Military Review

Last on the Moon: 50 years of the Apollo 17 mission

329
Last on the Moon: 50 years of the Apollo 17 mission
Apollo lunar rover



Was there a hoax?


В stories it so happened that with the Apollo lunar program, the Americans overtook the Soviet Union in the space race. Let it be given to the United States at a very high cost, but the Americans set foot on the surface of the moon, but Soviet citizens did not. It was a wonderful time - most of the scientific and technological projects were launched not for the sake of a business scheme, but solely to wipe the nose of an overseas opponent. And it did work out. The first artificial satellite, a man in space, the first ever planetary rover Lunokhod-1 and others. Americans in space, contrary to custom, harnessed for a long time, but quickly drove off. Suffice it to say that in terms of costs, the lunar program outdid the famous Manhattan Project. Five Apollo missions at once, numbered 11, 12, 14, 16 and 17, quite successfully delivered astronauts to the moon. The Nazi Wernher von Braun, who went to the Americans as a trophy, was appointed the head of the program.

For the Soviet Union, the lunar successes of the United States were painful, but no one was going to tear their hair on their heads - they quickly curtailed their own program for the development of the earth's satellite, concentrating on other objects. Fortunately, space turned out to be limitless for the implementation of the most daring fantasies.




Eugene Cernan (above) and Harrison Schmitt on the Moon in December 1972

But later there were alternative opinions. We are talking about conspiracy theories that expose the falsification of the entire lunar program by the Americans. On the side of the seekers of truth, all the power of Hollywood, which could easily shoot and edit any video with lunar landscapes. Astronauts in such "cartoons" could sit on the Sun if they really tried. It is not the task of this material to debunk such misconceptions, but it is still worth briefly dwelling on this point. Otherwise, the whole story around the 50th anniversary of the last visit of the Americans to the moon does not make sense.


US Apollo landing sites on the moon

The biggest weakness in the theory of any denier of astronauts flying to the Moon is the availability of lunar soil samples. The Americans brought with them a little less than four hundred kilograms of material from the moon, which they actively shared. For example, with the Soviet Union, which was given 324 grams of soil from the Sea of ​​​​Plenty, the mainland area near the Ameghino crater and the Sea of ​​​​Crisis. The exchange of alien material between the US and the USSR was fixed by an agreement back in the 70s - according to the protocol, it was necessary to give at least 3 grams from each mission. When domestic geologists compared the soil brought by the Apollo 11 mission and their own reserves from Luna-16, -20 and -24, it turned out that they were almost identical. It was impossible to reconstruct the lunar soil under terrestrial conditions, at least at the beginning of the 70s. The surface of the Earth's natural satellite is lined with a unique substance formed in vacuum, under scorching solar and cosmic rays, as well as under constant bombardment by meteorites. Strictly speaking, lunar soil is crushed rocks, pieces of glass are products of melting from impacts, and agglutinates formed from fragments and glass.

The second confirmation of the presence of Americans on the Moon was modern photographs from the Earth, in which lunar vehicles, landers, and wheel tracks are clearly visible. Even the path trodden by Neil Armstrong can be seen. By the way, our robotic planetary rovers of the Lunokhod series, which appeared much earlier than the Americans, are parked on the satellite.

When the conspiracy has been dealt a blow, it is possible to figure out what the Americans were doing during their last lunar mission, Apollo 17.

Records December 1972


Fifty years ago, American flights to the moon not only became commonplace, but were perceived quite calmly. An old Japanese proverb comes to mind:

"He who has never conquered Fuji is a fool, but he who has climbed to its top twice is a fool twice."

Be that as it may, until December 11, 1972, astronauts landed on the moon five times, spending a total of more than nine days on it. The last Apollo 17 mission was also to be the longest. And so it happened - Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt lived on the Moon for 75 hours, of which 22 hours directly on the soil of the earth's satellite. It was to Schmitt, a professional geologist, that the scientific world is indebted for the delivery of pure olivine, the most ancient mineral from the Moon. The analysis showed that the sample is at least 4,5 billion years old. Americans wouldn't be Americans if they didn't take cars to the moon with them. More precisely, battery-powered electric vehicles, which were not intended to be recharged. Each Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) was the lightest possible design, capable of being folded into a compact suitcase on the descent module. The “lunar punishments” were not subject to return and remained on the Moon as silent witnesses of the presence of the Americans. In December 1972, the astronauts had a nice ride at the foot of the Southern Mountain Range. Immediately seven and a half hours lasted the longest exit of the Americans on the rover. During this time, they traveled about 20 kilometers and collected more than 34 kg of samples of lunar minerals. A pair of seismic probes, a cosmic ray detector, as well as specialized equipment for a comprehensive study of the lunar soil were installed on the machine. It is possible to state with a high degree of certainty about the scientific mission of the Apollo 17 flight to the Moon - before that, all the expeditions carried more political overtones.












Lunar Roving Vehicle and its parts

A little bit about the astronauts' wheels on the Moon in December 1972. On one of the mini-expeditions, the rover was able to accelerate to an impressive 18 km / h, which forever remained a record. Schmitt, by the way, is still alive, and later spoke flatteringly about the characteristics of the car:

“The lunar rover proved to be the reliable, safe and flexible lunar exploration vehicle that we expected. Without it, the major scientific discoveries of Apollo 15, 16, and 17 would not have been possible, and our current understanding of lunar evolution would be impossible."

However, the Lunar Roving Vehicle still had malfunctions. During missions, the wings above the wheels collapsed on the rovers. It would seem that a trifling breakdown, on Earth they would not have paid attention to it. But on the Moon, wheels without wings kicked up clouds of dust that settled on the astronauts, equipment and the rover itself, threatening even more malfunctions. As a result, part of the wing was fixed with reinforced tape, which, after the lunar mission, gained truly worldwide fame.


If not for the Nazi Wernher von Braun, the Americans would have flown to the moon much later

Cernan and Schmitt returned on December 14, three days after landing on the moon. During this time, they traveled more than 35 kilometers and collected 110 kilograms of rock samples of the Moon, which researchers still cannot finally figure out. Even in our time, one can still find analytical reports by Russian authors engaged in the study of lunar soil samples delivered 50 years ago.

Was a manned mission to the moon necessary? On the practical side, of course, it did not make much sense - the scientific profit from multibillion-dollar flights was disproportionately small. Someone will say about the technological infrastructure of the mission, which in the future became the basis of the modern high-tech industry. If this is true, then only in part - many solutions, for example, integrated circuits, appeared even before the mission and independently of it. The lunar Apollos, like numerous Soviet space programs, were exclusively political products, born in the era of confrontation between two megapowers. And it was nice. And now we are sorely lacking this.
Author:
329 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 05: 33
    -2

    Maybe I'm blind, but where are the stars in the picture in the moonlit sky? what
    Stanley Kubrick spoke about the great NASA hoax during this period.
    By the location of the stars, you can determine the approximate coordinates of the American device on the surface of the Moon ... but they are not there ... sadness ... it smells like bullshit.
    1. Proxima
      Proxima 11 December 2022 05: 48
      +13
      An interesting pattern. I have not met a single specialist in the field of rocket and space technology who doubted a real landing on the moon. There are a number of serious bloggers in the field who are in the know and they don't question the landing either. But the lower the level of the posting, the greater the percentage of "adepts of the lunar scam." I asked all these adherents the same question: "Name at least one specialist who adheres to the lunar scam?" And then the circus began instead of answering ..
      1. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 05: 54
        -9
        Quote: Proxima
        I asked all these adherents the same question: "Name at least one specialist who adheres to the lunar scam?" And then the circus began instead of answering ..

        And I'm asking you and your cool specialists a simple question ... where did the starry sky go in the lunar images of American astronauts?
        In response, the same pattern about lunar adepts. smile
        Don't fool around.
        1. Proxima
          Proxima 11 December 2022 06: 01
          +8
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          And I'm asking you and your cool specialists a simple question ... where did the starry sky go in the lunar images of American astronauts?
          In response, the same pattern about lunar adepts. smile
          Don't fool around.

          Have you heard anything about the focus of film and photographic equipment? If you have not heard, then what will I answer you? This is about the level of understanding. Well, let me ask a simpler question: do you think it was difficult to paint stars in Hollywood so that you and your kind would not be very indignant?
          1. Lech from Android.
            Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 06: 15
            -14
            I heard about the trick and about the film equipment and about the asterisks, you are our omniscient comrade ... but Hollywood still made a puncture ... unacceptable. smile
            In such cases, there should be no doubts among the critical public ... and they are.
            For some reason, Gagarin's flight into Earth's orbit is beyond doubt ... but the first flight of Americans to the moon, sorry, looks more like a scam on a national scale. smile
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 11 December 2022 09: 10
              0
              Quote: Lech from Android.
              I heard about the trick and about the film equipment and about the asterisks, you are our omniscient comrade ... but Hollywood still made a puncture ... unacceptable. smile
              In such cases, there should be no doubts among the critical public ... and they are.
              For some reason, Gagarin's flight into Earth's orbit is beyond doubt ... but the first flight of Americans to the moon, sorry, looks more like a scam on a national scale. smile

              Go outside during the day and look at the sky, where have the stars gone? Can you answer? winked
              1. 26rus
                26rus 11 December 2022 16: 12
                +2
                Why are you talking about the day? It is well known that lunar landings were made on a lunar early morning. Can you see the stars during sunrise? And on the Moon, besides, there is no atmosphere, and consequently, no light scattering.
                1. Blackmokona
                  Blackmokona 11 December 2022 22: 11
                  +1
                  Quote: 26rus
                  Why are you talking about the day? It is well known that lunar landings were made on a lunar early morning. Can you see the stars during sunrise? And on the Moon, besides, there is no atmosphere, and consequently, no light scattering.

                  Therefore, the brightness is higher due to the lack of atmosphere and the stars are less visible.
                  1. Bad_gr
                    Bad_gr 12 December 2022 12: 28
                    +3
                    Quote: Lech from Android.
                    Maybe I'm blind, but where are the stars in the picture in the moonlit sky? what
                    Both the film and the matrix of a digital camera have a relatively small range in brightness. If the astronaut with the car were a little less illuminated, then the stars in the picture would be. I don’t know how it is now (I haven’t been interested in it for a long time), but at the dawn of the development of digital cameras, Fuji had a matrix (several generations) where the sensitive elements were of different sizes, and therefore, of different sensitivities. Information from both was processed separately, but then summarized. In general, thanks to a wider range, it was possible to photograph the forest against the background of the setting sun, and the sun would be normally visible and the foliage on the trees (I saw such a photo).
                    SuperCCD EXR

                    On the right, further development of this matrix (each element under its own lens, in the previous version the lens was common)

                    This is what I wrote for: the same rigmarole with photographic film (films with different sensitivities have grains of different sizes, but so that the grains of the film would have both, in order to have a wider range - there was no information about such films)
              2. IT Analyst
                IT Analyst 11 December 2022 21: 49
                +4
                Quote: BlackMokona
                Go outside during the day and look at the sky, where have the stars gone? Can you answer?


                During the day, the stars hid behind the glow of the atmosphere. There is no atmosphere on the moon. And there are a myriad of stars, much more and brighter than for an observer from the earth, since part of the light of the stars is absorbed precisely by the atmosphere.

                PS: I don't care if the Americans were on the moon or not, but remembering Colin Powell's test tube and other global deceptions, I tend to the version of what the Americans are best at - global lies.
                1. Blackmokona
                  Blackmokona 11 December 2022 22: 12
                  +2
                  Quote: AnalystIT
                  Quote: BlackMokona
                  Go outside during the day and look at the sky, where have the stars gone? Can you answer?


                  During the day, the stars hid behind the glow of the atmosphere. There is no atmosphere on the moon. And there are a myriad of stars, much more and brighter than for an observer from the earth, since part of the light of the stars is absorbed precisely by the atmosphere.

                  PS: I don't care if the Americans were on the moon or not, but remembering Colin Powell's test tube and other global deceptions, I tend to the version of what the Americans are best at - global lies.

                  Atmospheric glow? Ha, they hide from the brightness of daylight. You can open live broadcasts from spacewalks in the ISS and you won’t see the stars either
                  1. IT Analyst
                    IT Analyst 11 December 2022 22: 34
                    +3
                    Quote: BlackMokona
                    Atmospheric glow? Ha, they hide from the brightness of daylight. You can open live broadcasts from spacewalks in the ISS and you won’t see the stars either


                    I looked ... somewhere there are stars, somewhere (where there is a close-up with a strong illumination from spacesuits) yes, there are no stars. By the way, in the pictures from the moon rovers, there are also stars somewhere, somewhere you can’t see
            3. fsb_buzuk
              fsb_buzuk 11 December 2022 11: 56
              -2
              It's just that Gagarin prudently did not take a photo camera with him - and there is nothing special to analyze.
              But you thought that they could fool everyone and made "photos" with dolls. Leonid Konovalov made a professional analysis of how you did the filming.
              1. stankow
                stankow 11 December 2022 15: 57
                +3
                Gagarin took a camera and a tape recorder. And it was also recorded by a video camera.
            4. Hypertension
              Hypertension 11 December 2022 13: 15
              +1
              Quote: Lech from Android.
              In such cases, there should be no doubt in the critical public

              The criticizing public will not have any doubts in only one case - if they themselves are landed on the moon.
              Quote: Lech from Android.
              For some reason, Gagarin's flight into Earth's orbit is beyond doubt

              Why did it happen? Even the sphericity of the Earth is not recognized by everyone, and even more so there are those who do not believe in Gagarin's flight.
              Quote: Lech from Android.
              but the first flight of Americans to the moon, sorry, looks more like a scam on a national scale.

              And what does the second, third, fifth flight to the moon look like?
              1. Woodman
                Woodman 11 December 2022 14: 16
                0
                Quote: Hyperion
                The criticizing public will not have any doubts in only one case - if they themselves are landed on the moon.

                Smiled) And then an analogy arose with a tank and welded hatches)))
                1. Hypertension
                  Hypertension 11 December 2022 14: 28
                  -2
                  Quote: Lesovik
                  And then an analogy arose with a tank and welded hatches

                  One field of berries. The goal is to belittle the enemy, despite logic and common sense.
                  1. dauria
                    dauria 11 December 2022 15: 24
                    +5
                    The goal is to belittle the enemy, despite logic and common sense.

                    Well, not so primitive. Supporters of the "scam" came just from the USA. And the reason is simple. Those who were interested have long been familiar with both the design and the history of flight. And this stack of documents lies along with samples and ....no one needs it . How to pump 15 tons of fuel per second, pumping 2200 tons in two and a half minutes !!!? Well this is boredom, 99% of the inhabitants of the planet are not interested
                    And then bam !!!! We throw in the thesis "Scam, no one flew anywhere!" . And a tsunami of those who want to read and talk about it.
                    And now the American colleague of our "Lyokhi from Android" is already looking for the "wrong" stars .... wassat
                    Everything boils and boils, is printed and read .... Life, in a word. Well, and money. laughing
                    1. Hypertension
                      Hypertension 11 December 2022 17: 10
                      -1
                      Quote: dauria
                      Well, not so primitive. Supporters of the "scam" came just from the USA.

                      Do ardent patriots now wonder where the version of the "scam" came from and the prerequisites for its occurrence? The main thing is that - "Americans are stupid" and constantly lie. And whatever you take from them - everything is "of the wrong system." The mask also got nuts at one time. Recently, something has not been heard that he is a "swindler". Especially after his trolling of Ukrainians.
                      1. dauria
                        dauria 11 December 2022 21: 05
                        0
                        The main thing is that - "Americans are stupid" and constantly lie.

                        Well, just today I should return
                        SLS Orion of the Artemis program. Flew around the moon and returns. This rocket is more powerful than Saturn-5, it will fly to the Moon and beyond. Is it really so difficult to look at the history of its creation? Well, this is the most difficult work of the most intelligent people. Possessed in the best sense. And the "tension" of the entire industry.
                        Yes, we are like Pugs, we squeal, we bark, we are already wheezing. And the elephant goes ahead.
          2. Comrade
            Comrade 11 December 2022 06: 15
            +10
            Forgive me for interfering, colleague, but could you explain why Armstrong's shoes have different sole patterns in the picture from the Moon and in the picture from the museum?
            After all, it is claimed that this is the same spacesuit in which Neil walked on the moon.

            1. Aerodrome
              Aerodrome 11 December 2022 06: 57
              +8
              just look at the jaunty "astronaftofs" when they easily run out of the descent vehicle after splashing down to understand that they did not fly anywhere. soil? Yes, the robot scooped up, pictures? I beg you ... as Ostap Bender said, (... with such a level of printing in the West ...) I am for Stanislavsky.
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 11 December 2022 09: 14
                +2
                Quote: Aerodrome
                just look at the jaunty "astronaftofs" when they easily run out of the descent vehicle after splashing down to understand that they did not fly anywhere. soil? Yes, the robot scooped up, pictures? I beg you ... as Ostap Bender said, (... with such a level of printing in the West ...) I am for Stanislavsky.

                "Cheerful" astronauts "run out" after splashdown
            2. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 11 December 2022 09: 12
              +8
              Quote: Comrade
              Forgive me for interfering, colleague, but could you explain why Armstrong's shoes have different sole patterns in the picture from the Moon and in the picture from the museum?
              After all, it is claimed that this is the same spacesuit in which Neil walked on the moon.


              Attention to the lower right part, it is the answer to your question.
            3. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk 11 December 2022 10: 57
              +3
              Quote: Comrade

              Forgive me for interfering, colleague, but could you explain why Armstrong's shoes have different sole patterns in the picture from the Moon and in the picture from the museum?

              And that is not all. We all stepped on the dry sand with ribbed shoes. And what traces did we observe? Obviously not as clear as in the picture from the "Moon" I believe that during the filming of the track in the pavilion, the "lunar soil" was sprinkled with water so that it would not dust, so that the pictures would be clear, like on the moon. laughing wassat
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 12 December 2022 15: 41
                -1
                Magazine "Technique of Youth" No. 10 1969

                .........................................
                1. Expert
                  Expert 20 December 2022 22: 59
                  0
                  In those days, in such magazines there were approximately the same stories about encounters with aliens.
                  1. Bad_gr
                    Bad_gr 21 December 2022 03: 40
                    0
                    Quote: Expert
                    In those days, in such magazines there were approximately the same stories about encounters with aliens.
                    In the journal "Technique of Youth" they wrote this in the heading "Anthology of mysterious cases."
                    Armstrong and Aldrin landed in the Sea of ​​Tranquility on July 20, 1969. An article describing this event (an excerpt from which I copied) was published in the journal "Technology of Youth" No. 10 for 1969, literally, 3 months after the flight. Then no one doubted this flight.
                    1. Expert
                      Expert 21 December 2022 21: 21
                      0
                      Even in the United States back in those days there were people who not only doubted, but also understood that this could not be. And in the Soviet Union, specialists in the relevant profiles probably guessed about the deception.
                      It’s just that the probability that the United States, which lost the entire space race, suddenly took the lead, and even overtook the USSR, which did not stop its breakthrough development for a minute, tends to zero.
                      1. Bad_gr
                        Bad_gr 21 December 2022 22: 42
                        -1
                        Quote: Expert
                        Even in the United States back in those days there were people who not only doubted, but also understood that this could not be.
                        Of course, there were, and even more: American journalists started this whole campaign that there was no landing on the moon, but everything was filmed in Hollywood. I draw your attention: neither scientists and professionals associated with space, but journalists.

                        Quote: Expert
                        And in the Soviet Union, specialists in the relevant profiles probably guessed about the deception.
                        Where does such information come from? Cosmonaut Leonov said that all the conversations between the ships that flew to the moon and their MCC were listened to, monitored and knew exactly where the transmission was coming from.
                        Yes, and we immediately curtailed our Lunar program, since we would no longer be the first on the Moon, and there was no point in spending huge money to fly there second. The N-1 rocket, although it was very emergency, the situation was being corrected and it was quite possible to bring it up in the near future. But the project was closed. The last rocket was even forbidden to launch, although it was completely ready for this. But if they had doubts about the American landing, they could fly themselves, and then prove that the American flight was fake, and we were the first on the moon.
                        PS
                        Read the excerpt from "TM" carefully, it contains enough evidence on the topic (of course, for those who can understand the meaning of what was written and generalize)
            4. Blacksmith 55
              Blacksmith 55 11 December 2022 11: 19
              +8
              Yes, walking on the moon, winding kilometers, he wore out all the soles, what's incomprehensible here?
            5. IT Analyst
              IT Analyst 11 December 2022 22: 36
              -1
              Oops ... or not, the sole was worn out on the way from the moon to the earth
            6. Holy Diver
              Holy Diver 12 December 2022 15: 13
              +1
              Firstly, these are not Armstrong's prints, but Aldrin's.
              Secondly, special space "galoshes" were put on the boots of Aldrin's space suit. They provided additional protection for the spacesuit from possible mechanical damage. Here is a photo for you with these same galoshes
              https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/07/16/fashion/16MOONBOOTS-moon-walk/16MOONBOOTS-moon-walk-threeByTwoMediumAt2X.jpg
              1. Krasnoyarsk
                Krasnoyarsk 12 December 2022 16: 06
                0
                Quote from holy diver

                Firstly, these are not Armstrong's prints, but Aldrin's.
                Secondly, special space "galoshes" were put on the boots of Aldrin's space suit. They provided additional protection for the suit against possible

                It's not about whose footprints, Armstrong or Aldrin. And not in galoshes on their feet. The point is a CLEAR imprint of a RIBBED sole, which a priori should not be. The lunar soil is DUST, interspersed with fractions of various sizes and, most importantly, DRY. Such soil cannot leave such a CLEAR imprint of the sole. To leave such an imprint, WET primer is required. If this is a photo print from the Moon, then we should only draw one conclusion - there, shortly before the historical event, there was a good mushroom rain. laughing
                1. -Paul-
                  -Paul- 12 December 2022 21: 27
                  +2
                  In dry cement, excellent prints are obtained.
                  1. Expert
                    Expert 20 December 2022 23: 02
                    0
                    Here is the solution to the "lunar soil".
          3. Krasnoyarsk
            Krasnoyarsk 11 December 2022 10: 45
            +1
            Quote: Proxima
            Well, let me ask a simpler question: do you think it was difficult to paint stars in Hollywood so that you and your kind would not be very indignant?

            Of course it's not difficult. But for this, brains are needed to understand that without asterisks their photo is an obvious fake.
          4. 26rus
            26rus 11 December 2022 20: 30
            +4
            Quote: Proxima
            Quote: Lech from Android.
            And I'm asking you and your cool specialists a simple question ... where did the starry sky go in the lunar images of American astronauts?
            In response, the same pattern about lunar adepts. smile
            Don't fool around.

            Have you heard anything about the focus of film and photographic equipment? If you have not heard, then what will I answer you? This is about the level of understanding. Well, let me ask a simpler question: do you think it was difficult to paint stars in Hollywood so that you and your kind would not be very indignant?

            Yes, it’s not a problem to draw stars, there’s an ambush in another. I hope you will not mind that the position of the stars in the sky, on the Earth, on the Moon, depends on the geographical latitude of the place? And it also changes depending on the time of day (both the Earth and the Moon rotate, you know). And on every official picture of the lunar missions, among other things, the current time of the mission was indicated. And any discrepancy between the position of the stars and the current time will be immediately calculated and put everything at risk of exposure. And thousands of photos were taken for all the missions. Do you understand the scale of the problem?
          5. krops777
            krops777 12 December 2022 05: 11
            0
            Have you heard anything about the focus of film and photographic equipment? If you have not heard, then what will I answer you?


            By the way, everything is understandable about the stars, I myself am engaged in amateur photography, but they pierced in a completely different way, about Hasselblad EL, two cameras were equipped with a conventional f 2.8 / 80mm lens, the third with an f5.6 / 250mm telephoto lens and seven cassettes, whoever understands the topic, who is not, it makes no sense to chew here all the info is in the internet.
          6. Alex2711
            Alex2711 16 December 2022 12: 44
            0
            About photography and film equipment: the moon is brown, so why are the flags in American pictures colored, and the moon is gray?
        2. Fat
          Fat 11 December 2022 10: 50
          +7
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          Don't fool around.

          Do you know how to take photos with a classic camera, and not with a super smart smartphone? If you could, you wouldn't have this question.
          It would be much more suspicious if both the rover and the stars were in the picture. smile
        3. Blacksmith 55
          Blacksmith 55 11 December 2022 16: 56
          +3
          Lyokha from Android, perhaps the answer is simpler than you think. I mean the lack of stars in the photo.
          The photos were taken during the day, I think there is no doubt about it. Where on earth are stars visible during the day?
          And do not ask until hoarse about whether they were there or not.
          There are arguments both for and against.
          History will judge, and if they were not there, it will be the loss of such an image of America that no state probably knew.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Ramzaj99
        Ramzaj99 11 December 2022 08: 19
        +9
        1. Where is 400 kilograms of lunar soil that cannot be faked, and which was allegedly lost.,

        Does Russia have 300 grams of its Lunar Soil?

        2. Where buried on the moon or dropped in space

        300 kg of diapers-faeces from the flight?

        3. Where does the unreal agility come from immediately after splashdown, when

        Are real astronauts carried on stretchers?

        4.Where is the space sky, stars, planets on the Moon photos?

        5.Where are the cars, flags, equipment left on the moon?

        6. What did Apollo 13 do in Murmansk?

        7. How can I work at + 150

        degrees Celsius on the Moon without a cooler and at -150 degrees

        in the shade without heating, what kind of rubber will withstand,

        if at -60 deg. is she torn to shreds? Which

        Is the engine running at this temperature difference?

        8. How to land on the moon

        leaving no traces of landing and bury the nozzle

        in Lunar Soil?

        9. How can you ensure the accuracy of the docking

        in orbit of the Moon and splashdown to Earth with

        second cosmic speed with those computers?

        10. Why there was no explosion and fire

        methane emitted by astronauts per week

        in the oxygen atmosphere of the cabin?

        11. Why the descent cone did not burn and on it

        did the paint survive?

        12. Why Korolev and Gagarin died, and Leonov's relatives

        live in the USA?

        13.Where is the film, photo materials and design documentation?

        15. Why all the astronauts who tried to express their version died

        events?

        19. Why did the stone from the Moon, donated by NASA to the Dutch Rijkmuseum, turn out to be a piece of petrified wood?

        20. The moon has no atmosphere and no scattering of light from the air, turn away from the Sun and shoot the stars. Especially on the far side of the moon.
        If there are no stars there, then this is the wall of the pavilion.

        21. Where did they change into spacesuits on the Moon with a cramped cockpit, how did they lower a car to the Moon, why did they frolic so stupidly, dangerously, absurdly, frivolously falling with a satchel of life support equipment on the Lunar surface?

        22.Where does the dust from the rover wheels come from in the airless space of the Moon?
        23. Why does a Chinese rover leave a clear mark in the ground, but an American rover does not leave marks?
        1. Ulan.1812
          Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 12: 58
          0
          Quote: Ramzaj99
          coordinates

          I'm also wondering where they pooped sorry?
          Or did they have their anus stitched up? By the way, there is still a big question on the engines. And not all experts are sure that such a flight was possible at that time. I read somewhere that mathematicians calculated that, according to the theory of probability, the probability of such a flight at that time was no more than 5-7%.
          And how many successful test flights were there? Looks like three. And straight to the moon?
          Impressive reliability.
          1. your1970
            your1970 11 December 2022 19: 47
            +1
            Quote: Ulan.1812
            that, according to the theory of probability, the probability of such a flight at that time no more than 5-7 %.

            Therefore, we gave the GSS to the astronauts - because of the low reliability and lack of development of everything and everything.
            If there was reliability, there would be nothing to give ...
            1. Ulan.1812
              Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 20: 00
              +1
              Quote: your1970
              Quote: Ulan.1812
              that, according to the theory of probability, the probability of such a flight at that time no more than 5-7 %.

              Therefore, we gave the GSS to the astronauts - because of the low reliability and lack of development of everything and everything.
              If there was reliability, there would be nothing to give ...

              What is it about. And now the reliability is not one hundred percent, everyone remembers the disaster with the shuttles.
          2. Alex2711
            Alex2711 17 December 2022 10: 05
            +1
            According to the official version of NASA - in diapers!
            Also, according to NASA, their astronauts breathed pure oxygen for the entire flight! And where are the signs of decompression sickness after landing?
        2. nickname7
          nickname7 11 December 2022 14: 03
          -1
          Where does the unreal agility come from immediately after splashdown, when

          real astronauts on a stretcher are carried

          They are worn if an astronaut is weightless for half a year, then the pressure distribution system in the human blood vessels atrophies, therefore, after landing under gravity, people faint, they have to be forced out. They flew to the Moon for a short time (76 hours) and did not get atrophy, so the astronauts were not worn.
          The simplest proof is the footprints, if they are on the moon, then the Americans really walked on it. There are still traces.
          1. 26rus
            26rus 11 December 2022 16: 28
            +7
            Do not confuse warm with purple. 76 hours is the time spent directly on the Moon, the total duration of the Earth-Moon-Earth flight was 12+ days. Compare the state of the lunar astronauts and cosmonauts Sevastyanov and Nikolaev, who circled the Earth almost simultaneously on Soyuz-9 for 14 days.
            1. nickname7
              nickname7 13 December 2022 10: 31
              0
              12+ days

              I don’t know what you are confusing, 12 days of weightlessness is in any case too short to
              the cardiovascular system has been worked out so that a person faints when the position of the body changes. And half a year is not 12 days for you, the cardiovascular system will be worked up to such a state that astronauts have to wear it.
          2. Alex2711
            Alex2711 17 December 2022 10: 06
            +1
            According to NASA, their astronauts breathed pure oxygen for the entire flight! And where are the signs of decompression sickness after landing?
        3. krops777
          krops777 12 December 2022 05: 25
          +2
          You haven’t added a photo yet, but there are no less jambs than all of the above, by the way, the author writes that there are clear photographs of allegedly abandoned modules on the moon, I personally haven’t seen any except for points that may be remnants of unmanned vehicles, while the satellite can fly over 10 km from the surface, given the current resolution of photographic equipment, all dust particles can be counted on modules, and what this is still not widely available.
      4. steelmaker
        steelmaker 11 December 2022 10: 05
        +8
        "I have not met a single specialist in the field of rocket and space technology,"
        The United States delivered about 400 kg to Earth. soil. And with the USSR they shared lunar dust. All disputes will end when the United States shows and gives countries at least a 100-gram stone. Because Russia did it. Go to the Chelyabinsk Museum, look at the meteorite, which invigorates in the morning. Can you imagine what the conversations and accusations would be like if this meteorite had not been shown to the public. Therefore, stop grunting the USA with the author and show the moon stone at 100 gr.
        1. PPD
          PPD 11 December 2022 11: 52
          +6
          The United States delivered about 400 kg to Earth. soil.

          Interestingly, these kilograms were brought to the USA?
          Well, no one thought to remove this pile of sand?! wassat
          Something they did not come across taken together!
          If you think about it, this is the only material that was brought at all! And no need to argue! Fake photo, no! No, think logically!
          If you don't believe me, come here, here they are.
          Under glass in a vacuum, on public display! In the most crowded place, appreciate the type of power of America!
          Do not believe in authenticity, we can pick it up right now from any place for examination!
          Well, where is it all that secrecy is in style, and they brought something, but.
      5. paul3390
        paul3390 11 December 2022 10: 06
        +14
        There are several purely logical questions here.
        Here is the F-1 engine, judging by the claims - the greatest technological achievement, still unsurpassed. Where is the line of its development, why was it and its descendants not used anywhere else? That doesn't happen.

        Why did the cast weight increase with each launch? If the first Eagle of the type landed on the last drops of fuel, then they even hung a bibika on the latter and dragged the soil in centners. It is known - the battle is for every gram, but here - such liberties. Where?

        Why the hell would the mattress covers need a rover that has no scientific value? If an opportunity has already arisen, it would be more logical to drag, say, a drill to get a deep core, and not to collect dust with a scoop ..

        Psychologically unreliable behavior on the moon. Here you would - began to jump like a kangaroo, knowing that the slightest mistake - and you kirdyk, because there is no one to save? I think - every step was thought out, no?

        And such questions - for several volumes. However - for a long time set. And to which - no answers have been received.
        1. Ulan.1812
          Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 03
          +2
          Quote: paul3390
          There are several purely logical questions here.
          Here is the F-1 engine, judging by the claims - the greatest technological achievement, still unsurpassed. Where is the line of its development, why was it and its descendants not used anywhere else? That doesn't happen.

          Why did the cast weight increase with each launch? If the first Eagle of the type landed on the last drops of fuel, then they even hung a bibika on the latter and dragged the soil in centners. It is known - the battle is for every gram, but here - such liberties. Where?

          Why the hell would the mattress covers need a rover that has no scientific value? If an opportunity has already arisen, it would be more logical to drag, say, a drill to get a deep core, and not to collect dust with a scoop ..

          Psychologically unreliable behavior on the moon. Here you would - began to jump like a kangaroo, knowing that the slightest mistake - and you kirdyk, because there is no one to save? I think - every step was thought out, no?

          And such questions - for several volumes. However - for a long time set. And to which - no answers have been received.

          I agree, there are a lot of questions. In PM at the docking station. Engines with you considered that with such a section of the nozzle, the engine could not develop the declared power. The article was on "Malchish org". Put the maximum into low Earth orbit, without the lunar module.
        2. nickname7
          nickname7 11 December 2022 14: 13
          +1
          Here is the F-1 engine, judging by the claims - the greatest technological achievement, still unsurpassed.

          And why is the Soviet Buran not produced?
          The same reason with F-1, it was financed from the budget and was unprofitable, as the funding was closed, the project was closed, the staff was dismissed, the competencies were lost. Disband Roskosmos and in 10 years you will not be able to assemble it.
          1. paul3390
            paul3390 11 December 2022 19: 01
            +4
            Same reason with F-1

            Sorry - the heirs of the RD-170 from Energia are still in service and in good health, on its half of the RD-180 the US Atlas flies, and on the RD-191 Angara ... And where is at least SOMETHING from the F-1 ?? After all, they say that this is an epoch-making breakthrough machine, sort of like it was? AND?
            1. your1970
              your1970 11 December 2022 19: 51
              -3
              Quote: paul3390
              .. And where is at least SOMETHING from the F-1 ??
              - and where is at least something from the Soviet N-1 ??
              1. paul3390
                paul3390 11 December 2022 20: 01
                +6
                Are you kidding - or do you really not know the fate of the NK-33 engines ?? belay what

                It is used in the first stage of the Soyuz-2.1 V launch vehicle, it is planned to use it in the Soyuz-2-3 launch vehicle. It was used in the first stage of the Antares launch vehicle (Taurus II) of the Orbital Sciences Corporation.
                1. deddem
                  deddem 15 December 2022 12: 40
                  0
                  Quote: paul3390
                  Are you kidding - or do you really not know the fate of the NK-33 engines ?? belay what

                  It is used in the first stage of the Soyuz-2.1 V launch vehicle, it is planned to use it in the Soyuz-2-3 launch vehicle. It was used in the first stage of the Antares launch vehicle (Taurus II) of the Orbital Sciences Corporation.


                  After a couple of accidents at the stands, NK-33 on Antares is not used, RD-181 is used there.
            2. nickname7
              nickname7 13 December 2022 10: 24
              -1
              And where is at least SOMETHING from F-1

              That's because the product is for medium and small loads and they are often used, and the F-1 is too powerful, so the factories were dismissed.
              1. paul3390
                paul3390 13 December 2022 10: 41
                +2
                Yah??? What - for example, the hefty durynda Shuttle did not have to be launched?
                1. nickname7
                  nickname7 13 December 2022 12: 08
                  -1
                  Che - for example, the hefty fool Shuttle did not have to be launched


                  F-1 was too big even for a shuttle.
        3. Eule
          Eule 11 December 2022 18: 55
          +2
          Quote: paul3390
          needed a rover that had no

          The weight of the lunar rover is 210 kg,
          The weight of the "backpack" of the life support system, according to various sources, is about 36 kg, it has a supply of air and an absorber for 5 hours. That is, instead of a rover, it was possible to take six more sets for extravehicular work on the surface by weight, and dig a pit in 30 hours, take soil samples from different depths, in general, another 30 hours on the Moon - that would be a lot of scientific work, especially geologist.
          1. Alex2711
            Alex2711 17 December 2022 10: 17
            +1
            If we compare our apparatus, which was the first to bring lunar soil to Earth, and their apparatus, which carried two people and a car, then ours weighed 5600 kg before landing on the moon, and brought 100 grams of soil to Earth, and the American apparatus weighed about 3000 kg before landing on the moon. kg and then took off with two people and the ground! It's some weird math.
      6. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk 11 December 2022 10: 40
        +4
        Quote: Proxima

        An interesting pattern. I have not met a single specialist in the field of rocket and space technology who doubted a real landing on the moon. There are a number of serious bloggers in this

        And how many "specialists in the field of rocket and space technology" have you met? And "serious bloggers" are also, in your opinion, "experts in the field..."
      7. Submariner971
        Submariner971 11 December 2022 11: 08
        +4
        GSS cosmonaut Makarov and GSS and GRF cosmonaut commander Afanasiev (he flew on Shuttles, including) are not specialists for you?
        1. zenion
          zenion 11 December 2022 17: 15
          -1
          Did they design them? Or how a car driver can drive and know what to press, but the car cannot be repaired, specialists in various qualifications are needed. You can pour gasoline, add oil, but he did not study to change the piston and other ammunition.
      8. krops777
        krops777 12 December 2022 04: 55
        +1
        I have not met a single specialist in the field of rocket and space technology who doubted a real landing on the moon.


        And I had a chance to read about a Soviet specialist (I took it and measured the diameter of the exit hatch on the lunar module, but the meticulous ones turned out that the astronaut in his suit could not get through it), after his visit to the NASA museum, they stopped letting visitors to the exhibits lunar mission, you can only look from the side behind the fence, the rocket experts immediately figured out that the Saturn-5 rocket does not pick up the required speed and will not enter Earth orbit, it flies along a long parabola, and when the whole world applauded the flight of the Apollo 13 mission to the moon , our guys caught in the Bay of Biscay its descent module that had already returned, about the loss of documentation for Saturn 5 is generally beyond, NASA mutters something incomprehensible but prefers to remain silent more than nothing to hide the facts, it was not in vain that the USA, Lenya were coaxed, KAMAZ for 1 billion. green ones were built, and there were plenty of other gifts, why would it be at the height of the Cold War.
        1. Alex2711
          Alex2711 17 December 2022 10: 21
          +2
          I watched a video where an American museum worker (of average build) easily lifts a spacesuit in which they walked on the moon. Our most advanced space suit now weighs 150 kg. How much did their suit weigh then, and what super materials was the bull made of? And why is their modern suit now weighing 200 kg?
        2. Expert
          Expert 20 December 2022 23: 35
          0
          I would give you a plus, but I fundamentally disagree with this statement:
          Quote: krops777
          and there were plenty of other gifts
      9. qQQQ
        qQQQ 12 December 2022 22: 26
        +1
        Quote: Proxima
        And then the circus began instead of answering.

        But I'm interested in a slightly different question. How, at the level of electronics of that time, it was possible to carry out all stages of the flight, namely, take off - easy, fly, also not a problem, launch the landing module - there is such a thing, but then take off with this module, find the ship, enter the course, dock, well, fly back also not a question. And why these stages, with the modern development of technology, are still considered hardly possible for implementation, when it would seem that everything has already been invented. Transfer old schemes to a new base and fly.
      10. air wolf
        air wolf 14 December 2022 17: 47
        -2
        You are probably not yourself, go to a psychiatric hospital, check it out! And quickly, for the especially gifted:
        https://scorcher.ru/diary/topic.php?id=800&page_txt=39
      11. Mikhalych
        Mikhalych 17 December 2022 09: 23
        0
        An interesting pattern. I have not met a single specialist in the field of rocket and space technology who doubted a real landing on the moon.

        http://www.free-inform.narod.ru
        tongue
      12. Ivanov IV
        Ivanov IV 20 December 2022 16: 22
        +1
        You can name many who do not just doubt, but specifically asserts that they are falsified.
        Well, to the "lawyer" of the Americans Question:
        Bring at least one argument, at least one substantiated evidence confirming (confirming) the assurances of the Americans. They couldn't even take "cartoons" seriously in the pavilions. What kind of shooting can go in space.
        It is not difficult to deceive him who is glad to be deceived himself ...
        The Fool does not need a knife, you will lie to him from three boxes and ......
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 11 December 2022 06: 14
        +12
        Quote: Comrade
        They have nothing to say.
        I didn’t pay attention to the absence of stars before, in fact, really.

        One more... belay Dear! Well, try to shoot your let's say girl against the background of the starry sky! If you focus the device on a girl, then she will be perfectly visible, but there are no stars, and vice versa, if you focus on the stars, the girl will be "blurred".
        1. Lech from Android.
          Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 06: 33
          +2
          Quote: Proxima
          If you focus the device on a girl, then she will be perfectly visible, but there are no stars, and vice versa, if you focus on the stars, the girl will be "blurred".

          Then where are the pictures of the starry sky from the surface of the moon during this period of time?
          It would seem a trifle, but is it very significant?
        2. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 11 December 2022 11: 05
          +7
          If you focus the device on the girl, then it will be perfectly visible, but there are no stars, and vice versa, you point it at the stars, and the girl will be "blurred"
          In fact, you are right, but the point here is not in focus, but in exposure. For stars, a large exposure is needed, there is little light from them, and a lot from an object, a small exposure is needed there. Here you have to choose what you shoot.
          1. zenion
            zenion 11 December 2022 13: 23
            +3
            Aviator. So, what kind of reptile did not let them shoot, only the sky? It's so beautiful from this place, where they were to show what stars are visible from the moon, because they are not visible from the Earth. Here in this picture is the star Pegasik, and in that picture - his mother, her mother and mother-in-law.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 11 December 2022 13: 29
              0
              Aviator. So, what kind of reptile did not let them shoot, only the sky?
              Why are you asking me about this? I wasn't there, and I wouldn't shoot the sky there if I flew to the moon. The sky is visible from the Earth. But the suitcase of regolith that they brought is a significant proof of the nonsense of the PR campaign of the widow Kubrick. The old woman had to live on something, so she divorced the population.
              1. Krasnoyarsk
                Krasnoyarsk 12 December 2022 16: 19
                +4
                Quote: Aviator_
                I wasn't there, and I wouldn't shoot the sky there if I flew to the moon. The sky is visible from the Earth.

                I would shoot, and how I would shoot. Ido astronomers would have ordered. It is one thing to observe the stars from the Earth, another from the Moon, and still another from Mars. Why pull telescopes on satellites? To watch the STARS!
              2. Alex2711
                Alex2711 17 December 2022 10: 28
                0
                And where is this suitcase? They don’t give this soil to anyone, but what they gave to the Netherlands turned out to be a piece of wood. They conserved all the soil and said that it was for posterity. And what was handed out in the form of souvenirs was either filled with glass or plastic, and it is impossible to open it without damaging the soil, and there is no evidence that this soil is from the Moon.
        3. Ulan.1812
          Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 06
          0
          Quote: Proxima
          Quote: Comrade
          They have nothing to say.
          I didn’t pay attention to the absence of stars before, in fact, really.

          One more... belay Dear! Well, try to shoot your let's say girl against the background of the starry sky! If you focus the device on a girl, then she will be perfectly visible, but there are no stars, and vice versa, if you focus on the stars, the girl will be "blurred".

          That is, it is possible to remove the starry sky from the Moon.
          Moreover, this is also a scientific interest, which constellations are visible from this point on the Moon.
          Did the Americans not care?
          1. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 11 December 2022 13: 39
            -2
            Moreover, this is also a scientific interest, which constellations are visible from this point on the Moon.
            Did the Americans not care?
            There is no scientific interest in this. The constellations will be the same, since the nearest star (Proxima Centauri) is located 4 light years from Earth (9 km), and the maximum displacement of an observer on Earth relative to an observer on the Moon is 500 km. Consider an angle. And the other stars of the constellations are even further away.
            1. Ulan.1812
              Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 15: 23
              +2
              Quote: Aviator_
              Moreover, this is also a scientific interest, which constellations are visible from this point on the Moon.
              Did the Americans not care?
              There is no scientific interest in this. The constellations will be the same, since the nearest star (Proxima Centauri) is located 4 light years from Earth (9 km), and the maximum displacement of an observer on Earth relative to an observer on the Moon is 500 km. Consider an angle. And the other stars of the constellations are even further away.

              I think it is up to scientists to decide if there is a scientific interest for them or not.
              But a fact is a fact, the astronauts could take a picture of the starry sky, but for some reason they didn’t.
              Then such questions simply would not arise.
              1. Aviator_
                Aviator_ 11 December 2022 15: 49
                -2
                I think it is up to scientists to decide if there is a scientific interest for them or not.
                Well, here's how I deal with them. I even head the department of physics. And I don't think it makes sense.
                1. Ulan.1812
                  Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 17: 15
                  +2
                  Quote: Aviator_
                  I think it is up to scientists to decide if there is a scientific interest for them or not.
                  Well, here's how I deal with them. I even head the department of physics. And I don't think it makes sense.

                  Listen, firstly, it is unprovable that you are a scientist and manager. department of physics.
                  But I used to trust people, for which I was sometimes disappointed.
                  So I believe you BUT!
                  If you personally are not interested in this as a physicist, then this is not a reason to speak for everyone and that all scientists are not interested in this. Generally not an argument.
                  1. Aviator_
                    Aviator_ 11 December 2022 18: 16
                    -4
                    If you personally are not interested in this as a physicist, then this is not a reason to speak for everyone and that all scientists are not interested in this. Generally not an argument.
                    You see, all scientists, and not only professionals with whom I communicate, believe that they flew to the Moon not for images of the celestial sphere, but behind the ground. And if you believe Kubrick's widow, then please, discussions with believers are impossible. And in preparatory courses I give schoolchildren the task of estimating what size disk is needed to cover the Earth from geostationary orbit. Hold the disk at arm's length. Try to evaluate yourself, an interesting result will turn out.
                    1. Ulan.1812
                      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 19: 29
                      +2
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      If you personally are not interested in this as a physicist, then this is not a reason to speak for everyone and that all scientists are not interested in this. Generally not an argument.
                      You see, all scientists, and not only professionals with whom I communicate, believe that they flew to the Moon not for images of the celestial sphere, but behind the ground. And if you believe Kubrick's widow, then please, discussions with believers are impossible. And in preparatory courses I give schoolchildren the task of estimating what size disk is needed to cover the Earth from geostationary orbit. Hold the disk at arm's length. Try to evaluate yourself, an interesting result will turn out.

                      I have not been a schoolboy for more than forty years, so your desire to prick me is somehow petty.
                      Have fun yourself with your experiments with schoolchildren, and I have enough classes. I'm finishing up another order right now.
                      Whether I believe Kubrick's widow or not, this is again your personal conjecture. I didn't talk about it.
                      Nobody disputes the authenticity of Kubrick's notes. He wrote it, not the widow. Why did you transfer the arrows to the widow is not clear.
                      I don't get into a discussion. Impossible means impossible.
                      All the best.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 11 December 2022 20: 43
                        -3
                        It's impossible to talk to believers. I was trying to find out if you can appreciate anything in astronomy. It turns out you can't. It's about whether I'm a scientist or not. I will not present a scan from the work book. How to work with the camera is also forgotten.
                        Nobody disputes the authenticity of Kubrick's notes. He wrote it, not the widow. Why did you transfer the arrows to the widow is not clear.
                        And why challenge attempts to cash in on sensationalism? He wrote, the widow received the money. Well, that's all. hi
                      2. Ulan.1812
                        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 21: 08
                        +3
                        Quote: Aviator_
                        It's impossible to talk to believers. I was trying to find out if you can appreciate anything in astronomy. It turns out you can't. It's about whether I'm a scientist or not. I will not present a scan from the work book. How to work with the camera is also forgotten.
                        Nobody disputes the authenticity of Kubrick's notes. He wrote it, not the widow. Why did you transfer the arrows to the widow is not clear.
                        And why challenge attempts to cash in on sensationalism? He wrote, the widow received the money. Well, that's all. hi

                        You again try to record me as a believer. If I define you as a Buddhist, will you like it?
                        Why are you doing such an unseemly thing as ascribe to the interlocutor what he did not say?
                        Well, not pretty. Moreover, I have already answered this question, and you are again trying to write me down as some kind of believer. And where did I deny that the widow wanted to cash in on the sensation?
                        Are you responsible for your words?
                        Well then, quote where I denied
                        The fact that you are constantly conjecturing something about me, inventing something, is from the arsenal of trolls.
                        Have I ever come up with something for you? Why are you doing this?
                        And at the expense of photography, I wrote enough so that every person who was involved in it realized that I knew it firsthand.
                        And not with the one where at first there were soap dishes, then digital ones, smartphones, where you don’t need to think.
                        And with the one where the films are, where you need to think, where you need to develop the films and print the photos yourself.
                    2. Krasnoyarsk
                      Krasnoyarsk 12 December 2022 16: 29
                      +2
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      You see, all scientists, and not only professionals with whom I communicate, believe that they flew to the Moon not for images of the celestial sphere, but behind the ground. BUT

                      Woe to us, woe to such scientists. If they really think so. The Americans and our, not yours, scientists, after reading this, twist their fingers to their temples. The program is very expensive, so the goals of this program are not only lunar soil, but also a lot of scientific research. And not only on the surface of the Moon, if they were there, but also in flight to it.
                  2. Korsar4
                    Korsar4 11 December 2022 19: 07
                    0
                    People on the forum are quite suitable for verification. Although I have never met my colleague Aviator, I could confirm his regalia.
                    1. Ulan.1812
                      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 19: 33
                      +3
                      Quote: Korsar4
                      People on the forum are quite suitable for verification. Although I have never met my colleague Aviator, I could confirm his regalia.

                      Your right to confirm, I do not dispute his regalia, but I cannot verify.
                      Only a passport, diploma and work book can confirm.
                      And so most of us here under anonymous nicknames.
                      1. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 11 December 2022 20: 12
                        +1
                        Nevertheless, the image is formed. Even if it's a role-playing game.

                        And let the personnel department check it when they apply for work.
                      2. Ulan.1812
                        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 20: 53
                        +3
                        Quote: Korsar4
                        Nevertheless, the image is formed. Even if it's a role-playing game.

                        And let the personnel department check it when they apply for work.

                        So I don't argue with that. Of course, some idea of ​​a person can be added by communication.
                2. Alex2711
                  Alex2711 17 December 2022 10: 39
                  +1
                  I am not an expert in astronautics, I would like to hear the opinion of a scientist:
                  1. Soviet scientists found out that the Moon is brown, why is the Moon gray in all American photographs?
                  2. According to NASA, their astronauts breathed pure oxygen for the entire flight! And where are the signs of decompression sickness after landing?
                  3. Why is there no ablative protection on their descent modules? And why is there paint on the hull after landing on Earth?
        4. The comment was deleted.
        5. 26rus
          26rus 11 December 2022 16: 01
          +6
          [Quote] [/ quote]
          Then how can you explain that both the elements of the station's structure and the stars are perfectly visible on the pictures from the ISS?
        6. zenion
          zenion 11 December 2022 17: 19
          +2
          Proxima. The device flies sent to the planets and hell where, but at the same time it can shoot everything along the way, if there is a program for this. If you want to shoot the girl, if you want, shoot the stars. Moreover, he also sends to those who sent him to such and such a mother, everything that interested them, despite the fact that he can fly in the direction of the Sun. Isn't it interesting what kind of stars are visible from where they are and to take a lot of shots, in all directions, as launch vehicles to the Moon do. You can take a picture of a girl, and when she leaves the frame, shoot everything behind her, you can compare it and here she is against the background of the stars.
        7. vadimtt
          vadimtt 14 December 2022 15: 50
          +1
          That's not how it's done. Put a girl. Camera on a tripod. Hyperfocal focus, f-stop 7 to 11, ISO 100 or less, shutter speed 5 min. Highlight the girl with the weakest flashlight, you can emphasize something with light, turn off the flashlight, remove the girl. A few minutes later you have a gorgeous shot with a girl, stars and maybe even a gorgeous milky way laughing
    3. Qas
      Qas 11 December 2022 07: 01
      -1
      Bullshit smacks of your education. Physicists have long explained this point. There is a desire to make sure-YouTube will help you.
    4. steelmaker
      steelmaker 11 December 2022 10: 11
      +2
      "Where are the stars in the picture in the lunar sky?"
      Yes, the stars are second. Where is the dust from under the wheels?
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 11 December 2022 10: 59
      -2
      Maybe I'm blind, but where are the stars in the picture in the moonlit sky?
      And you try to photograph something near a street lamp at night so that you can see the starry sky too. Show the result. Here you have to choose what should remain in the picture - an object or a starry sky. The difference in their illumination is colossal, it exceeds the dynamic range of the recording equipment.
      1. Ulan.1812
        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 10
        +3
        Quote: Aviator_
        Maybe I'm blind, but where are the stars in the picture in the moonlit sky?
        And you try to photograph something near a street lamp at night so that you can see the starry sky too. Show the result. Here you have to choose what should remain in the picture - an object or a starry sky. The difference in their illumination is colossal, it exceeds the dynamic range of the recording equipment.

        Why should you choose? Why can't you take a picture of both? Isn't a snapshot of the starry sky from this point on the Moon of interest and couldn't it have been taken a couple of shots? What's the problem?
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 11 December 2022 13: 25
          -4
          Why should you choose?
          Because here different objects require different exposure. Only and everything.
          1. Ulan.1812
            Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 15: 17
            +3
            Quote: Aviator_
            Why should you choose?
            Because here different objects require different exposure. Only and everything.

            Yes, this is of course a huge problem, as A. Raikin said.
            Probably, in order to change the exposure, it was necessary to fly to Earth, change the exposure and return to the Moon.
            I hope you understand that this is not an argument.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 11 December 2022 15: 47
              -4
              Probably, in order to change the exposure, it was necessary to fly to Earth, change the exposure and return to the Moon.
              I hope you understand that this is not an argument.
              Have you ever photographed anything yourself? Looks like no.
              1. Ulan.1812
                Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 17: 06
                +3
                Quote: Aviator_
                Probably, in order to change the exposure, it was necessary to fly to Earth, change the exposure and return to the Moon.
                I hope you understand that this is not an argument.
                Have you ever photographed anything yourself? Looks like no.

                No, you didn't take pictures of anything. And I began to study at the House of Pioneers in the photo circle back in the 6th grade at the age of 13.
                And I still shoot with Zenit E for the mood.
                1. Ulan.1812
                  Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 17: 09
                  +3
                  Quote: Ulan.1812
                  Quote: Aviator_
                  Probably, in order to change the exposure, it was necessary to fly to Earth, change the exposure and return to the Moon.
                  I hope you understand that this is not an argument.
                  Have you ever photographed anything yourself? Looks like no.

                  No, you didn't take pictures of anything. And I began to study at the House of Pioneers in the photo circle back in the 6th grade at the age of 13.
                  And I still shoot with Zenit E for the mood.

                  I forgot to add it was back in 68 and you did not deny that the exposition could be changed on the spot. I don't think it needed to be changed.
                  1. Aviator_
                    Aviator_ 11 December 2022 18: 07
                    -2
                    You have not refuted in any way that the exposure could have been changed on the spot.
                    Why refute stupidity? The astronauts needed to take pictures of the moon and themselves on it, and that's what they did. The device was there, like, "Hasselblad". Its analogue is our Salyut. They did not need to shoot the stars, especially since the constellations from there look the same as from the Earth.
                    And I still shoot with Zenit E for the mood.
                    And mess around with a phenidone developer, or do you prefer hydroquinone?
                    1. Ulan.1812
                      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 18: 21
                      +1
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      You have not refuted in any way that the exposure could have been changed on the spot.
                      Why refute stupidity? The astronauts needed to take pictures of the moon and themselves on it, and that's what they did. The device was there, like, "Hasselblad". Its analogue is our Salyut. They did not need to shoot the stars, especially since the constellations from there look the same as from the Earth.
                      And I still shoot with Zenit E for the mood.
                      And mess around with a phenidone developer, or do you prefer hydroquinone?

                      Maybe stop being rude? It was you who said stupidity by writing for the astronauts what they needed or didn’t need, what they wanted and what they didn’t want.
                      Are you the heir of Wolf Messing, what thoughts can you read?
                      I don't understand your obstinacy.
                      The fact is the fact that the astronauts could photograph the starry sky. Everything that happened there is interesting. And this is also a fact.
                      Why they didn't do it is the question.
                      As well as many other questions.
                      I do not deny that they COULD be there under a very fortunate set of circumstances.
                      But perhaps they weren't.
                      The final answer can only be given by another expedition that will visit this place.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 11 December 2022 18: 31
                        0
                        I apologize if I offended you by mentioning the process of processing negative black and white film. I never thought that phenidone with hydroquinone would give such a reaction.
                      2. Ulan.1812
                        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 19: 56
                        +1
                        Quote: Aviator_
                        I apologize if I offended you by mentioning the process of processing negative black and white film. I never thought that phenidone with hydroquinone would give such a reaction.

