Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[Vixen]

Why would stars, when viewed from the surface of the moon, “twinkle”?

ETA: post attacked by multiple s

Literary licence. Stars may not twinkle but then nor does the sun shine, set, rise or sink; the wind does not blow, whisper, howl or cry; the brook doesn't babble and nor do the waves spume.

 

[Vixen]

You still haven't explained what sort of radiation stuff you think the frogmen were supposed to be spraying for.

Radiation risk is surely a bigger one than 'germs'. In any case, meteorites and asteroids from space frequently hit the earth.

 

[Vixen]

The sun was at 10-15^o 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

Just because the lunar day lasts apx 29 Earth days, doesn't mean its early morning sunrise isn't similar in terms of light thrown as the sun comes up over the horizon.

 

[Vixen]

The Artemis III mission hasn't happened yet.

The Artemis II didn't have 150 guys around the capsule prying people out. That notion is absurd to even visualize. Did you mean 15, perhaps? That might be closer to the truth.

Soz, errata, that should have read Artemis II, not III, and 15 guys, not 150. Here's a full stream version of the Artemis Recovery for those who want to compare and contrast.




It seems to me, they are trying to make it look as close to the Apollo recoveries as possible.

NB: Please note, this is a proposition for debating purposes.

 

[Vixen]

If anyone is genuinely interested in the recovery process, there's the book "Hornet plus 3", which goes into great detail (I have a copy). I got this from eBay

https://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/ephemera/NASA/tf-130-140.pdf

which is a press release from Task Force 130/140 for Apollo 15, so it obviously doesn't have the quarantine element..

You can read the Hornet's own logs https://catalog.archives.gov/id/595160

and all manner of documents from the Hornet and other ships in the recovery task force here

https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/search.html?q=apollo+11+recovery&start=0&pdf=true&ts=false

and in so doing add every single crew member to the list of co-conspirators.

Vixen asked what the chemicals were supposed to kill off. They didn't know, that was the point. There was indeed a very very minimal risk (arguably zero) of any kind of biological lunar contamination, but they didn't know that, so guess what, they took precautions and worked otu a way of dealing with an unknown quantity. Almost as if they planned things to cover all the bases.

threadworm, thanks for the detailed information. I know this means a lot to you, and I shall certainly look at it carefully.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Literary licence. Stars may not twinkle but then nor does the sun shine, set, rise or sink; the wind does not blow, whisper, howl or cry; the brook doesn't babble and nor do the waves spume.

Not the same thing at all. Stars do appear to twinkle when seen from earth, but would not do so when seen from the moon.

It's not a literary licence thing, where anyone attributes the twinkling to something the stars themselves do. The point is that it's that it's an atmospheric effect. No atmosphere, no effect.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Radiation risk is surely a bigger one than 'germs'.

What kind of radiation?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Just because the lunar day lasts apx 29 Earth days, doesn't mean its early morning sunrise isn't similar in terms of light thrown as the sun comes up over the horizon.

The sun came up over the horizon quite some time before. The sun subtends half a degree of sky. It was about 30 sun diameters above the horizon.

Also, as previously described, with no thick atmosphere to penetrate obliquely, sunrise on the moon is not the soft filtered light familiar on earth. As soon as the sun is visible, it shines at full strength.

 

[Vixen]

Since you played "what's wrong with this picture" and lost, here's another chance to get something right:

Why might it be a bad idea to get out of the Command Module and into the open ocean in a tiny raft while wearing a space suit?

Are you a "numbers person" or do you have dyscalculea? Why do you keep making up ridiculously exaggerated, or understated numbers?

Several Apollo splashdowns were filmed.

What are you talking about? What "especially pressurized module"? The Artemis II Orion capsule and the Apollo Command Modules were actually lower than sea level air pressure in space. Why do you keep making up "facts" only to be proved wrong?

Anyone at all who looked exactly like Aldrin, Armstrong and Collins.

Finally we get to see yet another of the many fields in which you have expertise.

Yeah, but then you confidently thought that being exposed to radiation makes you radioactive. So we know what your views are worth.

The Artemis II crew aren't stripped and redressed. As for radiation, I would have thought that was as big - if not more - a health concern for the individuals involved. Remember, two of the astronauts had been prancing about on the Moon.

 

[steenkh]

Just because the lunar day lasts apx 29 Earth days, doesn't mean its early morning sunrise isn't similar in terms of light thrown as the sun comes up over the horizon.

Actually, it is much different because of the lack of an atmosphere.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

... It seems to me, they are trying to make it look as close to the Apollo recoveries as possible.

NB: Please note, this is a proposition for debating purposes.

Okay, so in the spirit of debate, in what ways was that recovery actually similar to Apollo, and in what ways does it seem to you they were merely trying to make it look similar?

 

[LondonJohn]

Soz, errata, that should have read Artemis II, not III, and 15 guys, not 150. Here's a full stream version of the Artemis Recovery for those who want to compare and contrast.




It seems to me, they are trying to make it look as close to the Apollo recoveries as possible.

NB: Please note, this is a proposition for debating purposes.

For an alleged "numbers person", you sure make a lot of elementary mistakes with numbers...

 

[Vixen]

The sun came up over the horizon quite some time before. The sun subtends half a degree of sky. It was about 30 sun diameters above the horizon.

Also, as previously described, with no thick atmosphere to penetrate obliquely, sunrise on the moon is not the soft filtered light familiar on earth. As soon as the sun is visible, it shines at full strength.

As I pointed out right from the start. The length of day has no bearing on strength of light in terms of the angle of the Sun in relation to the horizon. Whilst the sun's heat is extremely hot on the Moon, on the other hand the parts still in shadow are extremely cold and very pitch black.

 

[Vixen]

For an alleged "numbers person", you sure make a lot of elementary mistakes with numbers...

A typo is a typo. We all make them.

 

[LondonJohn]

As I pointed out right from the start. The length of day has no bearing on strength of light in terms of the angle of the Sun in relation to the horizon. Whilst the sun's heat is extremely hot on the Moon, on the other hand the parts still in shadow are extremely cold and very pitch black.

No. No they're not. Why will you still refuse to learn anything?

 

[The Common Potato]

What kind of radiation?

Searing and Hellish.

 

[LondonJohn]

A typo is a typo. We all make them.

Neither of those things was a typo. And most of us read through our posts before we post them, to do a quick check for any errors. You, not so much it would seem. I would recommend it if you don't want to come across as ignorant.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

...As for radiation, I would have thought that was as big - if not more - a health concern for the individuals involved. Remember, two of the astronauts had been prancing about on the Moon.

When you say "the individuals concerned" do you mean the astronauts (who were wearing dosimeters), or do you mean the recovery crew? If the latter, what source of radiation would you see as a potential hazard?

 

[Vixen]

Actually, it is much different because of the lack of an atmosphere.

That's exactly why very early lunar morning was chosen. Any other time would have seen extremes of temperature in which their blood would have boiled or, conversely, frozen solid. But the direction of light isn't affected by heat. So the angle of sunlight on the Moon is exactly the same as on the Earth; i.e., 15° on the Earth is 15° on the Moon, or on Mars or on Planet X. (Assuming a perfect globe, ceteris paribus.)

 

[LondonJohn]

That's exactly why very early lunar morning was chosen. Any other time would have seen extremes of temperature in which their blood would have boiled or, conversely, frozen solid. But the direction of light isn't affected by heat. So the angle of sunlight on the Moon is exactly the same as on the Earth; i.e., 15° on the Earth is 15° on the Moon, or on Mars or on Planet X. (Assuming a perfect globe, ceteris paribus.)

Wail til Jay sees this doozy