I just sent him the following, basically an expansion on my post above. I'll have to see what happens, that he's responded well before favours a good response.
===============================================
Hi.
Recently your site was link to from the ApolloHoax forum and having a look at your site I saw you have some common questions as unanswered. Hence I have listed them and the answers below. I hope that you’ll find them helpful and allow you to add a few more questions to your answered page.
If you have further questions then please feel free to come and see us at ApolloHoax. I post there under the name PhantomWolf.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLAIM: Voice and TV recordings show Houston asking astronauts to fit a polarizing filter during an EVA while on the lunar surface, but the gloves worn were made so they could not grip anything smaller than about an inch. The gloves gave little fingertip feeling due to pressurization. A spokesperson for NASA confirmed this and stated that the astronauts would return to the lunar capsule to change film magazines or lenses, but there was no pressure in the LM so the astronauts could not have removed their gloves without first re-pressurising the cabin.Well since the TV images actually shows them doing both, including a wonderful shot of Charlie Duke as he is changing the magazine of his Hasselblad camera, he is at station 5 and is standing right next to the LRV TV camera, the statement that it was impossible is clearly wrong. In fact the Astronauts themselves say that such a claim is wrong. Here is the excerpt from the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal for the Charlie Duke magazine change (it is available as a Realtime file as well). Note the part I have bolded in red.
145:53:19 Duke: That is a great rock. (Pause)
[Charlie puts his seat down and then removes his used film magazine.]145:53:25 Duke: Okay, John, when you get around there (to the CDR seat), could you give me a film mag? Black and white?
145:53:30 Young: Okay.
145:53:31 England: I guess we could...
145:53:31 Duke: Which one do you want me to use, Tony?
145:53:32 England: Call that one the "Great Young."
145:53:37 Young: (Responding to Tony) Oh, come on.
145:53:40 Duke: It's not very big, but it's just a nice rock.
145:53:44 England: Okay.
[Charlie raises his seat again to stow the film magazine and John goes to the CDR seat.]145:53:46 Young: Yeah, it was made about...It looks like it's about 3 days old (pause) though it must be on the order of 4 billion.
[Charlie lowers his seat.]145:53:57 Young: Which one do you want, Charlie?
145:53:59 Duke: Any black and white. It doesn't matter. Wrong (underseat) pocket.
[Charlie leans across his seat to watch what John is doing.]145:54:06 Young: Any black and white?
145:54:07 Duke: Yeah, ain't but one...
145:54:08 Young: Okay.
145:54:09 Duke: ...magazine I.
145:54:10 England: Okay.
145:54:11 Young: You already shot up a roll of black and white?
145:54:12 Duke: Yeah. 170. Okay. (Dropping the magazine) Uh-oh. I got it. (Pause)
[The new film magazine apparently dropped between the seats. Charlie retrieved it, removed the dark slide, and passed the dark slide across to John.]145:54:24 Duke: There you go.
[Jones - "Do you have any comments on the detailed finger-work that was involved in manipulating the dark slide?"]
[Duke - "Practice."]
[Jones - "Never having worn those gloves, it seems almost amazing to me that you can manipulate that dark slide."]
[Duke - "Big objects you could handle, like those film mags. You could hold the magazine with fingertips at each side, and it had a little slide at the bottom. You just dropped it in and held it forward and then there was a lock at the top. I had to practice, but it was pretty easy to do. We didn't have any trouble. It took me a little bit to get that one locked - two or three tries - but no more than normal. You get much smaller than that, though, and that was the hard part - trying to manipulate little, small objects with those gloves. Threading a needle would be almost impossible in those gloves. The bigger the object, with the bulky gloves, the easier it was to get a purchase on them and do what you've got to do."]
[Jones - "That film magazine looked like it was maybe fist-sized or a little bit smaller."]
[Duke - "It's fist-sized; yeah."]
