Did NASA Use a Vacuum Chamber to Fake Apollo ?

[Duane Daman]

While perusing some of nasa's web sites and Apollo hoax forums this evening , I came across a post that reminded me of a nasa web site I found recently, describing their huge vacuum chamber , which was built in 1969 ... I had found this nasa site awhile ago when I was trying to locate some information about nasa's 1/6 gravity simulation chambers to send to Dave Greer .

Here is the post comment I found which references a nasa web site similar to the one I found ...

............................................................

From: The Rev Dodgson (Eng Sci) 25/06/2007 8:18:43 PM

Subject: re: Up for a challenge?

Looks like the Moon-hoax nutters have got this one covered:

"Moon Hoax? - NASA built huge hard vacuum chamber just before Apollo 11 and decommissioned it 1975

I was just researching moon landing conspiracies when I noticed the dust in the NASA videos ‘from the moon.’

The dust does not behave like it is in an atmosphere. This one had me for a while, and I began to consider that perhaps all the anomalies with the footage can just be ruled out based on the fact that the only vacuum hard enough and large enough to allow for fine dust to act that way would be the moon.

Then I found this:

"The Space Power Facility (SPF) is a vacuum chamber built by NASA in 1969. It stands 122 feet high and 100 feet in diameter, enclosing a bullet-shaped space. When completed, it was the world's largest vacuum chamber. It was originally commissioned for nuclear-electric power studies under vacuum conditions, but was later decommissioned. Recently, it was recommissioned for use in testing spacecraft propulsion systems. Recent uses include testing the airbag landing systems for the Mars Pathfinder and the Mars Exploration Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, under simulated Mars atmospheric conditions."

Would you believe they actually built a 30 meter diameter circular dome room between 1964 and 1969!? When their whole budget was supposed to be being spent on getting to the moon, here they are building huge vacuum rooms for “nuclear electric power studies under vacuum conditions.” And as if that weren’t enough: they decommissioned it in 1975! Just three years after the final Apollo mission, Apollo 17.

Now lets consider most of the footage you see. For any given scene the subjects walk around in a space approximately 20 meters by 20 meters. The jumps aren’t very high, as though just earth gravity slowed down to half speed. Obvious artificial lighting is used and the shadows aren’t sharp like they should be in hard sunlight.

Everything adds up now, for me. I am quite convinced that much, if not all, of the footage from the Apollo missions was faked. For what purpose, I know not. But as they say: It is what it is."

http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/new...pic3034264.shtm

.......................

The Rev Dodgson got his post material from a site similar to this one , describing the vacuum chamber which was large enough to film the Apollo EVA'a in .

"Built in 1969 to test nuclear-powered spacecraft, the Space Power Facility is the world's largest vacuum chamber. The rotund structure measures 100 feet in diameter and towers at 122 feet high.

"The second largest vacuum chamber is only one-quarter the volume of this one," said Facility Manager Jerry Carek.

A steel liner and an 8-foot thick wall protect the aluminum chamber and keep air from seeping in during tests. To prevent damage, researchers must pull 160 tons of air out of the chamber at a slow, deliberate pace. The entire process, from closing the chamber walls to deploying the sails in the space environment, takes as many as 10 hours. Researchers will study each sail system for up to 30 days.

The sails eventually could lead to missions to study the sun and its heliosphere, the magnetized bubble of plasma around it. Such missions are impossible using today's space vehicles.

"This is a technology whose time has come," said Les Johnson, manager of Marshall's In-Space Propulsion Technology Office. "Studying the solar system is part of the Vision for Space Exploration, and robotic missions often come before human missions. Countries around the world are looking at solar sails, and NASA wants to make them happen."

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/testfaci...n_Sunbeams.html

So not only did nasa have the use of 1/6 gravity simulators , they also built a huge vacuum chamber in which they could have filmed the faked Apollo moon landings .

[Jack White]

Where?

[Dave Greer]

"Built in 1969 to test nuclear-powered spacecraft, the Space Power Facility is the world's largest vacuum chamber. The rotund structure measures 100 feet in diameter and towers at 122 feet high.

"The second largest vacuum chamber is only one-quarter the volume of this one," said Facility Manager Jerry Carek.

<snip>

So not only did nasa have the use of 1/6 gravity simulators , they also built a huge vacuum chamber in which they could have filmed the faked Apollo moon landings .

Do you really think they could fake the Apollo photography in a concrete and steel chamber 100 feet across? What about the dozens of panoramas? The TV footage of the astronauts much further away from the TV camera than the size of the chamber? Remember, if this is a cylindrical chamber, how did they get the "cheesy looking moonsets" in? And what about your previous claim that stagehands were running about all over the place in sneakers, raking up the soil for some bizarre reason? They must have had spacesuits as well to cope with the vacuum, since it took 10 hours to empty it.

Sorry Duane, the more you look at it, the dafter this idea sounds.

Can you give examples of some photos or video footage that was taken in this vacuum chamber?

[Evan Burton]

Oooh, bad move Duane. I happen to know "Rev Dodgson" who posts on that board. Your post gives the impression he believes the landings were faked.

Not so.

He was quoting a "Hoax believer", not saying that himself.

Look further down the thread - he gives his e-mail address. Contact him and ask him yourself if you think that Duane is misrepresenting his position. Whilst there, ask him about his qualifications to judge such matters.

Edited July 29, 2007 by Evan Burton

[Evan Burton]

Now, reference the vacuum chamber.

Perhaps you don't remember, but I told you about that in January of this year, some 6 months ago.

From that post:

"The vacuum chamber used for Apollo testing (the largest in the world, I think - but am not sure) was only 45 feet in diameter and about 50 feet tall - insufficient to "fake" the lunar surface scenes that were witnessed."

Remember that thread? That's the one where you were vigorously defending "Charles T. Hawkins" and his book:

He even went to the newspapers with the proof that Apollo was faked , but the people who worked in the offices of the various newspapers informed Hawkins that they couldn't print his Apollo hoax information even if they wanted to ... He was apparently told that all of the news that is printed in the papers and that goes out over the air on radio and TV , is government controlled ... So there was absolutley no way they would be allowed to print his Apollo hoax evidence ... He was also told that for National security reasons , they could never print his findings .... and that his only recourse was to write a book , which is one of the few things left that isn't government controlled .

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=88184

You know, the Charles T. Hawkins that you accused of being a NASA plant, a 'disinformation agent', when it was shown that he was totally and utterly wrong.

[Duane Daman]

Evan ... Thanks for posting the photo of one of nasa's enormous vacuum chambers ... but by showing us the SMALLER one , you have now confirmed the fact that the LARGER one could have easily been used to fake some of the Apollo EVA video footage in .

Your information about the SIZE of nasa's largest vacuum chamber doesn't match their claim on their own web site though ... Here it is again in case you forgot ...

"Built in 1969 to test nuclear-powered spacecraft, the Space Power Facility is the world's largest vacuum chamber. The rotund structure measures 100 feet in diameter and towers at 122 feet high."

So not only does this nasa claim make your claim false , it also shows that you are being deliberalty deceptive , and that the vacuum chamber was plenty large enough to use to even film some of the bogus lunar buggy footage in .

As for the rest of your post comments , may I remind you of the 25 RULES OF DISINFORMATION , of which you just used several .. I put stars by the one's of your choice this time .

Who the hell do you guys think you're fooling , beside yourselves ?

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil

2. Become incredulous and indignant

3. Create rumor mongers

4. Use a straw man

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling, ridicule

6. Hit and Run

7. Question motives

8. Invoke authority

9. Play Dumb

10. Associate opponent charges with old news

* 11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions

12. Enigmas have no solution

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic

14. Demand complete solutions

* 15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses

* 17. Change the subject

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad

19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs

20. False evidence

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor

* 22. Manufacture a new truth

* 23. Create bigger distractions

24. Silence critics

25. Vanish

Oh , and you may "happen to know Rev Dodgson who posts on that board " , and he may very well believe that Apollo was real ... but once again you deliberately failed to miss the point .... Please read what he said again , more carefully this time , so you don't misunderstand what he said .

" LOOKS LIKE THE MOON-HOAX NUTTERS HAVE GOT THIS ONE COVERED :

"Moon Hoax? - NASA built huge hard vacuum chamber just before Apollo 11 and decommissioned it 1975

I was just researching moon landing conspiracies when I noticed the dust in the NASA videos ‘from the moon.’

The dust does not behave like it is in an atmosphere. This one had me for a while, and I began to consider that perhaps all the anomalies with the footage can just be ruled out based on the fact that the only vacuum hard enough and large enough to allow for fine dust to act that way would be the moon.

Then I found this:

"The Space Power Facility (SPF) is a vacuum chamber built by NASA in 1969. It stands 122 feet high and 100 feet in diameter, enclosing a bullet-shaped space. When completed, it was the world's largest vacuum chamber. It was originally commissioned for nuclear-electric power studies under vacuum conditions, but was later decommissioned. Recently, it was recommissioned for use in testing spacecraft propulsion systems. Recent uses include testing the airbag landing systems for the Mars Pathfinder and the Mars Exploration Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, under simulated Mars atmospheric conditions."

Would you believe they actually built a 30 meter diameter circular dome room between 1964 and 1969!? When their whole budget was supposed to be being spent on getting to the moon, here they are building huge vacuum rooms for “nuclear electric power studies under vacuum conditions.” And as if that weren’t enough: they decommissioned it in 1975! Just three years after the final Apollo mission, Apollo 17.

Now lets consider most of the footage you see. For any given scene the subjects walk around in a space approximately 20 meters by 20 meters. The jumps aren’t very high, as though just earth gravity slowed down to half speed. Obvious artificial lighting is used and the shadows aren’t sharp like they should be in hard sunlight.

Everything adds up now, for me. I AM QUITE CONVINCED THAT MUCH , IF NOT ALL , OF THE FOOTAGE FROM THE APOLLO MISSIONS WAS FAKED . For what purpose, I know not. But as they say: It is what it is."

http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/new...pic3034264.shtm

For a "believer " in Apollo , it doesn't get any clearer than that ... Even he knows the Apollo photography was faked ... and how clever of nasa to build that huge vacuum chamber and have it completed right before Apollo 11 launched for the moonset !!

[Duane Daman]

"Built in 1969 to test nuclear-powered spacecraft, the Space Power Facility is the world's largest vacuum chamber. The rotund structure measures 100 feet in diameter and towers at 122 feet high.

"The second largest vacuum chamber is only one-quarter the volume of this one," said Facility Manager Jerry Carek.

<snip>

So not only did nasa have the use of 1/6 gravity simulators , they also built a huge vacuum chamber in which they could have filmed the faked Apollo moon landings .

Do you really think they could fake the Apollo photography in a concrete and steel chamber 100 feet across? What about the dozens of panoramas? The TV footage of the astronauts much further away from the TV camera than the size of the chamber? Remember, if this is a cylindrical chamber, how did they get the "cheesy looking moonsets" in? And what about your previous claim that stagehands were running about all over the place in sneakers, raking up the soil for some bizarre reason? They must have had spacesuits as well to cope with the vacuum, since it took 10 hours to empty it.

Sorry Duane, the more you look at it, the dafter this idea sounds.

Can you give examples of some photos or video footage that was taken in this vacuum chamber?

Sorry Dave , but your replies get more daft everyday .... The Apollo photography was faked in MANY DIFFERENT WAYS ... Not just using the huge vacuum chamber ... Funny you should mention the PAN shots , as they are some of the most obviously faked , using cheezy looking moonsets .

The still photos would have no need to use the vacuum chamber , only the video footage ... for obvious reasons .

[Craig Lamson]

The still photos would have no need to use the vacuum chamber , only the video footage ... for obvious reasons .

Well, not quite, there is that little matter of the stills matching the video step for step....

[Duane Daman]

The still photos would have no need to use the vacuum chamber , only the video footage ... for obvious reasons .

Well, not quite, there is that little matter of the stills matching the video step for step....

Which unfortunately for nasa , they don't .... Golf on the moonset anyone ? .. LOL

[Evan Burton]

For a "believer " in Apollo , it doesn't get any clearer than that ... Even he knows the Apollo photography was faked ... and how clever of nasa to build that huge vacuum chamber and have it completed right before Apollo 11 launched for the moonset !!

Now, you sure you want to stand by that statement?

His reply to an e-mail I sent him:

Subject: re: Come over to the dark side, Luke...

From: Doug XXXX (xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx)

Date: 29/7/2007 20:04

To: Evan Burton (xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx)

Such are the dangers of the Internet I suppose! I'd have though that referring to them as "nutters" might have given a clue what I thought of the conspiracists

BTW I didn't find it as easy to measure accelerations from the video as I had hoped. It's difficult to be sure that you are measuring the same bit of dirt in each frame.

But when I have time to have a decent go at it. I'll report back.

Doug

On 29/07/07, Evan Burton <xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

hehehe

Just to let you know, you are now being quoted as being a pro-Apollo Hoax believer....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10576

So, be very sure about what you say - he believes that NASA faked the landings, right?

Just state it clearly so we can refer back to it later.

For the record, I state he is NOT a 'Hoax believer', and is in fact convinced that all the evidence is conclusive about Apollo being real.

[Dave Greer]

The still photos would have no need to use the vacuum chamber , only the video footage ... for obvious reasons .

Well, not quite, there is that little matter of the stills matching the video step for step....

Which unfortunately for nasa , they don't .... Golf on the moonset anyone ? .. LOL

Have you any specific examples of how Hasselblad images don't match up to TV or film shot on the moon? The only one I've seen highlighted by HBs was the Apollo 16 jump salute. David Percy's claim that the flap was not visible in the video has been proven to be wrong. I've done several comparisons of the TV footage to Hasselblad images, and can't find discrepancies at all. If you have, please let me know.

Here's one I looked at a while ago showing how congruent the 16mm film from a landing is with Hasselblad images taken from the LM.

The mission is Apollo 14.

This GIF is a composite of the 16mm footage of the landing at Frau Mauro, and AS14-66-9230. The still from the video is after touchdown, and has been resized and rotated to macth up with the filed of view of the Hasselblad image taken from the same window. The craters all match up, as do the timy indentations in the surface. The only significant differences I can spot are the slight changes in the shadow cast by the LM structure - which is what you would expect given that the sun has risen higher in the sky.

Can you provide similar evidence to back up your claim that the Hasselblads are incongruent with the TV/film footage?

Edited July 30, 2007 by Dave Greer

[Craig Lamson]

The still photos would have no need to use the vacuum chamber , only the video footage ... for obvious reasons .

Well, not quite, there is that little matter of the stills matching the video step for step....

Which unfortunately for nasa , they don't .... Golf on the moonset anyone ? .. LOL

Which unfortunatly for Straydog, they do. Care to show us a NASA still frame that does not match the video....? Oh I see, you can't.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Craig Lamson

[Evan Burton]

Perhaps Duane would want to use footage provided by Bart Sibrel, which shows that the same location is used on two different days and are claimed to be two different locations?

That famous piece called 'The Rocks Cry Out"?

Except that it would be shown that Bart Sibrel has used totally incorrect descriptions, claiming locations and times where they are not, putting soundtracks on footage which is totally different from that originally recorded. In other words, totally wrong.

Perhaps Duane would care to use that one?

[Evan Burton]

Now, you are quite correct that the Space Power Facility has it's dimensions given as being 122 feet tall and 100 feet in diameter.

Is that sufficient to fake all the moving images filmed during the moonwalks, the lunar traverses with the rover?

I think not, but please do try to convince everyone it is otherwise. Perhaps some footage would be appropriate.

By the way, the facility didn't open until OCT 69, nearly 3 months after the Apollo 11 mission, but I'm already sure I know what your reply to that is.

[Duane Daman]

Perhaps Duane would want to use footage provided by Bart Sibrel, which shows that the same location is used on two different days and are claimed to be two different locations?

That famous piece called 'The Rocks Cry Out"?

Except that it would be shown that Bart Sibrel has used totally incorrect descriptions, claiming locations and times where they are not, putting soundtracks on footage which is totally different from that originally recorded. In other words, totally wrong.

Perhaps Duane would care to use that one?

Before you accuse Sibrel of deception , you should get your facts straight .... Bart Sibrel took that footage directly from the TV show 'Conspiracy Theroy : Did We land on the Moon ?' , which was taken directly from nasa's PUBLIC DOMAIN footage .

nasa's first excuse for that particular little error , was that they made a " mistake in editing " ... Their current excuse is that they were mistaken , and the footge really wasn't taken a day apart from a different location , but taken the same day from the same location !!!

I guess the astro-NOTS decided that the view was so good , that they trotted back on up the hill for a second take !

Edited July 30, 2007 by Duane Daman