Conspiracy theorists weep, we did go to the moon!

[iflyforpie]

You may recall that the internet was developed under a
contract from DARPA.

Hedley, everyone knows that Al Gore invented the internet...


Love your pics Guido! I got to get me a telescope again!

[...]

We have NO business being in space

Many, many things that you take for granted - computers,
GPS, internet, carbon fibre - are a result of the US space
program.

Next time you go flying, leave your GPS off, ok, because
you don't need us to be in space.

In the same breath...I ask why do people have a GPS on the dash right next to the "Holy" cross of Jesus?

If we are going to continue to be inovative in technological advances within the realms of our creative conscientiousness...then why do we continue to promote the retardation of intellectual progress by believing and promoting fairy tales?

The Moon landing IS a fairy tale. Although I REALLY enjoy reading people on here regurgitating verbatim from government opointed "official" speakers convincing the masses otherwise.

The minute I was no longer Santa Claus eligible I found out there was no Jesus...there was NO Moon landing.

But I respect yours and other opinions on the matter...

[...]

So stop try to find amazing details that would "prove" the moon landing was fake, because even if it was so, YOU would never find any clues.

Time has a way of exposing the truth...and the lies.

In 1969 we would never find the proof with the limited tools and information the common person had access to. Today...valid questions.

Question the answers son...or remain a minion. Either way...pro or con...these are just distractions from everyday REAL life issues on this planet. BUT it suuuure is entertaining to read

[Spokes]

...
The Moon landing IS a fairy tale.

...

Thats a pretty bold statement. Do you have any evidence to back that up?

[...]

...
The Moon landing IS a fairy tale.

...

Thats a pretty bold statement. Do you have any evidence to back that up?

nope.

I also believed in the tooth fairy...until I went to the dentist when I was 8 years old...

Seriously...if you can locate OR explain where the 14000 reels of flight data from those missions that went missing are...I'll buy you a house.

[2R]

Strange ,that those countries who made the strongest denials about the achivements of the American Apollo moon programs are now planning their own moon landings.
The Communists who said it would be imposible to survive the radiation belts around the earth are now planning a moon shot.Even countries that cannot feed their people have space ambitions.They must be expecting charities to feed their people for them while they spend billions on a moon shot and nuclear weapons .
Maybe the next moon landing will not be a Hollywood scam but we will call it a Bollywood scam or even a Shanghi scam.Although i would love to see a Jackie Chan/Jet Li on the moon film.Kung Fu in one sixth gravity that would be awsome

[CelBatrin]

Your just "kicking" away at this, eh birddog.
Reminds me of that old saying bout wining an argument online.

Just to clear up my position: I'm not sure whether the moon landing was real or not.
And I don't see how you (and others) can be so certain that it never happened.
Until you go there yourself to see whats left of the landers (or lack thereof) you should
at least allow for the possibility. Then again, I supose the lander remains could have been
planted there.

And please lay of the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, and Jesus examples. Its not helping.

[...]

Your just "kicking" away at this, eh birddog.
Reminds me of that old saying bout wining an argument online.

Just to clear up my position: I'm not sure whether the moon landing was real or not.
And I don't see how you (and others) can be so certain that it never happened.
Until you go there yourself to see whats left of the landers (or lack thereof) you should
at least allow for the possibility. Then again, I supose the lander remains could have been
planted there.

And please lay of the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, and Jesus examples. It not helping.

I'm not arguing anything...I'm just looking for a valid arguement. There is a difference.
So far all I have read is regurgitated information that anyone can find on the net. Pro or con.

Plus...I'm not doing anything until 1pm...then I'm off to the gym and then the Toronto International Film Festivals to watch more make believe entertainment....

[Spokes]

...
The Moon landing IS a fairy tale.

...

Thats a pretty bold statement. Do you have any evidence to back that up?

nope.

I also believed in the tooth fairy...until I went to the dentist when I was 8 years old...

