Another look at the moon landing.

[David Lamb]

I don't think any of the above requires breathing equipment.

No, but they require internal combustion engines, satellites, etc. to work. Just as our bodies as created by God don't have the ability to breathe under-water, or high up a really high mountain, neither to they have the ability to travel at the speed of a car, or to send long-distance messages immediately, without the aid of internet or phone.

 

[Kathleen30]

That is how they were trained to communicate. Calm, accurate, nothing superfluous. There is also the fact that the press conference was held weeks after they had returned. That was weeks of medical examinations and debriefing including 2 weeks isolated at Tripler Medical Center in Hawaii, just in case they brought back some bug from the moon.

No stars are visible during daylight. Michael Collins was likely preoccupied with monitoring his orbit or getting sleep when in the moon's shadow. He wasn't on a sightseeing trip.

The aluminium body of the command module was equivalent to 7mm of lead. There was absolutely no lead used in the Apollo missions.

Gamma radiation is not significant in the Van Allen belts. They are made up of charged particles, primarily electrons and protons. Neutrons are not charged particles (big hint in the name "neutron") and are not present in the Van Allen belts. The risk to the astronauts from radiation was relatively minor compared to the risk of sitting on the top of a controlled explosion, or the possibility of damage causing the loss of their oxygen.

The level of conspiracy that would be necessary to fake the moon landings if they never happened is simply too mind bogglingly stupid to take seriously for a moment. It would require agreements between enemy nations spanning decades despite ongoing conflicts. You really need to have a tenuous grip on reality to be able to believe it.

Prodromus what you claim about the condition of the astronauts just doesn't fly . I could agree with you upon the 1st two days upon the aircraft carrier where they were hemmed up in mobile quarantine for two days

But after that upon making land fall they were flown to Texas Houston for the next 22 days to enjoy recovery at the newly established lunar receiving site especially built for moon rocks and astronauts recovery, medicals recreation and quarantine it’s not as if it was a regimented full on boots camp every day . They would have been fully recovered and refreshed in those 22 days

I’m not so sure if they spent the 22 days in Hawaii at tripuler medical centre but maybe more research on that

Prodomus you mention no stars by daylight. That’s correct. But what of the night hours and of the dark side of the moon ? No time for fully appreciating the beauty of the universe in all its glory. Are you serious ? Not even a peek at the universe and stars out the window by Michael Collins : ) while wizzing around the dark side of the moon on its many orbits of up to 22 hours duration ? I’ll leave it at that. : )

As to the aluminium command module having no lead. The paper I read says it did but upon further reading further it does say no lead so you be right its probably referring to a substance as strong as 7 mm lead. But that in no way changes the dangers to the health of the astronauts. And that being basically that they had no protection when going through the Van Allen’s. Yes not only 3 astronauts but 18 astronauts all up, from the Apollo missions passed through it . And despite all the warnings of the medical journals. All those astronauts passed their medicals with no side effects upon return and most all lived long lives even after passing through and back though the Van Allen belt some 6 hours all up . Prodomus that be a miracle bigger than Ben Hurr or just good luck as some like to say . I say no luck required because they never went. I simply apply logic.

And finally you mention the level of conspiracy that would be required to pull off such a amonumental lie . It’s a good question. Prodomus I would say to that. How many propaganda lies pass off as historical fact 80 yrs later right up to this very day more so from the 2nd world war. Many . I do say in the place where.the lights never go out. And if you should ever find yourself there. Then if me say my hand be left when it is right or that 1 +1 equals 3 then you will believe accordingly. So it is very possible. And the moon landings could very well just be that . I have written enough for now. Yours Kathleen

 

[Kathleen30]

This of course if the shuttle was actually in space, I believe the shuttle was a jet plane made up to look like the shuttle.

I remember watching a video about this, I will try and find it.

Apple I not know so much about that . I’ll await your video

 

[Apple Sky]

No, but they require internal combustion engines, satellites, etc. to work.

But still for me to drive a car or go on the Internet doesn't require me to use breathing equipment.

 

[prodromos]

IMO if God had meant for us to fly, he would have given us wings and the ability to breath in space, this supposed walking on the moon is against God's natural creation.

And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

I know we jet off around the world but just look at the air disasters we have encountered & what is the first thing the victims do, blame God.

I have never once heard of anyone blaming God for an aircraft crash.

 

[Apple Sky]

Apple I not know so much about that . I’ll await your video

I will try and find it when I get time

 

[Apple Sky]

I have never once heard of anyone blaming God for an aircraft crash.

There has been many especially during the 9/11 incident.

 

[Strong in Him]

They can be risky, but what they do is give one a broader out look into reality & sometimes the truth, and they also allow person to join up the dots.

No.
They are the opposite of truth. Conspiracy means a plot and suggests trickery or deceit - Gunpowder plot etc. I have given you Bible verses where God condemns conspiracies.
And you, yourself, have said that a theory is just an idea - i.e theory of gravity.

Conspiracy theories play on fear, e.g "aliens are invading the world", "vaccines change your DNA", or superstition, "these letters add up to 666, you need to be scared of this person". They assign random things to a greater plot - e.g the design for the London 2012 Olympics (which was awful) was apparently some new age/illuminati inspired thing that secretly signalled a demon attack/end of the world. (That must have been true, it was on YouTube!) But nothing happened.
Another one is the initials which spell NASA are apparently similar to some Hebrew word - which is "suspicious", and must be something that "they" planned deliberately.
Conspiracy theories sometimes tell people what they want to hear - eg Elvis is alive, Princess Di was murdered and so on.

I would say that conspiracy theories are anti God.
The Bible says that God made everything, that he is the Alpha and Omega, is over all things and has all power and authority.
Conspiracy theories give that power to someone, or something else - fate, luck, karma or some unseen, malevolent force known as "they". "They want us to believe ...", "they are trying to make it look .......", "they want to control us and how we think."

The Bible says that ALL things were created though Jesus. Everything that we have - even man made things, because God gave us the plants for the cotton, or the chemicals to be able to make something, or gave people the gifts to discover and create.
Before his ascension Jesus said that he had ALL authority and Paul says that the name of Jesus is over all and one day ALL things will be put under his feet and everyone will bow to him.
The NT also says that perfect love drives out all fear, and that whoever is fearful does not love.

 

[Kathleen30]

So if Charles Duke didn't really go to the moon, as he says he did as part of his testimony as a Christian, he must have been lying, in your view.

Regarding danger to the astronauts from radiation from the belts, I came across this site, Apollo Rocketed Through the Van Allen Belts which includes the following paragraph:


"To monitor radiation exposure during the flights, Apollo crews carried dosimeters on board their spacecraft and on their persons. And these readings confirmed NASA had made a good choice. At the end of the program, the agency determined that its astronauts had avoided the large radiation doses many feared would ground flights to the Moon. Over the course of the lunar missions, astronauts were exposed to doses lower than the yearly 5 rem average experienced by workers with the Atomic Energy Commission who regularly deal with radioactive materials. And in no case did any astronaut experience any debilitating medical or biological effects. And beside, the Apollo astronauts were former test pilots. Flying to the Moon, radiation exposure included, was still a safer day at the office than putting an experimental aircraft through its paces in the skies above Edwards Air Force Base."

David again you are using what NASA claims. If they never went it’s like putting the cart before the horse . 18 astronauts went back and forth though an unpredictable Van Ellen’s belt . A 6 hour duration when added both ways And all passed their medicals with flying colours upon their return to earth with no side affects? You say good experienced pilots flying experimental aircraft was more dangerous. I sure flying such things be much dangerous. But no danger for the astronauts because they never went through Van Ellen’s belt

 

[David Lamb]

But still for me to drive a car or go on the Internet doesn't require me to use breathing equipment.

Why this hang-up with breathing equipment? Yu wrote in an earlier post: "IMO if God had meant for us to fly, he would have given us wings and the ability to breath in space, this supposed walking on the moon is against God's natural creation." We wouldn't need breathing apparatus to fly in the sky where birds do, but to do so without something like a balloon or an aeroplane, we would indeed need a body equipped with wings. Similarly, to send instant messages over long distances without the use of man-made equipment, we would need extra-loud voices, or the ability to transmit and receive thoughts. I thought you were arguing that, because we were not created with wings, we should not fly in planes. How is that different to saying that we weren't created with the ability to transmit our thoughts, or to travel at the speed of a car? Yet you seem to be saying that using a car, the phone or the internet is fine, but using a plane or a space rocket or a diving suit is wrong. What's the difference?

 

[prodromos]

David I can only go what the NASA footage shows me and that’s shows the Apollo crew clearly staging a fake scenario claiming to be out in deep space when they are still in earths orbit.

Is the film actually from NASA? Has that been confirmed? If it is from NASA, what was the purpose of the film? For training? For testing equipment? I have not watched it for a while and don't remember how much of it was shown in that nonsense film you posted about. Flat earthers are notorious for editing footage in order to hide the context, so they can claim it proves one thing, when the full context often demonstrates the opposite

You ask of the Christian one Charles Duke. My reply to your question would be. Did any astronaut really pass through the Van Allen’s belt before even setting foot on the moon. You must remember there Be no medical journal that speaks favourably of the affects of radiation in doing so and of no adequate protection to suffice . One poster wrote they were going fast enough to not really be affected. But even with the alleged shorter journey through Van Ellen’s belt your still dealing with 3 hours

The radiation the astronauts were exposed to in those 3 hours was less than what a patient getting an MRI is exposed to in a few minutes.

 

[Apple Sky]

Yet you seem to be saying that using a car, the phone or the internet is fine, but using a plane or a space rocket or a diving suit is wrong. What's the difference?

