Moon Landing Hoax?

[HAZENDRO]

Wouldnt the moon be too hot to walk on?

[TheWaffle]

Wouldnt the moon be too hot to walk on?

What?

[Cheshire Cat]

Wouldnt the moon be too hot to walk on?
Brilliant deduction Sherlock, did you forget to take your medication today?

[vyo476]

Wouldnt the moon be too hot to walk on?

If anything it'd be pretty darn cold, what with the almost complete lack of atmosphere and all that.

Actually, if everyone doesn't mind, I thought I'd bring something else up - the Outer Space Treaty. The following comes from Wikipedia:

It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications

The irony of a treaty that protects a giant space rock with no life from military expansion while people down here on Earth are getting blown up on a daily basis is almost too much to bare.

[vyo476]

There's actually another part of the Outer Space Treaty which I found to be intellectually stimulating. Check out this quote from Article II:

Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

In other words, nations like us aren't legally allowed to colonize other worlds - unless those colonies are internationally administered. Just think - the UN in space! Getting nothing accomplished on an intergalactic scale!

[HAZENDRO]

im sorry i didnt mean to say walk..i was trying o say that when we walked on the moon and we was filming
"With no atmosphere on the moon, x-rays, solar and cosmic radiation would have caused the Kodak Ektachrome 64 and 160 ASA (ISO) 70 mm sprocketed film in the metal casing of the modified but unshielded Hasselblad 500 EL/70 camera to "fog" or lose all contrast. Radiation would have entered via the camera lens. Jan Lundberg of NASA stated that x-rays do not expose common emulsion. When told that X-rays at an airport do destroy Ektachrome film, he stated that the concentration of x-rays in space is hundreds of times lower. "
Plus wouldnt the heat that reflects off the sun on the moon that gives it the abilty to glow at night make a difference in the temp the moon would be?

[9sublime]

im sorry i didnt mean to say walk..i was trying o say that when we walked on the moon and we was filming
"With no atmosphere on the moon, x-rays, solar and cosmic radiation would have caused the Kodak Ektachrome 64 and 160 ASA (ISO) 70 mm sprocketed film in the metal casing of the modified but unshielded Hasselblad 500 EL/70 camera to "fog" or lose all contrast. Radiation would have entered via the camera lens. Jan Lundberg of NASA stated that x-rays do not expose common emulsion. When told that X-rays at an airport do destroy Ektachrome film, he stated that the concentration of x-rays in space is hundreds of times lower. "
Plus wouldnt the heat that reflects off the sun on the moon that gives it the abilty to glow at night make a difference in the temp the moon would be?


Maybe they put the camera in some kind of casing.

[HAZENDRO]

Maybe they put the camera in some kind of casing.

Maybe, but do you think they had that type of technology then?

[Rokerijdude11]

Well According to NASA this guy has a valid question ,it seems that we landed on a particular area of the moon each time.....as the side of the moon we chose did take advantahe of solar radiance and the warm temps it can bring with it

that side of the moon has different day and night tempratures the moon itself has a WILDLY fluctuating temprature from -364 to +250 depending on whether or not the sun has hit it
apparently diring high sun cycles the surface can be hot enought to cook a man

while still having craters full of frozen ice

[Dave]

Actually, this is one of the few conspiracy theories that raises some real questions that I've never seen answered. The guy brings up some good points about the camere and how it should have been foggy. When you pass through the van allen belt, you get exposed to massive amounts of radiation. So much radiation that it probably would have killed the astronauts. Thats why the Russians claim they never got to the moon. As for 9sublime's question, if they had some kind of casing for the camera, it would have been on the ship's manifest. The manifest for these missions is public record, and it wasn't on there. NASA calculates fuel, approach angles, course corrections, etc., for these missions based on the weight of all of the objects in the manifest. Rocket fuel is extremely expensive, so they don't put extra fuel in. A lead box for the camera would be pretty heavy and would definately have thrown off all of NASA's calculations.

[HAZENDRO]

Actually, this is one of the few conspiracy theories that raises some real questions that I've never seen answered. The guy brings up some good points about the camere and how it should have been foggy. When you pass through the van allen belt, you get exposed to massive amounts of radiation. So much radiation that it probably would have killed the astronauts. Thats why the Russians claim they never got to the moon. As for 9sublime's question, if they had some kind of casing for the camera, it would have been on the ship's manifest. The manifest for these missions is public record, and it wasn't on there. NASA calculates fuel, approach angles, course corrections, etc., for these missions based on the weight of all of the objects in the manifest. Rocket fuel is extremely expensive, so they don't put extra fuel in. A lead box for the camera would be pretty heavy and would definately have thrown off all of NASA's calculations.

Kind of Scary..Knowing the fact we been lied to..I'ts no telling what else thier not tellin us..

[9sublime]

Lol, how about a House Of Politics invesitgation into this? Someone dig up the records of what was on the spaceship, and see if the camera was inside a box.

Have they filmed any moon landings since the first, and with what cameras?

[Dave]

Kind of Scary..Knowing the fact we been lied to..I'ts no telling what else thier not tellin us..

Let's not fall into the fallacy of saying "they lied here so they must be lying about other stuff too." That's just bad logic.

9Sublime, I've been working to find the official manifest for the Apollo 11 mission, but to no avail. I might have been wrong about them being a matter of public record. LBJ made some of the files associated with the Apollo missions classified with a declassification date of 2026, which raises a whole different set of questions. I have found this good sight about how the film should have been damaged by temperature variations and radiation.

http://www.nicholasweiss.com/NASA2.html

One other question that has always bothered me was about the filming of Neil Armstrongs first steps on the moon. How was it being filmed from outside the LM? Does anybody know if NASA has given an explanation to this? Maybe I'm ignorant about this one, but it just seems odd.

[n0spam4me]

For the record, if we see examples of PROVEN malfeasents (example, Nixon ...)
and therefore we have right to NOT trust that person with anything at any time. For good reason! If your spouse cheated on you, just how eager to give them unconditional trust?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and as we all know
9/11 was an inside job
.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's not fall into the fallacy of saying "they lied here so they must be lying about other stuff too." That's just bad logic.

9Sublime, I've been working to find the official manifest for the Apollo 11 mission, but to no avail. I might have been wrong about them being a matter of public record. LBJ made some of the files associated with the Apollo missions classified with a declassification date of 2026, which raises a whole different set of questions. I have found this good sight about how the film should have been damaged by temperature variations and radiation.

http://www.nicholasweiss.com/NASA2.html

One other question that has always bothered me was about the filming of Neil Armstrongs first steps on the moon. How was it being filmed from outside the LM? Does anybody know if NASA has given an explanation to this? Maybe I'm ignorant about this one, but it just seems odd.

[Dave]

For the record, if we see examples of PROVEN malfeasents (example, Nixon ...)
and therefore we have right to NOT trust that person with anything at any time. For good reason! If your spouse cheated on you, just how eager to give them unconditional trust?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and as we all know
9/11 was an inside job
.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Youre falling into that bad logic of saying "the government did it." Nixon is long dead and buried. He isn't running the government anymore. The government is made up of individuals, it isn't just some continuous body that can't change. By your logic I could say John Marshall was power hungry, so that is reason to distrust the Supreme Court for its entire existance. It just doesn't make sense.

[n0spam4me]

do you not see that the current administration has demonstrated total contempt for RULE OF LAW?

[Sgt Schultz]

One other question that has always bothered me was about the filming of Neil Armstrongs first steps on the moon. How was it being filmed from outside the LM? Does anybody know if NASA has given an explanation to this? Maybe I'm ignorant about this one, but it just seems odd.

NASA had to have known how important it would be to have the moment filmed so they worked out a solution. This site also discusses a lot of other things I've read in this thread.

If Neil Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who shot the video of him descending the ladder and taking his initial steps on the lunar surface?

The TV camera was stowed in an instrument pallet in the LM descent stage. When Armstrong was at the top of the ladder, he pulled a lanyard to swing open the pallet, which was hinged at the bottom. The TV camera, which was attached to it, also swung down. Buzz Aldrin then switched on the camera from the LM cabin. The camera was pointing at the ladder of the LM so that TV pictures of Armstrong's initial steps on the Moon could be relayed to the world. The camera was later removed from its mounting and placed on a tripod some 30 feet from the LM, where it was left unattended to cover the remainder of the moonwalk. (http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm)

Personally I think people have been watching Capricorn One one too many times.

[Dave]

NASA had to have known how important it would be to have the moment filmed so they worked out a solution. This site also discusses a lot of other things I've read in this thread.

If Neil Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who shot the video of him descending the ladder and taking his initial steps on the lunar surface?

