Matthew Lewis

So now you know what I will and won't believe? Wow! I didn't know you were psychic too! Of course you know as you have been told already that Baron died after delivering his report. Wouldn't you think the timing might have been better? Or maybe, gasp!, his death really was just an accident. There weren't dozens of astronauts that hung a lemon, it was one. You have been told that before too. The lemon was also hung on the simulator because it wasn't being kept up to date with the changes in the real thing. I'm sure that's been mentioned before too. All supplied with references as well. Obviously the government doesn't control all the media, or you wouldn't be able to post. And what about the media in other countries? And once more, also interesting to note that NASA is not the only agency that has sent probes and living animals in and beyond the Van Allen belts. Strange how no other country or company that works in space thinks the radiation environment is too harsh for Apollo to have happened as advertised.

Since the scientific community of the world accepts that Apollo landed on the Moon, the extraordinary claim is that they didn't. If it was faked then why didn't the Russian call them on it? You have been provided with a link before showing the Russians tracked them to the Moon. Remember, the one in Russian that you refused to read because you didn't want to run it through one of the many online translation programs? Also, since they had their own program, they would have known first if it was possible, and second if the US had the equipment to do it. So why didn't they call the US on it again?

So no reference for the Zond 5 comment either? Why should they be concerned about a monkey (assuming it even existed) when they had the Mercury and Gemini programs to show that space travel in confined spaces was safe and, more importantly, they had already made two trips to the moon? You did know about Apollos 8 and 10 right? You know, the two missions that flew to the Moon and back before Apollo 11? Of course this is assuming this monkey incident (again, if it even existed since you have given no reference) happened right before Apollo 11 since you said it was just a few days before. And again, also interesting to note that NASA is not the only agency that has sent probes and living animals in and beyond the Van Allen belts. Strange how no other country or company that works in space thinks the radiation environment is too harsh for Apollo to have happened as advertised.

Any cite for this monkey? Or his cause of death? You forgot Zond 5. A Russian trip around the moon with live animals. Also, the ISS routinely passes through a part of the belts. Why should there have to be something damaging in the medical records for them to be hidden? I'll say it again. Would you want your medical records on display for the world to look through? And again, also interesting to note that NASA is not the only agency that has sent probes and living animals in and beyond the Van Allen belts. Strange how no other country or company that works in space thinks the radiation environment is too harsh for Apollo to have happened as advertised. Everything about the Apollo record adds up. I have not seen a single hoax claim that stands up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

Any proof that they are being paid by NASA? Oh that's right, you don't because there isn't any.

Of course you have no figures to back up that radiation claim. Also interesting to note that NASA is not the only agency that has sent probes and living animals in and beyond the Van Allen belts. Strange how no other country or company that works in space thinks the radiation environment is too harsh for Apollo to have happened as advertised. Also, the only classified documents are the personal medical records of the participants and a single military experiment. Would you want your medical records on display for the world to comb through?

I find it interesting that they don't have a source for that statement when the rest of the page seems to be well sourced. I find it unlikely that NASA would ever say something like that when they do say that these Apollo missions returned these amounts. Apollo 11 - 22 kg Apollo 12 - 34 kg Apollo 14 - 43 kg Apollo 15 - 77 kg Apollo 16 - 95 kg Apollo 17 - 111 kg Unless my math is way off, all of those added together is 382 kilograms or 842 pounds. These are also backed up by the pictures and videos of them being collected as well as the ALSJ.

I know. I read a similar discussion on another board where somebody was arguing that because the transcript said Aldrin but the video showed Collins, that NASA couldn't have simply made a mistake. Instead they must have been deliberatly covering up who said it. They said Collins forgot that he wasn't supposed to have been on the lunar surface and misspoke when the question was about seeing stars in solar corona which was an experiment that Collins did and therefore makes sense for him to answer.

I have seen the clip in question and as I remember it, the dialog is exactly as posted by Evan although I think the source he used may have the names wrong as Armstrong looked over to Collins for him to answer (because Collins was the one that was principle on the solar corona experiment) and Collins answered that he didn't remember seeing any. Again, the question was specifically about stars in the solar corona. Since it makes sense that they couldn't see stars on the surface of the daylit side of the moon or in the corona, what is this really supposed to prove? One can not definitively say that their body language shows that they are lying. At most it shows that they are tired after having spent a long time in space and then time in quarantine and debriefing with NASA. Maybe they just really wanted to go home?

They were specifically asked if they remembered seeing any stars "while they were photographing the solar corona". This was an experiment conducted on the way there and one done specifically by Collins which is why Armstrong referred the question to him. Collins who did the experiment, said he didn't remember seeing any. Never did he say that he couldn't see any stars at all, during any part of the mission.

As has been pointed out to you already, they did measure the radiation both before and during Apollo. What they are measuring now is for the longer stay to determine how it will affect them when they stay longer than just a few days. Regarding the videos of them collecting rocks. Do you have all the videos available of them either from NASA or spacecraftfilms.com? Or have you just looked at the few clips available online? Not everything is or should be available online. Sometimes you might have to get off of you butt and go out to do some research. I guarantee that there is plenty of footage available of them collecting rocks. That footage is not the most interesting though so why would somebody be motivated to convert it to put online? I doubt there is any evidence of the US collecting rocks mechanically as there is no evidence of a robotic program to do that. Perhaps you were confused when they mentioned the Soviet program?

