• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moon landing conspiracies

Benguin

Too Chilled For The Anti-Homeopathy Illuminati
B
Joined
Apr 23, 2004
Messages
1,897
On the basis of being a bit tired of magic water discussions, I thought I'd start another.

On of our cable channels had a repeat of a documentary on the "Apollo was a fake" theme last night. I was only half paying attention to their points;

1. Getting to the moon was incredibly important just to annoy the soviets.
2. Early apollo astronauts seem to have had an impressively high death rate (15%)
3. Radiation in the Van Halen belts would kill anyone in a small craft
4. All sorts of photographic stuff (which I did pay attention for);
a) apparent repetitive 'scenes'
b) inconsistent shadow angles
c) no silhoetting in backlit shots
d) foreground objects appearing to overlap marks stencilled on the film (I assume, the didn't explain the mechanism or those crosshairs)
5. Flag appearing to waive in the wind when 'the moon has no atmosphere'
6. Video shots sped up to double speed look like normal running around in earth gravity.
7. Lots of people who'll sit in front of computer screens and 'know with all their heart' the landings were not real.
8. NASA's tightlipped, so it must be true

I didn't find the program very persuasive (mostly, admittedly, down to it's style of presentation). I did, however, come away thinking some of the photos may have been doctored ... but there are several explanations for that unrelated to faked-moon-landings that the program failed to even mention, let alone explore. And some of the 'flaws' they pointed out (like shadow angles) have perfectly reasonable explanations they did not check out first.

Is their anyone here who believes the landings were faked? I've read a few sites on the topic, but they seem very partisan one way or the other ....
 
I think they mean the "Van Allen" belts, but I might be wrong.

Nonetheless, check out Phil Plaitt aka The Bad Astronomer. He pretty much lays everything to rest.

Michael
 
Benguin said:
3. Radiation in the Van Halen belts would kill anyone in a small craft
Click to expand...
They might as well jump! Go ahead and jump!

Ahem. It's actually the Van Allen Belts, named for James A. Van Allen, professor emeritus of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Iowa.
 
This Site also debunks the Apollo Fake Landings Rubbish

http://www.clavius.org/

The photos have been explained numerous times are there are not any real anomalies in them. Briefly is repsonse to your point 4

a) The astronauts (astronots lol thats quite funny) didn't really go very far so its no suprising that there wasn't much variation.

b) Easy explainable because the shadow that fall on slopes do go off at strange angles

c) Don't know off hand

d) This is a light bleeding effect , demonstrable quite easily.

5) My Fave, the flag was rigid, the motion is from the astronauts twisting it as they put it in the ground.


The whole prog has been thoroughly debunked, and i strongly suggest Phils Site (Bad Astronomy) and Clavius Moon Base for some classic debunking with photos :D
 
Van Halen Belt Buckle:

be_2.JPG




There are actually 27 hits for "Van Halen Belt" on google. This one's kind of funny, and appropriate here, I think.
 
I usually figure that as soon as people start making arguments based on "angles of shadows" in pictures, that they are pretty much blowing smoke out of their a$$e$. JFK conspirialists try this garbage, too (backyard photos of LHO with the rifle). Look at the pictures linked on those refutation sites and you can see that perspective is not a trivial issue.

Of course, artists figured that out in the 15th century or so, but moon landing hoaxers don't realize it today.
 
Yes, I have seen the bad astronomer site ... just wondered if these people were still persisting and had come up with something new.

I was entirely persuaded on the explanation of some of the photo discrepancies, but as I said ... that just suggests some photos are iffy. And that is all!
 
Let me state for the record that I was there and I know for a fact that it did NOT happen.

I was there with Neil, with Buzz, with Michael. I was the unnamed, unpublished, forth rider. I was, meager though it may be, Neil's caddy. Yes, I know, I goofed. I remembered to bring the club (a two wood, forgot the brand) but I forgot the ball (a Titleist if I remember correctly, and I do, given the impact of that mistake). Neil, the commander, refused to land because of my mistake, my forgettfullness, my shame. He stated to me privately, and with a bit of ire as well, that the only reason he accepted the mission in the first place was to prove that he, and he alone, could but a ball in orbit around the moon. Without the equipment, there was no reason to continue the mission.

I was slated for the next mission but Alan picked another (unnamed) caddy. I can't say as I blame him. As far as I know, that one actually happened. Of course, my knowledge of that landing is based entirely on gossip so don't take my word for it.
 
Ah, so it is finally settled.

Cheers Rob!
 
Brian the Snail said:
Moon landing conspiracies are wrong, huh? Well, I'd like to see you smarty-pantses debunk this.
Click to expand...

Maybe there's something wrong with me, but the caption for that first photo is one of the funniest things I've ever read. There's something wrong with me, isn't there?
 
Benguin said:
On the basis of being a bit tired of magic water discussions, I thought I'd start another.

On of our cable channels had a repeat of a documentary on the "Apollo was a fake" theme last night. I was only half paying attention to their points;

3. Radiation in the Van Halen belts would kill anyone in a small craft
Click to expand...

This is a classic, oft said, easily debunked.

Last year I did a fair amount of research on radiation risks. In part to try to understand risks associated with so called "dirty bombs." The Van Allen belt hazard is grossly overstated. "Radiation" trapped in the Belt is really just high energy protons and electrons. No gamma, no neutrons, It is indeed intense and anyone in a space suit doing EVA would get "tanned" in short order. That said, charged particle risks are largely reduced to manageable levels by fairly small, lightweight, materials.

I once bought a photographic dust brush with a Po Alpha emitter at a local retail shop. (4mev Alpha) It pegged my Survey Geiger up close but was undetectable just an inch of air away. That same brush, held up to a flourescent poster made a noticable glow with the lights off.

Turns out the real risk was solar mass ejections while the guys were on the moon. That risk was small compared to the overall mission risk. X-ray events associated with these can be quite intense also but are fairly low in energy and so can be dealt with.

-Marty
 
Benguin said:
...
3. Radiation in the Van Halen belts would kill anyone in a small craft
...
Click to expand...

I admit, Van Halen does seem to fluctuate wildly and seemingly at random. Whether the most dangerous times are during its "Lee-Roth" phase, Hagar wobbilation, or it's current status, the name of which I can't recall.

Also, I'll have you know that www.moontruth.com holds the real answers! You can't debunk that footage!
 
Just resurreecting this thread because I was watching University Challenge on the BBC on Monday and there was a set of astronomy questions about radiation and belts. No one knew the answers so they guessed and for each they said the Van Halen belt. No one not even Jeremy Paxman picked up on this. I don't think I would have done so either if I had not come here, so thank you guys.
 
Benguin said:
d) foreground objects appearing to overlap marks stencilled on the film (I assume, the didn't explain the mechanism or those crosshairs)
Click to expand...

This one is my favorite. What, they think they painted those marks on the set??

Jeremy
 
I dunno , the huckster in my just emerged....

Can You imagine part of the process beinging underwritten by "Top Flight" for Alan Shepherd's much ballyhooed slice? Or Nike Zero-G! designer space suits?

Hey Niel........... Now that You've landed on the moon what are going to do next??

I'm going to Disney world!!!!

Richard Branson is on the mark kiddies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom