Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

[CORed]

I'd been pro Apollo regular story Fat Freddy until about a year ago. Then this dude drives down to Denver from Fort Collins to show our little astronomy club his dad's notebooks. The guy from Fort Collins father was an aerospace engineer. The dad had been tasked to determine whether Swigert was a viable political candidate. During Swigert's run for congress this fellow would attend the various political functions , ask Swigert questions and that kind of thing. As it turns out this guy's dad became suspicious of Swigert. the man was an environmental systems expert and apparently when he'd ask Swigert about how warm the spaceship should have been and how much energy it takes to heat a spaceship Swigert did not know jack squat. There's more to it that that, but that was a significant part of it. This guy concluded Swigert was a fraud and recommended to his company not to support the astronaut's run for congress. Swigert of course did win , but never worked really in congress because he got sick. The aerospace engineer investigating all of this never went public, but with his recent death, his son has been showing the notebooks around, fairly selectively, at our astronomy club meeting and that kind of thing. they are obviously authentic and the son is planning to publish this stuff I believe but is looking for guidance. The incriminating claims by Swigert from the interactions this guy had with the deceased astronaut are pretty compelling. At least I think so. Keep your eye out for this sort of thing now FatFreddy. Nationally you don't see or hear much but in the smaller anecdotal cosmos of Denver it's sort of heated up.

There of course is great precedent for American and Western sponsored underground activities(conspiracies) featuring numerous participants that are never exposed or well exposed and simply never acknowledged for what they are;

1) Allende assassination
2) Recent predatory lending
3) The installation of the pro-American Shah
4) The activities of NATOS SECRET ARMIES 1945-1990 and perhaps beyond
5) The Government/AT and T supercomputer eavesdropping on us all in strong violation of the then law
6) Manned Orbiting lab, to function not as advertised
7) Iran Contra

And on and on, zillions of them. Apollo will probably wind up being like the AT and T supercomputer thing. At first everyone flips out including politicians and then it is all viewed as semi-necessary and even the president helps to smooth the BS over.

So, several years after the mission, Swigert couldn't remember some technical details that he probably didn't need to know during the mission, therefore the whole Appollo program was fake?

Okay.

ETA: And the government (or parts of it) have done some evil things in the past, so we should believe every conspiracy theory put forward, no matter how stupid it is?

 

[Garrison]

Wasn't trying to convince you of anything. Was just a communication mostly directed to Fat Freddy letting him know how I bounced to this side and little note to your side reminding you our secret government engages on hidden activities ad lib. Conspiracies are common place and the secrets are very well kept.

Actually history says the opposite about conspiracies and secrets in general, just ask PFC Bradley Manning.

 

[Foster Zygote]

More will be revealed. But I like the environmental arguments the Fort Collins guy trots out. The how can you keep a secret conspiracy angle is one that the in favor of Apollo side uses. I am just pointing out it is nonsensical. Of course western interests screw people in secret on a regular basis. Just ask Allende's wife, or the family's of the children blown up at the Bologna train station.

I really could not care less in my taking a look at Apollo about this sort of thing, if only your side said there never really were conspiracies perpetrated by our secret governmental arms.

So, basically, your argument that the Apollo program was a hoax is to point to other alleged conspiracies. Is there anything then that isn't a conspiracy?

 

[Garrison]

So, basically, your argument that the Apollo program was a hoax is to point to other alleged conspiracies. Is there anything then that isn't a conspiracy?

And what's worse conspiracies that by and large have been common knowledge for years or decades, rather negating the concept of keeping such things secret.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Wasn't trying to convince you of anything. Was just a communication mostly directed to Fat Freddy letting him know how I bounced to this side and little note to your side reminding you our secret government engages on hidden activities ad lib. Conspiracies are common place and the secrets are very well kept.

That's patently fallacious reasoning. That would be like a prosecuting attorney making his case by saying, "Murder in the defendant's neighborhood is common, therefor he is guilty of the murder he has been charged with".

 

[Foster Zygote]

So, in order to fake the moon landing, they had to build a Saturn V rocket. In order for the hoax not to be obvious, the rocket had to have engines big enough to launch the alledged payload to the moon, and the rocket had to be big enough to hold fuel enough to get to the moon. I suppose if it wasn't actually going to the moon, they didn't nave to put a full load of fuel on it.

The point's been made many times before, but it seems putting together a believable hoax would have been as difficult and expensive, if not more so, than actually going to the moon. So why bother?