Seriously...if you can locate OR explain where the 14000 reels of flight data from those missions that went missing are...I'll buy you a house.

Thanks, I already have a house. How does the loss of some of the flight data prove that it is all a fairytale? I'm sure that alot of documentation WWII is missing, or never found. Could it be that WWII never happened?

[...]

I'm sure that alot of documentation WWII is missing, or never found. Could it be that WWII never happened?

Funny, that's what the Nazi's claim.

anyway...

How does the loss of some of the flight data prove that it is all a fairytale?

SOME?...ALL.

Are you listening to yourself? The greatest technological feat in human history...all data...ALL data went "Houdini" and no one knows where it went to.

Common man...make an argument...make me a believer of the person behind the name "Spokes" I'm rooting for ya!!!

[Spokes]

No, from what I have read about it, it is the video telemetry data that was lost. Those are the recordings of the video data that was sent. I am not talking about video recordings in the classical sense most people think of. Video is (was in those days) linked to other stations as telemetric data. I spent some tiem in the airforce do analysis of this type of data from recononsance aircraft. I am not sure if the missing data also includes navagational telemetry, but for the sake of argument ill giv you that.

What about all the photographic and film data returned from the moon? What of the samples returned, what of all the technical and engineering records. I am certain that examining that information alone will determine once and for all that it is possible to get someone there.

And again, how does lost data prove that it never happened? It shows that some of the data was lost.

[...]

I had a great work out @ the gym...whew...

anyway,

What of the samples returned, what of all the technical and engineering records. I am certain that examining that information alone will determine once and for all that it is possible to get someone there.
And again, how does lost data prove that it never happened? It shows that some of the data was lost.

Moon rock samples...really!? OK...ever hear of Wernher von Braun's trip to Antarctica in 1967?

no? ok.

Landing believers claim that rocks brought back from the Moon prove that the landings took place; anyone in the know raises concerns about ex-Nazi and NASA's chief rocket scientist Wernher von Braun's trip to Antarctica two years prior to Apollo missions was in order to study and/or collect lunar meteorites to be used as fake Moon rocks.

Whilst NASA does not provide much information about why the MSFC Director and three others were in Antarctica at that time, it has been said that the purpose was "to look into environmental and logistic factors that might relate to the planning of future space missions, and hardware".

It is also said that because von Braun was a former SS officer, the NASA hoax proponents have suggested that he could have been susceptible to pressure to agree to the conspiracy in order to protect himself from recriminations over his NAZI past.

I'm not making this shit up...both pro/con sides agree about his NAZI past and his travels to the south pole...

NASA...NAZI....hmmmmm

At the end of the day...who phucking knows!? It's ALL so crazy and weird and cryptic and insane outside of the parameters of what we know to be real life regarding real life from fiction spy books we read as kids.... BUT it sure makes for interesting reading. It's better than baseball THAT'S FOR SURE


All I am saying is question the answers...with anything the government wants you to believe. Reasons given as to why there will be a rise in property taxes...and whether or not we put people on the moon

[Spokes]

Sorry, but that last post is moving you into tin foil hat territory.

You still have not explained how some missing data proves that the moon landings were faked. I will take it from your lack of response that it doesn't so that one is a non-argument.

The moon landings are on the record as having happened, I do not have to prove it.
Since you are makeing the fantastic claim, that the whole thing was faked, it is up to you to prove your case. You have not yet done that sir.

But to put answers to the absurd:

Yes, Werner Von Braun built V2 rockets for the NAZI's. While not a celebrated fact, it was never hidden. It was and still is a known thing. Again this is not any kind of proof that the landings were faked.

Werner von Braun was in Antarctica. This is information can be found on NASA web sites. If I was going to orchestrate a hugely elaborate hoax, involving hundreds of thousands of people I would keep this nugget out of the record. Wait, if I was going to send someone to antarctica to get moon rocks, I would send a geologist, not a rocket scientist. Wait, in 1967, it wasn't even known that there were meteorites at the antarctica that originated on the moon, so how would they know to send anyone? This is a rediculous argument that does not do a thing to prove your fantastical claim of a hoax. Heck it doesn't even raise doubts.

