Nixon ruined america by being a crazy president that did shady things. People have been expecting the same stuff ever since.

To answer the original question as to why there wasn't dust on the landing pads of the lunar lander, the exhaust from the lander would have blown it off the pads in the few seconds between touchdown and before the engine was shut down (or ran out of fuel, since they were close to running out when they landed). Remember, there's no atmosphere on the moon so dust acts differently than here on earth. There wouldn't be any cloud of dust flying up, it would have been blown out & quickly settled on the moon's surface.

There was another astronaut on another moon mission (video's on Youtube) who demonstrated it by dropping a hammer and a feather at the same time, and they both hit the ground at the same time (which itself should be proof that we went to the moon). CT's who expect there to be a bunch of dust blowing around seem to forget that there's no air to hold the dust up or blow it around.

Surely it would be more evident that it WAS faked if there WAS dust on the lander?

I don't understand the line of thinking that because there is no dust, it means that it's faked? WTF? *EDIT* Nevermind, I seem to have forgotten about the arguments from ignorance (I don't understand so god did it, I don't understand so it was faked) oops, silly me!

CT's in general need CS (Cat Scans).

Before asking why there is no dust on lunar lander's pad, first prove that if there were dust on the pad, one such as yourself would necessarily be able to definitively tell from the evidence you have. If you can't prove it, then the supposition that there is no dust on the lad isn't established so a "why" is not eligible to be asked.

http://www.def-logic.com/articles/lunarlanding.html

Quote:The speed of the falling dust in the Lunar video clips actually gives us reason to believe that the footage must have been taken on the moon. We know that dust can't fall at that rate on Earth because of the atmosphere. And even if the engineers of a Lunar hoax managed to created a vacuum in a studio, we would expect the dust to fall much faster than it did in the actual footage. Dust in a vacuum falls as fast as a brick.

So, the movement of dust in the Lunar footage can't be used to support the conspiracy theorist's claims. If the conspiracy theorist continues to assert that the footage is fraudulent, the following question arises: If the footage is fraudulent, how could the special effects producers of the 1960's create footage of dust falling to the ground in a vacuum slower than it would on Earth? The burden is on the conspiracy theorist to answer this question.

It is the last line which is telling in all of this. The nutters never answer questions. They merely insist that the official story is wrong and let their paranoia do the rest. The 9-11 crowd is even worse than the moon landing nuts when it comes to this.

9/11 CTs need a special place in the dungeon.

(July 13, 2011 at 12:14 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Nixon ruined america by being a crazy president that did shady things. People have been expecting the same stuff ever since.

Nixon was more honest about it than most presidents to precede him

---

(July 13, 2011 at 3:03 pm)Epimethean Wrote: 9/11 CTs need a special place in the dungeon.

I agree...

They can't even get a damn date right.

(July 13, 2011 at 11:41 pm)Aerzia Saerules Arktuos Wrote: They can't even get a damn date right.

Not this again...

I remember back in 1994 (25th anniversary of the landing) watching a replay of the actual footage on TV. One of the astronauts panned the camera around 360 degrees on the moon. While I realize it wouldn't be too hard to recreate the moon's surface in 360 degrees in a studio, it would have been a lot more trouble than it was worth.

But unless they made an entire studio a vacuum, I don't see how it would have been easy to fake this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDp1tiUsZw8