Russian rockets were a bit more reliable than their American counterparts in the early days, but they had plenty of failures. As stated by the previous poster, lift capacity was the main advantage of the early Soviet space program and it was a huge lead in the late 50's. Kruschev is supposed to have laughed when he heard how tiny Explorer 1 was. However, by 1964 with the launch of the first two stage Saturn I, the United States had a more powerful rocket than the Soviets. By 1967, the first Saturn V launch would give NASA a more powerful rocket than anything the Soviets would ever launch. The Energia rocket was close to the Saturn V in capacity, and could have exceeded its payload with some improvements, but it came twenty years later and only made two launches. The Saturn rockets were on the drawing board at least a couple of years prior to the start of the Apollo program.

One possible counter to the radiation argument you could have is that both NASA and Soviet Union sent geiger-counter equiped probes to the vicinity of the moon (and through the deadly Van Allen belts) in 1959. If there was a conspiracy to keep the radiation levels concealed it would predate the Apollo program by two years and require the US and Russia to cooperate on this concealment during the worst period of the Cold War. This would also mean that both nations knew that the Moon challenge was a farce from the very start. It was awfully nice of the Russians not to spill the beans.

Be proud, man! That's one nice site! =D>

While your videos are probably not going to make a passionate hoax believer see the lunacy (pun intended) of his "arguments", for a person who's just been exposed to the HBs, this might show them the more sensible possibility.

Kruschev is supposed to have laughed when he heard how tiny Explorer 1 was.

Was it Explorer or the Vanguard "grapefruit" that caused the laughter?

Remember, not just the Russians, but also the Soviets, and more to the point, the Russians after the fall of the USSR, who've been releasing Soviet secrets to the world ever since. And yet, no word of their complicity in this has leaked out yet. :-? :^o :roll:

__________________
GhiaPet Home Page

ops: Sorry.....(but you'll wish you listened when the mutant trees come to your town).

Very nice site, although personally I found the tone of the written text a slightly disconcerting blend of aggression combined with just a hint of the guy at the start of 'Plan 9 from Outer Space'. That's just me though - there is certainly some nice stuff in there! =D>

If you wanted to add more, Donnie B's idea above is excellent. Two other areas you could perhaps concentrate on as well; The sheer scale of the project (500,000 workers in nearly 20,000 companies over 10 years is a big deal) and my old favourite, the Tracking to & from the moon.

Oh, congratulations on your Master's, by the way! =D> =D> \/

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

I suppose I was aiming these videos at people who were not yet totally corrupted and honestly looking around. You know, they see a link for that "Send me $25 to see my hidden Apollo footage that shows Armstrong faking it-which should be public domain anyway-but nevermind, just send me money," which they should balk at. They then run across my site with FREE videos, which they watch.

Converting the corrupted would be a far more detailed project than I could attempt. My main goal was merely to say: "You have a video huh, Mr Hoax Man? Well TWO can play at this game, and my editing mojo has more kung fu than yours."

We'll see what kind of random traffic I get.

__________________
Once I thought that I was wrong,
But I was mistaken.

See my Lunar Hoax Debunking Page with documentaries HERE:::
HUMANS HAVE WALKED ON THE MOON

I agree. That argument really backs HBs into a corner. It proves that something the size of an S IV went to the moon. Most people are smart enough to realize that if we can send an empty rocket to the moon, we can easily find volunteers to ride it. Hell, if you had a space ship and you calculated that the occupant had only a 10% chance of making the trip alive, I'd still volunteer to go. And a horde of other people would be in line behind me.

Not to change the subject, but here's something that has always irritated me. In the movie Contact (I haven't read the book) the senator asks "what would it take to fake a signal from ET?" He implies that the rich guy faked the signal using satellites. That part ruins the movie for me because obviously a satellite cannot mimic a stationary signal. Why was that even in the movie?

if we can send an empty rocket to the moon, we can easily find volunteers to ride it

But the retort is that, yeah, we can send them there, but they'll be dead when they arrive, because they can't survive the Van Allen Radiation Belt.

Not to change the subject, but here's something that has always irritated me. In the movie Contact (I haven't read the book) the senator asks "what would it take to fake a signal from ET?" He implies that the rich guy faked the signal using satellites. That part ruins the movie for me because obviously a satellite cannot mimic a stationary signal. Why was that even in the movie?

I read the book, a long time ago, and it's all very clever. The Gov want people to think it was a hoax, even though they themselves don't know whether or not it was a hoax, or indeed, just what the hell is going on. I suppose instead of just admitting they don't know, they are willing to admit that the whole world might just have been taken for a ride by a rich industrialist who 'somehow' faked the signal. It's really just a play on proof vs faith. I recommend the book, even though it doesn't follow the film very closely (or the other way round!), but the thinking behind the suspected fakery is there.

__________________
Things are only impossible until they're not!-Captain Jean-Luc Picard

Admin of the new and very much improved Apollohoax forum