The latest moon hoax documentary

[foghorn]

I am already a full on totally suspicious of each and every claim made by every human

Alex, I have found the following free book which you may find interesting.
What do you think of this free book by: Paolo Attivissimo

I’m Paolo Attivissimo, a British-Italian science journalist specialized in research into conspiracy theories, hoaxes and urban legends

Wouldn’t the camera films have melted or frozen on the Moon?
IN A NUTSHELL: No. Temperature extremes refer to the lunar surface, from which the films were insulated by vacuum. In any case they were not reached during the Apollo missions, which landed on the Moon shortly after the beginning of the two-week-long lunar day at the landing sites, when ground temperatures were far lower. The films were also a heat-resistant type used for high-altitude reconnaissance and the cameras were treated to reflect the heat from direct exposure to the Sun, which is comparable with the heat from sunlight on a mountaintop on Earth.

From book here

Index
https://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/

How come the Van Allen radiation belts didn’t kill the astronauts?

IN A NUTSHELL: Because these belts are not as deadly as they’re often made out to be and also because they’re belts, so you can fly around them. Russian spaceflights flew animals through them without problems. NASA also conducted sensor-laden uncrewed test flights to measure the effectiveness of the shielding of the Apollo command module. The trajectories of all the moonshots were calculated to fly around the core of these donut-shaped belts and pass rapidly through their less intense outer portions. The astronauts on the International Space Station periodically pass through parts of these belts and they don’t die.

From here

Here James Van Allen replies to an e-mail. Asking about travel through the belts.
From the free book

Dear Mr. Lambert,

In reply to your e-mail, I send you the following copy of a response that I wrote to another inquiry about 2 months ago --

- The radiation belts of the Earth do, indeed, pose important constraints on the safety of human space flight.

- The very energetic (tens to hundreds of MeV) protons in the inner radiation belt are the most dangerous and most difficult to shield against. Specifically, prolonged flights (i.e., ones of many months' duration) of humans or other animals in orbits about the Earth must be conducted at altitudes less than about 250 miles in order to avoid significant radiation exposure.

- A person in the cabin of a space shuttle in a circular equatorial orbit in the most intense region of the inner radiation belt, at an altitude of about 1000 miles, would be subjected to a fatal dosage of radiation in about one week.

- However, the outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage - a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights. I made such estimates in the early 1960s and so informed NASA engineers who were planning the Apollo flights. These estimates are still reliable.

- The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense.

James A. Van Allen.

Here's NASA Astronaut Don Pettit's blog page, talking about Cosmic Rays and equitment in space.
From here

cosmic rays bombard us within Space Station, penetrating the hull almost as if it was not there. They zap everything inside, causing such mischief as locking up our laptop computers and knocking pixels out of whack in our cameras. The computers recover with a reboot; the camera as suffer permanent damage. After about a year, the images they produce look like they are covered with electronic snow. Cosmic rays contribute most of the radiation dose received by Space Station crews. We have defined lifetime limits, after which you fly a desk for the rest of your career. No one has reached that dose level yet.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Alex, I have found the following free book which you may find interesting.
What do you think of this free book by: Paolo Attivissimo

Well I would be inclined to be very suspicious for a start.

Although I am surprised that there could be a reasonable explaination for the camera and the film as I very going to introduce a conspiracy that folk in the program were involved in ordering flash cameras that would not work on the Moon but would be distributed between the boys involved on set construction to take home to enjoy on holidays. Still we need to wait for hoaxes to debunk all you present of course...anyways why haven't Mythbusters addressed this aspect...I rest my case...you can't use facts to sweep these things under the carpet.

And these belts of radiation you may notice that although I found them alarming I actually avoided any negative comments copping out of doing so merely on the basis that I did not know what I was talking about and this quality of avoiding comment simply because I did not know what I was talking about has unfortunately excluded me from any serious pursuit of a career in you tube conspiracy videos.

However I have done my best to support Fat Freddy by agreeing with all that was presented in the only video I bothered to look at ...and yet he seems little impressed with my conclusion..in fact I don't think he read much of what I posted and certainly failed to read between the lines...mind you that happens I fair bit with my posts, folk think I am just rattling on and so they rush through missing so many little things so subtle they could be missed entirely...

In any event I appreciate you becoming involved...but there are still many matters to address.

Any luck with the lighting issues...I don't see how we can get around them..you did see the expert evidence from those experts in the video....and it was in sub titles so there could be no misunderstanding about what they said..but thinking about it...what if they changed what they said and put in different subtitles..more questions..can you see why I am suspicious...

