moon hoax information index.

Quote from: Rayzor on February 28, 2016, 04:09:49 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 28, 2016, 03:33:32 PM

However, I must warn you: anyone who decides to question with a mindset, away from the mainstream norm - only do it if you're prepared to have your mind ripped wide open, because once you see the bullshit in just one small part, you will realise just how much of our history is lathered in bullshit with only potential snippets of reality.

It's up to you.

You mean that once you go crazy you never go sane.   LOL!

Seriously,  I'm all for your question everything approach,  we should all do that all the time,  but you also need to UNDERSTAND what you are looking at,  with knowledge of the underlying physics comes an appreciation for the design elegance and engineering that went into the Apollo missions.   Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's fake.  It means you need to learn what makes things work. 

However,  we have had this exact same discussion before, and now it's your turn to accuse me of being indoctrinated somehow,  my answer is simply that physics and maths cannot be faked.

They don't just fake physics, they suspend physics whenever the need arises.
It is dependent on how you want to view it. Oh - and we're all indoctrinated - it's just the extent of it that makes us all differ slightly.

And seriously, do not tell me about elegance and engineering that went into Apollo missions when you pretend to believe that this piece of absolute crap landed on a cement like frigging ball of space rock that magically illuminates for us looking up and yet is so dark for the pathetic suited up bullshit actors to supposedly stand on, amid a silly loft like spot light.

Ok,  lets try a test,  pick some part of that picture and tell me what you see, and describe why you think it was built that way?

As you are aware,  what you know about the world allows you to understand what you see.

Ok,  lets try a test,  pick some part of that picture and tell me what you see, and describe why you think it was built that way?

As you are aware,  what you know about the world allows you to understand what you see.

I see kitchen foil or marathon runners blankets and roofing paper, plus silly nonsensical skinny curtain like rods and sticky tape and all the rest of the crap that covers the cardboard effigy of the model on show.

Quote from: Rayzor on February 28, 2016, 04:26:42 PM

Ok,  lets try a test,  pick some part of that picture and tell me what you see, and describe why you think it was built that way?

As you are aware,  what you know about the world allows you to understand what you see.

I see kitchen foil or marathon runners blankets and roofing paper, plus silly nonsensical skinny curtain like rods and sticky tape and all the rest of the crap that covers the cardboard effigy of the model on show.

What do you think the "kitchen foil"  is for, and why is some of it a matt colour, and some a gold colour?

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 28, 2016, 04:36:16 PM

Quote from: Rayzor on February 28, 2016, 04:26:42 PM

Ok,  lets try a test,  pick some part of that picture and tell me what you see, and describe why you think it was built that way?

As you are aware,  what you know about the world allows you to understand what you see.

I see kitchen foil or marathon runners blankets and roofing paper, plus silly nonsensical skinny curtain like rods and sticky tape and all the rest of the crap that covers the cardboard effigy of the model on show.

What do you think the "kitchen foil"  is for, and why is some of it a matt colour, and some a gold colour?

The kitchen foil and thermal sheeting for marathon runners are simply there to cover the parts of the model that show the cardboard and probable plywood panels. Basically the colours are there to make the thing look a bit brighter.
Don't waste your breath trying to tell me they're for thermal protection on the moon and also for meteoroid protection lol.
If this is what you're gonna say, then  save your typing because it's not worth your while, to me.

Horse blinders.

Don't waste your breath trying to tell me they're for thermal protection on the moon and also for meteoroid protection lol.
If this is what you're gonna say, then  save your typing because it's not worth your while, to me.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.   I'll save the explanation for someone who doesn't have a closed mind.

Nope, no cardboard or plywood here.  Keep in mind every LM was built by Grumman, not NASA.  If you think they really built props and not working spacecraft then you have many more people that have to be in on it.  So much for your compartmentalization.

Here's what it looked like without that outer insulative layer.

Those pictures do not bear any real resemblance to the model that Papa Legba put up, so what's happened?

Those pictures do not bear any real resemblance to the model that Papa Legba put up, so what's happened?

This would be the LM before it is covered in its thermal control layers.

They basically tell you the truth in their stories. Just read between the lines. Oh, ok, I'll do it for you.

Apollo Astronauts Couldn't Sleep Before Lunar Liftoff.

By Tony Phillips, NASA | July 15, 2009 05:12pm ET

Editor's Note: This account of the moments before the Apollo 11 mission's lunar liftoff was provided today by NASA.

Neil Armstrong was supposed to be asleep. The moonwalking was done. The dancing boots were mothballed  The moon rocks were stowed away. His ship was ready for departure. In just a few hours, the Eagle's ascent module would blast off the Moon, something no ship had ever attempted before, and Neil needed his wits about him. He curled up on the Eagle's engine cover and closed his eyes. Next time you go on a jaunt in your car and you feel tired, just open the bonnet/hood and curl up on the engine. 

But he could not sleep.I wonder why?

