The Last Man on the Moon

[Scotty CTA]

On 1/20/2017 at 4:17 AM, Toepoke said:

 The accident in Scotty's link was attributed to high winds, which wouldn't be a factor on the moon.

On May 6, 1968, more than a year before his moon landing, Neil Armstrong had a narrow escape in the lunar landing research vehicle (LLRV) at Ellington Air Force Base near Houston, as seen in this silent film clip. On a simulated lunar descent, leaking propellant caused a total failure of his flight controls and forced an ejection. His only injury was a hard tongue bite. In his Armstrong biography First Man, author James Hansen recounts how astronaut Alan Bean saw Armstrong that afternoon at his desk in the astronaut office. Bean then heard colleagues in the hall talking about the accident, and asked them, “When did this happen?” About an hour ago, they replied. Bean returned to Armstrong and said, “I just heard the funniest story!” Armstrong said, “What?” “I heard that you bailed out of the LLTV an hour ago.” “Yeah, I did,” replied Armstrong. “I lost control and had to bail out of the darn thing.” “I can’t think of another person,” Bean recalls, “let alone another astronaut, who would have just gone back to his office after ejecting a fraction of a second before getting killed.”

[Scotty CTA]

On 1/20/2017 at 2:34 AM, Huddersfield said:

I'm only responding from memory here so stand to be corrected but I thought only one of them crashed. And even if that number did crash, it would be more accurate to say they crashed 'eventually'. Armstrong completed numerous test flights in the landing simulators, at the end of which NASA had learned vast amounts about their performance, manoeuvrability, etc.

Three of the five vehicles were later destroyed in crashes at Houston - LLRV No. 1 in May 1968 and two LLTV's, in Dec. 1968 and Jan. 1971. 

The two accidents in 1968, before the first lunar landing, did not deter Apollo program managers who enthusiastically relied on the vehicles for simulation and training.

http://www.astronautix.com/a/apollollrv.html

[Huddersfield]

 

On 20/01/2017 at 3:01 AM, Scotty CTA said:

In fact, 3 of the 4 Lunar Landing Test Vehicles were crashed BUT when they got 239,000 miles from earth, everything worked fine... the very first time!

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

The two accidents in 1968, before the first lunar landing, did not deter Apollo program managers who enthusiastically relied on the vehicles for simulation and training.

http://www.astronautix.com/a/apollollrv.html

 

 

 

Your link essentially proves the point I was trying to make. They had been used and tested and learned from, there was no first time lucky about it.

Short of taking you to the Moon, though, & showing you the evidence, I guess we'll end up stuck in the usual position. It is far easier to hypothesise that a historical incident didn't happen than it is to prove that it did. I am no scientist, but I am a trained historian, and without wanting to be personal I would suggest that the evidence for the Moon landings dwarfs that of other historical periods and stories that so many people allow to dominate their thinking and behaviour.

[biffer]

I've said this before multiple times when this has cropped up. If anyone can come up with a convincing explanation of how the movement of dust was faked in the film from the moon, I'll be very surprised. It's never covered on any conspiracy website, basically because there isn't a way to do it except with the kind of cgi that's available now. Couldn't have been done in the sixties and seventies.

[Toepoke]

7 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

 On a simulated lunar descent, leaking propellant caused a total failure of his flight controls and forced an ejection. 

Fair enough I'd read differently but also worth noting that the LLRV had a very much more complex propulsion system than the Lunar Module, combining a jet engine with rockets to attempt to simulate on Earth the conditions of landing on the moon.

 

[Toepoke]

8 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

No... I'm saying that I don't believe that man has ever or could ever travel that far.

I strongly recommend having a read at this excellent book (written by a Scotsman btw) to give you an insight into the incredible work that engineers put in to accomplish the goals of project Apollo...

https://haynes.com/en-gb/nasa-saturn-v-owners-workshop-manual

 

[Toepoke]

8 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

Or in the studio.

