Comment on Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Scientific Evidence by Alex has no idea of what the fuck he is talking about.
1) The fuel used to take off was composed of Aerozine 50 and dinitrogen tetroxide which ignited hypergolically and created an exhaust that was practically transparent. Besides, you can actually see a spark in the video of the take off of Apollo 17.
2) There was no atmosphere for the fuel to cause a flame anyways.
>U can see the flame on the image:
That links says that the exhaust came from the Reaction Control System and the Orbital Maneuvering Subsystem. If you and the guy who made that ridiculous page weren’t idiots, you’d have known that these phenomenons have two explanations:
First, the RCS mostly uses highly compressed gases as well as liquid propellants. This is what causes that white exhaust in the first picture.
The second and third pics are caused by a phenomenon known as the shuttle glow or shuttle tail glow, caused by the reaction of gases with other elements such as oxygen, some electromagnetic dance in there and it radiates light.
By the way, are you sure the third pic isn’t an aurora?
Your lunar rocks argument is ridiculous when scientists have agreed that they’re not of terrestrial origin.
>THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR MEN LANDING ON THE MOON.
You don’t say? The retroflectors, the dust going right back to the surface and David Scott’s experiment with the hammer and the feather are good enough. The landing has also been reconfirmed by the Japanese and Indian space agencies.
The hoax claims are easily debunked with the use of Physics and Astronomy. The scientific community doesn’t say the moon landings were fake, and science fans don’t say they were fake either.
There IS scientific evidence but you won’t look at it anyways and will stick to your emotional idea that they didn’t land.
Learn 2 physics and astronautics before you try this shitty trolling again.