The TV camera was stowed in an instrument pallet in the LM descent stage. When Armstrong was at the top of the ladder, he pulled a lanyard to swing open the pallet, which was hinged at the bottom. The TV camera, which was attached to it, also swung down. Buzz Aldrin then switched on the camera from the LM cabin. The camera was pointing at the ladder of the LM so that TV pictures of Armstrong's initial steps on the Moon could be relayed to the world. The camera was later removed from its mounting and placed on a tripod some 30 feet from the LM, where it was left unattended to cover the remainder of the moonwalk. (http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm)

Personally I think people have been watching Capricorn One one too many times.

Thanks for clearing that one up. I'll accept that explanation, but many of the explanations on the website you posted are a little too difficult to believe. Saying that astronauts spending a total of 2 hours in the van allen belt would only recieve one rem of radiation is definately one of the points that I have to disagree with. To say the least, I've seen conflicting reports. As for Kodak making special resistant film for the mission, if they did, Kodak isn't aware of it. Kodak said they gave NASA the same standard Ektachrome 64 ASA film they use on earth. The cameras being used were the Hasselblad Super Wide Camera with Zeiss Biogon 38mm lens. When actor Michael Plain's crew used these cameras to film at the south pole, they complained the cameras were freezing up at -22 degrees F. These cameras certainly couldn't handle the extreme temperature variations of the moon.

[Rokerijdude11]

hmmmmmmm No roker in here either?

[steveox]

I belive it was all fake.Theres no way we had that kind of technology back then with a tiny capsule.Theres no way we had those pictures like that to transmitt back to earth.I belive those 3 astronauts orbited the earth until it was time to come home.Hollywood did the rest. The moon was taped in the dessert of arizona in night and make it look they were on the moon.And get this the american flag stood straght up. And you saw the flag waved once could it a lil wind pushed it? theres no air on the moon! And get this look at the shadows from the sun even those are not correct.

[9sublime]

I am still unconvinced about the moon landing.

However, the flag would move if it was forceable stuck in the ground.

[n0spam4me]

Hey....

If it is a hoax, and we really did not go to the moon,
NOW WHAT? How does the fact or fiction of a manned moon mission change your life one way or the other?

Tell ya what, The JFK assasination, and 9/11/2001
CONSPIRACY fact or fiction - DOES affect all of our lives!?!?!?!?!?!

Please can we focus on the really important stuff and leave the fluff for sometime when we have some "spare time"...?


or?
.

[steveox]

Moon Landing was a way to challenge the russians to do it.And they couldnt. Our Goverment was trying to test the soviets on their technology.

[USMC the Almighty]

Moon Landing was a way to challenge the russians to do it.And they couldnt. Our Goverment was trying to test the soviets on their technology.

At least your conspiracy has a legitimate motivation behind it. The 9/11 kool-aid drinkers still haven't gotten that far.

[Abraxis Axis]

is that all your rednecked Hillbilly azz is capable of is Insulting others? why the Fock they chose you to moderate is beyond me ..........

one day i may check in to find you actually posting something of meaning?

I doubt it

all i see these days is your arrogant Im better than you manner and insults around the house

isnt your sister calling you?

[USMC the Almighty]

I didn't mean to insult anybody. I'm challenging the 9/11 conspiracy theorists to explain concisely and clearly (like steveox has done for the moon conspiracy) exactly why the Bush Administraton would risk their lives, the future of the Republican party, and an outbreak of all-out anarchy to slaughter over 3,000 innocent Americans.

And with that, I better walk away before I say something to you that I may later regret.

[steveox]

Let me tell you why i belive in this theory.Just examine those films and pics very carefuly and soon youll have the answer. Look at those shawdows where the light is. Look at those astronauts glass mask. I caught many hollywood mistakes in the movies i seen those same mistakes in those NASA moon footage.

[9sublime]

Roker, you NEED to chill your beans. I've apologised for my insults, directed at you, and they were hardly that offensive. Dense and moron I think were the words I used.

You have used Brit to insult me, and now you are stereotyping a large portion of the American public as well as insulting USMC directly. Stop it now.

[n0spam4me]

Question for USMC
Do you ever diminish the capability or tactical readiness of your unit to conduct a drill?

[steveox]

Can we stick to the subject as i posted? I asked yall to exam those pics very carefuly.And it will hit your head. Just like i saw mistakes on certain movies hollywood isnt all that perfect you know.They cant make any movie too realistic just look at Oceans 13 for example.

[USMC the Almighty]

Question for USMC
Do you ever diminish the capability or tactical readiness of your unit to conduct a drill?

No, but what are you really getting it?

[Abraxis Axis]

I didn't mean to insult anybody. I'm challenging the 9/11 conspiracy theorists to explain concisely and clearly (like steveox has done for the moon conspiracy) exactly why the Bush Administraton would risk their lives, the future of the Republican party, and an outbreak of all-out anarchy to slaughter over 3,000 innocent Americans.

And with that, I better walk away before I say something to you that I may later regret.

Yes you Did
The 9/11 kool-aid drinkers still haven't gotten that far.

you didnt challenge anyone directly in that statement? And you have misdirected the posters thread by blurring the moon landing with 9-11.

and as well you have then dragged in the republican party as well as the Bush Administration.and then have the gall to refer to the "Slaughter" (Sensationalism) of 3000 lives... you have completly trashed the thread and moved the post to 9-11

your obvious sensationalism is a direct insult to the families of those victims....and the honor of the dead themselves


which it was clearly titled the "Moon Landing" post...This is how Moderators behave? how then can you with clear mind then enforce rules upon another?

why not address 9-11 conspiracist in a 9-11 thread thats a novel idea isnt it?9 sublime Im sorry but USMC is also a super Moderator and therefore should be held to a higher standard he should not be insulting posters at every turn

he should look to others like yourself to see how to truly be Moderate

[USMC the Almighty]

Yes you Did


you didnt challenge anyone directly in that statement? And you have misdirected the posters thread by blurring the moon landing with 9-11.

and as well you have then dragged in the republican party as well as the Bush Administration.and then have the gall to refer to the "Slaughter" (Sensationalism) of 3000 lives... you have completly trashed the thread and moved the post to 9-11

your obvious sensationalism is a direct insult to the families of those victims....and the honor of the dead themselves


which it was clearly titled the "Moon Landing" post...This is how Moderators behave? how then can you with clear mind then enforce rules upon another?

why not address 9-11 conspiracist in a 9-11 thread thats a novel idea isnt it?9 sublime Im sorry but USMC is also a super Moderator and therefore should be held to a higher standard he should not be insulting posters at every turn

he should look to others like yourself to see how to truly be Moderate

Roker, I'm not going to try to reason with you because, if history is any indicator, it is an exercise in futility. Instead I'm going to kindly remind you that it was nospam, not me, who brought 9/11 into this thread.

[Rokerijdude11]

good please dont because Roker didnt post that Abraxis did

[USMC the Almighty]

good please dont because Roker didnt post that Abraxis did

Roker, you never fooled anyone with your little game and quite frankly, I've received PMs telling me how irritating you are with your 2 different usernames -- and they're right. Everytime you get proved wrong (like above) you just log on to your other name and derail the thread.

Your posting styles are identical, you've admitted that they are both your username, and they both have the same IP number.

[Rokerijdude11]

Roker, you never fooled anyone with your little game and quite frankly, I've received PMs telling me how irritating you are with your 2 different usernames -- and they're right. Everytime you get proved wrong (like above) you just log on to your other name and derail the thread.

Your posting styles are identical, you've admitted that they are both your username, and they both have the same IP number.

UMMMMMMM


Excuse your Highness...............can you Find ONE......JUST ONE instance where either Roker Or Abraxis has EVER ONCE denied anything?

ill be waiting and i wont hold my breath

[vyo476]

Fine. I'll bite.

Rokerijdude11, are you the same user who posts under the name "Abraxis_Axis"?

Edit: Apparently this is my 1000th post. Celebration?

[Abraxis Axis]

OHHHHH

I see, when you have been caught BLATANTLY disregarding the Rules, as well as ALLOWING ONES personal opinions to Interefere with the Job of being a "Moderate" .....Its at that point we TRY to de-rail the thread as you have accused me of


I see Moderators are allowed to do what they want without fear of reprecussion? thats what we have here eh? So being you have disregarded the rules, and that you have continued to be belligerent and condescending.....you have decided that you will use the Roker/Abraxis thing



to divert attention away from the FACT that you have NOT been a Moderate at all........YOU are in fact DOING exactly what it was you have accused roker of.........
Diverting the direction of the thread



dual accounts? Boy im POSITIVE that NOBODY here is Guilty of that? c'mon now...............have you Ever seen me or Roker deny or spin it any other direction?
Dont bother to answer i already know that neither of us Have its just a few of you who are still fixated on something that quite frankly is common Knowledge

3 pages of Moderator behaving like a CHILD who cant have his way..................
Also abusing your powers BY RUNNING IP numbers for PERSONAL GAIN


NICE JOB PAL

[Abraxis Axis]

Fine. I'll bite.

Rokerijdude11, are you the same user who posts under the name "Abraxis_Axis"?

That answer has been given at this website NUMEROUS times............................

