Moon hoax believers: Apollo 13?

a reply to: audubon

An optimistic and upbeat President John F. Kennedy suggests that the Soviet Union and the United States cooperate on a mission to mount an expedition to the moon. The proposal caught both the Soviets and many Americans off guard.

In 1961, shortly after his election as president, John F. Kennedy announced that he was determined to win the “space race” with the Soviets. Since 1957, when the Soviet Union sent a small satellite–Sputnik–into orbit around the earth, Russian and American scientists had been competing to see who could make the next breakthrough in space travel. Outer space became another frontier in the Cold War. Kennedy upped the ante in 1961 when he announced that the United States would put a man on the moon before the end of the decade. Much had changed by 1963, however. Relations with the Soviet Union had improved measurably. The Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 had been settled peacefully. A “hot line” had been established between Washington and Moscow to help avert conflict and misunderstandings. A treaty banning the open air testing of nuclear weapons had been signed in 1963. On the other hand, U.S. fascination with the space program was waning. Opponents of the program cited the high cost of the proposed trip to the moon, estimated at more than $20 billion. In the midst of all of this, Kennedy, in a speech at the United Nations, proposed that the Soviet Union and United States cooperate in mounting a mission to the moon. “Why,” he asked the audience, “therefore, should man’s first flight to the moon be a matter of national competition?” Kennedy noted, “the clouds have lifted a little” in terms of U.S.-Soviet relations, and declared “The Soviet Union and the United States, together with their allies, can achieve further agreements–agreements which spring from our mutual interest in avoiding mutual destruction.”

www.history.com...

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: turbonium1

I've seen images taken from lunar orbit showing a disturbance of some sort at the exact spot the Apollo lander is supposed to be, is what they believe to be a disturbance of soil, all around the lander, which caused the disturbance of soil.

So when I see images (supposedly) taken on the lunar surface, the same disturbance should be seen. But there is no disturbance of soil, as we do in the images from orbit.

Every time this is brought up, it is explained to you that the "disturbance" in the orbital images is due to contrasting regolith being exposed that is too subtle to be noticed in the surface images, since those photographs were taken while standing in the disturbed region. Explained countless times, dredged up by you again and again.

The surface images extend outward to where BOTH areas would be seen, within that same, single image.

It doesn't matter how 'subtle' the difference is, because if it can be seen from orbit as a distinct area, it will certainly be seen from the surface.

Why don't you replicate this phenomenon of yours?

Select any surface area, which is uniform.
Within that area, change a smaller area of it, but you must not be able to see the change you just made, from anywhere on he ground. Although you can clearly distinguish the change from orbit.

It cannot be "too subtle" on the ground because you can see both of the areas from the ground. Going up in orbit doesn't make it easier to see, it's just the opposite.