posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:27 PM
Originally posted by malcr
Originally posted by OccamAssassin
Excellent thread. S&F
I love to read about actual accounts of the Apollo missions from those who were there.
To those who think the moon landings were faked, you should really try and get some "first hand" accounts from people who actually lived through the
60's. The scale of people involved in both the USA and Australia is far to large to be able to fake such events. Surely someone would have come
forward in the last 40 years with solid evidence if it had actually been a hoax. Instead we only have crackpot theories with no basis beyond wild
speculation coming from people seek to capitalise on gullibility.
edit on 5/9/2011 by OccamAssassin because: (no reason given)
I tend to agree about the scale of the conspiracy. However, unlike say the 9/11 conspiracy the moon one depends on a very very small number of
people. The whole "truth" depends on a feed from 3 astronauts. So that's a fake feed from 3 astronauts plus however many people need to fake the
feed. Not only that but all that is needed is a delayed feed from all the genuine instrumentation measuring genuine "actors" coupled with fake
video!! Everyone else, the thousands downstrem are entirely dependant on the data coming from the Apollo craft. OK two feeds one from the command
module and one from the lem.
So it is just possible but still requires a lot of faith from technicians at the time not double checking the data feeds.
On the surface, it could appear to be that way (Capricorn One
), but such technology as telemetry data and directional antennae complicate. One
example, is the way the radio and video feeds were handled-- by line-of-sight, and then land line when possible.
Keep in mind, on the "small select group" scenario, you have a whole lot of professionals to fool-- and yet there was not a hint of suspicion of
If I recall correctly, I believe that I read that the network television feed was not functioning in real time, the video having to be downloaded
(s-l-o-w-l-y) and then transmitted via land line to Houston; so rather than wait, the networks, at times, simply filmed the monitor at the receiving
station. I wish I could remember where I read about that-- something specifically on the NASA communication network at the time) Maybe someone else
knows the source?
Also, a read of the transcripts (or listening to original audio) produce a number of unnecessary complications-- telemetry indicating that one of the
crew members forgot to set a circuit breaker, garbled transmissions and the resulting request to "say again" and that sort of thing. That is no
proof, but suggestive, none-the-less.
At some point, the details such as those start to overwhelm the concept of a "script", and the more details known, the less credible the hoax theory
becomes. Any single piece of the hoax scenario might be plausible in isolation, but when taken as a whole, is far more difficult to support and to
believe than that the astronauts really did walk on the moon.