Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[Jack by the hedge]

... playing on words can never change a fundamental truth.

You mean words like the earth always appearing gibbous from the moon?

 

[Smock]

Please stop with the triple-niner and eidetic jibes. I only mentioned those to correct certain persons making out I was backward and suffering from a terminal illness.

So what? Does your reason for mentioning them make you immune from living up to your own braggadocio?

 

[Vixen]

Especially ahead of time. Her thesis is that the "training photos" were indistinguishable from the ones passed off as real.

It's quoting NASA experts who said the training shots were so good no-one could tell the difference.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Nice attempt at changing the meaning of my words, quoting me out of context and putting words in my mouth.

I didn't change your words at all. I just showed what you didn't want to talk about.

You still don't want to talk about it, as evidenced by this attempted deflection of yours.

For you and others it's a game of semantics but playing on words can never change a fundamental truth.

You mean the fundamental truth that you are smarter than generations of people with master's and Ph.D. degrees because you figured out a big conspiracy that they're all too stupid to notice after spending a short time watching some YouTube videos?

I understand. It goes to the heart of your core beliefs so I don't blame you for clinging onto them.

Talk about psychological projection.

Vixen, please explain why there is a worldwide scientific consensus that Apollo landed on the moon six times. Why can't actual scientists see the lies that you see so easily?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

You've got nothing.

If @Vixen had nothing, her argument would have a lot more going for it than is going for the argument she's actually trying to make.

Do the maths.

Says someone who has repeatedly demonstrated her inability to do sixth grade arithmetic.

Your layperson's disbelief is irrelevant.

Please, let's not insult laypeople. It would be more correct to say sub-idiotic disbelief is irrelevant, but even that phrasing would be an insult to sub-idiots.

Far more damning to your fantasy even than the thousands scientists and engineers who worked directly on the Apollo Program, who should all be educated enough to know whether their work is supposedly impossible, are the many millions worldwide who have knowledge of the science and engineering behind said missions.

Although @Vixen is very nearly correct when she insists 99.9% of the world's population has enough knowledge of science and mathematics to disagree with her, belonging to the other 0.1% still implies tens of millions might be ignorant enough to agree with her.

 

[Vixen]

So what? Does your reason for mentioning them make you immune from living up to your own braggadocio?

Maybe consider Myriad's overweening post in which he says he was some -3 sd guy's only friend because everyone else didn't get him. So now consider whether a hypothetical you or Myriad are up to 3sd below me intellectually. See the difficulty I have..?

 

[Foster Zygote]

It's quoting NASA experts who said the training shots were so good no-one could tell the difference.

Citation, please.

 

[Axxman300]

NASA was the civilian arm but in essence the development of rocket technology was arm in arm with the development of nuclear weapons and real paranoid fear of the Soviet Union.

No. The military was quickly developing different prioties than NASA. NASA had nothing to do with nuclear weapons. And ask the Czechs if fear of the Soviets was paranioa.

How realistic was it to send guys to the Moon within seven years of Kennedy's pledge, from scratch, pre-digital and internet age, communicating by walkie-talkie, TV sets non-cable or WiFi, based on radio wave antennae and receivers - valves!

You've obviously never met folks who work in aerospace engineering, or technology development. First, they all love a challenge. Second, they're competitive with each other, just look at the innovative pranks MIT pulls on Harvard every year. And then someone hands thos guys a multi-billion dollar budget, and stand back to see what they pull out of thin air. The era between 1955 to 1975 saw unparalleled technological advances across every spectrum. Some of that was NASA, some was the Cold War, but most was capitalism building better mouse-traps.

Just because the iPhone didn't exist until 2006 doesn't make human innovation prior to 2005 impossible.

Yet here we are 2026 and the Chinese won't even be ready for yet another four years.

Lol.

Their "next generation" fighter's new engine is a 25-year old American design. Meanwhile, the US has a thriving space flight industry thanks to NASA and Space X. For crying out loud, Jeff Bezos is sending media whores into low earth orbit (sort of). It's almost as if communism sucks, or something.

 

[threadworm]

You say it's a still from the original but the original has been lost or wiped by NASA.

Please stop with the triple-niner and eidetic jibes. I only mentioned those to correct certain persons making out I was backward and suffering from a terminal illness.

