Hello,
Hello and welcome.
Ask any truther and temperature works like magic in space and on the Moon
Nope, temperature works in very defined ways everywhere.
NASA states below 56C in the shade which would make any Film unusable but of course Silver Anodising stops anything from getting hot or cold as truthers will say.
Nope. Things left in the dark on the Moon for up to two weeks reach that low temperature. Thermal control in a vacuum is a well-studied science. Presumably you believe all photography using film in space to be faked, since they would have the same supposed 'problem'.
NASA states 123C in the Sun on the Moon at the minimum because of the time they landed.
Funny thing is from all scientific sites I could find once the Sun shines on anything in space and on the Moon it doesn't matter what time of day it is as there is no atmosphere for the Sun to go through to lesson it's effects.
It does matter what time of day it is for the same reason time of day (and season) makes a difference to temperature here on Earth. It's not a function of atmosphere but angle of illumination. Low sun angle results in slower heating than high sun angle.
Yet when it comes to the Moon it's all SPECIAL no metal objects get to hot or too cold, must have been the Goldilocks time of day on the Moon each time.
That and the different thermal properties of every object and spacecraft.
Not one of you people look at the video and see them moving in slow motion and have one problem with it,
No, I don't have a problem because I don't see them moving in slow motion. I see them working with their hands and arms at the same pace they do on Earth. I see movements influenced by gravity being slower and that's all. Try speeding up the video of all the missions and find a section that shows an astronaut using his hands and arms that doesn't look ludicrously sped up.
First people on the Moon never done before never landed a manned vehicle on the Moon
Test pilots flying new planes for the first time don't know if it's going to land safely or slam into the ground, or break up in mid-flight. Ultimately the only way to test a spacecraft designed to be piloted to a safe landing on the Moon is to put two people in it and get them to pilot it to a landing, just as the only way to fully test a new aircraft is to put a pilot in it and get him to fly it.
all first time events as none of the equipment they used had ever been tested in a Lunar environment.
Apollo 5, 9 and 10 all tested the lunar module in every aspect of its capability except the landing itself. Apollo 11 was the final test. Risky? Undoubtedly. Unbelievably so? Not at all.
Yet they went from a less than 60% success rate to a 100% for every manned mission.
Improvements in success rates during development of technology are expected. Every manned flight had a glitch of some kind, and Apollo 13 was not a success in terms of its main objective. That is not a 100% success rate.
Years later they couldn't get close to this with the Shuttle missions.
Two failures 17 years apart in over 100 flights across three decades isn't close to a 100% success rate?
I am sure I will get a few responses that Believers would never lie or make things up 
No, you'll get responses that deal with the substance of your posts. no-one here takes Apollo on blind faith.
