I have to assume you are being wilfully obtuse here with this statement. We cannot verify calculations that don't exist. We cannot verify a calculation that cannot even be created due to the lack of known measurables. I also assume you are ignoring the fact that Apollo lunar samples have been analysed by hundreds of geologists world wide, and are of course proven to be of lunar origin? Or ignoring the unique properties of the lunar material? The fact that the a footprint can be imprinted on the surface while it is dry. You are also ignoring the fact that dust on the videos is shown to be going on ballistic trajectories, obviously not being effected by a gaseous atmosphere?

It is one thing to say it is cement. It is another thing to prove it, and it's your responsibility and burden of proof.

If NASA was so worried about screwing up, why did they continue the Apollo landings after the success of Apollo 11? As you said, after the first landing the race was over. What was to be gained by flying Apollo 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, or 17? Why fake these progressively more and more ambitious missions?

Apollo 12 made a precision landing and returned parts of the Surveyor 3 lander. Why fake it?

Apollo 13 didn't even land. Why fake a failure?

Apollo 14 operated a color TV camera and had much longer EVAs. Why fake it?

The J missions of Apollo 15-17 included a vastly improved remote-control color TV camera, the lunar rover, multiple science experiments, multi-day EVAs, and returned a wide variety of samples including very large rocks and 3-meter core samples. By this point, the public had lost interest in the program and budgets were being slashed. What's to gain by faking all of this?

Everything after Apollo 11 just adds risk of blowing the hoax. Every photograph, every minute of video, every bit of science data -- there's no benefit to any of it if it's all faked. And yet, there it is, presented openly for the world to examine. Thousands of scientific and engineering documents, thousands of photographs, hours and hours of video, hundreds of pounds of rocks and soil. All this from the same organization which you claim was so worried about screwing up a story that they kept an entire record-breaking lunar sample return program a complete secret for 40+ years.

Don't any of your beliefs about this stuff seem even a little bit awkward to you? You believe that NASA can easily design, build, and fly an automated lunar sample return mission in complete secrecy, yet can't design a rocket engine for a manned lunar module and can't design a spacesuit to withstand a simple rock abrasion. How can NASA and its contractors be so incredibly good at doing the things you require of them for a hoax, yet so incompetent at doing the things they claim to have done for the real landings?

I've been away for a while and I know that many of these points have already been raised by others here, but I just had to ask ...

But it wasn't "one fell swoop." You've just got through telling us that the US could have had a secret robot sample return program in 1966, using technology superior to the Soviets, (or even superior to anything we have to this day, or it would have been used since) three years before Apollo 11.

So which one is it? If the US could pull off a secret sample return program, then US space tech was clearly superior to the Soviets, and Apollo was at least possible.

If US space technology was inferior to the Soviets, then they couldn't have pulled off a secret sample return program in 1966, something that the Russians couldn't do until 1971.

You're arguing both sides at once.

Although Apollo 8 was a big "step", the US had "passed" the Russians back in 65', 66' during the Gemini missions.

In other words, it certainly wasn't in "one fell swoop".

...and I just noticed that AtomicDog has said (more or less) the same thing.

So, Turbonium...will you aknowledge this error on your part??

The burden of proof is on you...as long as you don't understand, and take responsibility, for that, no one is going to take you seriously.

A question for you...If Armstrong is lying about Apollo 11, is he also lying about Gemini 8?

A yes or no answer please.

So in other words you haven't watched the press conference without applying your personal bias. Thanks. Just wanted to clear that up.

No I haven't had to time to get this quote by MID verified yet.

"In Australia, a spacecraft flying from North to South would be a polar orbiting satellite, or the re-entry of such an orbiting affair. Even IF Apollo 11 was in Earth orbit, which it wasn't, this couldn't have been her, because Apollo Earth orbits were equatorial (inclination between 20 and 30 degrees). There is no overt North to South track of an equatorially inclined orbit over Australia.

