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

Warning: I’m trying some HTML in my response below, but without a preview feature or a list of what tags are supported, I’m not sure it will all work, so this will either look great or be an unintelligable mess.

Amazing, all these comments and no logic or rather stupid logic from so-called experts.

Which explanations do you specifically have issues with?

How many moon landings have there been since the original one?

After 11, we had 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17. So 5 successful landings after the first one. Nobody’s gone back since 17 for a number of reasons, the main one being that it’s bloody damned expensive to go. The entire Apollo program cost well over US $170 bn in 2005 dollars; any new manned lunar program would cost at least US $200 bn today.

Where is the footage for the entire trip?

You’re not going to find uninterrupted film footage from launch to landing. However, there’s a lot of material (stills, video, transcripts, reports, etc.) at The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/frame.html including plenty of fuzzy, badly-exposed photos that some hoaxers claim don’t exist.

We have all the right to deny that the moon landing ever took place,

I have the right to deny that the sky is blue; that has no bearing on the actual color of the sky.

it is up to NASA and the authorities to prove their case which if it did happen shouldn’t be very hard.

They’ve done that. They’ve provided physical evidence (in the form of samples and scientific results), documentary evidence (film, video, telemetry) and eyewitness evidence (reports from the astronauts themselves as well as engineers on the ground) to support the case that we landed men on the moon and brought them home.

The burden is now on the deniers to provide proof for their case.

If you think the lunar surface footage was shot on a sound stage somewhere, the burden is on you to provide the evidence that the sound stage existed and that the footage NASA presented as authentic was actually shot on that stage. It’s not enough to say “it must have been that way, prove me wrong.”

If you think the lunar samples were returned by unmanned systems, the burden is on you to show that those unmanned systems existed. Where were they launched from? When where they launched? Who built them? How were the samples recovered?

If you think the lunar samples are fake, the burden is on you to demonstrate how they were faked, and why they couldn’t have originated from the Moon.

If you think the images are doctored, it’s up to you to find and show the undoctored originals.

To the atheist(s) in this comment section, you can neither dis-prove God’s existence so you are taking a very big chance with your life and I am sorry to inform you that you are currently living your heaven, in other words, this life as you are living it is as good as it gets for you so enjoy the few decades left of your life because that will be the last enjoyment you will have, you IDIOT(S)!

Feel that Christian love.

At least I don’t live in never-ending fear.

More Comments on Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof by jfb


Who panned the camera?

His name was Ed Fendell, a controller in Houston in charge the remotely-controlled camera on the LRV.

Yes, he had to take the signal delay into account – he had to anticipate the liftoff and rate of ascent. …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof

Did you know that many of the people involved in the moon landing died from a car crash?

Upwards of 90 people die *every day* in car crashes in the US; it’s not at all surprising that a lot people “involved …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof

Some futher googling indicates that the original Saturn V plans are stored at MSFC in Huntsville, AL (which would make sense); however, the source I found isn’t authoritative (it’s a forum discussion with no links), so don’t take that as …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof

Paper copies were destroyed because storage costs money; many (not all) documents were saved to microfilm for long-term storage. Some of these documents are available online, such as:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-LMdocs.html
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-CSMdocs.html
http://klabs.org/history/ech/agc_schematics/
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/ApolloDescentGuidnce.pdf
http://contentcat.fhsu.edu/cdm/landingpage/collection/cosmosphere

That’s far from a complete list; I’m sure there …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof

Even one picture of the stars while the ship was on the way to or circling the moon.

I’ve explained this before, multiple times. You simply cannot expose for the sunlit surface of the Moon and the stars at the …


More Comments by jfb


Who panned the camera?

His name was Ed Fendell, a controller in Houston in charge the remotely-controlled camera on the LRV.

Yes, he had to take the signal delay into account – he had to anticipate the liftoff and rate of ascent. …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax

It doesn’t have to be pretty to work.

The foil acted as a thermal blanket, reflecting as much of the sunlight as possible to keep the base of the LM from overheating. The foil was only about 125 microns thick, …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Scientific Evidence

The blueprints *weren’t* destroyed; they’re on file at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, AL. Not that it matters; we couldn’t build the Saturn V today if we wanted to, because most of the technology it used is …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof

Did you know that many of the people involved in the moon landing died from a car crash?

Upwards of 90 people die *every day* in car crashes in the US; it’s not at all surprising that a lot people “involved …


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Camera Problems

It’s not a C, it’s an O.

And it *looks* like some kind of inclusion (a pebble embedded in a slightly softer matrix rock). It looks like the surrounding matrix has eroded a bit, leaving a small channel around the …