• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Moon Hoax conspiracy

Actually, the radiation belt is now the only real point of contention, now that he has conceded that in fact the technology did exist to send a mission - an unmanned mission at that - to the moon at the time.

If the technology existed, then only the danger to the astronauts from radiation is an obstacle to believing in the official story.
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Okay. Then we are not ready to move on to a new point of discussion.

You have made the claim that the radiation in the Van Allen Belt is fatal to astronauts. Other people have put forth counter-arguments against that claim. You must either refute those counter-arguments, or you must retract your claim.

Please do one of the two.
Click to expand...

When did I make that claim?
 
jsfisher said:
I notice that near the end of the spewage on the above web page, right before the final picture, it says:




Interestingly enough (at least to me), in the picture immediately preceding it, you can clearly see the chest camera mount, but something is missing, something permanent that at no time could be removed.
Click to expand...


I just laughed out loud, for the second time this evening, at something in this thread.

This is the worst conspiracy ever.
 
More on the Apollo Cameras.

Here is what the camera’s[sic] used on all of the Apollo missions looked like. They could at no time be removed from their permanent, mounted position.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is totally wrong. The camera was set onto a bayonet on the chest, but was easily removed simply by pushing it upwards. The Astronauts exited and entered the LM without their cameras and in a number of cases gave their camera to the other astronaut (on Apollo 11 they only had one camera on the EVA and passed it between themselves several times, altough Neil had it most of the time.) Whoever wrote the page had no knowledge of the programme beyond what he read on the back of a cornflake packet.

Although it is unfinished and so is not spell checked or complete, my Apollo 12 page has a lot more on the cameras.

On the LRRR's

You claim to that you want absolute proof that theywere put there by people. Sorry that's not how it works. We have missions reports, photos and witness testimony that say they were. It's now up to you to show that they weren't. Where are your photos, plans, witnesses, mission details for the LRRR's being plaved their by unmanned probes? You can't just wave away the evidence that says they were put them by people and then stated that it was an unmanned probe by default, you have to show the evidence that it was done by an unmanned probed or the evidence it was done by people stands.
 
ERichardson said:
Why must I have a qualification to tell someone that I dont agree that the Van Allen belt is non-fatal?
Click to expand...
Untold numbers of scientists from relevent fields have, over the decades, offered no objection to any of issues regarding the Apollo program.

Do you see what I'm getting at, or must I explain further?
 
ERichardson said:
Why must I have a qualification to tell someone that I dont agree that the Van Allen belt is non-fatal?
Click to expand...

Because without any evidence that you know what you are talking about and aren't just parroting others that don't know what they are talking about, and when the guy that found them and studied them for 40 years says you are totally, utterly and completely wrong, your claim is worth as much as someone saying that if you go outside in the rain you'll melt.
 
ERichardson said:
Why must I have a qualification to tell someone that I dont agree that the Van Allen belt is non-fatal?
Click to expand...

You mean considering that Van Allen himself believed that the astronauts could make it through?
 
If the camera couldn't be removed from its mount how did the astronauts leave it behind to lighten the load on the trip back up to the CM?

-Gumboot
 
Moon hoax believers only can prove one point:

Our schools are failing this country.
 
gumboot said:
If the camera couldn't be removed from its mount how did the astronauts leave it behind to lighten the load on the trip back up to the CM?

-Gumboot
Click to expand...
the took off their space suits and ran really quick back to the LM
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Untold numbers of scientists from relevent fields have, over the decades, offered no objection to any of issues regarding the Apollo program.

Do you see what I'm getting at, or must I explain further?
Click to expand...

The simple question posed to me was "do you agree it isn't fatal?". My answer is no. What is so hard to understand about that?
 
ERichardson said:
If they got through the belt in an hour then thats at least 2 hours counting the return journey. The apollo ship itself would provide virtually no protection, it was made of steel, aluminium etc.

The tape of the astronauts discussing how they were faking the earth images can't just be dismissed. Has anyone here watched the film?
Click to expand...
VA belt runs perpendicular to the axis of rotation and does not envelope the entire globe. Guess Sibrel forgot to mention that.
 
ERichardson said:
Is that a debunking?

The Space Shuttle, so far, has killed fourteen people, merely trying to attain an orbit about two hundred fifty miles above the Earth. How is it then, that a third of a century ago, with less computing power in the entire rocket than in a present day twenty dollar Wal-Mart watch, NASA claims to have gone 100,000% farther, six different times between 1969 and 1972, landing on another celestial body and then returning, without ever killing anyone? How could they have powered air conditioning in two hundred fifty degree heat for three days with batteries? Why is the "second round" of "returning" to the moon estimated to be no earlier than half a century after the first?
Click to expand...
Is Astrophysics a hoax? Is Cosmology a hoax? Is Astronomy a hoax? Get a life :)
 
ERichardson said:
Its a vacuum. And kookbreaker claimed there was no temperature. Total rubbish. There would be a temperature even if it was close to absolute zero.

What do you think happens in a vacuum to a thermometer?
Click to expand...
The glass breaks and the mercury goes floating away :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom