Didn't stay 'outta here' for long, did you?
6 times they found nothing interesting?
Nothing interesting by whose criteria?
And, what's the difference between moon rocks from the moon, and moon rocks from Antarctica?
Apart from the ones from Antarctica showing clear signs of having come screaming through the atmosphere at several thousand miles per hour, been subject to heating as a result, and then been sitting around on a sheet of ice for god only knows how many years? Or the ones from Antarctica being rocks and the Apollo samples including soil and core tube samples? Do you know what zap pits are?
Just stating the facts.
You have not stated anything like a fact in your entire time here.
You like my "nonsense" otherwise you wouldn't have posted a comment.
That's about as logical as anything else you have said. I don't like your nonsense. I comment on it because it is wrong, and if nonsense like yours goes unanswered people may mistake it for a fact.
And, how do you know it's nonsense? You only know what you think you know because that's what you've been told.
Bull. People here have hands on experience in the fields you are trying to lecture us all in. There are people on this forum who have built aerospace equipment, who have worked with the technology and the methods you say don't work. What makes your knowledge better than theirs?
For 40 years I thought we went to the moon. Then I looked into it.
Oh how tedious. The 'I used to be a believer' rubbish springs forth again. Don't any of your hoax believer friends have anything more original than that? You haven't looked into it with any kind of rigour, because you and your comrades always, and I do mean
always, show up amazing gaps in your knowledge of the availability of the record.
It scares you to think that the moon landings might have been faked, doesn't it. You're afraid of the mere possibility. It's easier to just say something is nonsense than face the truth, or even face the possibility.
We're scared? You're the one resorting to insults and dismissals rather than dealing with the substance of the arguments. You're the one who flounced off when you realised we knew you were just using a sock puppet. Who's acting scared here?
Do you believe everything the govt tells you?
Which government? Do you believe my government and yours are one and the same?
I seem to be the only one doing research.
I've already pointed out the low quality of your 'research' in an earlier post. Do you have anything to say to that that isn't a childish insult?
Handwaving? I'm just talking way over your head.
Ha! You keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. It's much easier to believe we just don't understand your arguments than to acknowledge we do actually know what we are talking about and that you might be wrong, isn't it?
I just need to fly over a landing site and beam back a camera image. If there's no descent stage, then they didn't go. Until the time comes that somebody does that,
Been done.
all we can prove is that it was infinitely easier to fake it than go to the moon, and that's a fact.
No, that's an assertion. Care to back it up with anything like telling us
how it was faked and why that is easier than going to the moon for real? No? Thought not.
I happen to know that they didn't go to the moon because they would have needed to do an IMU alignment on the moon, which they couldn't do, because they had no survey marker on the moon.
Prove they needed to know exactly where they were, and explain why they couldn't do an IMU alignment while sitting in a gravitational field (thus providing the attitude information) with an unobstructed view of the stars.
And, anybody who wants me to prove I'm an engineer, and that I worked on the Delta rocket, and the ISS, you need to put up some money and bet me.
Is that what you say to prospective employers when they ask for your employment history? You are making claims that rely on your claimed expertise in the field. If you want to be taken seriously, why would you have trouble proving your credentials?
A Director of Engineering at Boeing is a former co-worker. Another co-worker is a Chief Engineer at General Dynamics. I used to party with those guys. I've used them as work references. My college roommate is a director of engineering at Panasonic.
Why do we care what your friends do? The question is what
you do. The secretary of a company can claim to be a co-worker of the director of said company. That doesn't confer any technical expertise on the secretary.
In short, alex, provide your credentials, then explain why your argument about what they needed to do on the Moon is more valid than the reams of documentation detailing how they actually did it up there. Stop with the handwaving and telling us what your colleagues do.