"Because I said so" is the resort most often used when you have exhausted all reasonable attempts to explain something to someone who is simply incapable of, or refusing to, accept rational argument and explanation of the facts. It was not the starting point used by anyone here. It is pretty much the standpoint you have employed from the start and its use is entirely inappropriate given your lack of understanding of the things you are trying to examine.
The facts are that Apollo went to the moon. Every piece of evidence supports that. You have absolutely nothing that contradicts it no matter how many times you claim you do. All you have is a small collection of numbers collected from dosimeters worn next to the skin inside a structure that (regardless of whether you believe this) will intercept radiation. The numbers you report are adjusted from the original raw figures, which are higher. If you put some effort in you might even find those numbers.
You do not have adequate data on which to draw the unreasonably firm conclusions that you espouse, and your claim that it invalidates everything else in the Apollo record is incorrect. You need to look at the point you actually make yourself: there is an overwhelming amount of verifiable evidence supporting Apollo, how can it be possible if you are correct? You might just have to grasp the reality that you are wrong.
China, India and Japan have all taken images at the Apollo sites showing human activity. Not hardware, not physical objects, but the activity around them. Your a priori conclusions based on faulty assumptions cannot explain that.
