Its been shown many times on this BB and many other places that the lunar landings could not have been faked on earth, LEO, LLO without landing, any combination of the above, etc. If you have substantive evidance that teh lunar landings could be faked, please provide.

Ummmmm, to go to the Moon?

Why go on vacation when you can look at pictures of the beach?

Why travel to Antarctica when it snows here?

Why explore the Pyramids when those guys are dead anyway?

Looter, at least put a little effort into this. You're just sounding silly.

If you don't understand the point in human beings expanding their knowledge, there's little point in wasting your time and everyone else's by posting here. Besides, it can't be PROVEN that something was done when it wasn't. The only people who think the record of the Apollo moon landings was faked are people either too stupid, too lazy or too tunnel visioned to examine the evidence for themselves. You are a good example of a person who has chosen to believe in a hoax, not based on any critical examination of the evidence, but because it suits your particular preconceived notion that "going to the moon is impossible".
You have been challenged to provide evidence that it is impossible, a challenge to which you continue to respond with irrelevancies. We are left to conclude that in your mind it is impossible because that's what you believe. Maybe we could rephrase the question and ask you to explain the basis for your belief?

What's the point of posting to this board when you are apparently unable or unwilling to engage in an examination of the facts?

Did you ever see "Moon Shot", narrated by Barry Corbin? Slayton (who wrote what Corbin narrates) seemed to indicate that the Gemini space-walk was something of a debacle, IIRC - or am I thinking of another mission entirely? And I say "debacle" in terms of the astronaut making the 'walk being barely able to control his orientation or perform any meaningful tasks.

I wish I had a copy of Moon Shot so I could find out.

Anyway, it's a hell of a documentary.

Well you're the Clowns sitting here on earth "proving" that you went to the Moon rather than actually going there, yet you want me to pretend that you would have behaved differently in the past. The best way for fools like you to realize you can't go to the Moon is to try it. But none of you take your beliefs seriously enough to test them in the real world. Simply because your mind is too small to grasp that you could be wrong doesn't "prove" that your right, I'm the only person who can shut down your whole Moon Program for 50 years simply by not believing in it. Could you imagine what the World would be like if they never went to the Moon? Well look around, 'cause you're living in it. Can I imagine what the World would be like if they really went to the Moon, well back in the 70's I had lots of help and the future ain't what it used to be. So bark away, because you can't go to the Moon and you never could.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Such words ring true after 100's of years yet your childish fantasies have faded into nothingness in less than 30 years. I pity you poor fools if realizing than the Apollo Program was only a TV show is such a blow to your World view because it will be that much harder to adjust if the people who tell you what to think ever decide to end the deception. But I would then applaud any of you who had the integrity to still believe in the Man on the Moon when it is no longer politically correct because at least then you could think for yourselves, which is what "Mission Control" was all about. If they can make you believe in the Man on the Moon they can make you can believe in anything.

__________________
"Never believe in anything until it has been officially denied."

And your proof for your statements would be what?

It was in the Shakespeare. What, did you miss it? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Enough with this idiotic flim-flammery of yours.

You've done nothing but babble on like the fellow who's had one too many bottles of fortified wine at the expense of .25c a passer-by downtown.

You're so damn sure that Lunar exploration is a hoax? Prove it. You're calling Buzz Aldrin, Gene Cernan, Wally Schirra, Jim Lovell, Alan Sheppard, Neil Armstrong and countless other astronauts, engineers, scientists, physicists, pilots, computer technicians, aerospace engineers, contractors and just plain folks liars.

You've put them all on trial in your court of opinion and are accusing them of some sort of chicanery.

I'm not sure about the Canadian legal system, but in the United States a body is still innocent until proven guilty. Since there's volumes of evidence - indeed, enough to fill many warehouses if it were all printed out - that men in fact have successfully gone to and returned from the Moon, I'd like to see your evidence that mankind hasn't been there.

I recommend that you steer clear of the following already-debunked arguments:

Lighting issues, the films Capricorn One, Diamonds Are Forever or 2001: A Space Odyssey, dust under the LEM exhaust, crosshairs on photos, the Apollo 1 fire, the consitency of moon rocks, the shape of markings on moon rocks, the motion of the flag when it was snapped in place, van Allen belt radiation, the behavior of Hasselblad cameras, the quality of the video feeds, and just about any other fodder that's been debunked.

You may begin now:

... the Gemini space-walk was something of a debacle

Yes, that sounds about right. And it was. The Gemini suits didn't have very advanced restraint layers, so they had the same problem that nearly killed Leonov. Apollo suits, especially the J-mission suits, had very advanced restraint and assistance mechanisms, but weren't as comfortable as the Gemini suits, according to the astronauts.

As for mobility, it's just one of those things where you know all the physics that applies to a situation, but that doesn't mean you can get out there and perform it. We've gone through how many variations on the "jet pack" for astronaut EVA? Great ideas on paper, but they aren't practical. The latest incarnation is an emergency-only attachment.

The Gemini astronauts had the task of learning a skill by trial and error, and there was plenty of error. But once you know what works and what doesn't work, you can train others to concentrate on what works.

