I think of heard almost every argument against the landings, and they

Comment on Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof by STMan.

I think of heard almost every argument against the landings, and they are easily answerable. The picture of Aldrin shown above for example, is over exposed to make the astronauts suit brighter. Proof: Look at the surface that he is standing on, does it look like aspalt, which is what is said to be the reflectivity of the surface. If you put it in photoshop and lower the brightness so that the surface is not overexposed the suit is not that bright, and therefore we can conclude that it is due to reflection from the surface and not spot lights.

What about the flag waving in a vacuum. Answer: it’s not. It is supported by a horizontal rod at the top of the flag pole to make it fully visible. If you watch the video you can see that it only moves when the astronaut are in contact with the flag or the pole.

The reason for no stars in the black sky is another point. Anyone who goes out at night with their 35mm camera on a tripod,100 speed film, will realize that doing a 1/100 sec exposure at f16 or f11 will result in a black sky with no stars. This is what is needed in bright sunlight to get the surface, the equipment and the astronauts to be exposed properly. If you were on the moon and wanted to get a picture of the stars, you would need to do a 15 to 30 sec exposute at a low f number, which would cause everthing else to be hugely overexposed. It was necessary for the astronauts to use a high f number to avoid overexposure. This has the added benefit of giving a lot of depth of field. Meaning more is in focus, and therefore not requiring accurate focusing. By the way, this is why most cheap point and shoot cameras can get away with a fixed focus lens (no focusing).

One thing that I have done is to watch the video of apollo 11 while looking at the high res photos. I have all of them on my computer. You can tell when almost all of them are shot by mostly Armstrong during the 2.5 hour moon walk. Meaning that there was no need to fake the photos since we can see the photographer (Armstrong) as he takes them.

As for the dust. If you watch the videos you can tell that it is done in a vacuum, because all of the dust which is kicked up by the astronauts or the luner rover, just falls back the the surface. On earth when you do the same thing you get a dust cloud of fine particles that stay suspended in the air for some time. Because of the vacuum even though there is only 1/6th gravity, this does not happen.

One comment about the Clementine probe above, says that the resolution is 7 – 20 metres, ignores the fact that the lunar module (the largest man made object on the moon) is only about 5m, and would therefore be smaller than one pixel in size, so it would not be visible on any photos.

As for the retroreflectors that were left on the moon. When a extremely bright laser is aimed at the sites of the apollo landings that left them, the reflection can be detected with the telescopes at certain observatories. The reflection will only be detected when aimed at these sites.

It’s actually quite funny reading all of the conspiracy sites. I came across one yesterday, which said that Armstrong was contacted by aliens, who told them not to come back. Also that there is an alien base on the other side of the moon/ Hmm, so which is it, did they not really go to the moon, or did they, but aliens told them not to come back. I’ve come across a lot of conpiracy theories over the years, you know: The Kennedy Assassination ones, 9/11 conspiracies, and of course the moon hoax ones, and the all have similar things in common. There’s usually someone who was about to spill the beans (often to the one who is writting the book) but passed away just before they could tell all. (possibly the goverment had them killed, OOOOOh). This idea probably started because of the Oswald killing, which led to that conspiracy theory. Usually the conspiracy theorists claim that the reason the ones in the know (such as the astronauts) can’t say anything, because their lives are in danger. Oh please. Do you really thing that the lives of these astronauts in their 70’s or 80’s are being fallowed by govermnent agents (who by now would also be that old, unless they keep passing it down to younger agents who would now be part of an even bigger conspiracy). Also no evidence of the moon hoax is ever given. Where are all of the people who built the sets. You would have to have alot of truck drivers bringing in loads of gray dirt, and back hoe operators, digging all of those craters. Did you ever see an interview from some 80 year old guy, saying, yup, back in the 60’s I spent years working on the moon sets. Oh ya I forgot, his life would also be in danger if he gave an interview. Think about it people the hoax theories are all rediculous internet nonsense. The idea that all of this was done in a studio doesn’t add up. There is 16mm film of the rover driving long distances with the LM off in the distance. What kind of spot light could light this, without there being multiple shadows from singe objects. Answer: Here’s how they did it. Get ready – Brace yourself. They got in a Saturn V rocket, flew to the moon, landed, and returned, with all of the evidence: rocks dust, photos, film and video, that any person who actually looks at them, will know (not think, but know), that they actually did this. Nine times they went to the moon. that’s right NINE TIMES. Six of which they actually landed (Three they only orbited the moon), and returned, and most amazingly, they did it in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.

So why can’t they do it now you might ask. Answer: Because they stopped building the Saturn V rocket, which was the only rocked ever built which can lift a large enough payload into orbit, and instead opted for the reusable space shuttle. So it has nothing to do with technology being better now, and they can’t go so therefore people conclude that they never went. Just try getting on a supersonic passanger jet tomorrow. Oh ya, there isn’t one flying now, because the concorde has been put out of service. Does that mean that there never was supersonic passanger flights. Gee, there was in the 60’s and 70’s when the moon flights were taking place. Perhaps technology has taken a step backwards, or costs for both were just too high so they were cancelled.

I know someone is going to read this and still believe the conspiracy stuff, because I didn’t answer ever question. I can see it now. “There’s too much radiation, so they couldnt have gone” Doh. (as Homer would say).