We Probably Never Made it to the Moon

originally posted by: Grenade
Neil Armstrong states he never saw stars either on the way to the moon

Where did he say that? He only talked about the moon surface.

You failed to address that point because it's inconvenient.

The point is that when you're in full sunlight (or any bright object) you have a hard time seeing any stars in space. Without it you see a lot, that is how our eyes work; Exactly what the ISS astronauts are saying too.

There's artefacts suggesting photo editing all over those images you provided. You must be a complete novice in graphic design if you can't see that. In which case why would i waste my time debating someone who can't see the obvious.

There is not, that's why you trying to avoid pointing out by such a lame excuse. And remember it started out with your incorrect claim:

a grand total of 1 picture of the Earth from the lunar surface.

Oh and please not the earth shot from "A Funny Thing Happened on the way to the Moon" by Bart Sibrel. By now you should know that isn't the complete shot.

a reply to: MissVocalcord

Mike Collins never stepped foot on the lunar surface and clearly states "i don't remember seeing any".

In Armstrongs own words, key words being cislunar space:

a reply to: MissVocalcord

You would see a sky full of stars even in daylight on the moon due to it's lack of atmosphere.

a reply to: DystopianSunfall666

The flagpole have no shadow either

originally posted by: Grenade
Nope, 1000s of images of rocks and dust, featureless landscapes and boot prints

Even the bootprints give away that it is a faked mission:



Bootprints can only be that detailed if there is moisture in the substrate they are stepping on. Think of dry sand or dry dirt, you can't make detailed impressions on it. You can only make detailed impressions on wet sant or wet dirt. Since they said theres no water on the moon, it should be totally dry. Therefore, there should not be that much detail for each boot print.




The first picture above is wet sand, the second is dry. If the moon is truly dry then we would expect the same type of prints in the second picture, with no details in the print. But we see all the groove marks in the boots with each print, indicating it wasn't actually the moon:



It's these sorts of details that the directors of the moon landing forgot to consider.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: MissVocalcord
Mike Collins never stepped foot

Watch the whole interview he is clearly talking from Armstrongs and Aldrins perspective.

You would see a sky full of stars even in daylight on the moon due to it's lack of atmosphere.

No you wouldn't, because the moon is reflecting way too much light to be able to see them, therefore you can only see them when you go stand in the shadow of something and let your eyes adapt. As soon as there is something bright in your eyes it will take some time to adopt.
However they saw stars (although mostly through the instruments) for sure when traveling between the earth and the moon since they were using them to navigate too.

Can you come up with the roll, pitch, and yaw angle for the substellar point on this star? It's our second star.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

a reply to: MissVocalcord

asterism.org...

"It should be pointed out that as we reach new Moon, earthshine becomes a factor. Someone on the Moon sees a “full Earth” when we see a new Moon. As seen from the Moon, our Earth would look about 100x brighter than our full Moon. This is because of the Earth’s larger size and higher albedo. Imagine being on the Moon and seeing a full earthrise at magnitude –17.7, with earthlight dimly illuminating and casting shadows on the lunar scenery."

Hardly matches the photo evidence.

a reply to: MissVocalcord

Wow, you're actually talking absolute nonsense now. I just provided you a video of Armstrong stating he never seen stars even in cislunar space. Mike Collins states "i don't remember seeing any". Not sure what mental gymnastics you've had to work through to come up with this convoluted excuse.

a reply to: cooperton
You think the moon is covered with desert sand and therefore should react the same? Come on use google for once.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: MissVocalcord

asterism.org...

"It should be pointed out that as we reach new Moon, earthshine becomes a factor. Someone on the Moon sees a “full Earth” when we see a new Moon. As seen from the Moon, our Earth would look about 100x brighter than our full Moon. This is because of the Earth’s larger size and higher albedo. Imagine being on the Moon and seeing a full earthrise at magnitude –17.7, with earthlight dimly illuminating and casting shadows on the lunar scenery."

Hardly matches the photo evidence.

So now you start claiming the Apollo missions where during a 'full Earth"?

originally posted by: MissVocalcord
a reply to: cooperton
You think the moon is covered with desert sand and therefore should react the same? Come on use google for once.

No, the moon supposedly has no water. Without moisture how is the dust on the moon contouring to the details of the bootprint? Dry dirt or dust can not contour to the details of a bootprint, only dirt with moisture can.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: MissVocalcord
a reply to: cooperton
You think the moon is covered with desert sand and therefore should react the same? Come on use google for once.

No, the moon supposedly has no water. Without moisture how is the dust on the moon contouring to the details of the bootprint? Dry dirt or dust can not contour to the details of a bootprint, only wet dirt can.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: MissVocalcord

I doubt that at 1/6th Earth gravity there would be enough compressive force to compact dirt into these grooves while maintaining solid walls. Sand is similar to moon dust in that it is a granular material of finely divided rock and mineral particles. Probably the most analogous material we have in abundance.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: MissVocalcord

Wow, you're actually talking absolute nonsense now. I just provided you a video of Armstrong stating he never seen stars even in cislunar space. Mike Collins states "i don't remember seeing any". Not sure what mental gymnastics you've had to work through to come up with this convoluted excuse.

Because they hardly saw any stars, just read the transcript:

Houston, it's been a real change for us. Now we are able to see stars again and recognize constellations for the first time on the trip. It's - the sky is full of stars. Just like the nightside of Earth. But all the way here, we have only been able to see stars occasionally and perhaps through the monocular, but not recognize any star patterns.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: MissVocalcord
Sand is similar to moon dust in that it is a granular material of finely divided rock and mineral particles. Probably the most analogous material we have in abundance.

Lunar soil is the fine fraction of the regolith found on the surface of the Moon. Its properties can differ significantly from those of terrestrial dirt.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: MissVocalcord

So his testimony is inconsistent with the logs. Yet more inconsistency.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: MissVocalcord

I doubt that at 1/6th Earth gravity there would be enough compressive force to compact dirt into these grooves while maintaining solid walls. Sand is similar to moon dust in that it is a granular material of finely divided rock and mineral particles. Probably the most analogous material we have in abundance.

Yup, didn't even think of that... 1/6th the compressive force to make the footprint too.

a reply to: MissVocalcord

Can you leave footprints with such detail in bone dry soil?

a reply to: MissVocalcord

No, now you're putting words in my mouth, i said nothing of the sort.

Wow LOL. The moon landings were faked 😁. Our mortal enemy of the time, the USSR, just let us get away with that deception for free 👍. Over a hundred thousand people involved, not to mention the astronauts who walked on it, were sworn to secrecy to enable the cover up. Haha. Next thing you know, people are going to try and convince humanity, that the world is flat and science is wrong 🤣. I'm a Christian and know this is a fallacy. Maybe God meant 'under your feet' when He said the world is flat. Or maybe it was before the flood? I can't say, I wasn't there. But Christian or not, science has convinced me that we went to the moon and landed on it. Ditto the world is a sphere 👍.