Looter: Don't call people names on this board. This will be your only warning.

Actually, now that I've read this thread more carefully, many people here need to watch their language and manners. If someone posts something insulting, don't reply in kind. BE POLITE. The more it hurts to be polite, the more important it is.

Well you're the Clowns sitting here on earth "proving" that you went to the Moon rather than actually going there, yet you want me to pretend that you would have behaved differently in the past. The best way for fools like you to realize you can't go to the Moon is to try it.
Looter, please try to remain calm.

First off, asking us to go to the Moon to prove it was done during Apollo is not a useful argument. We don't have the resources amongst us - I've got about $12.85 on me right now [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] and nobody is going to fund us to go there just to prove something that already happened.

Second, we have a massive amount of evidence that we did, indeed, go to the Moon during Apollo. We have flight hardware, tracking records from independent sources, the consistent record of thousands of people who worked directly or indirectly on the missions, our own varied expertise in physics and engineering, samples which are indisputably not Earthly in origin and not meteorites, a gazillion pages of documentation... and so on.

Third, there is no credible evidence we did not go to the Moon. Every argument we have seen is either an "anomaly" which can be explained with a little knowledge of the subject, or an alleged testimony from someone who curiously enough didn't exist or has other severe credibility problems, or an out-of-context quote snippet, all covered by sinister and inherently disprovable claims of conspiracy.

But none of you take your beliefs seriously enough to test them in the real world. Simply because your mind is too small to grasp that you could be wrong doesn't "prove" that your right,
Au contraire, we take our "beliefs" seriously enough to test them against empirical evidence. Have you not seen the calculations of film exposure or radiation shielding adequacy, the analysis of computer adequacy, engine reliability, and trajectory differences? The tests performed of shadow convergence/divergence? We don't just deny HB claims; we work out why they are incorrect.

I'm the only person who can shut down your whole Moon Program for 50 years simply by not believing in it.
This is a rather powerful claim. Would you care to explain in further detail how your personal disbelief will prevent further lunar exploration for another 20 years, or how it has prevented it for the past 30?

Could you imagine what the World would be like if they never went to the Moon? Well look around, 'cause you're living in it. Can I imagine what the World would be like if they really went to the Moon, well back in the 70's I had lots of help and the future ain't what it used to be. So bark away, because you can't go to the Moon and you never could.
I'm afraid this is claim is not really evidence for your claim of an Apollo hoax, at least not without more detail. Can you elucidate what kind of "help" you had, and what records you have of this vision of a reality where we did vs. did not go to the Moon?

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Such words ring true after 100's of years yet your childish fantasies have faded into nothingness in less than 30 years.
Actually, our understanding of the Apollo program is not a fantasy, but based on hard engineering and science principles and evidence.

Not to mention the experience many of us have had with people who really worked on Apollo. I had the honor of working, a little bit, with Max Faget and C.C. Johnson, two key figures in the Apollo program (two decades after Apollo). It will take more than your characterizations for me to consider their work a "childish fantasy".

I pity you poor fools if realizing than the Apollo Program was only a TV show is such a blow to your World view because it will be that much harder to adjust if the people who tell you what to think ever decide to end the deception. But I would then applaud any of you who had the integrity to still believe in the Man on the Moon when it is no longer politically correct because at least then you could think for yourselves, which is what "Mission Control" was all about. If they can make you believe in the Man on the Moon they can make you can believe in anything.
What evidence do you have that Apollo was "only a TV show"? Also, who are "they", exactly? And exactly what does "Mission Control" have to do with thinking for oneself?

Looking forward to specific anwers to those questions.

"Never believe in anything until it has been officially denied."
That's not really a very useful rule of thumb. If something that's not true is "officially denied", than you believe in something that's not true.

Anyway, we would enjoy discussing any specific evidence you have that Apollo was hoaxed. But please see previous discussions for lines of argument that have already been debunked.

Well you're the Clowns sitting here on earth "proving" that you went to the Moon rather than actually going there

Well, no, we're responding to claims that we didn't go there. That's an important difference. It's disingenuous to level an accusation and then belittle the target of that accusation when he rises to defend himself.

Besides, going again today will not prove we did it back in 1969. This too is important. How do we know World War II happened? Should we wage it again and see what happens? You're talking about a historical event. Conclusive proof that any historical event happened the way we commonly believe it did (or at all) is impossible. We simply conclude that the best explanation for the body of evidence we have in hand is that the event happened. If we are willing to entertain fantastical and unsubstantiated alternate explanations for that evidence, we will be less sure it happned. But fortunately we generally do not accept speculative alternate explanations without some proof that it actually happened that way.

Simply because your mind is too small to grasp that you could be wrong doesn't "prove" that your right

Why do you propose that's what's happening here? In all your bluster have you failed to consider that you could be wrong, and that all your alleged anomalies and inconsistencies have perfectly plausible and reasonable explanations?