[vyo476]

That answer has been given at this website NUMEROUS times............................

Then answer it again. Answer the question straight up, no more dancing around it.

[Rokerijdude11]

Then answer it again. Answer the question straight up, no more dancing around it.

NUMEROUS times............................



Seems like Yourself USMC and Palerider arent the brightest bulbs in the package as its the 3 of you who STILL TO THIS DAY are flogging the horse




The REAL question is..............................................HO W MANY OF US ARE REALLY JUST ME?


you have heard of PROXY ip addresses havent you?


I mean isnt that what has been the case? it isnt ALWAYS the same IP now is it?

[Abraxis Axis]

WTF?

are you telling me they have my Address Roker? what the heck is an IP anyhow?

[vyo476]

NUMEROUS times............................



Seems like Yourself USMC and Palerider arent the brightest bulbs in the package as its the 3 of you who STILL TO THIS DAY are flogging the horse




The REAL question is..............................................HO W MANY OF US ARE REALLY JUST ME?


you have heard of PROXY ip addresses havent you?


I mean isnt that what has been the case? it isnt ALWAYS the same IP now is it?

We're sick of listening to you dodge these questions and complain about how we're mistreating you when you yourself refuse to be honest.

Nice dancing, by the way.

[Rokerijdude11]

WTF?

are you telling me they have my Address Roker? what the heck is an IP anyhow?

ITs a Unique Identifier that the network uses to log your location it is a number like 190.123.67.9

sometimes moderators overstep boundaries when people get them mad and they "Run" the ip address in an attempt to show where you are and if you are someone else

the problem with this theory is a smart user can have a different Ip every time they post if they choose

so its really not a good indicator for sure of anything really

[Rokerijdude11]

We're sick of listening to you dodge these questions and complain about how we're mistreating you when you yourself refuse to be honest.

Nice dancing, by the way.

I havent dodged anything


Follow the rules set forth for everybody else, and nobody will have anything to complain about eh buddy?

[Abraxis Axis]

He has been Honest? I dont see where he has lied or denied anything? therefore how is Honesty an issue? if he had lied about it and said NO im not or denied things THEN his honesty may come into play

you all just dont like him .....so you try at every turn to bait him thse days
I think he has handled it well myself?

[Rokerijdude11]

Thats allright its not my first Rodeo Abraxis

for all they know right now there are 7 of me or is it 9?

sh4t i dont know anymore these days its hell trying to generate interest sometimes

[Segep]

I'm a n00b so take it for what it's worth. If you are the same person, Abraxis and Roker....that's really irritating, and until I know for sure, I think I'll stop paying attention to either of you.

One thing that bugs me about his board is I don't know which of you have more than one account.

[Abraxis Axis]

ok then
ill accept that .have a great evening

[USMC the Almighty]

I'm a n00b so take it for what it's worth. If you are the same person, Abraxis and Roker....that's really irritating, and until I know for sure, I think I'll stop paying attention to either of you.

One thing that bugs me about his board is I don't know which of you have more than one account.

They have the same IP address, as if their identical posting style wasn't enough...

[Abraxis Axis]

do they ALWAYS have the same ip address?

[Vlad]

There are no double accounts in here. If you are you are getting instant ban. We have filters that find out even if you use PROXY.

[steveox]

Take a good look at this photo!
http://www.famousquotes.com.au/userimages/user1204_1144663445.jpg
Should the moon be all bright white? Just like when you walk outside and the sun doesnt shine on a portion doesnt it? It shines everywhere.According to this photo it looks like theres a hollywood stage light shine like that. Just like it does in the movies.

[USMC the Almighty]

Take a good look at this photo!
http://www.famousquotes.com.au/userimages/user1204_1144663445.jpg
Should the moon be all bright white? Just like when you walk outside and the sun doesnt shine on a portion doesnt it? It shines everywhere.According to this photo it looks like theres a hollywood stage light shine like that. Just like it does in the movies.

Do they claim that light is the sun?

[steveox]

According to NASA the sun was shining on their side when they landed.They couldnt have landed on the dark side now could they? Watch here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR-IjVv5NNQ

[Rokerijdude11]

If they had landed on the dark side as stated earlier in the thread they would have froze to death......although then it would likewise stand to reason that they would possibly have been cooked in direct sunlight

[steveox]

Why you think the Russians couldnt attempt to land a man on the moon? Cause they knew it was too impossible to do back then.Even they knew it was a hoax.But they couldnt speak out cause no one wouldnt belive them back in that time.