Moon Hoax Proof: There is NOT a Single Photo of the First Step on the Moon.

Just because there is no photo does not prove a hoax.

It merely proves that there is no photo.

it is perfectly feasible that there are other reasons why photos on the Moon were faked or doctored.

Ok, maybe the ladder was already attached to the LEM leg?

Nope...try again!

Why? they took photo everywhere but not to the most important place. So yes, this to me smell fisht a lot.

Ok I'm with you in that. However the nasa triky freaky did publish this illustration showing all the ready stuff:

[link to www.hq.nasa.gov]

but, yes, seems there is not any reference concerning where the ladder was stored or if it was already attached to the leg, SO it smell fishy as well...




-

Last Edited by DVCMCM on 12/07/2012 04:15 PM

So you invented a completely arbitrary standard of evidence that has to be met so you can safely ignore the heaps and heaps of evidence that is available?

And you think that that is a rational approach?


It only seems like that to you.
Because you, like all hoaxies, suck at research.

"I cannot find the answer to this question" does not mean someone is deceptive, it means that you haven't asked the right question to the right people in the right place.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Oh the shills are returned and without any proof to debunk anything, just hot air...




-

Last Edited by DVCMCM on 12/07/2012 04:36 PM

Only a country as stupid as modern America would fail to believe in one of its own greatest ever achievements.

.. right

What happened to the photos of Columbus stepping ashore in the New World?

Oh snap! Somebody noticed. Well, you see, I was hired to photograph the entire thing but the old Polaroid jammed! I mean, there I was, standing in a crater waiting to capture that momentous moment of man's first step on the moon and ...nothing. It really kills me, too, because I bid on the photography job for the first step on Mars but NASA won't have anything more to do with me after that moon debacle.

Wouldn't the first prints being practically under the craft be destroyed by the vehicles thrust when it took off anyway?

Do you mean in the Hollywood studios or something?

No, YOU prove there are no photos of that! Now we'll see how you conspiracy buffs enjoy being asked to prove a negative. Heh.

Such an eloquent and well reasoned rebuttal. LOL.


Claims of misconduct don't need to be debunked.
They need to be proven true, by those that make the accusations.
That would be you.

In over forty years hoaxies have only produced brain-farts, lies, and misunderstandings, not a single piece of evidence that supports their claims.
They don't have a fucking clue.

Maybe you'll be done for the Sedna, who knows.

straight from his anus and smells like dead fish

And what about that? --->> [link to i1249.photobucket.com]

double

Last Edited by DVCMCM on 12/07/2012 08:08 PM

It was attached to the outside and was always there.


that particular photo was of Aldrin taken by Armstrong. The caption even identifies it as such.



Why should there be? Stars are relatively dim. The pics were taken in bright sunlight. To take pic of a star requires a long exposure and a tripod.




It is. many photos show a scouring of the loose soil directly under the engine bell.

Last Edited by LHP598 on 12/07/2012 08:41 PM

Bolted to the side. It is a permanent part of the LM.



Neil himself. He pulled a lanyard, releasing an equipment pallet on the side of the LM. The camera was bolted to that pallet upside-down, and focused back on Earth to hit the bottom of the ladder.




Incorrect; A16 took astronomical studies in UV.




Incorrect; it is. Visibly.

Aside from every description of the LM, that is. It is part of the LM, bolted to the vehicle. It is even seen in pictures of the assembly of the A11 stack.

[link to www.hq.nasa.gov]

Oh, and here's one right after separation, high in Lunar orbit:

[link to www.hq.nasa.gov]

There's a good article @Wikipedia - Examination_of_Apollo_Moon_photographs:
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

And I think this photo says it all: [link to images.nationalgeographic.com]
- The flag is weaving. There's no need to further prove.
Not to mention that flag has no shadow.

Last Edited by Chaga on 12/08/2012 03:09 AM

_________________________________________

How can you tell if a flag is waving from a still picture?

Oh, and look closer. The shadow is there.

(This sort of thing always struck me as a non-starter, anyhow. Why would any kind of conspiracy build an entire moon set, LM, astronauts and technical equipment, and flag...but somehow not have the flag on the same set on the same day but have to paste it crudely in...and how is it the person who "pasted it in" was so good there isn't the slightest visible edge, and the lighting direction is spot on, and parts of the shadow are clearly visible...but somehow they "forgot" to finish painting in the shadow?)

(And then add to this...the flag appears in video. Taken from similar angles. Which means it WAS there on the "set" during one point. So why wouldn't it have been in the stills? Your conspiracy makes no damned sense.)

The flag is/was stiff as a fucking board and made to look like that, as otherwise it would have just laid limp there. that's well known, bozo.

They even did lot of pratice in studio for the event:

[link to www.apollomissionphotos.com]

Apollo 11 Demonstration of the First Step on the Moon
10 x 8 B/W Glossy NASA Photograph
NASA No. 69-H-703
22 April 1969


[link to www.apollomissionphotos.com]

Apollo 11 Demonstration of the First Step on the Moon #2
10 x 8 B/W Glossy NASA Photograph
NASA No. 69-H-702

22 April 1969
Apollo 11 Demonstration how the first step on the Moon will be made during lunar a surface practice session at the Cape. Neil will keep his right foot on the LM's foot pad as he tests the surface with his left.

Other images from the studios:

[link to www.apollomissionphotos.com] [link to www.apollomissionphotos.com]

[link to www.apollomissionphotos.com]

Apollo 11 Aldrin And The SWC
10 x 8 B/W Glossy NASA Photograph
NASA No. 69-H-704
22 April 1969






-

Last Edited by DVCMCM on 12/08/2012 05:21 AM

Really? somebody should tell these guys

[link to www.telegraph.co.uk]