Merged Discussion of the moon landing "hoax"

[TraneWreck]

No comment on this?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/47624d34f5eaab72a.jpg[/qimg]

Psssh, if that stuff looked like Pee-Wee Herman's face, I might believe you, but that's just lame.

 

[fess]

It would have been easy to have pre-recorded the landing in area 51 (which has a location that looks like the moon) and then played back the recording and said that it was live.

Totally false. "Area 51" looks like anything but the moon... not even close.

 

[slyjoe]

Totally false. "Area 51" looks like anything but the moon... not even close.

What - you don't see the saquaros?

 

[sts60]

That's why I asked if it was the ORIGINAL footage.

Apollo 11 video should not be considered proof of anything.

Once again, Googling is no substitute for understanding.

The five-foot vertical jump - which you said wasn't there despite your extensive "research", and you refuse to acknowledge has been shown to you - was seen by the world in the original footage. It's been in the available Apollo footage all along. The cleaned-up footage is just a better version of the same thing that was seen from the beginning. But you didn't know that, so your latest visit to U. Google made you think you had some sort of weapon to cast aspersions on the record - never mind that this made no sense in the larger context anyway.

You simply don't know anything about the Apollo record, which is why you keep making such embarrassingly elementary mistakes. But ignorance isn't your fundamental problem; it's your mindset - your inability to accept correction from knowledgeable people, your unwillingness to reevaluate your beliefs when the basis for them is shown to be flawed, your refusal to learn - not simply parrot what you read on the Web - and, it must be said, your arrogant presumption that no one else knows more about this than you do.

It would have been easy to have pre-recorded the landing

Wrong. The missions included live interaction with the ground, and crew conversations included current events.

in area 51 (which has a location that looks like the moon)

Wrong, still. Nevada still doesn't look like the Moon. This doesn't get any less wrong with repetition.

and then played back the recording and said that it was live.

Wrong, as illustrated above. Moreover, as has already been pointed out to you, transmissions to, around, and from the Moon were monitored around the world by multiple countries, organizations, and individuals.

I'm assuming the original footage could not have been doctored. That's why it is important to know if it was the original footage.

Still wrong.

ETA: You have yet to support your existing claims and deal with your numerous errors of fact.

 

[Spindrift]

Spindrift: I expect the response to be: "That could be anything." These guys are arguing for the sake of arguing. Or, "How do you know that's what you claim it is ... prove it.".


It's basically hopeless when it come to the MHBs.

No, he's totally ignoring it because he can't just dismiss it.

And this will be followed shortly by a dismissal and hand waving.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

It would have been easy to have pre-recorded the landing in area 51 (which has a location that looks like the moon) and then played back the recording and said that it was live.

No, it would not. It wouldn't have been the first step on the road to easy.

 

[matt.tansy]

Except that the chamber would need to be on the order of half a kilometer wide, probably more.

In their travels the crew of Apollo 17 got as far as 11 km apart.

Traverse maps for Apollos 15, 16, and 17.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/apollolanding/ApolloLanding/slide_25.html
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/apollolanding/ApolloLanding/slide_31.html
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/apollolanding/ApolloLanding/slide_37.html

Each landing site had unique topography, of course, so 6 separate vacuum chambers were needed to hoax them all, from a few hundred yards in diameter to a chamber measuring 11 km by 5 km for Apollo 17.

 

[Justinian2]

Here's a question for Conspiracy Theorists Only (I know the answer).

Just how much more slowly do you think things fall on the moon compared to on the Earth?

Using the approximation that Gm = 1/6th Ge, then the answer is 2.45. Using a more accurate gravitational constant, the answer is 2.46.

A drop on the moon would require approximately the square root of 6 longer.

 

[AdMan]

Using the approximation that Gm = 1/6th Ge, then the answer is 2.45. Using a more accurate gravitational constant, the answer is 2.46.

A drop on the moon would require approximately the square root of 6 longer.

You're just getting to that question?

If you're that slow, this is going to take forever.

How about addressing sts60's assessments of your many wildly inaccurate claims, here?

Or don't you have any answers?

 

[Spindrift]

What - you don't see the saquaros?

saguaro

 

[sts60]

What - you don't see the saquaros?

saguaro

I grew up in southern Arizona. If you see the saguaros, you're definitely neither on the Moon nor in Nevada.

 

[Corsair 115]

Apollo 11 video should not be considered proof of anything.

Good thing there's five other landings to choose from. And ALSEP (do you know what it is yet?). And even without the film footage, there's thousands and thousands of still photos.

 

[Arus808]

Anybody else go the the Space Center in the last year?

I have, just this past December. And all of your points are wrong.


the Star Trek experience was awesome btw, and I got to see Tron in IMAX 3D for the second time since it was included in the ticket (still not worth to see it in 3d however)

 

[Arus808]

The suits were behind glass. I wasn't able to assess their flexibility.

wow. you haven't been to the kennedy space center in the last decade have you?

right at the Space center, there is an exhibit that allows visitors to touch and see current suits that astronauts wear in space.

You can actually experience in seeing how heavy those suits actually are.


with everything worn by Armstrong and company, the ending weight is TWICE my weight.

Have you tried jumping up and down on EARTH in a 200lb suit that made you walk like a overblown Michelin Man? Why do you think they had contraptions for them IN ORDER to get into their suits and LOWERED into a POOL in order to move in them?

Those suits weren't meant for jumping in, they were made to keep the astronauts safe (and even then, they weren't even 100% sure that they would work) . Armstrong and company GAMBLED when they opened that hatch and took their first step outside, hoping that the suits they wore would protect them.

Mobility, the only thing NASA worried about was to make sure they could move their arms and hands enough to work on what they had to do in while on the moon. Since they weren't grabbing thing with their toes, mobility pass the waist was simply, small movements, since they knew that gravity wouldn't be an issue. But jumping wasn't something they considered (seeing as it could have been VERY dangerous for them to act like they were on a trampoline in space)


Your "trip" to the Space Center provided you bupkis. Oh and that " film " ? Didn't see any film during my tour there of what you are describing, and I was there for nearly 6 hours.


BTW, any kid who went through the SPACE Academy can tell you exactly how heavy those suits are, and how hard it is to move around in them.

 

[Justinian2]

That hotlink shows what could be a lunar rover path.

Discussions going back more than three years include calculating the time it takes the dust to fall from the rover wheels as proof that this was filmed on earth. The only problem with that is that earth gravity would speed up the fall of the dust, but the air would slow it down.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If it was in Earth atmosphere there would be billowing dust and dust hanging in the air.

 

[Justinian2]

wow. you haven't been to the kennedy space center in the last decade have you?

[...]

As I have mentioned several times previously, I went in September of 2010. I spent a day and a half there. The movies alone take several hours to see (in total)

There were many exhibits and movies. The actual suits worn on the moon were behind glass.

A reliable sources indicated the lunar suit weighed 150 pounds. A less reliable source suggested 120 pounds. You suggested 200 pounds.

 

[Justinian2]

If it was in Earth atmosphere there would be billowing dust and dust hanging in the air.

Have you been to area 51? I heard that there are signs that say that you may be shot on site if you enter. That is just rumor, but the truth remains that it is off limits for most.

 

[Justinian2]

You're just getting to that question?

If you're that slow, this is going to take forever.

How about addressing sts60's assessments of your many wildly inaccurate claims, here?

Or don't you have any answers?

I answered all those claims even before his post was made. I don't need to spam my answers.

 

[twinstead]

Have you been to area 51? I heard that there are signs that say that you may be shot on site if you enter. That is just rumor, but the truth remains that it is off limits for most.

This does not address his point.