Fake Moon Landings

[DarianF]

3 hours ago, Mr. Nice said:

 

Dude, I've seen this clip a thousand times. YOU look again! Facepalm? Really? This crap has been debunked 20 years ago. You stumble upon it and like every other hoax believer fail to check a single thing. It stops when he lets go of it - it moves more because a) less gravity b) no atmosphere to slow it. At 47 mins:

 

 

 

@DaleP Like all Apollo Hoax claims, this one has been addressed many times. http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#flag

[DarianF]

1 hour ago, DaleP said:

 

OK @DarianF

According to Mr Nice, the video you have posted is fake. Hence cannot be used to debunk Fake Moon.

 

Which video exactly? If it's the flag waving issue, it's addressed here: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#flag

[DarianF]

1 hour ago, Mr. Nice said:

 

BULLSHIT! The video is authentic, you are the one who thinks it is different to the one I posted showing where that clip comes from!

 

The flag stops waving after it is planted ( nb. @DaleP ). If there were wind, as the apollo hoax nuts claim, it would just keep blowing around.

 

 

[DarianF]

4 hours ago, DaleP said:

So the last video you have posted shows Australia on top....how is that possible?

 

 

[DarianF]

@DaleP

 

https://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/science-fact-514/

[DarianF]

The Chinese avoided the messy flag pole setup. This is so much more efficient:

 

 

[DaleP]

12 hours ago, DarianF said:

 

Which video exactly? If it's the flag waving issue, it's addressed here: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#flag

 

"the flag looks like it is waving because the astronauts wanted it to look that way. Ironically, they did their job too well. It appears to have fooled a lot of people into thinking it waved. "

 

^ It just sounds like a made up reason to cover it up.

[DaleP]

13 hours ago, Mr. Nice said:

It's astronaut.

 

Astra+not is a person who do/did not go to the space.

[Mr. Nice]

5 minutes ago, DaleP said:

 

Astra+not is a person who do/did not go to the space.

 

If you have to copy all the Apollo-hoax-sheeple, at least spell it right. Astronot. They provably went to space. If you want to start off from a position of fail before I've even begun to dissect this crap, at least do some basic research huh?

 

 

 

[Mr. Nice]

15 minutes ago, DaleP said:

^ It just sounds like a made up reason to cover it up.

 

Your opinion means nothing. Perhaps you are confusing it with proof. The flag was completely stationary as soon as they left it alone.

 

Click the timeline at 6:00 then any other place afterwards, pick a half dozen points. The flag is completely still.

 

 

 

Now apply logic. It moves about when they are putting it up. Then stops completely when they finish. What do your observational skills tell you about this!

[DaleP]

15 minutes ago, Mr. Nice said:

They provably went to space.

You are not even sure either anyway....

They may have, could have, probably have been to space, a half way may be but that doesn't prove they landed on the Moon.

People have said that there are already aliens on the dark side of the Moon that if anybody went near it they get attacked. If so, they would have done the U-turn.

[Mr. Nice]

22 minutes ago, DaleP said:

You are not even sure either anyway....

 

Yes I am. 100% positive. I provided a video taken in space showing weightlessness. There are so, so many things that team hoax have not a scooby-doo about.

 

24 minutes ago, DaleP said:

They may have, could have, probably have been to space, a half way may be but that doesn't prove they landed on the Moon.

 

No, the presence of 842lbs of peer reviewed rocks and soil and 3m core samples does that. Visible motion that can only occur in low gravity proves it. Images showing Apollo hardware on the Moon proves it. Quite a bit more also proves it.

 

27 minutes ago, DaleP said:

People have said that there are already aliens on the dark side of the Moon that if anybody went near it they get attacked. If so, they would have done the U-turn.

 

"People" said that did they? Alienz huh? Do you think "people" have evidence for that or do you think maybe they mysteriously plucked it from their bottoms to try and sell books and stuff?

[alexa]

 

 

[Mr. Nice]

@alexaIs there any subject you post on that isn't influenced by ignorant claims? This claim was made on the other thread, page 2!

