Proving the moon landing was a hoax - John Young is caught 'bare handed'.

You only have to look at the source (ArcAngel4Mike) to know that this thread is in exactly the right place.

Not a bare hand. A Glove.

He also mis-transcribes the spoken word.

it's not 'motor package', it's 'mortar package', which is why it is actually a 'thump imprint', not thumb.

originally posted by: cArLoSCuBsTaR
I see the problem here...

What the OP meant was that Young had "bear" hands not "bare" hands. That's why he couldn't have gone to the moon.

It's the switches and controls of the Apollo equipment, you see.... Designed for people. Not bears

Hope this clears up the confusion

LOOOL...brilliant man

a reply to: HooHaa

You should question everything

I do. So far...all I have is my gut feeling that something is not right. Yet, I must not let that be the decider. You listed many things...ultimately feelings and subjective views count for nothing.

If there is any conspiracy behind the Moon landings, to truly believe it...I must have stone cold 100 % undeniable physical proof. As long as there isn't any...it's all entertaining speculation...which I honestly don't mind at all.

The only way to kill the debate forever...is for someone to set up a high power telescope back here on Earth...and allow anyone to look at the landing sites for themselves...at close up. This would do it for me.

As for 100 % proof that landings did happen...I have also not seen any conclusive ones. All evidence offered by the pro Apollo camp so far...can be recreated and faked. I'm not saying it is...but it can be if there is a will to do it, and there certainly was ample reasons to do it back then...which is why I still entertain the idea of faked moon landings.

Anyways...here's hoping for that public telescope.

a reply to: SonofaSkunk

Well put. I wonder if the OP picked this up.



Bally

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

The primary mirror for such a scope will need to be 5 football fields wide to resolve objects that small.

Largest telescope right now is 10.4 meters wide.

a reply to: eriktheawful

I understand the difficulties for building such a telescope.

Hope dies last. Maybe some new tech will be developed in the near future that does not require such things like huge mirrors. Something with laser technology perhaps...

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: eriktheawful

I understand the difficulties for building such a telescope.

Hope dies last. Maybe some new tech will be developed in the near future that does not require such things like huge mirrors. Something with laser technology perhaps...

Lasers! What difference will they make? How about moving the telescope closer to the moon so it does not need to be as big. We could send a camera up with a long lens on a probe.....oh hang on the Indians, Chinese and ESA have all done that and the landing sites were photographed.

a reply to: yorkshirelad

We could send a camera up with a long lens on a probe.....oh hang on the Indians, Chinese and ESA have all done that and the landing sites were photographed.

Well...and what we're left with is these images first passing through NASA...then eventually into public domain...is what we have here in the first place.

I'm saying telescope in the public domain...which can then be viewed by any person...first hand. No middle man that can potentially alter the images. Your solution is inadequate to defeat the CT...since the CT's don't trust the source of the images.

a reply to: yorkshirelad

That won't work.

If you explain that the data beamed back by the LROC is processed by the Arizona State University with full public access, Moon Hoaxers point out that it goes through NASA's Planetary Data System first, and that they "photo shop" everything first.

If you point out other space agencies to them, you get the "they are all in on it" answer.

Even if there was a powerful enough public telescope to resolve the landings from Earth, they would then turn around and say "it was put there in secret by NASA using remote control", which is also the answer they will give if anyone else ever goes to the moon, lands and takes pictures of the sites.

You'll have more luck arguing with a brick wall.

a reply to: eriktheawful

I cant speak for the CT's...but "it was put there in secret by NASA using remote control" wouldn't fly with me. That would be massively ridiculous undertaking to achieve. Perhaps even harder than to put a man on the moon.

They would have to plan multiple trips to the moon with some serious payload to deliver to cover all the Apollo missions claims.

I would be completely satisfied with 5 minutes on that non existent telescope...to settle any "feelings" I may have.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

And now you know how all the explanations or ideas that some of us hear from Moon Hoaxers sound to those of us that have no doubt that the evidence is overwhelming that we did indeed go to the moon.

The only reason I even bother to post anymore in threads like these is to correct someone on something they got wrong (the science part), or to simply point out the flaws in their ideas or theories.

I've actually had better luck at convincing people that believe in PlanetX coming to destroy Earth doesn't exist than I've had trying to convince Moon Hoaxers that we really went.

a reply to: eriktheawful

To be fair, that's usually because the specific date on which Apocalypse will be nigh passes uneventfully and without the appearance of dread horsemen or oversized celestial gatecrashers.

a reply to: eriktheawful

And now you know how all the explanations or ideas that some of us hear from Moon Hoaxers sound to those of us that have no doubt that the evidence is overwhelming that we did indeed go to the moon.

I understand the frustration Erik. I'm going back and forth on this issue of Moon hoax. When I registered on this site...I was more leaning on the side of Moon hoaxers...this site has somewhat shifted my opinion on it since. I guess I can say...it was your doing and other guys that come here to debunk the Hoax theory.

Still...I'm not completely convinced. Some of the things still bother me. But I'm taking my time. All I really want is for the debate to end. To really really know for sure. Sadly...or luckily...I'm the kind of person that only believes his own eyes. I have come to know the human being...inside out...and realized...we are capable of great deceptions, and cant be trusted blindly. That's why I entertain the idea of a hoax...but am not emotionally invested in it.

If that scope is every built...and I look at the moon landing sites...and I see it all there...the rover...the tracks...the rest of the equipment left there, I will stand up and clap to America...as the greatest human achievement ever.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1

The unpressurized gloves are actually even bigger, or 'puffed out', than the supposedly 'pressurized' gloves, which are skin-tight.

