50 years on, Apollo 16 moonwalker still ‘excited’ by space

AP ^

[algore]

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Fifty years after his Apollo 16 mission to the moon, retired NASA astronaut Charlie Duke says he’s ready for the U.S. to get back to lunar exploration.

Part of that effort, Duke said Friday, will come in the form of the Artemis program, which includes NASA’s upcoming flight to the moon using its new Space Launch System rocket. The first of the huge rockets is supposed to blast off without crew later this year, with crewed flights planned subsequently.

“With Artemis, NASA is going to be focused on deep space, to the moon and beyond, and I’m excited about that,” Duke told The Associated Press in an interview in Columbia.

Duke, 86, is one of four surviving moonwalkers from the Apollo program, taking Apollo 16 to the lunar surface in 1972. He has been making the rounds to mark the 50th anniversary

The late John Young was first out of the lander and walked on the moon with Duke. Ken Mattingly orbited the moon in the command module, nicknamed “Casper.”

Duke said he does not begrudge NASA for ending the Apollo program to focus on space shuttles, the international space station and other missions in more remote parts of space. But he looks forward to future missions that build off of what he and others have learned from their time on the moon, which called “a great platform for science.”

Duke also noted that he’s encouraged by the commercial partnerships that have developed around space exploration, like Space X and Blue Origin. Those options, he said, “make space available for more people and more science and engineering and unmanned stuff.”

“The more people we get into space, who can see the beauty of the Earth ... it’s going to affect a lot of people.”

[Telepathic Intruder]

It’s a very poor argument to just offer a website that I’ll have to read for hours. I’ve looked at enough half-baked conspiracy theory websites already just to find they are full of speculation, misinformation, or outright lies. If you have a point, just say it.

[cgbg]

It is called doubling down.

Big contracts were and still are at stake—follow the money....

Fraud is where the big money is...a lot bigger profits than the real thing:

Here is just one example:

https://www.aulis.com/suits.htm

Meanwhile NASA is currently spending a billion dollars on what allegedly is fifty year old technology:

https://qz.com/2046840/a-1-billion-space-suit-is-holding-up-nasas-2024-moon-landing/

[cgbg]

Sure—Apollo’s manned moon landings were as fake as a three dollar bill.

They couldn’t make it so they faked it.

The details—component by component—lie by lie—are detailed at the web site—scientists and engineers from all over the world who are not on the payroll of NASA or NASA contractors or subcontractors.

That is the real reason every nation and corporation’s manned space program is still stuck in low Earth orbit.

[Texas Fossil]

NUTS!

I know one of the 16. I know people who worked for NASA here in Texas way back in the program.

When the shuttle mission was taking place I regularly heard the up down link from JPL piped into the Cactus Net from the West Coast to NM via remote base operators.

I spent 14 year in NM. (1972-1986) Many of my Ham Operator friends worked at WSMR, Rat Scat, Lockheed Martin, or at Kirkland AFB, Holloman AFB, at Ft Huachuca, AZ, at Los Alamos, and at NMSU university in Las Cruces.

I worked on electronic projects with some of them and they were the absolute top engineers, technicians and physicists.

My father-in-law was an Intelligence Officer in the 82nd Airborne and an electrical engineer and later a division manager at a weapons plant (he was there 40 years).

You are dead wrong.

[Telepathic Intruder]

Yes it is the details that matter, but I won’t accept having to go to some website and sift through them, and at the same time sit through some one-sided lecture that I can’t respond to. If your only argument is “the web site says so”, then it is a weak argument. Either you know the information the web site supposedly presents, or you don’t.

[Cecily]

Yes, thousands of people kept a secret this big for decades, and there were no whistleblowers. Totally plausible (not).

[Fury]

Re: 24 - My suggestion is to ignore FReepers when they post the manned moon landings were faked.

Their low intellect theories have been debunked over decades.

[rx]

Your emotionally-laden representations don't begin to cancel out the evidence I've seen and with which I've been entrusted.

Neither do your tech, physics or intel connections come close excelling as do mine. Furthermore, my tech background probably quickly cancels out yours. I've been president or CEO of four different tech-oriented companies (and never been fired, let go, or asked to resign).

Not everyone in NASA, the labs or related subcontractors was "in the know," thus such representations are expected and not counter-examples among those that know the Apollo moon landings never happened.

I have personally met Jim Lovell on multiple occasions (I took the picture below). It says something that he was asked to speak in support of Tom Hanks at the latter's Lifetime Achievement event. (They come from the same secret handshake club.)

   

Please consider more closely -cgbg-'s information.

