Merged Discussion of the moon landing "hoax"

[Paulhoff]

So, how much did they pay the Russians not to blow the cover.

Paul

I still like to know why Russian, of all counties, didn't jump all over it if it was a Hoax seeing that they were in the race with us to the moon.


Paul

 

[twinstead]

Unless those godless commies were in on it too!

 

[Erock]

Thanks for posting those videos, Erock. (Not to be confused with C-rock ) Those are even better than the rooster tails from the lunar rovers for proving the video was shot in a vacuum with low gravity. BTW do you know if Betamax101 posts here, on Apollohoax, or BAUT?

I haven't a clue. They are good though, pretty much buries that whole daft theory. I suspect that cosmored fatfreddy88 will attempt to wriggle out of accepting them though. But I have a cunning follow up

p.s. Speaking of c-rock:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEygpL7r6Pk

 

[sts60]

Yes but understand that to an outside observer going: "I know you from this other place and think you are stupid" isn't the most effective way to debunk them.

Agreed, Travis. I'll simply refer you to apollohoax for standing dissections of the same claims he's making here (look for "rocky" and "davidc", his usernames over there). If he actually says something new here, I will explain in terms of people who haven't sat through those threads.

But in terms of additional explanation, it's worth it to again mention Bob Braeunig's excellent original work analyzing the trajectory used to minimize exposure to the Van Allen belts, specifically for Apollo 11.

 

[dafydd]

Three words for you to follow: Library. Books. Read.

The depth of your ignorance on the sheer scope of the Apollo program is breathtaking. The depth of your ignorance on the vast breadth and depth of evidence demonstrating the reality of the lunar landings is similarly breathtaking. The idea that some isolated clips in some YouTube videos constitutes definitive proof of fakery is so laughable as to border on insanity.

Library. Books. Read. Before you make yourself look foolish beyond words once again...

Removed breach of Rule 0 and Rule 12.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[drewid]

And that's _really_ saying something

 

[fess]

But in terms of additional explanation, it's worth it to again mention Bob Braeunig's excellent original work analyzing the trajectory used to minimize exposure to the Van Allen belts, specifically for Apollo 11.

Thanks for the link sts, back on page 21 I made the following post;

#808Once again you act like most Moon Hoaxers in that you seem to believe that the Astronauts would have been killed by the radiation in the Van Allen belts. Although the space craft would indeed have to travel through the belts, would there be sufficient radiation to cause death? Well, let us see if this is true.

The Van Allen belts are made up of different zones (regions if you will), that give off various amounts of radiation. Without getting into the intricacies of space travel, a space vehicle traveling at over 15K MPH would take approximately 52+ minutes to traverse the belts. During this time, there would be approximately 11.4 Rads available for absorption. Well below the lethal dose stated by OSHA at 300 Rads/hr.

Also consider that this exposure would be for an astronaut outside of the space craft, inside, it would be harmless.

Note: According to radiation dosimeters carried by Apollo astronauts, their total dosage for the entire trip to the moon and return was not more than 2 Rads for the entire trip.

I guess we weren't far off the mark.

 

[tsig]

Unless those godless commies were in on it too!

Of course, the cold war was a hoax to keep the sheeple in line to be fleeced.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Quote:
#808Once again you act like most Moon Hoaxers in that you seem to believe that the Astronauts would have been killed by the radiation in the Van Allen belts. Although the space craft would indeed have to travel through the belts, would there be sufficient radiation to cause death? Well, let us see if this is true.

The Van Allen belts are made up of different zones (regions if you will), that give off various amounts of radiation. Without getting into the intricacies of space travel, a space vehicle traveling at over 15K MPH would take approximately 52+ minutes to traverse the belts. During this time, there would be approximately 11.4 Rads available for absorption. Well below the lethal dose stated by OSHA at 300 Rads/hr.

Also consider that this exposure would be for an astronaut outside of the space craft, inside, it would be harmless.

Note: According to radiation dosimeters carried by Apollo astronauts, their total dosage for the entire trip to the moon and return was not more than 2 Rads for the entire trip.

Isn't that what I just said?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7179391&postcount=2457

Here's Bob Braeunig's page of data relating to the Translunar trajectory
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/apollo11-TLI.htm

Someone did an animation for those with low attention span and inability to read numbers. Can't find it at the moment. STS60? Do you remember where that one is?

 

[drewid]

These?

 

[sylvan8798]

Of course, the cold war was a hoax to keep the sheeple in line to be fleeced.