                        Well, they mentioned and mentioned. Are you saying that I have never developed black and white film and I don’t know what a photo tank is?
                        That you've never done photo printing before? He did more than just printing. For example, he also worked with positive film for copying.
                        My magnifier was "Upa". This is in a suitcase, if you remember. As I understand it, you ask leading questions to convict me of the fact that I have no idea about photography and do not know what shutter speed, focusing, photo exposure meter, lens hood and so on are. I have no reason to deceive you.
                        However, enough has been said, there really is no point further, since the conversation went about Kubrick's widow and my faith in her, some schoolchildren, whether I was engaged in photography and so on.
                        The fact is the fact to photograph the starry sky from the moon, astronauts can. And why didn’t they do it, this is fortune-telling on the coffee grounds.
                        Only they can say it themselves.
                      3. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 11 December 2022 20: 50
                        0
                        My magnifier was "Upa". This is in a suitcase, if you remember.
                        Of course I remember. There was a father's, UPA-2, later, in 1976, I bought a UPA-6, because I shot a lot. Your advice on changing the exposure of the image exclusively on Earth is incomprehensible. And so - hi
                      4. Ulan.1812
                        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 21: 13
                        +1
                        Quote: Aviator_
                        My magnifier was "Upa". This is in a suitcase, if you remember.
                        Of course I remember. There was a father's, UPA-2, later, in 1976, I bought a UPA-6, because I shot a lot. Your advice on changing the exposure of the image exclusively on Earth is incomprehensible. And so - hi

                        I think the conversation was helpful and respectful, which is the most important thing.
                        Please accept my sincere respect. I have always respected professionals. hi drinks
                      5. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 11 December 2022 21: 33
                        0
                        Come on, what does not happen in the conversation. Yuri Mukhin pissed me off in his newspaper "Duel" at one time, we grappled with him about American soil from the moon. In his book, he also walked over me, and rather clumsily. However, that is why in 2006 I received a call from Channel One TV and was invited to participate in a program dedicated to Cosmonautics Day. Then this program was shown on April 15 after 24 hours, this is the airtime they chose. Well, sorry for my incontinence. drinks
                      6. Ulan.1812
                        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 21: 41
                        +2
                        Quote: Aviator_
                        Come on, what does not happen in the conversation. Yuri Mukhin pissed me off in his newspaper "Duel" at one time, we grappled with him about American soil from the moon. In his book, he also walked over me, and rather clumsily. However, that is why in 2006 I received a call from Channel One TV and was invited to participate in a program dedicated to Cosmonautics Day. Then this program was shown on April 15 after 24 hours, this is the airtime they chose. Well, sorry for my incontinence. drinks

                        We are all human beings and emotions are not going anywhere either. So if you have to excuse me. With regards to Mukhin, I'm not his fan ... to put it mildly. That's why I never refer to it.
                    2. Eule
                      Eule 11 December 2022 18: 58
                      +3
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      like Hasselblad.

                      It's funny, but part of the mirror movement mechanism of this apparatus is a pneumatic damper in the form of a cylinder with a piston. How it will work in vacuum is a complete mystery to me.
                      1. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 11 December 2022 19: 22
                        +2
                        It's funny, but part of the mirror movement mechanism of this apparatus is a pneumatic damper in the form of a cylinder with a piston. How it will work in vacuum is a complete mystery to me.
                        For me too. Probably modified for extreme conditions. And, most likely, the shooting was from a sealed box - they are tormented by transferring mechanisms to vacuum conditions. Indeed, even now, almost all aircraft on-board equipment is in hermetically sealed containers. When I recently had to shove the laser into an area of ​​low pressure, I had to shove its feeder into such a container with sealed leads - there were fears that the electrolytes would burst. And so everything turned out well.
                    3. Krasnoyarsk
                      Krasnoyarsk 12 December 2022 16: 35
                      +1
                      Quote: Aviator_
                      They did not need to shoot the stars, especially since the constellations from there look the same as from the Earth.

                      No not like this. Astronomers would tell you what the difference is.
        2. solar
          solar 11 December 2022 18: 17
          0
          Isn't a snapshot of the starry sky from this point on the moon of interest

          much smaller than the lunar surface. Stars can be removed from orbit, it's even more convenient
          1. Ulan.1812
            Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 19: 44
            +2
            Quote from solar
            Isn't a snapshot of the starry sky from this point on the moon of interest

            much smaller than the lunar surface. Stars can be removed from orbit, it's even more convenient

            Perhaps so, perhaps not. The question is that they could spend a couple of frames, and whether they are of interest or not, this would have been decided by American scientists.
            I don’t understand at all why, on such a simple occasion, you need to arrange such an argument and make assumptions and wonder why they didn’t. The exposition is not the same, not interesting and so on.
            There is a simple fact - you can take such a photo, although some here denied it.
            And the second fact - they could, but did not.
            Why didn't I put forward options, I just voiced the fact.
            And then let everyone fantasize why.
    7. yuriy55
      yuriy55 11 December 2022 12: 51
      +1
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      sadness ... it smells like bullshit.

      If this "sadness" smells like bullshit, then what's inside?
    8. Dmitry_24rus
      Dmitry_24rus 11 December 2022 16: 57
      -2
      Now traces of the Americans are visible in modern telescopes, as well as our Lunokhods. Wake up, it was.
    9. solar
      solar 11 December 2022 18: 15
      +3
      Maybe I'm blind, but where are the stars in the picture in the moonlit sky?

      On the spot. But they are not fixed on film - a much longer shutter speed is needed than for photographs of objects in daylight, which were taken on the moon. The Soviet and Chinese moon rovers did not have stars in the photo either.
      1. Expert
        Expert 21 December 2022 22: 06
        0
        What do you think this is? Pictured is Lunokhod-1.
    10. View from the outside
      View from the outside 11 December 2022 20: 30
      +1
      Actually, S. Kubrick's "interview" turned out to be a fake
    11. tarkhil
      tarkhil 11 December 2022 21: 03
      +1
      No, not blind, just never heard of the dynamic range of film.
    12. View from the outside
      View from the outside 11 December 2022 21: 15
      0
      This "interview" was made on maple by an unknown filmmaker Michael Murry, and a certain Tom Mayk acted as Kubrick. Saw, Shura (this topic), they are golden ...
    13. Gnefredov
      Gnefredov 11 December 2022 22: 50
      -1
      Exposure is short. To make it longer will not work, light the film.
      In general, the topic about the stars is well discussed on many forums where the lunalists ask what they think are "the most tricky questions" winked
    14. The comment was deleted.
  2. Comrade
    Comrade 11 December 2022 05: 40
    +10
    The biggest weakness in the theory of any denier of astronauts flying to the moon is the availability of lunar soil samples.

    Deny not all, but only the most first flight to the moon.
    Soil samples are great, but what about, for example, the "moonstone" that Armstrong personally presented to the Queen of the Netherlands during his world tour?

    When the revisionists began to talk that the very first expedition to the moon was a performance, the National Museum of the Netherlands in the summer of 2009 gave this exhibit for examination. The results of the analysis showed that it was a stone from the moon, but a piece of petrified wood. The verdict is final, beyond doubt.
    The Dutch called NASA, they replied that moon rocks were donated to more than a hundred countries around the world. However, these stones were delivered by later missions.
    And similar curiosities and inexplicable facts, a wagon and a small cart, which is quite enough to say that the mission Apollo 11 was fake.
    One American video, filmed by an enthusiast, came to mind, where, among other experiments, it is shown how an air jet from a pipe that blows off grass after cutting, and fallen leaves from lawns in autumn, easily lifts gravel into the air.
    And then they say - think about how, after landing the module on the surface of the Moon, dust could remain under it, on which the boot of one of the astronauts was printed, if the power of the engines of the landing module is immeasurably greater than the power of the motor of the tube for cleaning grass and leaves?
    Or here's another fact.
    The pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on the surface of the Moon does not match the pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on display in the museum.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 06: 21
      +2
      This is not only...

      Pay attention to the location of the flag-panel in an airless space where there is no wind... what
      What the hell...it shouldn't be like that.
      Although two sticks allow you to do this ... the stick is visible along the top edge of the flag.
      1. novel66
        novel66 11 December 2022 06: 34
        +9
        And where!! Where!! All these 400 kg of soil ??? They say - lost!!
        1. Ulan.1812
          Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 19
          +2
          Quote: novel xnumx
          And where!! Where!! All these 400 kg of soil ??? They say - lost!!

          And another question, where are the originals of the films shot on the moon?
          They say the cleaner lit up when she was cleaning and accidentally dropped a rack with films. Explanation for children and the insane.
        2. Comrade
          Comrade 11 December 2022 19: 45
          0
          Quote: novel xnumx
          And where!! Where!! All these 400 kg of soil ???

          Yes, they landed too quickly, so they threw the lunar soil overboard to slow down the fall.
          laughing
        3. your1970
          your1970 11 December 2022 20: 01
          -3
          Quote: novel xnumx
          All these 400 kg of soil ???

          Well, they transferred 340 grams to the USSR
          1. Alex2711
            Alex2711 17 December 2022 11: 01
            +1
            I read an interview with a scientist from GEOKHI, so he said that the Americans did not transfer any soil, but provided a ready-made document comparing their soil with ours.
      2. Catfish
        Catfish 11 December 2022 07: 07
        +11
        a stick is visible along the top edge of the flag.


        Quite right - there is a stick (tube) there.

      3. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 11 December 2022 11: 09
        +5
        Pay attention to the location of the flag-panel in an airless space where there is no wind...
        So what? An ordinary crumpled rag of the type of calendered nylon. If you don’t know what it is, I can give an example with crumpled starched linen.
      4. Human_manoid
        Human_manoid 11 December 2022 13: 06
        +3
        A very good example of the falsification of the presence of man on the moon. Planting a flag there makes America a pioneer. But the slope of the shadow from the flag and from the person is different, which means that the lighting of the picture was a studio light located nearby. And Hollywood made many more mistakes when creating the "documentary" of lunar landscapes. This was noted by experts.
        As for the experts, I can only refer to our cosmonaut Leonov, whom I personally met. And his opinion completely coincides with this point of view.
        Yes, undoubtedly the Americans received both soil and they had lunar landings there, but there was no Armstrong, who, lately, himself was not sure about his visit to the moon.
      5. Comrade
        Comrade 11 December 2022 14: 50
        +3
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        This is not only...

        Yes, the Americans made a lot of “punctures”.
        Off topic, of course, but I remembered the revived "corpse" in Bucha, after the passage of the last car, he sat down on the curb and tucked his legs. You could see him in the rearview mirror.
        Also the production of the Americans, and also a puncture.
      6. Eule
        Eule 11 December 2022 19: 01
        -1
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        the location of the flag-panel in the airless

        On Earth, dust raised by shoes is immediately decelerated by air and falls. In space, dust particles from steps, regardless of their weight, will fly in an arc, and six times longer than on Earth, and dust particles hitting the flag and giving it vibrations that are impossible on Earth - you can see fabric gaps from slightly larger grains.
      7. Alex2711
        Alex2711 17 December 2022 10: 57
        +1
        According to the research of Soviet scientists, the Moon is brown, and in all American photographs it is gray))
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 11 December 2022 09: 17
      +1
      Quote: Comrade
      The biggest weakness in the theory of any denier of astronauts flying to the moon is the availability of lunar soil samples.

      Deny not all, but only the most first flight to the moon.
      Soil samples are great, but what about, for example, the "moonstone" that Armstrong personally presented to the Queen of the Netherlands during his world tour?

      When the revisionists began to talk that the very first expedition to the moon was a performance, the National Museum of the Netherlands in the summer of 2009 gave this exhibit for examination. The results of the analysis showed that it was a stone from the moon, but a piece of petrified wood. The verdict is final, beyond doubt.
      The Dutch called NASA, they replied that moon rocks were donated to more than a hundred countries around the world. However, these stones were delivered by later missions.
      And similar curiosities and inexplicable facts, a wagon and a small cart, which is quite enough to say that the mission Apollo 11 was fake.
      One American video, filmed by an enthusiast, came to mind, where, among other experiments, it is shown how an air jet from a pipe that blows off grass after cutting, and fallen leaves from lawns in autumn, easily lifts gravel into the air.
      And then they say - think about how, after landing the module on the surface of the Moon, dust could remain under it, on which the boot of one of the astronauts was printed, if the power of the engines of the landing module is immeasurably greater than the power of the motor of the tube for cleaning grass and leaves?
      Or here's another fact.
      The pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on the surface of the Moon does not match the pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on display in the museum.

      The moonstone was sent to the museum by the children of an important dignitary of the Netherlands, and their story no longer fit; their entire parent did not hold any post at the time of the alleged transfer, NASA also knows nothing about this transfer. Just a couple of guys fed the museum fake
      1. Ulan.1812
        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 23
        +3
        Quote: BlackMokona
        Quote: Comrade
        The biggest weakness in the theory of any denier of astronauts flying to the moon is the availability of lunar soil samples.

        Deny not all, but only the most first flight to the moon.
        Soil samples are great, but what about, for example, the "moonstone" that Armstrong personally presented to the Queen of the Netherlands during his world tour?

        When the revisionists began to talk that the very first expedition to the moon was a performance, the National Museum of the Netherlands in the summer of 2009 gave this exhibit for examination. The results of the analysis showed that it was a stone from the moon, but a piece of petrified wood. The verdict is final, beyond doubt.
        The Dutch called NASA, they replied that moon rocks were donated to more than a hundred countries around the world. However, these stones were delivered by later missions.
        And similar curiosities and inexplicable facts, a wagon and a small cart, which is quite enough to say that the mission Apollo 11 was fake.
        One American video, filmed by an enthusiast, came to mind, where, among other experiments, it is shown how an air jet from a pipe that blows off grass after cutting, and fallen leaves from lawns in autumn, easily lifts gravel into the air.
        And then they say - think about how, after landing the module on the surface of the Moon, dust could remain under it, on which the boot of one of the astronauts was printed, if the power of the engines of the landing module is immeasurably greater than the power of the motor of the tube for cleaning grass and leaves?
        Or here's another fact.
        The pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on the surface of the Moon does not match the pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on display in the museum.

        The moonstone was sent to the museum by the children of an important dignitary of the Netherlands, and their story no longer fit; their entire parent did not hold any post at the time of the alleged transfer, NASA also knows nothing about this transfer. Just a couple of guys fed the museum fake

        Go nuts, some kids bring a stone supposedly from the Moon to the museum, and the museum staff are all the time ... oohs and immediately believed the kids?
        Maybe I should also send my grandson with a cobblestone to the museum since everyone there is so gullible.
    3. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 16
      +1
      Quote: Comrade
      The biggest weakness in the theory of any denier of astronauts flying to the moon is the availability of lunar soil samples.

      Deny not all, but only the most first flight to the moon.
      Soil samples are great, but what about, for example, the "moonstone" that Armstrong personally presented to the Queen of the Netherlands during his world tour?

      When the revisionists began to talk that the very first expedition to the moon was a performance, the National Museum of the Netherlands in the summer of 2009 gave this exhibit for examination. The results of the analysis showed that it was a stone from the moon, but a piece of petrified wood. The verdict is final, beyond doubt.
      The Dutch called NASA, they replied that moon rocks were donated to more than a hundred countries around the world. However, these stones were delivered by later missions.
      And similar curiosities and inexplicable facts, a wagon and a small cart, which is quite enough to say that the mission Apollo 11 was fake.
      One American video, filmed by an enthusiast, came to mind, where, among other experiments, it is shown how an air jet from a pipe that blows off grass after cutting, and fallen leaves from lawns in autumn, easily lifts gravel into the air.
      And then they say - think about how, after landing the module on the surface of the Moon, dust could remain under it, on which the boot of one of the astronauts was printed, if the power of the engines of the landing module is immeasurably greater than the power of the motor of the tube for cleaning grass and leaves?
      Or here's another fact.
      The pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on the surface of the Moon does not match the pattern of the sole of Armstrong's boot on display in the museum.

      There are enough stones from meteorites on the Moon. And there are enough of them on Earth.
      Perhaps the only real flight was Apollo 13, which ended in an accident.
      And perhaps it was another accident, because such a one that we are told about would have smashed the ship to pieces in a vacuum.
      But that's just my guess.
    4. solar
      solar 11 December 2022 18: 20
      0
      Soil samples are great, but what about, for example, the "moonstone" that Armstrong personally presented to the Queen of the Netherlands during his world tour?

      he didn’t present anything to the queen, you would have read the sign. However, it was written from the words of the descendants of Middendorf, no one confirmed this statement
  3. ammunition
    ammunition 11 December 2022 06: 13
    +11
    sad
    At full thrust, the acceleration of the rise of the lunar module (with astronauts on board and a load of soil), must be - 1.6 m / s square. Considering 0.2 sec of inertia of exit at 100% power - After 2 (two) seconds after the start, the module must rise above the start table by 3 (three) meters. (on the video - more than 6) 3 seconds after the start - on 6.1 метр.(on the video - at least 15 ti) (The height of the take-off stage is 3,76 m).
    But judging by this shooting, the acceleration of the rise was ( estimated ) from 4.5 to 5.7 m/s sq. (which is impossible)
    ---------------------------
    I will not answer. I won't explain either. I haven't quite figured it out myself.
    1. dmi.pris1
      dmi.pris1 11 December 2022 08: 01
      +4
      Do you take into account G for the conditions of the Moon? I can only explain this.
      1. ammunition
        ammunition 11 December 2022 08: 28
        +7
        Quote: dmi.pris
        Do you take into account G for the conditions of the Moon? I can only explain this.

        sad You just "kill" with such a question -)) Of course, it is taken into account everything.. Calculated accurately and rechecked 40 times. All this elementary Dynamics, Kinematics and Statics (etc., etc., etc.) have been for more than 40 years .. like 2x2 \u4d XNUMX .. got into -)) . I knew .. that it is difficult to resist .. not to answer! winked .
        Please repeat the calculations yourself! All data for this is publicly available. The mass of the takeoff stage with fuel. Masses of astronauts in spacesuits. Take-off engine thrust .. Gravity on the Moon (weight on the Moon).. etc. etc. etc. Two days for a scrupulous calculation .. (although it is elementary) .. but rechecking and rechecking ..-)) .
        But I’m definitely putting an end to this comment .. A toxic topic .. and empty arguments. ehma!
        1. dmi.pris1
          dmi.pris1 11 December 2022 08: 39
          +4
          I agree with you, so much has been broken on this topic ..
    2. shikin
      shikin 11 December 2022 18: 21
      +2
      Are you sure that the shooting speed is sustained?
      1. ammunition
        ammunition 12 December 2022 16: 43
        +1
        Quote from shikin
        Are you sure that the shooting speed is sustained?