Even if you could go and get 800lbs of meteorites from the Antarctica that originated on the moon, I would tend to think that a geologist would be able to tell if the thing has gone through the blistering heat of earth atmosphere re-entry.

I will say it once again. I do not have to prove the moon landings happened. However if you will tell me what you would consider to be proof, I will do my best. Can you prove to me that WWII happened, The Hollocaust? Kenedy Assasination? Of course not, you must rely on historical record. The historical record: photo's, movies, hardware, moon rock samples, peoples recollections etc are available to all.

You are the one makeing the fantastical claim that the whole thing was a fake. You have yet to give me one shred of evidence to back your claim. None. Arguments based on the records i.e. photo's proved groundless. The move to innuendo involving missing data and trips to the Antarctic also have shown to be groundless.

What else you got? Don't give me that 'I dont care, I'm just asking questions' routine. You do care, otherwise you would not post. You do not know the answer, so you immidiately make the jump to the fantastical claim of a massive government conspiracy. That is the mark of a conspircay theory junkie.

[AuxBatOn]

How about the lunar landers that can be seen on the surface of the moon?

[Spokes]

How about the lunar landers that can be seen on the surface of the moon?

Your a lightweight. Any conspiracy theorist worth his salt will point you at photoshop

Personally I think these photo's are pretty cool. I am looking forward to when the LRO settles into its final orbit, and is able to take pictures from a closer distance.

[trampbike]

Spokes (and many others), thanks for posting on this thread! I'm so tired of trying to argue logically with people who don't give a damn about logic and rational information processing. I'm not doing it anymore on forums (frustrated me too much!), but I admire your tenacity.

For the conspiracy theorists, what about this one? http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=af07

This guy is on something Let's start the hard reasearch work on the internet and dig deeper to find the REAL cause of this catastrophy.

[...]

The thing about the internet is that it has given everyone a voice...but no one is really listening to other. *sigh* I never said I don't believe it. I'm saying there is much too much doubt back then given the limited technological circumstances and political climate (Cold War) back in those days to push sectors of the US government into a possible hoax. Soley based only on what we've been told...I don't know that it happened. AND NEITHER DO YOU. THAT'S MY POINT.

Sorry, but that last post is moving you into tin foil hat territory.

You still have not explained how some missing data proves that the moon landings were faked. I will take it from your lack of response that it doesn't so that one is a non-argument.

The moon landings are on the record as having happened, I do not have to prove it.
Since you are makeing the fantastic claim, that the whole thing was faked, it is up to you to prove your case. You have not yet done that sir.

wow.

"The moon landings are on the record as having happened, I do not have to prove it"

Wow. You know what else is on record...Jesus walked on water. Noah was 600 years old when he built that ark. There were no POW's left behind in Vietnam. saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction. So, I guess it's all true.

Government do things perfectly and they don't lie because it is on record. A novel concept.

I gave you ample opportunities to help me understand if we went to the moon. ALL you gave me was regurgitated rhetoric COPY and PASTED from another site.

You had no real opinions I suspect. Just regurgitated rhetoric.

BY the way, It wasn't a tin foil hat...it was a titanium helmet I wore as a kid...to protect me from people pounding in falsehoods into the soft spot in our heads we were all born with.


Here....You can keep (below) this ...I know where to find it. Copy and pasting information proves nothing to me. I was hoping you had point. I even rooted for ya

http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/vonbraun/v ... rviews.pdf

But to put answers to the absurd:

Yes, Werner Von Braun built V2 rockets for the NAZI's. While not a celebrated fact, it was never hidden. It was and still is a known thing. Again this is not any kind of proof that the landings were faked.