Neither could Buzz Aldrin. In the cramped lander, Buzz had the sweet spot, the floor. NASA make sure all the comforts are there for their special guys. He stretched out as much as he could in his spacesuit and closed his eyes.The perfect thing to sleep in for comfort. Nothing happened. On a day like this, what else could you expect...?Exactly, they were just too excited and sleeping wasn't going to happen

July 20, 1969: The day began on the farside of the Moon. Armstrong, Aldrin and crewmate Mike Collins flew their spaceship 60 miles above the cratered wasteland. No one on Earth can see the Moon's farside. Even today it remains a land of considerable mystery, but the astronauts had no time for sight-seeing.  Collins pressed a button, activating a set of springs, and the spaceship split in two. The half named Columbia, with Collins on board, would remain in orbit. The other half, the Eagle, spiraled over the horizon toward the Sea of Tranquillity.

"You are Go for powered descent," Houston radioed, and the Eagle's engine fired mightily. The bug-shaped Eagle was so fragile a child could poke a hole through its gold foil exterior.Which is just how the astronauts liked it because the danger gave the pair of them tingling great big hard on's.  Jagged moonrocks could do much worse. So when Armstrong saw that the computer was guiding them into a boulder field, he quickly took control. The Eagle pitched forward and sailed over the rocks.Hip hip hooray for Neil.

Meanwhile, alarms were ringing in the background.Because these alarms knew the moon inside out and sniffed out the danger through the space vacuum. Danger danger, Neil Armstrong.


"Program alarm," announced Armstrong. "It's a 1202." The code was so obscure, almost no one knew what it meant.NASA double up on everything. They leave nothing to chance and always make sure their well trained astronits are 100% well trained. Well, apart from a 1202, which is an obscure code that only the janitor knows about and he's too stubborn to share.  Should they abort? Should they land? "What is it?" he insisted. Choices choices. 

Scrambling back in Houston, a young engineer named Steve Bales produced the answer: The radar guidance system was pestering the computer with too many interruptions.I can sympathise with that computer, because a guy used to nudge me whilst talking to me every time I tried to take a drink of beer. If I was that computer I would have strangled that annoying radar guidance system No problem. "We've got you..." radioed Houston.Houston are full of joysticks and tippy tappy computer personnel that Neil had no worries, I don't think.  "We're Go on that alarm."

And on they went. Things, however, were not going exactly as planned. The Sea of Tranquillity was supposed to be smooth, but it didn't look so smooth from the cockpit of the Eagle.  Armstrong scanned the jumbled mare for a safe place to land. "60 seconds," radioed Houston. "30 seconds." Mission control was hushed as the telemetry came in. Soon, too soon, the ship would run out of fuel. The danger of it. It's a good job none of them cacked (pooed/shit) themselves, eh?

Capcom later claimed the "boys in mission control were turning blue" (Probably all into self asphyxia) when Armstrong announced "I [found] a good spot." As you do on a moon full of boulders.  As for Armstrong, his heart was thumping 156 beats per minute according to bio-sensors.Absolutely amazing what they had in 1969, isn't it. So their bodies were all wired up like an ECG machine and remote controlled back to Houston.  The fuel gauge read only 5.6% when the Eagle finally settled onto the floor of the Sea of Tranquillity.

Houston (relieved): "We copy you down, Eagle."

Armstrong (coolly):156 beats a minute "Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed." BA DUM BA DUM BA DUM BA DUM.

Immediately, they prepared to leave. This was NASA being cautious. No one had ever landed on the Moon before. What if a footpad started sinking into the moondust, or the Eagle sprung a leak? They didn't give a shit about the big thrusting nozzle and what that could do. Just worried about a footpad or a leak. I mean, a leak? They made this thing so strong....oh wait a minute, a leak would be worrying. A child could puncture it. Phew. While Neil and Buzz made ready to blast off, Houston read the telemetry looking for signs of trouble. There were none, and three hours after touchdown, finally, Houston gave the "okay." The moonwalk was on. The frigging moonwalk 

At 9:56 p.m. EDT, Neil descended the ladder and took "one small step" (left foot first) into history. From the shadow of the Eagle, he looked around: "It has a stark beauty all its own--like the high desert of the United States." Weirdly enough, eh? lol Houston reminded him to gather the "contingency sample," and Neil put some rocks and soil in his pocket. As you do. I'd do it on a moon full of money. I'd stuff wads of it in my space suit pockets, so I can understand the NASA boys asking Neil to pocket some rocks and not worry about puncturing his space suit. lol If, for any reason, the astronauts had to take off in a hurry, scientists back on Earth would get at least a pocketful of the Moon for their experiments.Take off in a hurry  Picture it. " Buzz Buzz, quick run and jump into the LM we have to dukes of hazard our way out of here, some clangers are running at us with pick axe handles with nails in." 

Soon, Buzz joined him. "Beautiful view!" The type of thing I say when I open a bag of cement at night. he exclaimed when he reached the lander's broad footpad. "Isn't that something!" agreed Armstrong. "Magnificent sight out here."

"Magnificent desolation," said Aldrin.Most people start dripping piss walking down a dark hallway to go to the toilet in an empty house but this desolation is comforting for them. 

Those two words summed up the yin-yang of the Moon. The impact craters, the toppled boulders, the layers of moondust--it was utterly alien. Yet Tranquillity Base felt curiously familiar, like home. I just bet it did. I just bet it frigging well did. lol Apollo astronauts on subsequent missions had similar feelings. how coincidental. Maybe this comes from staring at the Moon so often from Earth. Of course, because looking at a lit up moon like a beacon actually mirrors exactly what they see in that dark cement like environment.  Or maybe it's because the Moon is a piece of Earth, (Now you're getting there) spun off our young planet billions of years ago. No one knows; it just is.No, it just isn't.

Truly, much of the scene was weird. The airless landscape jumped out at the astronauts with disconcerting clarity and, as a result, the horizon felt unnaturally close.It felt that close that Toto the dog astronaut ran over and pulled back the dark curtain that was put up at the end of the stage set. lol The whole world seemed to curve, a side-effect of the Moon's short thousand-mile radius. "Distances [here] are deceiving," noted Aldrin. Just ask Toto.

The sky was equally baffling. Although the Eagle had landed on a bright lunar morning, the sky was as black as midnight. An astronomer's paradise? No. Not a single star was visible. The glaring, sunlit ground ruined the astronaut's night vision.Or the stage lighting blinded anyone who looked directly into it. Only Earth itself was bright enough to be seen, luminous blue and white, hanging overhead.Yeah, HANGING overhead will be about right.


Armstrong was particularly fascinated by moondust, which he kicked and scuffed with his boots. As you do, because nob ody gives a shit about damaging the suits and killing themselves in this apparent vacuum. On Earth, kicking dust makes a little cloud in the air--but there is no air on the Moon. "When you kick the surface, [the dust goes out in] a little fan which, to me, is in the shape of a rose petal," recalls Armstrong.No air on the moon and Neil can make rose petals by kicking moon cement. "There's just a little ring of particles--nothing behind 'em--no dust, no swirl, no nothing. It's really unique."And yet the moon buggy made a nice up and down kick back just like on Earth.

Enough of that. It was time for work.They were about to piss off earlier.

Almost forgotten in Apollo lore are the checklists sewn to the forearms of the spacesuits. These "honey-do" memos from NASA were jam-packed with activities--from inspecting the lander to deploying the TV to collecting samples. Some of the tasks were as detailed as bending over and reporting to Mission Control how it went. They had a lot to do.Just getting out of the piece of shit LM would have been a fantastic feat in itself, especially as Buzz had bent the door on opening because they still had air inside the LM. lol

Neil and Buzz deployed a solar wind collector, a seismometer and a laser retroreflector. They erected a flag and uncovered a plaque proclaiming, "We came in peace for all mankind." Which the clangers wrecked out of pure badness.
image hosting free They took the first interplanetary phone call--"I just can't tell you how proud we all are," said President Nixon from the Oval Office. Nixon was given the number of the mobile phone that Buzz had in his top pocket. Nixon was on an ordinary landline. Luck,ily it worked flawlessly.  They collected 47 lbs of moon rocks and took 166 pictures. Check. Check. Check. Imagine knowing that there would be another 5 moon missions and then asking to bring back 47lb of moon rock, plus his pocket rock, remember. I would have said, just get a few pounds and let's see how it goes with fuel. But anyway.  The check check check is the huge checks needed for future bullshit jaunts.


Right: Buzz Aldrin totes experiments from the Eagle onto the lunar surface.

Finally, after two and a half busy, exhilarating hours, it was time to go. The checklist continued: Climb back in the Eagle. Stow the rocks. Eat dinner: Beef stew or cream of chicken soup. And finally, sleep. And don't forget to cack inside your space suits after dinner.

That was the limit. "You just are not going to get any sleep while you're waiting [for liftoff]," Aldrin said after the mission.

The Eagle was not a sleepy place. The tiny cabin was noisy with pumps and bright with warning lights that couldn't be dimmed.It's like a punishment, isn't it? What on Earth (cough) did Neil and Buzz do to deserve this?  Even the window shades were glowing, illuminated by intense sunshine outside.  "After I got into my sleep stage and all settled down, I realized there was something else [bothering me]," said Armstrong. The Eagle had an optical telescope sticking out periscope-style. Just what you need for a moon contraption. A periscope.  "Earth was shining right through the telescope into my eye. It was like a light bulb."Yeah, probably a 100 watt light bulb.

To get some relief, they closed the helmets of their spacesuits. It was quiet inside and they "wouldn't be breathing all the dust" they had tramped in after the moon walk, said Aldrin. Alas, it didn't work. The suit's cooling systems, so necessary out on the scorching lunar surface, were too cold for sleeping inside the Eagle. The best Aldrin managed was a "couple hours of mentally fitful drowsing." Armstrong simply stayed awake.All those surgical gowns and hats on Earth and these bastards cake the LM in frigging moon dust. It's a good job they didn't fall asleep. Can you imagine them sleeping in when they should have been lifting off the moon? or worse, using up their oxygen and suffocating. lmao


When the wake-up call finally came,

"Tranquility Base, Tranquility Base, Houston. Over."

Armstrong answered with alacrity,

"Good morning, Houston. Tranquility Base. Over."

It was time to go home, to Earth, for a good night's sleep.

And they all lived happily ever after on people's hard earned tax dollars.

- See more at: http://www.space.com/6984-apollo-astronauts-sleep-lunar-liftoff.html#sthash.o3vmUMii.dpuf

Those pictures do not bear any real resemblance to the model that Papa Legba put up, so what's happened?

No resemblance?  You can't tell that is the structure underneath the insulation?  Really?  Even after it was mentioned in the description?

another very lengthy post in which scepti basically says "I have no clue of how this stuff works, so it must be all fake". when will u stop embarassing yourself?

another very lengthy post in which scepti basically says "I have no clue of how this stuff works, so it must be all fake". when will u stop embarassing yourself?

Incorrect. NASA has told you of unbelievable things. Since you believe everything NASA tells you believe. You say to yourself, I am very smart and understand it all. Anyone who does not believe my master is uneducated and an embarrassment to humanity.

You know, I have always been a very inquisitive person. I was never - what you say - a conspiracy type thinker, I was more of a figure out how and why thing's work, kind of person.
A lot of it was probably due to my father and uncle, etc in the early days, which simply made me take things apart and think up all kind of inventions to make our lives much simpler and more practical.

I used to watch all these rocket launches or read about them and think 'wow' how can man create such a monster machine and have it fly into space without it blowing to pieces.
I'd think about the astronauts atop that 350 feet long stick of fuel filled pipe and wonder how men can be so brave as to want to do this.

I'd often wonder about fighter jet pilots going ballistic and passing out and wonder how on Earth the astronauts managed to train much harder than these pilots, considering they're sat atop a long pipe going ballistic and making these pilots appear like they're on a morning ballistic stroll, yet these astronauts were just too resilient and never even felt the effects.

I used to sit there and wonder how the stages of these rockets separated, until I read up on them being held together with metal straps and explosive bolts that kept the straps tight enough to hold these massive diameter sections and able to explode the bolts without damaging any of the rocket.
Sort of like buying two halves of a car and instead of welding the two parts together, just put a metal strap over the joins and a few bolts to keep the strap tight, then down that motorway you go, in full knowledge that your car is safe as long as you weren't stupid enough to use NASA issue explosive bolts. 

Can you imagine someone coming up to me and saying ' hey, what if those huge rockets are not actually what we've been told?'
My reaction would have been something like, ' yeah, ok, if that's the way you feel then let's leave it at that and we can move on to getting on with our lives.'

It sometimes take a massive reality check to come to terms with the extent of the bullshit we've been fed. It was like a massive slap in the face for me to realise that this moon crap was nothing more than a bunch of frigging sci-fi writers and Hollywood film makers putting into motion, a concept straight out of the Jules Verne school of thought, except this was conveyed as a reality to us poor bastards who were just too easily led and naive to offer any resistance or rebuttal to anything that was put before us. We simply swallowed it all like  hungry cod in dark waters.

Sometimes I beat myself up for believing all the crap fed to me, but then I realise that it's not my fault. I can only live by what's actually fed and what I'm allowed to buy, unless I try to grow my own.
The trouble is, the space to grow your own is being squeezed thinner and thinner which is not allowing us to work from our own in house ways.
Basically we are fed the news, we get it all explained and we have to accept it, because if we don't, we are ridiculed if we dare to think for ourselves and become self sufficient. This is when your self sufficient plots become thinned and trampled on. Our minds are crushed into submission for daring to question.

Look at this ship below.
Imagine if someone said to you, ' I think I'll throw some rocket engines on the back of this and tip it upright and fly it high into the sky.' You'd laugh, right?
Of course I expect the space enthusiasts to mention rolling it into a tube and seeing no problem with it. lol.



That ship above is around 3000 tonnes, just like we are told a saturn V is. See what I'm getting at?
You see; it's only when you start to nibble into this stuff over time, is when you start to see how ridiculous this stuff is, but first you have to dispel the mind numbing sci-fi shows that were put before you to even dare to challenge this preposterous load of crap.

Your brain is warped with flash Gordon or 2001 a space odyssey - etc etc etc.

Thousands of astronauts. Hundreds of thousands of people overseeing it all. News media in saturation. Live launches. Blue prints. You name it, it's all put before us, so how in the hell can it be a lie? How can it be fantasy when all those people are part of it and all those people cannot lie and keep it a secret, right?

Everyone knows what compartmentalisation is. It's basically Peter not knowing what Paul is doing and Peter and Paul not knowing what Mary and Joan are doing, even though they work for the same company.
The puppeteer at the top pulls all the strings and all the puppets simply move to the pull of the string.

You're paid to work and think for that work. You are not paid to think outside of that.
The actors that star in all the films are many. In fact there are so many that you wonder why all films don't get leaked to the public or at least the story-lines.
Imagine an actor leaking that info?

'Capricorn one' the film. The scene where the computer buff sees that co-ordinates do not match up and tells the head cheese lol that things just don't add up. He's told his computer is dodgy and to get back to work and basically shut up.
He doesn't shut up though - and the rest is history. A fantasy film at the time but is closely becoming a reality as far as the gullible public will be concerned, except it will just be another fantasy sold as real, until people wake the eff up and stop being so kiddified over clear pathetic nonsense.

This saturn V is full of hydrogen, we are told, yet what kind of foam coating did this long piece of shit pipe have on it to stop the hydrogen from expanding and blowing this thing to smithereens?
You know - remember the shuttle main tank that was covered in rusty coloured foam, we were told, to keep the hydrogen super cool?