        In the upper right corner of the screen is a native stopwatch, with a voice countdown. Synchronized with the stopwatch of the video itself.
  4. Luminman
    Luminman 11 December 2022 06: 27
    +10
    It is impossible to hide such a falsification. Too many people were involved in the project...
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 06: 30
      +4
      The Americans urgently needed something to kill the championship of the USSR in spacewalks ... but here all means are good. request
      1. novel66
        novel66 11 December 2022 06: 35
        +8
        Rocket - carrier where? Not even documentation
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 11 December 2022 09: 17
          0
          Quote: novel xnumx
          Rocket - carrier where? Not even documentation

          Even the three assembled rockets remained and are exhibited in museums.
      2. novel66
        novel66 11 December 2022 06: 36
        +5
        Where is the toilet?? Shit in your pants?? ! T! Ttttt
        1. Lech from Android.
          Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 06: 44
          +7
          Quote: novel xnumx
          Where is the toilet?? Shit in your pants?? ! T! Ttttt

          Difficult question... what
          the volume of the spacecraft capsule is small and pooping in it without a separate toilet is a thankless task ... remember how the American astronaut on the ISS freaked out when their toilet broke ... she drilled vile holes in our toilet out of anger. am
          So trust them after that.
        2. Qas
          Qas 11 December 2022 07: 08
          -2
          Pampers - they were already in the USA at that time. You only need a couple or three for each. And the Americans, by the way, recognized it.
          1. vitvit123
            vitvit123 11 December 2022 07: 47
            +5
            I'm just arguing ... how to change diapers in a spacesuit?
            1. dmi.pris1
              dmi.pris1 11 December 2022 08: 04
              +4
              How long were they in spacesuits?
              1. vitvit123
                vitvit123 11 December 2022 10: 54
                +4
                So I want to ask you to explain this to me ... as far as I think, all the time of the flight ... I think when the astronauts flew in the ship, they were also in spacesuits ... they did not hang in orbit ... and the size of the ship, in my opinion, they don’t contribute to dressing up, it’s not the ISS ... somehow I think so ... but I do, ..., ak, so I’m forgiven if I’m wrong ...
          2. dmi.pris1
            dmi.pris1 11 December 2022 08: 04
            +1
            They had bags for poop. By the way, one of the astronauts demonstrated this .. True, without taking off his pants. laughing
            1. vitvit123
              vitvit123 11 December 2022 10: 55
              +3
              I think that demonstration of faeces was much later, no?
        3. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 11 December 2022 09: 18
          -1
          Quote: novel xnumx
          Where is the toilet?? Shit in your pants?? ! T! Ttttt

          Shit in bags
        4. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 11 December 2022 11: 11
          +5
          Where is the toilet?? Shit in your pants?? ! T! Ttttt
          Right there. In diapers.
          1. Ulan.1812
            Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 33
            +2
            Quote: Aviator_
            Where is the toilet?? Shit in your pants?? ! T! Ttttt
            Right there. In diapers.

            Come on. And what did you wash your butt after? Napkins? Pampers are good for urine, but for something else for three people, this is as much as you need, and it’s very uncomfortable and stinks in a closed small capsule.
            When these guys splashed down, both from them and from the capsule, it should have been like from a station toilet.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 11 December 2022 13: 54
              +7
              When these guys splashed down, both from them and from the capsule, it should have been like from a station toilet.
              Didn't it carry? Apparently, it was. That is why the American astronaut with the speaking name Serina already in our century, having broken her toilet at the orbital station a couple of years ago, began to make holes in our module for immediate evacuation.
              1. Ulan.1812
                Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 15: 25
                +1
                Quote: Aviator_
                When these guys splashed down, both from them and from the capsule, it should have been like from a station toilet.
                Didn't it carry? Apparently, it was. That is why the American astronaut with the speaking name Serina already in our century, having broken her toilet at the orbital station a couple of years ago, began to make holes in our module for immediate evacuation.

                Yes, I remember what a scandal there was. It seems at first they asked to go to our toilet.
                1. Aviator_
                  Aviator_ 11 December 2022 15: 53
                  +4
                  It seems at first they asked to go to our toilet.
                  At first they dirtied all their diapers, then they began to ask for our module, but it is only designed for two users. Then she asked to be delivered back to Earth, but ours did not agree for free, and NASA did not have money. After that, the girl began to make holes in the station.
          2. Illanatol
            Illanatol 13 December 2022 14: 26
            0
            During such a period?
            I can imagine what kind of gait it should have been after 10 days you go under yourself (both big and small). Even the Yankees would not smile in such a situation... laughing
    2. Submariner971
      Submariner971 11 December 2022 11: 46
      +4
      There is no need to hide it, it is enough for the media machine to recognize as outcasts all those who have any doubts, including some Roketdine engineers, and the crew of astronauts who were going to speak in Congress because of the innocence of the program simply burn on the simulator.
    3. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 27
      +4
      Quote: Luminman
      It is impossible to hide such a falsification. Too many people were involved in the project...

      And a lot of people associated with these flights died in a strange way.
      Kubrick also bequeathed to publish his recordings only after his death. Apparently he was also afraid.
  5. parusnik
    parusnik 11 December 2022 06: 34
    +19
    It was a wonderful time - most of the scientific and technological projects were launched not for the sake of a business scheme, but solely to wipe the nose of an overseas opponent.
    To wipe the nose of the overseas partner, they drowned the MIR station, for the sake of a business project, the ISS. laughing It's already in the beautiful present.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 06: 46
      +7
      Thanks for this to Gaidar's associate Nemtsov...he tried hard as a scoundrel.
      1. alekseykabanets
        alekseykabanets 11 December 2022 09: 21
        +6
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        Thanks for this to Gaidar's associate Nemtsov...he tried hard as a scoundrel.

        They are all good there! We also found a scapegoat. And they are still there, and they are not going anywhere from there.
  6. Li17
    Li17 11 December 2022 06: 47
    +9
    They weren't there... By the way, the Chinese very thoroughly stated that the Americans weren't there... but then they fell silent. The crux of the matter is different, we LOST! Even if the production, or an imitation of the type, threw junk on the moon ... And for some reason the original films from NASA disappeared, it’s also somehow curious and hard to believe that the secret materials are just like that .... But I emphasize the main thing again, we lost, even let it be a scam, but it's a brilliant scam! I think that, as usual, this was the goal, to drag us into a race on this dummy in which we would have lost ... but, apparently, we also found smart ones who did not go for this crumb!
    1. Submariner971
      Submariner971 11 December 2022 11: 53
      +7
      More collusion, not loss. The USSR knew how to defend its interests, in contrast to the current "effective" ones... Realizing the hopelessness, the country withdrew from the project, but also firmly intended to prove the failure of American plans. At that time, we still had reconnaissance... And the story of the caught capsule and the simultaneous "A-13 accident" forced the opponents to negotiate. And yes, the USSR gained a lot from this deal, in all likelihood.
  7. Vladimir100
    Vladimir100 11 December 2022 06: 53
    -5
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    Pay attention to the location of the flag-panel in a vacuum where there is no wind... what

    What's wrong with the flag. ignoramuses have already been explained a hundred times that the flag does not flutter in the wind, but oscillates in an airless space where fabric vibrations die out much longer.
    I must honestly admit that in this case the United States wiped its nose on the USSR.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 07: 01
      +6
      Quote: Vladimir100
      I must honestly admit that in this case the United States wiped its nose on the USSR.

      Do you want to be proud of it? smile
      I'm proud that we wiped the nose of the United States Gagarin. smile
      1. ArchiPhil
        ArchiPhil 11 December 2022 07: 18
        +3
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        Do you want to be proud of it?

        Alexey, yes, this is not pride, but a recognition of the fact. That's all. As well as the fact that Gagarin is the first cosmonaut of the planet Earth.
        Were Americans on the moon? Yes, they were. And this is a fact, whether you like it or not. hi
        1. parusnik
          parusnik 11 December 2022 07: 34
          +10
          hi
          As well as the fact that Gagarin is the first cosmonaut of the planet Earth.
          Gagarin, according to the author, this is not a business scheme, but, to spite the United States, they sent laughing
          1. ArchiPhil
            ArchiPhil 11 December 2022 07: 43
            +3
            Quote: parusnik
            US evil, sent

            Good morning!
            Yes, just a protracted discussion of the old movie *Capricorn-1*. laughing
            The Americans could not because they were bad. And we are good, but we didn’t want to! bully
            1. Lech from Android.
              Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 09: 19
              +7
              And that Americans are good, honest, kind, white and fluffy?
              1. ArchiPhil
                ArchiPhil 11 December 2022 09: 38
                +8
                Quote: Lech from Android.
                And that Americans are good, honest, kind, white and fluffy?

                Yes, they are different! Different! However, like us. However, like everyone else on our planet. hi
                * Is there life on Mars? Is there life on Mars. Science is unknown .... * (c) bully
                1. Lech from Android.
                  Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 09: 58
                  +2
                  Quote: ArchiPhil
                  Yes, they are different! Different! However, like us. However, like everyone else on our planet.

                  You are mistaken ... deeply mistaken.
                  Anyone who is not instilled with the molecules of democracy and freedom in the American way from the point of view of Americans has no right to exist ... from this point of view, Americans are the same.
                  smile
            2. Illanatol
              Illanatol 13 December 2022 14: 29
              0
              Nobody can. Still.
              Because they do not fly.
    2. zenion
      zenion 11 December 2022 13: 33
      +1
      Did you wipe your nose with a flag? Wasn't there other lunar material? They could wipe it with sand, or with a stone with an inscription - Vasya was here.
  8. U-58
    U-58 11 December 2022 07: 00
    +14
    The author explicitly stated that the purpose of the publication is NOT to confirm or deny American missions. But the public again rushed into a completely useless discussion.
    Let me remind younger people that mankind lived for decades without any doubts in the fulfillment of the mission. Then, when Comrade Gorbachev's perestroika and glasnost introduced us to the theory of falsification, there wasn't much fuss either.
    But when our lagging behind in space matters became not only a fact, but a NOTICEABLE, LARGERING fact, this topic became perhaps the most beloved ..
    It seems that, purely psychologically, we are trying to find an outlet to smooth out the pain for our lagging behind.
    As an employee of the space industry, I can say that officially, as well as in informal communication, the flights of Americans for the Month have never been questioned by anyone.
    However, this topic can diversify the lives of lovers of conspiracy theories.
    Well, to your health.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 07: 09
      -1
      Quote: U-58
      It seems that, purely psychologically, we are trying to find an outlet to smooth out the pain for our lagging behind.

      Burn me at the stake ... but somewhere the Americans are cheating here ... well, they can’t play fair ... purely in their cowboy mentality.
      1. ArchiPhil
        ArchiPhil 11 December 2022 07: 20
        0
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        in his cowboy mentality.

        In your opinion, Americans simply cannot play honestly, right? Precisely because they are Americans and cowboys? bully
        Alas, these are stereotypes. Propaganda stereotypes.
        1. Lech from Android.
          Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 09: 20
          +3
          Quote: ArchiPhil
          Alas, these are stereotypes. Propaganda stereotypes.

          You might think your stereotypes are not pro-American propaganda. smile what
          1. ArchiPhil
            ArchiPhil 11 December 2022 09: 43
            +3
            Quote: Lech from Android.
            You might think your stereotypes are not pro-American propaganda.

            Wow! And I *Kent* smoked. As long as I could afford it. Yes, and I’m not indifferent to *thirties* jazz. I don’t mention jeans. bully
            1. Lech from Android.
              Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 10: 42
              +1
              Quote: ArchiPhil
              And I *Kent* smoked. As long as I could afford it. Yes, I’m not indifferent to jazz *thirties*. I don’t mention jeans.

              And I don’t smoke either Kent or the White Sea Canal, I can’t stand jazz, and my jeans always burst with a bang at the most inopportune moment. smile Now I prefer sports pants.
            2. parusnik
              parusnik 11 December 2022 12: 42
              +4
              And I’m not indifferent to jazz * of the thirties *. I don’t mention jeans.
              laughing We sold it to the USSR for jeans and jazz .. laughing True, Lyokha has not known from Android that the social origins of jazz begin from genuine Negro songs, the so-called blues. And the Negro people - that's something they should know! - is the most disenfranchised and the most oppressed population of the North American states, and, therefore, his music cannot be bourgeois, on the contrary, it is progressive and revolutionary!
            3. zenion
              zenion 11 December 2022 13: 40
              -2
              ArchiPhil. The union also had "jeans" but they were for work, canvas pants were called. There were several colors, but not blue. They were brown and black. There were canvas suits, there were different types for different jobs, the cheapest, 70 rubles each for the money that Khrushch replaced. Then, they began to cost 12 rubles. It was a shame to sell this for Khrushchev's 7 rubles. Then prices started to rise.
              1. ArchiPhil
                ArchiPhil 11 December 2022 15: 28
                +2
                Quote: zenion
                The union also had "jeans" but they were for work, canvas pants were called. There were several colors, but not blue. They were brown and black. There were canvas suits, there were different types for different jobs, the cheapest, 70 rubles each for the money that Khrushch replaced. Then, they began to cost 12 rubles.

                Do you * overalls * mean? Or * Tver * and * I believe *? Well, I agree. Compared to what they * dress * workers in now, this is of course class! on a jacket, without valves. Two pockets on the pants, sometimes a third one in the back. Well, uncomfortable things, aren't they? Today's * overalls * are certainly more diverse and functional. But? to buy them for employees. Or did you mean something else? hi
              2. Fat
                Fat 11 December 2022 17: 05
                +2
                Quote: zenion
                called canvas pants.

                TWIS or DIAGONAL trousers it was called. The fabric from which the "worker" was sewn was twill.
                It differs from other types of fabric weaving in that with each subsequent thread, the thread crossing system shifts by 1, 2 or more threads, which gives it a characteristic "diagonal" appearance (one of the common names). This type of weaving in the middle of the XNUMXth century was taken as a basis by Levi Strauss and called "denim" ...
                1. ArchiPhil
                  ArchiPhil 11 December 2022 18: 11
                  +2
                  Quote: Thick
                  on 1, 2 or more threads, which gives it a characteristic appearance "diagonal

                  It is impossible not to mention the Wrangler * Christmas tree *. hi
                  Greetings Borisych!
                  And yet I did not understand the question of a superior comrade.
                  1. Fat
                    Fat 11 December 2022 18: 55
                    +1
                    I also misunderstood. Fresh indigo denim was always dark blue (indian blue - not Indian, but from India) and moreover, "not blue"

                    Twill - not expensive material, painted with affordable paints.
                    Indigo dye (indigonoska) was also grown in North America ... although there has been synthetic dye (BASF) since the beginning of the 20th century, nevertheless it was rare with us.

                    And these are Tuareg in natural "indigo" of their own production. These are their holiday clothes. smile
        2. Illanatol
          Illanatol 13 December 2022 14: 40
          +2
          Quote: ArchiPhil
          In your opinion, Americans simply cannot play honestly, right? Precisely because they are Americans and cowboys?


          Just a question: why?
          If flights to the moon had a practical purpose: the creation of a military base with rockets or the extraction of valuable minerals. Then - it made sense to actually fly, but to create a fake - no.
          But if the flight to the moon has a purely propaganda value, then a fake is preferable.
          It doesn’t matter if you were on the moon or not, if your flag is there or not: the main thing is that others believe in it. If you are able to convince others of the veracity of your fake - why do you need a real flight?
          A real flight is much more expensive than a fake filmed in a pavilion. This means that you can save billions that are worth spending on more pressing needs, in particular, the war in Vietnam, which turned out to be more expensive and less successful than the Yankees expected.
          Fake - more reliable, less likely to have an emergency. Well, they would really send their katsmanauts to the moon, they would stick a flag, and then - an emergency and the death of these heroes live. All dividends from achievements - down the drain. And in the pavilion - everything is under control, without misfires. Landing on an unprepared site on the moon, almost blind - please. Docking in lunar orbit, far from the MCC - no problem, on the first try.
          Like in the movies. However, why "how"?
    2. Li17
      Li17 11 December 2022 07: 15
      +4
      Quote: U-58
      As an employee of the space industry, I can say that officially, as well as in informal communication, the flights of Americans for the Month have never been questioned by anyone.

      Oh is it? It is also unprofitable for us to question, this success of amers is like a carrot for a donkey to walk! The topic itself is muddy, especially where and what happened is still a mystery. Given the influence of amers, there will not be much wishing to impose their opinion, especially since such amounts appear there, they will bury them for less! Well, you here, as a representative of the space industry, know very well that although science is global, you often have to carry developments from each other, though the Americans are cooler here too, they pull out talents from all over the world!
      1. Ulan.1812
        Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 42
        0
        Quote: lithium17
        Quote: U-58
        As an employee of the space industry, I can say that officially, as well as in informal communication, the flights of Americans for the Month have never been questioned by anyone.

        Oh is it? It is also unprofitable for us to question, this success of amers is like a carrot for a donkey to walk! The topic itself is muddy, especially where and what happened is still a mystery. Given the influence of amers, there will not be much wishing to impose their opinion, especially since such amounts appear there, they will bury them for less! Well, you here, as a representative of the space industry, know very well that although science is global, you often have to carry developments from each other, though the Americans are cooler here too, they pull out talents from all over the world!

        All doubts and questions, of which there are many, can only be dispelled by new flights to the moon.
        But infa slipped through that the Americans supposedly forbid visiting those areas where their ships allegedly landed.
    3. ammunition
      ammunition 11 December 2022 07: 15
      +6
      Quote: U-58
      As an employee of the space industry, I can say that officially, as well as in informal communication, the flights of Americans on the Month of Doubt

      laughing So we should "thank" you for the lack of the necessary constellation of satellites? .. "So it was you who carried our buns" ..? lol
      1. U-58
        U-58 11 December 2022 08: 03
        +6
        I will please: my colleagues and I are working not on satellites, but on carriers. With this, we are more or less successful. And so it has always been. Give us a PN-we'll take it out. Yes, and at least the flyby of the Moon.
        Toko took all the commercial launches for himself. Elon Musk.
        Well, purely his own was not enough, which is depressing. But even then, there was light at the end of the tunnel.
        Let's tune in to an optimistic wave.
        1. Al manah
          Al manah 11 December 2022 09: 20
          +1
          Musk, who has the biggest ships?
    4. vitvit123
      vitvit123 11 December 2022 07: 52
      +7
      I’m not at all opposed to the fact that the Americans were on the moon .., but what is the problem for specialists, you in particular, to take and explain all the doubts to people who doubt? Those who doubt - ask elementary questions, those who believe - say believe, because. you are fools, but the smart ones believe .. it looks no less stupid ..
      1. U-58
        U-58 11 December 2022 08: 34
        +3
        Well, in fact, enough arguments were given, even redundantly. They are also given in the material under discussion.
        For our part, if the statements of A. Leonov, the commander of the first lunar crew, for a moment, failed
        the Soviet lunar mission is not enough, then the fact that our tracking stations receive telemetry from the landing Apollo 11 is quite enough.
        1. vitvit123
          vitvit123 11 December 2022 11: 03
          +3
          Well, on the one hand, I understand that your arguments are weighty, but this does not dispel doubts, especially Leonov’s words .. I respect his merits with all due respect, but words are different ...
          As for telemetry, everything is not so simple here either ... but if I start talking to you, then you won’t want to listen right away and tell me what I’m doing, .., ak ..., but with that, I’m somehow I don't argue...
          For any du, ..., aka, a very simple question arises (because he is du, .. ak) if the Americans flew so easily, then why don’t they fly then and still? And do not say that they do not need this! Here you will already be in the role of a fool .. I explain, because. the stage of the moon is the next one in space exploration for everyone, which is now slowly happening from China .. the Americans will definitely catch up, but later when they can and this 100% .. and here is the key here - WHEN THEY CAN .... And when they can do it right away i.e. . they will really need it then, as they can .. understand?
        2. Ulan.1812
          Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 46
          +1
          Quote: U-58
          Well, in fact, enough arguments were given, even redundantly. They are also given in the material under discussion.
          For our part, if the statements of A. Leonov, the commander of the first lunar crew, for a moment, failed
          the Soviet lunar mission is not enough, then the fact that our tracking stations receive telemetry from the landing Apollo 11 is quite enough.

