NASA photographic record of Manned Moonlanding:Is there evidence of fabrication?

[frenat]

Prediction: Romulus will not return to the threads he has conspicuously abandoned, but will lie low for a few days, then open a new thread on a different aspect of Apollo hoping that everyone will forget previous failures and bow to his "science knowledge". Rinse, lather, repeat.

Basically, a slo-mo gish gallop.

Well, no. What you do not realize is simply disabling a single computer is a useless gesture.

So now you're claiming someone here has somehow remotely disabled your computer?  Paranoid much?

[Romulus]

Indeed, but the hoaxers are so utterly ignorant of the relevant physics that I doubt they're even aware of the fact that the earth's magnetic field has absolutely no effect on ionizing photon radiation. The solar X-ray (and UV, and optical, and infrared) flux is exactly the same in low earth orbit as on Luna (assuming daytime in both places, of course).

First of all, as I have already established, I am the debunker. You are the hoaxer. You have reassigned roles.

If you've got in in your mind that I do not know magnetic fields do not measurable effect electromagnetic radiation, you are badly underestimating your opponent. I know more about this particular subject than anyone here, and your misrepresentations about what you believe I have said prove it. That is unless you are willing to concede you are intentionally lying.

[Romulus]

Prediction: Romulus will not return to the threads he has conspicuously abandoned, but will lie low for a few days, then open a new thread on a different aspect of Apollo hoping that everyone will forget previous failures and bow to his "science knowledge". Rinse, lather, repeat.

Basically, a slo-mo gish gallop.

Well, no. What you do not realize is simply disabling a single computer is a useless gesture.

So now you're claiming someone here has somehow remotely disabled your computer? 

YES

Paranoid much?

Perhaps. Probably not.

[Bob B.]

You keep lying like a rug about things I've supposedly said and I will not permit it to go unchalleneged. You have lied dozens of times about what  have said, and you are in the simplest of terms a blowhard and a liar.What I actually said is that NASA does not publish any detailed information on the translunar injection trajectories. I wasn't referring to books written by propagandists. I want NASA's data so I can use it to prove they lied like they do about nearly everything else.

"Apollo by the Numbers" is just a compilation of NASA data that is readily available from other NASA documents.  For example, the following:

Document No. D5-15560-6, Apollo/Saturn V Postflight Trajectory - AS-509, October 6, 1969

The translunar trajectory data can be found in Table 4-IV, page 4-9 (page 63 of the PDF).

[carpediem]

If it makes any difference, I have never read any Apollo critics books either, for the same reason. To be fair.

You're saying you haven't read Dark Moon now?

[JayUtah]

There is nothing absurd about it.NASA  doesn't publish translunar injection trajectories for a reason,  because to do what they claimed they did is simply impossible and it can be proved.

NASA does publish translunar trajectory information, whether you think they do or not.  And anyone with a suitably developed skill at orbital mechanics can use that data to derive the actual orbits and show that they have the properties required for a manned lunar mission in all respect.  An example of that computation has been put to you, but you simply refuse to look at it.

Your posts are turning into nothing but sheer denial.

[JayUtah]

I know more about this particular subject than anyone here...

I require a demonstration of that knowledge.  Start by answering the various questions put to you regarding your claims on that topic.

[Romulus]

What I actually said is that NASA does not publish any detailed information on the translunar injection trajectories. I wasn't referring to books written by propagandists.

Apollo By the Numbers is written by a NASA employee and published by NASA.

OH REALLY!

This is the very first time I have seen that particular claim. I see it on Amazon and I see it has a library of congress number.WASN'T AWARE NASA CLAIMS CREDIT!
Very interesting, thank you

[DD Brock]

Not to be unnecessarily insulting, but I personally find the author to not be credible...

Then show what part of his work is in error.  It's easy simply to call someone a liar.  That's just words.  To show someone is a liar requires you to understand and show that what he produced was dishonest.  Do so, please.

...and I do not consider that book to be hard evidence.

Changing horses.  You claim the figures are not published, but they are published.  Whether you believe them or not is a separate matter.  Will you withdraw the claim?

You are a liberal democrat, aren't you?

You keep lying like a rug about things I've supposedly said and I will not permit it to go unchalleneged. You have lied dozens of times about what  have said, and you are in the simplest of terms a blowhard and a liar.What I actually said is that NASA does not publish any detailed information on the translunar injection trajectories. I wasn't referring to books written by propagandists. I want NASA's data so I can use it to prove they lied like they do about nearly everything else.

You should probably read NASA's data then.

I hardly think Mr. Windley's politics are relevant to the discussion. Practice what you preach, sir.

I think his politics are reflective of his character.I think he's a liberal cretin with zero integrity.
He has already lied dozens of times about things I have supposedly said. I can see this forum operates exactly like all of the others dedicated to this subject. I could go on any one of the many anti-NASA/Apollo hoax forums and post with no opposition but that isn't my style. What I would like to see is just one unbiased and fairly moderated forum where this subject can be discussed without the same people using the same worn out propaganda tactics. Science isn't propaganda, at least not from my perspective. We all need a neutral battleground and I think the time has come to create it.

As a conservative, do the rest of us a favor and keep quiet about YOUR politics. People like you give conservatism a bad name.

If you are unhappy with the way you have been treated here, by all means create your own forum that conforms to your sensibilities. Personally, I think you've been treated far better than you deserve. You would have been banned long ago at the music forum I moderate.

[Romulus]

If it makes any difference, I have never read any Apollo critics books either, for the same reason. To be fair.

You're saying you haven't read Dark Moon now?

I have never read any propaganda pieces from either side.

[JayUtah]

I see it has a library of congress number.

Do you even know what the Library of Congress does?

[Luke Pemberton]

There is nothing absurd about it.NASA  doesn't publish translunar injection trajectories for a reason,  because to do what they claimed they did is simply impossible and it can be proved.

You have missed a subtle point. You said you want NASA's data to prove they lied, but you say they lie about everything. If they lie what point is there in having their data to prove anything? You already claim the data to be false. No good scientist would use data they don't trust. Your demands are not commensurate with your position.

[DD Brock]

Indeed, but the hoaxers are so utterly ignorant of the relevant physics that I doubt they're even aware of the fact that the earth's magnetic field has absolutely no effect on ionizing photon radiation. The solar X-ray (and UV, and optical, and infrared) flux is exactly the same in low earth orbit as on Luna (assuming daytime in both places, of course).

First of all, as I have already established, I am the debunker. You are the hoaxer. You have reassigned roles.

If you've got in in your mind that I do not know magnetic fields do not measurable effect electromagnetic radiation, you are badly underestimating your opponent. I know more about this particular subject than anyone here, and your misrepresentations about what you believe I have said prove it. That is unless you are willing to concede you are intentionally lying.

LMAO, no you aren't. Not by half.

[Chief]

Why is it that every hoaxer that ever was always resorts to calling their opponents liars?

I seriously don't get that. No one has lied here Romulus, If someone misquotes you or has a different understanding of what you are trying to say it does not mean they are liars nor that it was done deliberately.

[JayUtah]

I have never read any propaganda pieces from either side.

So your quote of Groves from it was just cherry-picked, without knowing whether it was a good, reliable source or not?  You are citing a conspiracy theorist's book and telling us it's to establish a "fact we all should know."

And the Armstrong's remorse bit.  You came up with that all by yourself?