Moon landing in 1969?

Question

i got a science assignment and i need opinions

ps. its not cheating

Answer 1

If it was a Hoax then it was accomplished maliciously, despite the practical development of all of the relvant technology, which we now enjoy in our own homes.  Doesn't it strike you as particularly silly to go through the great expense of developing all of this stuff, and then saying:  Hey, I have an idea, just for the giggles, lets pull a fast one on them and lets do it at least half a dozen times.....  

BTW, if that part was faked then where did the subsequent space program come from, or have we fake that too?  

Answer 2

On July 20, 1969, Armstrong, accompanied by Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin, landed the lunar module Eagle on the surface of the Moon. Armstrong and Aldrin spent a day on the surface of the Moon before returning to Earth. A total of six such manned moon landings were carried out between 1969 and 1972.

The U.S. Moon exploration program originated during the Eisenhower administration. In a series of mid-1950s articles in Collier's magazine, Wernher von Braun had popularized the idea of a manned expedition to the Moon to establish a lunar base. A manned Moon landing posed several daunting technical challenges to the U.S. and USSR. Besides guidance and weight management, atmospheric re-entry without ablative overheating was a major hurdle. After the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik, von Braun promoted a plan for the United States Army to establish a military lunar outpost by 1965.

After the early Soviet successes, especially Yuri Gagarin's flight, U.S. President John F. Kennedy looked for an American project that would capture the public imagination. He asked Vice President Lyndon Johnson to make recommendations on a scientific endeavor that would prove U.S. world leadership. The proposals included non-space options such as massive irrigation projects to benefit the Third World. The Soviets, at the time, had more powerful rockets than the United States, which gave them an advantage in some kinds of space missions. Advances in U.S. nuclear weapons technology had led to smaller, lighter warheads, and consequently, rockets with smaller payload capacities. By comparison, Soviet nuclear weapons were much heavier, and the powerful R-7 rocket was developed to carry them. More modest potential missions such as flying around the Moon without landing or establishing a space lab in orbit (both were proposed by Kennedy to von Braun) were determined to offer too much advantage to the Soviets, since the U.S. would have to develop a heavy rocket to match the Soviets. A Moon landing, however, would capture world imagination while functioning as propaganda.

Mindful that the Apollo Program would economically benefit most of the key states in the next election—particularly his home state of Texas because NASA's base was in Houston—Johnson championed the Apollo program. This superficially indicated action to alleviate the fictional "missile gap" between the U.S. and USSR, a campaign promise of Kennedy's in the 1960 election. The Apollo project allowed continued development of dual-use technology. Johnson also advised that for anything less than a lunar landing the USSR had a good chance of beating the U.S. For these reasons, Kennedy seized on Apollo as the ideal focus for American efforts in space. He ensured continuing funding, shielding space spending from the 1963 tax cut and diverting money from other NASA projects. This dismayed NASA's leader, James E. Webb, who urged support for other scientific work.

In conversation with Webb, Kennedy said:

Everything we do ought to really be tied in to getting on to the moon ahead of the Russians [...] otherwise we shouldn't be spending that kind of money, because I'm not interested in space [...] The only justification for [the cost] is because we hope to beat [the USSR] to demonstrate that instead of being behind by a couple of years, by God, we passed them.[citation needed]

The Saturn V booster was the key to U.S. moon landings, using more efficient liquid hydrogen fuel instead of kerosene in its upper stages to lift heavier payloads with a launch record of no failures in thirteen launches. The N-1 exploded in flight during four secret test launches and never achieved operational status.

Whatever he said in private, Kennedy needed a different message to gain public support to uphold what he was saying and his views. Later in 1963, Kennedy asked Vice President Johnson to investigate the possible technological and scientific benefits of a Moon mission. Johnson concluded that the benefits were limited, but, with the help of scientists at NASA, he put together a powerful case, citing possible medical breakthroughs and interesting pictures of Earth from space. For the program to succeed, its proponents would have to defeat criticism from politicians on the left, who wanted more money spent on social programs, and on those on the right, who favored a more military project. By emphasizing the scientific payoff and playing on fears of Soviet space dominance, Kennedy and Johnson managed to swing public opinion: by 1965, 58 percent of Americans favored Apollo, up from 33 percent two years earlier. After Johnson became President in 1963, his continuing defense of the program allowed it to succeed in 1969, as Kennedy had originally hoped.