          And the assurances of Leonov, a member of the Board of Directors of Alfa-Bank, are not enough, and much has also been said about telemetry.
        3. 26rus
          26rus 11 December 2022 17: 06
          +3
          Ours did not receive any telemetry from the A-11. In general, only two tracking stations accepted it - in Hawaii and Australia. And everything that was shown around the world was distributed by amers through the Intervision system in an already edited form.
      2. Fat
        Fat 11 December 2022 11: 03
        +2
        hi How to do it?
        Quote: vitvit123
        but what is the problem for specialists, you in particular, to take and explain all the doubts to people who doubt?

        How if there is a contingent who is sure that the earth is flat, and satellite photos are fake.? .. request
        1. vitvit123
          vitvit123 11 December 2022 11: 12
          +5
          No, no, no need to exaggerate!!! This is again from the opera "YOU DO, .., AK" listen here and that's it! I heard that supposedly someone, somewhere, really says that the Earth is flat, but you don’t need to stoop to that, it was a video a la tik-tok (which I can’t digest at all) .. many doubters are not stupider than you or you Do you think they are all dumber than you?
          1. Fat
            Fat 11 December 2022 12: 18
            +2
            In the modern era, the pseudoscientific belief in a flat earth originated with the English writer Samuel Rowbotham in an 1849 pamphlet, Zethetic Astronomy. Lady Elizabeth Blount founded the World Zetetic Society in 1893, which published magazines. Other notable flat earthers of the 19th and early 20th centuries include William Carpenter, E. W. Bullinger, John Jasper, Paul Kruger, and Wilbur Glenn Voliva. In 1956, Samuel Shenton founded the International Flat Earth Research Society (IFERS), better known as the "Flat Earth Society" of Dover, England, as a direct descendant of the World Zetic Society.
            In the age of the internet, the availability of communication technologies and social media such as YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter has made it easier for people, famous or not, to spread disinformation and lure others into misconceptions, including the flat earth.
            To maintain faith in the face of overwhelming controversy, publicly available empirical data accumulated during the space age, modern flat earthers must generally adhere to some form of conspiracy theory due to the need to explain why major institutions such as governments, the media , schools, scientists and airlines, argue that the world is a sphere. They tend to distrust observations they have not made themselves, and often do not trust or disagree with each other.

            1. vitvit123
              vitvit123 11 December 2022 12: 31
              +5
              It all came down to the same: Listen here or do it yourself, .., ak! Here's a joke for you with big words, try to disagree ..
        2. Lech from Android.
          Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 11: 23
          +5
          Yes, and the specialists inquisitors, too, have not gone anywhere.
          All heretics who deny Saint Apollo on the Moon are subjected to a public auto-duff... at the stake of heretics.
      3. Glory1974
        Glory1974 12 December 2022 11: 20
        +2
        Those who doubt - ask elementary questions, those who believe - say believe, because. you are fools, but the smart ones believe .. it looks no less stupid ..

        It is impossible to explain unambiguously, there will always be provisions that can be challenged.
        Personally for myself, I concluded that they did not fly for the following facts:
        1. The Saturn rocket, the documentation for which is allegedly lost and therefore cannot be done now, in fact did not give out the declared characteristics. The diameter of the combustion chamber is about 1 meter, in such a volume it is not possible to ensure uniform combustion of the fuel. That is, it’s impossible to simply increase a rocket engine and get more power. They didn’t know this before. ., Korolev said, "For reliability, do no more than 50 cm." That's the whole story, about a rocket that could not fly to the moon purely according to physical laws.
        2. Docking in Earth orbit requires at least 4 hours, experiments are being carried out with docking in 1,5-2 hours. This is after half a century of systematic flying into orbit. On the Moon, docking occurred according to NASA, after 2 hours. modern computers, no radar, how the calculations were carried out is not clear. And NASA can't explain it.
        That is, takeoff from the Moon and docking, as it was according to official descriptions, are impossible.
        3. All splashdowns of the Americans were in a square of 10 by 20 km. where the ships were waiting for them. But, the speed of rotation of the Earth is 40 km. per second. That is, using modern methods, it is possible to calculate the square of a hit with a size of at least 40 by 40 km. As NASA calculated then, it is silent.
        These facts are enough in my opinion to understand that people did not fly to the moon.
        And all the disputes on the Internet are moving to diapers, flag fluctuations, footprints, etc. , that is, for which technical knowledge is not required.
        1. vitvit123
          vitvit123 12 December 2022 12: 32
          +2
          In general, you have things about which no one speaks from "flight witnesses". For an explanation of your questions it would be very, very interesting to hear! But even simple questions are not clear, and those who explain these simple questions, maybe explain them from the position of as if the details and everything worked out for them ...
    5. Submariner971
      Submariner971 11 December 2022 11: 58
      0
      Apparently you are a more serious worker in the space industry than cosmonaut Makarov and commander of the detachment Afanasyev ...
      1. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 14: 07
        +1
        Quote: Submariner971
        Apparently you are a more serious worker in the space industry than cosmonaut Makarov and commander of the detachment Afanasyev ...

        Well, what are you... such an honor is not of my level. smile
        I am a sick old forum member... and grumbling is the last joy in my worthless essence. smile
        1. Submariner971
          Submariner971 12 December 2022 13: 51
          +1
          I don’t know why the chat put my comment in the wrong place - it was not for you. I just support your position.
    6. solar
      solar 11 December 2022 18: 24
      -2
      The author explicitly stated that the purpose of the publication is NOT to confirm or deny American missions.

      I think he knew perfectly well how it would end :))))
  9. Vladimir100
    Vladimir100 11 December 2022 07: 11
    -9
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    I'm proud that we wiped the nose of the United States Gagarin. smile

    This is one of the rare cases in the confrontation with them. But in this case, the German developments served as the base, which allowed the USSR to gain time. Thanks to them, it was possible to create reliable rockets for going into space and delivering nuclear charges, otherwise they would have been engaged in amateur collective farm activity for a long time to come. Then, at a new stage, when the lunar race began, the USSR was no longer able to independently cope with the solution of this technical problem.
    1. Mikhail Ya2
      Mikhail Ya2 11 December 2022 08: 07
      +8
      Until now, Russia flies on the royal seven, only on modern technologies
    2. U-58
      U-58 11 December 2022 08: 43
      +9
      To be fair, let's remember that both American and Soviet [modern] missiles came from the V-2.
      The failure of our lunar mission was due not so much to technical problems as to the total chronic underfunding of the program in the first third of the work. There is also a subjective factor. A quarrel (but what the hell is a quarrel? They quarreled completely and forever!) Between Korolev and Glushko.
      If Sergei Palych put Glushko's engines on the N-1, we would be on the moon. Let not the first, but were. Premature death, Korolev and the appointment of the same Glushko instead of him is also a significant factor.
      This topic has been discussed many times. And this fact cannot be erased from history.
      1. zenion
        zenion 11 December 2022 14: 08
        0
        U-58. They had the same thing as in Lilliput and Blefuscu. The dispute came out from which end you need to break the eggs. Some said that it was necessary to break from the sharp end, others said - from the blunt end, and a war began between them. The same happened between Korolev and Glushko. Again, because of the little things. Korolev said that a glass of beer should be held in the left hand, and a piece of ram in the right hand. Glushko insisted otherwise. He offered to hold a glass of beer in the right hand, which is stronger, and a milligram ram in the left hand, between the thumb and forefinger. Korolev insisted that the ram should be held between the index finger and thumb, and not vice versa. Chekhov overheard this dispute, and wrote about it, how two landowners quarreled among themselves because of a ram. So forever Ivan Ivanovich quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich, as well as Korolev and Glushko.
    3. Scientist
      Scientist 11 December 2022 11: 16
      +4
      Not a base, but a start. Korolev immediately began to reshape the rocket in his own way. But for the States, German developments were not just a base, but the foundation of the foundations. After all, rockets were made there by von Braun, the same one that developed the Fau. Without it, indeed, the States would not even be able to get close to the USSR in space.
  10. Vladimir100
    Vladimir100 11 December 2022 07: 26
    +3
    everything is baby talk compared to what the Chinese are now up to. they will cover the entire moon in the next thirty years with greenhouses.
    1. Luminman
      Luminman 11 December 2022 07: 48
      +1
      they will cover the entire moon in the next thirty years with greenhouses

      Yes, easily!
  11. Boris55
    Boris55 11 December 2022 07: 31
    0
    There were no Americans on the moon! Not a single photo with an angle to the stars and the Earth.
    Are they not visible from the moon? Protection of the cosmic radiation has not yet been found.
    All orbital stations are protected by the Earth's magnetic field:



    1. Luminman
      Luminman 11 December 2022 07: 50
      -3
      Not a single photo with an angle to the stars and the Earth

      You probably think that flying to the moon is an easy ride on a tourist boat? wink
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 11 December 2022 08: 15
        +2
        Quote: Luminman
        You probably think that flying to the moon is an easy ride on a tourist boat?

        So tired that there was no urine to look at the stars? laughing

        Have you seen photos, videos, how cheerful the astronauts were after the flight to the "Moon"?



        And now you bet with what our artists were after the flight to the ISS and the questions will disappear by themselves. “After returning, Julia feels everything is heavy, as if the environment is pressing, does not allow her to breathe calmly and do her usual things.”

        1. Andrey VOV
          Andrey VOV 11 December 2022 15: 55
          -2
          The way they trained before, and how they trained Yulia, heaven and earth ... Yes, but where is the kinl filmed in space ??))?
        2. Fat
          Fat 11 December 2022 22: 46
          +2
          hi Boris Leontievich.
          Quote: Boris55
          Have you seen photos, videos, how cheerful the astronauts were after the flight to the "Moon"?

          In the photo you provided, Eugene Cernan and Thomas Stafford after flying to Gemini (Gemini mission 9A) aboard the USS Wasp on June 6, 1966. Flight duration: 3 days 21 minutes ...

          Stafford was the commander and Cernan was the lunar module pilot. (Command Module Pilot - John Young.) Apollo 10 mission almost three years later (May 18-26, 1969).
          The crew of Apollo 10 was the first to use a special television camera in space and the first to broadcast in color during the flight. In June of the same year, Tom Stafford, John Young and Eugene Cernan were awarded the Emmy Award.
          Eugene Cernan - Commander of Apollo 17...
  12. Vladimir100
    Vladimir100 11 December 2022 07: 42
    -7
    Quote: lithium17
    The topic itself is muddy, especially where and what happened is still a mystery

    An example with tanks, planes, cars of the first half of the 20th century, which were produced by tens or hundreds of thousands, and now there are only a few of them left in the world.
    It seems like nothing has gone anywhere ... something is still on the moon, and something is in the museum.
    1. your1970
      your1970 11 December 2022 20: 28
      0
      Quote: Vladimir100
      An example with tanks, planes, cars of the first half of the 20th century, which were produced by tens or hundreds of thousands, and now there are only a few of them left in the world.
      the abyss of technology was produced in SECOND half of the 20th century - and they are also almost gone
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. Vladimir100
    Vladimir100 11 December 2022 07: 48
    -6
    99 percent of "patriots" somehow calmly use cars and computers created by Americans and Germans. You can also remember about TVs and airplanes.
    1. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 13: 58
      +1
      Quote: Vladimir100
      99 percent of "patriots" somehow calmly use cars and computers created by Americans and Germans. You can also remember about TVs and airplanes.

      Really? That is, you did not hear about the fact that the television image was first transmitted to the Republic of Ingushetia? What then did Zworykin take all the developments to the USA?
      What is the first mobile phone engineer Kupriyanov? What is an electric copier, a copier is also the USSR.
      That the modern architecture of personal computers was created by a scientist from the Urals and is used by all computer manufacturers?
      In what the USSR lagged behind so much in implementation, and not in inventions.
      So we use our own, our inventions. And by the way, without the films of Zhores Alferov, there would be no smartphones.
  15. Vladimir100
    Vladimir100 11 December 2022 07: 53
    -3
    Quote: Boris55
    There were no Americans on the moon! Not a single photo with an angle to the stars and the Earth.
    Are they not visible from the moon? Protection of the cosmic radiation has not yet been found.
    All orbital stations are protected by the Earth's magnetic field:

    How NASA solved the problem of organizing a flight to the moon

    The short answer is no. The fact is that in order to get to the moon, the spacecraft must move as quickly as possible and over the shortest distance. For "flying and maneuvering" there would not be enough time or fuel. Thus, participants in the program had to cross both the outer and inner radiation belts.

    NASA knew about the problem and so they needed to do something about the skin of the astronaut spacecraft. The skin had to be thin and light to provide protection. It was impossible to "weight" it too much. Therefore, minimal radiation protection with metal plates was added to the design. Moreover, theoretical models of the radiation belts, developed in anticipation of the Apollo flights, showed that passing through them would not pose a significant threat to the health of astronauts.
    But that's not all. To get to the Moon and return home safely, the Apollo astronauts had to not only cross the Van Allen belts, but also the vast distance between the Earth and the Moon. In terms of time, the flight took about three days in each direction. Mission members also had to work safely in orbit around the moon and on the lunar surface. During the Apollo missions, the spacecraft stayed outside of Earth's protective magnetosphere most of the time. Thus, the Apollo crews were vulnerable to solar flares and to the flow of radiation rays from outside our solar system.
    Why are the astronauts still alive?

    We can say that NASA was lucky, because the time of the mission coincided with the so-called "solar cycle". This is a period of growth and decline in activity, which occurs approximately every 11 years. At the time of the launch of the devices, a period of recession just fell. However, if the space agency had delayed the program, then everything could have ended differently. For example, in August 1972, between the return of Apollo 16 to Earth and the launch of Apollo 17, a period of increased solar activity began. And if at that time the astronauts were on their way to the moon, they would receive a huge dose of cosmic radiation. But this, fortunately, did not happen.
    1. zenion
      zenion 11 December 2022 14: 16
      +1
      All this cannot be compared with photographic film, which withstood all the radiation, although these were ordinary cameras. When the Americans were hinted at this, they suddenly remembered that there were containers, this was already after they showed how one Roleiflex filmed another. Even the faces of the shtatovtsev did not turn red.
  16. know
    know 11 December 2022 08: 12
    +11
    If we try our best to objectively look at this issue, we will have to admit that the American flights to the moon were unmanned. The Americans did not have and still do not have the technology to deliver a man to the moon and bring him back alive. They didn’t even have toilets on ships then, and their light suits would not have given protection from ionizing radiation. Samples of lunar soil turned out to be fakes in a number of cases, a 2009 study proved that pseudolunar soil transferred by the United States to the Netherlands is fake. Soviet lunar soil
    not identical to American! This is an absolutely proven fact, and the author is ashamed not to know this. American samples of that time do not contain non-oxidizable iron, which is found in all other samples delivered later!
    99% of the photo and video materials about the "lunar expedition" are lost. "Doesn't it seem suspicious? The modern level of expertise made their storage extremely dangerous. There is no serious evidence of the landing of American astronauts on the moon now. But the Americans stubbornly offer to take their word for it.
  17. Illanatol
    Illanatol 11 December 2022 08: 40
    +7
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    And I'm asking you and your cool specialists a simple question ... where did the starry sky go in the lunar images of American astronauts?


    Strictly speaking, this cannot serve as proof of the absence of flights to the moon. NASA has already acknowledged that many of the filming, filming and photography is done in the pavilion. Although this is obvious ... in the conditions of a real moon, it is simply impossible to get such clear frames, and even color ones. The radioactive background on the moon is too high and it would leave traces on photographic and film film. It is enough to look at the footage taken at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant after the disaster.
    But there are many real questions. Including on the ground from the moon. Why did the Yankees provide their samples to the Soviet side with such a delay and in such a small amount. With what super-technologies (probably later lost) did they protect their Apollos, LM, and astronauts during the flight and stay on the Moon from radiation? After all, there is no protection in the form of anti-radiation Van Allen belts that protect us all, including the crews of the ISS.
    And why do all sorts of misunderstandings occur with the materials of lunar expeditions? Either magnetic tapes will be erased with the most valuable materials (allegedly there were not enough clean carriers), then samples of lunar soil will be stolen, or something else ...
    And why was the lunar program curtailed ahead of schedule, when all the costs were already behind, it was only possible to collect a few inches? Were their aliens asked to get out of the moon, or were the Nazis dug in there (according to Chapman and Prokopenko)?
    And most importantly, why can't an "exclusive superpower" repeat these past achievements half a century later? It is as if the great aviation power could not reproduce the flight of the Wright brothers decades later ...

    And yes. Even the Yankees would not have dragged their "space car" to the real moon. Considering the cost of logistics. On the Moon, you can walk 20 km on foot, low gravity makes walking not too tiring. And if they nevertheless decided to send vehicles there, they would make it extremely light and compact, something like a folding tricycle bicycle with a thin titanium frame and bicycle wheels. And not such a clunker as in the photo, obviously with excess weight and a margin of safety, even for earthly conditions.
    1. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 14: 08
      +2
      Quote: Illanatol
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      And I'm asking you and your cool specialists a simple question ... where did the starry sky go in the lunar images of American astronauts?


      Strictly speaking, this cannot serve as proof of the absence of flights to the moon. NASA has already acknowledged that many of the filming, filming and photography is done in the pavilion. Although this is obvious ... in the conditions of a real moon, it is simply impossible to get such clear frames, and even color ones. The radioactive background on the moon is too high and it would leave traces on photographic and film film. It is enough to look at the footage taken at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant after the disaster.
      But there are many real questions. Including on the ground from the moon. Why did the Yankees provide their samples to the Soviet side with such a delay and in such a small amount. With what super-technologies (probably later lost) did they protect their Apollos, LM, and astronauts during the flight and stay on the Moon from radiation? After all, there is no protection in the form of anti-radiation Van Allen belts that protect us all, including the crews of the ISS.
      And why do all sorts of misunderstandings occur with the materials of lunar expeditions? Either magnetic tapes will be erased with the most valuable materials (allegedly there were not enough clean carriers), then samples of lunar soil will be stolen, or something else ...
      And why was the lunar program curtailed ahead of schedule, when all the costs were already behind, it was only possible to collect a few inches? Were their aliens asked to get out of the moon, or were the Nazis dug in there (according to Chapman and Prokopenko)?
      And most importantly, why can't an "exclusive superpower" repeat these past achievements half a century later? It is as if the great aviation power could not reproduce the flight of the Wright brothers decades later ...

      And yes. Even the Yankees would not have dragged their "space car" to the real moon. Considering the cost of logistics. On the Moon, you can walk 20 km on foot, low gravity makes walking not too tiring. And if they nevertheless decided to send vehicles there, they would make it extremely light and compact, something like a folding tricycle bicycle with a thin titanium frame and bicycle wheels. And not such a clunker as in the photo, obviously with excess weight and a margin of safety, even for earthly conditions.

      Another stone. The Americans claim that the soil on the moon is gray.
      But the Chinese took photos from their devices and the ground is brown.
      1. your1970
        your1970 11 December 2022 20: 41
        0
        Quote: Ulan.1812
        Quote: Illanatol
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        And I'm asking you and your cool specialists a simple question ... where did the starry sky go in the lunar images of American astronauts?


        Strictly speaking, this cannot serve as proof of the absence of flights to the moon. NASA has already acknowledged that many of the filming, filming and photography is done in the pavilion. Although this is obvious ... in the conditions of a real moon, it is simply impossible to get such clear frames, and even color ones. The radioactive background on the moon is too high and it would leave traces on photographic and film film. It is enough to look at the footage taken at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant after the disaster.
        But there are many real questions. Including on the ground from the moon. Why did the Yankees provide their samples to the Soviet side with such a delay and in such a small amount. With what super-technologies (probably later lost) did they protect their Apollos, LM, and astronauts during the flight and stay on the Moon from radiation? After all, there is no protection in the form of anti-radiation Van Allen belts that protect us all, including the crews of the ISS.
        And why do all sorts of misunderstandings occur with the materials of lunar expeditions? Either magnetic tapes will be erased with the most valuable materials (allegedly there were not enough clean carriers), then samples of lunar soil will be stolen, or something else ...
        And why was the lunar program curtailed ahead of schedule, when all the costs were already behind, it was only possible to collect a few inches? Were their aliens asked to get out of the moon, or were the Nazis dug in there (according to Chapman and Prokopenko)?
        And most importantly, why can't an "exclusive superpower" repeat these past achievements half a century later? It is as if the great aviation power could not reproduce the flight of the Wright brothers decades later ...

        And yes. Even the Yankees would not have dragged their "space car" to the real moon. Considering the cost of logistics. On the Moon, you can walk 20 km on foot, low gravity makes walking not too tiring. And if they nevertheless decided to send vehicles there, they would make it extremely light and compact, something like a folding tricycle bicycle with a thin titanium frame and bicycle wheels. And not such a clunker as in the photo, obviously with excess weight and a margin of safety, even for earthly conditions.

        Another stone. The Americans claim that the soil on the moon is gray.
        But the Chinese took photos from their devices and the ground is brown.

        The difference is in the quality of equipment and optics. Actually, everything around us has no color - different coatings reflect different parts of the spectrum.
        So what color is everything around us (not like on the moon !!) - it is not known ....
        1. Ulan.1812
          Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 20: 55
          -1
          Quote: your1970
          Quote: Ulan.1812
          Quote: Illanatol
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          And I'm asking you and your cool specialists a simple question ... where did the starry sky go in the lunar images of American astronauts?


          Strictly speaking, this cannot serve as proof of the absence of flights to the moon. NASA has already acknowledged that many of the filming, filming and photography is done in the pavilion. Although this is obvious ... in the conditions of a real moon, it is simply impossible to get such clear frames, and even color ones. The radioactive background on the moon is too high and it would leave traces on photographic and film film. It is enough to look at the footage taken at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant after the disaster.
          But there are many real questions. Including on the ground from the moon. Why did the Yankees provide their samples to the Soviet side with such a delay and in such a small amount. With what super-technologies (probably later lost) did they protect their Apollos, LM, and astronauts during the flight and stay on the Moon from radiation? After all, there is no protection in the form of anti-radiation Van Allen belts that protect us all, including the crews of the ISS.
          And why do all sorts of misunderstandings occur with the materials of lunar expeditions? Either magnetic tapes will be erased with the most valuable materials (allegedly there were not enough clean carriers), then samples of lunar soil will be stolen, or something else ...
          And why was the lunar program curtailed ahead of schedule, when all the costs were already behind, it was only possible to collect a few inches? Were their aliens asked to get out of the moon, or were the Nazis dug in there (according to Chapman and Prokopenko)?
          And most importantly, why can't an "exclusive superpower" repeat these past achievements half a century later? It is as if the great aviation power could not reproduce the flight of the Wright brothers decades later ...

          And yes. Even the Yankees would not have dragged their "space car" to the real moon. Considering the cost of logistics. On the Moon, you can walk 20 km on foot, low gravity makes walking not too tiring. And if they nevertheless decided to send vehicles there, they would make it extremely light and compact, something like a folding tricycle bicycle with a thin titanium frame and bicycle wheels. And not such a clunker as in the photo, obviously with excess weight and a margin of safety, even for earthly conditions.

          Another stone. The Americans claim that the soil on the moon is gray.
          But the Chinese took photos from their devices and the ground is brown.

          The difference is in the quality of equipment and optics. Actually, everything around us has no color - different coatings reflect different parts of the spectrum.
          So what color is everything around us (not like on the moon !!) - it is not known ....

          It is truth too. Including shades can change filters.
        2. Alex2711
          Alex2711 17 December 2022 11: 41
          0
          I read that in the 70s, Soviet scientists came to the conclusion that the moon is brown.
    2. your1970
      your1970 11 December 2022 20: 36
      0
      Quote: Illanatol
      It is as if the great aviation power could not reproduce the flight of the Wright brothers decades later ...

      And what - were they able to build an analogue of the AN-2 ????
      Increased security requirements and all - "No, shmogla!!".
      A primitive flying machine with one motor .....
  18. Illanatol
    Illanatol 11 December 2022 09: 00
    +6
    Quote: Vladimir100
    We can say that NASA was lucky, because the time of the mission coincided with the so-called "solar cycle".


    Even during the recession, the Sun radiates very strongly. Or do you think that solar radiation is only during flares on a star?
    In addition, the Sun is not the only source of radiation in outer space.
    Cosmic rays, even on the earth's surface, are recorded by sensitive instruments. And this is despite the anti-radiation belts and the protective properties of the atmosphere itself.
  19. Illanatol
    Illanatol 11 December 2022 09: 03
    +9
    Quote: Vladimir100
    99 percent of "patriots" somehow calmly use cars and computers created by Americans and Germans. You can also remember about TVs and airplanes.


    Of course, the Russians did not participate at all there.
    There was no Zhukovsky, Zvorykin, Alferov.
    And in honor of whom the "Pentiums" were named that way, you know?
    1. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 14: 11
      +2
      Quote: Illanatol
      Quote: Vladimir100
      99 percent of "patriots" somehow calmly use cars and computers created by Americans and Germans. You can also remember about TVs and airplanes.


      Of course, the Russians did not participate at all there.
      There was no Zhukovsky, Zvorykin, Alferov.
      And in honor of whom the "Pentiums" were named that way, you know?

      Popov was the first to invent the radio, and Marconi patented it.
      The theory of unsinkability of Makarov is used by the whole world, as well as the theory and calculations of the lifting force of Zhukovsky's wing.
  20. Illanatol
    Illanatol 11 December 2022 09: 10
    +11
    Quote: U-58
    As an employee of the space industry, I can say that officially, as well as in informal communication, the flights of Americans for the Month have never been questioned by anyone.


    And what is this proof?
    Truth can easily be sacrificed for political expediency. The Soviet leadership could conclude a political deal with the United States to recognize the truth of the flights to the moon in exchange for some concessions (of which there were enough in the 70s, by the way). And then - it simply lost the opportunity to turn it back, because it became an accomplice in the conspiracy.

    Even small lies breed great mistrust. I consider it quite right to pay with doubts and distrust to a power that, on false fabricated pretexts, unleashes wars and destroys innocent millions. This is what the Yankees deserve, even if their achievements are quite real.
  21. Kruglov
    Kruglov 11 December 2022 09: 16
    +6
    Few people know, but at the time of the launch of the American lunar mission in the Kazakh steppe, a terrible tragedy occurred ... Which resulted in a terrible environmental disaster.
    And the following happened: A terrible plague swept across the steppe like a fiery shaft among the gophers living there. They died by the hundreds of thousands, and no one could understand the reasons for what was happening. Finally, after a few days, it was possible to find out why and why there was a terrible pestilence among harmless fur-bearing animals.
    The reason turned out to be outrageously banal, and, as it always happens with us, it was caused by the bungling of the engineering and technical staff of Baikonur when the strictest secrecy of what was happening was not observed.
    Now to the point: during the start of the “expedition to the moon” at Baikonur, they received all the information in real time. And so, the men, sweaty and steamed in the heat, went out, as they say, into nature, comfortably settled down on the nearest hillock, drinking warm vodka and eating the same warm crooked cucumbers, began to talk loudly, aloud, about what was happening.
    In the end, this caused them to laugh wildly and twist a finger at their temples about the possibility, or rather the impossibility, of the Americans to accomplish their plan.
    Meanwhile, the gophers living in the nearest burrows, being sociable and curious creatures by nature, with visible interest clearly expressed on their faces, approached the merry company and carefully began to listen to conversations about what was happening. At that moment, something happened that later led to the tragedy mentioned above.
    Living all their lives on the territory of Baikonur, the local ground squirrels gradually enriched themselves with such engineering knowledge about space technology and the possibilities of space flights that they clearly surpassed service people, both from NASA and from the American space program in general, in their knowledge. As a result, the gophers, like our engineers, also began to laugh!
    Yes Yes. Everything is so simple. Gophers just started neighing, and then, on the spot, die of laughter! A terrible wave of information about the "American space miracle" rolled across the steppe like a devouring fire, from one gopher hole to the next. The gophers neighed and died of laughter. They roared and died...
    The tragedy began to subside and stopped only on the third day, when the news of the "American successes" was already hundreds of kilometers from Baikonur, a terrible skating rink of ridiculous death swept across the Kazakh steppe. As it turned out later, the gophers living so far from Baikonur were no longer so well versed in special knowledge, and the news about the events no longer caused such a sharp reaction in them - Homeric laughter. Which ultimately allowed the unfortunate gophers to survive everything that happened and further restore their population.
    In order to prevent such events in the future, Baikonur personnel were warned of strict responsibility for non-compliance with secrecy when using information for official use, and also warned about the inadmissibility of transferring, even unintentionally, classified engineering and technical information to ground squirrels living in Baikonur. Responsible employees were reprimanded with entry in a personal file. The technical staff was stripped of their quarterly bonus.
    These are the events that took place in the Kazakh steppe on the day of the "start of the American lunar mission." Note! This information is stamped chipboard. It is not subject to disclosure and distribution. For violation of a fine in the amount of a monthly salary in favor of the author! laughing
    1. Dmitry_24rus
      Dmitry_24rus 22 December 2022 21: 41
      -1
      Incredible Soviet fable! Is the story reprinted, or from memory, each time with additions? There is a lot of text, this is an incredible scoop ..
  22. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 11 December 2022 09: 23
    +3
    Quote: Vladimir100
    But even in this case, German developments served as the base, which allowed the USSR to gain time.

    Oh really... smile
    the Americans had Wernher von Braun with his achievements ... remember what he did in his time?
    1. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 14: 20
      0
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      Quote: Vladimir100
      But even in this case, German developments served as the base, which allowed the USSR to gain time.

      Oh really... smile
      the Americans had Wernher von Braun with his achievements ... remember what he did in his time?

      Only an absolutely illiterate person could write such a thing.
      If you believe this Vladimir, then Gagarin flew into space on the V-2 (R-1).
  23. Scientist
    Scientist 11 December 2022 09: 30
    +10
    As for whether they were or not, old Muller said: "Little lies give rise to big suspicions." Fake soil samples, editing some photos in our time (in terms of the color of the lunar surface), a lot of evidence of forgery of a number of photos and videos that have not yet been admitted, etc. Why would this be necessary if everything is honest and transparent?
    1. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 14: 22
      0
      Quote: U. Cheny
      As for whether they were or not, old Muller said: "Little lies give rise to big suspicions." Fake soil samples, editing some photos in our time (in terms of the color of the lunar surface), a lot of evidence of forgery of a number of photos and videos that have not yet been admitted, etc. Why would this be necessary if everything is honest and transparent?

      That's it. Who will believe once lied.
    2. Leontrotsky
      Leontrotsky 11 December 2022 17: 30
      +2
      Moreover, the Americans used to try to make falsifications. I'm talking about reaching the North Pole by R. Scott. He publicly declared that he had reached it, took a photo on it, and then the Eskimos showed him his winter hut in Greenland. Where did he spend "travel time". We carefully studied his photo. And we found out that the photo was also taken in Greenland. The structure of snow in Greenland and at the Pole is different.
    3. your1970
      your1970 11 December 2022 20: 47
      0
      Quote: U. Cheny
      As for whether they were or not, old Muller said: "Little lies give rise to big suspicions." Fake soil samples, editing some photos in our time (in terms of the color of the lunar surface), a lot of evidence of forgery of a number of photos and videos that have not yet been admitted, etc. Why would this be necessary if everything is honest and transparent?

      Why did the USSR need to stir up the death of Gagarin?
      To break records...
  24. evgen1221
    evgen1221 11 December 2022 09: 30
    +8
    It meant that they had a radiation-delaying supersuit and materials in general. But when Chernobyl happened and from their own accident at a nuclear power plant, oops, but there is nothing. Well, it doesn’t happen, especially among the Americans, they would have earned such a super technology of PR as they did not. Not to mention that all of their reactors without exception would be wrapped in this material. But oops. So was it a boy?
  25. Joker62
    Joker62 11 December 2022 09: 40
    +3
    Quote: Lech from Android.

    Maybe I'm blind, but where are the stars in the picture in the moonlit sky? what
    Stanley Kubrick spoke about the great NASA hoax during this period.
    By the location of the stars, you can determine the approximate coordinates of the American device on the surface of the Moon ... but they are not there ... sadness ... it smells like bullshit.

    They will point to exposures for photographic films, from here you can’t see the stars ... crying
  26. Krasnoyarsk
    Krasnoyarsk 11 December 2022 10: 35
    +7
    = Each Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) was the lightest possible design, capable of being folded into a compact suitcase on the descent module. =
    Yep, very light weight. It is not clear just why the wheels on the "rubber" (?) course and the wings above the wheels. Compare them with the wheels of our "Lunokhods" - that's where the lightest construction really is.
    = When domestic geologists compared the soil brought by the Apollo 11 mission and their own reserves from Luna-16, -20 and -24, it turned out that they are almost identical. =
    And who are these "domestic geologists"? Employees of "Geohim"? And how many people were allowed to study the "lunar soil"? And where is this "lunar soil" now? Mattress makers said that it .... was stolen. Can I not believe this?
    = The second confirmation of the presence of Americans on the Moon was modern photographs from the Earth, in which lunar vehicles, landers, and wheel tracks are clearly visible. Even the path trodden by Neil Armstrong can be seen. By the way, our robotic planetary rovers of the Lunokhod series, which appeared much earlier than the Americans, are parked on the satellite. =
    If you don't mind, would you show us these pictures? And then the pictures of the "rover", etc. You presented us, but the most interesting, for some reason - no. Why?

    = However, the Lunar Roving Vehicle still had malfunctions. During missions, the wings above the wheels collapsed on the rovers. It would seem that a trifling breakdown, on Earth they would not have paid attention to it. But on the Moon, wheels without wings kicked up clouds of dust that settled on the astronauts, equipment and the rover itself, threatening even more malfunctions. =
    But on Earth, for some reason, the wings over the wheels of any equipment do not prevent dust from rising and hanging in the air for a long time. On the Moon, where the force of gravity is much less, the dust raised by the rover should hang even longer, but for some reason there is no dust in the picture of the rover that has just stopped. Why? Did they wait for the dust to settle? Couple of hours?
    = ...collected 110 kilograms of rock samples from the moon, with which the researchers can not finally figure it out until now. Even in our time, one can still find analytical reports by Russian authors engaged in the study of lunar soil samples delivered 50 years ago. =
    Until now, "can not figure it out" how? At least one analytical report, to confirm your words, in the studio!
  27. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 11 December 2022 11: 14
    +5
    It is enough to compare the photos, which show the difference between how our astronauts look after the flight and how the astronauts look after the flight to the Moon. Americans did not yet know about the effect of the absence of gravity. Therefore, they cheerfully exit the descent vehicles. That's when they really fly to the moon, that's when the whole truth will come out. No matter how much the rope twists, and the scam with flights to the moon will still be revealed.
    1. solar
      solar 11 December 2022 18: 29
      -4
      This is a fabrication. Ours were no different under the same conditions.
    2. Alex2711
      Alex2711 17 December 2022 11: 49
      0
      Also, according to NASA, their astronauts breathed pure oxygen for the entire flight! And where are the signs of decompression sickness after landing?
  28. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 11 December 2022 11: 19
    +2
    They were there. Here are the results of comparing the soil delivered by us and them.



    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 12 December 2022 11: 32
      +1
      ground comparison is not proof of human flight. The USSR delivered the soil with an unmanned station, the USA could also do this. In this case, the evidence can be a moon rock. Because the probe cannot pick up the rock.
      The Americans did not present the stones, although they claimed that the astronauts collected kilograms of them. That there is indirect evidence that the lunar soil was delivered precisely by an automatic probe.
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 12 December 2022 18: 18
        0
        The USSR delivered the soil with an unmanned station, the USA could also do this.
        Could not. At that time, all their funds went into manned cosmonautics. They turned to their Voyagers after.
        1. Glory1974
          Glory1974 13 December 2022 09: 42
          +1
          Could not. At that time, all their funds went into manned cosmonautics.

          This is the official version. And it is not confirmed by the brought lunar rock, which is not there. But there is lunar soil, which is brought by an automatic station. The conclusion is unequivocal.
    2. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 12 December 2022 17: 00
      +2
      Quote: Aviator_

      They were there. Here are the results of comparing the soil delivered by us and them.

      Forgive me, but although I am not a Ukrainian, I will not believe it until I feel it.
      So I see that the comparisons were carried out by five foreigners, but where are our employees of "Geohim"? Why not from the conclusion? With their full name?
      That's when the conclusions of Geochem's employees, indicating their full names and the topic of their work, you present to us here, then we'll talk.
    3. Alex2711
      Alex2711 17 December 2022 11: 52
      0
      I read an interview with one specialist from GEOKHI, he said that the Americans did not give them any soil, but gave a ready-made document comparing "their soil" and ours.
  29. Mikhalych
    Mikhalych 11 December 2022 11: 21
    +2
    Re: Proxima (Obolensky Sergey)
    The biggest weakness in the theory of any denier of astronauts flying to the moon is the availability of lunar soil samples.

    The presence of petrified wood in the samples is especially striking.
    I asked all these adherents the same question: "Name at least one specialist who adheres to the lunar scam?" And then the circus began instead of answering ..

    Yes, no question: http://www.free-inform.narod.ru
  30. Mikhalych
    Mikhalych 11 December 2022 11: 47
    +5
    Look at pictures of the Moon from the Soviet Lunokhod. The stars are also visible there: https://s15.stc.yc.kpcdn.net/share/i/4/1429341/wr-750.webp
    1. solar
      solar 11 December 2022 18: 35
      -1
      Full of photos and videos from the Chinese lunar rover, flew in 2013.
      There are no stars in the pictures and videos
      https://zelenyikot.com/china-moon/

      The Soviet ones didn't have them either.
      1. View from the outside
        View from the outside 11 December 2022 21: 08
        -1
        Plus, but the "putriots" will not like your picture. And the fact that the scandalous "interview of S. Kubria with Murray (more correctly read as Mury) has long been exposed as a fake, sloppy with the participation of an actor named Tom, there is even a review on IMDB, then this is not a decree for the fools
  31. kan123
    kan123 11 December 2022 12: 13
    +5
    You yourself, being such a politician as that US president, would have allowed a dangerous flight - when the monkeys were sent, they all died from radiation. They wrapped it in foil, then they just came up with it, it was like magic. Ours would have sent a Komosomol tester - few people know that Gagarin flew with minimal chances - maybe even Korolev sacrificed the second number so that Titov would already be sent, more competent, if the first cosmonaut did not succeed. This is the level of cosmonaftics, what kind of flights to the moon are there. They just sawed the money, the movie was shot, the United States then paid billions to shut up the USSR about their "landings". There was no one on the Moon - the Chinese will be the first astronauts there.
    1. Ulan.1812
      Ulan.1812 11 December 2022 14: 28
      +1
      Quote: kan123
      You yourself, being such a politician as that US president, would have allowed a dangerous flight - when the monkeys were sent, they all died from radiation. They wrapped it in foil, then they just came up with it, it was like magic. Ours would have sent a Komosomol tester - few people know that Gagarin flew with minimal chances - maybe even Korolev sacrificed the second number so that Titov would already be sent, more competent, if the first cosmonaut did not succeed. This is the level of cosmonaftics, what kind of flights to the moon are there. They just sawed the money, the movie was shot, the United States then paid billions to shut up the USSR about their "landings". There was no one on the Moon - the Chinese will be the first astronauts there.

      And over there, our native Soviet tortoise circled the Moon in the Union and did not die.
  32. Leader_Barmaleev
    Leader_Barmaleev 11 December 2022 12: 38
    +7
    To all the questions already asked, I will add a few of my doubts:
    1. Why are all the arguments for the fact that the Americans were on the moon always only verbal?
    2. The height of the stationary orbit on the Moon is only 45 kilometers - from such a height, and without air, modern optics will be able to read the microtext on a bank agreement. Why is there not a single satellite photo of landers, footprints, flags, rover, etc.?
    3. Why did the breakthrough technologies that allowed the Americans to "fly" to the moon have no preface and why were they not used in the future?
    4. Why is most of the photo and video materials from the "Moon" - a show and goofing, and not serious scientific work?
    5. Why was all the soil taken only from the surface? So that, with some shaming, it would be almost identical to what Luna-16 brought back? Isn't it our regolith that they foisted on us?
    Briefly speaking. They weren't there. Balagan all this.
    1. solar
      solar 11 December 2022 19: 35
      -6
      1. 400 kg of lunar soil and tens of thousands of photos - are they verbal?
      2. Do you think that there are many devices flying in lunar orbit, and even over the right place?
      But there are plenty of such pictures - they were filmed by both the Chinese and the Indians.
      https://habr.com/ru/company/moonmodule/blog/576404/
      3.
      For example, Apollo pioneered the technology behind GPS, telecommunications satellites, DustBuster handheld vacuum cleaners, Lasik eye surgery, seismic devices in buildings, wireless earphones, CT scans, and air purifiers.

      4. Only 17000 photos have been posted in open access. For example,
      https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/
      And the fact that journalists like such, and not strictly scientific, is also understandable.
      5. He was not handed over, but they were exchanged. Even Houdini could not have been replaced.
      1. vitvit123
        vitvit123 12 December 2022 12: 54
        +2
        And you are talking about those 400 kg. The soil that was lost?
        1. solar
          solar 12 December 2022 23: 46
          -3
          The one that is in place, in the vault, where it should be.
          The lunar soil sampling laboratory is located at the Lyndon Johnson Space Center near Houston.
          1. vitvit123
            vitvit123 13 December 2022 06: 14
            +1
            These words mean absolutely nothing, because. we are offered to believe again "on the word" ... and who to believe: those who said that the soil was lost, or those who say that it is where you said it is?
            1. solar
              solar 13 December 2022 10: 10
              -3
              I not only said, but also brought a photo of that very lost soil. Do you know what kind of uncle on the left in the photo, to whom this soil is shown? Ask. Go through it, and they will show you personally.
              1. vitvit123
                vitvit123 13 December 2022 10: 45
                +1
                I was filled with respect for my uncle !!!
                But this one is not 100% confirmation!! Well, they gave this uncle soil that some kind of automatic station could deliver .... and the uncle was satisfied and confirmed everything! ... so what? And the deception remained a deception ... well, just, I'm sorry, yes, primitive, but very simple ...
                1. solar
                  solar 13 December 2022 14: 21
                  -4
                  The uncle was shown the whole storage, there are not enough automatic stations there.
                  1. vitvit123
                    vitvit123 13 December 2022 14: 51
                    +1
                    Yes stupidity again all this !!! Words , words , words ... and this uncle analyzed all the repositories ? All soil, in all storages? How do you know what kind of inspection he carried out or was he allowed to conduct? today some kind of ship flew in, they studied some kind of radiation, without studying which they used to fly calmly .. they studied on dummies, and 60 years ago people calmly fell asleep and it turns out again - healthy ....
                    Maybe it's time to tell you that I'm a fool so I don't understand anything?
  33. jdiver
    jdiver 11 December 2022 12: 55
    +1
    Yes, there is no point in even commenting. volumes are written according to the discrepancy between what the Americans presented on their lunar scam with reality. starting from different frame details on different official images of rovers from the Moon (which shows that the rover participated in the filming more than one during the same expedition) and the banal calculation of the rover stopping distance with 6 times less gravity, which the swindler gentlemen forgot about to the artifacts in the photo and video, the originals of which NASA suddenly suddenly lost when people climbed up with the analysis of this bullshit with modern tools. Accidentally erased, it happens. But in principle, it is certainly wrong to expect a dirty trick from the creators of 9/11 and the Donetsk Boeing.
  34. Roman Efremov
    Roman Efremov 11 December 2022 13: 23
    +4
    Quote: Ramzaj99

    why did they frolic so stupidly, dangerously, absurdly, frivolously falling with a pack of life support equipment on the lunar surface?

    Yes, they frolicked, but at the same time, not a single astronaut on any of the expeditions guessed to jump 2 meters high or jump 5 meters to the side - which, with lunar gravity, is quite natural and not difficult !!! On the contrary, everyone moved in small steps, minced their legs along their "moon".
    1. solar
      solar 12 December 2022 23: 48
      -3
      Wanted to live, infection. The reduced force of gravity does not cancel inertia in any way, and they did not smile at falling so hard that they could damage their suit or life support systems on some stone.
      1. Illanatol
        Illanatol 13 December 2022 14: 07
        +2
        But at the same time they played golf and generally behaved like a shkolota at recess.
        1. solar
          solar 13 December 2022 14: 19
          -4
          Reduced gravitational force does not cancel inertia

          they proceeded from this and tried not to take risks once again. Playing golf is not about jumping a few meters.
  35. grandloup74
    grandloup74 11 December 2022 14: 01
    -2
    C'est aussi vrai que les dogmes religieux: croit celui qui veut croire. Jusqu'à preuve manifeste du contraire, tout ça reste du baratin. Classique au pays du cinema et du bluff.
  36. air wolf
    air wolf 11 December 2022 14: 04
    -1
    All the arguments for a possible mission to the moon are overridden by the fact that the moon turns out to be brown, and this is the most important thing, and the film in video and photo equipment could not work under the conditions of the moon,
    as Grechko said, stop talking nonsense!
    1. your1970
      your1970 11 December 2022 20: 55
      +2
      Quote: air wolf
      and the film in video and photo equipment under the conditions of the moon could not work,

      And on the Lunokhods, too, could not ????
  37. Christian Revuelta
    Christian Revuelta 11 December 2022 14: 08
    -2
    For those who still believe in that fairy tale, check this out...
    https://youtu.be/TDwW9ZKjGXk
  38. iouris
    iouris 11 December 2022 14: 28
    0
    When the Chinese prove that the US was on the moon, that's when I will believe.
  39. avaks111
    avaks111 11 December 2022 15: 25
    0
    Seriously? 400 kg? And all the missions are like knurled? We have been fiddling with the refinement of the "Union" for 5 years, and they have everything, once, and flew! Where are the steps to develop complex technology?!
  40. alex aircraft
    alex aircraft 11 December 2022 15: 38
    +3
    It doesn’t give rest to the scammers that the Americans landed on the moon first and begin to talk nonsense about mystification. But at least they know about our lunar program! Do they know the N 1 rocket ?? my opinion is that if it were not for the death of Korolev and problems with Kuznetsov's engines, we would be on the moon.
    1. Illanatol
      Illanatol 12 December 2022 08: 38
      +2
      Wouldn't be.
      By the way, the N-1 rocket was originally developed for a flight to Mars.

      And where are these Kuznetsov engines? In the same place as F-1 and Saturn-5?
      If something is created and it can be brought to mind, it is used and developed.
      And if something created turned out to be useless junk, it is only suitable for fakes.

      How did it happen that the Yankees, having created a rocket engine with a thrust of 500 tons, later completely forgot about it and began to buy from the "rest of Russia" the RD-180 (half of the RD-170), whose thrust is one and a half times less?

      If Saturn-5 really existed and had the declared characteristics (such a launch vehicle actually existed and flew, but its technical characteristics turned out to be noticeably more modest), then how many space exploration problems the Yankees would have solved long ago!

      With such a powerful launch vehicle, any space orbital station could be launched in a couple of launches. And how many times did the shuttles have to fly to bring the American segment out?
      After all, the shuttles had 5 times less carrying capacity than Saturn-5 (30 tons versus 140).

      With such a powerful launch vehicle, it was possible to launch much larger interplanetary stations over a longer range (Titan, Europe, and even further) with extended functionality (descent and even return modules).

      And I am silent about the possible military use. With such a super-heavy launch vehicle, it was possible to launch real orbital fortresses.

      If Saturn V really existed the way it is being portrayed.
      If there is a suitable tool, then it is there and it is used.
      But if the instrument is just a publicized fake, then its place is where Saturn-5 is, for the amusement of the idle public.
      1. solar
        solar 12 December 2022 23: 55
        -2
        How did it happen that the Yankees, having created a rocket engine with a thrust of 500 tons, later completely forgot about it and began to buy from the "rest of Russia" the RD-180 (half of the RD-170), whose thrust is one and a half times less?

        It turned out very simply, it's a matter of price. What is cheaper for specific tasks is what they use. And if someone is ready to sell inexpensive engines based on Soviet developments, why not buy?
  41. Vladimir100
    Vladimir100 11 December 2022 15: 49
    -2
    Quote: U. Cheny
    Not a base, but a start. Korolev immediately began to reshape the rocket in his own way. But for the States, German developments were not just a base, but the foundation of the foundations. After all, rockets were made there by von Braun, the same one that developed the Fau. Without it, indeed, the States would not even be able to get close to the USSR in space.

    Quote: Ulan.1812
    Really? That is, you did not hear about the fact that the television image was first transmitted to the Republic of Ingushetia? What then did Zworykin take all the developments to the USA?

    it’s strange how it turns out in most industries they became pioneers and legislators, but in space they couldn’t get closer to the USSR.
    tales are all to amuse national pride. the fact is that they were the first to create and start producing real products. there is a contribution of Russian designers and scientists to them, but it is not comparable with the global one, primarily European and American.
    1. solar
      solar 13 December 2022 10: 58
      -3
      in fact, unlike the unified Soviet space program, which started with German developments, the Americans led several independent projects at once - Explorer, Vanguard, Discoverer, they had their own directions. Von Braun only worked for one of them, the Explorer.
      On television - the first transmission of the image was carried out by Georges Rinho and A. Fournier in Paris. Later, Rosing in Russia conducted a transmission using a Brown tube (one of his assistants was an 18-year-old student, Zworykin).
      The first transmission of a moving image was by Scottish inventor John Logie Baird.
      hi
  42. Leontrotsky
    Leontrotsky 11 December 2022 17: 23
    +1
    Let's start with the fact that from each lunar mission they were going to transmit 3 gr. Nobody handed over 324 g of the USSR. So much lunar matter was delivered by artificial satellites of the Luna program. Moreover, with the USA there was an exchange of samples in the above quantities (gram units). That is, nothing prevented this amount of lunar soil from being delivered by artificial satellites.
    As for the traces allegedly found on the moon of the stay of the Americans on it. Modern telescopes give a resolution of the lunar surface of a maximum of 40 meters. That is, neither an electric car (and it should remain on the moon), nor even traces could be found by gel. However, you can throw off the link where you found this material.
    However, the Americans themselves, if they were on the moon, are pretty foggy. I’m talking about Saturn, whose drawings disappeared somewhere (and nothing was created on its basis), about periodic reports whose American lunar soil was stolen by someone, or NASA reports that they don’t fly to the Moon again because a modern spacesuit will not protect against radiation ( how did you defend it in the 70s?). Yes, and the research of the French on the lunar soil transferred to them by the United States raises questions. The French compared it with the Russian, delivered by the Moon and revealed a bunch of differences. So they had to assume that the Moon collected soil at the site of the meteorite impact.
    So questions, in general, remain. And when the Chinese began to swell their satellites, the Americans categorically did not advise them to land at the Apollo landing site. Like the moon weather is not so hot there.
  43. lubesky
    lubesky 11 December 2022 17: 45
    0
    VV Putin removed all questions about the lunar program, he has access to the most classified materials. Do you think the USSR did not study the possibility of a fake and doubt the COMPETENCE of our then capabilities? Wouldn't the UNION use such an opportunity to prove the lie of an ideological enemy? Putin made it clear - "they were there, on the moon, I assure you."
    1. vitvit123
      vitvit123 12 December 2022 12: 56
      +1
      Putin is no longer the standard of truthfulness! He also speaks from conjuncture!
  44. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 11 December 2022 19: 50
    +1
    Quote: Aviator_
    Were they there

    Stanley Kubrick showed where and how they were.
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 12 December 2022 16: 57
      -1
      Quote: 16112014nk
      Stanley Kubrick showed where and how they were.
      A lot of money was pumped into the Lunar program, and if taxpayers were shown a few dark photographs and a few video frames taken by non-professionals, then the question would immediately be voiced: is that all?!!!. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that NASA involved Hollywood in this case in order to present the material as colorfully as possible.
      PS
      Our cosmonauts have no doubts about the reality of American flights to the moon.
  45. air wolf
    air wolf 11 December 2022 20: 56
    0
    https://scorcher.ru/diary/topic.php?id=800&page_txt=39
  46. IT Analyst
    IT Analyst 11 December 2022 21: 48
    +4
    Quote: BlackMokona
    Go outside during the day and look at the sky, where have the stars gone? Can you answer?

    During the day, the stars hid behind the glow of the atmosphere. There is no atmosphere on the moon. And there are a myriad of stars, much more and brighter than for an observer from the earth, since part of the light of the stars is absorbed precisely by the atmosphere.

    PS: I don't care if the Americans were on the moon or not, but remembering Colin Powell's test tube and other global deceptions, I tend to the version of what the Americans are best at - global lies.
  47. n-Stozhar
    n-Stozhar 11 December 2022 23: 21
    +3
    Merikos savages, who had the rocket fuel formula only after it was transferred by Filkinstein, and they tried to attribute it to Belenko, it didn’t work out, .. they spoiled all space images in the entire history of their civilization .. monochrome, cement moon, monochrome asteroids, starless sky on the shooting of aeronauts from orbital stations. so it will be until the end of this thieves and criminal ruling group .. already the moon rover, transmitting monochrome images, showed stars. they kept orientation ...
  48. venaya
    venaya 12 December 2022 05: 50
    0
    Quote: Aviator_
    Come on, what does not happen in the conversation. Yuri Mukhin pissed me off in his newspaper "Duel" at one time, we grappled with him about American soil from the moon. In his book, he also walked over me, and rather clumsily. However, that is why in 2006 I received a call from Channel One TV and was invited to participate in a program dedicated to Cosmonautics Day. Then this program was shown on April 15 after 24 hours, this is the airtime they chose. Well, sorry for my incontinence. drinks

    Thank you for reminding me of Y. Mukhin after so many years. This article is not the first one on this site, since the previous time I actively participated in the discussion on this topic, then Mukhina was talked about and referred to more, but time goes by and the amount of available material increases significantly. I must say right away that I really liked Dry from the moment he discussed the topic of KatynskVashufery, there he showed himself from the best side, but about the "Moon Scam" - so the amount of information already available is increasing all the time, it is not always possible to follow everything. As for television, and especially the 1st channel, this garbage dump, as it was terrible, has still managed to wash itself off, sincerely I hope that everything is still ahead of them. Therefore, I was very interested in what specific position you presented in that very TV program. I'm sorry, but it's very, very interesting. If you don't mind, briefly describe your position at that time. Thank you in advance.
  49. Illanatol
    Illanatol 12 December 2022 08: 23
    +2
    Quote: your1970
    The difference is in the quality of equipment and optics. Actually, everything around us has no color - different coatings reflect different parts of the spectrum.


    That is, if they show you blue coal, will you not be surprised at all?
    The lunar surface is indeed brown-brown and has an albedo (reflectivity) similar to that of low-grade coal. But we see the moon in the sky silvery. The reason is that the earth's atmosphere plays the role of a light filter, passing rays of a certain region of the spectrum. So the Yankees made the surface gray-silver ... they actually saw the Moon only like us, from the surface of the Earth.

    "And the moon still silvers the space with its rays" laughing
    1. Sumotori_380
      Sumotori_380 14 December 2022 21: 35
      0
      And before that, the Yankees did not land probes on the moon? And they did not fly around the moon?
  50. Illanatol
    Illanatol 12 December 2022 08: 51
    +3
    Quote: lubesky
    Wouldn't the UNION use such an opportunity to prove the lie of an ideological enemy?


    Not necessary. Since at that time the Soviet elite had already begun to give up positions to "ideological enemies." "Detente of international tension", "peaceful coexistence" and other ideologemes are the forerunners of the "Perestroika project".
    In addition, the Yankees had something to offer in exchange for the consent of the Soviet nomenklatura to recognize their lies as the truth and publicly confirm it.
    Concessions in the economic sphere, for example, the lifting of the embargo on grain supplies to the USSR. The permission of the USSR to expand economic cooperation with the countries of Western Europe (primarily Germany).
    Concessions in the military sphere: softening of the US position in the SALT-1 and ABM treaties. It is also possible to wind down some promising military programs.

    As for Putin... what choice does he have? He, the poor fellow, still hopes for a "normalization of relations." And if you openly admit that the authorities of the late USSR and his predecessor Yeltsin covered up the deception of the Yankees - in what light will our country appear?

    And even though the voice gets stuck in clouds of verbal dust,
    I want to ask a question: where have you been before?

    Everyone is too bogged down in this global deception. No one can get out of it without reputational losses. Therefore - THE YANKS WAS ON THE MOON! NO TO CONSPIRACY THEORIES!
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 12 December 2022 11: 57
      +3
      Therefore - THE YANKS WAS ON THE MOON! NO TO CONSPIRACY THEORIES!

      where is the conspiracy theory? People want to know how they flew to the moon, but instead they tell us fables.
      There were no Americans on the Moon. You don’t just need to talk about the flag, it is the technical details that point to this.