Merged Discussion of the moon landing "hoax"

[aggle-rithm]

FYI, the AGC - and most similar computers of the time - were programmed in assembly.

The device, and the tasks assigned to it, were carefully sized to fit. If the AGC was only, say, 60% used, then it would be oversized.

It's also educational to look up the 1202 error on Apollo 11. In particular, read Failure is Not An Option by Gene Kranz^WP.

Also, keep in mind that the assembly language was probably quite different from the ones most of us learned in college. Most likely a simpler instruction set and fewer/smaller registers.

 

[Justinian2]

Then, if the first flight was faked, why does all the evidence corroborate the later flights? - especially the lunar samples, which not only match the later flights but match the Lunokhod samples.

ETA: And you have ignored the list above, and have ignored my earlier question about scientific theory change because of Apollo lunar samples.

Did you know that there is still scientific research going on using the Apollo samples, with results published this month?

Many of the moon samples are similar - or identical - to meteroite samples found in Antartica and other places on earth.

 

[aggle-rithm]

There are funky things going on. Perhaps the first flight was faked and the rest real. I don't know.

What, in your opinion, is the best evidence that any of the moon landings were faked?

 

[carlitos]

Thanks, kmorits.

So, Justinian2, back on topic: You have made the following claims, starting with the list that sts60 posted here:
...
So, I would ask which of these are withdrawn, and which we should concentrate on; otherwise, we're just skipping from topic to topic without any real resolution.

Thanks to both of you for saving me the 43 pages. Whenever the Eisenhower Military Complex quote comes out, it's unlikely that your substantive arguments are going to get a producive response. Good luck, though.

 

[Spindrift]

Many of the moon samples are similar - or identical - to meteroite samples found in Antartica and other places on earth.

No they aren't. Do you have any proof?

 

[grmcdorman]

Also, keep in mind that the assembly language was probably quite different from the ones most of us learned in college. Most likely a simpler instruction set and fewer/smaller registers.

There's a full emulator online, yaAGC. Lots of details in discussions over at ApolloHoax.net or BAUT, in particular here. Great stuff, which is mostly why I read those threads.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Many of the moon samples are similar - or identical - to meteroite samples found in Antartica and other places on earth.

I don't think that's true. I think it's been established for quite a while that minerals from the moon are much closer in composition to earth rocks than meteorites. That's the main piece of evidence that tipped the balance in the debate over how the moon was formed: It was once part of the Earth.

 

[CptColumbo]

Apollo 14 was the first where the rover was used. Those look like rover tracks.

Read a book on the subject before you post anymore theories. Apollo 15 was the first to use the Rover.

 

[Justinian2]

Also, keep in mind that the assembly language was probably quite different from the ones most of us learned in college. Most likely a simpler instruction set and fewer/smaller registers.

Similar to the Z80 and other instruction sets of the '80s including the PDP 8.

The 68000 was quite a bit different - and nice. I could program more quickly in 68000 assembly than I could with the early C language.

 

[matt.tansy]

Apollo 14 was the first where the rover was used. Those look like rover tracks.

I've discussed this picture before.

Was it faked?

There are funky things going on. Perhaps the first flight was faked and the rest real. I don't know. I do know that government and government agencies are capable of ANYTHING. As Eisenhower said: "Beware the industrial military complex".

Apollo 15 was the first mission to use a rover. Apollo 14 used a cart.

How many errors need to be pointed out to you before you admit you know practically nothing about Apollo.

 

[aggle-rithm]

There's a full emulator online, yaAGC. Lots of details in discussions over at ApolloHoax.net or BAUT, in particular here. Great stuff, which is mostly why I read those threads.

Thanks, I was mainly talking out of my hat when I made that statement. Mostly, I deduced what the assembly language would be like based on the technology of the time and the extremely small memory available.

 

[grmcdorman]

Many of the moon samples are similar - or identical - to meteroite samples found in Antartica and other places on earth.

No they aren't. Do you have any proof?

Indeed.

Problems with this claim:

• Volume. Apollo samples exceed the volume of the lunites collected from Antartica, as I recall.
• Timing. Lunites were not identified until after the Apollo missions - by their similarity to the Apollo samples.
• Similarity. They are not identical, and any geologist can do so.
• Uniqueness. The Apollo samples contain features that clearly mark them as from an airless origin, without reentry or subsequent weathering.

ETA: "lunite" may not be a valid term; Google only knows about "lunar meteorites". There have been about 134 found, according to WP.

 

[dafydd]

flunk!

You flunk too. I received this reply from the Kennedy Space Center about the movie you claimed you saw there,you know,the one with the wires.



Thank you for your inquiry into the KSC Public Inquiries System.



No it does not exist and is not shown at the Kennedy Space Center.