Werner von Braun was in Antarctica. This is information can be found on NASA web sites. If I was going to orchestrate a hugely elaborate hoax, involving hundreds of thousands of people I would keep this nugget out of the record. Wait, if I was going to send someone to antarctica to get moon rocks, I would send a geologist, not a rocket scientist. Wait, in 1967, it wasn't even known that there were meteorites at the antarctica that originated on the moon, so how would they know to send anyone? This is a rediculous argument that does not do a thing to prove your fantastical claim of a hoax. Heck it doesn't even raise doubts.

Even if you could go and get 800lbs of meteorites from the Antarctica that originated on the moon, I would tend to think that a geologist would be able to tell if the thing has gone through the blistering heat of earth atmosphere re-entry.

I will say it once again. I do not have to prove the moon landings happened. However if you will tell me what you would consider to be proof, I will do my best. Can you prove to me that WWII happened, The Hollocaust? Kenedy Assasination? Of course not, you must rely on historical record. The historical record: photo's, movies, hardware, moon rock samples, peoples recollections etc are available to all.

You are the one makeing the fantastical claim that the whole thing was a fake. You have yet to give me one shred of evidence to back your claim. None. Arguments based on the records i.e. photo's proved groundless. The move to innuendo involving missing data and trips to the Antarctic also have shown to be groundless.

What else you got? Don't give me that 'I dont care, I'm just asking questions' routine. You do care, otherwise you would not post. You do not know the answer, so you immidiately make the jump to the fantastical claim of a massive government conspiracy. That is the mark of a conspircay theory junkie.

[iflyforpie]

It doesn't matter whether what you believe and how much proof you offer up, there will always be skeptics.

I could show you a picture of Jesus walking on water and you would say it is photoshopped. Nothing is believable in this world.

I am willing to take a few things on faith. I have seen the photographs, the footage, and the rockets and capsules themselves. The biggest leap IMHO was to actually get a man into space and return him to earth and very few doubt that ever happened. The moon shot was just further application of the space technology used in NEO and the lunar part would be arguably the easiest part of all (no atmospheric reentry, single stage to orbit, low gravity, etc).

With the second superpower scrutinizing every move and thousands of NASA employees involved in the program, you would think something more conclusive would have slipped through. But the USSR never debunked the US claim and immediately switched their space program to NEO space stations rather than Lunar landings after Apollo. I would think the USSR would have landed on the moon just to prove the US didn't....

That is enough for me to believe....

[MUSKEG]

Birddog. Do you think the Kurds also think it a hoax that Sadam had WMD?

[The Old Fogducker]

Conspiracy theorists ... Bozos in my opinion.

The KGB would have loved to obtain some info showing the moon shot was a fake ... do you stunned idiots think there wouldn't have been tens of millions of dollars, innumerable beautiful and talented hookers, fast cars, villas, drugs, booze, fame, .....absolutely ANY enticement on the face of the earth that could be offered to a mere mortal who would bring forth the smallest bit of info the Soviets could have used against the United States in the propaganda war?

The mileage they could have obtained from that type of story in Pravda or Radio Moscow would have been incalculable....especially among those third world states where the populace was still peeing in their drinking water.

Somewhere in the hundreds if not thousands of people required to fake up a moonshot would be at least one person willing to sell the information to the highest bidder for his/her own ends. All you need to do is look at a piece of human scum like John Walker selling secrets to the Soviets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5dC6vru4kk

Sooner or later, "the secret" (if it were true) would have come out. But then, the KGB weren't as accomplished at obtaining information as the "founders" of the conspiracy theory are they? After all, ..... those Cold War era KGB operatives were just such bumbling stooges they must have missed all those so-called "undeniable clues and facts" which prove the landings weren't real.

Of course, the KGB and Khrushchev were in on the whole thing too weren't they? Paid off by big oil money ... or was it big pharmaceuticals ... nope ... must surely have been Big Film Makers ...like Kodak and 20th Century Fox productions ... or could it have been Metro Goldwyn Mayer Films?