A polar orbit, like that of the ISS (51.5 degrees), most definitely will track, and does track North to South over Australia on selected orbits.
Of course, it was determined that Proton 4 was re-entering the atmopshere at the time. Proton 4 was a Soviet satellite launched in order to study high energy cosmic particles. (Hint : any such satellite will be polar in orbit).

Sure enough, proton 4 was launched at an inclination of 51.55 degrees.

**One way or the other, at 7:00pm in the Summer,** the only orbiting item that could've been seen was a re-entering object. This one was obviously on a ploar orbit. No Apollo was ever on a polar orbit. It couldn't have been Apollo 11...besides, we knew where that one was. In fact, Australian tracking stations were following her at that moment..."

As I've already stated MID doesn't seem to know that July isn't summer in Australia so he was obviously wrong with some of the facts he has claimed for a start off!

Mr White seemed to have made it quite clear in the video because the re-enactment scenes he shot of the evening in question were all in darkness. i.e. night time.

You're really "stuck" on that huh?? It's not helping you to dwell on something so (and I hate to use the word but it applies) irrelevant.

Anyhow...how about answering the question in my last post.?

Irrelevant? July is not summer time in Australia so MID's original quote is INCORRECT.

Do you agree?

"A question for you...If Armstrong is lying about Apollo 11, is he also lying about Gemini 8?

A yes or no answer please"

Did Armstrong ever claim he went to the Moon with Gemini 8?

Theres your answer.

Give it a break...you're starting to sound silly...it makes no difference what season it was when we KNOW that Apollo couldn't have been in a polar oirbit...GET IT??

Now answer my question....was Armstrong lying about Gemini 8???

So he wasn't lying about his Gemini flight? Why believe him one time and not the other??

Your the one who brought it up my friend.


July is not summer time in Australia so MID's original quote is INCORRECT.

Do you agree?

Why believe him one time and not the other???

Answer the question...

Because Gemini 8 never claimed they travelled 250,000 miles there and back!

Mind you. If anybody has footage of a Gemini 8 press conference and Armstrong gave half the performance he gave at the celebration of mankinds greatest achievement I might start having some doubts.

Of course he wasn't put into quarantine for 3 weeks after Gemini 8 so I'm sure he was fine and dandy!

I agree that this question HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS DISCUSSION, and If you continue to ask it, I will report you to the mods.

So flying to orbit, you believe, but not to the Moon...

....and your evidence for this is that you don't "like" the way Armstrong responded at a press conference?

I'm trying to see exactly where you stand...

So was Apollo 8 faked too??

....and your evidence for this is that you don't "like" the way Armstrong responded at a press conference?

It has nothing to do with me not "liking" the way Armstrong responed at a press conference. It's do with the performance of him, Aldrin, and Collins that day.

Just in case you've missed it.

Apollo 11. The Most Miserable Press Conference In History

http://moon-hoax.com/home/videodirectlink-16.html

So was Apollo 8 faked too??

Apollo 8 has got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Neil Armstrong.

Apollo 8 has got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Apollo 11 press conference either.

It has everything to do with it...AGAIN, are the Apollo 8 astronauts liars or not?...

just answer the question...

edit to add...take your time answering I have to leave for a while..

I will leave you with one thought to ponder...the only difference between Earth orbit and going to the Moon is a less than 6 minute burn of the J2 rocket engine.

Anders, Lovell, and Borman are Apollo 8 NOT Apollo 11 so it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Apollo 11 press conference. Do not ask me again.

So the Apollo 8 astrronauts did go to the Moon???

Thanks for that thought. Mind when you get back. You've a press conference to watch. I'll be asking questions so make sure you do.

Do you agree that Jarrah White is incorrect in his assumption that the object seen entering the atmosphere was Apollo 11? After all, it was spotted over South Australia, heading from north to south, and disappeared over the southern horizon according to the eyewitness reports in the newspaper clips. Apollo 11 splashed down over 4000 miles north east of Sydney, at 13°19′N 169°9′W.

