Comments by "CatsRule" (@1133saginaw) on "A Brief History of Moon Hoaxes - Why do people still believe in them?" video.

The lunar soil was 3" deep. Below that was bedrock. There was a crater, it was just a very shallow. one.
5
@rutexas7157 I think NASA knew how to photograph the moon. The likely had every expert in the industry working out the camera settings and exposure rates, etc. There is a mountain of evidence the landings did occur. This is one of them : http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/Apollo17/APOLLO17.htm
4
@rutexas7157 How do you explain this: https://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/ls15.jpg The first image was generated recently (2009, I think) by the Japanese lunar orbiter Selene using 3D laser technology. The second was taken nearly 50 years ago by Apollo 15. If they created fake Hollywood movie sets in the late 60's, early 70's, how did they get the background EXACTLY correct, without the benefit of a photograph to copy?
4
If they were held up with wires, how was it possible to fall down?
3
@bewaver The use of the flimsy shielding on the LEM actually confirms they went to the moon. I would have been more concerned if the lander looked like something out of a Star Wars movie, in other words - a spacecraft showing no concern for weight. If there was a concern for weight (there was) one would expect to see a minimized, cut down , no frills spacecraft which pretty much describes the LEM. The gold Mylar shielding material used in the lower part of the LEM in the 1960's is used on deep space probes and satellites today. It is extremely light weight and it works.
3
@bewaver I don't know where you get this "cardboard" stuff. Obviously, you don't follow the space program very closely, and your knowledge of the Apollo program leaves much to be desired. You haven't mentioned how they managed to fake the moon rocks. You won't either, because you rely on hoaxer videos for your information and hoaxers won't touch that subject with a ten foot pole. Instead of aping the latest silly hoaxer nonsense, you should try doing a little research of your own. I do. It's fun. I have yet to find any hoaxer claim that I haven't been able to debunk in five minutes.
2
@bewaver Don't get your "facts" from hoaxer videos. I can tell what video you got your information from just by your comments. What they are showing you in that video is damage to the LEM from 3 days baking in the sun. All that stuff is shielding being warped by the sun. Anyway, the whole thing a a straw man argument. They can't debunk photographs and moon rocks, things the count, so they go after the silly stuff. The shadows are wrong, astronauts are suspended by wires, etc. For some people , for some reason, you included, that is sufficient.
2
What would be the advantage of weaponizing the moon?
2
Let's see...there are several thousand photographs, dozens of videos, film clips of moon walks and rover footage , Saturn V launches witnessed by millions, 840 LBS of moon rocks and lunar soil samples, hundreds of scientific papers written about the geology of the moon, hundreds of photographs taken of the back side of the moon, dozens of pictures of the earth taken at great distance ,400,000 people worked on the program, there were eye witnesses in Hawaii who saw and took pictures of the Apollo fire its engine to get out of orbit and go to the moon, amateur astronomers and school children listened in on astronaut conversations by pointing their directional antennas toward the moon, the Soviets and other countries tracked the flights with radar and about twenty more items . This should count as some proof. Care to debunk them?
2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dr98RgNjAgg
1
Today's NASA budget is 17% what it was in the 1960's. Does that explain it clear enough? Most of the infrastructure required to go is gone. There is a mountain of evidence the the landings took place. You just need to listen to the people with PHD after their names and leave the hoaxer videos alone. These people are losers.
1
There is too much photo evidence proving they went to the moon. Hoaxers only dwell on certain anomalies in the photographs. That is not logical. A photograph of the Great Pyramids containing anomalies will not prove the pyramids do not exist. One thing hoaxers do NOT dwell on are the videos and film footage of the lunar rover trecs which would require more than a simple movie set. How do you film traverses covering several miles without a movie set which would have to be even larger? How would you light it?
1
@bewaver So you are saying the pictures were magic. If no one went to the moon to take pictures how do they exist? And there is a lot more evidence out there the hoaxer videos don't mention. Their main concern is photographic anomalies and the Apollo news conference, which is pretty weak.
1
@bewaver Money is not an issue? Today, the NASA budget is 50B. During the 60's, in today's dollars, it's budget was close to 200B. Added to that, the moon is not a very interesting place.
1
@bewaver Fundamental impossibilities? When you gather a crowd of engineers and give them an unlimited budget, you don't tell them something is impossible.
1
@bewaver Anyway, the photographs and the video and the film footage, and the moon rocks and the eyewitness accounts - all the scientific studies added to that is quite a mountain of evidence. If the moon landings were faked, the information released by the government would have been sparse, incomplete and contradictory - like that lone, fuzzy photograph of the Loch Ness monster. But in the case of the moon landings - Thousands of photographs? Hours of video? The panoramas? Film footage showing every aspect of the missions? 842 LBS of moon rocks, available to anyone who wishes to study them? Full transcripts of all the missions available on line?
1
@bewaver I'll keep that in mind next time I see the space station streak over my house.
1
@bewaver I agree with all that, but budgets are budgets. Yes, they find money, but unfortunately, going back to the moon is not anyone's priority at the moment.
1
@bewaver Flimsy arguments? I don't think so. You have google - do a little research on your own then post your comments (I didn't say "little' research). Someday, if you really try, perhaps you will know more about the subject.
1
@bewaver Watch some of this , especially the 2nd half, and tell me how they faked this. WARNING! THIS IS NOT A SUBJECT COVERED IN HOAXER VIDEOS . You'll have to do it on your own. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU1W1dGynAg&t=169s Now the hoaxer's "movie set" explanation might be plausible for the Apollo photos alone (if you ignore the panoramas), but the rover trek videos??? Did they build a colossal , mile wide "movie set? Where is that movie set today? How did they light it? If it was filmed in the Nevada desert, how do you light an entire desert (without ten thousand insects flying around )? If it was filmed indoors, where did they get all the mountains of sand? And this is just touching the surface. The more you dig into this stuff, the more questions are raised. Hoaxer videos will not touch this material for obvious reasons. They are silly enough as it is. The conclusion is : It was either impossible to fake a moon landing or the cost of faking it would have exceeded the cost of going to the moon.
1
The current NASA budget is 17% what it was in the mid 1960's. Does that explain anything? And the moon rocks. You have to explain the moon rocks.
1
@Jan_Strzelecki That would make as much sense as putting weapons on top of Mt. Everest.
1
You hoaxers have about a 10% knowledge of the evidence supporting the moon landings. Believe it or not, there is a thing called google on the internet that allows you to research the missing 90% . Why don't you give it a try? You can learn why the VA Belts did not hinder the moon missions . You can view the many closeup photographs of the backside of the moon. You can learn about the composition of the moon rocks and the theories about the lunar origin based on those studies. You can even learn how the computers , weak as they were, were quite sufficient to navigate and run the spacecraft.
1
@jimhobby1980 You learned this...from where? Did you google it? Did you pull it out of your ass ? You told four lies in two sentences. Congratulations! The Russians have their own space suits. They knew space suits were useless against x rays. They didn't ask for anything. So the Russians went 350 miles up. This is from Wikipedia: "Gemini 11 used the rocket on its Agena target vehicle to raise its apogee to 853 miles (1,373 km), the highest Earth orbit ever reached by a crewed spacecraft.[5] " And the astronauts are either still alive or lived to a ripe old age.
1
Chas Maravel The Greeks figured out the earth was a sphere 3,000 years ago.
1
Chas Maravel LOL
1
@nosher_4114 "lunar surface temperatures in excess of of 150 degrees" How many times did you see them lay their cameras on the surface? None? So why do you mention that?
1