So what's my advice to Bozos who don't believe we went to the moon?

"Get stuffed!" or maybe "Flush your head down the toilet."

Am I mocking you nut case conspiracy theory types? Damned straight I am ... because you're friggin' idiots!

Oh, but then I'm part of the cover up team aren't I? Placed here to throw "real free thinkers" off the fact trail.

The Old Fogducker

[Wilbur]

If you want to know if the US landed on the moon, get a telescope and look at the shit they left their. Landing gear from the lunar module, moon buggies, laser reflectors, etc. You don't need to question if photo's were doctored, look for yourself.

Of course, even doing something that simple won't satisfy the tin foil hat crowd. They buy into a position and then can't change because doing so requires them to admit they are cukoo for cocoa puffs. They only believe what they can understand, so when confronted with something complex and beyond their capacity to sufficiently comprehend, it can't be true. If it's not true, there must be a grand conspiracy that only they are cleaver enough to have identified. They have an infinite ability to raise fallacy based arguements and questions, and therefore an unlimited capacity to cling to their wacky beliefs.

[iflyforpie]

If you want to know if the US landed on the moon, get a telescope and look at the shit they left their. Landing gear from the lunar module, moon buggies, laser reflectors, etc. You don't need to question if photo's were doctored, look for yourself.

Unfortunately, you can't. Even the space-based Hubble Telescope doesn't have the angular resolution to see the biggest piece they left on the moon, the lander base.

The laser reflectors are more easily detectable, but you need more than laser pointers and a hobby telescope to observe them.

Thus, all the information we have must come from the corrupt and conspiring government....

[iflyforpie]

I got this off a conspiracy website a few months ago. It is a list of questions they wanted answered by people who believe the landings were real.

I copied into a word document and then went through each point. I didn't answer all the questions; some because I don't have the knowledge, some because I couldn't figure out what they were talking about.

Enjoy...

1) Sceptics argue that the lack of stars on Moon photographs is acceptable, despite zero atmosphere to obscure the view. Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be "astonishingly brilliant". See the official NASA pictures above that I have reproduced that show 'stars' in the sky, as viewed from the lunar surface. And why exactly do you think there are hardly any stars visible on Apollo films taken from the Moon? The answers simple - Professional astronomers would quickly calculate that the configuration and distances of star formations were incorrect and so NASA had to remove them to make sure they could keep up the scam.

Yuri Gagarin would have only seen the stars during the night portion of his orbit around the Earth. Due to logistics, the Moon landing took place during daylight on the moon surface. The large contrast between the Moon surface and the night sky resulted in no stars being visible in the photographs.

The exposure for a moon photograph for a 35mm camera is 1/60 at f16, far too low for stars which require a time exposure.


2) The pure oxygen atmosphere in the module would have melted the Hasselblad's camera covering and produced poisonous gases. Why weren't the astronauts affected?

Huh?


3) There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LM's 10,000 pound thrust rocket. Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away?


First, the engine has a variable thrust and wasn’t operating at full power during landing. Second, due to the vacuum of space, the gasses are spread over a greater area and as a result is couldn’t create the kind of pressures required to create a crater. Some dust was removed, but some remained.


4) Sceptics claim that you cannot produce a flame in a vacuum because of the lack of oxygen. So how come I have footage on this page showing a flame coming from the exhaust of an Apollo lander? (Obviously the sceptics are wrong or the footage shows the lander working in an atmosphere)

Oxygen fed rocket engines, like all rocket engines, don’t require an atmosphere to function.


5) Footprints are the result of weight displacing air or moisture from between particles of dirt, dust, or sand. The astronauts left distinct footprints all over the place.


Footprints are a result of displacing dust. You don’t need moisture or air to hold dust or dirt together, especially in micro-gravity.


6) The Apollo 11 TV pictures were lousy, yet the broadcast quality magically became fine on the five subsequent missions.


It’s funny how the new digital cameras take better pictures than my old one.


7) Why in most Apollo photos, is there a clear line of definition between the rough foreground and the smooth background?


Why only in most but not all?


8 ) Why did so many NASA Moonscape photos have non parallel shadows? sceptics will tell you because there is two sources of light on the Moon - the Sun and the Earth... That maybe the case, but the shadows would still fall in the same direction, not two or three different angles and Earth shine would have no effect during the bright lunar day (the time at which the Apollo was on the Moon).


Stand in a warehouse or arena with several mercury vapor lights and you will see several shadows going different directions. The Earth isn’t as bright as the sun, but it is closer to the moon and has a greater angular dimension. Also, the perspective will make parallel shadows converge to a vanishing point. This is easily observed by having two people stand apart just after sunrise or before sunset (one light source).


9) Why did one of the stage prop rocks have a capital "C" on it and a 'C' on the ground in front of it?


Coincidence. Same as the Mars 'face'. Why would they put in two places to mark center stage, especially if it was something they wanted to hide?


10) How did the fibreglass whip antenna on the Gemini 6A capsule survive the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry?


Gemini didn’t go to the moon.


11) In Ron Howard's 1995 science fiction movie, Apollo 13, the astronauts lose electrical power and begin worrying about freezing to death. In reality, of course, the relentless bombardment of the Sun's rays would rapidly have overheated the vehicle to lethal temperatures with no atmosphere into which to dump the heat build up.


Actually, the craft would reradiate the heat into space just as rapidly. We don’t see asteroids glowing brightly because they are constantly bombarded with radiation.


12) Who would dare risk using the LM on the Moon when a simulated Moon landing was never tested?


Who would dare fly an untested aircraft?


13) Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in "one sixth" gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches.


The astronauts had bulky suits on (far more weight than they could ever bear in Earth’s gravity) and they also restricted motion. If the landings were fake, don’t you think they would have done the math and got the jump height correct?


14) Even though slow motion photography was able to give a fairly convincing appearance of very low gravity, it could not disguise the fact that the astronauts travelled no further between steps than they would have on Earth.


Heavy awkward suits. Also a change in gravity doesn’t change a man’s stride. See answer to question 13.


15) If the Rover buggy had actually been moving in one-sixth gravity, then it would have required a twenty foot width in order not to have flipped over on nearly every turn. The Rover had the same width as ordinary small cars.


Heavy batteries and a low center of gravity combined with a low speed.


16) An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours. Russian scientists calculated in 1959 that astronauts needed a shield of 4 feet of lead to protect them on the Moons surface. Why didn't the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation? And why are NASA only starting a project now to test the lunar radiation levels and what their effects would be on the human body if they have sent 12 men there already?


The moon landings were not done during periods of solar flares.


17) The fabric space suits had a crotch to shoulder zipper. There should have been fast leakage of air since even a pinhole deflates a tyre in short order.


Not part of the pressure envelope. Also any small leaks would be constantly replenished by oxygen.


18) The astronauts in these "pressurized" suits were easily able to bend their fingers, wrists, elbows, and knees at 5.2 p.s.i. and yet a boxer's 4 p.s.i. speed bag is virtually unbendable. The guys would have looked like balloon men if the suits had actually been pressurized.


Suit design prevented ballooning. This was a problem during the first Soviet spacewalk. A boxer’s speedbag doesn’t need to bend.


19) How did the astronauts leave the LEM? In the documentary 'Paper Moon' The host measures a replica of the LEM at The Space Centre in Houston, what he finds is that the 'official' measurements released by NASA are bogus and that the astronauts could not have got out of the LEM.


Look at the pictures dumbass. It shows the astronauts climbing out of the lander.


20) The water sourced air conditioner backpacks should have produced frequent explosive vapour discharges. They never did.


Only if there was a leak, moron.