 

 

This engineering marvel was built by these guys:

 

 

Here it is without the cladding for micro-meteorites, and very expensive heat dispersion/ reflection foil

 

Another whackamole, Apollo-conspiracy-by-numbers moment. Let's put it into perspective. NASA didn't even design this craft and if it was faked, the entire Grumman team built a machine not fit for purpose and there was an awful lot of them! Plus, why didn't NASA make their craft a work of visual art for the

pictures.

 

 

 

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/5899/why-does-the-ascent-stage-of-apollo-11s-lunar-module-look-like-its-made-of-pap

Like everything else, the ascent and descent stages were built to be as light as possible. But because they knew they would operate only in a vacuum, many things really didn't need to be sturdy, nor did the shape of it matter. It would never have to deal with aerodynamic drag. In fact, the descent stage was designed to buckle in the right places upon landing, that was how it absorbed the impact. It was only going to be used once, this was the most weight-efficient method of handling the shock of landing. 

Also, the complex insulation blankets covering the module had many layers, and contact points between the layers needed to be minimized so that heat wouldn't be passed through them by conduction. The black material is where thin Inconel sheets formed the outer layer of the insulation blanket, and they were painted matte black with Pyromark paint to improve their heat emission properties, so they would cool off quickly. (Black material both absorbs and emits heat better than material of other colors.) Beneath the black layer were reflective layers to prevent the heat of the black layer penetrating into the module. This treatment was done where the exhaust of the reaction control thrusters heated the lunar modules. It had a tendency to crinkle, and on this particular module, that may have been accentuated by the fact it was in fact installed at the last minute, as were the chutes under the thrusters. From the Lunar Module Coatings Page:

A few months before flight, shock tunnel tests using a new thruster duty cycle revealed that the Pyromark painted Inconel lay-ups on the upper sides of the Descent Stage quads would not be sufficient protection against the hot plumes. A crash program to design a fix resulted in "coal chute" plume deflectors mounted below the down-firing jets. These were installed on LM 5 while it was on the pad, just before launch.

Another last minute thermal fix added 39 pounds of Kapton and Pyromark painted Inconel to the landing gear, pads and probe. One of the reasons for this added weight was a crew request(!) that they be allowed to keep the engine on past probe contact to pad touchdown. This would result in greater heating from the engine plume as it reflected off the lunar surface past the gear.

Considering the vast ambition of going to the Moon for the first time, it isn't surprising some fixes were last-minute.

The foil is Kapton MLI (multi-layer insulation) blankets, and it is actually pretty complex. In the places on the lunar modules that only needed to be a heat barrier to sunlight, high reflectivity was the most efffective approach, and those places are the shiny amber color of the Kapton. As there is no air in space to pass heat by convection, if you lower absorption of heat radiation by making surfaces that are highly reflective or emissive, and there are few contact points to pass heat by conduction, insulation can be highly effective. With the Kapton foil blankets, the contact points were reduced by hand-crinkling an inner layer of the blanket. From the Apollo News Reference:

To make an even more effective insulation, the polymide sheets are hand crinkled before blanket fabrication. This crinkling provides a path for venting, and minimizes contact conductance between the layers.

So, this is bound to make the outer layer rather uneven.

All the other covering material you see is also just there to protect whatever is underneath from the effects of sunlight. Perhaps they were also thinking a bit about keeping dust out. That is all it has to do, and it was made merely sufficient for that job. Weight savings were more important than looks. The fancy stuff is underneath all those bare-bones panels.

I found a different photo of the lander that gives a better sense of the complexity of it. The photo shows the Ascent Stage in the process of assembly, before the heat shielding had been put on it:

This photo of an LM test article shows the sturdy underlying aluminum and titanium structure pretty clearly:

And a quote from the book Chariots of Apollo available on the NASA website's History section:

By the end of 1965, Scrape and SWIP had pruned away 1,100 kilograms, providing a comfortable margin below the control weight limit. One of the more striking changes to come from this drive for a lighter spacecraft was the substitution of aluminum-mylar foil thermal blankets for rigid heatshields. The gold wrapping characteristic of the lander's exterior saved 50 kilograms. Many of these weight-reducing changes made the lander so difficult to fabricate, so fragile and vulnerable to damage, that it demanded great care and skill by assembly and checkout technicians. Structural components took on strange and complex shapes, requiring careful machining to remove any excess metal

'Scrape' and 'SWIP' were both programs Grumman, the company that fabricated the Lunar Module, instituted specifically to reduce the weight of the LM.

I found both things on a great thread on the topic at CosmoQuest

You can pore over the LM Apollo Operations Handbook for a great deal of technical information on the spacecraft, for more evidence.

[DarianF]

7 hours ago, alexa said:

 

 

 

Apollo deniers' laughable ignorance of engineering.

[DarianF]

 

[DarianF]

7 hours ago, Mr. Nice said:

@alexaIs there any subject you post on that isn't influenced by ignorant claims? This claim was made on the other thread, page 2!

 

 

 

This engineering marvel was built by these guys:

 

 

Here it is without the cladding for micro-meteorites, and very expensive heat dispersion/ reflection foil

 

Another whackamole, Apollo-conspiracy-by-numbers moment. Let's put it into perspective. NASA didn't even design this craft and if it was faked, the entire Grumman team built a machine not fit for purpose and there was an awful lot of them! Plus, why didn't NASA make their craft a work of visual art for the

pictures.

 

 

 

 

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/5899/why-does-the-ascent-stage-of-apollo-11s-lunar-module-look-like-its-made-of-pap

Like everything else, the ascent and descent stages were built to be as light as possible. But because they knew they would operate only in a vacuum, many things really didn't need to be sturdy, nor did the shape of it matter. It would never have to deal with aerodynamic drag. In fact, the descent stage was designed to buckle in the right places upon landing, that was how it absorbed the impact. It was only going to be used once, this was the most weight-efficient method of handling the shock of landing. 

Also, the complex insulation blankets covering the module had many layers, and contact points between the layers needed to be minimized so that heat wouldn't be passed through them by conduction. The black material is where thin Inconel sheets formed the outer layer of the insulation blanket, and they were painted matte black with Pyromark paint to improve their heat emission properties, so they would cool off quickly. (Black material both absorbs and emits heat better than material of other colors.) Beneath the black layer were reflective layers to prevent the heat of the black layer penetrating into the module. This treatment was done where the exhaust of the reaction control thrusters heated the lunar modules. It had a tendency to crinkle, and on this particular module, that may have been accentuated by the fact it was in fact installed at the last minute, as were the chutes under the thrusters. From the Lunar Module Coatings Page:

A few months before flight, shock tunnel tests using a new thruster duty cycle revealed that the Pyromark painted Inconel lay-ups on the upper sides of the Descent Stage quads would not be sufficient protection against the hot plumes. A crash program to design a fix resulted in "coal chute" plume deflectors mounted below the down-firing jets. These were installed on LM 5 while it was on the pad, just before launch.

Another last minute thermal fix added 39 pounds of Kapton and Pyromark painted Inconel to the landing gear, pads and probe. One of the reasons for this added weight was a crew request(!) that they be allowed to keep the engine on past probe contact to pad touchdown. This would result in greater heating from the engine plume as it reflected off the lunar surface past the gear.

Considering the vast ambition of going to the Moon for the first time, it isn't surprising some fixes were last-minute.

The foil is Kapton MLI (multi-layer insulation) blankets, and it is actually pretty complex. In the places on the lunar modules that only needed to be a heat barrier to sunlight, high reflectivity was the most efffective approach, and those places are the shiny amber color of the Kapton. As there is no air in space to pass heat by convection, if you lower absorption of heat radiation by making surfaces that are highly reflective or emissive, and there are few contact points to pass heat by conduction, insulation can be highly effective. With the Kapton foil blankets, the contact points were reduced by hand-crinkling an inner layer of the blanket. From the Apollo News Reference:

To make an even more effective insulation, the polymide sheets are hand crinkled before blanket fabrication. This crinkling provides a path for venting, and minimizes contact conductance between the layers.