[It wasn't until March 2006 that I realized that the dark slide had a wire handle large enough to accommodate the glove fingers.]145:54:27 Young: Okay. Dark slide is in the camera box (under the seat). (Pause)
145:54:35 Duke: (Examining the magazine) Hope it runs; I got dust on it. (Pause)
[Charlie installs the magazine.]145:54:42 Young: (Garbled) (Pause) (Garbled)
[Charlie shoots two frames and, as he does so, we can see a lever/crank on the side turn. The first of these is completely lightstruck but the second, AS16-108- 17584, is partly useful.]145:54:51 England: Okay, we can...
145:54:52 Young: (Lost under Tony)
145:54:53 England: ...see it works.
145:54:55 Duke: Okay, Tony. (Stops to listen) Yeah, magazine India (which is also known as AS16-108).
145:54:59 England: Okay.
145:55:01 Duke: And starting with frame count number about 3. I guess I fired off a couple.
145:55:07 England: Okay. (Long Pause)
CLAIM: In the vacuum on the moon, there should be very high contrast. Things would be either black or light, yet areas in shadows on the moon have been filled in with light. NASA spokesperson Jan Lundberg stated that the Moon's albedo (reflectivity) is 60 to 70% and this lead to the shadows of astronauts and equipment being illuminated. The Moon actually reflects an average of 7% of the visible light that hits it. This is about the same reflectivity of asphalt.Asphalt’s reflection of sunlight is really plenty to light up things in the shadows, especially with the Hasselblad camera's f-stop is set for shadows. Check out those images taken by Clavius’ JayUtah.
apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1149538875&page=1#1149542321CLAIM: There are "hot spots" in photographs as if a huge spotlight was used at a close distance. In an Apollo 12 voice recording astronaut Pete Conrad says "That Sun's bright, it's like somebody is shining a spotlight on your hands! I tell you...it really is. It's like somebody's got a super-bright spotlight!" Of one photo of Aldrin, NASA spokesperson Jan Lundberg stated "Yes, it seems like he is standing in a spotlight and I can't explain that. Umm, that escapes me why. So maybe you have to find Armstrong and ask him."The first part is simply a way of describing something, commonly called a simile. I’d also note that the two sections of the quote are said about 4 minutes apart too. It’s not stating that it is a spotlight just that it’s as bright as having one on him.
The second is an effect of the lunar surface. In the particular photo of Aldrin the ground behind him look very bright because the engine of the LM swept over it as a result of its passing over it has removed the small craters and bumps which cast shadows down sun and so make the ground appear darker. The front of him can be seen as lit up from light being reflected back at him from three major sources, the lunar surface, Armstrong’s spacesuit, and the Mylar thermal blankets covering the LM.
For more on these effects see:
www.clavius.org/manmoon.htmlCLAIM: A reticle is a cross hair placed within half a micron of accuracy on the film plate by metal evaporation at Zeiss. Small ridges on the film transportation edges raise the plate about one 800th of a millimeter above the film's surface. They were used to determine if the film had curved. They did not help NASA in judging lunar distances. The full area of image AS11-40-5903 (click small image on the right to enlarge) has an off-center reticle. This is physically impossible given the fixed position of the cross-hairs in the camera's design. Images from nasa.govThis is true only on altered images for republication. They add an area of black to the top and cut the bottom off to centre Buzz. The actual scans of the image show that the image ends at the top of the PLSS and actually cuts part of it off. When the correct image is used, the large central crosshair is in the correct place. For a proper scan see
www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5903.jpgor
www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5903HR.jpgCLAIM: Apollo 6 was a disaster, the 2nd stage failed to light, it didn't reach Earth orbit and there were over 20 major failures in flight. No significant changes were made from Apollo 6 to 7, but Apollo 7 was suddenly perfect. Twenty-three months after the fire on launch pad 34 that killed three astronauts, Apollo 8 successfully sailed around the moon with two astronauts and returned to Earth safely. This flight was conducted without first attempting an unmanned flight. After Apollo 8, on June 28, 1969, NASA launched a 14 lb monkey. This animal died early on of a heart attack brought about by problems associated with weightlessness and low body temperature. If a monkey could not be kept alive in earth orbit for 8.5 days, how did Apollo 8 [Dec. 21-27, 1968, (6 Days 3 hrs 0 min 42 sec)] and Apollo 10, [May 18-26, 1969, (8 Days 0 hours 3 min 23 sec), 31 lunar orbits] astronauts survive their trips around the moon?Wow there’s a lot in this, and most of it is just so bad that as one person I know says, it’s not even wrong.
