Of course Russia's ex-space boss doesn't believe US set foot on the Moon
- Reference: 1683614226
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/05/09/dmitry_rogozin_moon_landing_sceptic/
- Source link:
Rogozin questioned the lunar landing in a message on his Telegram channel over the weekend. He claimed that before he worked at Roscosmos, he sent an official request to the Russian space agency for evidence supporting NASA astronauts had set foot on the Moon, and only received a book titled "Conquest of the Moon by Astronauts".
He criticized the book for containing only anecdotal evidence from a cosmonaut, who was told by NASA that astronauts had successfully landed on the Moon. When he later led Roscosmos from 2018 to 2022, Rogozin claimed he failed to find any data that convinced him Apollo 11 touched down on our natural satellite. He said that NASA fans and Russian scientists pushed back on his claims and accused him of trying to sow disharmony between Washington and Moscow.
[1]
"Yes, I did not undermine or aggravate anything, but only by virtue of my nature I tried to get to the bottom of the details and establish, at least for myself, the true state of affairs in the issue of exploration of the Moon by our competitors. It was not clear to me how the United States, at that level of technological development of the 60s of the last century, did what they still cannot do now?," he said in a [2]translated Telegram post.
[3]Russia: Hey, don't act surprised if we're still on the ISS in 2030
[4]Russia fines Google $374 million for letting the truth about Ukraine be told
[5]Dmitry Rogozin sacked as boss of Russian space agency Roscosmos
[6]Russia's Mir space station returned to Earth 21 years ago
It's not clear to The Register how the boss of Roscosmos could seemingly be unaware of the retroflectors Apollo 11 left on the Moon, and the many successful attempts to shine an Earth-based laser off the devices. It's not like the reflective devices walked to the Moon. Not to mention massive Soviet intelligence systems that would have called out such a fraud at the height of the Cold War.
But we digress.
[7]
Rogozin is well-known for being provocative. Last year, he was suddenly ousted as Roscosmos' boss and replaced with the current head Yuri Borisov. It's not clear why he was moved on, although some have speculated it could be due to his controversial rants on social media or aggressive comments.
Tensions around Rogozin's behavior increased after Russia illegally invaded Ukraine in February 2022. The European Space Agency [8]axed plans to launch the ExoMars rover in 2024, a joint project with Roscosmos, amid sanctions against Russia. In response, Russia pulled out of other EU space projects.
[9]
During his time, Rogozin also repeatedly threatened to [10]pull out of the International Space Station and build a private Russian-only lab in low-Earth orbit. ®
Get our [11]Tech Resources
[1] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZFoZxggTphfNXIa8oSAhwQAAANQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[2] https://t-me.translate.goog/s/rogozin_do/4122?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/05/roscosmos_nasa_iss/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/19/russia_fines_google/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/15/roscosmos_rogozin_dismissed/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/23/mir_deorbit/
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZFoZxggTphfNXIa8oSAhwQAAANQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/17/exomars_suspended/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZFoZxggTphfNXIa8oSAhwQAAANQ&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/22/russia_iss_2025/
[11] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Lets pretend USA didnt land on the moon, surely taking 70 years to "notice" and "say something" is pathetic.
54 years. But let's not quibble.
Rogozin should worry about his own ass more. It can be shot again. ;)
By implication...
That means the Soviet moon program was also a hoax!
Seeing as Luna 15(?) was circling the moon with intention to land as well (and bring samples back). And watching Apollo!
Shirley, that'd be a complete lie as well, no ?
Re: By implication...
Let us not forget the Lunokhod early CGI epic.
about 4 years ago...
Dmitry congratulated NASA on the 50 th anniversary of the [1]Moon landings .
[1] https://tass.com/science/1069574
Re: about 4 years ago...
Yes, but 4 years is a long time for the gullible and fools to start believing any sort of bullshit on social media?
Sadly I know of other friends (probably more ex-friends now) who have drink the stupid kool-aid over the pandemic period :(
Let's look at the Russian space program
[1]Here it is . наслаждаться!
[1] https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/soviet-space-shuttle-covered-in-graffiti/index.html
A to-do list with only one box
Once NASA had succeeded in getting people to the Moon and back, they were left without any way to capture the public imagination and therefore budget.
It seems that this time, they have learned that time is money and that the more time something takes, the more money they get. Or on personal levels of their staff, the longer their people can spin-out a project, the longer they will keep their jobs.
Saying the US can't do it now?
Seems deluded. The US could do it now if they wanted to. They'd just need the budget to do so. But, landing back on the moon hasn't been a political priority. That's not the same as not being able to.
Hell, given a bit of time and more money, SpaceX could do it I have no doubt.
What about the 5 other times NASA landed on the moon? Were they all faked too?
Photos as evidence
I was given a copy of "Apollo Remastered" by Andy Saunders. A masterpiece. A large, heavy book with more black photo-ink than I've ever seen in one place. Some of the pictures make you just stop and marvel at what it was to be there, and really complement the text-based works on the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programmes. I ended up reading it in small chunks, wearing my head-tourch on a diffuse setting, to help my aging eyes pick out the detail of the pictures and the sparse text provided with each.
Not proof that they went there of course, but a marvel of photographic restoration and presentation.
Porkies
"What about the 5 other times NASA landed on the moon? Were they all faked too?"
No. One of them had nip over to Tranquility Base on the qt to leave the laser reflectors :)
I once shut one of these loonies up by saying that you could see Armstrong's bootprints on the lunar surface using the most powerful terestrial telescopes - seemed reasonable to me at the time but actually isn't true :( or apparently due to the limits of optics ever likely to be.
I cannot imagine any of this party making diligent inquiry to prove the lie :)
If I were Roscosmos I would have sent him instead, a copy of Dahl's "James and the Giant Peach."
Whatever next?
Perhaps he'll state that Russian farming output is up 15%, manufacturing by 20% and all comrades will celebrate this momentous news.
Or he'll argue that black is white - and we all know how that ends!
Re: Whatever next?
One could also question as to how, in the 60's, Russia was able to keep a dozen or more soviet republics in line, and propped up with puppet governments, when they cannot do so now. Or question as to how Russia managed to feed and employ it's own population in the 60's, which it cannot do now. Or had a military that made the west quake in their boots and kept us awake at night in fear, while now they cannot even invade a fairly defenceless neighbour now without it becoming a total farce.
Maybe it's the same reason Russia had competent armed forces capable of defeating the Nazi menace in 1945, but they can't do it now.
Rogozin is well-known for being provocative.
In ancient times, like 10 years ago, there still was a difference of "being provocative" and "spitting bullshit, completely disqualifying the speaker for even a simple conversation about the weather".
Could we please re-introduce that distinction?