Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

onebigmonkey
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

www.jb.man.ac.uk...

www.astr.ua.edu...

[url=http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?81998-two-absolute-definitive-answer-proving-man-on-the-moon-is-not-a-hoax/page4&p=1382134#post1382134 ]http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?81998-two-absolute-definitive-answer-proving-man-on-the-moon-is-not-a-hoax/page4&p=1382134#post1382134[/ur l]

It does't really matter how many. What matters is whether it's true or not. It's true.

Tapes buried in the Jodrell Bank archives finally revealed 40 years later? Do you really expect us to believe that Jodrell Bank saved all the Apollo tapes but NASA lost 700+ boxes of Apollo tapes? That's just crazy talk.

And Sir Bernard Lovell. Let's talk about him.
What does Sir Bernard Lovell have to say about his trips to the Soviet Union in the 1960's?

"It was a sinister time and a lot of my compatriots who went to the Soviet Union in those days in the early 1960s never did return, or when they did return they never survived.
"I was one of the fortunate ones." www.telegraph.co.uk...

Another quote from Jodrell Banks boss during the Apollo era, Sir Bernard Lovell,

"They tried to remove from my memory the fact that they had taken me to their own defence nucleus on the Black Sea coast, because they did not want news of what they had brought back to this country."

Sir Bernard sounds like a conspiracy nut-job doesn't he? Could Sir Bernard is a Manchurian Candidate or a whistle-blower?

He added: "It remains an interesting memory and I have written a detailed memorandum on the whole of that visit and my previous and subsequent visits to the Soviet Union which is now in the John Rylands Archive and I have asked that it not to be published while I am still living."

Look what the Apollo Defenders have for independent verification of Apollo.

Larry Baysinger, the guy who recorded 5 minutes of Apollo 11 space noise with a chicken wire antenna.
Sir Bernard Lovell, the guy who claims the Russians tried to wipe out his memories AND kill him with radiation.

Oh, and Sven Grahn, who recorded Apollo 17, "First voice from the Moon: "Standby three zero", and "Perfect voice: "The barber pole - it is gray".:

That's only 2 missions, A11 and A17.

Where are the "Ham Radio operators" who can prove A8, A10, A12, A13, A14, A15 and A16?

reply to post by turbonium1


And I also explained to you that using wires to control the absorbtion of the jump is preposterous..

On one hand nasa is accurate enough to control an event that occurs I less than 0.1 seconds and on the other hand nasa is not accurate enough to control an event that occurs in about 1.5 seconds..

So which is it??

I looking at the absorbant ion of the jump because there is an issue with you recording method.. There is obviously frames missing.. As proven by frame 28, 29 and 30 why is it that john young floats for one frame and teleports about 5 cm the next frame?

That proves that your video capture program is not recording all the frames.. Since they are moving so quickly not all frames will be captured. That is why you miss when john young lands, which is after the myth busters as proven when they both proceed to absorb the jump. Which is clearly after the myth busters. But you say it like NASA had the myth busters jump as a reference to deliberately delay john young absorbing his jump which is impossible..

Also which is it? Is nasa accurate enough to delay john young absorbing his jump to less than 0.1seconds or is nasa not accurate enough to get a jump right that occurs in about 1.5 seconds??

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


And look at all the proof sayonara has for proving mobots were used to setup the lunar landscape here's a list:

1. Himself

Done.

choos
reply to post by turbonium1

 

Since you are so convinced of the accuracy of your videos and your recording techniques, hint hint,

Can you explain to everyone that since john young at 2.46 x speed up is moving quickly why frame 28 and frame 29 I believe it was (sorry still using my phone) why john young does not move?

That's a good point.

Indeed, neither one moves in frame 29.

And, did you notice that Young not move in frame 31 while the Mythbusters guy does?

The same thing happens in other frames, too - one guy moves, the other guy doesn't move at all, or both guys don't move.

Why is that?

Hmm..

Is it due to flawed recording techniques, and/or using flawed videos?

Well, you can try it for yourself, like I've already asked you to do, many times before.

I've told you the specific videos that were used, and I told you exactly how I made frames from them.


You were told how it was done, step-by-step. You were repeatedly told to try doing it yourself, but you've refused to even try it.


