Did Neil Armstrong really land on the moon??

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Did Neil Armstrong really land on the moon??

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 61 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #604850

    kfb
    Participant

    A few years back while I was in yeshiva, a peer of mine told me that no one has been to the moon. I thought he was just humoring me, however he was dead serious. He told me we don’t believe anyone’s been to the moon. I was shocked that he said such a thing when we have all of this proof that we’ve landed on the moon on numerous occasions. Anyone have an answer as to why he said this?

    #896843

    Shopping613 🌠
    Participant

    Weird….

    ?ns ?o suo?????do ?o p??? pu? ‘??p???? ‘??puno? ???

    (319bu?ddo?s) 319[$]

    [$]613 (Shopping613)

    The Founder, Awarder, and Head of Operations of SUC

    #896844

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    The Rambam holds that the moon is a spiritual place not a physical place so a landing was not possible.

    Rav Yaakov Kamminetsky when the original moon landing occured rushed to watch it on TV as he wanted to know if the Rambam was right or wrong.

    #896845

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Well, the Rambam held that the moon was not a physical entity, so if someone wanted to defend that position, he would have to say the whole thing was a hoax.

    #896846

    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Anyone have an answer as to why he said this?

    Why do you want us to answer why someone believes in something that is counterfactual?

    The Wolf

    #896847

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Occams razor would say that it is simpler that he just lied, than that they actually landed on the moon.

    It wouldn’t take a complicated conspiracy; just a few dudes at NASA.

    #896848

    Health
    Participant

    zahavasdad -“The Rambam holds that the moon is a spiritual place not a physical place so a landing was not possible.”

    Source?

    “Rav Yaakov Kamminetsky when the original moon landing occured rushed to watch it on TV as he wanted to know if the Rambam was right or wrong.”

    That’s not what I heard. I heard he said that Pshat is noone can touch any heavenly objects. So how did man touch the moon? He answered- if you can only touch it with a spacesuit -this isn’t called touching.

    #896849

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Source?

    Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 2:4

    #896850

    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Its those FreeMasons again!

    #896851

    vochindik
    Member

    Just because the moon is a rock doesnt contradict the fact that it is, in some way, sentient. As it so happens, the statement about the moon is a Zohar in a few places. He says thats what it means when it says “Yetzorom Bdaas bebinah uvehaskel” – that Hashem created the luminaries including their wisdom. Rav Chaim Kanievsky also, in Kiryas Melech, goes through the Rambam in Hilchos Deos bringing sources for just about every statement there. Rav Schneur Kotler ZTL said that he remembers that Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk ZTL once said that there are people who hold Rambam was wrong, and they are totally wrong, and he (Rav Meir Simchah) would really write a sefer showing that every word of the Rambams Hilchos Deos is culled from Chazal, but the Malbim already wrote such a Sefer so he doesn’t need to. Rav Schneur continued, that nobody knew what Rav Meir Simcha was referring to by the Sefer of the Malbim until a few years ago (about 35 years ago from today) they reprinted a Sefer from the Malbim showing that the Rambam’s Hilchos Deos was all from Chazal.

    #896852

    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Well, the Rambam held that the moon was not a physical entity, so if someone wanted to defend that position, he would have to say the whole thing was a hoax.

    Forget the moon landings… that would have to mean that all the other moon missions that landed on the moon (i.e. the unmanned ones) as well as those in lunar orbit are ALL fakes (since you can’t land an object on a non-physical entity and the data the orbiters are gathering would obviously be false).

    In addition, I don’t believe the Rambam’s statements are limited to the moon, but to all heavenly bodies (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong). So the Mars rovers, the Voyager and Pioneer missions, the Cassini mission and on and on would have to be faked as well.

    Thus we’re left with a number of possibilities:

    1. The Rambam was wrong on this.

    2. The entire enterprise of space exploration is a hoax, covering multiple nations in direct competition with each other and who would have loved to be able to prove the other side was faking an accomplishment (think back to the US/USSR space race)

    3. The Rambam is not speaking b’pashtus.

    4. Fill in your own possibility here.

    I’ll leave it to you to decide which is the case.

    The Wolf

    #896853

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    daasyochid- NOPE ! You are misquoting the Rambam and, dare I say, misrepresenting what R’ Yaakov MAY have said. The Rambam- in the halocho that you mention- does NOT speak about the moon (or other heavenly bodies) at all. He speaks about “malochim”- angels. Please check again.

    And,actually ,in the mishne before that (3), he specifically addresses the heavenly bodies and says that THEY ARE PHYSICAL- just the opposite that you said. What he says is that that world- “olam hagalgalim”- is fixed and never changes- in contrast to the living world (us) that changes all the time (birth, growth, death).