I consider your "You are dead wrong" comment to be a personal attack that the site owner forbids.

[cgbg]

There have been whistleblowers—but NASA and the mass media have kept them away from your view.

Bill Kaysing was the first one.

Thomas Ronald Baron was the second one.

Gus Grissom (the astronaut) was so disgusted with the program that he put a lemon on the flight simulator.

Then there was Astronaut Neil Armstrong’s plea to all of us:

“There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove truth’s protective layers.”

In addition there are some nameless whistleblowers who intentionally doctored photos and other documents in the NASA archives to show “impossible” things in the hope that historians would find them.

There is a fascinating history here for those who wish to pay attention.

[rx]

If one looks to Twitter, Facebook or Youtube for a count of whistleblowers there have been on a given topic, J6 or the Apollo missions, for examples, one would have a totally skewed impression. This has long been de rigeur for how the conspirators within and allied with the US Government treat real whistleblowers.

[rx]

The little girl asked why we haven't gone back to the moon.

[21twelve]

Chuck Colson, convicted lawyer from Watergate and later Christian ministries guy (mostly to prisoners) said something about how people say that the resurrection of Jesus was a hoax perpetrated by the disciples and the hundreds of people that claimed to have seen Jesus after his death.

He said something like “That means hundreds of people had to lie and keep it a secret. Many of them tortured and sent to death and still claiming it. A half-dozen of the most powerful men on earth couldn’t keep their lie about Watergate straight or a secret for even a year!”

I think the same idea applies to the moon landings.

Now, it wouldn’t surprise me if there were some “beauty shots” taken of the guys posing with a lander on earth that ended up being passed off as being taken on the moon.

“Hey Marv - all those shots we got where we wanted to show the American flag on the side of the lander were all blurry...”

[UCANSEE2]

bm

[rx]

Debunking does not actually happen through evidence-free, broad brush insults about posters' intellect, despite your earnest stab at it.

Please explain how the next photo below is just one of many examples of doctored images among NASA's Apollo photos.

Should people's emotionally-laden invectives about their intelligent friends that might have collected government paychecks related to NASA activities cancel out such evidence? Sorry.

And how about these two bright lights reflected in Buzz's helmet lens from this extremely famous photo? There are zero alternatives to them being reflections of stage lighting. (Pssst! There were no such lights in the lunar sky that day.)

Whom do you know that would never lie? EVERYONE THAT HAS A JESUIT MASTER HAS SWORN TO LIE IF REQUIRED!

When will you, dear reader, become an honest devotee of scientific truths, no matter where they lead?

[Fury]

Sorry, that dog won’t hunt.

There is evidence online both proposing the moon landings were faked and responding to such proposals.

I’ve read the evidence to date (well, up until 2019). I believe the moon landings were not faked.

I don’t use the phrase “low intellect” lightly. It is based on some of the claims made on websites proposing that the moon landings were faked.

And statements like this:

“EVERYONE THAT HAS A JESUIT MASTER HAS SWORN TO LIE IF REQUIRED!”

sort of drive home the point.

[rx]

Perhaps you'd prefer to hear from the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Council, Scottish Rite from 1859 to 1889, how well that "deception dog" has hunted for more than a century and a half, as it's been authoritatively quoted in that time:

[cgbg]

One of my favorite pieces of evidence of fakery you may not be familiar with:

https://www.aulis.com/rover_fenders.htm

It looks like they used the exact same rover on three different Apollo “missions”. How do we know?
They had identical oil leaks from the left rear wheels!

There was no need to fix the oil leak since they were doing the video in a studio and it wouldn’t matter if the Rover died.

One more “geeky” evidence of fakery—the on board navigation computer (that would have to work for a real world moon landing) was a mock up that would never work in the real world:

https://www.aulis.com/pascal.htm

Today folks wonder how that old on board computer technology (less calculating power than today’s cell phones) could do the complex calculations needed for a manned moon landing.

They could not—so NASA just faked it.

[minnesota_bound]

I Walked On The Moon
https://youtu.be/f713tLbdlu4?t=3148

[PeterPrinciple]

Meanwhile NASA is currently spending a billion dollars on what allegedly is fifty year old technology:

https://qz.com/2046840/a-1-billion-space-suit-is-holding-up-nasas-2024-moon-landing/

---

That particular argument is not a good one. Find others.

We had cars 50 years ago but the technology has changed. I can still go places with my 70 year old car but not on the free way.

[minnesota_bound]

#8 Proof we made it to the moon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v52LFgUq-8&t=7s