What incredible gall you have to now go off spewing a bunch of crap about how it must be my fault if Young doesn't move in one of the frames!!

To be such a delusional fool, it just boggles the mind.


If you think the frame is my fault, then you need to prove it. If you can't prove it, shove it up your arse.


Here's a hint for you on why some of the frames have no movement -

A jump with wires doesn't reflect a true gravity, while a jump without any wires does reflect true gravity.

Do you know what that means, or do you need me to explain it to you?

choos
reply to post by turbonium1

 

And I also explained to you that using wires to control the absorbtion of the jump is preposterous..

On one hand nasa is accurate enough to control an event that occurs I less than 0.1 seconds and on the other hand nasa is not accurate enough to control an event that occurs in about 1.5 seconds..

So which is it??

I looking at the absorbant ion of the jump because there is an issue with you recording method.. There is obviously frames missing.. As proven by frame 28, 29 and 30 why is it that john young floats for one frame and teleports about 5 cm the next frame?

That proves that your video capture program is not recording all the frames.. Since they are moving so quickly not all frames will be captured. That is why you miss when john young lands, which is after the myth busters as proven when they both proceed to absorb the jump. Which is clearly after the myth busters. But you say it like NASA had the myth busters jump as a reference to deliberately delay john young absorbing his jump which is impossible..

Also which is it? Is nasa accurate enough to delay john young absorbing his jump to less than 0.1seconds or is nasa not accurate enough to get a jump right that occurs in about 1.5 seconds??

NASA slowed down a wire-assisted jump to 66.66% speed, just as Jarrah White did with the Mythbusters jump.

Why do you think it's anything more that that?


Now, if you think I didn't capture all the frames in Young's jump, then you need to prove it.

What are you waiting for?

After that, you can tell me the correct video you used. And what program you used to capture all the frames. Or just show me the missing frames, for starters..

Don't tell me how a jump is missing frames. Show me the missing frames.

SayonaraJupiter

onebigmonkey
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Tapes buried in the Jodrell Bank archives finally revealed 40 years later? Do you really expect us to believe that Jodrell Bank saved all the Apollo tapes but NASA lost 700+ boxes of Apollo tapes? That's just crazy talk.

Just once again proves how little you know about the real world observatories keep archives on everything they do. Theres observatories with complete records all the way back to the 1800s, But of course you wouldn't know this because you make accusations without even checking if there factual.We have already figured out you do no research whatsoever and provide no proof though oddly you expect others to.

And Sir Bernard Lovell. Let's talk about him.
What does Sir Bernard Lovell have to say about his trips to the Soviet Union in the 1960's?

Seemed to enjoy them actually he and his wife seemed to enjoy it when they were invited.

"It was a sinister time and a lot of my compatriots who went to the Soviet Union in those days in the early 1960s never did return, or when they did return they never survived.
"I was one of the fortunate ones." www.telegraph.co.uk...

Actually this is an internet myth he never claimed radiation or Russians tried to kill him in fact after the 1963 visit he returns again.

Another quote from Jodrell Banks boss during the Apollo era, Sir Bernard Lovell,

"They tried to remove from my memory the fact that they had taken me to their own defence nucleus on the Black Sea coast, because they did not want news of what they had brought back to this country."

He was building his telescope at the time and the Russians offered to fund a larger one so itwas sort of a job offer, he later remarks they may have wanted him to work for them like the british did in there missile early warning system. Jodrell Bank was actually designed to detect soviet missile launches. Making it ideal for tracking space objects like ICBMs.His diary has attracted a lot of interest from the media, who never allow the absence of hard facts to get in the way of a good story. But as we know you do love your fiction dont you?

Sir Bernard sounds like a conspiracy nut-job doesn't he? Could Sir Bernard is a Manchurian Candidate or a whistle-blower?

Wow if that aint the pot calling the kettle black could you even type that with a straight face? Oh and you do realize the manchurian candidate was a fictional movie right? Oh never mind i forgot you dont spend much time in reality with some of your crazy ideas never mind will move on.

He added: "It remains an interesting memory and I have written a detailed memorandum on the whole of that visit and my previous and subsequent visits to the Soviet Union which is now in the John Rylands Archive and I have asked that it not to be published while I am still living."

Yes the observatory did indeed release it after his death of his trip to leningrad Ive read it its interesting maybe you should do some research and actually see what he wrote instead of get your information of wiki. The observatory made it available in fact you can see the scans of his actual notes or read the typed version i suggest that his handwriting was really bad.

So was there any point to this? I guess other than showing you to be wrong maybe you ought to try checking out facts instead of facts assuming a website got it right. And if you are unable to find it with your vast research skills let me know and ill tell you where to find his diary.

Jodrell Bank was also used by the Russians to track their own space missions. It makes perfect science that Lovell would visit Russia to discuss this. If Lovell was in league with the Russians it would be in their interest to get him to deny Apollo, not prove it.

If SJ would care to present his proofs that the ham operators (who monitored all the missions, one of the links I posted I believe says that) did not monitor them, and that Baysinger did not monitor Apollo 11, and that Apollo 17 was not recorded it would be marvellous.

Argument from incredulity is not proof. Disbelief is not proof.

Still no discussion I notice as to how it is possible that the ascent footage from Apollo 15 shows features in Hadley Rille not photographed in the same level of detail until the LRO. Odd that.

choos


And I also explained to you that using wires to control the absorbtion of the jump is preposterous..

You're telling me it's impossible to have a person (or object) who is in mid-air, say 6 feet above ground, fall to the ground slower than 1g speed, even if wires are attached to the person?

If I throw a tennis ball up in the air, it will fall to the ground at 1g speed, right?

Let's say I attach wires to the temmis ball, and I hold onto the other end of the wires at a platform 20 feet above the ground. My friend throws the tennis ball up in the air.

Do you think it's possible for me to control the speed the tennis ball falls to the ground? Do you think I can make it fall slower than 1g speed? Can I set the ball gently down to the ground?

By your argument, I couldn't slow the ball down with wires.

Same as an astronaut can't be settled down to the ground slower than 1g with wires.

I suggest you get a ball, and attach a 4 ft.length of string to the ball. See if you can drop the ball down to the ground slower than 1g speed.

I bet you can.

Same as the astronaut can be set to ground slower than 1g, without ever having to absorb the fall by bending his knees.

You get it now?

turbonium1

That's a good point.

Indeed, neither one moves in frame 29.

And, did you notice that Young not move in frame 31 while the Mythbusters guy does?

The same thing happens in other frames, too - one guy moves, the other guy doesn't move at all, or both guys don't move.

Why is that?

Yea because in frame 30 the myth busters doesn't move and in frame 31 he absorbs the jump. In frame 31 john young doesn't move and in frame 32 he absorbs the jump..

Ie john young is lagging behind the myth busters

However the reason I believe john young floats for one frame is due to your recording program dropping frames due to the speed at which the jumps occur.

I have john youngs jump at 1x speed and there are definitely frames that are missing in your video.

Hmm..

Is it due to flawed recording techniques, and/or using flawed videos?

Well, you can try it for yourself, like I've already asked you to do, many times before.

I've told you the specific videos that were used, and I told you exactly how I made frames from them.

I must have missed it because I have only seen you say to post it on YouTube..

I don't even know how to run videos side by side so if you could tell me how that would be great.

You were told how it was done, step-by-step. You were repeatedly told to try doing it yourself, but you've refused to even try it.

As above, as far as I know you have not told me how.. You haven't told me which myth busters video you are using you haven't told me which recording program you haven't told me how you are running the videos side by side..

What incredible gall you have to now go off spewing a bunch of crap about how it must be my fault if Young doesn't move in one of the frames!!

To be such a delusional fool, it just boggles the mind.

I'm getting you to think your recording program is obviously not recording all the frames.. Go check the john young clip at 1x speed and show me where in your video frame 273- 277 are..

If you think the frame is my fault, then you need to prove it. If you can't prove it, shove it up your arse.

Shove it up my ass?? My my aren't we angry??

As above I just did prove it that your recording is missing frames.. At 1x speed you can see john young landing even if I speed it up to 73.7 fps the frames are still there..

The problem is your recording program not being able to record all the frames!!

Here's a hint for you on why some of the frames have no movement -

A jump with wires doesn't reflect a true gravity, while a jump without any wires does reflect true gravity.

Do you know what that means, or do you need me to explain it to you?