Apollo 6 suffered from what is called “pogo” and this caused damage to several of the Saturn V's panels during launch but it did indeed make orbit and was highly successful otherwise. The flight only suffered from one failure of all its five main mission goals, to verify operation of Saturn V’s propulsion, guidance and control, and electrical systems in orbit. This was because of the Saturn IVB’s engine failed to reignite. More on Apollo 6 can be found here:
science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/apollo/apollo-6/apollo-6.htmlApollo 7 was not actually launched on a Saturn V, but rather it was launched on a Saturn IB (the only manned Apollo Mission to do so) so that would be a rather significant change. Apollo 7 was mainly a test of the Block 2 Command Module and the Service Module.
More on Apollo 7 can be found here:
www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/history/apollo/apollo-7/apollo-7.htmThe Saturn V did undergo some minor modifications prior to the time Apollo 8 flew to try and limit pogo (all of the Saturn V’s had minor changes with more significant changes on 10 and 14,) though all flights still suffered from it to some extent, the worst being Apollo 13 when they had to cut the central F-1 first stage engine off well earlier than planned to prevent the motion damaging the craft and endangering the mission. Pogo is really a major problem for large rockets though and while it was lessened to the point of bearability, it was never entirely solved. More on Pogo can be found here:
www.clavius.org/techsvpogo.htmlApollo 1’s fire was a result of a defective Command Module. The CM for Apollo 1 was a prototype (Block 1), which is why Gus Grissom was chosen for the mission. He was NASA’s go-to-guy and had already given a number of successful changes to the Mercury and Gemini capsules. Because of this he and his team were making numerous suggestions on changes to the Apollo CM, and it is believed that one of those changes helped cause the spark that set the fire. The Rocket (a Saturn IB) was not the problem and in fact flew on Apollo 5, launching the unmanned LM for remote testing. Apollo 7 tested the Block 2 CM, modified with all of the suggestions that Grissom and his crew had made as well as the lessons learned from the fire. By the time of Apollo 8, we’re talking an almost entirely different spacecraft. Not only did Apollo 8 launch on a Saturn V (Apollo 1 like Apollo 7 had a Saturn IB launch vehicle remember) but it also used the same Block 2 type CM that Apollo 7 did, so the CM was quite different as well. Really comparing the two is like comparing the Mercury Redstone and the Gemini Atlas, they are different machines.
The Monkey referred to in the launch of June 28th, 1969, was Bonnie, launched aboard Biosatellite 3. Though they are not totally sure why, it has been suggested depression was the cause, Bonnie refused to drink and become severely dehydrated over the 8.8 days of orbit, a condition that subsequently lead to heart failure and death. As far as is known, the condition had nothing to do with being weightless, or having a low body temperature.
As to long term manned flight, you have to also remember that prior to any Apollo mission being flown that the Gemini missions had already shown that men could easily survive in space for nearly 2 weeks (Gemini 7’s mission lasted 13 days and 18 hours) so 8-10 days was really not a problem.
What WERE the recorded temperatures during the EVAs?From the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal we can find out that during EVA 2 for Apollo 16, the surface temperature seems to have been about 100-120°F and for their EVA 3 it was around 185° F Other mission may also have temperatures given as well, I haven’t really looked very hard for them.