The USA Fake Of The Moon Landings
juan.g71 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 17 12:50:01 PST 2015
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 12:03:14 -0500
Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:
> >> A couple of answers below, although I don't have a strong
> >> either for or against the fake hypothesis, oh sorry,
> >> 'nutcase' 'conspiracy' 'theory'.
> It does approach that. One of the proofs offered by Beleivers is
> that it is impossible for human beings to pass through the Van
> Allen belts and live. Because they have been called "radiation"
> belts and as we all know, radiation is deadly.
Well, radiation certainly *can* be deadly. For instance, if you
were to stand near an ordinary wood fire long enough you could
easily get burns caused by *infrared radiation* that would kill
you in, say, hours. Not a nice death either. Notice that the
heat is being transferred by radiation, not direct
Regarding the moon trips, random 'mainstream' source :
"There was no shortage of threats facing Apollo astronauts on
missions to the Moon. Like radiation. Specifically, the dense
radiation environment of the Van Allen belts. NASA...had
studied the “Van Allen problem” as it were, knew the risks, and
made the decision to go anyway.
Seems to me that asking about radiation is rather sensible
whereas dismissing people who ask as not-so-well-educated
'conspiracy theorists' isn't.
> > They call for speculation, but that seems to be OK in our
> > present context since the position they challenge is itself
> > based on speculation.
> > How is it possible that the Soviet Union did not detect
> >> I don't know the technical details. Could radar track the the
> >> landing of a small object on the moon in 1960? Can it even do
> >> it now?
> 1969 and later, actually. :D
Oh, ok. I thoguht the first landing was a bit a earlier.
Anyway, so far nobody has provided much detail about radar
resolution. Yes, voice comms were allegedly followed, yes, you
can bounce microwaves off the moon. I freely admit that my
knowledge of em theory is lacking so I wouldn't mind more
information to go from "bounce radio off the moon" (big object)
to realtime tracking of a small object on the moon, and without
any fancy 'dsp' microelectronics.
> Not my field, but I do know that ham radio operators using /very/
> directional high gain antennas followed the missions from Earth
> orbit to the surface of the Moon, listening to and recording voice
> and telemetry signals.
But that's not the same thing as getting an accurate position?
> The cost of sending transmitters to the
> Moon, and maintaining a constant stream of 100% believable signals
> all the way there and back, would have been quite staggering. The
> odds of this unlikely mission failing would have approached 100%
> over the course of six missions.
> Cheaper to build and launch a series of Saturn V launch vehicles
> with LEMs and command modules on top, than to just go ahead and
> send them all the way? At minimum it would cost the same as doing
> the program for real.
I never said nor suggested that everything was fake. Just as an
hypothesis, the fake part may be the landings, or some of them.
If the landings were technically impossible at that time, or at
least the first one(s), then they had to be faked.
> Also consider that part of the price of simulating an Apollo
> program would have been the cost of maintaining the illusion from
> beginning to end, under the watchful eyes of thousands of
> engineers who thoroughly understood the systems they were working
> on, documented everything they did in minute detail, and
> distributed that documentation to other equally well informed
> engineers working on related systems? It would have cost much
> more to fake the program than to actually do it.
Well, that's where we certainly differ. You seem to be
conveniently overlooking all the incentives all the state
parasites and nationalists have to lie.
> Not to mention the 100% risk of exposure, since /one/ error in the
> deception would have resulted in a chain reaction leaving the
> whole deception exposed to dozens, then hundreds, then thousands
> of very smart, very committed, very pissed off people. Even the
> Soviets could not have kept a lid on something like that.
I don't know. That sounds like unfounded 'anti cospiracy'
'theory' based on the dogma/irrational belief that secrets
can't be kept.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the cypherpunks