Can you picture  the scene inside the fantasy NASA deliberating room?

 NASA BOSS:" Ok, we have to get a rocket to the moon, how do we do it."

MIT NIT: " We do it in stages and build it 350 feet high rocket with fuels of hydrogen/helium/LOX and fine grade kerosene. We anchor the massive rocket down with explosive bolts before lit off, then as we set ignition to attain max thrust, we explode the bolts away from the rocket so as not to damage it.
We then set off all the explosive bolts for each section of rocket as it gains height, making sure no explosive bolt shrapnel damages the rocket. We just do this for every section and we should have flawless launches after launches of this massive easily constructed sky scraper sized 3000,000 part super rocket  that can be churned out like a production line of tinned tomatoes."

NASA BOSS: "Sounds good, let's put that to the gullible public."

And this is about what we constantly get.

I mean, we eventually went to a shuttle. A re-usable shuttle that apparently was a cost saver to start with and a comfortable ride for the astronauts who would happily sit strapped into this shuttle that was bolted to
a massive tank of hydrogen via one small top bolt on a two legged strut and two 3 legged struts at the bottom attached with one bolt apiece.
All of this - the shuttle and the main rusty coloured foam tank, are attached to two solid rocket boosters by 4 straps - two for each booster.
I SAID, ALL OF THIS, THE SHUTTLE AND THE MAIN RUSTY COLOURED FOAM TANK, ARE ATTACHED TO TWO SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS BY 4 STRAPS - TWO FOR EACH BOOSTER.

Anyway, I strayed from the moon hoax for a few minutes.

The amount of stuff that had to work flawlessly on those saturn V moon (cough) rockets could only come from a fantasy film or novel. Real life could not provide this, because as clever as we think we are, we simply cannot perform real magic, just sleight of hand or mouth.

Any rational person who spends a few hours going through this stuff with an open mind will continue to sift through it for many more hours and come to the conclusion that the posters on their wall can now be used for stacking in the box marked sci-fi memorabilia.

Only kids and naive wannabe space scientists who idolise actors/actresses in this field, can swallow this crap on a regular basis without so much as a raised eye brow and yet these same people will argue till they are old, against anyone who questions their fantasy.

I have every sympathy for those that have no time for questioning or bother to; because not everyone is interested in this stuff and would rather watch TV soaps or drink or whatever - and just go along their merry way. hats off to those people - I should have stayed one.

I have no sympathy for those that have clearly looked into all this stuff and still come out defending the bullshit like a seagull defending its young by attacking and pecking at all those who encroach within 50 feet.

I have absolute respect for all those that question everything. The mere fact that a person can do that without allowing cross contamination of indoctrinated mainstream supposed facts to scupper their thoughts, gets my full respect, no matter what.

Anyway, I think I've went on a little bit and I'm sure the influx of the TL;DR brigade will surely saturate the post. I don't care about these people but I do have time for those who take their time to read it and actually open one eye to possibilities, because that's all it takes for the flood-gates to open.

However, I must warn you: anyone who decides to question with a mindset, away from the mainstream norm - only do it if you're prepared to have your mind ripped wide open, because once you see the bullshit in just one small part, you will realise just how much of our history is lathered in bullshit with only potential snippets of reality.

It's up to you.

It's funny to me that you would post such a lengthy subjective argument. Anyone that understands physics enough to know what you are talking about in the post, knows that you draw some very irrational conclusions. It's a catch twenty-two. If you know what scepti is writing about, then you know how wrong he is. Anyone with little enough knowledge to believe you, probably can't comprehend the physics you're referring to and (probably) loses interest.

Quote from: luckyfred on February 29, 2016, 05:57:34 AM

another very lengthy post in which scepti basically says "I have no clue of how this stuff works, so it must be all fake". when will u stop embarassing yourself?

Incorrect. NASA has told you of unbelievable things. Since you believe everything NASA tells you believe. You say to yourself, I am very smart and understand it all. Anyone who does not believe my master is uneducated and an embarrassment to humanity.

I  understand not cause i believe in what nasa tells me but because I've studied the physics and math involved and I can figure out that it is indeed possible. Scepti pretend it is impossible simply because he's too lazy to educate himself

Quote from: luckyfred on February 29, 2016, 05:57:34 AM

another very lengthy post in which scepti basically says "I have no clue of how this stuff works, so it must be all fake". when will u stop embarassing yourself?

Incorrect. NASA has told you of unbelievable things. Since you believe everything NASA tells you believe. You say to yourself, I am very smart and understand it all. Anyone who does not believe my master is uneducated and an embarrassment to humanity.

Bolded = signs of a crazed lunatic

Anyone who does not believe my master is uneducated and an embarrassment to humanity.

Are you calling sceptimatic an embarrassment to humanity?

I see the running dancing one is still giving it the biggun,
claiming to have "studied" the maths and physics involved   

I smell bravo sierra,
must be his full nappy 

let the record show rayzor et al cannot even come up with an acceptable scientific constant that explains how sound travels in the Apollo movies "vacuum" 

Bunch of bottlers.