There is a massive difference, can't you see this ?

 

[David Lamb]

David again you are using what NASA claims. If they never went it’s like putting the cart before the horse . 18 astronauts went back and forth though an unpredictable Van Ellen’s belt . A 6 hour duration when added both ways And all passed their medicals with flying colours upon their return to earth with no side affects? You say good experienced pilots flying experimental aircraft was more dangerous. I sure flying such things be much dangerous. But no danger for the astronauts because they never went through Van Ellen’s belt

What I am saying is that the Van Allen belts did not prevent the astronauts from travelling to the moon. It is not just NASA that says the astronauts came safely back. The source I quoted was an o-line periodical called "Popular Science," not NASA.

 

[David Lamb]

There is a massive difference, can't you see this ?

What difference? You claimed that it was wrong to go in an aeroplane, because if God intended us to fly, He would have created us with wings. What is different about saying, "If God had intended us to travel at 70 miles per hour, He would have created us with bodies that are able to do that?" Both flying and travelling along roads at 70 mph require humans to use man-made equipment.

 

[prodromos]

There is a massive difference, can't you see this ?

A car is a device that permits man to travel much faster than humanly possible, while protecting him from being hit by insects or animals or even other vehicles. According to your argument, man should only be allowed to travel as fast as he can run.

 

[Apple Sky]

No.
They are the opposite of truth. Conspiracy means a plot and suggests trickery or deceit - Gunpowder plot etc. I have given you Bible verses where God condemns conspiracies.
And you, yourself, have said that a theory is just an idea - i.e theory of gravity.

Conspiracy theories play on fear, e.g "aliens are invading the world", "vaccines change your DNA", or superstition, "these letters add up to 666, you need to be scared of this person". They assign random things to a greater plot - e.g the design for the London 2012 Olympics (which was awful) was apparently some new age/illuminati inspired thing that secretly signalled a demon attack/end of the world. (That must have been true, it was on YouTube!) But nothing happened.
Another one is the initials which spell NASA are apparently similar to some Hebrew word - which is "suspicious", and must be something that "they" planned deliberately.
Conspiracy theories sometimes tell people what they want to hear - eg Elvis is alive, Princess Di was murdered and so on.

I would say that conspiracy theories are anti God.
The Bible says that God made everything, that he is the Alpha and Omega, is over all things and has all power and authority.
Conspiracy theories give that power to someone, or something else - fate, luck, karma or some unseen, malevolent force known as "they". "They want us to believe ...", "they are trying to make it look .......", "they want to control us and how we think."

The Bible says that ALL things were created though Jesus. Everything that we have - even man made things, because God gave us the plants for the cotton, or the chemicals to be able to make something, or gave people the gifts to discover and create.
Before his ascension Jesus said that he had ALL authority and Paul says that the name of Jesus is over all and one day ALL things will be put under his feet and everyone will bow to him.
The NT also says that perfect love drives out all fear, and that whoever is fearful does not love.

I agree some conspiracy theories are utterly bonkers & then there are some that have turned out to be true

Here is our list of 11 unbelievable conspiracy theories that are actually true.

 

[Apple Sky]

According to your argument, man should only be allowed to travel as fast as he can run.

Where did I say this ?

 

[David Lamb]

Where did I say this ?

You didn't, but you did say that if God had intended us to fly, He would have created us with wings, which is not different to saying, "If God had intended us to travel at 70mph, He would have created us able to do so." Both activities, driving a car or travelling by plane, require us to use man-made equipment.

 

[Kathleen30]

Is the film actually from NASA? Has that been confirmed? If it is from NASA, what was the purpose of the film? For training? For testing equipment? I have not watched it for a while and don't remember how much of it was shown in that nonsense film you posted about. Flat earthers are notorious for editing footage in order to hide the context, so they can claim it proves one thing, when the full context often demonstrates the opposite

The radiation the astronauts were exposed to in those 3 hours was less than what a patient getting an MRI is exposed to in a few minutes.

Adromus as far as I know with the film it’s never been denied as not being NASA”s footage. Many claims that the producer of the film fabricated the footage. But never proven . You say that it’s nonsense Ok many have seen the film and see and think much differently and would disagree with you. As to the radiation claims by NASA the medical books prescribe a much grimmer outlook. Suddenly NASA proclaims to the medical profession it’s all going to be alright. I don’t think so

 

[Kathleen30]

What I am saying is that the Van Allen belts did not prevent the astronauts from travelling to the moon. It is not just NASA that says the astronauts came safely back. The source I quoted was an o-line periodical called "Popular Science," not NASA.

David what science and the Bible say are often on two opposite sides of the street. Everything has its natural order. Men has his limitations of where he can go. The ancient ones have already proclaimed. To whom the Gods would destroy. And so it was that Icarus who flew to close to the sun