Strong arguments versus weak arguments.

[SolusLupus]

I'm not a gentleman, I'm a method man.

[advancedboy]

Jay, You have worked on 787 Delayliner, yet you tell me to go study photography, implying that the picture still in the video at 10;11 is ok. But it is not. You can compress or unzip as often you like, you won`t see such an anomaly around a single object within a video, while having no similar patterns  elsewhere. You always demand to go study originals. Originals what? The orginal film it was shot on, or  NASA website, that would have managed to sanitize such things. Jay, how was the wing design ? Did the guys at Mitsu have  to sweat a lot? Well, that is kinda off topic, sorry from me.
 As to Russian scientists talking about  Apollo  11 star` recollection , I can post the whole video, if you want, but it is unfortunately in Russian. They also talk about flag waving, but not that it waves in wind, but that it doesn`t sway to the way inertia would require, they point to periodic fluttering towards one side.
On a sidenote, I predict grim future for Boeing, as it will have to face fiercer and fiercer competition from Airbus, Comac, Russians as well, with their MC-21 and Sukhoi-100, .  I believe Boeing had to build their Large single deck aircraft once they displayed their plans in Aviation week And Space technology  to fight A380. Sadly they resorted to botox injection in old 747.
Anyway, sems strange that I have been researching and loving aviation since childhood, and I had never doubted things in aviation, except I have been disppointed in eternal shrinkage of US plane diversity, and completely maddened by Boeing renaming an old MDd as 717. Aviation was the last US industry that didn`t have rebadging. Besides that I didn`t doubt much anything, but Apollo was different,. And when you said that Kaysing bluntly lied, and that he made stuff up, I can`t believe it. I simply can`t.  It is beyond my power to believe that Kaysing would have lied. Not him. He might have been wrong on some issues, but I would bet my life, not blatantly lying.
My disbelief in US moonlandings actually comes from another aspect, but it is a seperate discussion. it deals with 2 issues- extremely complex engineering. And US ability to deal with extremely complex engineering using in-house engineering  all years afterwards . For me the reliabilty of the whole Apollo project + its complexity, is somewhat suspicious.  Imagine after the demise of Apolo project, those great engineers should have been working and appluying their superb engineering skills in civilian world, meaning facing real competition with Asians and germans. But it is one big disappointment after another , at least for me.  I will delve in this issue much later. And don`t be that agressive, I simply have no power of believing Apollo so far, and it is beyond my power to lie  to myself that I believe it.

[Andromeda]

Advancedboy, read this: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/hoagland/artifacts.html

I find it hard to understand why you find it so easy to believe thousands of people lied about Apollo (and continue to do so, including all of us), but you cannot even consider that Bill Kaysing is full of it.

[Glom]

At least you post reasonably frequently.  It means I can be amused.

Stars- moonmissions gave them a chance to make pictures without atmospheric aberation, although, they could have  done it from low-earth orbit. Since they didn`t have adaptive optics then, they could used advantage of lack of atmosphere.  Also if they could see but couldn`t photograph, seems funny that on Apollo 11 they couldn`t remember what stars they could see, which was also admitted by Russian scientists  to be very weird.

There is nothing the 70mm Hasselblad camera could have achieved on the Moon that they couldn't on Earth.  It's only when you get into the really high end astronomical equipment that atmospheric effects begin to matter.  The Lunar missions weren't about building an observatory on the Moon, as cool as that would be, it was about studying the Moon.

Emma, I don`t care what your papers are, but rather what is that you do, meaning where you apply your knowledge and passion `muscles`.
 The video  with  the rectangle is suspicious,  it doesn`t take a rocket scientist to see that if there is a rectangle around a blob which seems to be an astronaut, there is something fishy. Of course, you could imply that it was faked by the author who posted it.

So what is your exact explanation for it then?  We want to see if it makes sense even on your own terms.  Frequently, conspiracists' explanations for their anomalies don't, eg why on Earth or the Moon would they paste the LRV over the top of the crosshair.

I believe that Apollo was hoaxed, even if it implies surnames of these people. I `d rather believe aliens hanging around S4 and flying around in a TR3a mercury plasma rotating engine than Apollo( as a comparison). Sorry,  I can`t fathom Apollo missions.  Even if it means for you that I am ignorant fool. So be it.

What do you mean you'd rather believe aliens on the Mandeville Road?  Isn't this about what is credible, rather than would is a preferred viewpoint?  No wonder you believe it, if you have such a bias.

I sense, that it might be that some former astronaut is even here in these forums, reading it and being angry to me.  Just a guess.  I also have this feeling that most of you work for government institutions or formerly did, hence the reservedness about 9/11 simple yes/no answers.

We suspected that was your game.  The irrelevant 9/11 question was simply an attempt to elicit a response you could use to dismiss us through ad hominem.  If we did work for government institutions, wouldn't we just say the government line rather than equivocating?

[SolusLupus]

For the record, I have never worked with any government.  I am a college student, and a history major/archaeology minor, so it's unlikely I'll end up working with the government.

[Luke Pemberton]

And when you said that Kaysing bluntly lied, and that he made stuff up, I can`t believe it. I simply can`t.  It is beyond my power to believe that Kaysing would have lied. Not him. He might have been wrong on some issues, but I would bet my life, not blatantly lying.

The man was rotten to the core. I used to have sympathy for him, and felt he dealt out many wonderful acts of kindness. As I have learned more about him, I realised he was a bitter and selfish man that used the moon hoax to kick around with his ego at every possible opportunity; no matter what lies and mistruths he spread. He was good at hamming it from his rocking chair, kindly old Kaysing pretending to sound erudite on all matters.

[Glom]

Jay, You have worked on 787 Delayliner, yet you tell me to go study photography, implying that the picture still in the video at 10;11 is ok. But it is not. You can compress or unzip as often you like, you won`t see such an anomaly around a single object within a video, while having no similar patterns  elsewhere. You always demand to go study originals. Originals what? The orginal film it was shot on, or  NASA website, that would have managed to sanitize such things.

You haven't played with compression much, have you?  You can make all sorts of things appear.

On a sidenote, I predict grim future for Boeing, as it will have to face fiercer and fiercer competition from Airbus, Comac, Russians as well, with their MC-21 and Sukhoi-100, .  I believe Boeing had to build their Large single deck aircraft once they displayed their plans in Aviation week And Space technology  to fight A380. Sadly they resorted to botox injection in old 747.

The number of times in the past decade both Boeing and Airbus have been doomed is too innumerable.

And when you said that Kaysing bluntly lied, and that he made stuff up, I can`t believe it. I simply can`t.  It is beyond my power to believe that Kaysing would have lied. Not him. He might have been wrong on some issues, but I would bet my life, not blatantly lying.

Really?  You'll believe 400,000 people will bluntly lie, but not one man, the judicial system labelled a kook.  Did Elvis do drugs?

My disbelief in US moonlandings actually comes from another aspect, but it is a seperate discussion. it deals with 2 issues- extremely complex engineering. And US ability to deal with extremely complex engineering using in-house engineering  all years afterwards . For me the reliabilty of the whole Apollo project + its complexity, is somewhat suspicious. 

What reliability?  They killed three astronauts with one accident and nearly killed three others with another.  Oh wait, those were really just sub-conspiracies.  When things goes well, it's suspicious.  When things goes badly, something fish y is going on.  It's the head I win, tails you lose logic of the conspiracy theorist.

[nomuse]

..787 Delayliner..study photography...sanitize such things..the guys at Mitsu..Apollo  11 star` recollection..flag waving..future for Boeing..US plane diversity..renaming..Kaysing bluntly lied..complex engineering..competition with Asians and germans...

Too much coffee man.

[Tedward]

I am curios as to what you are going to achieve with a camera on the moon, that is the one taken and given the mission.

[Jason Thompson]

Jay, You have worked on 787 Delayliner, yet you tell me to go study photography, implying that the picture still in the video at 10;11 is ok. But it is not.

Here we go, a man with NO experience in photo analysis telling a man who DOES have that expertise how to do his work. What is it with you people who think everything is understandable by common sense and instinct?

You always demand to go study originals. Originals what? The orginal film it was shot on,

YES, for the umpeenth time!

NASA website, that would have managed to sanitize such things.

Typical. If they can 'sanitise' the original film (another element that you have NO clue about, as you have demonstrated from your first post talking about 'negatives'), how the hell did that 'unsanitised' image get published? Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting they could hide all the evidence of modifying the original picture, but decided to do it AFTER it has been mass-copied and distributed around the world?

And when you said that Kaysing bluntly lied, and that he made stuff up, I can`t believe it. I simply can`t.  It is beyond my power to believe that Kaysing would have lied. Not him. He might have been wrong on some issues, but I would bet my life, not blatantly lying.

Why? Did you know the man personally? What is it that convinces you he was so honest? Why do you place your faith in a person's integrity above things that are actually verfiable?

Tell me, what is your opinion of a man who writes a book accusing NASA of fraud and murder, among other things, then tries to sue an astronaut for calling him 'wacky' after reading the book? A man who appeals constantly to anonymous authorities and dead people to support his arguments? A man who claims the media is being controlled and people are being killed to keep the hoax quiet, yet uses that media to publish his stuff and openly publishes his address? Why are the 'feds' so incompetent they can't silence a man who gives them his calling card?!

For me the reliabilty of the whole Apollo project + its complexity, is somewhat suspicious.

Since you have demonstrated no understanding of the project, this counts for very little.

Imagine after the demise of Apolo project, those great engineers should have been working and appluying their superb engineering skills in civilian world, meaning facing real competition with Asians and germans.

Why 'should' they have followed that route?

it is beyond my power to lie  to myself that I believe it.

