In American courts of law, on a daily basis......
Wrong. You are wrong, sir. You are wrong.
Once again, your only standard of evidence is what You, Patrick, think you would have done if you ran the space program. That's a pretty low standard. That's not even the reasonable man standard. It's just nothing. Do you have any evidence other than your personal feelings that a manned mission to the moon would have given cameras to both astronauts? Any whatsoever?
Let's ask the question in the logical way: Given the short amount of time Apollo 11 was on the moon, is it reasonable that NASA would divide the labor such that one astronaut was tasked with taking pictures and one was assigned to do other things?
And if we're going to leave the hard science, as you have done in this post, and speculate about human motivations, why have you ignored my questions on those subjects? Why didn't the Soviets expose the moon mission? Why didn't the Soviets shoot small projectiles at the moon to destroy the military instruments as MAD demanded them to? Why would America have objected to a military flight to the moon sufficiently to make this ruse possible? Why, after the end of the Cold War, do Russian documents from the era show any suspicion about the moon missions? Why doesn't the US come clean now and claim credit for their military victory that saved the world from nuclear war? Why has not one person who worked on the project ever come forward to the fame and fortune that would await them? Why is every question asked of you answered with a change of subject?
In American courts of law, on a daily basis, jurors are asked to decide this or that, decide whether an occurrence seems reasonable to them or not, decide whether something happened or did not happen, decide whether something was real or was made up, decide as to whether something might or might not constitute a lie based on common sense, based on what a reasonable person raised and living in our culture would do, would think about, would think of when it came to such and such. Our court system is predicated on this.
I am only doing the same here. It is the very first moon landing. Were this thing real, not all, but some of the photography would be scripted. In the same sense Armstrong "took" the scripted panoramas in the case of the fraudulent reality that is the Apollo 11 Mission, had it been a real mission, a genuine manned lunar landing, Aldrin would have been instructed to have taken some "set" photos which would have included Armstrong. Of course there would be some improvisation. But with limited time and history on the line, there would have been a dedicated effort to script some photos prominently featuring the first man on the moon, WHETHER ARMSTRONG LIKED IT OR NOT!.
It its high time you were called this recurrent and pathetically oh so weak weak weak weak argument of yours Loss Leader, called on your incessant appeal to this particularly feeble defense of the official narrative. Of course you are welcome to say and write over and over that because Patrick is making an appeal to common sense, that does not make his claims, his points based on common sensical appeals accurate, make them correct. But as common sensical thinking, as appeals to what is and is not only reasonable for most of us, demonstrates more and more that Apollo can only be viewed, must only be viewed as fraudulent, as Apollo becomes less and less and less credible with NASA's cock and bull becoming ever so not worthy of more than a giggle, you'll find yourself surprisingly in that shrinking minority Loss Leader, a shrinking minority of individuals still conned by this HOKEY UNREASONABLE UNCOMMON SENSICAL JIVE.
Of course you are welcome to say, "people don't think as you do Patrick, so what you are saying is not necessarily true".
But as time goes on, more and more people will realize that my statement, "would you send a guy to the moon and NOT plan to take his picture, a good picture, a dedicated picture, the best you could muster, a picture of him out in front of his space ship? Of course not!!!!" is only too reasonable a statement. And they shall come to know it not only as an all too reasonable statement , but A TRUE STATEMENT AS WELL. It must be. It can only be so, just add a little common sense. It is a statement that must be true because it is the type of thing that we all do, and that includes NASA people. They do this picture taking stuff too, at weddings, birthdays, WHEN THEY TRAVEL. Whoever gave the astronauts but one camera and instructions for Armstrong to handle all the pics more or less, that person, that guy, is a big fat PERP!
Taken together with the rest of the Apollo narrative "facts", the lack of a good Armstrong photo, one that would have shown him on the moon proudly standing in front of his "new car", will one day become a piece of evidence undermining the bogus old official story, a piece of evidence that helps to proclaim the truths of the real story, MY STORY, THE IMPOSSIBLE TO LOSE BUT NEVERTHELESS LOST LOST LOST EAGLE STORY.
This is a court of law of sorts Loss Leader. I am suing the U.S. Government and NASA, figuratively speaking, for 20% of an annual US fiscal budget. We the REASONABLE want our money back! Kick and scream and cry about it all you like Loss Leader, appeal to NASA's special privilege to not engage in the common sensical all you like, but at the end of this all, there is only one possible outcome, the obvious outcome. The Apollo 11 Mission will be EXPOSED like a poorly lit studio pic for the fake fake FAKE, phony baloney charade that it is, sure as the lunar day is long long long my friend.
Ask yourself this Loss Leader; ever been to the Roman Colosseum? If you have, bet someone took your picture out in front of that bad boy. If you haven't, bet you'll have someone take your picture in front when you do go.........
This thing is so very fake fake fake fake, just ask the guy next door what he thinks. Ask him what he does when he goes to Paris and visits the Eiffel Tower Loss Leader...........
