[MB.]

How could suits so thin protect an astronaught from the radiation of space?

Don't know anything bout the radiation of space, but did you ever think that perhaps they didn't protect them? Radiation does not equal death.

The radiation levels the astronaughts were taking in on the moons surface were really nothing special.

[Reddy Peoples]

The light is just part of it! The chemicals (usually in gaseous form) that are incontact with the film pla¥ a large part of the chemical interaction- and by the way, film for photography is celluloid- unstable as FUCK. Radiation is dangerious as fuck- not dying right away is one thing, but living until now like some kind of ubermench is something else, and MOST of the original astronauts have done so. The moon's radiation isn't the point- the van-allen belt is. The ship itself would have to be hard as hell to not FRY dudes flying through it.

[Reddy Peoples]

How could people all over the world observe the landing site on the moon from Earth with telescopes if no one was there? They landed on the light side, not the dark side of the moon, no?


Cap

Love your sig. That being said, I don't know of ANYONE observing the landing except on television.

[MB.]

The moon's radiation isn't the point- the van-allen belt is. The ship itself would have to be hard as hell to not FRY dudes flying through it.

Passing through the Van-Allen radiation belt the astronuats recieved about as much collected radiation as you;d get from having two series of dental X-rays in a row.

That nonesense about 'frying'? Come on.

[MB.]

The light is just part of it! The chemicals (usually in gaseous form) that are incontact with the film pla¥ a large part of the chemical interaction- and by the way, film for photography is celluloid- unstable as FUCK.

The 70mm Habbelblad film sheets used were well protected in specialy designed canisters.

[Blake]

Yeddi wrote

Why couldn't they jump higher on the moon- which has less gravity?

They were weighed down so they didn't float away.

[MB.]

the entire Apollo program only cost $20 billion in adjusted dollars.

Actaully, it cost 500 billion dollars, American modern.

EDIT: sorry, the Apollo program only cost 100 billion, but the set-up behind it, Ie, the Gemini program and other factors bring that tally up to 1/2 a trillion dollars.

[MB.]

there were probably many many terrible shots that you never see.

Actaully, there are hundereds of terrible shots, and they *are* visible in the Apollo Surface journal.

[Yeddi]

If your arguement is based on 'facts' from that shitty TV show, they are systematically proven to be false at this page: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

That includs your idea bout the Van Allens belt.

[Blake]

Who the hell is this Van Allen guy?

[Attila The Nun]

Maybe they're thinking Van Halen.

[Blake]

Van Halen's belt. Ohhhh yeah that shit is radioactive.

[Cap]

How could people all over the world observe the landing site on the moon from Earth with telescopes if no one was there? They landed on the light side, not the dark side of the moon, no?


Cap

Love your sig. That being said, I don't know of ANYONE observing the landing except on television.

Well I don't know of anyone either... but it seems to me that some would be watching... it was a pretty historical event.


Cap

[MB.]

I actaully bought Phil's book. Well worth the read.

[Siberian Fox]

I don't know of ANYONE observing the landing except on television.

The Russians. They even landed their own unmanned craft on the moon a short while earlier. As I said, the Russians would not have allowed the USA to steal the glory and get away with a hoax.

[MB.]

The moon landing was confirmed by individual RADAR sites world wide.

It was widely observed.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I have posted this poll out of sheer curiosity.
It's occured to me that there are MANY sources on the www that dispute the american moon landings and the evidence backing up their arguments is terribly vivid.
I am a logical person, and would in all sincerity love to be able to KNOW with all CERTAINTY that these 'Moon Hoax' ideas aren't true.

But weighing up the evidence, it is really a 50/50 situation for me now.

The most common "Moon Hoax" argument that I have heard is that in the video in which they show the American moon-landing with the Astronaut sticking the flag on the moon, that it shows the shadow of the Astronaut, which is through common sense though to not exist on the moon in all probability.

....but I ask you this, why has it taken over 30 years for NASA to even contemplate going back to the moon? Whats the hold up? The technology has improved enormously since then, and please, say nothing of the costs, because back then the entire Apollo program only cost $20 billion in adjusted dollars, and yet, the invasion of Iraq has to this day passed the $100 billion mark.

Thats the problem, the answer to your question is within your question, though not obvious; which is that the American government has wasted too much money for other projects and on wars, now you might ask why, the reason why is that they consider the moon-landing to be a "mission accomplished" and want to go onto other missions, such as searching other planets and using wars to conquer new markets to get the import-tax among other taxes for revenue in supporting such things as the space program and paying their greedy bourgeois politicians.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I don't know of ANYONE observing the landing except on television.

The Russians. They even landed their own unmanned craft on the moon a short while earlier. As I said, the Russians would not have allowed the USA to steal the glory and get away with a hoax.

Not unless they both did a hoax for the explicit aim of achieving mutually assured domination over and praise from the rest of the world, especially since in those days there was a constant rivalry between the second-class world powers (U.K., France, etc.) and the 2 super-powers (U.S.A. and U.S.S.R.), this is most evident in that era in which there was the war between an alliance of U.K., R.F. (Republic of France), and S.I. (State of Israel) versus Egypt in order to seize the Suez Canal from the Egyptians (In 1954). This was just a small fragment of the amount of things that the second-class world powers did to re-establish their supremacy, especially such as the coup in Iran by the British Intelligence Agents and the American Intelligence Agents (in 1953); and France's vigorous nuclear testing in that era, which made France a nuclear power before China (remember the France-Indochina conflict and the ensuing debacle for France, which was later corrected by the Americans in the "Vietnam War").

[Yeddi]

(In 1954)

All of this happened 15 years earlier... The 60's was the height of Soviet US Tensions.

[kayne-ballard]

I dont get it, there is no gravity on the moon, so how did the space craft "land" on the moon and also how did the frag stick into the ground?