 

57 minutes ago, biffer said:

I've said this before multiple times when this has cropped up. If anyone can come up with a convincing explanation of how the movement of dust was faked in the film from the moon, I'll be very surprised. It's never covered on any conspiracy website, basically because there isn't a way to do it except with the kind of cgi that's available now. Couldn't have been done in the sixties and seventies.

Faking the moon landings in a 1960s studio would've been more unfeasible than actually going there....

 

[Mindimoo]

17 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

 

Faking the moon landings in a 1960s studio would've been more unfeasible than actually going there....

 

The fact we are focusing on something that may or may not have happened half a century ago irks me somewhat.  If people were more engaged in the here and now .........

#namaste

@Toepoke

[Scotty CTA]

If we don't reveal the big lies of the past then they not only get away with them, but allowed to build on them.

[phart]

Michael shermer, why do you keep citing this feckwit.

 

Research him and David Cole/Stein to see how he got into "skepticism" , by going round as a double act with holocaust denier/revisionist David Cole/Stein.

 

P.S. They went to the moon. The moon itself is interesting though, as it shouldn't really be there, a bit of a mystery.

[Orraloon]

12 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

No... I'm saying that I don't believe that man has ever or could ever travel that far.

I've travelled a lot further than that in my car. Piece of piss.

 

[phart]

6 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Why do you keep suggesting Shermer is a feckwit ?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/03/david-stein-cole-holocaust-revisionist

Responding to their claims does not make it a double act

As i said research it. Not look at a guardian article about the reappearance of the "republican party animal" David Cole/stein.

For instance you can hear the tapes from back then which Cole secretly made where they colluded to be on shows, cause Shermer was desperate to get on TV.

or you could google their two names and pick out the first article that maintains your world view and consider it "researched".

So about 2 hours of audio and a book to read, to get the gist of it. takes a bit longer than 5-10 mins.

Shermer tried to have the book not published.

[phart]

1 minute ago, Ally Bongo said:

How does disagreement become collusion FFS

Well i'd rather you went and researched it rather than i spoon fed it to you by typing it all out. You need to read more than the first thing that serves your bias.

Hard to paraphrase hours of audio and a book you understand?

[phart]

Basically Cole was getting death threats so he recorded (illegally) all his calls, and some of them are calls from Shermer who saw Cole as his chance of getting onto TV by "debunking" the holocaust denier and contacted him so they could work together.

 

This was back in the early 90's, Cole faked his death and became a part organiser for republicans and after he got exposed wrote a book for money and had all these recorded calls that he made, it's all in the book, the calls are online or were anyway, the book ended up getting published etc etc.

[phart]

1 minute ago, Ally Bongo said:

Spoon fed ?

You are coming across as quite the knowall

I watched the Donahue show ages ago

Donahue show has nothing to do with it, it all came out in 2014 when Cole/Stein had to write a book as he was skint and outed as a holocaust denier (A jewish one)

[phart]

4 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

I was under the impression Cole got death threats after the Donahue show and had to go into hiding - after appearing with Shermer

As i said - why are you so quick to believe Cole ?

I don't believe him, i listened to the tapes and found out for myself.

[phart]

6 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

“So what’s a knowledgeable but disgraced Holocaust revisionist to do? Play both sides. And make some decent scratch. I created two pseudonyms – one to sell books and videos to Holocaust studies departments around the world, and one to sell books and videos to revisionists.”

– David Cole, Republican Party Animal

Aye after he faked his death he made mainstream holocaust content and sold it and also sold his other work.

You need to read everything to get context, not google till you find something you think preserves your worldview and post it, that's in his book, should read it.

This is a textbook case of confirmation bias. You can't consume the source material in just a few minutes. It's hours of audio and a whole book. So you're just looking to falsify rather than understand what happened. 

Anyway my Auntie up with her Scottish Terriers so going to go and keep them amused. I'm too busy to type out reams and reams of stuff.

 

[phart]

I can call him a feckwit though

They love me so i doubt i'll be getting anything but cuddles from my wee pals

[Toepoke]

Thought I'd check this thread out after a few hours, it certainly took an interesting deviation!

