Apollo Discussions > The Hoax Theory

Apollo 12 and the Surveyor 3 Mystery

(1/59) > >>

Derek K Willis:
I recently published an article on the aulis.com website describing what I consider to be "anomalies" with the account of how the Apollo 12 astronauts Pete Conrad and Al Bean examined the Surveyor 3 lander.

I was asked by some members of the Unexplained Mysteries forum if I would join ApolloHoax and debate the issue here. I am happy to that, and will attempt to answer any questions. The article can be found here:

https://www.aulis.com/surveyor3.htm

It would be helpful if people looked at the article before commenting, as that would save me from having to explain what it is all about.

AtomicDog:
Not how it works. You present you argument here, and your link is for reference.

JayUtah:
In that the OP was specifically invited here specifically to discuss the article in question, it doesn't seem unreasonable to read the article where it stands.  I personally won't have time to digest anything of substance until next week.

The stipulation that arguments appear here rather than elsewhere has roots in prior bad experiences.  In general, we like the claims and the rebuttal of the claims to appear in the same place.  If the claims are there and the rebuttal here, one can easily read one without the others.  And it has often been the case that claims sourced from elsewhere are brought here by people other than their authors, and the rejoinder too often then is, "You'll have to ask the author."  That obviously won't do.  But the OP has clearly identified the article as his original work and seems to be willing to argue it here in good faith.

Derek K Willis:
My argument is presented in my article. But, okay, here is a condensed version.

Photographs of Surveyor 3 clearly show it is discolored due to being covered in dust. The astronauts, however, insisted the discoloring was caused by the paint having been been baked in the Sun. Then, after half an hour examining the lander, they suddenly realized it was covered in dust. I find that hard to believe.

Also, as far as I can see, there has never been a convincing explanation for why the Surveyor 3 was covered in dust. A small amount was deposited during the Surveyor's "difficult" landing - the T.V. images sent back were blurred, and that seems to have been caused by dust deposited on the camera's mirror. Explanations for the dust shown on the Apollo 12 photographs have included "lunar fountains" and the electrostatic attraction of the lander. The most popular explanation is that dust was blown onto the Surveyor when the LM flew past prior to landing. When asked by Mission Control, Conrad and Bean had said any dust would have flown over the top of the lander.
         

JayUtah:

--- Quote from: Derek K Willis on June 01, 2019, 01:56:35 PM ---Conrad and Bean had said any dust would have flown over the top of the lander.
--- End quote ---

I disagree that this would have been the case.  It would have hugged the ground since that's the minimal energy path.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page