So, this is bound to make the outer layer rather uneven.

All the other covering material you see is also just there to protect whatever is underneath from the effects of sunlight. Perhaps they were also thinking a bit about keeping dust out. That is all it has to do, and it was made merely sufficient for that job. Weight savings were more important than looks. The fancy stuff is underneath all those bare-bones panels.

I found a different photo of the lander that gives a better sense of the complexity of it. The photo shows the Ascent Stage in the process of assembly, before the heat shielding had been put on it:

This photo of an LM test article shows the sturdy underlying aluminum and titanium structure pretty clearly:

And a quote from the book Chariots of Apollo available on the NASA website's History section:

By the end of 1965, Scrape and SWIP had pruned away 1,100 kilograms, providing a comfortable margin below the control weight limit. One of the more striking changes to come from this drive for a lighter spacecraft was the substitution of aluminum-mylar foil thermal blankets for rigid heatshields. The gold wrapping characteristic of the lander's exterior saved 50 kilograms. Many of these weight-reducing changes made the lander so difficult to fabricate, so fragile and vulnerable to damage, that it demanded great care and skill by assembly and checkout technicians. Structural components took on strange and complex shapes, requiring careful machining to remove any excess metal

'Scrape' and 'SWIP' were both programs Grumman, the company that fabricated the Lunar Module, instituted specifically to reduce the weight of the LM.

I found both things on a great thread on the topic at CosmoQuest

You can pore over the LM Apollo Operations Handbook for a great deal of technical information on the spacecraft, for more evidence.

 

Charles Bud And The Lunar Lander

 

 

[DarianF]

22 hours ago, Mr. Nice said:

 

Your opinion means nothing. Perhaps you are confusing it with proof. The flag was completely stationary as soon as they left it alone.

 

Click the timeline at 6:00 then any other place afterwards, pick a half dozen points. The flag is completely still.

 

 

 

Now apply logic. It moves about when they are putting it up. Then stops completely when they finish. What do your observational skills tell you about this!

 

Well obviously, they turned off the fans in the film studio and that's why it stopped waving. It's amazing, isn't it? All that fucking detailed planning to fake the mission, and some idiot production assistant forgot to turn the air conditioner off before filming.

[DarianF]

On 6/26/2020 at 11:55 PM, alexa said:

We all know it was faked, so why are we discussing it all again ?

 

List of artificial objects on the Moon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_on_the_Moon

 

You're going to look rather silly when these are found (including these cameras). https://www.hasselblad.com/inspiration/history/hasselblad-in-space/

[alexa]

On 3/27/2022 at 3:04 PM, DarianF said:

 

You're going to look rather silly when these are found (including these cameras).

 

I'll take that risk 

[peter]

On 3/25/2022 at 7:48 AM, DaleP said:

Before you jumped to artificial objects or legitimacy of surveyor...... we need to first establish if we can land on the Moon.

How is anybody going to that, in your eyes its those bloody lying masons, end of story

Edited April 20, 2022 by peter

[alexa]

Another piece of junk which is supposed to fly off into the never never world 

 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10711069/NASA-shows-Psyche-spacecraft-fly-Mars-explore-strange-asteroid.html

 

 

[Pre-Raphaelite]

Ah, the old Apollo moon debate still goes on.

 

Would be nice if this debate could be finally concluded one way or the other. But that looks a long way off since nobody is imminently going to the moon.

[alexa]

18 hours ago, Pre-Raphaelite said:

But that looks a long way off since nobody is imminently going to the moon.

 

Why ? because they can't.

[Beaujangles]

On 4/24/2022 at 11:30 AM, Pre-Raphaelite said:

Ah, the old Apollo moon debate still goes on.

 

Would be nice if this debate could be finally concluded one way or the other. But that looks a long way off since nobody is imminently going to the moon.

 

If they haven't 'returned' there in 53 years I doubt its on the cards LOL - so much for technology eh? ;-)