I know this is late but they're on now......

__________________
Don
NAR 53455
"Carpe Diem"

And they're off now.

Well, if you missed it, it's on again in the morning......1am Eastern.

They busted every piece of evidence that conspiracy theorist use to say that the moon landings were faked.....but we knew they would....

__________________
Don
NAR 53455
"Carpe Diem"

But was it enough to satisfy Brad Guth?

Doug

.

__________________
YORF member #11

I was just reading an interview with 86 year old Wayne Green (no relation, though I met him 25 years ago). He's the guy who started 73 Magazine (for radio amatuers), and Byte, 80 Micro, and Kilobaud for computer geeks, and CD Review for early CD adopters. Apparently he was a guest on Art Bell's show a lot. He's firmly convinced the landings didn't occur. And his main evidence is the existance of dust on the lunar surface. He says dust can't be produced without the assistance of an atmosphere!

I mean, what does anyone think will happen when a small rock at 40000mph hits a big rock like the moon? It'll get pulvarized mostly to dust! What a maroon. Of course, someone on one of the computer fourms pointed out that the rover wheels would pick up said dust, which would promptly fall back to the surface, something that wouldn't happen for awhile here on Earth.

__________________
Roy
nar12605

Any idiot who believes that Venus is inhabited by intelligent beings will firmly reject the mythbusters show as part of the overall conspiracy to keep NASA's moon landing 'hoax' alive.

OK, I'm not saying we didn't go to the moon, but technically wouldn't what the Mythbusters did yesterday actually be evidence that it COULD be faked? I mean, it sure looked like everything they did was reproducing the "authentic" evidence, all from labs here on Earth, with nothing being launched. The logic of what they did just didn't sit right by me, though it would be like trying to disprove a negative, and practically impossible to do from a logic perspective.

Faking the shots from here, to me, doesn't prove that we DID go to the moon, but it does help refute the claims of impossible photos by introducing a plausible theory that supports how they could have been real, along with a terrestrial demonstration of how that would have worked.

Chan, Chan, Chan.

What they did was take the conspiracy theory advocates reasons for saying the landings were fake and showing how those reasons don't work. For instance, the very first experiment. CTAs said the photograph was a fake because the shadows show two different light sources so it had to be done in a studio. Mythbusters showed that the shadows could be replicated using a single light source.......BUSTED!

I missed the part about the lighting of the spacesuits while in the shadow of the LEM but I imagine it had to do something with the surface reflecting light. Duh, can't we see at night by the light of the moon which is just sunlight reflected into the earth's shadow?

Boot prints in the moon dust can't be made without moisture. Who would have even imagined that moon dust would have sharp edges instead of rounded?....BUSTED

Flag blowing in the wind? No resistance to movement so momentum from the astronaut kept it moving. Just a few frames further, when there is no astronaut to impart energy to make it move....absolutely motionless........BUSTED!

And the absolute biggest convincer.......bouncing laser beams from a reflector left behind by Apollo 15............

For some folks, I guess even a picture of equipment left behind taken by the Hubble won't be enough

__________________
Don
NAR 53455
"Carpe Diem"

Don, Don, Don...

I agree they busted the conspiracy arguments, but I'm suggesting that they also added fuel to the fire by creating very realistic portrayals of things like a photograph of a lander on the surface of the moon with non-parallel shadows, or a toy astronaut climbing down a stairway illuminated by reflected light, and they did it from here, not the moon. They even created fake moondust for fake footprints. If I were a conspircay whacko, and I'm not, about 2 seconds after I got over the fact that they shot most of my theories down, I'd bounce right back up and say "see what I've been saying all along? YOU guys just faked it, so that just proves NASA could have faked it!"

I don't have cable, so I didn't see this show.

I too am constantly amazed by otherwise intelligent people who claim the Apollo program was faked. Here are my arguments that it was real:

1) Even today we can bounce laser beams off the corner cube reflectors left at the landing sites. How else did these things get to the moon?

2) The piece of Surveyor-3 brought back from the moon by the Apollo-12 crew, that is now on display in the NASM. Did little green men return it to earth?

3) The Apollo 8 photograph of "Earthrise", probably the best picture ever taken during our entire history in space. And it says more than words ever can why we need to explore space, AND why we need to preserve our home planet.

4) The Radio and TV signals that were sent back during the lunar missions. Has any one NOT seen the movie "The Dish". If you haven't buy it or rent it. It's an interesting fragment of Apollo history. But how else did these TV signals of Armstrong setting foot on the moon come to this giant dish in the Australian outback FROM THE MOON.

5) One of my favorite questions is "Why can't we see any of the Apollo "stuff" on the moon through telescopes. The Apollo astronauts were able to see and photograph the landing sites from their orbit around the moon. To date we don't have anything with enough resolution that can observe the lunar surface. But with the new orbiter, and two more with even higher resolution, we may finally get decent pictures. And a recent photo may be our first glimse of the Apollo 15 landing site:

http://media.airspacemag.com/images...a-Ap15-main.jpg (the bright dot just to the right of center, 3/4 of the way down)

And if you can't trust youtube, what can you trust:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbTRGj5aNCM

Better images should be available form higher resolution probes in the next year.

6) A rather rare tidbit that I had the chance to see many years ago: perhaps the only existing LIVE footage of the actual Apollo 13 explosion. I went to Northwestern in Evanston IL during the early 70s. In the 60s, they built an observatory on the lakefill, just north of Chicago. WTF would someone build an observatore just outside Chicago, with all its light and air pollution? Simple: it wasn't to observe, it was to develop technology for use elsewhere. A mile down the road from LARC was TECH Institute, a world class science and engineering facility. They could develop by day and test by night, EVERY night. If instead you had to take the equipment to the observatory in the Andes mountains, the turnaround time would be weeks to months.

What they happened to be working on at the time was a device called the Image Orthicon tube. It was an electronic light amplification device, and is the forerunner of the CCD imager in every digital camera today, from your cell phone to Hubble. The goal was to be able to observe astronomical objects that change with time, like binary and variable stars. Things that you can't do with a 12 hour photographic exposure. The scope was controlled by a PDP-8/S! At any rate, just by luck, they had the scope pointed at Apollo 13 with video tape rolling at the time of the accident.

Although it's been meny years, I've seen the tape. There is this white dot that doesn't track correctly, because it's moving against the star background. Someone is using manual controls on the scope to track the motion against the star background. Then all of a sudden, the dot gets brighter, brighter, bier, brighter, ... At some point you can resolve multiple images. The images separate, and then, maybe a minute after the incident started, it's back to the single dot. My best guess is that we weren't seeing debris, but gas clouds that dispersed.

I've yet to hear an alternate explanation for what we saw, through an independent telescope, pointed out into space where Apollo 13 was supposed to have been, at the time of the explosion.


So tell those doubters to get out their tin foil hats, and to watch out that they don't fall off the edge of the earth.