Moon Landings Faked? (and all other space mission fakery)

[Smersh]

But Mark - I've never ever for one moment believed the moon landings were faked! I think you're getting confused with my posts in the UFO threads ...

 

[Quantum11]

When it comes to the how did they do it discussion of the Apollo moon hoax, one needs to become aware of the space environment simulation and project Apollo.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWgHmBtUUCo[/youtube]

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...y+and+project+apollo&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[Quantum11]

... Q: What about the vast number of people involved in Apollo, wouldn’t someone have spoken out.

Let's not forget that those who work for NASA and other government organizations are hindered from saying anything due to their security clearances, and confidentiality agreements...Anyone who would have outed Apollo, would have been labeled a commie traitor. Immediately imprisoned...or worse. Giving away NASA secrets....such as their faked space missions to create the illusion of space superiority over those nasty Russkies!

 

[CommonMan]

How old are you Quantum11? I was very young at the time, but still remember when the Apollo crew went to the moon the first time. It was aired on TV the whole time. We watched them land while I was in school. People gathered at Nasa and watched them get in the rocket and blast off. They went somewhere. Other countries around the world tracked them. Why would they ALL lie? Wake up!

 

[Quantum11]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Quantum11[/b]":icfoslw9]

So just to be clear, what does H-a Imp, McMath Plage, Profile abcde, and Index mean?

Write to NOAA and ask them. Also ask them how a human bean in an honey-combed aluminum container, or bouncing around in a Nylon outfit would fare if hit with one of them beyond our magnetosphere.

Then, when you wake up from your Apollo Fairy Tale, see how you get treated here. Although, once you are brave enough to speak to the topic, in public, with flesh and bone people. you'll be amazed at how many people already know Apollo was a fraud. That's if you ever become brave enough.

I personally doubt it!

That's not how it works here at SDC. You are the one saying that this is evidence of major flares that would have killed or incapacitated the astronauts. It's up to you to demonstrate that fact, not just post a bunch of numbers you don't understand.
Again, I'd suggest you read the Community Guidelines

MW

Oh, I understand the numbers allright...What you need to do is convince me you are not going to ignore the information, and quit with your ridicule. Until then, I'll just keep that information to myself. I'm rather tired of putting my time and efforts trying to illuminate truth for Apollo fanboys too lazy to do the legwork themselves.

I know, we can do this. You tell me what part of the CFI you understand, then I'll fill in what you cannot fathom for yourself. That way you can see for a fact, that I know what I am talking about. FYI, do not try and BS me or it won't look very good when I trounce on you. LOL Trounce...I just love that word.

Until you are ready to discuss this intelligently, and without continued ridicule, I'll leave you these to check out. Compare the numbers of the Seahorse flare that solar physicists agree would have killed the astronauts, with the numbers from the major flares during just three Apollo missions.

You could also try asking people who survived Tchernobyl how radiation effects human beings?

Then, when you are sufficiently disturbed by the answers, you can go ahead and keep parroting how amazingly radiation-proof test pilots are! That's sure to tickle their funny bone, if they were born with bones that is..

Even the damn moon itself is radioactive for christ's sakes.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/08sep_radioactivemoon/

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

How old are you Quantum11? I was very young at the time, but still remember when the Apollo crew went to the moon the first time. It was aired on TV the whole time. We watched them land while I was in school. People gathered at Nasa and watched them get in the rocket and blast off. They went somewhere. Other countries around the world tracked them. Why would they ALL lie? Wake up!

It's irrational to think that we didn't land on the moon, given the mountains of evidence available to anyone who has a few minutes and access to google.

This conspiracy just keeps getting bigger. It's spanning the entire world now, involving dozens of countries and hundreds of thousands of individuals who were all in on it. It's a lot easier to believe we landed on the moon with all the supporting evidence than to go around trumpeting yet another world wide conspiracy.

Also I have a question for Quantum and cosmored, what are your opinions on the current space shuttle missions and ISS? Are those fake too? And what do you think about the future of human spaceflight? Should we stagnate on Earth or go beyond? Just curious.

 

[frodo1008]

You know, while I do not like being called a liar (I was one of the 500,000 or so people responcible for the Apollo missions), and I was admittedly a small frog in a very large puddle (which is still agreat deal more than any of these moon hoax types could ever be), what realy gets my goat is the implication that far better men than I will ever be, had no integrity.

Such a man is John Young, not only my personal hero, but by any standard a true National American Hero. Where you simple children (and I would probably be banned if I called you what I really think!) get off impinging on the honor of a man that has done more with his life by accident than all the moon hoax types put together have ever done on purpose, is just seyond me!

You can call that hand waving if you wish, I simply call it truth!

And there is one item that you will NEVER be able to get beyond. The last segment of the excellent National Geographic Societie's program which totally debunked the moon hoax theories was absolutely conclusive. That was where high energy lasers are used to reflect off of the reflectors placed on the moon back to the Earth to be able to measure the moon's distance from the moon to the Earth down to centimeters. The reflectors could NOT have been so placed by anything other than the astronauts themselves. And the head astonemer for that project stated that NONE of the moon hoax types had ever even visited the telescopes where this is done. So, just who are the real liars here?

 

[frodo1008]

By the way, that will be my last post on this misbegotten excuse for a thread, as I am too disgusted to even continue anymore!!!! :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x

 

[ZenGalacticore]

By the way, that will be my last post on this misbegotten excuse for a thread, as I am too disgusted to even continue anymore!!!! :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x

Yeah right. We hear that all the time, Frodo! :lol:

:mrgreen:

 

[a_lost_packet_]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Write to NOAA and ask them. Also ask them how a human bean in an honey-combed aluminum container, or bouncing around in a Nylon outfit would fare if hit with one of them beyond our magnetosphere...

I don't think they're going to have any data on human beans.

 

[Quantum11]

You know, while I do not like being called a liar (I was one of the 500,000 or so people responcible for the Apollo missions), and I was admittedly a small frog in a very large puddle (which is still agreat deal more than any of these moon hoax types could ever be), what realy gets my goat is the implication that far better men than I will ever be, had no integrity.

Such a man is John Young, not only my personal hero, but by any standard a true National American Hero. Where you simple children (and I would probably be banned if I called you what I really think!) get off impinging on the honor of a man that has done more with his life by accident than all the moon hoax types put together have ever done on purpose, is just seyond me!

You can call that hand waving if you wish, I simply call it truth!

And there is one item that you will NEVER be able to get beyond. The last segment of the excellent National Geographic Societie's program which totally debunked the moon hoax theories was absolutely conclusive. That was where high energy lasers are used to reflect off of the reflectors placed on the moon back to the Earth to be able to measure the moon's distance from the moon to the Earth down to centimeters. The reflectors could NOT have been so placed by anything other than the astronauts themselves. And the head astonemer for that project stated that NONE of the moon hoax types had ever even visited the telescopes where this is done. So, just who are the real liars here?

John Young. Skip to 7:39 of the following video for the kind of guy John Young is...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0p7JvhNtV8[/youtube]

No one that I know of is taking anything away from these guys accomplishments before Apollo. It's just since they decided to take part in a huge swindle committed against Americans, they became Milli Vanilli type of astronauts. Everyone remember what happened to them when they were outed as fakers?

 

[Quantum11]

How old are you Quantum11? I was very young at the time, but still remember when the Apollo crew went to the moon the first time. It was aired on TV the whole time. We watched them land while I was in school. People gathered at Nasa and watched them get in the rocket and blast off. They went somewhere. Other countries around the world tracked them. Why would they ALL lie? Wake up!

I watched it too. But I also watched shows like Buck Rogers. And guess what? Buck Rogers really wasn't in space either. Go figure.

How much do you think the producers of Buck Rogers made off it's programs?

NASA made over 30 Billion for their show.

Why would they lie? They were getting their asses handed to them by the Russians in terms of firsts in space. They needed a big win. They decided to cheat their way to first place. They had to cheat. No way was anyone going into all that radiation within and beyond the VAB's without dying. And dead astronauts would equal dead Apollo program. Huge embarrassment for America, and the rest of the 'free' world. So, the only way to guarantee success, was to pre-record, and playback guaranteed successful missions. It doesn't take a gunuis to figure this stuff out!

BTW, no one had the capability to track them to the moon and back. NO ONE! Everyone took for granted what they saw on television was real. Well, almost everyone!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eDTioD_250[/youtube]

 

[yevaud]

BTW, no one had the capability to track them to the moon and back. NO ONE!

Pfft. Wrong.

Look up the Soviet IP-14 through 16 series, and also "Pluton" and "Saturn" systems in the late 1960s.

Btw, the IP-14 had a range of over 100 million km.

 

[Smersh]

I have a question for Quantam11, Cosmored and/or other Apollo hoax believers reading or posting in this thread. It's one of the two basic arguments supporting the fact that we landed men on the moon during the Apollo missions (the other being that the Soviets etc didn't blow the whistle) but as far as I can see nobody has yet answered, even though it has been asked and pointed out several times by various people.

Hundreds of thousands of people all over the world were either directly involved with, or contributed to, the Apollo missions. How come not a single one of those people has yet come forward to reveal it was all faked?

Thanks for posting this question...

... As for the hundreds of tousands of people who were either directly involved or contributing question: Love this one. Again speculation as to the degree of knowledge any one person, or group would have had access to.

Obviously the astronauts, and those involved in filming and relocating them during their 'short time in space'. Some of the individuals involved in receiving the pre-taped feeds would have known. Other than that...All those other hundred thousand people contributing to various parts of the mission, from construction to testing would have been compartmentalized ...

Components made by external contractors, especially for cutting edge, untried and untested technology as it was at the time, like the absolutely massive Apollo project can be expected to fail or or not perform as expected quite a lot - then modifications either to those components, the higher assemblies they fit on to or in some cases both, either have to be put in place or the original designs have to be scrapped and started afresh.

In the case of a hoax this wouldn't matter except that in order to conceal the hoax failures would have to be invented and in many cases expertise from people outside NASA (ie the contractors involved in designing and making the components) would have to be consulted and in some cases called in to NASA premises to join a team trying to solve the "problem." If every tiny one of millions of components, large and small, worked perfectly first time, every time, people would soon get suspicious, so the "problems" would have to be invented, with scenarios such as I just described created to try to solve them. In some cases it would even be expected that experts from outside NASA and from several different manufacturers would have to be present permanently on their premises, to resolve "problems" as they arise. An engineering project ("hoax") on the unprecedented scale of Apollo cannot be "compartmentalised" and still made to look realistic.

... Take a look at what Thomas Ronald Baron reported in regards to the quality control of North American Aviation.

It must be noted that all of these problems were given to my supervisors at the time they took place or shortly thereafter. Many of the problems could and should have been eliminated or prevented if NAA took the proper steps to do so. Almost every case of trouble gave a clear warning as to what was going to happen. This is why I say, that if the leadman, or assistant supervisor took the proper action the problem for the most part, could have been avoided.

Lack of coordination between people in responsible positions.
Lack of communication between almost everyone.
The fact that people in responsible positions did not take many of the problems seriously.
Engineers operating equipment instead of technical people.
Many technicians do not know their job. This is partly due to the fact that they are constantly shifted from one job to another ...

Absolutely. But you think those are all problems uniquely associated with North American Aviation? Every organisation, especially the very large ones, suffers from those problems at least to some extent, including NASA and their contractors, sub-contractors and sub-sub-contractors. Human failings such as the ones described by Thomas Ronald Baron are commonplace in the workplace as I know only too well from my 28 years working in engineering with a very large aviation company before I retired. ("Pobody's nerfect." ) How could a massive hoax on the scale that the alleged Apollo one would have to be possibly work when it's organised by human beings with human failings?

 

[drwayne]

BTW, no one had the capability to track them to the moon and back. NO ONE!

Pfft. Wrong.

Look up the Soviet IP-14 through 16 series, and also "Pluton" and "Saturn" systems in the late 1960s.

Btw, the IP-14 had a range of over 100 million km.

I seem to recall the moon being used as a target for testing/calibration of some of our radars.

 

[yevaud]

Absolutely. And, beginning in 1974, Arecibo began active scanning/mapping of the moon as well. The capabilities were well-established by the late 60s.

 

[bmk1245]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjc2wOGr9wU[/youtube]
[...]

I see you are using JarrahWhite's claims...

Lets see the whole article (in russian) http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/content/numbers/271/03.shtml which was referenced in the video you posted (2:25), shall we? We read in this article:

Now you can put this part (from link I provided) in some translation website, for example, babelfish (I'm fluent in russian, but just in case you find me lying, you can check it by yourself). What we get from babelfish translation is following:

This approach to the calculation of aim designations made it possible to sufficiently reliably pick up signals from “the Apollos”. The task of the search for signals was facilitated by the fact that the antenna radiation pattern covered practically half of the disk of the Moon.
Tracking was conducted after the spacecraft of expeditions “Apollo-8”, “Apollo-10”, “Apollo-11” and “Apollo-12” since December 1968. until November 1969. From all these ships the telephone negotiations of astronauts with the Earth and telemetry data about the state of onboard systems started with a good quality. TV the signal adopted had low quality because of the insufficient level of the energy potential of radio link on the base of 32- meter antenna.

