I'm convinced they were behind schedule, most definitely. I belive the early landings were staged to appease almost everybody and to acquire that much needed preeminence in space.

But you also freely admit that you are not an engineer, that you have no particular experience or expertise in the creation of aerospace technology or any sufficiently complex engineering enterprise.

People all over the world with eminent degrees and considerable industry experience have no problem believing that the Apollo program progressed beyond the Apollo 1 issues and toward a successful landing. What experiential or educational basis can you bring to bear on the issue? Your opinion differs from most others. Why is yours right and theirs wrong?

I'm an engineer. I hold a degree in engineering. I have worked in the industry for a number of years. In other words, I am prepared to entertain a discussion of any degree of complexity on this topic that you choose to offer. Can you provide an argument sufficient to convince engineering experts that your assessment of the Apollo endeavor is credible?