Wait, I know this one:

The whole world is controlled by the Illuminati, who are apparently obsessed with the numerical symbolism of everything they do. The idea that there are separate "countries" is a pretext to justify the military industrial complex and to control the sheeple population, who are mostly indiscriminately breeding brainwashed cannon fodder.

They convinced the scientists and engineers (who knew moon travel was impossible, of course) to go along with threats or by brainwashing them to believe it was important for sake of the country. They pretended to go six times because NASA was getting a lot of money to do so - why not? After awhile it got risky to continue, as some of the sheeple were starting to wake up and realize it was a hoax. Yada, yada, yada...

 

[SpitfireIX]

The whole world is controlled by the Illuminati, who are apparently obsessed with the numerical symbolism of everything they do. The idea that there are separate "countries" is a pretext to justify the military industrial complex and to control the sheeple population, who are mostly indiscriminately breeding brainwashed cannon fodder.

• War is peace
• Freedom is slavery
• Ignorance is strength

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

These?

YES! Thanks, drewid. I spent several minutes trying to find it at ApolloHoax, then I spent several more minutes starting a thread to complain about the search function.

So, fatfreddy88, when you get back would you please look at these and respond?

 

[Paulhoff]

• War is peace
• Freedom is slavery
• Ignorance is strength

Sounds a little like 1984 to me.

Paul

 

[000063]

And the mirrors left on the Moon that any university or scientific body equipped with a powerful enough laser can bounce beams off. Or are they all in on it too? Fat Freddy's cat was the smarter of the pair,come to think of it.

I've heard people seriously make that claim. Never mind that a conspiracy involving thousands that goes undiscovered for fifty years is ludicrous enough.

I've also heard that the reflectors were placed by robots.

Unless those godless commies were in on it too!

Closest thing I've heard to an explanation is some feeble theorizing about "food credits", and then they moved the topic along as fast as possible.

 

[tsig]

Wait, I know this one:

The whole world is controlled by the Illuminati, who are apparently obsessed with the numerical symbolism of everything they do. The idea that there are separate "countries" is a pretext to justify the military industrial complex and to control the sheeple population, who are mostly indiscriminately breeding brainwashed cannon fodder.

They convinced the scientists and engineers (who knew moon travel was impossible, of course) to go along with threats or by brainwashing them to believe it was important for sake of the country. They pretended to go six times because NASA was getting a lot of money to do so - why not? After awhile it got risky to continue, as some of the sheeple were starting to wake up and realize it was a hoax. Yada, yada, yada...

No, no, you're not supposed to give it away all at once. You're supposed to trickle it out bit by bit over hundreds of pointless posts.

Trollin', yer doin' it wrong.

 

[FatFreddy88]

Sorry to be away for so long. I got pretty busy with work this week.

In fact, over on apollohoax you denied that the South Atlantic Anomaly even existed

Could you please link to where I said that? That doesn't sound like something I'd say as I'm not in a position to verify something like that.

Rather detailed explanations have been provided to you, davidc/rocky. You simply ignored or denied them

Please link to the actual discussion and we can discuss whether the arguments had any credibility.

We understand that you don't know anything about the subjec

I can read all about the types of radiation that exist. That's not the issue. The issue is whether NASA is giving us the true info on the nature and levels of space radiation. Studying radiation will do nothing to help us know whether NASA is telling us the truth.

Doesn't this make you a little suspicious?
http://hey_223.tripod.com/bulldoglebeautaketooooo/id82.html
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To prove his thesis, Rene tries to get certain solar data from NATIONAL
OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, (NOAA) using clever techniques
to
disguise his true intentions, [i.e. to get true data on solar flares.] NOAA,
unfortunately, proved to be as cagey as Rene in dodging the giving out of any
really good DETAILS on this matter, [you know, where the devil resides.]
Rene, seeing games being played, deduced that there must be two sets of data,
one which is sent to scientists on the preferred list, and one sent to the
likes of Rene as casual strangers. (p.125)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now...as to the radiation issue. Even if true you (meaning FatFreddy) are basically saying that work from earlier in Van Allen's career is to be more trusted than the later work. Why?

I think it's plausible that, when he started working for NASA, he was pressured into changing his findings so they'd be consistent with NASA's plan to fake the moon missions.

This article makes a pretty good case for that.
http://www.buzzcreek.com/grade-a/MOON/articles1.htm

This video supports the article.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2rotplZn0g

 

[beachnut]

No data on how much radiation there is, just cut and paste nonsense, no science, only delusions. Why are these moon landing deniers delusional on this issue? Lack of science? Physics?