However if one thing has come out of all this and even I nearly missed it...let us for a moment assume all these points made by Fat Freddy via his backing of particular videos which he sees as his opinion although not expressed by any words from him..well to a degree...all of the points even if established only establish at most that a movie set was used, and in my clumbsy way I have tried to show how such may well fit,....there is nothing in any thing that I have seen that establishes that there was no trip to the Moon....that is the point I am making for Freddy and even supporting his views of the conclusions in the various propositions he finds of concern not one does anything more than support a movie set proposition which actually says nothing as to going or not...and finally what he needs to realise is the only way to put the matter at rest is for him personally to inspect the landing sites and so short of that he is wasting his time...
Alex

 

[paddoboy]

You only think it is silly because you have never given any thought to the difficulties in ruling millions of people.
It is not silly in the least if you think it through.
Alex

I have been a witness to your rather subtle humour for a while now Alex. Always good for a giggle.

Let me now sum up my case.....Firstly it is really damn well impossible for NASA to have pulled off any pretense of landing on the Moon, for the obvious reasons... The incredible thoughtful and scientific build up to the actual first landing by Apollo 11....the original Astronauts, the three scientifically thought out phrases...Mercury, Gemini, and then Apollo....the cold war at that time, and the obvious interest of the USSR in making sure it did happen...the landing of the Luna probe by the USSR just before Apollo 11...the involvement of many tens of thousands of people around the world...Australia's own involvement and the fact that Honeysuckle creek and Parkes Radio telescope were the first to receive the signals back from the Apollo 11 on the Moon's surface.
The psychiatric condition of people pushing conspiracy theories is now well established...they pine for attention [notice how Freddy sometimes near begs for others to watch his videos]they are lonely souls and thrive for excitement to add spice to an otherwise dull listless life...some are criminals like Bart Sibrel, the ratbag that verbally assaulted Buzz Aldrin, and copped a beautiful right cross for his trouble...others are simply charlatans and dishonest liars.
Let's look at how this nonsense conspiracy started...remember the raising of why there were no stars in the background of the famous shot of Armstrong on the surface? Easily explained away and something most normal people are aware of, particularly you Alex as a proficient astro photographer.
Then the dust after the take off of the LM, again explained simply by any student of physics.....
Needing to keep there nonsense being discussed, more and more fabricated aspects were raised and all in turn refuted....all!
Here is a list of many of those....
https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...-landed-on-the-moon-steph-curry/#639e2ebd49d9

The sad part in all of this is why NASA or anyone should need to justify and prove that these things did happen, when the proof is irrefutable that it did. I see it as a blight on the memories of all those astronauts that have died in man's pursuit to walk on Earth's closest neighbour...Chaffee, White and Grissom in Apollo 1, were the first American astronauts to die in the attempt.

Finally Alex, if you did check out Freddy's video, you would know if you followed the whole debate that took place at "cosmoquest" that it was given an undeniable fair hearing over many pages, until finally the perpetrator was found to be a sock and then banned...again illustrating the dishonesty, liars and charlatanism that these fools need to stoop to, to keep there "religion" [conspiracy] alive.

Finally earlier this morning I decided to check out the http://www.sciforums.com/threads/psychology-of-conspiracy-theorists.144995/ thread....the first few pages. Worth noting in those first few pages, how one of this forum's chief woo woo "experts" sees the need to suggest that the holocaust and Jews during WW2 was a conspiracy started by the Jews.
It is outstandingly funny, and even more stupid and outrageous!
In reading that and the nonsense from that well known perpetrator of woo woo, it should be noted that this current perpetrator of woo woo, also supports and thrives on other conspiracy nonsense.

What will these fools and charlatans do when we return to the Moon?
What conspiracy will they see the need to fabricate when we finally get to Mars? The mind boggles!
The facts are in hindsight, that getting to the Moon and back is really easy....the technology, the hardware etc Remember the computer technology needed for Apollo 11 is less then that which powers our I-phones today!
A shame that we, humanity, see the need for militaristic build up etc, rather then putting the money into returning to the Moon, getting to Mars and even beyond.

 

[paddoboy]

I have seen the incident and I think the violet response was most unwise for reasons I think anyone can work out so I won't list them and sidetrack Freddy from presenting his one proof..it only takes one...like the little bit pregnant thing or DrA saying they only needed on scientist to prove him wrong not hundreds..it takes only one proof.

Since it was Buzz that was assaulted, I find his reaction justified, as did the judge when Sibrel [a criminal] took him to court. More importantly, I'm sure you would have reacted in the same way after such verbal assault Alex.
Secondly of course is Freddy has no proof, and neither does any other perpetrator of Moon landings conspiracy have any proof.
All they have is fabricated scenarios that they themselves are too ignorant to explain, or alternatively too much into woo woo to have their little exercise exposed for the nonsense it is.

I failed to mention in my previous post Alex, that much of our history and knowledge of the Moon, is a result of those six landings and the rock samples brought back.

 

[paddoboy]

and finally what he needs to realise is the only way to put the matter at rest is for him personally to inspect the landing sites and so short of that he is wasting his time...
Alex

There are photos of footprints, Luna landing moduls, rover tracks, instruments etc, my previous link has them

 

[paddoboy]

https://www.fastcompany.com/90377951/guess-who-was-waiting-at-the-moon-for-apollo-11-the-russians

Guess who was waiting at the Moon for Apollo 11? The Russians
How the race to the Moon between the United States and the Soviet Union was a race to the very end.

This is the 48th in an exclusive series of 50 articles, one published each day until July 20, exploring the 50th anniversary of the first-ever Moon landing. You can check out 50 Days to the Moon here every day.


When the Apollo 11 spaceship that carried Michael Collins, Buzz Aldrin, and Neil Armstrong from the Earth to the Moon arrived in lunar orbit on Saturday, July 19, 1969, there was already another spaceship in orbit around the Moon waiting for them. It had arrived two days earlier, from the Soviet Union.

It was certainly no coincidence that with the whole world watching—at the moment when the United States was getting ready to land people on the Moon’s surface—the Russians had decided they, too, ought to have a spacecraft at the Moon.

Luna 15, an unmanned craft, had been launched on Sunday, July 13, and the Russians said it was simply going to “conduct further scientific exploration of the Moon and space near the Moon.”

But from the moment of Luna 15’s launch, U.S. space scientists and NASA officials speculated that it was a “scooping” mission, designed to land on the Moon, extend a robotic arm, scoop up some soil and rocks, and deposit them in a compartment on the spacecraft, which would then zoom back to Earth, bringing home Moon rocks just like Apollo 11 would, and maybe, just maybe, arrive back on Soviet soil with its cargo before the Apollo 11 astronauts could make it back to the United States.

Frank Borman, the commander of the Apollo 8 mission that had orbited the Moon, had just returned from a nine-day goodwill tour of Russia—the first visit by a U.S. astronaut to the Soviet Union—and appeared on the NBC news show Meet the Press the morning of Luna 15’s launch.

“I would guess it’s probably an effort” to bring back a soil sample, Borman said. “I heard references to that effect [in Russia].”


NASA, at least publicly, was mostly concerned that Russian communications with Luna 15 might interfere with Apollo 11. In an unprecedented move, NASA asked Borman to call Soviet contacts from his just-finished trip and see if they would supply data on Luna 15. The Soviets promptly sent a telegram—one copy to the White House, one copy to Borman’s home near Houston’s Manned Spacecraft Center—with details of Luna 15’s orbit and assurances that if the spacecraft changed orbits, fresh telegrams would follow.

It was the first time in the 12 years of space travel that the world’s two space programs had communicated directly with each other about spaceflights while they were being flown. NASA said Luna 15 and the Apollo spacecraft would not come anywhere near each other. Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins, NASA said, would have neither opportunity nor time to look out the window in search of the rival spacecraft.

more at link.....

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Finally Alex, if you did check out Freddy's video, you would know if you followed the whole debate that took place at "cosmoquest" that it was given an undeniable fair hearing over many pages, until finally the perpetrator was found to be a sock and then banned...again illustrating the dishonesty, liars and charlatanism that these fools need to stoop to, to keep there "religion" [conspiracy] alive.

I only looked at the one video specifically to be able to say honestly that I did watch a video, knowing that, presuming that, I could make my point.
And it was a good video and so I decided to present as I accepted everything it put forward again knowing where that would take things mainly to demonstrate that these videos actually do not prove what they think they prove...in other words let us accept the flag movement etc ..all one can establish is what was shown to the public may be made on a movie set...and if that is the case there are perfectly logical reasons for such an approach but moreover proving a movie set has absolutely nothing to do with proving there was no Moon missions...I was more tied up in issues of proof than anything really related to the Moon missions if that makes sense.
And I think the most interesting thing to come out of this was Freddy basically ignoring that I was more or less conceeding that his video established what it sort to establish..over his head...anyways an exercise in time wasting as what I was up to is lost on everyone...and on that point folk don't read all one writes but jump at a conclusion once triggered...oh I could go on but I know by now no one has any idea of my point or why I am making it and automatically have put me in a box labeled Fat Freddy and friends...I just don't care about the Moon thing..

