The secret NASA tried to hide has been discovered: The
quantity of photos purporting to record the Apollo lunar
EVAs could not have been taken on the Moon in such an
impossible time frame. So why do these photos exist? How did
these photos get made? Did ANY men go to the Moon? Or was it
truly the greatest hoax ever?
© 2005 Jack White
Editor's Notes: *According to Andrew Chaikin, author of A
Man on the Moon the LRV averaged only 5 to 7 miles per hour,
which would reduce even further the time available for
photography.
Timing Out
Taking the Apollo 11 mission as his example, and the Apollo
11 Lunar Surface Journal (1) consulted by Jack White in this
Skeleton article, an 'apollogist' or critic, has posted a
long refutation of the above time and motion study. This
critic asserts that a shot rate per mission calculated on
time available over number of photos taken is inappropriate,
since some pictures took longer than others, and that the
pictures were taken during the tasks over the whole EVA
period.
This is not a point that Jack White is disputing.
Taking the Apollo 11 EVA of 151 minutes, the critic would
prefer that the photos are evaluated according to his own
calculations which split the EVA into 9 segments of 'about
15 minutes each' (2). Working from the Apollo 11 Lunar
Surface Journal, this critic has estimated the number of
photos taken for each segment.
According to these criteria there are variable averages of
7.5 minutes (segment two) to 2.5 minutes (segment six) or 31
seconds (segment seven). However, when studying the actual
mission elapsed time line we can see that this is not a
reflection of the time allowed for photography at all. Nor
is the approximate 15 minute segment a true reflection of
the time taken by each bundle of tasks that this critic has
allocated per segment. Further, while taking Jack White to
task for not listing the EVA tasks in the correct order, the
critic splits single EVA tasks (such as the flag ceremony)
across two separate 'segments' and also splits multiple
panorama shots across 'segments'. As it turns out, this
critic's method simply demonstrates that at some points in
the mission fewer shots were taken than at others.
Not a point Jack White is disputing either.
Nor is the critic's argument the same. He proposes that
there was plenty of time for photography since it was spread
across the mission. Jack White proposes that given the
workload, the number of photographs to be taken, and the
conditions under which they were taken, there was not enough
time to achieve the standard of photography revealed within
the official Apollo record. Not to mention the anomalies!
Workload
Jack White's critic demonstrates that he is in a muddle
about what he is trying to prove by recommending the ideal
method for ascertaining accurately the time available for
photography. While not doing it himself, due to the amount
of time it would take, he thinks is necessary to note each
shot relative to the mission elapsed timings. Taking this
advice to heart and also checking the tasks of each
astronaut against their individual EVA timings (3) does
indeed take hours.
It also produces the following result:
The Apollo 11 EVA workload was ............2hrs 03 minutes
The time allocated to photography was........... 28 minutes
The average time to point-and-shoot .......121 photos was
13.88 seconds
The average time to point-and-shoot .......122 photos (2)
13.77 seconds
These figures demonstrate two things:
a) The role of astronaut photography in this mission was
minimal, and most of it was of the point-and-shoot variety.
Which begs the question regarding those carefully composed
shots.
b) There is a difference between a time and motion study as
per Jack White, demonstrating the time available for
photography within a mission, and the dissenter's
demonstration of the moment within that mission during which
that photography took place.
Using the second demonstration as a response to the first is
to merely demonstrate these differences, and saying that
"White suggests in his study that the work load was such
that there should have been two hours with no photography"
is a false premise. Yet this statement turns out to be
virtually correct when it comes to evaluating the amount of
time required for the EVA workload. It would appear that
this critic may have done all these calculations and then
muddled his paperwork.
As a result of the foregoing, it is clear that Jack White's
conclusion of a reserved time of 31 minutes for the
Hasselblad still photography across the Apollo 11 EVA, was
virtually spot on. We are down to 28 minutes.
In any event, the crux of the matter is that on average
across all missions, one photograph had to have been taken
every 50 seconds even if Apollo astronauts were doing
nothing but photography while allegedly on the Moon.
NOTES:
(1) Lunar Surface Journal reference:
http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/frame.html used by White,
critic and Aulis editor in this matter of the Apollo 11 EVA.
(2) Critic's posting: 'Bad Apprentice': Wed Apr 20, 2005
10:28 pm on badastronomy.com. His segments are 'approx. 15
mins', his total photos is 122:
1. 0 photos; 2. 20 photos; 3. 2 photos; 4. 4 photos; 5. 17
photos; 6. 25 photos; 7. 29 photos; 8. 19 photos, 9. 6
photos.
(3) The Apollo 11, NASA Mission Report volume 3 (complied
from the NASA archives, Edited by Robert Godwin) pp 145/174.
"Apollo debates are usually dominated by physics arguments
which can be confusing for most people. Jack White's new
analysis is breath-taking in its simplicity: now anyone can
understand the evidence and come to their own conclusion."
John P. Costella PhD
Dr. Costella is a physicist living in Australia
http://www.aulis.com/skeleton.html
==================================================
THE FACT WE DID NOT GO TO THE MOON.
Video: Part 2
http://www.apfn.org/movies/Griggs2.wmv 18.6MB
Apollo 11 - Moon Mission faked by NASA
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTvZPItszTI
click:
# The cost of the entire Apollo program: USD $25.4 billion
-1969 Dollars ($135-billion in 2005 Dollars). See NASA
Budget. (Includes Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Lunar
Orbitar, Apollo programs.) Apollo spacecraft and Saturn
rocket cost alone, was about $ 83-billion 2005 Dollars
(Apollo spacecraft cost $ 28-billion (CS/M $ 17-billion; LM
$ 11-billion), Saturn I, IB, V costs about $ 46-billion 2005
dollars).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Apollo
#
Motives
Several motives have been suggested for the U.S. government
to fake the moon landings - some of the recurrent elements
are:
1. Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a
popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam
war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned
missions cancelled, around the same time that the US ceased
its involvement in the Vietnam War.
2. Cold War Prestige - The U.S. government considered it
vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going
to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and
expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the
landing, thereby ensuring success.
3. Money - NASA raised approximately 30 billion dollars
pretending to go to the moon. This could have been used to
pay off a large number of people, providing significant
motivation for complicity. In variations of this theory, the
space industry is characterized as a political economy, much
like the military industrial complex, creating fertile
ground for its own survival.
4. Risk - The available technology at the time was such that
there was a good chance that the landing might fail if
genuinely attempted.
The Soviets, with their own competing moon program and an
intense economic and political and military rivalry with the
USA, could be expected to have cried foul if the USA tried
to fake a Moon landing. Theorist Ralph Rene responds that
shortly after the alleged Moon landings, the USA silently
started shipping hundreds of thousands of tons of grain as
humanitarian aid to the allegedly starving USSR. He views
this as evidence of a cover-up, the grain being the price of
silence. (The Soviet Union in fact had its own Moon
program).
Proponents of the Apollo hoax suggest that the Soviet Union,
and latterly Russia, and the United States were allied in
the exploration of space, during the Cold war and after. The
United States and the former Soviet Union today routinely
engage in cooperative space ventures, as do many other
nations that are popularly believed to be enemies. However,
this suggestion is challenged by the impression of intense
international competition that was under way during the Cold
War and is not supported by the accounts of participants on
either side of the Iron Curtain. Many argue that the fact
that the Soviet Union and other Communist bloc countries,
eager to discredit the United States, have not produced any
contrary evidence to be the single most significant argument
against such a hoax. Soviet involvement might also
implausibly multiply the scale of the conspiracy, to include
hundreds of thousands of conspirators of uncertain loyalty.
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations
