Laura Murray Cicco sues NASA over vial of moon dust

[nickrulercreator]

You really like the moon stuff. IS this a doubleday?

Space exploration is my specialty. The Apollo programs are likely the greatest technological achievement in human history. I've never been given a credible reason to doubt them, as all claims made by hoaxers have been easily proven wrong. Faking the missions would have been impossible due to both the size of the conspiracy, and the impossibility of simulating lunar gravity, equal sunlight over wide terrains without multiple shadows, lack of heat waves (if filmed outside), movement of the lunar dust in the videos, etc. A moon landing hoax doesn't conform to occam's razor, at all. Lastly, there is loads of evidence we went there.

 

[titorite]

Your speciality? So you understand rocket science at least a little bit yeah? Why they are multi stage, how the shuttle worked, Low Orbit vehicles and the like yes?

AS for faking it being impossible? Thats like saying 19 arabs that couldn't fly prop planes were capable of navigated the most crowded skies on the plant with out air traffic control assistance and preform military maneuvers that commercial jets just are not physically capable of (like tight descending corkscrew spirals).

The question is HOW? how would one fake a lunar landing past the flight control people? Dont include them. Run them through a simulation thinking that its all real. When running a covert op you want to include as few people as possible.

 

[nickrulercreator]

Your speciality? So you understand rocket science at least a little bit yeah? Why they are multi stage, how the shuttle worked, Low Orbit vehicles and the like yes?

I do, yes. Rockets have to have multiple stages as a result of the Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation, basically.

AS for faking it being impossible? Thats like saying 19 arabs that couldn't fly prop planes were capable of navigated the most crowded skies on the plant with out air traffic control assistance and preform military maneuvers that commercial jets just are not physically capable of (like tight descending corkscrew spirals).

Apples and Oranges (also, they didn't have to make tight descending spirals, this was the final maneuver before impact of Flight 11, a VERY wide right-hand turnwhile Flight 175 was more straight-on with a slight bank at the end. They also knew how to fly prop planes, as well as larger planes. The pilot hijackers trained here in the US and studied each aircraft extensively, they weren't idiots. A Boeing 767's controls are also similar to a cessna. I wanted to be a pilot before moving on elsewhere, and the controls for both planes were similar, and simple. Boeings aren't capable of MANY tight descending corkscrew spirals, but none were made, so that doesn't have to be worried about.)

But again, apples and oranges. There are a LOT of details going into faking a moon landing that are just impossible to recreate on Earth, without the aid of modern CGI technology (AKA, 1969). To fake it you'd need to be able to do what I listed above: ensure that hundreds or thousands of people could keep a secret for 50 years, despite the fact that much smaller government secrets get out in record time (Watergate: dozen people; Clinton sex scandal: like 2 people, etc; the NSA eavesdropping scandal uncovered by Snowden: IDK how many people; Tuskegee syphilis experiment: Several hundred people; MKUltra: unknown; Teapot Dome Scandal: Couple dozen people); simulate 1/6 Earth gravity, not just for the astronauts, but EVERYTHING, including the dust (which is impossible to rig to wires); have perfectly equal lighting over a wide terrain with no evidence of multiple sources of light, like multiple shadows; have parallax in the background if you use a backdrop, which is impossible for a 2D backdrop; not show a single heatwave if the landings were filmed outside, as just a single heatwave would show that it was filmed in an atmospheric environment; hide a giant spacecraft that would be orbiting earth instead of heading to the moon, a spacecraft that would be the most visible man-made object in the night sky, easily seen by anyone from the ground, etc; fake transmissions from the moon captured by independent observers with no affiliation with NASA whatsoever; fake the moon rocks, all of them, perfectly, and ensure they have no evidence of terrestrial weathering by wind or water, ensure there is no evidence of them being manmade, ensure that some are older than the oldest rocks found on Earth, create fake glass spherules in the rocks despite the fact that they can only be created in volcanic activity, or meteorite impacts, and nearly all spherules vaporize almost instantly in volcanoes; ensure that the moon rocks could stand up to thousands upon thousands upon thousands of tests done on them by independent scientists around the world; ensure the soviets don't spoil the whole thing and claim the US isn't actually at the moon; fool independent photographers taking photos of the TLI burns that actually put the spacecraft on a lunar trajectory; and more. The list goes on, and on, and on. The amount of things required to do that would have been impossible at the time is huge. There are impossibilities in the filming technique at the time as well. Sorry, but faking it just couldn't have been done.

The question is HOW? how would one fake a lunar landing past the flight control people? Dont include them. Run them through a simulation thinking that its all real. When running a covert op you want to include as few people as possible.

Good luck. Simulations can only take you so far. No training sim got past the actual landing. You'd also have to have astronauts talking in real time with mission control, meaning there was no script, as mission control could have said anything to the astronauts and they'd have to respond accordingly. That increases the chance of error by a LOT. You could reduce this by having both mission control and the astronauts in on it, but then you'd have more people involved in the conspiracy of course. For Apollos 15-17, where the camera could be controlled from Houston, you'd need to be filming all 3 EVAS (3 for each mission lasting from 4.75 hours to 7.5 hours, so 9 total) in real time, or else the camera operator would know that something is up as he tried moving the camera, and the camera wouldn't move accordingly. The camera controlled could be in on it as well I guess, but that's another person involved. You also need to consider the people who write the simulations, if that's how you go at it. Someone needs to create the algorithm that processes the data. Then you need someone to feed the simulation into the computers as well.

You still need tons more people. You need the president, the people organizing the faking of the landing (and frankly anything filmed in space), the people creating the sets, people creating the props, people on the set as they filmed it including, but not limited to, set designers, director, camera men, lighting assistants, wire workers, caterers for the crew when they get hungry, etc etc etc. Think about how many people it takes to produce a 2 hour movie, then think even larger. You'd need people for each mission and for each EVA (that lasted up to 7 hours. The shortest was Apollo 11's only EVA at 2.5 hours).

THEN you have the people who fake the images. The people involved had to create the mini, or real-sized props, set up lighting, create the sets, take the photos, and develop the film perfectly. This isn't a simple 2-man job. This would take dozens of people to do at the rate the landings occurred.

 

[nickrulercreator]

I also forgot to mention that you need to keep every astronaut quiet as well. 24 went on missions to the moon, but more trained as well that didn’t go.

You also need to keep the people that trained them and walked them them through the faking of it quiet.

You also need the people who wrote the scripts for them, if they used scripts, to keep quiet.

That’s more people.