Good books about the moon landings hoax?

[Zakalwe]

One word ... NASASCAM.

In a twisted way i loved that site, if only for the immortal line:

"FACT: Rumour has it..."

FACT: The current Airfix plastic kit model of the Saturn V rocket, has no mention whatsoever on the box that Apollo went to the Moon, in fact the word "Moon" does not appear anywhere on the box. It merely states that the Saturn V launched the Apollo capsule into space, (low earth orbit, which is correct). Evidently Airfix realize that Apollo did not go to the Moon, otherwise there would be a reference to it somewhere on the box containing the model. As many would say "The truth is as plastic as the model".

Is it a wind-up site??? Surely, no-one can be that stupid?

[RAF]

It's the sheer lack of even the most basic of research that does it for me.

..or the constant repeating of throughly debunked ideas....in particular, I'm thinking of the "no stars" argument.

[Luke Pemberton]

"FACT: Rumour has it..."

That has tickled me, if you could only see how much.

[Luke Pemberton]

For sheer sillyness, the lack of rover tracks is another good one.  So let's get this right, we have a wheeled vehicle capable of being driven into a position that is was supposed to be driven into.   But instead of driving it in into that position, we decide to hoist it into place with a crane.  Meanwhile it never occurs to anyone that by hoisting it we never produce the tire tracks that should have been there had we driven it.

And round and round it goes...

But that doesn't sound as good as the rover was hoisted there by a crane, which would have involved more people from an external crane company, and they would have been in on the conspiracy too, but that's not a problem as the project was well compartmentalised and there isn't a chance the crane company would have blown the whistle as they were paid by NASA using the NASA shill budget.

[Sus_pilot]

ETA: I've now posted 333 times. For those that know their cricket, I've levelled with Goochy on triple Nelson. OK, no one cares...

I gotta tell you, as a USAian, I find hoax theories more comprehensible than cricket rules...

ETA:  Luke, Tapatalk is truncating the right margin, so I can't seem to get the quote formatted corretcly.

Or edit "correctly". 

[Luke Pemberton]

I gotta tell you, as a USAian, I find hoax theories more comprehensible than cricket rules laws...

Fixed that for you... 

It's straighforwards really, here's an explanation of Cricket:

You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out.

Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.

There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.

[Zakalwe]

It's straighforwards really, here's an explanation of Cricket:

You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out.

Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.

There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.

You sure that's not a MP sketch???

[Sus_pilot]

I gotta tell you, as a USAian, I find hoax theories more comprehensible than cricket rules laws...

Fixed that for you... 

It's straighforwards really, here's an explanation of Cricket:

You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out.

Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.

There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.

The last time someone tried to explain it to me was while we were on vacation in the Caymans.  I immediately felt the need for a strong rum drink.  Sadly, I do now, but I have a flight student in 10 minutes, and the FAA frowns on that sort of thing.

Sigh...

[JayUtah]

Is it a wind-up site??? Surely, no-one can be that stupid?

Sam Colby can certainly act that stupid, but the jury has been out for some 15 years whether he really is that stupid.  He does a slightly better job of protecting his anonymity than AwE130, so it's hard to really track him across the web.

[Chew]

The one I can't forget no matter how hard I try is the 'hospital porter for truth' who said the footage of a LM rendezvousing with the CSM was obviously fake because the LM was moving to its right but it was "banked" to the left.

[frenat]

I still like Jarrah's description of a polar orbit.

[nomuse]

Or the alleged vacuum.

[gillianren]

When my friends are discussing stupidity, "alleged vacuum" comes up a lot.  They like watching me splutter incoherently, it seems.

[Luke Pemberton]

I still like Jarrah's description of a polar orbit.

Oh, you've gone and done it now, and I was trying so hard not to go over old ground. The infamous '1.5 x 0.5 = 1.0 wiggle myself off the hook with circular logic get-out' is still my favourite.

'If I take the Apollo footage (Young's jump salute) and increase its speed to 150% (3/2 times) it looks like a man moving in Earth's gravity. I shall now render the sped up video. I now take my rendered video at 150% (3/2 times) and reduce it's playback speed to 67% (2/3 times speed) and it looks like the Apollo footage.' He plays slowed down rendered video next to original unaltered video.

So you've just shown that 3/2 x 2/3 = 1? Way to go 

[nomuse]

Sounds on a par with IDW's "10^5 = 1,000,000"