Moon Landing: Fake or Real?

[Anomalocaris]

..and yet here we are, still busy trying to reverse engineer them...nearly half a decade after we got them to work in the first place.

Kinda makes me think of the Egyptian pyramids of Giza. Seems they also forgot how to build them because the ones that came after weren't as good.

I'm not sure what to think of the moon landing myself. I do have a conspiracy theory background myself. But that was before becoming a sceptic. An interesting thing I'm noticing in this thread is the mentioning of evidence. Photograph this, photograph that. These are photos taken by NASA who claims to have been on the moon. Isn't this slightly circular since we have powerful tools like photo editing programs? There's a reason why even video evidence is not always admissible in court.

Now this is not to say the landing didn't happen. I'm undecided on that. I'd accept it if an independent third party like China were to confirm the claims of NASA backed up by snaps of their own.

This thread is particularly interesting in that it is a microcosm of what happens elsewhere in this site. X happened and we have our bible to prove that. Y happened and we have our photos to prove it. What I haven't seen is a demonstration of why we can place such confidence on pictures that couldn't possible be tampered with. I don't know, I'm just making an observation.

1. Powerful Photo editing software is a phenomenon of 1980s. Apollo photos were published in 1960s.

2. Apollo missions were telecast live. The direct tv transmissions from the CM and LEM could be picked up and its location in the sky independently verified by a large number of independent organizations, universities, labs, radio and television organizations.

3. The Chinese have AFAIK not published a independent photo of American landing site, but the photo and video of their own rover and lander on the moon they did release exactly confirms all the properties of lunar surface that can be inferred by Apollo images and foot ages. Did nasa simply get incredibly luck in their fraud 40 years ago?

---

Er, Stimbo, you wouldn't need a decompression chamber. I believe the allegation is that it was shot at normal earth gravity. A little video editing makes for the lower-gravity-look authentic by slowing it down. Speed up the video and it looks like they're in an environment that mimics the earths gravity.

Er, except that it doesn't. Speed the footage up six times to Earth-normal G and all the movement looks hilariously jerky. Even if you allow the atronauts to be on wire rigs and then slow the footage, as the Mythbusters showed it doesn't replicate the Apollo footage even accidentally.

In any case, the decompression chamber angle addresses the lack of air, not the simulation of one-sixth gravity. The signature lack of air dampening on objects such as the flags necessitates a vacuum.

Slowing earth shot footage 6 times, or shooting actors on the wire rig, can not explain the behavior of the lunar dust each steps kicks up, unless you put each particle of dust on a wire frame.