We do not profess to have proved the authenticity of the moon missions simply by our unwillingness to believe they could have been faked. In my case, I assert the authenticity of the landings because I have very carefully examined the Apollo evidence and have found it to be entirely appropriate and consistent. And exceptionally voluminous, by the way. And I have also examined the various theories which purport to explain away that evidence and establish instead evidence for a hoax, and have found them to be, for lack of a more polite word, ignorant in the extreme.

Now when faced with the question of whether my knowledge is deficient or whether the hoax believers' knowledge is deficient, I note that I have earned certifications of expertise in the physical world, and have practiced that profession where the difference between correctness and incorrectness is also the difference between survival and starvation. The hoax believers, on the contrary, can offer no such certification, and when I apply their theories to the physical world I find they come up short. Further, when I ask the hoax believers to solve real world physical problems, they can't do it.

I therefore conclude it is the hoax believers who are ignorant and not me.

I'm the only person who can shut down your whole Moon Program for 50 years simply by not believing in it.

But that doesn't mean that's a rational disbelief. You can say you don't believe in electricity or don't believe in air, and that doesn't make these things go away. Someone else's inability to prove to you that those things exist does not mean they don't exist. Existence and occurrence are independent of our ability to believe or prove.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Actually in this scene Hamlet is not necessarily accusing Horatio of narrowmindedness. "Your" in this sentence is a definite article, as in, "Take your New York Knicks, Horatio; now there's a fine basketball team." Hamlet is saying that philosophy can only get you so far.

And so what am I to say when a hoax believer tells me certain shadows must have been produced by a studio light and cannot have been made by the sun, and I go into the studio and find that I can't make studio lights produce those same shadows but I can go out in the sun and produce those shadows in seconds? What am I to say when I sit down and perform the geometric calculations which show rigorously that sunlight should indeed produce those shadows?

Indeed, Looter, philosophy will only get you so far. In your argument, however, it will not get you far enough. You need some cold, hard facts, not just name-calling and innuendo.

If they can make you believe in the Man on the Moon they can make you can believe in anything.

What I'm more worried about is people who make you disbelieve in the moon landings on the basis of an entirely groundless and logically invalid argument, despite the mounds upon mounds of appropriate evidence. If they can make you disbelieve in the man on the moon, they can make you disbelieve anything for which there is suitable evidence, including their own motives.

What part of going to the moon do you think is impossible?

I would think launching a six million pound rocket would be up near the top of the list, but I saw that with my own eyes. so what other part of going to the moon do you think was too difficult to accomplish?

Tom

[/quote]Bill S. wrote:

Did you ever see "Moon Shot", narrated by Barry Corbin? Slayton (who wrote what Corbin narrates) seemed to indicate that the Gemini space-walk was something of a debacle, IIRC - or am I thinking of another mission entirely? And I say "debacle" in terms of the astronaut making the 'walk being barely able to control his orientation or perform any meaningful tasks.

I wish I had a copy of Moon Shot so I could find out.

Anyway, it's a hell of a documentary.
[/quote]

Gene Cernan explained his EVA very graphically in his book. At several points he (as well as Stafford) felt like he might not be able to get back in the capsule. While thankfully he did make it back, he was plagued with thoughts that he actually failed his mission. It wasn't made too public, but Ed White had more difficulty on his EVA then he let on. This is explained in Andrew Chaikin's book "A Man on the Moon".

As Jay pointed out, each new mission was trial and error, building on the next. They kept adding toe holds and hand holds on the surface of the capsules. The spacewalkers were rigorously debriefed and this helped train astronauts for future EVA's.

By the end of Gemini, the spacewalks were becoming more successful. And in the later Apollo missions, the CMP would make an EVA to the science platform in the SM to retrieve film and such. By then they had practiced so much and gotten the hardware right that no one complained of any difficulty.

(fixed quote and grammar)

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Thumper on 2002-07-02 08:13 ]</font>

At several points he (as well as Stafford) felt like he might not be able to get back in the capsule.

The most chilling part was when Deke Slayton pulled Stafford aside before the mission and whispered something to him and when Cernan asked about it later Stafford told him Deke had reminded him that if Cernan couldn't get back in the spacecraft Stafford's orders were to cut him loose and come home and not try anything stupid.

In a recent TV documentary that I recorded then lost, Stafford mentioned that Deke had told him to bring Cernan back even if he was dead. He didn't want him left in space. This would have meant re enrty with one of the hatches open, which Stafford was not to pleased about. Having Cernans body whipping round outside was also 'worrying'.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: johnwitts on 2002-07-02 18:06 ]</font>

From http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcr...tothemoon.html ..:

"NARRATOR: NASA downplayed the concern, but losing an astronaut during EVA was a very real fear. Hours before the flight began, Deke Slayton, head of the astronaut office, had spoken to Tom Stafford in private about the unthinkable.

TOM STAFFORD: "Tom," he says "NASA management wanted me to let you know if something happens to him out there and if he dies, you've got to bring him back, because we can't afford to have a dead astronaut floating around out there." I looked at him and I said, "We've never talked about this before."

NARRATOR: Cernan is getting his oxygen from an umbilical hose that passes through an open hatch. Stafford must fly the