unfortunate effect of sheer ignorance being inserted in place of "common sense."
look at all the words you actually substitute for 'common sense'
no my friend, it is you that fail to see 'prop rocks' in the photos of the moon landing, not me.
it is you that fails to see the backdrop used, and the multiple re-uses of the same background
the list of 'problems' with the moon landing is nearly infinite
here is a list of the real reasons each 'space mission' happened. it was literally 'taken away' after it was feared to being overused. it was and it was already to late.
But alas, this fact of physics, is likely too subtle for you.
ah yes, you are a professional! making up new stuff as we go! right on.
for one, there is a atmosphere, supposedly . you seem to omit facts or change them as it suits you.
is that common sense to you?
given the entire picture, a few pieces (dust didn't move) being shaky is 'small potatoes' compared to the fact the first time they attempted to land a 'lunar modular' using rocket propulsion failed incredibly badly. - and was never tested again
or the first/only time they tested a 'space suit' the man fainted .. and it was never tested again
i say you must overlook an insane amount of evidence that fails the scientific test
You are making allegations without evidence. What is a "prop rock"? That's what you are declaring what you see, not evidence of it being unauthentic. Same thing about a "backdrop." What makes the background view a "backdrop"? The fact that it doesn't change with time? Gee, that is sort of what happens in a largely stationary environment: not much happens.
The "moondoggie" page is just a reading assignment. I looked at the first article. No images. No interest in wasting my time because you can't make a point for yourself.
An atmosphere on the Moon? If you think so, you are truly ignorant. It is vacuum. Rocket exhaust has nothing to push around, and it expands very rapidly once out of the nozzle, so there is no problem with small rocks not being moved. (There is some streaking radiating from where the exhaust did impinge.) The first time landing the LEM did not fail (there was an interval that the guidance program had to work through before touchdown, and this was known by both the astronauts and ground control). Space suits were in use since the Mercury flights.
I say you need to learn some science before you see "evidence" that is only your own misunderstanding or ignorance.
look at all the words you actually substitute for 'common sense'
no my friend, it is you that fail to see 'prop rocks' in the photos of the moon landing, not me.
it is you that fails to see the backdrop used, and the multiple re-uses of the same background
the list of 'problems' with the moon landing is nearly infinite
here is a list of the real reasons each 'space mission' happened. it was literally 'taken away' after it was feared to being overused. it was and it was already to late.
https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie/
ah yes, you are a professional! making up new stuff as we go! right on.
for one, there is a atmosphere, supposedly . you seem to omit facts or change them as it suits you.
is that common sense to you?
given the entire picture, a few pieces (dust didn't move) being shaky is 'small potatoes' compared to the fact the first time they attempted to land a 'lunar modular' using rocket propulsion failed incredibly badly. - and was never tested again
or the first/only time they tested a 'space suit' the man fainted .. and it was never tested again
i say you must overlook an insane amount of evidence that fails the scientific test
You are making allegations without evidence. What is a "prop rock"? That's what you are declaring what you see, not evidence of it being unauthentic. Same thing about a "backdrop." What makes the background view a "backdrop"? The fact that it doesn't change with time? Gee, that is sort of what happens in a largely stationary environment: not much happens.
The "moondoggie" page is just a reading assignment. I looked at the first article. No images. No interest in wasting my time because you can't make a point for yourself.
An atmosphere on the Moon? If you think so, you are truly ignorant. It is vacuum. Rocket exhaust has nothing to push around, and it expands very rapidly once out of the nozzle, so there is no problem with small rocks not being moved. (There is some streaking radiating from where the exhaust did impinge.) The first time landing the LEM did not fail (there was an interval that the guidance program had to work through before touchdown, and this was known by both the astronauts and ground control). Space suits were in use since the Mercury flights.
I say you need to learn some science before you see "evidence" that is only your own misunderstanding or ignorance.