Compare what was said in the video and in the article. Any thoughts, Quantum11?
I only see cherrypicking in claims you presented, nothing more.

 

[drwayne]

Absolutely. And, beginning in 1974, Arecibo began active scanning/mapping of the moon as well. The capabilities were well-established by the late 60s.

The spacecraft also had beacons, correct?

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

Quantum, this alleged cooperation between the US and the USSR space program is just wild speculation and imagining. You have no data to support that the USSR would give us access to their spacecraft to fake OUR moon landing. You just made that up because it ties nicely into your moon hoax theory.

 

[yevaud]

Absolutely. And, beginning in 1974, Arecibo began active scanning/mapping of the moon as well. The capabilities were well-established by the late 60s.

The spacecraft also had beacons, correct?

Of course. To do otherwise would have been a complete lack of common sense. Those Apollo guys covered every contingency six way from Sunday. They wanted as much near real-time data as they could glom.

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

I watched it too. But I also watched shows like Buck Rogers. And guess what? Buck Rogers really wasn't in space either. Go figure.

How much do you think the producers of Buck Rogers made off it's programs?

NASA made over 30 Billion for their show.

What are you talking about? There wasn't any revenue made from the Apollo programs. It cost a lot of money, our returns were measured in national pride and scientific progress.

Why would they lie? They were getting their asses handed to them by the Russians in terms of firsts in space. They needed a big win. They decided to cheat their way to first place. They had to cheat. No way was anyone going into all that radiation within and beyond the VAB's without dying. And dead astronauts would equal dead Apollo program. Huge embarrassment for America, and the rest of the 'free' world. So, the only way to guarantee success, was to pre-record, and playback guaranteed successful missions. It doesn't take a gunuis to figure this stuff out!

Again, wild speculation and rhetoric with no basis of proof or evidence to back it up. It's like saying the battle of Yorktown was staged because America kept losing battles.

BTW, no one had the capability to track them to the moon and back. NO ONE! Everyone took for granted what they saw on television was real. Well, almost everyone!

Again, WHAT are you TALKING ABOUT. Of course peopel were tracking them to the moon and back! Like Yevaud said, check out the Soviets' programs for tracking in the lat 60's. And watch the movie The Dish which shows the Australian station tracking and broadcasting radio/TV images from the apollo craft.

 

[cosmored]

(from page 34)

What is being said is that every thing you mention has been more than adequately explained before.

What is being said is that the scientific method requires YOU to explain yourself when opposed to scientifically accepted solutions, not the other way around.

If you're too intellectually lazy to seek these solid explanations out for yourself, the fault is not ours. All people here do is remind you of their existence. The rest is up to you.

And in particular...

/Mod Hat On

In keeping with the spirit and the rules here, you have been repeatedly asked to document your assertions, why they diverge from the mainstream accepted explanations, and how it is that you are correct and the mainstream is not.

Do so.

/Mod Hat Off

I don't see where the movement of Collins' jacket corner has been explained. I also asked for your opinions of the Chinese space walk (see last post on page 33). I don't see where that has been dealt with.

I don't see how I've broken any rules by asking that a pro-Apollo person explain why the corner of Collins' jacket stops moving upward, and comes back down the way it would in strong gravity when they were supposed to be halfway to the moon.

When you say I'm supposed to "Document my assertions", I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do when it comes to asking for opinions of the way Collins' jacket corner behaves. I can say that it differs from the mainstream in that the mainstream view is that they were halfway to the moon in that clip where the micro-gravity would be almost indistiguishable from zero-gravity but the movement of the jacket corner is not consistent with zero-gravity. It's consistent with strong gravity.

Now I'm asking that the pro-Apollo people respond.

If I didn't meet your requirements for posing questions, please tell me what I did wrong.

cosmored, one of the moderators at Bad Astronomy states that collins' jacket corner is perfectly consistent with zero g:

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php ... -deal-with
http://www.livevideo.com/video/7720A028 ... m-par.aspx

Here are the arguments in the Bad Astronomy thread.

I pointed out that the dog tags in the latter video act much like Collins' in that they bounce up and back again; the key difference is that Collins is running vigorously while the woman is just lunging out a bit the one time, so the dog tags just bounce the one time, and not so vigorously.