Not to mention that in order to simulate the effect of dust moving in a vacuum, they'd have to build a giant sound stage that could be evacuated to virtually zero atmospheric pressure. Then, to simulate the effect of 1/6 gravity, they'd have to be able to drop the whole sound stage from from a considerable height for minutes at a time.

 

[JayUtah]

Wasn't trying to convince you of anything.

No, not in the sense that you laid out a cogent argument arriving at the stated belief. More like you simply assumed it was a fact Apollo was faked and are just speculating about the aftermath. That's like me saying, "When your boss finds out you're a drunkard, he'll probably fire you." Complex-question arguments are arguments nonetheless. Give us a reason to believe your anecdote.

Was just a communication mostly directed to Fat Freddy letting him know how I bounced to this side...

If it had been directed at Fat Freddy you could have sent him a private message. But since you posted it in public then it's fair game for comment from anyone. Your claims are being challenged. Are you willing to defend them?

...and little note to your side reminding you our secret government engages on hidden activities ad lib.

Asked and answered. You neglected to provide any testable proof for your claim, so you ran off on a tangent instead.

Conspiracies are common place and the secrets are very well kept.

Then how do you know the conspiracies are commonplace? And the secrets don't appear to be so very well kept if all you have to do to discover that Apollo was faked is attend a Denver area amateur astronomy club.

 

[JayUtah]

More will be revealed.

Why not now?

But I like the environmental arguments the Fort Collins guy trots out.

Then why haven't you reproduced them already instead of just boasting about how convincing they are to you? Why doesn't he come here and present them himself? Why does he need a stooge?

"I have a friend who's an expert on space technology and he says Apollo was faked." How many times have we heard this same handwaving indirection? Bring him here and let him debate. Why should we debate you? You don't know anything about it.

Of course western interests screw people in secret on a regular basis.

People screw other people over in secret on a regular basis the world over, no matter one's station. That isn't proof that Apollo was one of those instances. No matter how much of humanity's proverbial feces you throw into the air, that's not proof of some particular affirmative claim. Handwaving doesn't impress me.

I really could not care less in my taking a look at Apollo about this sort of thing...

Yet you arrived at JREF and practically made a beeline for the Apollo hoax thread while still in single-digit post counts.

...if only your side said there never really were conspiracies perpetrated by our secret governmental arms.

Yes, if only we said that then your straw-man handwaving would make sense. But sadly for you we don't say that, so it doesn't. No one is claiming that people don't keep secrets and that people don't do things clandestinely. You're saying Apollo was one of those clandestine hoaxes. Therefore you owe us evidence for Apollo as a hoax, not handwaving references to other sins elsewhere, real or imaginary.

 

[threadworm]

I'd been pro Apollo regular story Fat Freddy until about a year ago. Then this dude drives down to Denver from Fort Collins to show our little astronomy club his dad's notebooks. The guy from Fort Collins father was an aerospace engineer. The dad had been tasked to determine whether Swigert was a viable political candidate. During Swigert's run for congress this fellow would attend the various political functions , ask Swigert questions and that kind of thing. As it turns out this guy's dad became suspicious of Swigert. the man was an environmental systems expert and apparently when he'd ask Swigert about how warm the spaceship should have been and how much energy it takes to heat a spaceship Swigert did not know jack squat. There's more to it that that, but that was a significant part of it. This guy concluded Swigert was a fraud and recommended to his company not to support the astronaut's run for congress. Swigert of course did win , but never worked really in congress because he got sick. The aerospace engineer investigating all of this never went public, but with his recent death, his son has been showing the notebooks around, fairly selectively, at our astronomy club meeting and that kind of thing. they are obviously authentic and the son is planning to publish this stuff I believe but is looking for guidance. The incriminating claims by Swigert from the interactions this guy had with the deceased astronaut are pretty compelling. At least I think so. Keep your eye out for this sort of thing now FatFreddy. Nationally you don't see or hear much but in the smaller anecdotal cosmos of Denver it's sort of heated up.

There of course is great precedent for American and Western sponsored underground activities(conspiracies) featuring numerous participants that are never exposed or well exposed and simply never acknowledged for what they are;

1) Allende assassination
2) Recent predatory lending
3) The installation of the pro-American Shah
4) The activities of NATOS SECRET ARMIES 1945-1990 and perhaps beyond
5) The Government/AT and T supercomputer eavesdropping on us all in strong violation of the then law
6) Manned Orbiting lab, to function not as advertised
7) Iran Contra

And on and on, zillions of them. Apollo will probably wind up being like the AT and T supercomputer thing. At first everyone flips out including politicians and then it is all viewed as semi-necessary and even the president helps to smooth the BS over.

