moon landings

[BEXFlyer]

I'm sure some folks here saw the Fox special several years ago which questioned the moon landings. They nrought up some interesting questions......anybody have any answers.......

1) why are there no stars in the background of any pictures shot from the moon?

2) why did the flag "wave" on the moons surface with "supposedly" no wind in that type of atmosphere?

3) with all that thrust, why was there no thrust-crater below the lander when landed on the moons surface?

4) why is there front-lighting on several astronauts in many of the photos when they didn't carry any front-lighting equipment?


anyone?

 

[VNugget]

1. The bright foreground necessitated a lowering in the brightness threshold of the photo, to the point where the stars do not appear. (I have no idea what the actual photographic terms are that I should have used, this is just a lay explanation that common sense would come up with)

2. With no air to dampen any waving of the flag, and 1/6 gravity, any disturbance would take quite a while to settle down.

3. Below the thin layer of dust, the surface of the moon is hard.

4. Not sure what you're talking about, can you explain?\

A quick Google search will find you many sites, like this one, that explain these moon hoax issues, plus many more.

 

[GogglesPisano]

5. Why would anyone expend too much intellectual effort on a "documentary" on Fox? Remember the alien autopsy?

 

[whatwasthat?]

Are you calling the Alien Autopsy a hoax? You heard the "experts". Where did they get the 50's era film? Or was it shot in the 50's?

 

[fr0g]

crater from rocket thrust:
Would you get a crater in a vacuum??
anyone? anyone?

 

[VNugget]

Well of course, since that there's a vacuum has nothing to do with the high velocity gases from the rocket blowing the dust away.

 

[GogglesPisano]

"High Velocity Gasses"

Pretty much sums up these message boards! Just kidding guys. I love all of ya!

I'm here every Thursday and Saturday night. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

 

[Fast8945]

The flag was placed into the position prior to liftoff from Planet Earth.

 

[Flying Illini]

The Earth's cheese supply is running low, that's why Bush wants to go back. How can I request some more colby-jack, is there a website or something?

 

[huncowboy]

I was reading it somewhere that they had a wire frame running in the flag to keep it in that position. Not sure if it is true but it makes sense.

 

[chignutsak]

Guys,

Check out http://www.clavius.org.

Excellent site that deals with the morons' assertions, one by one, in a systematic manner.

Tom

 

[pilotyip]

joke from the 70's

There was a joke about airline hirng back in the late 70's, "That the only way for a pilot over 30 to get an interview with American Airlines, was to have two logged lunar landings" The answer was "Anyone can log landings"

 

[LJDRVR]

To answer number three:

Three of the LM landing pads had 4-foot metal probes attached. Add another 4 feet of distance from the bottom of the pads to the bottom of the LM DPS bell. Add 3 feet from the bottom of the bell to the combustion chamber. 11 feet, right? O.K., here's how it works: during the final moments of the landing phase, the probes contact the surface of the moon. Inside the LM cockpit, a blue contact light illuminates, and the mission commander shuts down the descent engine quickly. In other words, the combustion chamber fo the engine is 11 feet from the lunar surface when shutdown occurs. The LM freefalls the last 4 feet to the surface in 1/6th of the earths gravity Hence, no "burn marks". This does not even include the science behind whether or not it's even possible for torchings to exist given the environment.

BEXFlyer, there are dozens of excellent books available for anyone who would like to educate themselves about the Apollo Program. I've got them all, if you'd like a recommendation, I could provide you with one. Actually here are a few:

"Carrying the Fire" Michael Collins
-Probably the best all around overview book ever written

"Angle of Attack" Mike Gray
-Harrison Storms and the North American team that built the spacecraft.

"Moonwalker" Charlie Duke
-The Apollo XVI CMP's memoir, really puts you in the seat. Best narrative out there. Don't read it if born-again types offend you.

 

[BEXFlyer]

Good Info. Yes i still think we went to the moon, but the points they made left me with questions.....and oh yea, I don't trust the gov't. In regards to quest #4, in some of the photos, the astronauts were illuminated from the front as if they were shooting on a movie set. With no external front-lighting, the object being photographed would appear very dark. The program stated they carried no external lighting equip. The photos looked too brilliant for just a normal camera flash.

 

[ShawnC]

I'm sure some folks here saw the Fox special several years ago which questioned the moon landings. They nrought up some interesting questions......anybody have any answers.......

1) why are there no stars in the background of any pictures shot from the moon?

2) why did the flag "wave" on the moons surface with "supposedly" no wind in that type of atmosphere?

1) They were using slide film, slide film doesn't have that great of dynamic range for the given aperture, and shutter speed even these days.

2) The flapping while it was put up was simply to moment as they put it on the pole. Now the wave is there because that's how astronauts felt it should be put up, so it looks it's waving in the breeze.

 

[Singlecoil]

I've recently uncovered a nefarious plot by NASA and the freemasons to alter history with a fake tape of the Armstrong "landing". The actual tape can be found here: Click now.

 

[Aerosmith]

I am still laughing and tears just ruined my keyboard

 

[NEDude]

A few more questions:

1) Why did the Soviet Union conceed, after monitoring the moon flights, that we did in fact go. If it was faked, the Soviets would have been the first to cry foul.

2) Several hundreds of pounds of moon rocks were brought back from the Apollo missions. These rocks have been examined by thousands of scientists worldwide for over thirty years. Nobody has claimed them to be anything other than authentic.

3) NASA made six moon landings in a nearly three and a half year period (July 1969 through December 1972). All of these hoax theories focus mostly on the first landing, but none of the subsequent five landings. With each launch the risk of exposure of fraud would have become greater. The goal of JFK was met with the first landing, why continue to increase the risk?

Anyone have any answers?

 

[de Pez]

Sorry if this is off topic, but the question is so idiotic that it probably needs some marginal lucidity..Anyone have any autographed photos from that period? I was just digging around in an old box and found an autographed photo of Michael Collins. Anyone else have some others?

 

[VNugget]

The astronauts could have been lit by the sun, for one, and also by its reflection off the surface.

By the way, here's a photo of the surface below the descent rocket. You definitaly see a discoloration, which is probably scorching.