No, they aren't. You are delusional just as you were when you claimed to see a bare hand.
There is little discernible difference because 3.75 psi is very low pressure. It would barely inflate a toy balloon much less the pressure gloves which, if you read the material I provided, you might know a bit about. The gloves could not be "skin tight", however, if anything, the pressurized glove displays a smoother surface than the unpressurized, which makes sense.

What doesn't make sense is that his fingers are the same size with 'pressurization', as they are without it!

His fingers should be distinctly larger ('puffed up') due to his gloves being pressurized to 3.75 psi. They are clearly not.

NASA has the gloves, and they don't want anyone else to test them out, for a very good reason...it would prove the gloves wouldn't look the same, or work even close to the same.

Unless you know of such tests being done, and we can see them for ourselves...

originally posted by: turbonium1
NASA has the gloves, and they don't want anyone else to test them out,

How do you know that?

Have you approached NASA with a proposal to test the gloves, detailing all your tests, who is going to perform them and the reason for them, or are you just babbling crap!

originally posted by: ClandestineKid

originally posted by: SachaX
If we didn't land on the moon you bet your sweet a#$ the Russians would have exposed it.
After all, they were watching intently with very high satellites.

Exactly. I'm a Brit who to be honest despises America but only a fool would think that it was hoaxed. It would have required tens of thousands of people to be involved in the hoax. The USSR had KGB spies employed all over the USA to gain any intel they could on even the most mundane simplistic of things.

There's no way in hell tens of thousands of people could lie, especially without the KGB intercepting that it was a hoax and they would have revelled in exposing it.

Don't get me wrong, the USA would have faked it if they knew they'd get away with it ,but at a time like that the huge propaganda defeat it would have caused at such a delicate point in history would make it a risk they'd never be foolish enough to take.

This issue is off topic, but I obviously need to address it, yet again....

The USSR had the perfect opportunity to unleash Communist propaganda years before the 'moon landings' came along...with the JFK assassination, and its aftermath...

After JFK was murdered in Dallas, the US Government immediately said who did it, and that he acted alone. Oswald, the 'lone nut' assassin, shot and killed the President, so they claimed.

But many Americans (and much of the planet) didn't buy their story, in part, or all of it. Many were very skeptical of it, and their own Government, in saying that it was so.

The USSR knew that Americans lost trust in their own Government, of course.

But the USSR said nothing about it, which shows they were not their great enemy, at all.

So why would you think the USSR would have said anything about a hoax, if they were silent on JFK?

It's about time your side buried this non-issue, once and for all.

originally posted by: turbonium1
But the USSR said nothing about it, which shows they were not their great enemy, at all.

No, it shows that they also agree it was Oswald, and not a conspiracy!

So why would you think the USSR would have said anything about a hoax,

As the moon landing was not a hoax, and there is zero evidence showing it was a hoax, why would the USSR claim it was a hoax?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: turbonium1
NASA has the gloves, and they don't want anyone else to test them out,

How do you know that?

Have you approached NASA with a proposal to test the gloves, detailing all your tests, who is going to perform them and the reason for them, or are you just babbling crap!

Iirc, Ralph Rene repeatedly asked NASA for the gloves (or an exact replica of them), years ago, but NASA always refused his request. I'm not sure if others requested the gloves, but it seems clear that nobody has ever tested them, to verify anything in public. It's obvious that NASA would have had to thoroughly test their own gloves, before using them on actual missions. So - I'd like for you to show me any of NASA's tests on the gloves, before and after they are pressurized to 3.75 psi....

If you cannot find any such tests, you have a major problem.

originally posted by: turbonium1
but it seems clear that nobody has ever tested them

More garbage from you, so you think NASA never tested them, you think the manufacturer never tested them.... you really are getting desperate with your silly claims now!

you have a major problem.

Wrong again, the only ones with a major problem here are those who refuse to accept the facts, preferring to make up silly conspiracy theories devoid of any science or facts!

Here is some trivia,

While the historical trail is still unclear, it appears that in 1971, the Soviet Union’s space suit manufacturer, Factory 53 (now Zvezda), acquired a pair of ILC Apollo A7L gloves. The AL7 gloves were reverse- engineered to provide the glove (with minor chang es) that started service on Russian space suits in 1973 (ref. Fig. 2.11). In the 1990s, China acquired tw o Sokol KV-2 suits for training purposes. The Chinese reported that they had designed and manufactured Shenzhou 5 space suits used on their first manned spaceflight in 2003. This is interesting as the suit appeared to be identical to a Russian Sokol KV-2 space suit, including its gloves. While the Chinese ha ve made noticeable improvements to the torsos of their space suits in recent years, th e gloves appear to be unchanged. Thus the gloves ILC originally designed for Apollo SPD-143 Training Suits has con tinued with minor changes to not only be used on all man’s explorations of the moon but continu es to see service in the pr esent Russian and Chinese space programs

originally posted by: hellobruce

No, it shows that they also agree it was Oswald, and not a conspiracy!

You must be joking, right?

Many Americans [bdid not believe the official JFK story, as told by their own Government. If the USSR was truly the USA's great enemy, they would have immediately pounced on the chance to further cast doubts in the American public, with propaganda. Without question, they would have trumpeted to the whole world that Americans had lost faith, and trust, in their own government! The Soviets might have said it proves corruption is an inherent flaw of a western, democratic, political system. But not so for their superior Communist system, which is so very honorable and trustworthy, blah, blah...

Do you get the point here?

originally posted by: hellobruce
As the moon landing was not a hoax, and there is zero evidence showing it was a hoax, why would the USSR claim it was a hoax?

I've already explained to you that the USSR said nothing about the JFK issue. Americans had lost trust in their own government. That the USSR was silent, means they were not the 'evil arch-enemy' of the US. It was portrayed to the world that way, and it had very real, and very horrific, consequences (ie: the Vietnam War).

Silence spoke the truth, harshly