Read the actual site, both of those things are covered properly.
Have been having a read of the clavius.org website. Those people are ANGRY. Interesting responses to all moon related conspiracy theories.
However, as with the conspiracy theorists' arguments, you have to take their word for it. So it still seems to come down to what you BELEIVE to be true based on who convinces you the most. (A bit like religion but WITH references to scientific evidence).
However, as with the conspiracy theorists' arguments, you have to take their word for it.
No you don't, you can do the research and calculations yourself to confirm it. Unless you assume that the conspiracy includes not just everyone at NASA, the contractors who built stuff for them, the Soviets, Jodrell Bank, and countless other involved parties, but also all physics and mathematics textbook authors too. :p
They're angry for the same reason that astronomers get angry when someone insists the sun and planets revolve around the earth, or why geologists get angry when someone insists the earth is only 6,000 years old.
No you don't, you can do the research and calculations yourself to confirm it.
They're angry for the same reason that astronomers get angry when someone insists the sun and planets revolve around the earth, or why geologists get angry when someone insists the earth is only 6,000 years old.
The Russians sent an unmanned craft (Luna 15) to the moon at the same time as Armstrong and Aldrin went. Jodrelll Bank recorded radio transmissions from both spacecraft at the moon: http://media-newswire.com/release_1093912.html
Not to mention the fact that the actual mission communication required co-operation from tracking stations in the US, Madrid, Canberra and Syndey - who were obviously all in on the "scam", along with ex-nazis who designed Saturn V, and the many competing companies who designed the various bits of hardware.
Trying to get away with faking it would have been far harder, and riskier, than just actually going. A fact that the serious conspiracy mentals never really seem to address.
Not to mention the fact that the actual mission communication required co-operation from tracking stations in the US, Madrid, Canberra and Syndey - who were obviously all in on the "scam", along with ex-nazis who designed Saturn V, and the many competing companies who designed the various bits of hardware.
Trying to get away with faking it would have been far harder, and riskier, than just actually going. A fact that the serious conspiracy mentals never really seem to address.
None of which addresses the issue of if a man was in it. :lol:
Well. There are very few people who could prove or calculate, for example, the effects of radiation outside the Van Allen belt, in their own home. This could be down to lack of equipment, data, knowledge, intelligence, etc. And I respectfully suggest this includes you.
So we (I) have to trust what the experts say. Therefore, when you get one Professor/doctor saying one thing, and then another professor/doctor contradicting him/her, I seems to me to come down to who convinces you the most. I don't KNOW who is right. But I might be convinced enought to BELIEVE one of them. I certainly ain't going to be recreating any experiments myself, like the vast majority of people on both sides of the arguments.
None of which addresses the issue of if a man was in it. :lol:
It couldn't pilot itself. The designs and specifications for most of the hardware are available to buy (I have a lot of them).
The exception being Saturn V, as the germans were mostly left to do their own thing according to Gene Kranz and Chris Craft's autobiographies - fortunately Saturn V is the bit that most obviously "happened" as there where lots of people watching, filming, and tracking it at the time, with it being quite difficult to miss :)
None of which addresses the issue of if a man was in it. :lol:
If the astronauts weren't in the LEM on the journeys to the moon, how did they manage to take photos of the lunar surface with themselves in the photos? They would have had to fake up the photographs and footage on Earth which would have taken considerably more effort (if it was even possible at all at the time) than just going to the moon in the capsule. :p
I'm sure you could do it very easily now, just paint a room bright green and put the moon in afterwards :)
Well. There are very few people who could prove or calculate, for example, the effects of radiation outside the Van Allen belt, in their own home.
So go for the low hanging fruit first instead. If any part of the conspiracy doesn't stand up, all the other arguments are irrelevant.
Once you know that the photos of men walking on the moon are real it removes the problem of proving that the radiation exposure wasn't lethal since the astronauts came home very much alive :)
If the astronauts weren't in the LEM on the journeys to the moon, how did they manage to take photos of the lunar surface with themselves in the photos?
Um, isn't the base argument that the photos were faked?
they would have had to fake up the photographs and footage on Earth which would have taken considerably more effort (if it was even possible at all at the time) than just going to the moon in the capsule. :p
Why do you think making a few fake photos is 'considerably' more difficult than going to the moon! :lol: (not to mention the point of not sending men would be to avoid the loss of life).
I'm sure you could do it very easily now, just paint a room bright green and put the moon in afterwards :)
Secondly how do you know the Van Allen belts even exist at all? Presumably you believe that they do otherwise there would be no problem for the astronauts anyway. So having accepted that there are belts of high energy particles why would you not also believe Van Allen that passing through them wasn't a problem for the Apollo missions? :)
If the astronauts weren't in the LEM on the journeys to the moon, how did they manage to take photos of the lunar surface with themselves in the photos? They would have had to fake up the photographs and footage on Earth which would have taken considerably more effort (if it was even possible at all at the time) than just going to the moon in the capsule. :p
I'm sure you could do it very easily now, just paint a room bright green and put the moon in afterwards :)
Not to mention the voices of Armstrong and Armstrong recorded at the moon by Jodrell Bank, at the link I gave above.
Ah yes, that's right. Sod putting men inside the craft we've built, we'll put a tape recorder in it instead to broadcast their voices!
Why do you think making a few fake photos is 'considerably' more difficult than going to the moon!
"Making a few fake photos" is easy. What is probably impossible or at least *extremely difficult* is producing photographs and film footage on Earth that exhibit the properties we see in the lunar photographs.
Not to mention the voices of Armstrong and Armstrong recorded at the moon by Jodrell Bank, at the link I gave above.
Ah yes, that's right. Sod putting men inside the craft we've built, we'll put a tape recorder in it instead to broadcast their voices!
