the fact remains that there is no scientific basis to any of the claims made by the Conspiracy mob. it would be easer to argue the case if there were.
you mention film being damaged by heat, which is quite true. but even if the sun is full, making the temp about 250 or so, a 1mm bit a alli foil will cast a shadow, the temp in the shadow will be closer to -200. the lack or air being the clue.
the shadow thing makes me krack, nobody with an ounce of photographic experience would even question them, why? because, given the right light, this happens on all photos. and effect of translating a 3d image into a 2d image.
doctoring pictures, you do realise this was 1968. all doctoring was done by a darkroom expert with a brush and paints. not something that would stand up to scrutiny with todays equipment. but not on picture has been identified as being tampered with. though ther are some that have been cropped, these are the ones that show no index marks.
your letter C, on the rock, does not actually appear until into the seventys. prints made from the original film, made in at the time, show no such mark.
i agree this can only be what i believe, unless i get to visit the landing sites. but the evidence give against the landing is so ill thought out and has so little to do with real science as to make it laughable.
The Van Allen belt, is a hard one. few, credible scientist doubt that the belts can be traversed, by humans with safety, but until someone went there we just didnt know. so if the contention is that they can not be traversed, how do we know? one thing we can say. a satellite in orbit in the Van Allen belt receives a rem dosage of about 2500 rem per year. that works out at just short of 7 rem per day. there seems no evidence that ill effects are caused when the dosage is below 10 rem. indeed 10 rem is used by many country as a maximum safe level of exposure.
Bookmarks