OK, so, let's have the name of the guy with the notebooks, the name of the astronomy club and the date of the meeting. Then we should really check that you were there, seeing as this must have happened over 30 years ago.

Without any of this information, your story is going to smell really bad. Of stale feet.

 

[TheRedWorm]

This 'new' guy reminds me of the funniest moon landing was faked reason I've ever heard:

My mom and a co-worker were talking about something when the subject of the moon landing came up.
Guy: "You know they faked the moon landings, right?"
Mom: "What makes you think that?"
Guy: "Those rockets were way to small to carry enough coal to get to the moon and back!"
Mom: ""

 

[indomitablespirit]

So, several years after the mission, Swigert couldn't remember some technical details that he probably didn't need to know during the mission, therefore the whole Appollo program was fake?

Okay.

ETA: And the government (or parts of it) have done some evil things in the past, so we should believe every conspiracy theory put forward, no matter how stupid it is?

The actual argument is quite technical. One I certainly could not produce here. Here's a nice little exercise. Ask yourself why Armstrong and Aldrin were so cold the night they were supposed to be parked on the moon and why the Apollo 15 astronauts were burning up. Then ask yourself and go and find what the temperature was said to be in the two LMs on those 2 occasions.

One of the most compelling points in favor of a hoax is that such an effort need be made on the for Apollo side. Why does Phil Plait go on the air and utterly embarrass himself debating a comedian? Per the poster above, why did they add an entire section to the 1994 Moon Shot publication in 2011 to cover the attack by the advocates of hoax? Why do defenders of Apollo spend so much time and energy on this ? If it's fake, why waste your time? There is no danger from us. The thing is a big joke. Very big joke. And quite sad I might add. Think of Armstrong's ultimate legacy, nothing less than abominably pathetic.

 

[LaurelHS]

The actual argument is quite technical. One I certainly could not produce here. Here's a nice little exercise. Ask yourself why Armstrong and Aldrin were so cold the night they were supposed to be parked on the moon and why the Apollo 15 astronauts were burning up. Then ask yourself and go and find what the temperature was said to be in the two LMs on those 2 occasions.

Are you just here to ask other people to do your research for you?

 

[JayUtah]

The actual argument is quite technical.

I'm an engineer. I work in aerospace. Try me.

One I certainly could not produce here.

Try.

Begin irrelevant handwaving in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...

Here's a nice little exercise.

Has nothing to do with your claims.

Ask yourself...

Begging the question. You said there was a rigorous technical argument produced by an engineer that you found compelling and which you said supported your belief that Apollo was faked. Provide it -- put up or shut up.

Then ask yourself and go and find what the temperature was said to be in the two LMs on those 2 occasions.

What is the basis for your apparent belief that the LM cabin should be at the same temperature all the time?

One of the most compelling points in favor of a hoax is that such an effort need be made on the for Apollo side.

That effort is in response to, and commensurate with, the degree of attack on Apollo. We react. So if you are surprised at the degree of the reaction, ask yourself why Apollo hoax claimants are so fervent. Fat Freddy, for example, went on a five-year binge of posting to just about every forum in sight. The original author of this thread, Patrick1000, has reappeared countless times as a sock puppet until the administrators ban him. You'll find that as soon as the hoax claimants leave, this thread goes dormant until another arises.

Try again, that argument doesn't wash.

Per the poster above, why did they add an entire section to the 1994 Moon Shot publication in 2011 to cover the attack by the advocates of hoax?

Why are you so immediately interested in the arguments of a banned sock-puppet?

Why do defenders of Apollo spend so much time and energy on this?

Why are you trying to shame your critics away from responding? You obviously considered this important enough to find a suitable forum and start posting about it. Can we also not show the same interest?

There is no danger from us. The thing is a big joke. Very big joke. And quite sad I might add. Think of Armstrong's ultimate legacy, nothing less than abominably pathetic.

What evidentiary value does your editorial comment have? You're being asked to prove your case, not gloat over it.

 

[Erock]

One of the most compelling points in favor of a hoax is that such an effort need be made on the for Apollo side.

Pathetic point. Were no refutation provided of the constant idiotic claims, the claimants would cheer in "victory" like Gollam holding his ring aloft!

Why does Phil Plait go on the air and utterly embarrass himself debating a comedian?

Two reasons, the comedian has a mouth larger than the Channel Tunnel and used it endlessly, then raised a completely bogus claim about von Braun the rocket engineer and his "rock gathering" exercise to the Antarctic. Rocks I might add, that would no more fool a geologist than a piece of Polar bear poop(something you might know about).

