You said that "the analog video transmissions from the "moon" were bounced off c.1970 P3 Orions...
to an island...
to a boat... from Austrailia...
to Texas.
That's what YOU said.
And the first oceanic cables were laid in the 1950's but this was telephone line, NOT coaxial cable line. Do you know how long it would take to transmit video over 1960's telephone wires? A VERY LONG TIME. NOT 1.5 seconds.
(But you already know that...)
So, back to your first lie...
you said there was microwave "sight to line of sight" stations from boats to planes to islands, from Australia to Texas in less than ONE SECOND in order for there to be a "remote control" of the zoom lens on the video camera that was strapped to the Lunar Rover Dune Buggy.
Now you are still claiming that there is a 250,000 mile tracking with infrared telemetry from Houstaon to the Moon...
...so Houston could remote control the zoom lens on the camera here?
And then you say there were "chemical batteries" on the "moon" powering all this stuff?
So you are saying that this infrared beam from Houston to the "moon" traveled through the Van Allen Belts and could accurately hit the zoom lens on the video camera left behind on the "moon"...? With the earth spinning at 66600 miles per hour and the moon orbiting the earth at 2,288 miles per hour? Please provide the infrared telemetry math for how Houston controlled such a zoom shot and a tilt shot on the "moon"...
Oh, and please explain the "chemical batteries" that were used on the "moon" to power so much video broadcasting from the Lunar Dune Buggy. (That oughta be rich.) But I'd rather you defend your lunacy (LOL) here... please detail for us how this isn't the greatest hoax in the history of the world: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6vAiyUIQog
Here some engineer deconstructs the actual foil and cardboard, taped LEM on the "moon"... Please defend against this man's decontruct of NASA "engineering quality"... down to the rivets... here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6vAiyUIQog
"I am an engineer and admire the bravery of the few who have attempted to defend this obvious stoned, high-schooler quality prop,(NASA's LEM)."
"The only explanation for such a ramshackle creation I can think of is that it is some crude model created prior to actual fabrication as a rough, to-scale prototype, possibly to help determine possible ranges of distance and ergonomic timing parameters to accurately plan surface activities,. It is absolutely NOT the product of any real engineering process."
For a project of this scale and cost, every part would be manufactured and have fit tolerances of a few thousandths of an inch."
"Highly precise mechanical manufacturing techniques were available at the time, allowing the fabrication of things like precision optics, avionics, and watch-making."
"Every fastener location would be precisely calculated to minimize tension, shear, and stress loads, based on a mathematical load profile model, not randomly taped or glued, nailed, or riveted at random locations."
"There is not a professional engineer in the world who would permit the possibility of a fabrication phase that would let obviously unskilled and sloppy technicians just wing it at the last minute."
"It makes no difference that “panels don’t have to be have to be that precise,” as some have opined, the design process would automatically result in the consistent, and highly optimized placement of every part."
"There would be no use of tape, let alone pipes only half-wrapped! Sticky tape is made from gummy (liquid state) glue."
"Any liquid, exposed to a vacuum, 200 degree+ temperatures, and intense UV radiation would immediately boil, or vaporize."
"Also, the design would never allow for gaps - anywhere. Any gap is a potential for unknown objects or particles to enter locations which could change the weight distribution, or result in unplanned thermal or chemical conditions, and would have been designed out the realm of possibility in the first draft."
"Even a small possibility of something being even slightly dislocated from a precise location would be unacceptable, as this would represent an unknown, which would require much more complexity in design."
"For example, in this case, the engineering design fabrication procedure must have specified something like “now just put tape wherever it looks like something might shake loose, or Lord knows what could happen!”
"Of course this is absurd, but the engineering design process would necessarily have to account for such a ridiculous fabrication variations, and would require an analysis of all the possible places that the fabricator might in fact place the tape, and how those possible tape placements might affect thermal and stress characteristics. It is far easier to simply specify exactly where everything needs to be fastened, as one would expect."
"And WTF are they doing protecting metal struts from the sun anyway?? There are plenty of other exposed metal struts."
"And why are the thruster assemblies different? (see the right side of the NASA-linked picture) and why are there more than what is necessary to provide orientation control?"
"Or, to save on weight, why not have one gimbaled thruster per corner, and aim it in the right direction, using a gravity, acceleration, and altitude-actuated control system? The analog control systems technology to do this had been used in rocket guidance systems for decades."
"I could go on listing absurdities for hours, as could any first year engineering school drop-out, (as could any mechanic, or manufacturing industry worker, for that matter)."
"I’ve never been a moon hoax conspiricist, but if this picture is one NASA actually claims is taken on the moon, it is absolutely certain the entire program was a fraud. If there were something beyond absolutely certain, it would be that."
