On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 17:09:33 -0700,

On Sep 2, 12:52 am, Doc Smartass <gek...@astroskivviesboymail.com>
wrote:
snip

One caveat:

If they can't back up their claim, Buzz Aldrin (or his appointed
fisticuffs representative) gets to punch them the way he did Bart "Moon
Landings Were Faked!" Sibrel.

Holy *****, Doc! I found a video! Nobody ever told me it was caught on
tape!

http://www.csicop.org/articles/20021018-aldrin/

You can hear the normal people cheering after Sibrel calls Buzz liar &
coward. I never knew the man who practically invented working in space
was a leftie.

We sinister types are everywhere.

On Sep 1, 10:59 pm, "kingdoodlesquat"





<neggerschegg...@negatseacatspam.com> wrote:

"Ben Kaufman" <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-doll...@pobox.com> wrote in message

news:ln3kd3h66mgvald16pl37o1l0r6pdtt66j@4ax.com...

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:18:26 -0500, Don Martin <drdonmar...@comcast.net>

wrote:

We have had a few mentions of these of late, and it occurs to me that
their hobbyhorse presents a testable hypothesis.

IF it is true that themoonlandings were faked in a Hollywood sound
stage,

THEN whether this is possible is demonstrable.

PARAMETERS:

The demensions and weight of spacesuits are known quantities.
The state of the art in film production circa 1969 is a known
quantity.
Sound stages are available for rent.
The footage taken on themoonis available.

The CHALLENGE:

Take any 30-segment in which one or more persons are moving rapidly on
"themoon", and duplicate the setting on a soundstage according to
1969 technology (you can show stars overhead, but they must be there
to photograph and not added by green screen or computer enhancement
techniques). Then dress a reasonably close facsimilie of the astronaut
in question in either a genuine spacesuit or a fake thereof weight the
same as the real one. Film your actor covering the same amount of
ground in the same amount of time as the astronaut in one continuous
30-second shot. Camera speed variation techniques permitted to get him
to "float" more. Run your footage side by side (or over and under)
with the original for purposes of comparison. If impartial observers
cannot tell the two apart, you hypothesis, if not established, is
supported. My money is on its being falsified.

Especially the trajectory of kicked up dust in a vacuum under the force

of

moongravity.

Ben

Would it not be far easier & simpler to build a telescope to look across the
250,000 or so miles at the landing sites? There should be enough evidence of
all the junk left behind (provided you could see it).

They've found the Ap 15 site in imagery taken by Clementine.

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/missions/apollo15_touchdown_phot...

Clem's cameras were too cheap (anyone else remember "faster, cheaper,
better!" LOL) to resolve the lander & stuff, but it does show the dirt
kicked up by the exaust at the landing site.

Thurisaz is right, though. No amount of proof is enough for these
loons..

Would it not be far easier & simpler to build a telescope to look across the
250,000 or so miles at the landing sites? There should be enough evidence of
all the junk left behind (provided you could see it).

If we do not already have a telescope capable of doing it then the answer is no.

kingdoodlesquat wrote:

"Ben Kaufman" <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com>
wrote in message
news:ln3kd3h66mgvald16pl37o1l0r6pdtt66j@4ax.com...

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:18:26 -0500, Don Martin
<drdonmartin@comcast.net>

wrote:

We have had a few mentions of these of late, and it occurs to
me that their hobbyhorse presents a testable hypothesis.

IF it is true that the moon landings were faked in a
Hollywood sound stage,

THEN whether this is possible is demonstrable.

PARAMETERS:

The demensions and weight of spacesuits are known quantities.
The state of the art in film production circa 1969 is a known
quantity.
Sound stages are available for rent.
The footage taken on the moon is available.

The CHALLENGE:

Take any 30-segment in which one or more persons are moving
rapidly on "the moon", and duplicate the setting on a
soundstage according to 1969 technology (you can show stars
overhead, but they must be there to photograph and not added
by green screen or computer enhancement techniques). Then
dress a reasonably close facsimilie of the astronaut in
question in either a genuine spacesuit or a fake thereof
weight the same as the real one. Film your actor covering the
same amount of ground in the same amount of time as the
astronaut in one continuous 30-second shot. Camera speed
variation techniques permitted to get him to "float" more.
Run your footage side by side (or over and under) with the
original for purposes of comparison. If impartial observers
cannot tell the two apart, you hypothesis, if not
established, is supported. My money is on its being
falsified.

Especially the trajectory of kicked up dust in a vacuum under
the force

of

moon gravity.

Ben

Would it not be far easier & simpler to build a telescope to
look across the 250,000 or so miles at the landing sites? There
should be enough evidence of all the junk left behind (provided
you could see it).

This is actually quite easy. Apollo 11/14/15 left laser
reflectors on the Moon. These are still in use today to measure
variations in the distance between the earth and the moon.

kingdoodlesquat wrote:

"Ben Kaufman" <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-doll...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:ln3kd3h66mgvald16pl37o1l0r6pdtt66j@4ax.com...

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:18:26 -0500, Don Martin <drdonmar...@comcast.net>

wrote:

We have had a few mentions of these of late, and it occurs to me that
their hobbyhorse presents a testable hypothesis.

IF it is true that themoonlandings were faked in a Hollywood sound
stage,

THEN whether this is possible is demonstrable.

PARAMETERS:

The demensions and weight of spacesuits are known quantities.
The state of the art in film production circa 1969 is a known
quantity.
Sound stages are available for rent.
The footage taken on themoonis available.

The CHALLENGE:

Take any 30-segment in which one or more persons are moving rapidly on
"themoon", and duplicate the setting on a soundstage according to
1969 technology (you can show stars overhead, but they must be there
to photograph and not added by green screen or computer enhancement
techniques). Then dress a reasonably close facsimilie of the astronaut
in question in either a genuine spacesuit or a fake thereof weight the
same as the real one. Film your actor covering the same amount of
ground in the same amount of time as the astronaut in one continuous
30-second shot. Camera speed variation techniques permitted to get him
to "float" more. Run your footage side by side (or over and under)
with the original for purposes of comparison. If impartial observers
cannot tell the two apart, you hypothesis, if not established, is
supported. My money is on its being falsified.

Especially the trajectory of kicked up dust in a vacuum under the force

of

moongravity.

Ben

Would it not be far easier & simpler to build a telescope to look across the
250,000 or so miles at the landing sites? There should be enough evidence of
all the junk left behind (provided you could see it).

This is actually quite easy.Apollo11/14/15 left laser reflectors on
theMoon. These are still in use today to measure variations in the
distance between the earth and themoon.

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 14:20:09 -0000 there was an Ancient BradGuth
<bradguth@gmail.com> who stoppeth one in alt.atheism

On Sep 4, 10:15 am, Hollis Brown <AT_Tapp...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sep 1, 5:18 pm, Don Martin <drdonmar...@comcast.net> wrote:

We have had a few mentions of these of late, and it occurs to me

their hobbyhorse presents a testable hypothesis.

IF it is true that themoonlandings were faked in a Hollywood sound
stage,

Haven't themoonhoax people all moved on to the World Trade Center by
now?

HB

I had no idea that alt.atheism was such a Yid's news group. Go
figure.

And this is why Brad should be ignored. He's nuts. Everyone who
confronts him with facts is a "yid." He ignores cites to actual
research.

Pity him.