Don't forget that Ed Mitchell also runs and posts on his web forum.

So now JayUtah and others are working for NASA to try to keep the lid on? Any evidence for this or is it yet another unfounded assumption?

If the footage you are now referring to is the one I think, and I'm pretty sure it is, it is yet another case where a documentary (quite possibly the same one, I am checking on this) not made by NASA screwed up. Research into it confirmed that NASA had the footage correctly labeled and has always been correctly labeled and this documentary made a mistake. It happens sometimes. subsequent versions of the same documentary corrected this error. But to sum it up, it was not a NASA error.

There is no reason for the director to show spacewalk footage from a Gemini mission or put Apollo 11 audio over the Apollo 16 landing either but he did it. The only fact I see is there is no proof that NASA messed up the audio and as the only source is in this documentary it most likely originated in this documentary. Try to face the facts okay here Duane?

any and all stories of Hijackers still being alive came out soon after 911 before the FBI release their final and official list. After that the stories stopped. This points to the stories being mistaken identity with people with similar names. Another thing to think about is why would Saudi Arabia admit that 15 of the hijackers were their citizens if they were in fact alive? http://www.911myths.com/html/still_alive.html The seismic data only appears to show explosions when viewed in a highly compressed format. When looked at in a closer scale, seismic experts agree there is nothing suspicious. http://www.911myths.com/html/seismic_record.html If the towers fell at freefall speeds, then why is there debris falling off the towers that fall faster than the collapsing building and outpace the collapse? http://www.911myths.com/html/freefall.html http://911review.com/errors/wtc/times.html Notice that second link is a CT site.

But considering that she most likely would have survived if she had been wearing a seatbelt, how did the conspiracy to kill her make it so she didn't? Or how did they know she wouldn't? If she was worried about her death happening in a car accident, why wouldn't she wear her seatbelt?

Works fine for me.

Here's a neat photo of the LLRV team and their 100th flight http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/gallery/photo/LLR...all/E-14754.jpg

Except there is a problem with that statement. There is only one recorded crash by Armstrong of the sim vehicle. That vehicle was the LLRV and the crash was not due to Armstrong's piloting but to an unrelated mechanical failure (the LLRV and the LLTV were actually more complicated than the LM as they used jet engines to support 5/6 of their weight and a rocket engine for the remaining 1/6 as they were designed to operate in an Earthly environment unlike the LM which only operated in space and on the moon.) This single crash is backed up by the fact that we know how many training vehicles there were and what happened to them and where they are now. Incidentally, there were hundreds, yes hundreds, of succesful flights of the LLRVs and the LLTVs.

Perhaps Jack can point out which rule I have broken? Matt, I have nothing against you as a person...but the rules are to have a photo [exceptions only if you have legit reason you explain to Administrators ie good cause.....no digital camera not being the kind they had in mind...more like harmful to one's 'health'], sorry. Then please, show me this rule. And if you are so adamant about it, then am I to assume you will be buying me a camera? Further, if you can't find said rule, I may be tempted to interpret your repeated asking for a picture as both "harassing" and "invasion of my privacy," both which are against the rules.

An addition from the terms and rules that must be agreed to in order to register Perhaps Jack can point out which rule I have broken?

At least Burton has the courage to show his face. Mr. Golfball does not, claiming "national security".... Why is Mr. Golfball allowed to violate forum rules? Jack Now Jack, you know that is a lie. I have no personal objection to posting a picture, only a monetary one. I know of no rule saying I must post a picture, only a suggestion, and I have looked. From the Board Guidelines linked at the top of each page It appears that the generic avatar bothers you greatly as well. Did either of you have an incident at a Mini-golf as a child? But I digress, since it bothers you so much, perhaps you could share the cost of a camera with Mr. Lemkin? I chose a golfball because I like golf. Shudder the thought. Since the generic avatar is so disturbing to you both, I will remove it. Now the next question is, why is Jack making up forum rules?

Oh please, do the math. I would like to see it. As for showing my face, I know of no rule saying I must. Further, I do not have a digital camera, nor a scanner. It seems as if it really bothers you that you have to resort to namecalling instead. Perhaps if it is so important to you that I show my face you could buy me a camera?

The fires are not visible in the picture with the woman although there is still plenty of smoke showing there was a fire deeper in. Air would have been rushing in through the hole she was standing in to feed the fire and her location would actually have been quite cool. "The fires are not visible in the picture with the woman although there is still plenty of smoke showing there was a fire deeper in. Air would have been rushing in through the hole she was standing in to feed the fire and her location would actually have been quite cool." For this, Colby gets the dumb statement of the day JOKER award. Maybe you should give yourself that award Jack. You can't even be bothered to see who's post you're quoting. So do you have anything of substance to add or will it just be namecalling from you?