The dogtags around Collins' neck go up, stop, and come back down the way they would in gravity. I was able to exacty duplicate the movement of Collins' dogtags with some keys on a string. I jogged in place and all I had to do was impart a little extra horizontal motion to my upper body to exactly duplicate the movement of Collins' dogtags. His feet can't be seen so he may be on some kind of exercise device which would explain the extra horizontal motion.
Here's the video of the comparison.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3dGBSggYq8

It that video the dogtags move until they hit the astronaut's chin. They don't stop moving by themselves.

The person on the Bad Astronomy thread doesn't go into detail about the nature of the force that makes Collins' dogtags stop going up, and come back down. I say it's gravity. Please tell us what you think it is as the person on Bad Astronomy didn't address this.

Actually, the way that the astronaut floats up when he stops running makes it pretty obvious that they are in zero G. Also, the oscillatory motion of the jacket is a natural consequence of the oscillatory motion of the astronaut regardless of the number of G's.

When he moves up, his feet can't be seen so it's plausible that he's standing up. Again the person at Bad Astronomy didn't explain the force that made the corner stop, and come back down. In oscillation there's a force that makes an object reverse directions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscillation

He doesn't explain what the force is.

The movement of Collins' jacket corner is consistent with Newton's laws of motion in gravity but is inconsistent with them in zero-gravity.

Please give your explanations of this and also tell us if you think that the Chinese spacewalk was real as the official NASA position on this is that it was real.

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

I don't see where the movement of Collins' jacket corner has been explained. I also asked for your opinions of the Chinese space walk (see last post on page 33). I don't see where that has been dealt with.

I already have explained that for you, page 34 or 35 I believe.

I don't see how I've broken any rules by asking that a pro-Apollo person explain why the corner of Collins' jacket stops moving upward, and comes back down the way it would in strong gravity when they were supposed to be halfway to the moon.

I'll adress that for you below.

When you say I'm supposed to "Document my assertions", I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do when it comes to asking for opinions of the way Collins' jacket corner behaves. I can say that it differs from the mainstream in that the mainstream view is that they were halfway to the moon in that clip where the micro-gravity would be almost indistiguishable from zero-gravity but the movement of the jacket corner is not consistent with zero-gravity. It's consistent with strong gravity.
Now I'm asking that the pro-Apollo people respond.

We've been responding for ages. I get the feeling that you just skipped over all of Smersh's posts.

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php ... -deal-with
http://www.livevideo.com/video/7720A028 ... m-par.aspx

It that video the dogtags move until they hit the astronaut's chin. They don't stop moving by themselves.

The person on the Bad Astronomy thread doesn't go into detail about the nature of the force that makes Collins' dogtags stop going up, and come back down. I say it's gravity. Please tell us what you think it is as the person on Bad Astronomy didn't address this.

I can tell you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread. What's causing it isn't gravity, it's the absence of air resistance and the mechanics of whatever was holding him in place that was below his waist which we can't really see.

Also, how about you do a bit of explaining for us. If the Apollo 11 landing was really filmed in a set with normal gravity on Earth, then how do you explain this:

These are two succesive pictures which show Aldrin saluting, then putting his hand down, but the flag remains perfectly still. If they were truly in a film set on Earth, wouldn't the flag be furled and pointing towards the ground? How do you explain that?

Please give your explanations of this and also tell us if you think that the Chinese spacewalk was real as the official NASA position on this is that it was real.

I've never seen a video of that, but NASA is a credible government organization so I'm willilng to take their word for it. If you do not think it's real then post a video of it then explain why it was faked.

 

[cosmored]

I don't see where the movement of Collins' jacket corner has been explained. I also asked for your opinions of the Chinese space walk (see last post on page 33). I don't see where that has been dealt with.
I already have explained that for you, page 34 or 35 I believe.

At the top of page 35 there's a rebuttal to my first request that you explain the movment of the jacket corner. I then gave a counter-rebuttal. Now I want someone to address my counter-rebuttal. You just pointed out the post to which I gave a rebuttal.

I'll adress that for you below.

When you say I'm supposed to "Document my assertions", I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do when it comes to asking for opinions of the way Collins' jacket corner behaves. I can say that it differs from the mainstream in that the mainstream view is that they were halfway to the moon in that clip where the micro-gravity would be almost indistiguishable from zero-gravity but the movement of the jacket corner is not consistent with zero-gravity. It's consistent with strong gravity.
Now I'm asking that the pro-Apollo people respond.