Anyways thanks for your post I think it all is worth saying but it does register with certain folk.

I did not see the Cosmo quest thread I generally don't bother with these sort of things I think they are a waste of time.

More importantly, I'm sure you would have reacted in the same way after such verbal assault Alex.

Well I hope you would be wrong as I really try not to be violent these days.

My opinion on this does not turn on justification but on not letting folk cause me to respond emotionally.

In Buzzes case I think he played into that fools game..he got publicity which I would have denied him.
He could have broken a bone in his fist, very likely when you age, the other guy could have returned a punch which again because of age changes things..a punch from a young man to an old man can be lethal...

I have had arguements with folk about Buzz responding as he did and frankly no one sees it the way I do...except Jesus.

I have learnt the only way to deal with fools who get in your face is not to respond in the least such that they become bored and leave you to seek out someone who will play their game. Most everyone craves attention and often they don't care how they get it I won't give any and so they leave me alone finding someone who will burr up...up here you get heaps of folk who are crazy and my method has seen me rarely bothered.

Secondly of course is Freddy has no proof, and neither does any other perpetrator of Moon landings conspiracy have any proof.

Well that was my point really...

There are photos of footprints, Luna landing moduls, rover tracks, instruments etc, my previous link has them

Now you have spoilt the surprise.

I was setting up for that.

Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I failed to mention in my previous post Alex, that much of our history and knowledge of the Moon, is a result of those six landings and the rock samples brought back.

I never knew that but now that I think about it that makes sense.
Alex

 

[paddoboy]

The following are two videos showing the dishonesty and lies of craig2 at cosmoquest, who was subsequently banned due to sock puppetery

Video 1 Shows a gravitational analysis of the Cernan hopping sequence. The analysis proves that the jump is perfectly consistent with lunar gravity.

Video 2 shows a piece the soil being kicked up to jump height just like your volleyball player, that hits the ground at the same time as Cernan. This proves they are not on wires. [remember the hammer/feather experiment?]

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

This proves they are not on wires.

Here is one that the publisher thinks proves the opposite...I ran it first at normal speed and then at slow speed then at fast speed and must admit a couple of these look as if there are wires holding them up...are hoaxers editing these or are they real shots?

 

[paddoboy]

Here is one that the publisher thinks proves the opposite...I ran it first at normal speed and then at slow speed then at fast speed and must admit a couple of these look as if there are wires holding them up...are hoaxers editing these or are they real shots?

That's the sad part with these conspiracy nuts...they see evil/conspiracy where ever they go. Reminds me somewhat of the fifties growing up, and the reds under the bed nonsensical scare tactics being preached at every opportunity by Menzies.

And most probably while the WWW and the Internet are probably the greatest inventions of our time, being open to all and sundry means the nuts can say whatever they like.

 

[FatFreddy]

(from post #111)

I am rather convinced that the landing was a movie production

Xelasnave.1947 is starting to see the light. Do the rest of you pro-Apollo people agree with him?


You people refused to seriously address the issues I asked you to address at the bottom of page #35.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-2#post-3636828

You also refuse to address this issue.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-4#post-3645211

No one who takes the time to read those parts of the thread is going to take you people seriously.

1. Dry sand takes no prints whatsoever.
2. Wet sand does, fine detail or otherwise.
3. When you kick wet sand it clumps.

From that we can deduce that the Apollo footage is not dry sand because we see prints being made all the time, it cannot be wet sand because we see fine dust being kicked all the time. Your crap theory is busted.

We've already had a long discussion on this. Viewers - go back to page #3 and do a page search on the word "sand" and watch this video.

MoonFaker: Project Sandbox.

2. Itemise in your own words the top 10 undebunkable "hoax anomalies".

This would be enough for an objective truth-seeker.
https://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=31034

The evidence that the footage was taken in atmosphere proves the hoax all by itself.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-6#post-3645387


You people are about as impressive as the Black Knight in this video.

Monty Python - The Black Knight - Tis But A Scratch

 

[paddoboy]

(from post #111)

Xelasnave.1947 is starting to see the light. Do the rest of you pro-Apollo people agree with him?

Alex is humouring you mostly.....

You people refused to seriously address the issues I asked you to address at the bottom of page #35.

I refuse to jump through the hoops of a charlatan or conspiracy ratbag.

You people are about as impressive as the Black Knight in this video.

