My Debate with a Moon-Landing Skeptic – WHO filmed the first Men on the Moon? – The Answer

(000228.79-:E-000157.73:N-:R-SU:C-30:V)   

Let me briefly tackle the moon landing statements you made – at the end of each sentence I’ll put a "-" and a comment. Here goes:-

Moon landing stuff:

the first press conference with the astronauts after their moon-landing. They look like they just attended their mother’s funeral; they do not look at all like they just did this monumentally exciting thing, going to the moon. – I’ve seen this myself and I was very amazed especially by Armstrong, the first man on the moon and how miserable he looked. I’ve seen this and yes, I agree with you on this. I can make many comments on this, and I totally agree, it was bad. But I would not say this is proof that they lied. I think this is a minor issue we can return to later.

criss-crossing direction of shadows in the pictures – Could you send me anything on this again – even short videos on it. I do recall this – and I just need to refresh myself on this.

Where are the stars? – I also came across this – ditto send me something short on this and I’ll get back to you on this. I need to refresh myself on this.

Who was filming the first steps on the moon? – I also wondered about that. I actually found the answer recently while browsing old Apollo video footage. The answer is simple! Yet, I’ve never heard anyone mention it: The engineers built a camera into the landing gear of the Apollo moon lander and it was controlled from inside the cabin. So they could then press a button or something and the camera would unfold on the leg and then it could begin filming when they walked down! They did not need a cameraman! It was just some simple engineering actually!!! 🙂 If you want more on the answer, ask and I’ll find it for you. Can you accept that answer?

phone call from Nixon to the astronauts on the moon on an old-fashioned telephone – Please explain why this is a problem? I think I can guess why you think this is a problem, and I’m sure I know the answer – but please explain it.

decades later a child asks one of them (Aldrin or Armstrong?) why we haven’t returned to the moon, and the astronaut answers because we haven’t been there – Please get me the video footage of this. I think I looked into this. Just find something and I’ll look.

the amount of fuel to get to the moon and back would have been far more than they could have transported. – I’m surprised by this – who says this is impossible? Please provide a video or something as evidence – then I’ll look at it. But I will say, space is a very near vacuum – for all practical purposes it is a vacuum – so once an object has velocity – only gravity can slow it down or speed it up. Otherwise, it can fly for billions of years. The engines only have to get you to a certain speed and then they shut down and you just sail on. THE KEY is that you must reach ESCAPE VELOCITY. That is 25,000 MPH. When you reach the planet’s escape velocity then the planet’s gravity can’t stop you. So if you fly at 24,500 MPH for example, you’ll reach a certain distance from the earth and then you’ll fall bad. But if you exceed it, then you’re on your way.

Plus, how did they take off from the moon? – Why is this a problem? Please explain and provide proof. The short answer is the Moon is much smaller and lighter than the earth. Its gravity is very weak. So your rocket engine only has to have a fraction of the power of a rocket on earth. Also, it has no atmosphere so there is no friction. So to take off from the moon is a very easy take off.

they "lost" that technology, and it would be too hard to get it back, according to astronaut being interviewed decades later – Please provide proof of this.

they "lost" the tapes, or accidentally taped over them, supposedly. Right. – I have heard rumours of this – but again – please provide proof and how this is relevant to your case.

The landing module looks like it could have been put together by a high school science class, including with tape and tinfoil – I do enjoy this one and I’ve noticed many people saying this. But the reality is that because it is functioning in a vacuum it does not need to be aerodynamic. So yes, you can have, literally, tinfoil, hanging off it AND it can travel at thousands or tens of thousands of MPH without the tinfoil being ripped off. If there is any PROOF that the Apollo lander actually functioned in SPACE in a vacuum, then that weird design is the PROOF of that. Also, keep in mind that in the design of all the things, that WEIGHT IS A CRITICAL ISSUE. WEIGHT = More fuel = MORE COST – in a BIG WAY. So they had to rip off and cut down to the BONE every ounce of weight they could – ESPECIALLY for the LANDER because the lander needs to lift off. I’m not joking if I say EVERY GRAM OR OUNCE OF WEIGHT MATTERED. They needed to make that thing a skeleton – because even adding 1 Kg would add serious additional complications and problems. In truth, I don’t see how the "weird design" in any way disproves the moon story. In reality, it is brilliant engineering, cut to the BONE for travelling in a vacuum. So if there is an issue, then just elaborate it.

various pictures of the earth from space have different sizes of the same continents. They admit that those are composites made in their labs. Why do that, if they were really out there – Now this is a very interesting question. Very. I’ve never heard this. Please provide more proof of what you are saying. I had all kinds of weird photos. I have some of the strangest photos you’ve ever seen of the earth taken from space. And, I BOUGHT most of my photos from NASA – directly from NASA in the 1990s! I have really nice photos and weird ones – proper NASA photos! . Returning to your question. I can guess at some answers. Most satellites (especially the early ones) were at orbits so low that I doubt they could see the whole earth. Most satellites are very low. You have to get much higher. We could find out the distances at which you have to be to see most of the earth. I’m sure we can easily find a table of calculations.