It is not beyond your power to educate yourself, but no, you prefer to remain blissfully ignorant of the details that are REQUIRED to draw a defenisble conclusion. It just doesn't fit your expectation, therefore it is suspect. Well who says your expectations are right?

[nomuse]

Not that it matters, but I worked for "The Government" twice -- federal for three years and change, and state for ten years.  In the latter, my paycheck was actually signed (stamped) by the state comptroller (because we were an independent district that fell directly under the state).  I have also followed two career paths in which I carried the title of "engineer" -- but in neither was I required to have anything particularly resembling the discipline and education of, well, engineering.  I'm an arts major, a science geek without the math to understand much beyond the basics, and I work currently as a freelancer in the arts industry.

And you can STILL take your 9-11 question, advancedgameboy, and stick it.

[SolusLupus]

So, let's see.  We have two sides (and I don't think you can accuse it of being a false dichotomy):

A)  We worked hard on the space program, getting the best and the brightest of engineers, the best and the bravest of test pilots, all working together as a team to make little steps in getting us into space, and later to the moon.  Being an entirely new experimental form of human transportation into a hostile region (far more hostile than even a submarine in the ocean, which can come up for air), not everything went perfectly, the first Apollo craft had a horrible accident, and Apollo 13 nearly resulted in the death of its crew, coming back only thanks to ingenuity and good communication between the astronauts and ground control.  In short, experimental new age of discovery, taking small steps, that had accidents along the way.

B)  A hidden conspiracy by unknown characters, buying the silence somehow of hundreds of thousands of experts, keeping them from telling anyone else (including their wives and family) even well after the Apollo missions were over and even after the USSR collapsed.  Things going well is evidence of this conspiracy, and things going poorly is evidence of this conspiracy.  It would have either been better if everything went drastically wrong, or everything went perfectly as planned.  Regardless, in spite of this vast overpowering conspiracy, they still are careless enough to leave traces that any teenager sitting in front of his computer could figure out, including mistakes in photography, engineering, etc.

[advancedboy]

  Emma, I have never believed  Richard Hoaxland. He is a sincere, good old jolly chap, has hair, which is a nice fact in itself, but doesn`t have a ruler that would let him draw a line between reality and a fairy tale. Hoagland is similar to John Lear, who is also a nice fellow, interesting, amusing and loves to mix facts with unicorns. But these 2 fellows don`t radiate a  single yota of evil . Neither does Kaysing. And Kaysing admitting  that he had lied, is beyond my ability to grasp.
 Someone also mentioned that US won`t need an RD-180 replacement, for it is good enough to outsource it to Energomash.  But I want the jobs to return to the US., the  meaningful jobs. Jobs in droves that would involve mechanical engineering.  Whenever you outsource a single component abroad, it is simply killing me,. Buell, Kodak, Oldsmobile, Plymouth, Saturn,  the endless list of engineering jobs evaporating goes on and on. How do you plan to support purchasning power of your nation if avoiding jobs of measurable added value?
 You see, had US been abundant in all mechanical engineering fields of  mass manufacturing such as consumer electronics, trucks,trains, industrial robots, cars, workbenches, etc, showing a fierce competition in diversity, fit and finish,  reliability nad complexity , I would have never gone into checking moonhoax theory at all. never. Sorry, if I omitted many answers, I can`t catch up.

[SolusLupus]

  Emma, I have never believed  Richard Hoaxland. He is a sincere, good old jolly chap, has hair, which is a nice fact in itself, but doesn`t have a ruler that would let him draw a line between reality and a fairy tale.

...Buh?   

Now that one took me aback.  I'm assuming it's humor.

Anyways, I still stick by my previous post.


EDITED:

You see, had US been abundant in all mechanical engineering fields of  mass manufacturing such as consumer electronics, trucks,trains, industrial robots, cars, workbenches, etc, showing a fierce competition in diversity, fit and finish,  reliability nad complexity , I would have never gone into checking moonhoax theory at all.

Er, the US has been quite innovative.  You do realize that there's a difference between capitalizing on mass manufacturing and actually inventing whole new designs, right?

Not that I wish to denigrate the East in their own contributions, but most of them came relatively recently, more within the last few decades as they found their specialties.

Also, Berkeley is proving whole new ideas every day... are you going to ignore that?

[Luke Pemberton]

A man who claims the media is being controlled and people are being killed to keep the hoax quiet, yet uses that media to publish his stuff and openly publishes his address? Why are the 'feds' so incompetent they can't silence a man who gives them his calling card?!

The irony so succinctly described. Yep, an evil controlling media magnet protecting the government produces a documentary on one of the biggest networks in the world (FOX). All those people killed to prevent the hoax becoming public knowledge, yet the CIA cannot manage to kill Grandfather Bill and Uncle Ralph, despite them leading loner hermit lives and being easily waxed. At the same time, they allow an illegal alien entry into the US on several occasions (Jarrah). Damn, with that track record, I'm surprised the hoax took so long to surface.