• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

When one goes for a job interview, good advice is to at least show interest and enthusiasm in your potential employer's core brand, mission and strategy.
The Apollo crews used celestial navigation, one of three systems to track their position/location in space. So guess what? They saw more than Venus.

Also, pilots tend to be enthusiastic about flying, and you obviously have no idea how competitive the astronaut program was.
 
It was 1969, not 1976.
And yet here you are, almost two years after that post, still talking about people walking on the Moon in 1976:
 
Reminds me of that staff appraisal scene in The Office with Steve from Accounts reacting to every question with dumb nonchalance.

To be fair, I think they just wanted All-American guys with good looks, named Bubba, Billy-Ray and Chuck.
Armstrong was chosen because among other things he was an incredibly experienced test pilot.
Buzz Aldrin's doctoral thesis is titled “Line-of-Sight Guidance Techniques for Manned Orbital Rendezvous.”
He has the nickname 'Dr. Rendezvous.'

Astronomy wasn't a requirement apart from their training in celestial navigation.
 
Last edited:
You seem not to understand what constitutes a debate. 'Paris is the capital of France.' You can look up that fact on Google. Please see the topic title to get an idea of what the debate is about.

Clear now?
Oh yes, it is always very clear that you are deflecting.

And the facts of the moon landning, which you are arguing against, have been clear since 1969.
 
Oh yes, it is always very clear that you are deflecting.

And the facts of the moon landning, which you are arguing against, have been clear since 1969.
What we are debating is whether the 'debunking' term is merited, versus the doubts expressed by others.

You are entitled to assume there is nothing to debate. I am not clear why you believe we should not be allowed to discuss it.
 
What we are debating is whether the 'debunking' term is merited, versus the doubts expressed by others.

You are entitled to assume there is nothing to debate. I am not clear why you believe we should not be allowed to discuss it.
OK, let's discuss it. What equipment and camera settings would you use to simultaneously photograph sunlit objects and the stars?
 
So which one was the Astrophysicist? The Canadian one?

Yeah, yeah, so was I. That had what, exactly, to do with the price of fish.

Ah, tea in China i see.
Not sure what you are getting at but the only astrophysicist I can think of is a guy who was in my class who went on to teach/ research at Rutgers, or so he told me at a school reunion.

This was the boy who invented a homemade periscope to look up girls' skirts. Thankfully, the other boys shook their heads and he retreated.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom