I'm tempted to just plaster some links offering standard rebuttal to the whole lot of them!
Actually, more than tempted, here they are:-
http://www.clavius.org/
http://www3.telus.net/summa/moonshot/main.htm
http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm
http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked
http://science.howstuffworks.com/moon-landing-hoax.htm/printable
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/moonhoax2.html
http://as204.blogspot.com/
http://www.ka9q.net/crackpots/apollohoax.html
http://www.iangoddard.com/moon01.htm
http://meteorites.wustl.edu/lunar/howdoweknow.htm
http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/space/apollo.html
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/conspiracytheorydidwegotothemoon.htm
Link 1:
Some quotes from the genius Bill Kaysing:-
"But there's a little problem, you know, the temperature on the moon is 250°F during the lunar day, and a friend of mine put some film in an oven and ran it up to 250 and the film just curled up. If you notice that the Hasselblad camera is worn outside of the astronaut's suit and it is not curled in any way. So that camera would have heated up to the temperature to bake cookies in a very short time, because the Sun on the moon is absolutely relentless, there's no atmosphere to mitigate the heat of the Sun."
Mr Kaysing seems to think the maximum possible Lunar surface temperature compares to an oven! There is no air on the Moon, so no convection. The actual surface temperatures on the Moon were not even close to maximum. The smart guys at NASA decided that landing early Lunar morning was a great idea!
He gives no indications or calculations as to how he decides the camera would bake like a cookie. There is only radiated heat from the Sun, and conductive heat for anything heated by it. Since the camera had very few parts in contact with the film, had extra shielding on it, and spent equal amounts of time in the shade, his contention is complete bunkum.
"No stars on any photographs"
Stars are too faint to be captured without very long exposures. There is also the fact that light pollution from the Lunar day would limit what was possible.
Demonstrated perfectly by this camera progression:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmPFv7S7My4
Debunked by numerous other examples:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTP2VoNr2r4
Photographing stars:-
http://howto.wired.com/wiki/Photograph_the_Stars
"The Van Allen belt would probably have cooked any astronauts who ventured into that area."
Charged particles don't cook things. The Apollo missions took 30 degree trajectories around the edges of the belts. Demonstrated in this video:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuH4rxda3Z4
Explained in great detail on this site:-
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/apollo11-TLI.htm
And this picture:-
Mr Kaysing doesn't do research, he just makes bare assertions and backs it up with anonymous witness accounts.
"The Russians discovered that the radiation on the moon would require astronauts to be clothed in four feet of lead to avoid being killed."
No they didn't. Kaysing offers just his opinion on this, as though it closes the case! The Russians had their own Lunar landing program, they knew the Lunar surface was manageable with the right shielding and spacesuits.
"The Russians never intended to land men on the moon."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_(rocket)
"Apollo 13 was totally faked. It never left the earth."
Weather patterns match with photography and video footage taken during Lunar coast:-
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=theories&thread=3132&page=2#90134
The Apollo 13 launch, that "never left Earth"!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta6q6-52a3c
"Shadows diverged. In other words, if you have a point source of light, like the Sun, and you can see this anytime outdoors, all shadows will parallel - telephone poles, trees, you name it - all the shadows will be parallel. "
Multiple light sources create multiple shadows.
Debunked in 30 seconds:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATrFuCnW6T8
"Did the Challenger blow up? Did NASA know it would blow up?
Yeah, and you know why it blew up? Because Christa McAuliffe, the only civilian and only woman aboard, refused to go along with the lie that you couldn't see stars in space. So they blew her up, along with six other people, to keep that lie under wraps. I claim that Christa McAuliffe was murdered."
Yeah, and you know why it blew up? Because Christa McAuliffe, the only civilian and only woman aboard, refused to go along with the lie that you couldn't see stars in space. So they blew her up, along with six other people, to keep that lie under wraps. I claim that Christa McAuliffe was murdered."
Bunkum. So stupid it is hardly worth debunking. Even now ISS astronauts talk about the stars. The idea that NASA blew up a shuttle because of one person who was going to reveal this stunningly obvious non secret, is ludicrous.
"Oh, yeah. One of my friends went to the Smithsonian and he measured the exit door of the lunar lander and found out that astronauts wearing their life-support systems could not have gone out that door, they were too big. "
Now a bit of fun with Mr Kaysing and getting his story straight:-
http://www3.telus.net/summa/moonshot/random.htm
That's His Story Part 2
According to Bill Kaysing, the Apollo astronauts never left the earth.
"The Apollo 11 vehicle, or Saturn 5, was sent out of people's sight, and then it was jettisoned into the South Atlantic, where all of the six [sic] that were launched now reside. There were no astronauts, of course, on board." (Nardwuar interview)
"The Apollo 11 vehicle, or Saturn 5, was sent out of people's sight, and then it was jettisoned into the South Atlantic, where all of the six [sic] that were launched now reside. There were no astronauts, of course, on board." (Nardwuar interview)
According to Bill Kaysing, the Apollo astronauts did leave the earth.
For the Conspiracy Theory show, he says he believes the astronauts lifted into orbit, waited several days, then splashed down in the ocean "as shown on film."
For the Conspiracy Theory show, he says he believes the astronauts lifted into orbit, waited several days, then splashed down in the ocean "as shown on film."
According to Bill Kaysing, the Apollo astronauts might have gone to the moon.
"[A] trio of men supposedly made the quarter million mile journey between earth and its satellite. Now whether this journey was made or not, a great many people witness the failure of their leaders...." (We Never Went to the Moon, 2002, p. 70)
"[A] trio of men supposedly made the quarter million mile journey between earth and its satellite. Now whether this journey was made or not, a great many people witness the failure of their leaders...." (We Never Went to the Moon, 2002, p. 70)
Link 2:
First video shows the mockumentary about Kubrick directing the landings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Side_of_the_Moon_(mockumentary)
That documentary has been suckering in gullible HBs since it was first released. I question anybody's power of discernment when that appears in prime position on their website!
Loads of WHOTM and AFTHOTWTTM. Nothing not covered in those two films, to be addressed in the direct film analysis.
Link 3:
Link doesn't work.
Link 4:
Interview with Bart Sibrel. The liar.
http://www.thekeyboard.org.uk/Bart%20Sibrel.htm
This video demonstrates that Bart Sibrel is very much wrong in his idiotic contentions about the "secret Apollo 11 film"!!:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T9ZM50n0z4
This video demonstrates that weather patterns match with on board photography and transmitted video, on the Apollo 11 trans lunar coast:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OnZwqc-96Y
Simple but effective video, showing the Earth rotating during a 10 minute video sequence shot during Apollo 11 Lunar coast:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMe4kBklHhA
Link 5:
Link doesn't work, why am I not surprised at the presence of long defunct links present in your numerously repeated wall of spam from years gone by!
Link 6:
Aulis - the David Percy team, plus Jack "what is photogrammetry?" White!
How poignant, as he presents one inept contention after another. If I get the time and inclination, I may do a complete point by point rebuttal.
Here is one already done:-
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5911
Link 7 and 8:
The same blog in both links. Nothing new, all covered in the list of links I presented above.
Link 9:
Cosmic apollo. Totally debunked here:-
http://www.clavius.org/bibdave32.html
I look at that sight and am appalled at the ignorance shown by the website owner. He actually contradicts himself by claiming we never landed on the Moon, and covering up alien bases we discovered when we landed on the Moon. Bunkum.
Link 10:
Another duff link. Clearly your spam and paste needs a review!
Link 11:
Yeah, needs a review, yet another duff link.
Link 12:
They discussed this at BAUT and ripped it to shreds:-
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/94568-McGowan-s-quot-Wagging-the-Moondoggie-quot
