yup, the evidence appears to be intangible and vapour like.
Google for the (supposed) actual footage from the moon landings. Select any photo or video you like.
I did notice very early on a plea for hoax evidence in a desperate attempt to change thread subject matter.
I didn't ask for evidence, I asked for your
theory. If I don't know what theory exactly I am supposed to compare the evidence against, how the hell am I supposed to know which piece of evidence is compelling? I cannot "prove" anything in a vacuum (no pun intended).
Hands up who thinks it strange that the mission disciples are so reluctant to proudly post their most compelling piece of evidence.
You have free hand to select whatever pieces of evidence you find most suspect. I find it strange that you haven't used that opportunity.
Your attempt at "winning the argument" is way too transparent. Someone is going to post a piece of evidence, you will come up with a halfway reasonable argument for why this single piece of evidence could possibly be a fake, and then claim that since their most "compelling piece of evidence" was not beyond reasonable doubt (as if any single piece of evidence could possibly be), clearly they are wrong and you have proven the hoax. But it doesn't work that way. You have to come up with an explanation for any and all observations regarding the moon landings, and
then we can figure out what piece of evidence would be decisive proof that one of the theories was wrong.