The photo is a photo. The TV view of Earth was broadcast live. Do you need reminding what the question was? Again?

 

[threadworm]

It's quoting NASA experts who said the training shots were so good no-one could tell the difference.

They never said that. Prove me wrong.

 

[Steve]

You say it's a still from the original but the original has been lost or wiped by NASA.

Please stop with the triple-niner and eidetic jibes. I only mentioned those to correct certain persons making out I was backward and suffering from a terminal illness.

When the written evidence (See that word? you should provide some.) Points in a certain direction....

 

[Axxman300]

So here is NASA's image of the Sun. AS12-46-6739 (Apollo 12)

View attachment 73779

Compare and contrast to threadworm's image of the Earth from the surface of the Moon.

But from the Moon, the Sun and the Earth should both appear as the same size. (Otherwise, how can there be a solar eclipse..?).

Hold on, that is clearly a star. You said there are no stars in any of the Apollo pictures. Make up your mind.

 

[JesseCuster]

But from the Moon, the Sun and the Earth should both appear as the same size. (Otherwise, how can there be a solar eclipse..?).

That’s a staggeringly dumb thing to stay. How can you be so ignorant and lack such basic understanding of the matter at hand to blurt out this kind of utter inanity?

 

[SuperMurrio]

Nice attempt at changing the meaning of my words, quoting me out of context and putting words in my mouth.

For you and others it's a game of semantics but playing on words can never change a fundamental truth.

I understand. It goes to the heart of your core beliefs so I don't blame you for clinging onto them.

Speaking of changing the meaning of words:

circumvent the Moon
telescopic lens
geopositioned satellites
magnitude of your camera lens
etc.

 

[Vixen]

I didn't change your words at all. I just showed what you didn't want to talk about.

You still don't want to talk about it, as evidenced by this attempted deflection of yours.

You mean the fundamental truth that you are smarter than generations of people with master's and Ph.D. degrees because you figured out a big conspiracy that they're all too stupid to notice after spending a short time watching some YouTube videos?

Talk about psychological projection.

Vixen, please explain why there is a worldwide scientific consensus that Apollo landed on the moon six times. Why can't actual scientists see the lies that you see so easily?

Because it's official. As taught in schools. If people like LB Johnson, Nixon, Bush and Trump could not get away with some stuff, think of the stuff they did get away with. All they need do is rubber-stamp it and it becomes true.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

You say it's a still from the original but the original has been lost or wiped by NASA.

Please stop with the triple-niner and eidetic jibes. I only mentioned those to correct certain persons making out I was backward and suffering from a terminal illness.

Your lack of attention to detail is amazing. That original is not the original you imagine you are talking about. It's not the same mission.

The data tape which was presumed wiped for re-use was one from Apollo 11 in, of course, 1969. The video still, you failed to note, is from 1972.

The wiped telemetry data tape was one which included the Apollo 11 slow scan TV data radioed back from the moon before it was extracted and up-converted to NTSC for broadcast. That NTSC footage was recorded and is of course still available. Only the pre-conversion 10 frames per second version was lost. Later missions did not use a slow scan camera so they did not have an unconverted signal.

 

[JesseCuster]

Yes, I have now corrected it.

Let me guess, you obviously didn’t mean to say that the earth and sun should appear the same size from the moon?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It's quoting NASA experts who said the training shots were so good no-one could tell the difference.

Reference please.

 

[Steve]

Your lack of attention to detail is amazing. That original is not the original you imagine you are talking about. It's not the same mission.

The data tape which was presumed wiped for re-use was one from Apollo 11 in, of course, 1969. The video still, you failed to note, is from 1972.

The wiped telemetry data tape was one which included the Apollo 11 slow scan TV data radioed back from the moon before it was extracted and up-converted to NTSC for broadcast. That NTSC footage was recorded and is of course still available. Only the pre-conversion 10 frames per second version was lost. Later missions did not use a slow scan camera so they did not have an unconverted signal.

Vixen didn't know this.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Maybe consider Myriad's overweening post in which he says he was some -3 sd guy's only friend because everyone else didn't get him. So now consider whether a hypothetical you or Myriad are up to 3sd below me intellectually. See the difficulty I have..?

Yes I do. You have difficulty persuading people you're smarter than average.