digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at dsc.discovery.com

Discovery Space: Moon Landing Factoids

dsc.discovery.com — What has duct tape and lightning got to do with the Apollo Program? Actually, quite a lot. Have a browse through these lesser known facts of the Apollo missions and take a quick journey back to the moon, pausing to examine some of the lesser-known facts along the way.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 10, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

28 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • RogerStrong, on 07/10/2009, -0/+16Hoagland and the rest of the tinfoil-hatters have yet to come up with a "moon hoax" theory that can't be easily disproven by a few minutes research or the smallest amount of critical thought ability.

    Hoagland's followers are stupider than most - he claims that the trips to the moon were a hoax AND we discovered an alien base when we made the trips to the moon. Somehow folks like EmilyCragg don't see the logic problem in this.
  • alpharaptor, on 07/10/2009, -0/+9i hope buzz aldren is right behind you.
  • chadsmith729, on 07/10/2009, -0/+8Let's get this all on one page: http://dsc.discovery.com/space/slideshows/apollo-f ...
  • Harabeck, on 07/10/2009, -1/+6The deniers are those who are lying nonstop. Stop being a sheeple and use your brain.
  • appleseed1234, on 07/10/2009, -0/+5I'm betting that if a lightning strike like that happens again if and when we go back, the media will be so all over it that the entire Constellation fleet would be grounded and NASA would spend 8 years wringing it's hands before going up again. I can't imagine how much time we'd lose if one of them failed on the way there, it's sad to think that in the 60s it would have just been a minor setback.

    I've already given up on leaving this rock in my lifetime, but now I'm beginning to despair that humanity never will judging from our lack of drive as a society.
  • hplasm, on 07/10/2009, -0/+4/s ??
  • Hetman, on 07/10/2009, -0/+4Seriously though Nasa can put a man on the moon but they cannot fit all these on one page. That is just absurd.
  • RogerStrong, on 07/10/2009, -0/+3They ran out of funding.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roton_SSTO
  • twiztidsinz, on 07/10/2009, -0/+3"What has duct tape and lightning got to do with the Apollo Program?"
    A LOT MORE THAN YOU MITE THINK!!!!!

    /crazydenyer
  • OrangeBob, on 07/11/2009, -1/+4No.
  • superterrorizer, on 07/10/2009, -0/+3All this would be solved if we had a space helicopter.
  • Fogdelune, on 07/10/2009, -0/+3Snoopy come home!
  • DankBuddz, on 07/11/2009, -1/+3Trust me, that's one thing I never forget.
  • DankBuddz, on 07/11/2009, -1/+3Not funny.
  • Astark, on 07/10/2009, -5/+7The whole thing was done with CGI and photoshop. Yes, those have been around since the 60's. Give me 10 minutes, and then look it up in Wikipedia.
  • diggdat, on 07/10/2009, -0/+2Oh the drama...you would think that successful moon landings would be enough geek bling for people, that they do not have to dream up conspiricy theories...
  • gdha, on 07/10/2009, -1/+3Great reading here. I had no idea about most of those.
  • anonymousmedic, on 07/11/2009, -0/+2I dont see why your getting dugg down. I LOL'D.
  • sameer768, on 07/10/2009, -0/+1Why don't they just build the whole space shuttle out of duct tape?
  • Chak2007, on 07/11/2009, -0/+1We'd have to put macgyver in the cockpit if that were the case.
  • Chak2007, on 07/11/2009, -0/+1Every year NASA keeps getting the short straw on budgeting as well. It seems we as a society are more focused on pop stars like Michael Jackson, and silly trends then we are advancing as a species.
  • anonymousmedic, on 07/11/2009, -1/+1Professor Peabody, can you answer that question?

    NO.
  • inactive, on 07/11/2009, -1/+1Can propellers actually create thrust in a vacuum of space?
  • inactive, on 07/11/2009, -2/+2Lies! Lies! Lies! We never landed on the moon! I saw it in a mooovie.


    /s
  • lilpilot, on 07/10/2009, -4/+2Ugh, where to begin. Mach 36? There is no air in space, therefore there is no Mach number in space. The whole reason that we deal in Mach numbers is because true airspeed becomes rather useless to aerodynamic theory in thinning atmospheres.
    That's like telling someone that swimming underwater has the equivalent wind chill of 200 MPH.

    Moon dust "coating their space suits and raising their absorption of dangerous solar radiation?" You mean that darker colors are hotter in sunlight, don't you. People who are actually smart don't try to hid simple concepts in scary language.
  • inactive, on 07/11/2009, -4/+1Did you forget to smoke?
  • hplasm, on 07/10/2009, -5/+1We could use yours- it's fresh and unused.
  • EmilyCragg, on 07/10/2009, -21/+0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Is_VcbBKtY

    http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/426.html

    We get lied to, nonstop.

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.