Does he think calculating this is not feasible in some way? There must be people in the moon hoax community who have enough math skills to prove leaving the moon was impossible if it was.
I do not understand this line of argument, what is his point? Is his argument that is hard to leave the moon? If so, as long it is not impossible it is no argument at all.
What he is talking about is not easy, but again, nothing in space is.
I agree he makes a lot of arguments from incredulity, but I take his essays more as a journalist compiling information in a format that is approachable rather than a scientific paper. His essays provide a starting point for research and have aroused my skepticism enough to want to research the moon landings more... which nothing else I had previously come across compelled me to do. I'd like to do some calculations when I have time to see for myself... Some argument from incredulity is justified when talking about immensely complicated engineering feats that had not been thoroughly tested/simulated.
Please show me which ones you find compelling, i have a hard time finding one.
I would like to go back through all 14 essays and analyze the points in detail... unfortunately I've only had time to quickly read through once... but quickly skimming back through... here's a few things:
I mentioned one compelling point above... the fact that all the data originally transmitted back from the Apollo missions was lost or recorded over.
It is interesting that the space suits and ship had no protection against solar or cosmic radiation. Would like to know what was the accumulated exposure the astronauts endured.
No noise is heard from the rocket engine that gently set the LEM down on the moon. Noise from a 10,000 lb thrust rocket should travel through the structure and into the cabin.
Photographs of the LEM don't appear to show disturbed lunar soil directly below the LEM's descent engine.
The footage of the blast off from the LEM appears to be fake... especially since there's no way they could have remotely controlled the camera from earth considering the time delay.
No modern photogrpahic evidence exists showing any left behind equipment.
Before the LEM no one had ever successfully built a rocket engine with a throttle.
No one ever successfully landed in the LEM landing simulator.
The Ascent engine had to be rebuilt after every trial so the actual engine on every LEM was untested.
The LEM failed the pressure test blowing out a window which was merely replaced; no redesign.
No major issues occurred with any of this new untested unproven equipment except for Apollo 13 which was replete with 13 numerology (this point wasn't made in the essay, but its something I recall hearing before).
Adjusting exposure, focus, and Aperture with heavy pressurized gloves on and not being able to look through the viewfinder would be... problematic.
Apollo 8 was the first manned launch of a Saturn V rocket... and it allegedly went to the moon and back... after the previous Saturn V test launch failed.
Anyway.. that's all I have time for right now.