strange picture

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emily said:
Sure I do... it seems like if that were faked, it would get out somehow.

I think there are more than just the pictures. I read some articles talking about:

1. pure oxygen problem. as early as 1965 Nasa realized that using pure oxygen in the landing cabin was not safe, because electrical sparks would cause severe fire. but in 1967 they still did an experiment, about using pure oxygen in the landing cabin; the experiment objects were 3 REAL ASTRONAUTS. They KNEW it was dangerous why they still use real astronauts? They ended up all dead because of the fire. some People thought they were actually intentionally killed because they didn't want to cooperate with the fake project.

2. Moon temperature and the film. The temperature of moon in daytime is as high as 250 F, how could they make video shot with the film which shrinks at 150F? apparently the camera didn't have any protection as we see in the video shot.

3. Saturn 5's power was larger than any current rockets. why it was abandoned, and no any design papers left?

4. In the video shot the astronauts only jumped as high as we do on earth. everybody knows that moon's gravity is 1/6 of the earth, those astronauts should jump 6 times higher than we do. Some people played the video 2.5 times faster than that shown by NASA, and everything looked fine just as it was on earth.

5. Landing. everybody knows about Armstrong's first footprint. A regular jet plane's engine can blow stones as big as eggs away, on earth; how about the spaceship's engine, on the moon? if the powerful engine didn't make any effect on the moon surface how could Armstrong easily make an footprint? Or we can consider that where the ship landed had thick layer of sand underneath, so the engine wouldn't blow all them away and Armstrong could make a foot print; but in this case the ship has already sunk into the sand. Therefore they must find a big rock surface to land on; then how comes the foot print?

6. how could the development of the whole project use very short period of time? After the death of three astronauts in that experiment, they had to modify the ship's structure, and those electrical wiring, which took them 18 months. But right after that was the successful landing. It was too fast to be rational.

I got all these from the internet, they seem to be pretty strong arguments.
 
2. Moon temperature and the film. The temperature of moon in daytime is as high as 250 F, how could they make video shot with the film which shrinks at 150F? apparently the camera didn't have any protection as we see in the video shot.

The film could have been easily designed for the tempuratures. Why would they use standard film when what they were filming was supposedly not exactly something standard at all?

4. In the video shot the astronauts only jumped as high as we do on earth. everybody knows that moon's gravity is 1/6 of the earth, those astronauts should jump 6 times higher than we do. Some people played the video 2.5 times faster than that shown by NASA, and everything looked fine just as it was on earth.

You must consider that their suits (which is obvious by just looking at pictures, let alone statistics) weigh them down by enormous amounts, probably making their weight feel proportionally equal to that on earth. On earth, they could not have walked on those suits the way they could have on the moon.



I don't see arguments 6 or 1 as very good either. The best arguments are probably number 3 (which still could have it's reasons) and number 5. There was not enough thought put into these. I still fail to see why the US government would fake the moon landing when it was completely possible to be done.
 
According to other arguments, landing on moon with human was not quite possible at that time. for example, the fuel problem, if the rockets and the landing ship used liquid hydrogen, they would need a whole lot of hydrogen to keep them working, especially when the ship was trying to land without bumping, geting off moon, and returning to earth without burned out in the atmosphere. all those processes cost a lot of fuel. And during that time the technique of keeping such fuel in an extremely low temperature and high pressure was not very matured.
 
Not to mention the possibility of the dissipation of the small amount of whatever gases were necessary to land could have prevented the disturbance of the sand, leaving the footprint still intact because of the actual weight disturbance.....at such a small gravitational pull, the gases might distribute themselves rather thansink low enough to the surface to do any serious movement.....the opposite would be true on take off though, as the particles would need something to push off against......and as for keeping the fuel at a low temp, the technology was there, they would have to be in order for ANY space travel to work, not just moon landings.....the show you guys talked about was mostly conjecture that could be as easily faked (like difference in shadow placement, some arguement about the range markers on the film appearing behind objects, all BS that could have been produced by any network cheaply)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom