CSTXAg92 said:
During your research, be sure you can answer all of these questions:
1) How were the videos beamed to Earth from the moon? We've all driven past giant satellite dishes the broadcast companies use to send signals on Earth. How were they able to send signals from the moon to Earth without a similarly huge antennae? Also, how were those broadcasts powered? 239,000 miles is *a long way* for a signal to travel and as a result it would have to be a *very powerful* signal to make it that far.
2) Why is there no sign of even a slight blast crater below or around the lander?
3) The lunar lander pad surfaces are all shiny. Why was there no dust on those surfaces kicked up from the lander's thrusters?
4) Why do the crew of Apollo 11 (Armstrong, Aldrin, Collins) have a 'star' (it's actually shaped like the moon) on Hollywood's Walk of Fame? Mind you, the stars were awarded to members of the entertainment community.
There are countless other questions on this topic that should give any objective person pause before enthusiastically deriding those who are cautiously skeptical, especially when we know what we know about our government's track record with the truth.
When I see a person posting these questions, I know they haven't actually done any research as every bit of doubt and questions from the deniers has been answered and explained time and time again.
1) You don't need a large dish to broadcast a signal if you have a large receiver dish, which is what was used during Apollo and is how we communicate with our probes to other planets and even to Voyager 1 and 2 which are both well beyond the solar system. Here's the one in Australia that was used during the Apollo missions
2) The LMs had 5' long contact probes attached the bottom of 3 of the 4 landing pads. Once contact was made with surface, an indicator light would activate and the astronauts would cut the descent engine off and let the lander fall naturally to the surface. Also consider that in the vacuum of space, the rocket thrust expanded outwards without the presence of an atmosphere, so the thrust wasn't focused on a spot directly below....you can see this during rocket launches as the rocket gets higher into the thinner upper atmosphere, the exhaust gases expand quite a bit outward. You can see on the films that were taken of each descent the regolith dust being pushed outward, but again the thrust was not strong and focused enough to leave a blast crater. If you watch the TV footage of Armstrong as he steps onto the surface, among his first comments on the condition of the soil is that there isn't much of blast crater, which is something NASA scientists and engineers had wondered about. If NASA had faked the landing, why wouldn't they have added a blast crater?
3) The reason there's no regolith on the struts and pads is because there is no atmosphere to suspend the dust. Any dust kicked up follows a ballistic path out and down. As soon as the engine was cut off, the last regolith that was kicked out fell to the surface well before the pads touched down.
4) The first moon landing is the most watched live event in the history of television. That's why Hollywood gave the crew a TV star.
You have any more questions? Go for it. I've seen them all.
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose