2008 05:33 AM

No offense love, but there are people with a far more solid handle on space exploration and physics who have questioned the things you are questioning.

**shweedart** · 12-14-2008 07:32 AM

Which means I can't have an opinion?

**anonymouswhitefemale** · 12-14-2008 02:31 PM

Of course you can have an opinion, though you should base your opinions on evidence. If it were that simple to debunk the moon landings don't you think it would have been done already?

**rcoreyus** · 12-14-2008 04:14 PM

Why fake the moon landings? Its clear we have put people in orbit (I've spoken to an astronaut personally). Going to the moon was harder - but not all that much harder, and probably easier than the sort or conspiracy that would be needed to fake it.

**CHANDLERS WISH** · 12-15-2008 02:33 AM

The Universe is a strange thing.

I think your thread is an excellent one..

Man has accomlished much, electricity, gas, cars, alot..

Eventually we will know what is "out there" everywhere... It seems fascinating to me that UFO's are "not real" haha, man made, but then there are the "unexplainable"...

As I said, good thread.

CW