Moon Landing Hoax - The Space Suit

Originally posted by toocoolnc


No. these are not little thing. all of these things have a large singnificance regarding going to the moon and back and the reason these are put forth is so that they can be debunked not just so we can pick out straws. and once all of these things have been debunked and debunked convincingly then I could believe that man has set foot on the moon. But that has not been the case

Well regarding the space suit size, I debunked that here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

These answers are nothing you can't get by doing a few google searches.

reply to post by paradox


I am not saying that the answers are not there.

What i am saying is that not all the answers are convincing

Originally posted by toocoolnc

So rather then sending man back to the moon to prove their point, they would rather publish a book deciphering the hoaxes.

That's kind of an expensive way to recognize a bunch of...insignificant fringe conspiracy peddlers.

What point do they have to prove, and better yet, to who?

Originally posted by toocoolnc

It does have more important issues, which is why it ended up being squashed.

Maybe it was all Jim's suggestion, a personal vendetta. Maybe officially NASA never considered it.

Do you work everything in your life with this much conjecture? Or are you just creating a cheap argument clinic.

You simply have a very insignificant point, and that is after considering not being rude and calling you names.

I don't believe you can be serious, unless it is a medical condition.

reply to post by Illustronic

That's kind of an expensive way to recognize a bunch of...insignificant fringe conspiracy peddlers.
What point do they have to prove, and better yet, to who?

Exactly, thats what i was wondering.

Why would nasa consider proving to the "moon hoax conspiracy theorists" that they went to the moon if the conspiritors are "insignificant". surely they would'nt give a sh*t about the conspirators never mind thinking about writing a book for them.

I don't believe you can be serious, unless it is a medical condition.

Well if it is a medical condition then i am thankful that i have it.

You simply have a very insignificant point, and that is after considering not being rude and calling you names.

Are you a complete joker? Because you believe my point is insignificant you were concidering being rude and calling me names?

From my understanding. my points are not insignificant as i am getting constructive answers.

But you obviously dont understand this so that makes you completly insignificant

reply to post by toocoolnc


You've been asking the same thing for the last 15 posts I haven't read one 'constructive' reply, because the question should have been ignored.

Funny how you quote me repeatedly but omit the actual game killer. Once or twice I can see, you've been going on about this until somehow someone agrees with the insignificant conjecture.

reply to post by Illustronic

Funny how you quote me repeatedly but omit the actual game killer.

And what is the game killer? If you are reffering to the space suit then have you not read that i understand how it works?

Once or twice I can see, you've been going on about this until somehow someone agrees with the insignificant conjecture.

What you fail to understand is that this is not intended for anyone else. this is to help me with my own understanding

And if it rarther pleases you to call me names and being rude then i'd rather not have help from you

You see by debunking the throries, i understand more, but thats something you dont understand and you'd rather i'd just "believe"

WHat >I< was referring to about name calling was I omitted using idiot or stupid in describing the insignificant fringe conspiracy peddlers, and 'through conjecture' if you consider yourself among that group then it could be considered I called you an idiot or stupid, so I didn't.

So that is that.

Does conjecture mean anything to you? Why did you not respond to the idea the book may have just been Jim's idea?

Give us one source an official NASA statement ever addressing the moon hoax fringe believers.

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by toocoolnc

 

You've been asking the same thing for the last 15 posts I haven't read one 'constructive' reply, because the question should have been ignored.

Funny how you quote me repeatedly but omit the actual game killer. Once or twice I can see, you've been going on about this until somehow someone agrees with the insignificant conjecture.

Hi ill,
Looks like you are stuck with one foot in a hole while the other tries to run away from you.
You would not be in this fix if you spent some time agreeing with me here. that,
The Apollo 11 launch of the Lunar Lander, the landing on the moon. Then the lift off from the moon and return to the CM. Men in space suits or not
Tell me they were not a first time sucessful test filmed for TV.
If it even ever happened.

Ever heard of the 6 Mercury launches, the 10 Gemini launches, Apollo 7, 8, 9 and 10? First time? You spew disinformation.

Originally posted by TattooedWarrior
According to NASA the day time temps on the moon regularly exceed 130C...

That's the surface temperature of the Moon and it reaches those temperatures by the Lunar afternoon, when the Sun is at its highest point over the Lunar surface. All the Apollo missions landed in the Lunar morning and the surface temperatures were not that high at that time.

reply to post by defcon5


Hi defcon,
Glad I asked before I gave you any stars.
Thanks for your honest reply.
If the Russian's were to stupid to figure out how to get a man to the moon.
I don't see how they could catch anyone else one way or the other.
I think that they just had a poor movie industry or they could have CLAIMED firsties.
later ljb

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by defcon5

 

Hi defcon,
Glad I asked before I gave you any stars.
Thanks for your honest reply.
If the Russian's were to stupid to figure out how to get a man to the moon.
I don't see how they could catch anyone else one way or the other.
I think that they just had a poor movie industry or they could have CLAIMED firsties.
later ljb

First it is dissociative conjecture to imply if one is (too stupid) to achieve something than one is (too stupid) to achieve something else. What we have proof of is one is (too stupid) to spell too.

If you had any research skills you'd might have discovered the Russian space program of the 60's were challenged by powered landings of a size capable of containing live men, they still have an accumulative total of ZERO manned powered space launch landings to their credit today. Not necessarily replying to you just clarifying your once again disinformation and logic debate fallacies. Just give up or bring a gun to a gun fight, instead of a pretzel.

reply to post by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
If the Russian's were to stupid to figure out how to get a man to the moon.

They weren't stupid. They knew how to get stuff to the Moon. But in order to get people there, they needed a bigger rocket. And they had one called the N1, but they were unable to solve the issues they had with it, abandoned it and denied that they even tried. The N1 program was kept secret until the collapse of the USSR.

I don't see how they could catch anyone else one way or the other.

They were able to track the spacecraft by Radar.

Also, take a look at the third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings

I think that they just had a poor movie industry or they could have CLAIMED firsties.

You "think" they did, but you don't really know at all.

Take a look at "Road to the Stars" from 1957:

Originally posted by TattooedWarrior
According to NASA the day time temps on the moon regularly exceed 130C and no water cooling system can deal with that - you would need to use a pressurised system with something similar to R134a gas in it and they did'nt have that back in the 70's. NASA are lying again imo - I work with a/c systems for a living and even with todays technology it would be extremely difficult to manufacture a suit with a gas based pressurised internal air con system that was safe and practical.

The surface temp, yes. There isn't any atmosphere, so the only thing the surface temp's going to affect is the boot soles.

The moon's also a hard vacuum, so you can carry away the internal heat with a sublimator, which works just fine in those conditions.