APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!??

OK, I know Barls will probably dissect, slice and dice me line-by-line, so have at it.

Whose responsibility is it to prove that the moon landings were real?

There is a widely-held belief that it is NASA's responsibility to prove the conspiracy theorists wrong in order to prove the moon landings were real.

There is a principle which states. The person proposing a theory has the burden of proof.

To paraphrase a common catch cry of hoax theory supporters. "Despite the evidence, we dont believe the landings were real.

We have proposed our own theory. Unless you prove that we are wrong then we must be right."

Logic dictates that this is not the case.

You cannot assume you are right just because someone else has failed to prove you are wrong.

------

There are hundreds of websites devoted to the moon hoax theory, some for, some against. When you visit a website FOR, check out a few things:

Who wrote the material? What are their credentials and can they prove them? Try searching the internet for the authors name - often you will find independent information about their history which may be of interest.

Does the website sell books, videos or other material?

Invariably hoax supporters want to sell you their best material, whereas "debunkers" tend to be non-profit and share all their material freely and have nothing to gain from influencing your opinion.


Now, back to some of the posts.

NO BLAST CRATER!!???

Tests from lander prototypes did not produce any such crater, and neither do routine landings by military VTOL (Vertical Takeoff and Landing) aircraft.

A small amount of disturbance maybe, but certainly nothing like a crater. Bear in mind that Harrier jets are far more powerful than the lunar lander and they dont go around making craters.

Although the Lunar Module descent engine was capable of 10,000 lbs of thrust (the usual hoax advocate's claim), it was throttled down to below 3,000 lbs as it neared the lunar surface.

While still several feet above the ground, the descent engine was shut down as probes, extending 5 feet below the footpads, sensed contact with the surface.

The LM descended at an angle, moving laterally across the ground. When the astronauts identified a suitable landing site, the LM leveled off and dropped to the surface. The LM did not hover over its final landing site for any significant length of time.

The Moon's surface is covered by a rocky material called lunar regolith, which consists of fine dust particles, glass spheres and a jumble of large boulders and rocky debris.

Lunar regolith has many unique properties, the most obvious being that the particles are very jagged, which causes them to interlock. When subjected to pressure, the regolith will resist, almost like solid rock.

In a vacuum exhaust gases expand rapidly once exiting the engine nozzle.

MOONROCKS!!???

The most compelling evidence is the 382 kilograms of moon rocks brought back to Earth by the Apollo missions.

These samples have been independently analysed by geologists from all over the world for more than thirty years.

The conclusion is basically 100% unanimous - EVEN FROM THE NOT SO USA FRIENDLY COUNTRYS, these rocks could not have originated on Earth and must have come from the moon.



Not even to mention the Russians(!)They were watching the USA space programme like hawks and analysing everything the Americans did. If there was the slightest suggestion that a hoax was happening, the Russians would have been falling over themselves to tell the world about it.

COMPUTER ON APOLLO!!???

Unlike general-purpose computers, the Apollo guidance computer had to perform only one task - guidance. Most of the number crunching was performed at Mission Control on several mainframe computers.

The results were then transmitted to the onboard computer, which acted upon them. The Apollo guidance computer was capable of computing only a small number of navigation problems itself.

Since the guidance computer had to run only one program, that program could be put in ROM, thus only a small amount of RAM was required to hold the temporary results of guidance calculations.

The hoax advocates tend to overrate the tasks performed by the onboard guidance computers of the 1960's.

In fact, the Mercury spacecraft, 1961-63, flew into space without any onboard computer whatsoever, yet the trajectories were precisely controlled and the capsule was capable of fully automated control.


Did I forget anything...???

Barls, just out of curiosity, have you ever uncovered anything that gave you pause about the viability of the Apollo program, even temporarily?

Then I asked, "so what are they using to communicate with Mission Control? Shouldn't there at least be some kind of a large directional dish for their 244,000-mile communications?' They didn't exactly have DirectTV pizza dishes in 1969.