It's actually because your recording program is not recording all the frames available.. It isn't able to as it's occurring too fast.

Sometimes recording similar frames sometimes dropping frames..

But by all means tell us how nasa are able to consciously manipulate something that occurs in less than 0.1 seconds nearly perfectly but are not able to get a jump that occurs in about 1.5 seconds accurately..
Oh the contradictions..

reply to post by turbonium1


This was in reference to the absorption of the jump which will naturally occur after they land..

You said they manipulated john youngs absorption of his jump so that it occurs deliberately after the myth busters by use of wires or something

That was your explanation..

The absorbtion of the jump is one frame difference proving they definitely occurred at different times..

You believe john young lands at or before the myth buster lands yet was able to delay his absorption of his jump til after the myth busters..

So nasa are able to manipulate an event down to less than 0.1seconds, keep note of this.

You also previously stated that you deny john youngs jump at 1x speed is at lunar gravity of 1.62m/s^2. Due to nasa being so incompetent that when they try to show off lunar gravity they get it wrong!!

So the jump occurs in about 1.5 total at 1x speed.. And they screwed that up.. But NASA have the accuracy to within less than 0.1 seconds also!!

You are contradicting yourself!!

turbonium1

NASA slowed down a wire-assisted jump to 66.66% speed, just as Jarrah White did with the Mythbusters jump.

Why do you think it's anything more that that?

Which means everything was recorded at a general gravity of around 4m/s^2

Including the dust..

Don't tell me how a jump is missing frames. Show me the missing frames.

Frame 273-277 in the john young jump at 1x speed

If you used the second jump then frame 364-372

turbonium1

choos


And I also explained to you that using wires to control the absorbtion of the jump is preposterous..

You're telling me it's impossible to have a person (or object) who is in mid-air, say 6 feet above ground, fall to the ground slower than 1g speed, even if wires are attached to the person?

If I throw a tennis ball up in the air, it will fall to the ground at 1g speed, right?

Let's say I attach wires to the temmis ball, and I hold onto the other end of the wires at a platform 20 feet above the ground. My friend throws the tennis ball up in the air.

Do you think it's possible for me to control the speed the tennis ball falls to the ground? Do you think I can make it fall slower than 1g speed? Can I set the ball gently down to the ground?

By your argument, I couldn't slow the ball down with wires.

Same as an astronaut can't be settled down to the ground slower than 1g with wires.

I suggest you get a ball, and attach a 4 ft.length of string to the ball. See if you can drop the ball down to the ground slower than 1g speed.

I bet you can.

Same as the astronaut can be set to ground slower than 1g, without ever having to absorb the fall by bending his knees.

You get it now?

Where are the wires?

Where are they attached?

Where is the harness to which they are attached?

Where are the two teams of people operating the wires?

How come the two sets of wires don't get entangled when Young and Duke swap places?

How come the dust doesn't behave like it's in an atmosphere on Earth?



I shook Charlie Duke's hand. I know who I believe.

reply to post by onebigmonkey

I shook Charlie Duke's hand. I know who I believe.

It's a wonder that you shook Duke's hand it seems he's always got a felt tip pen signing everything he can get his hands on...

Did you get your autograph? How much did you pay for it? $115.00 US?
www.charlieduke.net...

Did you get your signed hard cover book for $75?
www.charlieduke.net...

Did you get your 'exact replica' Apollo 16 Signed Patch?
This Beta cloth patch is an exact replica of the patch worn on our crew spacesuits. $400.00
www.charlieduke.net...

I occasionally sell flown and unflown artifacts from my days in the astronaut program. When I decide to place these items in the public domain, you can now find some of them at Farthest Reaches™ These items range from flags and hardware that have flown in space, to personal items carried on Casper and Orion, to personal citations. This is your chance to own an extremely rare artifact from the "golden age of spaceflight" that originated from my personal collection. I invite you to visit Farthest Reaches™ and take a look at the "Astro Offerings" page as well as the "Apollo 16" page. All of the artifacts that come from my collection come with my personal certificate of authenticity.

How much did you pay to attend whatever function Charlie Duke was having? You are delusional if you think shaking somebody's hand is proving that somebody landed on the moon way back on 1972. It does not equate to logic, does it?

Well, congratulations for meeting one of the 'Dirty Dozen' in persona... don't let your high esteem for the man 'cloud' your judgement when looking at the evidence..

choos
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

And look at all the proof sayonara has for proving mobots were used to setup the lunar landscape here's a list:

1. Himself

Done.

Well, the "Ham Radio operator" evidence didn't work out like you guys thought it would, did it? Larry Baysinger is only relevant to Apollo 11. Sven is only relevant to Apollo 17. Sir Bernard Lovell went to Russia so he could be a Russian double-agent.

So I asked you all Defenders where is the "Ham Radio operator" for Apollo 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16?

Surely, you have at least ONE "Ham Radio operator" for each manned Apollo lunar mission. Or you don't? Please have some caution when you bring out the "Ham Radio operator" arguments. One Ham Radio operator, or two, does not prove all of Apollo.

I feel confident when asking the Apollo Defenders "Where are the Ham Radio operators with evidence for Apollo 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16?" because I know that Defenders are lacking for that evidence.

By my count you need 7 more Ham Radio operators to prove the remaining Apollo missions. Where are you Mythbusters NOW?

SayonaraJupiter

choos
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

And look at all the proof sayonara has for proving mobots were used to setup the lunar landscape here's a list:

1. Himself

Done.

Well, the "Ham Radio operator" evidence didn't work out like you guys thought it would, did it? Larry Baysinger is only relevant to Apollo 11. Sven is only relevant to Apollo 17. Sir Bernard Lovell went to Russia so he could be a Russian double-agent.

So I asked you all Defenders where is the "Ham Radio operator" for Apollo 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16?

Surely, you have at least ONE "Ham Radio operator" for each manned Apollo lunar mission. Or you don't? Please have some caution when you bring out the "Ham Radio operator" arguments. One Ham Radio operator, or two, does not prove all of Apollo.

I feel confident when asking the Apollo Defenders "Where are the Ham Radio operators with evidence for Apollo 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16?" because I know that Defenders are lacking for that evidence.

By my count you need 7 more Ham Radio operators to prove the remaining Apollo missions. Where are you Mythbusters NOW?

So thats the way you handle it when someone proves you wrong simply request more proof? So in other words you cant dispute any of the information presented can you once again you were proven wrong and all you do is say ok well what about this over here. Man your back must hurt carrying around that goal post like you do.

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

I shook Charlie Duke's hand. I know who I believe.

It's a wonder that you shook Duke's hand it seems he's always got a felt tip pen signing everything he can get his hands on...

Did you get your autograph? How much did you pay for it? $115.00 US?
www.charlieduke.net...

Did you get your signed hard cover book for $75?
www.charlieduke.net...

Did you get your 'exact replica' Apollo 16 Signed Patch?
This Beta cloth patch is an exact replica of the patch worn on our crew spacesuits. $400.00
www.charlieduke.net...

I occasionally sell flown and unflown artifacts from my days in the astronaut program. When I decide to place these items in the public domain, you can now find some of them at Farthest Reaches™ These items range from flags and hardware that have flown in space, to personal items carried on Casper and Orion, to personal citations. This is your chance to own an extremely rare artifact from the "golden age of spaceflight" that originated from my personal collection. I invite you to visit Farthest Reaches™ and take a look at the "Astro Offerings" page as well as the "Apollo 16" page. All of the artifacts that come from my collection come with my personal certificate of authenticity.

How much did you pay to attend whatever function Charlie Duke was having? You are delusional if you think shaking somebody's hand is proving that somebody landed on the moon way back on 1972. It does not equate to logic, does it?

Well, congratulations for meeting one of the 'Dirty Dozen' in persona... don't let your high esteem for the man 'cloud' your judgement when looking at the evidence..

Unbelievable how this astronaut tries to get money out of this fraud.

choos
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

And look at all the proof sayonara has for proving mobots were used to setup the lunar landscape here's a list:

1. Himself

Done.

Why don't you come to my Apollo Study conference? Seats are $150.00 each. You can even stand in line to shake my hand for $25.00! There will be a souvenir booth with keychains, t-shirts and coffee cups and books, wall posters, dvd's and more!

After my presentation there will be a short amount of time for questions from the audience. It will be no more than 30 minutes. If the questions go out of bounds then the question time will be immediately curtailed. *See 50-page attachment for "Out of bounds questions". When the audience question time is over that is the end of the program.

However, exclusive VIP after-dinner tickets will be available for $500.00 which will allow the ticket holder to sit in a large banquet hall with the VIP Guest after-dinner.* No Cameras or Recording devices allowed.

“No one else has ever seen what you are going to see tonight," he told the audience of about 1000 people, who had paid several hundred pounds to listen to his speech. "It has allowed me to see the landing approach as I saw it 42 years ago.”

Armstrong, who stopped signing autographs in 1996 after becoming fed up with being exploited, only saw the recreation himself in recent months and gave his approval just hours before its screening. Source www.telegraph.co.uk...

Pow! Right in the face, Neil Armstrong.

As part of his contract with organisers, no pictures or video were allowed to be taken during his speech in the city’s Darling Harbour. It is not known how much Armstrong, who resides in Lebanon, Ohio, about 30 miles from Cincinnati, was paid for his appearance, which included a question and answer session with the audience.

Truth's protective layers = "several hundred pounds"

SayonaraJupiter

choos
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

And look at all the proof sayonara has for proving mobots were used to setup the lunar landscape here's a list:

1. Himself

Done.

Why don't you come to my Apollo Study conference? Seats are $150.00 each. You can even stand in line to shake my hand for $25.00! There will be a souvenir booth with keychains, t-shirts and coffee cups and books, wall posters, dvd's and more!

After my presentation there will be a short amount of time for questions from the audience. It will be no more than 30 minutes. If the questions go out of bounds then the question time will be immediately curtailed. *See 50-page attachment for "Out of bounds questions". When the audience question time is over that is the end of the program.

However, exclusive VIP after-dinner tickets will be available for $500.00 which will allow the ticket holder to sit in a large banquet hall with the VIP Guest after-dinner.* No Cameras or Recording devices allowed.

“No one else has ever seen what you are going to see tonight," he told the audience of about 1000 people, who had paid several hundred pounds to listen to his speech. "It has allowed me to see the landing approach as I saw it 42 years ago.”

Armstrong, who stopped signing autographs in 1996 after becoming fed up with being exploited, only saw the recreation himself in recent months and gave his approval just hours before its screening. Source www.telegraph.co.uk...

Pow! Right in the face, Neil Armstrong.

As part of his contract with organisers, no pictures or video were allowed to be taken during his speech in the city’s Darling Harbour. It is not known how much Armstrong, who resides in Lebanon, Ohio, about 30 miles from Cincinnati, was paid for his appearance, which included a question and answer session with the audience.

Truth's protective layers = "several hundred pounds"

So let me get this straight a company creates a video pays an astronaut to come to the opening and people pay to see said movie set up by the promoter.Whos job it is to sell said video and this proves Apollo was faked. So i guess when hollywood producers create a video pay for people to come to the premier and than have people pay to watch the video proves apollo was faked. Who would have thought creating a movie was all tied back to apollo. Oh and congratulations at least we didnt tie it to Nixon yet so your making progress.But we did just have the academy awards so im sure we can figure out someway we can show its a conspiracy caused by Nixon. Do you even realize how badly you embarrass yourself. Sad part is we have to watch its like watching a train wreck you just can't turn away look forward to more entertainment what's next?

onebigmonkey

Where are the wires?

Where are they attached?

Where is the harness to which they are attached?

Where are the two teams of people operating the wires?

How come the two sets of wires don't get entangled when Young and Duke swap places?

Watch the Mythbusters jump, it will provide the answers to your first 4 questions.

The answer to the last question is also in the Mythbusters episode. Watch the guy skip along with wires/harness attached. It doesn't get tangled up either.

onebigmonkey
How come the dust doesn't behave like it's in an atmosphere on Earth?

The dust does behave like it does on Earth. We've gone over this point already, not that it's relevant to the specific issue at hand.

onebigmonkey
I shook Charlie Duke's hand. I know who I believe.

Unlike you, I don't automatically believe someone's every word just because I once shook hands with them.

However, it is a perfect example of Apollo-ite idol-worship. You look at the Apollo astronauts as if they were living Gods.

Shaking hands with one of your Gods has definitely left an indelible impression on you.