No no need for a tape recorder...simply transmit the stream to the unmanned vehicle on a scrambled and little used frequency and then transmit that from the capsule. Place a few Nasa guys around the world with transmitters...job done.
No problem at all in an unmanned or shielded vehicle...
Well exactly. It was no problem because the command module had adequate shielding for the trip. An unmanned vehicle wouldn't have been any use because then you wouldn't have been able to get all the photos and film footage of men walking on the moon :p
Well exactly. It was no problem because the command module had adequate shielding for the trip. An unmanned vehicle wouldn't have been any use because then you wouldn't have been able to get all the photos and film footage of men walking on the moon :p
Why do you think making a few fake photos is 'considerably' more difficult than going to the moon! :lol: (not to mention the point of not sending men would be to avoid the loss of life).
Except they didn't just publish a few photographs. They published all the available data, returned soil and rock samples to give to geologists (err... and politicians) around the world, published details of exactly how they did it in painfully minute detail, filmed it and the majority of the significant events leading up to it, and broadcast it all live on public TV.
Yeah but you'd have to fill the film set with lunar soil, and pump out all the air. That means all the filming would have to be done with full space-suits etc on. You may as well just do it on the moon :p
Except they didn't just publish a few photographs. They published all the available data, returned soil and rock samples to give to geologists (err... and politicians) around the world, published details of exactly how they did it in painfully minute detail, filmed it and the majority of the significant events leading up to it, and broadcast it all live on public TV.
So you don't dispute that the Apollo missions happened, you just think that all the details of how it was done and equipment used were all fabricated, while a second secret mission to achieve all the same things without actually putting people in the spacecraft took place?
And you assert that would be somehow easier than the missions having being carried out as officially described?
Comments
Have been having a read of the clavius.org website. Those people are ANGRY. Interesting responses to all moon related conspiracy theories.
However, as with the conspiracy theorists' arguments, you have to take their word for it. So it still seems to come down to what you BELEIVE to be true based on who convinces you the most. (A bit like religion but WITH references to scientific evidence).
No you don't, you can do the research and calculations yourself to confirm it. Unless you assume that the conspiracy includes not just everyone at NASA, the contractors who built stuff for them, the Soviets, Jodrell Bank, and countless other involved parties, but also all physics and mathematics textbook authors too. :p
They're angry for the same reason that astronomers get angry when someone insists the sun and planets revolve around the earth, or why geologists get angry when someone insists the earth is only 6,000 years old.
I. See. (Starts backing away)
Trying to get away with faking it would have been far harder, and riskier, than just actually going. A fact that the serious conspiracy mentals never really seem to address.
Why?...
None of which addresses the issue of if a man was in it. :lol:
Well. There are very few people who could prove or calculate, for example, the effects of radiation outside the Van Allen belt, in their own home. This could be down to lack of equipment, data, knowledge, intelligence, etc. And I respectfully suggest this includes you.
So we (I) have to trust what the experts say. Therefore, when you get one Professor/doctor saying one thing, and then another professor/doctor contradicting him/her, I seems to me to come down to who convinces you the most. I don't KNOW who is right. But I might be convinced enought to BELIEVE one of them. I certainly ain't going to be recreating any experiments myself, like the vast majority of people on both sides of the arguments.
The exception being Saturn V, as the germans were mostly left to do their own thing according to Gene Kranz and Chris Craft's autobiographies - fortunately Saturn V is the bit that most obviously "happened" as there where lots of people watching, filming, and tracking it at the time, with it being quite difficult to miss :)
If the astronauts weren't in the LEM on the journeys to the moon, how did they manage to take photos of the lunar surface with themselves in the photos? They would have had to fake up the photographs and footage on Earth which would have taken considerably more effort (if it was even possible at all at the time) than just going to the moon in the capsule. :p
I'm sure you could do it very easily now, just paint a room bright green and put the moon in afterwards :)
So go for the low hanging fruit first instead. If any part of the conspiracy doesn't stand up, all the other arguments are irrelevant.
Once you know that the photos of men walking on the moon are real it removes the problem of proving that the radiation exposure wasn't lethal since the astronauts came home very much alive :)
Um, isn't the base argument that the photos were faked?
they would have had to fake up the photographs and footage on Earth which would have taken considerably more effort (if it was even possible at all at the time) than just going to the moon in the capsule. :p
Why do you think making a few fake photos is 'considerably' more difficult than going to the moon! :lol: (not to mention the point of not sending men would be to avoid the loss of life).
I'm sure you could do it very easily now, just paint a room bright green and put the moon in afterwards :)
2001 a space odyssey looked pretty good ..1968...
Not to mention the voices of Armstrong and Armstrong recorded at the moon by Jodrell Bank, at the link I gave above.
Ah yes, that's right. Sod putting men inside the craft we've built, we'll put a tape recorder in it instead to broadcast their voices!
Not good enough to pass off as real.
No no need for a tape recorder...simply transmit the stream to the unmanned vehicle on a scrambled and little used frequency and then transmit that from the capsule. Place a few Nasa guys around the world with transmitters...job done.
Well exactly. It was no problem because the command module had adequate shielding for the trip. An unmanned vehicle wouldn't have been any use because then you wouldn't have been able to get all the photos and film footage of men walking on the moon :p
It looks better than the lunar footage!
But you could get them from a film set ;)
Yeah but you'd have to fill the film set with lunar soil, and pump out all the air. That means all the filming would have to be done with full space-suits etc on. You may as well just do it on the moon :p
All could be achieved with unmanned vehicles...
The explosion in Die Hard look better than a real bomb going off in a building but it's not remotely realistic :p
Except that the photos had people in them :p
And you assert that would be somehow easier than the missions having being carried out as officially described?
:lol:
perfect
..in California. :p