The Apollo Moon landings were among the most completely documented and observed events in history. Moon rocks have been examined by scientists from all over the world, not just NASA scientists. U.S. Video special effects were in their infancy in the late 60's so that faking a landing on the Moon would probably have been more difficult than actually going there, and it seems highly unlikely that the hundreds or even thousands of people who would have had to be involved in such a conspiracy would have kept it a secret for so long. Ultimately you'll have to decide for yourself if any evidence offered to show this was all a hoax is compelling enough to overturn the overwhelming evidence that it actually occurred, but make sure you check the facts carefully, you need to be a little skeptical of the skeptics, too. For more detailed information, see:



http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/apollohoax.html

http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/

http://web.archive.org/web/20051023205705/www.rationalinquiry.org/essays/moon_lowman.html

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

http://www.clavius.org/

http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm



Wikipedia also has a very intense site on the Moon Landing Hoax theory



You are encouraged to frequently visit http://www.nasa.gov for the latest NASA news and information. In addition, NASA invites you to consider using one or more of the following easy and convenient communications tools for receiving NASA Updates on the exciting work NASA is doing.



· For more information on NASA and KSC please visit our Frequently Asked Questions page at http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/about/information/faq.html

· Subscribe to E-mail Delivery – Simply go to www.nasa.gov, enter your e-mail address, set your delivery preferences, and choose your area(s) of interest.

· Receive Updates by RSS (Really Simple Syndication) – NASA RSS Feeds are available at http://www.nasa.gov/rss/index.html

· Join Twitter at http://twitter.com/NASA



Your interest in NASA and America’s space program is greatly appreciated.



Sincerely,



Public Communications Officer

John F. Kennedy Space Center

[email protected]

 

[Spindrift]

Similar to the Z80 and other instruction sets of the '80s including the PDP 8.

The 68000 was quite a bit different - and nice. I could program more quickly in 68000 assembly than I could with the early C language.

You must have sucked at C if you could program assembly faster.

 

[Justinian2]

Read a book on the subject before you post anymore theories. Apollo 15 was the first to use the Rover.

I stand corrected

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed personal attack

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_rover

I'm feeling nice today, so no yellow card for ignoring a mod box. Consider this the final warning for the thread.

Posted By: kmortis

 

[Justinian2]

You must have sucked at C if you could program assembly faster.

The 68000 Assembly compiler has if then else structures, for loops and lots of macros.

 

[grmcdorman]

For interest, here's a bit of a post by the esteemed JayUtah on ApolloHoax.net about the AGC code:

In both the AGC and the 3x0 architectures, the register that keeps the return address is accessible to the programmer. If you are writing a modular subroutine and you know you'll be calling another one from within it, you simply save the contents of the link register to memory before making a new call. In the 3x0 architecture it's one of the general registers -- here, register 1.

        BAL  R1, VECMULT    ; call vector multipler VECMULT
                            ; return address in register 1, similar to AGC Q
          (continue after vector multiplication)
...

;
; Here is the subroutine module VECMULT
;
VECMULT   (do some stuff)
        S     R1, MYSAVE    ; save my caller's bookmark
        BAL   R1, MULTROW   ; call another subroutine to
                            ; multiply vector by one row of the matrix
        L     R1, MYSAVE    ; restore my caller's bookmark
          (do more stuff)
        BR     R1           ; go back to whoever called us

And here is the equivalent in AGC

        TC VECMULT  ; call VECMULT subroutine, return address stored in Q
          (continue after vector multiplication)
...

VECMULT   (do some stuff)
        QXCHG MYSAVE   ; exchange Q with contents of memory at MYSAVE
        TC    MULTROW  ; call routine for row multiply, return address stored in Q
        QXCHG MYSAVE   ; restore previous contents of Q
          (do more stuff)
        RETURN         ; go back to caller's bookmark, original value of Q

Now, I'm not familiar with the Z80, but I don't think the Z80 had instructions like that. In particular, the Z80 was an 8-bit machine; the AGC was not.

 

[kookbreaker]

flunk!

I'm sorry, but grmcdorman has not flunked anything. You have been shown to be demonstrably wrong. Crying 'flunk' in the face of that being pointed out is not going to help anything.

 

[kookbreaker]

Many of the moon samples are similar - or identical - to meteroite samples found in Antartica and other places on earth.

Completely untrue, even with regards to the Lunar meteorite pieces.

BTW, do you know how many pounds of moon meteorites have been recovered? Now how many pounds of Lunar rocks were brought back by Apollo.

 

[dafydd]

Read a book on the subject before you post anymore theories. Apollo 15 was the first to use the Rover.

I stand corrected

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed personal attack

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_rover

I'm feeling nice today, so no yellow card for ignoring a mod box. Consider this the final warning for the thread.

Posted By: kmortis

Do you admit that the movie does not exist?