They don't research radiation, they repeat failed lies from others. We have deniers that are follower, not leaders, not thinking for themselves.

 

[Corsair 115]

FatFreddy88:

Library. Books. Read.

You can also check out the huge series of space books offered by Apogee Books. The following list should be of interest to you:

• Apollo 11 NASA Mission Reports Vol 1
• Apollo 11 NASA Mission Reports Vol 2
• Apollo 11 NASA Mission Reports Vol 3
• Apollo 12 NASA Mission Reports Vol 1
• Apollo 12 NASA Mission Reports Vol 2
• Apollo 14 NASA Mission Reports
• Apollo 15 NASA Mission Reports
• Apollo 16 NASA Mission Reports
• Apollo 17 NASA Mission Reports Vol 1
• Apollo 17 NASA Mission Reports Vol 2

All of these books feature a wealth of information. All come with either CD-ROM or DVD packed with extra material.

The Apollo 17 NASA Mission Reports Vol 1, for example, comes with a CD containing the complete television downlink from the lunar surface—over eleven hours of video. Vol. 2 has a DVD which holds over 3,600 photos taken during the mission. It also holds several official documents: "The Apollo 17 Mission 5-Day Report" (45 pages), "Apollo 17 30 Day Failure and Anomaly Listing" (41 pages), "Apollo 17 Voice Transcript Pertaining to the Geology" (365 pages), "Apollo/Saturn V Instrumentation Plan" (74 pages), "Apollo 17 Flight Mission Rules" (296 pages), "Apollo 17 Preliminary Science Report" (679 pages), and the "Saturn V Flight Evaluation Report" (294 pages).

Thoroughly read both books and view all the additional material on the accompanying CD and DVD. Then, when you are done, feel free to report back here and demonstrate how every bit of that material is faked.

You've got a lot on plate, so get to it! We'll wait.

 

[FatFreddy88]

To keep astronaut motion to the criteria you yourself suggest, it would move for 20 seconds (speeded up 1.5 times).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

According to Jarrah White the slow-motion is 67%.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MW31fOWzY-E

It would have to by sped up by a factor of 1.5 to get the actual speed.

The fabric is clearly heavier on his flag so much less likely to stop quicker as a light fabric would

It looks lighter to me. Ligher fabric would stop more quickly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0RsDqmPa_s

Why do you say it's obviously heavier?

Now, the so called initial motion that you claim is caused by 'the atmosphere explanation'. Here is a short video demonstrating a wide book falling from height that doesn't move an extremely light object until it is within a few inches of it. The Apollo astronaut is a couple of feet from the flag when this so called initial motion occurs - nobody pushes air of any significance in front of them. Air seeks the path of least resistance and creates a wake to the side of a moving object:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJyv4TYpTKo

That video is just an attempt to obfuscate the issue. If he'd wanted to prove that a moving person wouldn't cause a wall of air in front of him, he would have done the experiment with a person instead of a book. I hanged a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light in my living room and trotted by it at about a 40 degree angle. It moved just before I got to it the way the Apollo flag did (do YouTube searches on "Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement" and "MoonFaker: Flagging the Dead Horses").

Here is Jarrah White in yet another debunking himself video. He runs past a flag to demonstrate that an air wake will move a flag(which everybody knows anyway). The problem he didn't notice or anticipate was that the flag only started to move as he was level with it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2uhMQXRegc

In the Apollo video the astronaut trots by the flag at about a 40 degree angle–not a 90 degree angle. The conditions should be exact if one wants to show that an alleged anomaly is not an anomaly.

Now the initial motion itself. It is caused by "an anomaly with the colour wheels on the Apollo camera, compensating for an addition to the screen, and a rapid increase in contrast." In this video that shows the anomaly, the whole flag shifts to the right, including the flagpole itself and the blue part of the flag.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kalT4NGdDsk

This video shows that to be wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0
(do a YouTube search on "The flag that moved")

It's clearly an actual movement.

No data on how much radiation there is, just cut and paste nonsense, no science, only delusions. Why are these moon landing deniers delusional on this issue? Lack of science? Physics?

They don't research radiation, they repeat failed lies from others. We have deniers that are follower, not leaders, not thinking for themselves.

I could link to the official data but would that prove it's the real data? The issue is whether the official data are bogus, or real.

Here's a link to all the alternative info I've found.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5237476&postcount=2243

Now I'd like to hear everybody's analyses of this anomaly.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5237480&postcount=2245