I also wondered how they landed on the moon in the daytime with purported 250-degree heat,

what kind of auxillary power system was used to cool the LM and what kind of battery power was being used for all this communication and cooling equipment.

Also, why was the lunar footage extremely crappy and degraded B&W imagery while the orbital docking shot looked like a 70 mm color sequence from '2001: A Space Odyssey'?

I also thought the lunar liftoff looked downright fake, starting with Armstrong's "3, 2, 1, start engines" and then cutting to the LM several hundred feet in the air.

Next thing you know, I was hundreds of pages deep in Apollo 11 technical manuals and schematics, which BTW are not nearly as explanatory as you'd think.

I never found anything about the exact number or capacity of batteries aboard.

The "Soviet Union" was invented by Wall Street money, and totally controlled by it.

So the same forces controlling the US "Moon Program" controlled the Soviet Union.

"Moon Rocks" are the same as rocks from the North/South Poles of earth.
That is what is 100% unanimous about them. There is nothing special about "moon rocks". They are earth rocks.

Yet Werner Von Braun commented that in order for a craft to reach the moon, it would have to be as large as the Empire State Building (1,000 feet) , fuel concerns and all.

To point out again; 40 years later, we can only go 400 miles into orbit, they cannot reach the moon. Which is 244,000 miles away.

Did I forget anything...???

"Moon Rocks" are the same as rocks from the North/South Poles of earth.

That is what is 100% unanimous about them.

""Unlike general-purpose computers, the Apollo guidance computer had to perform only one task - guidance. Most of the number crunching was performed at Mission Control on several mainframe computers.""

Yet Werner Von Braun commented that in order for a craft to reach the moon, it would have to be as large as the Empire State Building (1,000 feet) , fuel concerns and all.

To point out again; 40 years later, we can only go 400 miles into orbit, they cannot reach the moon. Which is 244,000 miles away.

In other words, you cannot keep in contact with a vessel 200,000 miles away from you with 1960's technology.

You cannot go 244,000 miles with that amount of fuel.

Simple math

In other words, you cannot keep in contact with a vessel 200,000 miles away from you with 1960's technology.


Umm, no...did you read the thread? Link budgets, explanations about bandwidth, it's all there. Is there a specific point you have a problem with?

"Oh, good. So it should be easy to find a quote to back this up. You'll have to explain what definition of '100% unanimous' allows for the entire geological community to claim otherwise, of course."

Already have.

Moon rocks are earth rocks.

I encourage your research.

You cannot go 244,000 miles with that amount of fuel.

Simple math


Simple? Good. Show us. Because I doubt you've actually done any.

"Oh, good. So it should be easy to find a quote to back this up. You'll have to explain what definition of '100% unanimous' allows for the entire geological community to claim otherwise, of course."

Already have.

Moon rocks are earth rocks.

I encourage your research.


Troll.

And liar. There is plenty of evidence that geologists agree that the Moon rocks are different. Can you provide me with one reference that says otherwise?

Im sure that Barls Knarkley can tell you HBs the comunication used on The Eagle, I know I can. All one has to do is use Google.

We could do your homework for you all week.

But, the main deal here is....

It is the one making the claim that the Apollo was faked by NASA, that has the burdon of proof.

Were is the evidence!!??

I say again: troll.

All I see is taunting assertions that you are right. You have no intention of backing anything up, you just contradict anything Hazzard or I say. Grow up.

To point out again; 40 years later, we can only go 400 miles into orbit, they cannot reach the moon. Which is 244,000 miles away.


Distance has nothing to do with it. To quote Robert Heinlein, once you are in low Earth orbit, you are halfway to anywhere else. We haven't left LEO recently for financial reasons, not technical ones. This argument is like saying that because your family has been going on budget camping holidays to the local lake for the last decade, that therefore the extravagant trip to Europe all those years ago was technically impossible.

This is like saying saying, once I leave my front steps, I am halfway to Nashville.

No matter how far you go, fuel doesnt matter,