21) During the Apollo 14 flag setup ceremony, the flag would not stop fluttering.


Extended oscillations due to lack of atmosphere to dampen them.


22) With more than a two second signal transmission round trip, how did a camera pan upward to track the departure of the Apollo 16 LEM? Gus Grissom, before he got burned alive in the Apollo I disaster A few minutes before he was burned to death in the Apollo I tragedy, Gus Grissom said, 'Hey, you guys in the control center, get with it. You expect me to go to the moon and you can't even maintain telephonic communications over three miles.' This statement says a lot about what Grissom thought about NASA's progress in the great space race.


Could be a signal sent from the LEM as the camera probably didn’t have a high-gain antenna. Remote control had been around for nearly 70 years at the time of the moon landings.


23) Why did NASA's administrator resign just days before the first Apollo mission?


Because the moon landings were fake of course.


24) NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear.


The Watergate Scandal broke with only about a dozen people knowing. Even if only 100 knew it would have broken and been more convincing than this babble.


25) In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to "see" the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!


All Apollo astronauts have increased incidents of cataracts as a result of passing through the belts.


26) The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man's own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions). Gus Grissom was obviously trying to make a big statement as he placed a lemon in the window of the Apollo I spacecraft as it sat ready for launch!


???


27) CNN issued the following report, "The radiation belts surrounding Earth may be more dangerous for astronauts than previously believed (like when they supposedly went through them thirty years ago to reach the Moon.) The phenomenon known as the 'Van Allen Belts' can spawn (newly discovered) 'Killer Electrons' that can dramatically affect the astronauts' health."


CNN, the conspiracy junkie’s information source.


28) In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator.


Ah, what we could do before bloatware!


29) If debris from the Apollo missions was left on the Moon, then it would be visible today through a powerful telescope, however no such debris can be seen. The Clementine probe that recently mapped the Moons surface failed to show any Apollo artefacts left by Man during the missions. Where did the Moon Buggy and base of the LM go?


A telescope would require a mirror over a mile wide to provide the angular resolution to observe the equipment on the moon.


30) In the year 2005 NASA does not have the technology to land any man, or woman on the Moon, and return them safely to Earth.


They don’t have the funding.


31) Film evidence has recently been uncovered of a mis-labelled, unedited, behind-the-scenes video film, showing the crew of Apollo 11 staging part of their photography. The film evidence is shown in the video "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!". and appears above in the 'Why Did Apollo 11 Astronauts Lie About Being In Deep Space?' section.


Several fake scenes were made to ‘rehearse’ the landings and to better portray scenes that didn’t show up well enough for publishing. This doesn’t change the convincing photography that naysayers so desperately try to debunk with poorly thought out conspiracy theories.


32) Why did the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History's greatest accomplishments?


They destroyed all the blue prints for the Avro Arrow as well as all the aircraft, an advanced Canadian interceptor for basically no reason other than politics. You can still see a Lunar Rover and Lander today though.


33) Why did NASA need to airbrush out anomalies from lunar footage of the Moon if they have nothing to hide?


For aesthetics and to clear things up for the viewing public. WWII fighter pilots used to doctor their photos to emphasis the enemy markings. Not to hide things but to emphasize them.

[mcrit]

OK, in that era the Russians wanted to do everything that they could to make the Americans look bad. You can bet your last dollar that the reds had radar and all sorts of other surviellence on the Apollo missions. If something was screwy don't you think the reds would have been all over it at the time?

[...]

Conspiracy theorists ... Bozos in my opinion.

So what's my advice to Bozos who don't believe we went to the moon?

"Get stuffed!" or maybe "Flush your head down the toilet."

Am I mocking you nut case conspiracy theory types? Damned straight I am ... because you're friggin' idiots!

Oh, but then I'm part of the cover up team aren't I? Placed here to throw "real free thinkers" off the fact trail.

The Old Fogducker

This is AWESOME!!!

...keep goin'