There is no danger from us.

Just armwaving bluster as per usual.

The thing is a big joke. Very big joke.

Yes. Anybody who still thinks Apollo was hoaxed should be regarded as such.

And quite sad I might add.

Yep!

Think of Armstrong's ultimate legacy, nothing less than abominably pathetic.

Only for brainless conspiracy nuts.

 

[Foster Zygote]

The actual argument is quite technical. One I certainly could not produce here.

There are a lot of engineers here, so please, produce your argument.

Here's a nice little exercise. Ask yourself why Armstrong and Aldrin were so cold the night they were supposed to be parked on the moon and why the Apollo 15 astronauts were burning up. Then ask yourself and go and find what the temperature was said to be in the two LMs on those 2 occasions.

What is this supposed to prove?

One of the most compelling points in favor of a hoax is that such an effort need be made on the for Apollo side.

Fallacious reasoning. One could easily say the same thing about the effort mage by the conspiracy theorists.

Why does Phil Plait go on the air and utterly embarrass himself debating a comedian? Per the poster above, why did they add an entire section to the 1994 Moon Shot publication in 2011 to cover the attack by the advocates of hoax?

Some people actually try to counter the spread of ignorance.

Why do defenders of Apollo spend so much time and energy on this ? If it's fake, why waste your time?

Again, this is fallacious reasoning. One could easily ask the same of the conspiracy theorists.

There is no danger from us.

Ignorance and fallacy can be very dangerous.

The thing is a big joke. Very big joke. And quite sad I might add. Think of Armstrong's ultimate legacy, nothing less than abominably pathetic.

What is abominably pathetic is the effort of people who use conspiracy theories like the "moon hoax" in an attempt to inflate their own egos. They self-aggrandize by convincing themselves that there's some great secret that only they are smart enough to work out.

 

[abaddon]

The actual argument is quite technical. One I certainly could not produce here.

Also an engineer here. Bring it on.

Here's a nice little exercise. Ask yourself why Armstrong and Aldrin were so cold the night they were supposed to be parked on the moon and why the Apollo 15 astronauts were burning up. Then ask yourself and go and find what the temperature was said to be in the two LMs on those 2 occasions.

Thermodynamics. Also do you have a citation? No?

One of the most compelling points in favor of a hoax is that such an effort need be made on the for Apollo side. Why does Phil Plait go on the air and utterly embarrass himself debating a comedian?

Nonsense.

Per the poster above, why did they add an entire section to the 1994 Moon Shot publication in 2011 to cover the attack by the advocates of hoax?

Citation?

Why do defenders of Apollo spend so much time and energy on this ?

Well because if nobody steps up to the plate then crackpots rule the world.

If it's fake, why waste your time?

It is not fake, so not a waste of time.

There is no danger from us.

There is if you think about it. It is only one step away from creationism in schools, since who would object to it?

The thing is a big joke. Very big joke. And quite sad I might add. Think of Armstrong's ultimate legacy, nothing less than abominably pathetic.

As usual, you don't understand it therefore it must be fake.

 

[tsig]

The actual argument is quite technical. One I certainly could not produce here. Here's a nice little exercise. Ask yourself why Armstrong and Aldrin were so cold the night they were supposed to be parked on the moon and why the Apollo 15 astronauts were burning up. Then ask yourself and go and find what the temperature was said to be in the two LMs on those 2 occasions.
One of the most compelling points in favor of a hoax is that such an effort need be made on the for Apollo side. Why does Phil Plait go on the air and utterly embarrass himself debating a comedian? Per the poster above, why did they add an entire section to the 1994 Moon Shot publication in 2011 to cover the attack by the advocates of hoax? Why do defenders of Apollo spend so much time and energy on this ? If it's fake, why waste your time? There is no danger from us. The thing is a big joke. Very big joke. And quite sad I might add. Think of Armstrong's ultimate legacy, nothing less than abominably pathetic.

I know why.

 

[abaddon]

I know why.

Don't tell him.

 

[indomitablespirit]

I know why.

Be sure when you tell us all why you also tell us the temperature inside the LM on both occasions. That of course is the part that makes the why of it all so very interesting, and revealing when it comes to proving how downright not real never happened in a million years this all is. So please go ahead, tell us all why and how hot it was in there on the moon, both times, Apollo 11 and Apollo 15.

 

[indomitablespirit]

Don't bluff me. What kind of fool do you take me for? Why don't you tell us all how hot or cold it was inside the LM on the occasion of the Apollo 11 stay on the moon and likewise please tell us the temperature inside the LM during the Apollo 15 stay.