Why the hang up over whether MID made a minor error about summer/winter in the southern hemisphere? Are you holding Jarrah White to the same standard regarding accuracy? If so, why did he not point out where Apollo 11 splashed down?

Do you believe this object was Apollo 11? If so, why? How do you explain the reported landing position being over 4000 miles away, and in the opposite direction? Did Jarrah White attempt to explain this in his video?

No hang up. I'd just like MID to clarify his original post. A minor error is still an error. There's no harm admitting he made a minor error.

How about the content of the video itself, which is far more pertinent to the subject thread than arguing semantics over a very simple mistake that many "northerners" like myself make when referring to summer/winter in the southern hemisphere. How likely do you think it is that the object in question was Apollo 11, given where it was spotted, where it was headed, and where Apollo 11 was retrieved from?

This behaviour is typical of a red herring logical fallacy. You are refusing to acknowledge the fact that you were wrong, and you are using a minor error made by MID to pursue a modicum of some sort of victory, which is pathetic to be honest.

Yes, MID made a minor error, however his argument is JUST AS SOLID. You however made multiple major erroneous facts and assertions and were just plain outright wrong.

"Apollo 11 splashed down over 4000 miles north east of Sydney, at 13°19′N 169°9′W."

Apollo 11 splashed down approx 5 and half hours later

I'd also quite like an answer to these questions.

Well I've still not verified ALL the info that Mr White gave in the video. He appears to have checked other sites that don't mention the decay date.

I would have liked answers to my simple request last night. We don't always get what we'd like in this world. You'll soon learn that son.

It's nice to see you verify facts before making wild assumptions and perpetuating conspiracies

Likewise kid

I always do!

So let me get this straight. You're still not willing to admit that you were wrong about Apollo 11 entering orbit 5 hours early, even though the splashdown of Apollo 11 was broadcast worldwide on TV?

Maybe they entered the atmosphere and parked on a cloud for five hours!

Ergo, what was seen could not possibly have been Apollo 11, since re-entry takes 2-3 minutes, not 5 hours.

It entered the atmosphere at 7pm over Southern Australia according to who? You? The link to the video was there for six hours before you piped up anything about it and ONLY after MID came out with his revelation.

He doesn't even know that July is the middle of winter in Australia.

So perhaps he'd like to clarify exactly what he MEANT yesterday. Because he made a MINOR ERROR.

Mr White never claimed it was re-entering the atmosphere. He claimed it took 4-5 mins to fly over EXACTLY as a object orbiting would AS CONFIRMED by Jay Windley and James Oberg.

Put your crayons away sonny.

You should review your own source, cheese merchant.

The article that Mr White is quoting is quite blatantly about something entering the atmoshere:



Here's a quick newsflash. Orbiting objects don't cause 'bright lights' in the sky and people to look up and take notice. They simply look like a star progressing slowly across the sky. Barely noticeable.

What calculations?
About how dust moves? You've already been told that without a knowledge of energy imparted, you cannot determine anything....

That you don't understand that shows an innate lack of knowledge about physics...simple physics.

Objects dropped in lunar gravity? We saw that, we can measure it, and we can verify that it's definiely 1/6 g with a stopwatch and rough estimate of height...such as one we can easily derive by observation of Dave Scott's hammer an feather drop on Apollo 15.

Knowing distance of fall (roughly 4.5-5.0 feet), intitial velocity (that's easy, it was "0" FPS), and acelleration (5.33 fps/s), the time of fall may be calculated by the square root of (2 times the accelleration of gravity times the distance), all divided by the acelleration of gravity.

That of course has been done on these threads several times and shows that the hammer and feather fall for a time precisely corresponding to 1/6 g.


And of course, being that the two objects fall at precisely the same time, with absolutely no effects to the feather...it rather conclusively shows that a vacuum existed.

It was on the Moon.