We've been responding for ages. I get the feeling that you just skipped over all of Smersh's posts.

I just checked back to page 30 and Smersh didn't mention it once. Please link to a page and tell me which post from the top it is.

It that video the dogtags move until they hit the astronaut's chin. They don't stop moving by themselves.

The person on the Bad Astronomy thread doesn't go into detail about the nature of the force that makes Collins' dogtags stop going up, and come back down. I say it's gravity. Please tell us what you think it is as the person on Bad Astronomy didn't address this.

-----------------------------------------------
I can tell you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread. What's causing it isn't gravity, it's the absence of air resistance and the mechanics of whatever was holding him in place that was below his waist which we can't really see.

This is very vague. The dogtags stop going up and come back down while they are in a space craft with air. You say what caused the dogtags to stop going up is the absence of air resistance. Please explain this.

How is the mechanics of what's holding him in place going to affect the direction the dogtags take? Please go into some detail; this explanation is very vague.

These are two succesive pictures which show Aldrin saluting, then putting his hand down, but the flag remains perfectly still.

You would have to explain why Aldrin's saluting would make the flag move. We'd have to see a video to do a good analysis.

If they were truly in a film set on Earth, wouldn't the flag be furled and pointing towards the ground? How do you explain that?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/furled
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------
Adj. 1. furled - rolled up and secured; "furled sails bound securely to the spar"; "a furled flag"; "his rolled umbrella hanging on his arm"
----------------------------------------------------------

If a flag is furled, which means rolled up, how could it point to the ground? They could leave it furled, or unfurl it either on the moon, or in a studio. I have to say that I'm confused by this one. Could you be a little clearer?

I've never seen a video of that, but NASA is a credible government organization so I'm willilng to take their word for it. If you do not think it's real then post a video of it then explain why it was faked.

I pointed out where the videos were in my last post. I didn't want to clutter up the thread with repeat posts but here they are.
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=NVbBFwdmldA
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=kG4Z_r38ZDE

There's the issue of the bubbles, the way the flag ripples when it's pulled the way it would in a medium, and there's the issue of the buoyant safety cables.

I want to hear the opinions of all the pro-Apollo people on the Chinese spacewalk.

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

This is very vague. The dogtags stop going up and come back down while they are in a space craft with air. You say what caused the dogtags to stop going up is the absence of air resistance. Please explain this.

How is the mechanics of what's holding him in place going to affect the direction the dogtags take? Please go into some detail; this explanation is very vague.

The explanation is vague because the video is vague. You can't really see much of anything except for Collins' smiling and his upper torso, but not what's beneath the waist. It's pretty obvious they are in zero g though based on the way all the other objects are moving. Since it is zero g there's no pre-determined direction for his jacket corner to point, but him running vigorously on the treadmill thing and being strapped to it would cause the jacket corner to point towards the ground.

I just checked back to page 30 and Smersh didn't mention it once. Please link to a page and tell me which post from the top it is.

I didn't mean to the gravity point, just all the baseless arguments about Russian-US cooperation for this whole fake moon landing and the many other points that have been refuted and debunked for years.

You would have to explain why Aldrin's saluting would make the flag move. We'd have to see a video to do a good analysis.

My point on the flag is, that if it is in real gravity, the flag would be bunched up and pointing to the ground. The fact that the flag stays exactly the same in those two pictures (when aldrin brings down his arm) proves that it is in zero g and on the surface of the moon.

There's the issue of the bubbles, the way the flag ripples when it's pulled the way it would in a medium, and there's the issue of the buoyant safety cables.

I want to hear the opinions of all the pro-Apollo people on the Chinese spacewalk.

I watched the real video instead of a biased one claiming to prove that it's fake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvpPknmHGAM

I saw no bubbles or cables. It looks legit to me. As for the flag, yes there is no medium but he is still moving it back and forth to create the rippling. Any cables you saw were the tethers connecting him to the ship. The official opinion of other space agencies is that it was real, and I'm willing to trust that opinion over someone who believes that all the Apollo, Gemini, and Mercury missions were fake based on someone's jacket corner pointing towards the Earth.

Here's another question, if nobody ever got in the Saturn V, then what about when the Apollo 11 capsule landed in the ocean and the astronauts were pulled out?