[Scotty CTA]

13 hours ago, Huddersfield said:

Your link essentially proves the point I was trying to make. They had been used and tested and learned from, there was no first time lucky about it.

The official version of events claims that in 1969 NASA landed 2 men on the moon and safely returned them to earth (at the first time of trying).

13 hours ago, Huddersfield said:

Short of taking you to the Moon, though, & showing you the evidence, I guess we'll end up stuck in the usual position.

I could definitely be convinced that man really did land on the moon. I am open to it.

Let me explain my thinking by using some examples...

1. Obama (who is 5 months younger than me) has always refused to show his birth certificate. He even spent 2 million dollars on lawyers to try and avoid having to do so. What he did end up showing everyone was a doctored version of an electronic birth certificate that didn't even exist in 1961. So I'm kinda suspicious as to why he never showed his actual birth certificate to us. If you came to my house, I could show you my birth certificate in 30 seconds with nothing to hide. So what's the difference in one's ability to show their birth certificate between someone born in the NE of Scotland in 1961 and someone (allegedly) born in Hawaii in 1961? There really shouldn't be a difference. Just produce it in the same 30 seconds that I can produce mine. There... done. No controversy.

2. We were told that a hijacked 757 crashed into the Pentagon during the attacks on 9/11. Many don't believe that. So my question is, with so many security cameras on the world's most protected building, why don't they just show us? It makes it look as if there is something to hide. Why not simply go "Here's the video footage (from multiple angles) of Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon." There... done. Easy peasy. No controversy.

3. Now, as far as the alleged moon landings go... Why didn't one of the 12 men to have allegedly walked on the moon just stand on a 2 square foot spot and film while they turned 360 degrees? "Hello planet earth... This is what it looks like when I turn around while standing on the moon. You will see all 360 degrees of what I see." Not just the 3 walls of a studio set like "Friends"...

"You will not see cameras and a studio audience as the '4th wall' because we really are on the moon." There... done. No conspiracy.

My whole point is this... If what they are telling us is true and easily provable, then why in the name of 2+2=4 won't they lift their baby finger and prove it?

[Scotty CTA]

6 hours ago, Orraloon said:

I've travelled a lot further than that in my car. Piece of piss.

You haven't travelled 239,000 miles from earth in your car.

[Huddersfield]

With regards to your specific point about the moon landings, I believe there are several 360-degree panoramic photographs from the later moon landings. There also exists an array of video footage which I suspect would be incredibly difficult to recreate in a studio. I suppose it never occurred to them that 50 years later we'd have a conspiracy theory for everything. If we had the footage you want, I'd bet my house to a penny somebody would find something to prove it was a hoax.

I'm always intrigued what deniers of the landings think the tens of thousands of NASA scientists, technicians & planners thought they were doing? How would "they" keep so many people off the scent so that not even one of them smelled a rat? You couldn't keep that many people quiet really could you, nor really could you silence the TV crew that would have had to set up such a complex stage, film it, broadcast it, etc.

 

[Scotty CTA]

2 minutes ago, Huddersfield said:

With regards to your specific point about the moon landings, I believe there are several 360-degree panoramic photographs from the later moon landings.

How does one go about taking a 360 degree photograph?

(Is there film shot by hand of what I am asking for?)

 

[Scotty CTA]

42 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

All these have been explained but not to conspiracy theorists satisfaction

The reason for that is no amount of explanation would be enough for conspiracy theorists

That's too easy to say.

I'm a Truther and I'm listening with an open mind.

Whatcha got?

[Huddersfield]

15 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said:

How does one go about taking a 360 degree photograph?

(Is there film shot by hand of what I am asking for?)

 

 

Yes there is film. Does it comprise an astronaut doing a 360 spin to satiate conspirators of the future? I suspect not. Does that prove the landings never happened? Only, in my personal opinion anyway, if you've already decided they didn't & want to find obscure, essentially pointless, arguments to prove you own hypothesis. And you haven't answered my question about the tens of thousands employed on the space programme & how every man jack of them had the truth hidden, or were persuaded to hide it, for over a decade actively working on it & 45+ years since.