• 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

Jack by the hedge said:
You guys do have some above average dramatic geography around Utah. I idly searched for a calculator of the sun's elevation in different places and times, and found if you live in, say Helsinki, Finland, 15° is about how high the sun gets at noon in the first weeks of February or November. (I have no idea which parts of Finland any of our contributors might live in, but that might be a useful comparator for some of us.)
Click to expand...
The 11th November is traditionally the greyest day of the year. We had one month recently where there was no sun at all (rather, it was too cloudy to be seen). Yes, there'll often be sun in your eyes whilst driving, so a baseball cap is needed. However, summer is the near opposite; hardly any night at all. Coming up to midsummer I was still outside reading a book at 11:30pm and could see the Moon from early evening, despite it still being daylight and sunny. But it's never really pitch black unless it's a 'moonless' night and you're in the countryside with no street lights, and thick forests. There's usually comforting animal and bird noises. This wouldn't be at all comparable to the extremes of the Moon.
 
Vixen said:
This wouldn't be at all comparable to the extremes of the Moon.
Click to expand...
The Apollo 11 photos were taken nominally in full sun with the sun at an elevation of 15º. I proved to you what photographic settings were suitable for photography under full sun at that elevation. They are not compatible with the incidental exposure of stars on the film because the shutter speed is orders of magnitude different.
 
JayUtah said:
Which has nothing to do with the sky or stars.


There was no attempt to disinfect the spacecraft exterior. The astronauts were given biological isolation garments through the open hatch, which they donned. They were scrubbed down, in the suits, when they egressed into the raft according to the presumption that any organism encountered in the mission would have been be inside the ship. This was done mostly for public relations as very few people actually believed that back contamination was a real risk.
Click to expand...
Oh please. The claim they 'changed clothes' in the module was to explain why the unidentifiable persons on the raft were wearing wetsuits and not their space gear. The astronauts on Artemis III had to be prised out by up to 150 guys. Here you have a handful of 'frogmen'. We never actually saw it splashdown, either. OK, so Artemis III was in an especially pressurised module and the crew never left the craft. But the three guys who bounded down the navy helicopter steps could have been anyone at all, or at least they looked as right as rain.

As for the quarantine; that was utter nonsense, too. The word quarantine comes from the Italian for 'forty', meaning forty days isolation to ensure no symptoms of ill health appear. 21 days is a joke, when even the latest Hantavirus and Ebola contacts are forced into legally-enforced quarantine for much longer periods.

I agree the entire thing, especially the interview behind glass was an entire performance for TV PR.
 
Vixen said:
Oh please. The claim they 'changed clothes' in the module was to explain why the unidentifiable persons on the raft were wearing wetsuits and not their space gear. The astronauts on Artemis III had to be prised out by up to 150 guys. Here you have a handful of 'frogmen'. We never actually saw it splashdown, either. OK, so Artemis III was in an especially pressurised module and the crew never left the craft. But the three guys who bounded down the navy helicopter steps could have been anyone at all, or at least they looked as right as rain.

As for the quarantine; that was utter nonsense, too. The word quarantine comes from the Italian for 'forty', meaning forty days isolation to ensure no symptoms of ill health appear. 21 days is a joke, when even the latest Hantavirus and Ebola contacts are forced into legally-enforced quarantine for much longer periods.

I agree the entire thing, especially the interview behind glass was an entire performance for TV PR.
Click to expand...
◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ crazy.
 
Vixen said:
Oh please. The claim they 'changed clothes' in the module was to explain why the unidentifiable persons on the raft were wearing wetsuits and not their space gear.
Click to expand...
What in the world are you talking about now? Wetsuits? Are you attempting to claim the recovery was faked but NASA somehow couldn't dress the recovered crew in flight suits so had to dress them in something else?

Is this another example of "if all that was known about Apollo was the bit I know..."? Sure looks like it.
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
What in the world are you talking about now? Wetsuits? Are you attempting to claim the recovery was faked but NASA somehow couldn't dress the recovered crew in flight suits so had to dress them in something else?
Click to expand...
It was probably a dress rehearsal. After all, the Russians found one of the capsules floating about. I think it was JayUtah who confirmed it was used for 'training'.

Anyway, if 'Moon Germs' were feared, why open the hatch in the middle of the ocean, when it could have been towed to an isolation unit (if alien germs were the big fear)?
 
Vixen said:
I was right and I know I am right.
Click to expand...

That's just the thing, Vixen: you weren't and you're not. As others have pointed out, it's one thing posting the cavalcade of errors and ignorance that, in this thread alone, has almost amounted to a whole body of work. But it's quite another thing when people whose knowledge is far, far superior to yours patiently attempt to educate and inform you and point out your errors (and precisely how/why they are errors), and then you handwave everything away and insist you've been correct all along. It's laughable, and it's unworthy of this forum.
 
Vixen said:
Oh please. The claim they 'changed clothes' in the module was to explain why the unidentifiable persons on the raft were wearing wetsuits and not their space gear. The astronauts on Artemis III had to be prised out by up to 150 guys. Here you have a handful of 'frogmen'. We never actually saw it splashdown, either. OK, so Artemis III was in an especially pressurised module and the crew never left the craft. But the three guys who bounded down the navy helicopter steps could have been anyone at all, or at least they looked as right as rain.

As for the quarantine; that was utter nonsense, too. The word quarantine comes from the Italian for 'forty', meaning forty days isolation to ensure no symptoms of ill health appear. 21 days is a joke, when even the latest Hantavirus and Ebola contacts are forced into legally-enforced quarantine for much longer periods.

I agree the entire thing, especially the interview behind glass was an entire performance for TV PR.
Click to expand...

Wow. Full-on conspirawhackadoodle.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
"Probably"? Would you like to expand on why that would be done and how they could expect to get away with it?

It sure does look as if you're just regurgitating conspiracy nutcase stuff about how some detail doesn't look the way you imagine it might.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the flag shouldn't have moved around cos there should be no wind on the Moon etc etc etc
 
Vixen said:
I wasn't referring to the slim shadow of the Moon Lander, obvs. The lunar sun had only just barely risen
Click to expand...
:notm
The sun was at 10-15o when Apollo 11 was on the moon.
The sun “rises” at 1/2 a degree per hour on the moon.

20 to 30 hours after sunrise is not “only just barely risen”
SMH

Vixen said:
(Rest of nonsense snipped)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

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