APOLLO REALITY?

[inconceivable]

Has this web page been successfully debunked?


www.geocities.com/Apolloreality/

[frenat]

Many, many times. Although the page is really self-debunking. Some of it is really quite funny.

[Ranb]

What is there to debunk? This guy takes a bunch of photos of hardware that was used to develop the Apollo program and tells us that they were used to support a hoax. No evidence is presented that shows they were used for anything but the real thing.

Is there anything about this site that is convincing at all?

Ranb

[scooter]

Simulation in those days was a new art, pretty crude with some "Rube Goldberg" type approaches. They tried anything and everything.
To somehow equate all this hardware and improvised technique, all of which was very public at the time, with a hoax is beyond ignorant.
This entire hoax site is completely self debunking, if you learn even the slightest bit on how Apollo was claimed to have been accomplished. This guy's knowledge of Apollo, and spaceflight in general, is virtually nil.
At the same time, it is entertaining, in a twisted way...

[laurel]

He thinks it was the Apollo 7 capsule that caught fire? Oh, dear.

[AtomicDog]

I've said it before: If I was running a fake lunar landing project, the very last thing I would do is proudly display to the world the props and equipment I intended to produce the fake with.

Does David Copperfield bring the public behind the stage and show them how his tricks work before he begins his act?

[Bob B.]

Same old HB BS. According the the HBs, Apollo couldn't work because everything was allegedly untested. But show them the equipment NASA used to actually test everything, and the HBs claim it is the props used to fake it.

"It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality." -- JayUtah

[Jason Thompson]

That page is more of Colby's usual crap. He shows pictures of simulation hardware, then ascribes functions to it that simply do not tie up with reality. He claims that the huge crane was used for the fake landscape shots, but can't explain why that huge brihghtly coloured scaffold showed no hint of its existence on the film and TV from the surface. He claims the faked cratered landscape under it was used in the footage but can't match it to any actual footage. Frankly, it doesn't even look convincingly like any real images of the lunar surface except for the crater layouts. He claims a big model of the Moon was used to make the film of ascent taken out of the LM windows, but can't explain how that film is able to go from surface to orbit in one continuous shot, something no model of that scale could possibly have the fidelity to achieve.

He also wishes to make some suspicious innuendo about NASA continuing to use the facility after they successfully landed, as if continuing to train other astronauts would suddenly stop once one crew had done it for real, or that staff at Langley are sworn to secrecy. Most employees of research establishments are. I am not at libery to disclose details of my work to anyone outside a select group, so am I part of some nefarious activity?

And in 40 years of research he still makes the mistake of identifying Apollo 7[/i] as the one that caught fire, and still maintains that rocket engines are impossible to control.

Basically, Colby is either a con artist, an idiot, or mentally disturbed. He knows nothing about reality.

[Bob B.]

May 20, 2008 9:37:08 GMT -4 Jason Thompson said:

I am not at liberty to disclose details of my work to anyone outside a select group, so am I part of some nefarious activity?

My company has a special bonus program, but to receive the payments I have to sign a non-compete and confidentiality agreement. My company has proprietary software and cost information that it is trying to protect. They are essentially paying me off to keep that information secret.

I just work for a construction company and there is really very little damage I could do if I were to quit and go to work for a competitor. Yet my company has safeguards in place to protect itself. There is certainly nothing nefarious about it; it is just common business practice. Everyone keeps secrets.

[JayUtah]

Some of the people I consult for go to jail if they reveal the details of their work, and not because there are nefarious plans afoot but because they are privy to private details of people's lives as a prerequisite to providing those people a service. To guard the customer's privacy, laws are put into place. I have drawers full of non-disclosure agreements to which I am subject. Yes, everyone keeps secrets.

Unfortunately none of that applies to the NASA landing training. As near as we can tell, Colby lives in England and has never been to the United States. For years he wrongly believed that Langley, Virginia (the headquarters of the CIA) and NASA's Langley Research Center were the same thing. NASA/Langley is actually in Hampton, half a day's drive away. It doesn't matter whether NASA/Langley's staff was sworn to secrecy; a major highway runs right past the gantry crane, and was there in 1969. Thousands of motorists a day can see what those wacky Langley nuts are up to. You can't run a black op next to a highway.

Colby's "sworn to secrecy" claim is simply the standard excuse for why his claims and the evidence tell two completely different stories. It tries to explain the absence of evidence for his claim.

[sts60]

The notion about faking the landings at this giant facility which was visible to the public, and which NASA routinely publicized like the rest of the training efforts, is hilarious. And the bit about simulating LM exhaust with a fan is pretty funny too. This would cause billowing dust, unmistakably indicating an atmosphere and unmistakably not the lunar surface.

The whole thing is nonsense. A cheesy pastiche of unfounded suppositions, misrepresentations, misinterpretations, and outright lies.

inconceivable, the ball is in your court. What do you have to say?

[Jason Thompson]

Colby's "sworn to secrecy" claim is simply the standard excuse for why his claims and the evidence tell two completely different stories. It tries to explain the absence of evidence for his claim.

But fails hilariously to explain why a lot of his evidence is publicity photos of the stuff he says was used to fake it. The simulated moon rock photo is surely the funniest example....

[gillianren]

Heck, I've had to sign a nondisclosure agreement--I used to work in a call center taking credit card applications. The company takes a very dim view of anyone working there and participating in identity theft; it's bad for the company. Also, you know, illegal.

[laurel]

I do volunteer work in retail and even I had to sign an agreement saying I wouldn't talk about certain things. I asked the store manager what this agreement referred to, and she said for example, if someone tries to pay for their purchase with a credit card that gets rejected, I shouldn't go around telling everyone that so-and-so is having financial problems.

[LunarOrbit]

May 20, 2008 12:26:54 GMT -4 laurel said:

I do volunteer work in retail

You volunteer to work in retail? Are you crazy?