Of course, people like you come back and say..."It could've been faked. They could've lowered them with invisible wires," which is an easy, and exceedingly lazy way out.

Does the idea of "prove it" escape you? That is your obligation here...or at least to make a reasonably sound intellectual argument for your case.






Another incredibly inadequate dodge.
Lunar soil is incredibly fine dust. You've been given the refernces that you may seek out and learn from. It is not the point of these threads to refute silly concepts about volcanic ash and sand...especially since you knew nothing about lunar simulants until I told you about them.

They were created after we had thoroughly examined lunar soil, brought back from Apollo... ThinK a little rationally. We couldn't make a simulant without knowing what we were simulating.

My telling you about this stuff was the genesis of a statement like the one you made above. Unbelievable.

No...that information was for you to learn something from, not to base another cockamamie theory upon. Your logic is impeccable!

I believe you made a minor error CONFIRMED by your pals about July being summertime in Australia. Could you please re-tract your original statement and clarify EXACTLY what you should have said.

I think we discussed that already. It doesn't matter...the object seen in Australia was in a POLAR ORBIT. Apollo 11 was not in orbit.
Is it that difficult to read?

Well if you wouldn't mind chap going back to your original statement and clarify exactly what you stated because you've made an error I'm afraid.

I've never laughed so loud. How about following some of your own advice?

Laughings good for you sonny. Glad to hear. That and your crayons. It will put a smile on your face.Cheer up.

Tell me if an object entered the atmosphere would it still take the same time to traverse the sky as an object orbiting?

I tolds you, twice, perhaps thrice, that my error was irrelevant. You have been provided with more than adequate information to this effect.
You are now trolling...what I have said, and what should be clear to you is that a re-entering object would cause a bright light that people noticed...whether just beyond dusk, or in the full night sky That's what was seen.

I have also told you that Apollo 11 was not in orbit, and no Apollo mission was ever in a polar orbit, which this object obviously was.
You want to harp on the fact that I , who live on the other side of the planet, made some irrelevant comment about July being summer when it's actually winter in Australia.

Jesus, what's wrong with you?

It has nothing to do with the discussion.
You are treading on very thin ice here.

I suggest you get on with some other point you may wish to ask about, rather than obstinately talk about an irrelevancy, when your points are being soundly refuted at every turn.

What you don't seem to realize is that because it was Winter in Australia, the sunset was much earlier than 7:00pm.
My irrelevant mistake, but unfortunately, you're downfall.


Know what that means...NO ORBITING SATELLITE COULD BE SEEN ON ORBIT, since at 7:00pm in the winter, the sun is well below the angle it needs to be to illuminate a LEO sattellite (remember I told you that orbital sightings occur withing the period shortly before sunrise and shortly after sunset? Of course you don't ...you're far too intent on posting irrelevancies to the discussion, rather than reading what's been posted for your benefit and knowledge). This therefore, HAD TO BE A RE-ENTERING VEHICLE...

My "mistake", as irrelevant as it actually was, sealed your fate.

It was a re-entering satellite, and of course, it couldn't have been Apollo 11, since Apollo 11 was not in orbit, and not on a polar orbit ever....

What White claims is irrelevant, I prefer to deal with what facts are available. The sources in the newspaper quoted in his video point to it being something re-entering the atmosphere. If it was just a satellite in orbit as opposed to re-entering the atmosphere, it wouldn't elicit responses such as:-

"The object could have been a satellite re-entering the earth's atmosphere"

"The most remarkable thing he had ever seen in the sky"

"A little glow about the size of a ping pong ball"

"It gave me a big fright and as soon as I got to the old coast road I stopped at the first house I saw and nearly banged the door down"

"Do you believe in flying saucers?"

These are the responses of people living on the west coast of Australia, as the object flew north to south. It's actually further away from the Apollo 11 splashdown site than I first said - approx 6000 miles. Given the available evidence, how likely is it that what was seen was indeed Apollo 11?

With the evidence I've seen, I'd say the odds are vanishingly small.