Page 10 

Page 9 

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:58:19 AM

up to page 8  now 
 

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:17:24 AM

Page 7 now 
 

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 12:24:47 PM

Sixth page 

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 06:50:30 AM

Fifth page now,

Is running dancing rayzor still running and dancing ?
yup.

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 02:36:02 AM

Is running rayzor still running ?

Quote from: feuk on February 24, 2016, 05:35:28 AM

FAO running dancing rayzor

Oh Jesus *face palm*,
ahhhh ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha.....

You got a direct response,,
Seems I will have to repeat myself veeeery slowly.

sound of hammering clearly audible because why ?
You claim the sound is travelling through his hand (clearly exclaimed in your post)

My response was how is sound travelling without direct contact on the Apollo excursions ?
clattering moon buggy compartment lids was one example,
Remember, you decided reptilian moon bases and a heavily choreographed dance number was the best response.

Added to this I also asked why sound does not travel through the hands of ISS manual labourers working in the vacuum,
(the post you are ignoring whilst claiming you answered it a week ago  )

And how sound does not propagate through solid hand held tools or the solid ISS whilst the observer is in the vacuum,
remember,
you gave examples of the observer being inside the air filled ISS,
Which is obviously unrelated to the subject.

Then you started your trip down memory lane pretending you elaborated on this obvious problem a week ago.

Let's try again....
I'm afraid your rather nasty insults, expletives, dance numbers and long distance running is only damaging your extremely tenuous logic and understanding.

(btw plagiarising phrases to repeat back to the original poster and the constant  repetition makes you sound like a bot,
let me guess, "beep, does not compute, beep"   )

Anyway, response please.

Quote from: feuk on February 24, 2016, 02:30:36 AM

Any chance of a response to the below ?
Or is more trolling,
more running,
more dancing your preferred debating style ?

Quote from: feuk on February 23, 2016, 06:41:14 AM

back for more my running dancing friend ?
Still proving you are full of it ?
Still struggling with the very basic science which you claim needs to be "dumbed down" for me ? 

Let me highlight your most obvious comprehension fails, and why your claims of understanding your own argument are hilarious internet slap stick   

firstly you claimed to be proving sound travels through the vacuum of space with your first link,
Which states
" Finally, inside the ISS there indeed is a very high level of noise pollution."
The word "inside" is what you appear to be misunderstanding.
unless you are claiming that it's a vacuum "inside" the ISS then that's an epic face plant.

Secondly you link to an article I have being quoting for over a week 
Which states,
" As an EVA is in progress, you can hear the spacewalkers bumping and clanging along as your crewmates translate on the exterior of your module."
The word you are misunderstanding here is "exterior", he is describing sound from inside the ISS,
unless you are claiming that it's a vacuum "inside" the ISS.

EVEN YOUR LINK (that I posted a week ago) DEBUNKS YOUR OWN ARGUMENT,
 
" It is true, however, that sound cannot travel in a vacuum so you do not hear things outside.  When you drive a bolt or tap a piece of equipment with a tool, you don't hear a thing.  "

OUTSIDE THE ISS running dancing rayzor, OUTSIDE IN THE VACUUM OF SPACE.

your (originally mine) link continues to demolish your false sense of understanding with,
" One interesting thing that happens is that when you put your crewmates in the airlock to perform an EVA and then shut the hatch, at first you can hear a bunch of clanging as their metal tools softly strike the other equipment, handrails, or the hull of the small airlock.  Then as you depress the airlock it still looks exactly the same through the hatch window.  But now the clanging sound is gone.  You can see their equipment bumping into stuff as before, but now it is silent."

I think the word you are struggling with here is "silent", even when the observer is inside the ISS.

there we have it,
Your inflated self image is in fact delusional idiocy,

That might sound harsh but I can only go on what you are posting,
Which clearly shows you are attempting to prove sound travels in a vacuum by quoting links that show sound travels through air.
sounds like internet slap stick idiocy to me.

I think this is where you claim to be "dumbing down" your misunderstanding of basic science and obvious struggles with the English language.

my spidey sense tells me you will begin an elaborate dance routine before running away shouting infantile insults over your shoulder,

all I ask is that you actually read and understand the links you are quoting, analyse the data and form a coherent factual explanation,
Please
 

[/quote]

Guys ? 
bottling it ?
Is this evasive behaviour compulsory to be a member of the moon landing congregation ?

Guys ?
 

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 09:42:52 AM

Don't do a rayzor guys,
At least attempt to counter the evidence,
If you can.

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 06:47:26 AM

Quote from: sokarul on February 26, 2016, 06:33:58 AM

Everyone who knows people have walked on the moon?

Cool.....

Heeey have you seen the Apollo movies where sound is recorded during  excursions into the lunar vacuum ?

I heard the sound travelled inside the suits from the vacuum outside,
Or travelling through solids then travelling through the suits.
Trouble is sound is recorded in the vacuum where no physical contact occurs,
and the deafening noise of the engines never travelled through the LM onto the audio.

The plot thickens when we realise non of these phenomena happen in the vacuum around the ISS according to the audio record and eye witness testimony.

can that be true ?

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:59:29 AM

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:18:34 AM

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 02:08:41 AM

Just placing this here so globedebunker can find it easier.

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 12:14:29 PM

Quote from: GlobeDebunker link=topic=65666.msg1762244#msg1762244 date=1456429022

The defendants (in this case) have promoted investigation!! Haha! We have asked multiple times for proofs that the moon expedition was a hoax. Not speculative jibber-jabber. 'I think this should do that, or that should be doing this, but I have nothing to confirm these suspicions'

What happens when the prosecutor doesn't have any concrete evidence of the 'crime'?
The prosecution is dismissed. If the suspect is still convicted, then the system is corrupt.

Maybe you could explain how outside sounds are recorded on the audio of Apollo movies in the vacuum of space,
We have already had the idea sound vibrated through the contact hand with tools and this is transferred onto the recording,
Bit of a stretch and has never being recorded on any post Apollo space movie.

But more than this sound is recorded travelling through the vacuum of space when no physical direct contact is evident (discounting the flimsy "drum skin" excuse),
Tiny little metallic rattles, subtle and soft noise, even crunching regolith.
The example given was slamming compartment lids on the lunar buggy with no direct physical contact with the suit,

Sound travelling through solids was offered but is obviously not relevant to the situation, and has not being recorded in a vacuum since.

Any reasoning should be universal,
We do not see this with modern ISS excursions,     
eye witness testimony confirms hand held tools transfer  no sound in the vacuum of space inside the suit,
nor has it being recorded.

how is this possible ?
How can one set of evidence contradict the other ?

Already established facts -
Lunar atmosphere is the same as that surrounding the ISS according to the defendant, a vacuum.
both suits have the same design, a layered skin filled with air,
Tools are made from the same materials,
vehicles are made with the same material,
modern audio is better quality.

Go.....

I love how you suggest few had to be in on it dues to compartmentalisation (though Apollo was notable for not being compatmentalized) and then suggest the rocket didn't work necessitating many hundreds if not thousands more to be in on it.

Ha ha ha ha ha..
This ^ is utter bollocks, and you know it.
"Apollo was notable for not being compartmentalised" 

can you back up this BS ?
need citations that ALL involved were briefed on ALL aspects, redesigns, rebuilds, testing across ALL different firms and disciplines.
numbskull.
Lying only weakens your already weak story.

Quote from: frenat on February 28, 2016, 06:45:42 AM

I love how you suggest few had to be in on it dues to compartmentalisation (though Apollo was notable for not being compatmentalized) and then suggest the rocket didn't work necessitating many hundreds if not thousands more to be in on it.

Ha ha ha ha ha..
This ^ is utter bollocks, and you know it.
"Apollo was notable for not being compartmentalised" 

can you back up this BS ?
need citations that ALL involved were briefed on ALL aspects, redesigns, rebuilds, testing across ALL different firms and disciplines.
numbskull.
Lying only weakens your already weak story.

I never said "ALL involved were briefed on ALL aspects, redesigns, rebuilds, testing across ALL different firms and disciplines".  Nice attempt at a strawman.  I read on another forum that it was notable for a lack of compartmentalization.  It may or may not be correct and does not affect the rest of my post that you ignored.  The point stands even without the part in parentheses.

From another forum

"because there was so much hardware that had to interface with other parts, that Team A needed insight in Team B and C and D and E to do their own job - and team E needed A, B, C, D, F, G H to talk to too. The navigation system team needed to talk to the computer team, the propulsion team, the environmental system team, the power supply team, and so on.

And if a Navigation system guy noticed that the propulsion system team wasn't doing their job, he'd ask some very pointed questions. You can't compartmentalize such a interdependent project - especially not when the press was crawling all over at the same time."

and from another poster on that other forum

"Further, Apollo was expressly uncompartmentalized.  We have both anecdotal and documentary evidence of aggressive familiarization and cross-training among project engineers."

You don't agree then take it up with them.  http://www.apollohoax.net/

If you argue full compartmentalization (which nobody ever seems to prove) then everyone would have built working hardware.  Goes against the argument that the rockets didn't work.  You argue then that the rockets didn't work and more people would have had to be in on it.  There had to be at least some lack of compartmentalization as engineers would have had to make sure their components worked with others.

^ 
Frenut makes an obviously wild and inaccurate statement,
Is asked for citations,
panicks,
hastily googles for something, anything,
and offers up an anonymous forum poster making the same wild and innacurate claims on apollohoax.net.

You couldn't make it up 

^ 
Frenut makes an obviously wild and inaccurate statement,
Is asked for citations,
panicks,
hastily googles for something, anything,
and offers up an anonymous forum poster making the same wild and innacurate claims on apollohoax.net.

You couldn't make it up 

I googled nothing. You're imagining panic.  I linked to the forum where I read the quotes I posted.  Their logic makes sense which is why you aren't addressing that.  You're still ignoring the fact that you can't have only a few in on it and non-working rockets. 

Quote from: feuk on March 01, 2016, 12:05:48 PM

^ 
Frenut makes an obviously wild and inaccurate statement,
Is asked for citations,
panicks,
hastily googles for something, anything,
and offers up an anonymous forum poster making the same wild and innacurate claims on apollohoax.net.

