Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="prasadana2" data-source="post: 5239299" data-attributes="member: 4664">5: Proofs That The Moon Landing HappenedNo.5 - The Soviet Union Did Not Dispute ItAt the height of the Cold War, winning the space race represented a massive feather in the ideological cap of the anti-Communists. As such, if there had been any way to discredit the United States, you can be sure the Soviet Union would have found it. The political damage they could have wrought would have been enormous had they been able to discredit the moon landings. Given that the Soviets were still suffering from the embarrassing climb-down of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, any opportunity that would have allowed them to embarrass the United States would surely have been grasped with both hands. The fact that in the 40 years since that momentous occasion in human history, not one person from the Soviet camp has produced evidence to dispute the veracity of the moon landings, is as telling as any other evidence you care to name. It has been suggested that the Soviets were in on the hoax; this is too ludicrous for words, especially in an era when tensions between the two countries were so high. It is suggesting complicity in something which would be immensely damaging to their own regime, and that's simply absurd. Forget the arguments; the deafening silence from the Soviet camp is as incontrovertible as any other evidence. <img src="http://images.askmen.com/top_10/entertainment/1247853589_top-5-proofs-that-the-moon-landing-happened_5.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" />No.4 - The Number of PhotographsIt seems obvious to the point of absurdity, but the sheer number of photographs -- none of which show anything terrestrial -- is pretty compelling evidence. Much has been said about light sources, errant shadows and so forth, but this is all based on how light behaves in Earth’s atmosphere. The moon has no atmosphere to speak of, and so refraction and reflection will be slightly different. The Lunar Module was covered in reflective paneling, and so would have had a major effect on the way light was reflected onto the surface. Undulations in the moon’s surface would also have an effect on shading. The lack of stars has also been cited as proof, but the cameras were set to daylight exposure and would not have picked up the stars anyway. We should also consider the fact that the astronauts -- who were extremely well trained photographers by the time of the mission -- were there to photograph the moon, not the view of the stars from the moon’s surface. The sheer number of photographs which were taken, and the absence of anything more than weak circumstantial evidence, is a strong argument.<img src="http://images.askmen.com/top_10/entertainment/1247853334_top-5-proofs-that-the-moon-landing-happened_4.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></blockquote>

Verification: Hata thunen beduwama keeyada? (60 bedeema thuna)

Top Bottom