Funny thing is I have found the opposite in the sense that I have found truther's to make fake accounts...
You have no evidence that any number of the regular posters here are sock puppets. This does not start you out on good footing.
I have found quite a few people that are believers that just make up stories left and right...
Another claim made with no examples or evidence.
that go against the transcripts as well as equipment lists provided by NASA and easily found from the NASA site.
You make a lot of references to what you claim NASA has provided, but you supply no documentation for any of it. Simply saying here and there that "NASA says" does not establish that it is really the case. And failing to supply specific references prevents anyone from checking up on you to see whether you've quoted properly or put things in the right context.
Made up stories about SPECIAL battery packs, where as the truth is as explained by NASA of the shelf technology was used where ever possible and batteries were one of the off the shelf items used.
Total nonsense. Practically all the batteries used in the Apollo program were custom-designed and custom-made. Why? Because they had to have specific form factors and specific energy densities. There were simply no COTS batteries that fit the design specs in each case. You chastise others for not providing specific references, but you provide no specific references for this or any other claim you make.
Every truther makes out they know for fact how temperatures work in space and on the Moon...
Yes, I do know for a fact how temperatures work in space. I'm certified to do so, have done so for nearly 30 years, and am legally liable for errors made in my understanding. Thermodynamics and heat transfer, I've found, are one of the counterintuitive elements of space engineering that constantly mystify and baffle conspiracy theorists.
yet NASA states complete opposite views as they seem to have results from experiments done in space and on the Moon showing temperatures.
Vague claims made with no evidence. Odd that you would cite NASA's experiments done on the Moon apparently in support of claims that they did not go.
Ask any truther and temperature works like magic in space and on the Moon...
No, nobody is claiming that "temperature" (more properly, heat) works like magic in space. However, thermodynamics and heat transfer absent an atmosphere work quite differently than conspiracists intuitively believe. They want to parlay their ignorance into the appropriate standard of proof. Funny how the more people know about the relevant sciences, the less they are likely to be bothered by hoax theories.
NASA states below 56C in the shade...
Source? And you haven't said
what attains that temperature in the shade.
...which would make any Film unusable...
Nope. ESTAR base from Kodak is good to almost 400 C. It was made for use in spy satellites. Now it's commonly available and can be tested by anyone willing to conduct the proper experiment. Bold move for someone you insinuate has done something physically impossible.
...but of course Silver Anodising stops anything from getting hot or cold as truthers will say.
No, that is not the claim. But yes, coatings are an important part of thermal design for objects designed for space. The only appreciable means by which heat can be transferred to the film magazine is absorption of solar radiation. Reduce the absorptivity and you reduce the heat load. That's elementary heat transfer and first-year engineering design. If you don't know anything about that, that's on you. Coatings aren't an absolute solution, as you insinuate your critics believe. But they are an important part of thermal design.
Leave an item on the Moon in the shade for 8 hours and truthers say no problems it won't get to cold...
That's right. Why is it so hard to believe that objects can be designed for the environment they're designed to work in?
...what temperature it does get none of them say...
Sure, because equilibrium temperature in any given situation depends on a number of variables, most of which can't be known precisely enough for any given hypothetical situation. Something left in the shade will conduct heat to whatever surface it's left on. To what extent depends on exactly what surface -- the lunar surface, a footpad, a rock? It will radiate heat to the environment around it. To what extend depends on whether it's left under something, or next to something, or -- in short -- what the object can "see" around it. Again, this is first-year heat transfer. The principles are well known, and if you give a precise set of conditions any competent engineer can give you a first-order estimate of equilibrium temperature. Not all objects reach the same equilibrium temperature in any given thermal environment. Laymen have a hard time grasping this.
NASA states 123C in the Sun on the Moon at the minimum because of the time they landed.
No, quite the contrary. Landings were done in early lunar morning, with the sun low on the horizon. The temperature of the lunar surface would have been probably 0-20 C. The temperature of other objects, such as the back panel of the LM, would have equalized at a different temperature because it's more directly facing the sun and because it's made of different material. You don't give any reference, and you don't say what exact substance would have achieved this temperature.
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.
The lack of atmosphere eliminates convective heat transfer, which has a significant effect in thermal environments on Earth. However, the angle at which heat-bearing electromagnetic radiation strikes a surface has a very profound effect on the amount of heat that's transfered. This is basic heat transfer, and it's clear you know essentially zilch about it.
Any object in direct Sun can reach a temperature of 250C...
No. Equilibrium temperatures vary according to their material properties.
...which is what happens and again proof from ISS Astronauts and Shuttle crew explaining the problems they have whilst outside in space with tools getting so hot they need to use insulation wraps or blankets.
Different objects reach different equilibrium temperatures. Citing examples of some objects that get hot does not substantiate that all objects get that hot.
Not one of you people look at the video and see them moving in slow motion and have one problem with it...
I don't see them moving in slow motion in the videos.
...not once do you hear any of them talking as though at any second they could die.
Why would you think that an any moment they could die? Seems like you're pasting your naive expectations on what people should be doing and saying. I worked routinely with test pilots, who have a career 25% mortality rate. Every time they take an airplane do I expect them to talk endlessly about panicking that they could die at any minute?
First people on the Moon never done before never landed a manned vehicle on the Moon all first time events as none of the equipment they used had ever been tested in a Lunar environment.
Engineers knew a whole lot about the lunar environment before sending astronauts. Even so, the early missions were tentative, and engineers modified things for later missions based on what they learned from prior missions. That's what they do. Certain things can be tested in Earth orbit which, for most intents and purposes, duplicates the lunar environment. Do you really think people can only do things that have been done before? People do new things all the time. What's magical about one of those things being flying in space?
Yet they went from a less than 60% success rate to a 100% for every manned mission.
You aren't telling us where you're getting these success rates.
Years later they couldn't get close to this with the Shuttle missions.
Why would you think those two programs are directly comparable, either qualitatively or statistically?
I am sure I will get a few responses that Believers would never lie or make things up 
You clearly think very little of people who knowledgeably believe in the Apollo missions, but you're simply spouting the same long-debunked, ignorant nonsense as all your predecessors. Just because you don't understand how smart people did things doesn't mean they can't have done it.
Since the bulk of your claim deals with heat transfer, read a basic text. There are several available for free. Then read chapter 11 of
Spacecraft Systems Engineering, the standard text on how to design for space and planetary environments. The authors and editors don't work for NASA. I'll be available to answer your questions.