Well simply put, most of us just don't fall for your nonsense.
Now go take that disprin and have a good lay down...you have nothing, as historical facts have shown the Moon landings took place and more will also in the future.
Perhaps you need to join a forum where they promote the reality of the Easter Bunny?

 

[paddoboy]

While Freddy deals with his Easter Bunny illusion.....
https://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/2017/07/17-dress-rehearsals-then-real-thing.html
1.7 Dress rehearsals, then the real thing

Kennedy’s deadline is looming and the Apollo project advances at full speed. In March 1969, Apollo 9 flies in Earth orbit to test the lunar module, the navigation systems, the lunar spacesuits and the docking maneuvers.

In May, Apollo 10 soars to the Moon and rehearses every step of a Moon landing mission except for the touchdown itself. Apollo 10’s lunar module carries Thomas Stafford and Gene Cernan to within 14.45 kilometers (47,400 feet) of the lunar surface.

The next mission, Apollo 11, takes mankind to the Moon, live on worldwide TV, landing there on July 20, 1969. Commander Neil Armstrong cautiously sets his left foot on the surface of the Moon at 10:56 EDT (July 21 2:56 UTC).

Lunar Module Pilot Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin then joins him and together they plant the flag of the United States on the surface, conduct scientific experiments, collect Moon rock samples and take historic photographs while the third crew member, Command Module Pilot Michael Collins, waits in lunar orbit to take them home and join them in the history books.

 

[David C]

cosmored/fatfreddy/rocky/drifty

I await this unbelievable person to answer where he is cornered. He references where we have "discussed" this before and points to where he basically just denied it!

We know three things for a fact:

1. Dry sand takes no prints whatsoever.
2. Wet sand does, fine detail or otherwise.
3. When you kick wet sand it clumps.

From that we can deduce that the Apollo footage is not dry sand because we see prints being made all the time, it cannot be wet sand because we see fine dust being kicked all the time. Your crap theory is busted.

1. EXPLAIN this in your own words. I'll just keep posting it until you answer it properly.

2. Itemise in your own words the top 10 undebunkable "hoax anomalies". You keep making your moronic claim that it is proven when any true thinking person laughs at idiots who can't see how it has been debunked. You cowardly dismiss presented debunks to you by claiming opposing views represent no credibility.


I find it interesting that you have another person who thinks the footage was faked but seems to lack the scientific rigour to understand how that it is actually provably impossible.

@xelasnave,1947 You asked for proof, just one item - try this one video I found. If you don't understand the implication I can explain. This is IMPOSSIBLE to fake, physics cannot be rigged like this:

Edit: another video to show what that video is explaining - it deals with the gravity and fall times:

Hey Alex, gonna address this? Or must we endure more gish gallup distraction. The big PLSS on the astronauts backs pulls them backwards, if they were on wires how come there is no centre of gravity jerkiness and how come they keep falling over? Have you seen the size of the areas they are covering? Miles wide.

Cosmotroll won't address these two videos because just these prove beyond any doubt that they are in a low gravity environment. You cannot fake physics - well before the digital age.

 

[FatFreddy]

I refuse to jump through the hoops of a charlatan or conspiracy ratbag.

This response would get you thrown out of the debating hall. You can pretend all you want. You're checkmated by those issue.

 

[David C]

This response would get you thrown out of the debating hall. You can pretend all you want. You're checkmated by those issue.

You just ignored videos you deluded troll - no response as always. You would not even get in the debate hall - ignorant clueless individuals are not invited.

 

[paddoboy]

This response would get you thrown out of the debating hall. You can pretend all you want. You're checkmated by those issue.

You wouldn't even be allowed into any debating hall. Like your mate sock puppet at Cosmoquest, or that criminal Sibrel.
Oh and of course we need a subject worth debating with points on both sides...as history has factually shown, you don't have any points at all...just fabricated silly claims that have all been totally debunked.

We went to the Moon and 12 men walked on its surface. An historical fact that in time will be repeated.....probably as a stepping stone to Mars.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Do the rest of you pro-Apollo people agree with him?

Well I certainly don't agree with him as he seems to exhibit a multiple personality disorder.
Alex

 

[paddoboy]

Most of those that did go to the Moon are old men now, in their eighties.
I suggest we get Freddy and his banned friend the sock puppet known as craig2 at Cosmoquest, along with the criminal Sibrel, and let them lose among those former astronauts...then let them tell these brave men they never went to the Moon, and that Chaffee, White and Grissom from Apollo1 was also a staged conspiracy. Let them prove there nonsensical crazy claims to those men.
We can always have paramedics standing by just in case Buzz decides to let loose again