[edit] Soviet strategy

Answer 3

Not sure but I have my doubts. If it was a lie congratulations must go to those who fooled the World.

Cheers !

Answer 4

Happened just like history books and NASA tells.  

Answer 5

I don't think it ever happened!  Why haven't they been back since?!  If there was no wind or gravity why was the flag blowing in the picture?  I think it is a big hoax!  Technology back then was nothing like todays.

Answer 6

Opinions on what? If it was real?

Its not a matter of opinion when it comes to that... the moon landing was most certainly real.

You need to be a bit more specific before we can give you opinions on what you want. *What* about the moon landing in 1969?

Answer 7

Yeah. Hard to say the moon landing was fake when the astronauts returned with MOON ROCKS :D

Answer 8

Which is more probable?

We went to the moon with less computer power than a modern digital watch, and we're going again. Then to Mars and off to Zeta Reticuli.

or

Your government has sold you out and wants to force this on you:

http://www.verichipcorp.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0gXGTcd6...

Check this out:

Lawn furniture or super groovy interplanetary spaceship of the naive 60's?

http://moonmovie.com/images/AS11-40-5922...

(make sure to enlarge in order to really get a good look at American engineering at its finest)

Answer 9

The Moon didn't land, it's still up there.

Answer 10

Honestly, you should hope that your science teacher is not on Yahoo Answers.  You'd be surprised how many instructors LOVE to help out with answers.  

Perhaps it would be better if you did a Google search and comprised your own work.  Besides, you won't learn much if you depend on copying down what someone else has worked to research and compile for you.  

Sample search - note keywords:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=...

(CAUTION:  Not to mention the folks online who get a big thrill of giving faulty information just because they know someone is gullible enough to swallow it without checking resources.)

Best to you.

[edit]  Please don't go with the conspiracy theorists without forming your own opinions.  "Capricorn One" was a movie.

x

Answer 11

Here are some opinions:

It was spectacular.  --A great advance.  --A triumph in the aviation and aerospace   fields.  --The realization of Kepler's Dream.  They did what had been thought impossible just a few decades earlier.

"Computer power"!  Kids now think computers are needed.  The US (and Russia) didn't need "computer power" to go to the Moon and back.

Answer 12

if you have a science assignment about the Moon landing and there was ANY doubt expressed by your instructor as to whether it actually happened or not, you NEED to report this moron to the school's supervisor.  If he is not immediately dismissed, you should go to the local paper and explain how your tax dollars are being wasted on unfit turds with teaching certificates.

Answer 13

Moon Landing :

A moon landing is the arrival of an intact manned or unmanned spacecraft on the surface of a planet's natural satellite. The concept has been a goal of humankind since it was first appreciated that the Moon is Earth's closest large celestial body. One of the clearest early examples of the concept in fiction was Jules Verne's novel From the Earth to the Moon, written in 1865. Since the Soviet Union first succeeded in implementing the concept in 1966, this term referred to eighteen spacecraft landings on the Moon through 1976. Nine of these missions returned to Earth bearing samples of moon rocks.

The United States achieved the first manned landing on Earth's Moon as part of the Apollo 11 mission commanded by Neil Armstrong. On July 20, 1969, Armstrong, accompanied by Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin, landed the lunar module Eagle on the surface of the Moon. Armstrong and Aldrin spent a day on the surface of the Moon before returning to Earth. A total of six such manned moon landings were carried out between 1969 and 1972.

The Soviet Union later achieved sample returns via the unmanned Luna 16, Luna 20 and Luna 24 moon landings. Since this was during the time of the Cold War, the contest to be the first on the Moon was one of the most visible facets of the space race.

Progress in space exploration has since broadened the phrase to include other moons in the solar system as well. The Huygens probe of the Cassini mission to Saturn performed a successful unmanned moon landing on Titan in 2005. Similarly, the Soviet probe Phobos 2 came within 120 miles (190 km) of performing an unmanned moon landing on Mars' moon Phobos in 1989 before radio contact with that lander was suddenly lost. There is widespread interest in performing a future moon landing on Jupiter's moon Europa to drill down and explore the possible liquid water ocean beneath its icy surface.