    I don’t know what R’Yaakov zz’l said but ,based on this Rambam, he clearly did not say anything that is being quoted.

    #896854

    Ramchas
    Participant

    Where have you fond a source for this? in Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 2:4?? It talks about Malachim there!

    All I see in 3:1 is the Rambam mentioning the moon as one of the Galagalim, such as the stars and the sun…

    #896855

    welldressed007
    Participant

    no, he was just ‘moonlighting’

    #896856

    frummy in the tummy
    Participant

    I don’t KNOW, but I believe.

    #896857

    ED IT OR
    Participant

    hang on, did bin laden really die?

    how about saddam hussein?

    #896858

    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    hang on, did bin laden really die?

    how about saddam hussein?

    Bin Laden was a member of the Bilderberg Group, and was eliminated by the order of the Illuminati.

    Saddam is alive. They killed his clone, and he himself was ables to escape & is now a member of the Blue Man Group (ever wonder why they are blue)?

    #896859

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    If the Rambam held that it is not physical, only spiritual, then you can only see it in a dream! Now, what does that say about me?

    #896860

    cherrybim
    Participant

    “if you can only touch it with a spacesuit -this isn’t called touching.”

    However, loads of moon rock were brought back for public viewing and touching.

    #896861

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    This brings up the bigger question

    What is your response when modern science contradicts Chazal or a Gadol Like the Rambam

    Is your response

    1) Chazal were only commenting on Science known in those days and could be wrong on those issue

    2) Chazal were correct and Modern Science is wrong

    3) We did not understand Chazal

    4) Chazal were correct in those days and the Science has changed

    #896862

    shmoel
    Member

    5) Chazal and science are talking about two different aspects.

    #896863

    iak
    Member

    kfb, your friend was probably living in a dream world after his first couple of years in israel. Some people go to extremes just to put themselves in a special mindsets. I bet this guy was the same guy who moved to the UWS and went off the derech.

    #896864

    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    5) Chazal and science are talking about two different aspects.

    Ah, yes, the famous “lice come from eggs but they don’t *really* come from eggs” answer.

    The Wolf

    #896865

    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    However, loads of moon rock were brought back for public viewing and touching.

    In their defense, I suppose you could argue that once it’s separated from the moon, it’s no longer “moon,” much the same way that dirt separated from Eretz Yisroel is no longer considered part of Eretz Yisroel (i.e. foods grown in such dirt are not subject to tevel restrictions, etc.).

    The Wolf

    #896866

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    There is no proof that the moon is solid in any way.

    A small conspiracy aimed at scaring the Russians is a far more plausible explanation than that we somehow were able to land and then take off again from the moon.

    #896867

    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    “lice come from eggs but they don’t *really* come from eggs”

    I always understood this answer to mean that Chazal was wrong, and Al Pi Teva of their time they should have made the other Halachic choice, but none the less Halachicly they are right. This is because Hashem makes/changes the Teva in an unnoticable way (that we do not understand) so that the Teva will follow the P’sak of Chazal.

    Correct me if I am wrong?

    #896868

    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    I always understood this answer to mean that Chazal was wrong, and Al Pi Teva of their time they should have made the other Halachic choice, but none the less Halachicly they are right. This is because Hashem makes/changes the Teva in an unnoticable way (that we do not understand) so that the Teva will follow the P’sak of Chazal.

    I’m not sure I followed what you were saying, exactly.

    The Wolf

    #896869

    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    Wolf:

    I understand it to mean that Chazal made the wrong Halachic decision. None the less, since Halacha follows Chazal, Teva changes slightly so that the halachic definition of “grows from an egg” can no longer include Lice, and as such they are now correctly excluded. This may also include changing the Halachic definition, but since that is also defined by Chazal, even if they did not mean to change the Halachic definition, none the less it is changed.

    #896871

    1) Chazal were only commenting on Science known in those days and could be wrong on those issue

    2) Chazal were correct and Modern Science is wrong

    3) We did not understand Chazal

    4) Chazal were correct in those days and the Science has changed

    I go for 1, which probably makes me a total heretic and chayav missah.

    #896872

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    coming from “the gatesheader’. it indeed was a a surprising answer but don’t worry- you are no a heretic at all. The chazal themsleves realized that their knowledge of science is not perfect nor final. see Pesaschim about the earth and the sun, where the chazal say that the view of the gentiles is more logical.

    #896873

    golfer
    Participant

    Would the venerable CR members consider it a cop out for someone to forego trying to argue with chazal, or figure out what they meant, and just say “teiku” ?

    #896874

    PBT
    Member

    Normally I wouldn’t even give this question the dignity of answering in a debate, but yes Neil Armstrong and 11 others have walked on the moon, with several others having spent some time in lunar orbit. All I can say about the conspiracy theories is that society has come to a very sad state when people pretend to be intellectuals by denigrating or denying the accomplishments of others. Since I’ve heard this conspiracy stuff from a bachurim in a number of yeshivos, it makes me wonder just exactly what other kinds of hooey they’re teaching, and if they can even be trusted regarding Torah itself.

    #896875

    Curiosity
    Participant

    Anyone who thinks the moon landing is a hoax should watch the Mythbusters episode in which they clearly bust all aspects of this myth. There are even methods to detect artifacts that were intentionally left behind on the moon by the astronauts who were up there. See the episode for more details.

    #896876

    Sam2
    Participant

    kfb: Apparently not believing in the moon landing is a common conspiracy theory.

    #896877

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    rob,

    You’re right, the source I found was a typo, it’s actually 2:3, and not so clear in what way the heavenly bodies differ from the things we find here on Earth, but apparently, it’s normally understood to mean that they are not solid enough to land on. On YU’s Torah site, there’s a lecture from R’ Nosson Kamenetzky in which he supposedly relates the story with his father zt”l (although I didn’t listen to it), and it may have been recounted in Yonoson Rosenblum’s R’ Yaakov biography, although I don’t have it in front of me and I don’t remember it with certainty. I do remember that Rosenblum got much of his information from R’ Nosson.

    #896878

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    FTR, and FWIW, I personally think Neil Armstrong landed on the moon. I’m just explaining what the motivation could be for someone to deny it.

    #896879

    WIY
    Member

    There are many differences between moon rock and earth rock.

    1. Moon rocks are anhydrous; no entrained water at all. And no water involved in their formation.

    2. There’s no weathering. Moon dust has lots of minuscule jagged structures, while rock dust on Earth has these spires worn off.

    3. More titanium in moon rocks than Earth rocks.

    #896880

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    daasyochid- i cannotvouch for what R’Yaakov zz,; said. But i do know that the Rambam you are referring to- 2-3- clearly writes that the heavenly bodies (olam hagalgalim) are physical and exist in full reality. Check the words “megushem” -measning earthly and real.

    #896881

    Sam2
    Participant

    Supposedly, when this conspiracy theory had a huge tracking in the 90s, a reporter visited Buzz Aldrin’s house and asked him if he actually ever walked on the moon. Buzz responded by punching the reporter in the face.

    #896882

    on the ball
    Participant

    On the subject of Neil Armstrong – what a shame he fluffed up that line on such an unprecedented historic occasion.

    ‘One mall step for man, one giant leap for mankind.’

    If he would have said ‘…for A man…’ it would have made sense. The way he said it, ‘man’ and ‘mankind’ mean exactly the same.

    #896883

    Shopping613 🌠
    Participant

    Trust me…he did but he was only first cuz he pushed the other guy out of th way…….

    ?ns ?o suo?????do ?o p??? pu? ‘??p???? ‘??puno? ???

    (319bu?ddo?s) 319[$]

    [$]613 (Shopping613)

    The Founder, Awarder, and Head of Operations of SUC

    #896884

    PBT
    Member

    “Buzz punched reporter in the face:”

    I rarely agree with Buzz Aldrin on things, but that reporter deserved it. On that one, Buzz was 100% correct!

    #896885

    WIY
    Member

    Apparently Neil Armstrong used to tell unfunny jokes about the Moon, and follow them up with , ” Ah, I guess you had to be there.”

    #896886

    tzaddiq
    Member

    there were lots of ‘proofs’ by conspiracy theorists that there never was a moon landing, but those were all ‘shlogged’ up. people will come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories for almost anything these days

    #896887

    2scents
    Participant

    I remember watching a long video on you tube regarding this conspiracy, it looked quite convincing.

    #896888

    WIY
    Member

    READ my previous comment if you have a sense of humor.

    #896889

    tzaddiq
    Member

    WIY – lol

    it is interesting to note that when Neil Armstrong died in August, it was in a month that had 2 full moons (a rare occurance known as “a blue moon”), the first Aug.2 and then again on Aug. 31

    pretty cool huh?

    #896890

    Sam2
    Participant

    On the ball: He actually said “a man”. Watch the videos on Youtube. It was just very blurry sound quality which caused the whole world to mis-transcribe him.

    #896891

    more_2
    Member

    Nobody or anything touched the moon. They get there and float around but nobody touches the moon. There’s no gravity.

    #896892

    Curiosity
    Participant

    Sam2, I’m pretty sure he wanted to say “a man”, but got mixed up and just said “man.”

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 61 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.