You couldn't make it up 

I googled nothing. You're imagining panic.  I linked to the forum where I read the quotes I posted.  Their logic makes sense which is why you aren't addressing that.  You're still ignoring the fact that you can't have only a few in on it and non-working rockets.

Yeah, I asked for a CITATION ,
You know, actual evidence.
You offered an anonymous forum post also without any evidence or  citations  .

can you please back up your claims with some evidence.

Whose ignoring ?
You made a claim and I asked for evidence,
(that, as you claim, everyone involved in the Apollo program knew in detail what the others were doing and where all briefed on a mission overview in detail)
Good luck,
But of course you will not produce anything of substance just more hot air.


To probe the point,
Another citation is needed that I think rockets can't work.
Good luck.

(btw pretending I'm ignoring your post like it's an outrage is frankly laughable. Please look up and try not to ignore my post that has being repeated for the last ten pages  )

 

Quote from: frenat on March 01, 2016, 12:52:57 PM

Quote from: feuk on March 01, 2016, 12:05:48 PM

^ 
Frenut makes an obviously wild and inaccurate statement,
Is asked for citations,
panicks,
hastily googles for something, anything,
and offers up an anonymous forum poster making the same wild and innacurate claims on apollohoax.net.

You couldn't make it up 

I googled nothing. You're imagining panic.  I linked to the forum where I read the quotes I posted.  Their logic makes sense which is why you aren't addressing that.  You're still ignoring the fact that you can't have only a few in on it and non-working rockets.

Yeah, I asked for a CITATION ,
You know, actual evidence.
You offered an anonymous forum post also without any evidence or  citations  .

You apparently ignored where I posted this

It may or may not be correct and does not affect the rest of my post that you ignored.

Whose ignoring ?
You made a claim and I asked for evidence,
(that, as you claim, everyone involved in the Apollo program knew in detail what the others were doing and where all briefed on a mission overview in detail)

I didn't make that claim.  Again another attempted strawman from you.

To probe the point,
Another citation is needed that I think rockets can't work.
Good luck.

I never said YOU did.  The post you quoted was directed toward another poster who did.

(btw pretending I'm ignoring your post like it's an outrage is frankly laughable. Please look up and try not to ignore my post that has being repeated for the last ten pages  )

Why should I pay attention to a post not directed toward me?

If feuk wants to make an argument about who knew what about the details of the Apollo program,  I propose a simple test. 

Name ONE major component of the Apollo program,  that was not put out for public tender,  the specifications and design requirements are well documented, as well as the various contractror supplied documents.   The project itself was hardly a secret,  not like the Manhattan Project,  and even with that top secret military project, there were spies and leaks.

By comparison,  the Apollo program,  the Explorer program, The Surveyor program, the Gemini Program are all open books,  everyone actually did know the detail of what everyone else was doing.  That was one of the keys to it's success.   

If you can find something, anything about any of those programs that is secret,  or not made available to the general public,  feel free to enlighten us.

Your conspiracy theories don't hold water,  they are just paranoid delusions.

@ frenut

So.....no citation then.
which puts it in the "incorrect" category for evidence purposes,
Compartmentalisation means separated or working independently of other projects,
You are the one claiming that the nylon strap makers were briefed on the minutia of the collapsable LM legs,
The makers of the poo bags briefed on the minutia of the parachute deployment system
Etc etc

You claimed I ignored the "logic",
Nope,
Just pointed out it's anti logic.
Sorry,
I have no need to run,
or  dance,
because debunking this nonsense is easy 

@ the running dancing delusional nappy wearing bottling post ignoring comedy monkey rayzor.

" I wouldn't bother with the crazy feucker,  he misquotes,  ignores,  makes countless unsupported assertions, and generally has the reasoning power of a demented pigeon"
 

Your meltdown has now taken a rather public comedy twist 
you have form for delusional ranting and just making stuff up,

and I think it's cute you think we can't all see the post you have being ignoring for 10 pages 

I know, to get round it claim I'm ignoring your post 

yeah that will work

Or pretend I don't use NASA links and video you can't explain 

In reality you got spanked and are now running scared refusing to even discuss the Apollo sound travelling in a vacuum   

so sad.


Take care bottler.

@ frenut

So.....no citation then.
which puts it in the "incorrect" category for evidence purposes,
Compartmentalisation means separated or working independently of other projects,
You are the one claiming that the nylon strap makers were briefed on the minutia of the collapsable LM legs,
The makers of the poo bags briefed on the minutia of the parachute deployment system
Etc etc

You claimed I ignored the "logic",
Nope,
Just pointed out it's anti logic.
Sorry,
I have no need to run,
or  dance,
because debunking this nonsense is easy 

Again, I did not claim that everyone was briefed on everything everyone else was doing.  That is a strawman YOU invented.

Again, I did not claim that everyone was briefed on everything everyone else was doing.  That is a strawman YOU invented.

Nope,
Just pointing out the obvious.

the alleged Apollo total workforce was obviously and severely compartmentalised.

To suggest otherwise is ridiculous,
and illogical.

You seem to be agreeing by suddenly distancing yourself from the idea that every individual allegedly involved knew what every other individual was doing.

compartmentalisation is essential for even the most mundane and simple manufacturing environment.

Let's use a little logic shall we.