Thanks for your reply, too, generally! Yes, there is a multitude of holes in the official moon exploration narrative. Many Apollo-contemporaneous, current and retired NASA employees have risked their jobs, careers, pensions and sometimes lives to come forward, even anonymously, and make the public aware of their piece(s) of the puzzle as they saw one or more important problems. We should appreciate their taking a moral stand against the public being duped and their being falsely used where it was not (or perhaps "no longer") in the public interest that the narrative's lies be kept hidden (see the video). As you probably remember, even Neil Armstrong did so at the 25th Anniversary celebration of Apollo 11 making quite clear "his coming out" included his saying that he had been used as "a parrot" to say things and not for his ability as a great flyer.
Although it's certainly NASA's take to represent that they're debunking "conspiracy theorists" ad finitium and at every turn (for their claims are all valid, don't you know!), sometimes a whistleblower, in outing only what they know, may not be able to represent a particularly complete foundation or context for what they know. We should not necessarily let such whistleblowers be summarily consigned to a "loony bin,"--unless there's proof otherwise. Seemingly valid evidence still needs to be accounted for. But further, we also know and have seen that NASA has literally planted paid, whacko-sounding voices and video producers on the Internet, whose job NASA created to allow their claims to be shot down in figurative flames. One of those is Michael Aquino, whom NASA paid to spout all manner of Flat Earth conjectures. Another was the falsified vacuum chamber test cited and linked in a previous post of mine. NASA's many suspcious initiatives very much fit a recurring pattern that must by virtue of its frequency be considered ill-intentioned.
For Armstrong, it was a confession and apology, much as many believe Stanley Kubrick delivered in his movie, The Shining, which included several moon and Apollo references (e.g., the young boy with the knitted Apollo 11 sweater and the prominent Room 237, for the hundreds of thousands of miles the moon is from Earth).
None of the many aspects of hoax should necessarily take a way from those who dedicated their talent and professional lives to NASA projects. There's often an implicit sense of diminished pride if not insult felt by those who didn't see problems where they were and who have long considered so-called "conspiracy theorists" (I would prefer "skeptics") to be insulting to their high-moral-standard comrades or compatriots. Indeed, many of these risked a lot for the US citizenry--outside of any known hoax--and all should be careful not to diminish their contributions by painting their exposures with too broad of a brush.
Even the hoax had its noble aspect. Nixon, NASA and the Deep State (DS) (for indeed, RMN was a major player in the CIA) were on a course to benefit the US citizenry as they drove the Soviets into bankruptcy. To oversimplify, it benefited all of us that we for so many decades have been able to take trips, build our companies and roads using $0.79/gallon gasoline and didn't send our children to battle the USSR (well... except to a lesser extent in Viet Nam.)
Still I believe the advanced (think Space Force), DS-controlled space technology has afforded us to visit the moon. I believe the Space Force initiative is PDJT's working to make sure that hidden technology isn't used against the non-elite and that our children, too, become versed in it as a matter of course, for the many that will be inspired by travel throughout the heavens.
I believe that when one is able to step back to see a sufficiently large picture, even a skeptic's views are not wholly of one DS-bashing flavor, as above. The 13-families that continually seek after unfair advantage are so surprisingly to the uninitiated, quite content to "dump all over us" (or is that Steppenalloverus?). Yes, like HRC, they'll coldly injure, kill and prepare the cannons for the rest of us as if we were simply fodder. As the 500M Earth-sustainable lives (see again, the Georgia Guidestone tenets/commandments.) certainly include most of the rest of us, our morality, thankfulness and faith should nonetheless motivate us to endeavor to put an end to the overriding disregard for human life of these evil-doers. I believe this has been PDJT's main thrust through his first term and as he's prepared for his second. When this is rightly seen, it should and likely will be as so much more motivating than were others motivated by a $25/hour Soros activism job to burn, loot, create mayhem as life and limb are risked. Striving for the full goodness of what God has prepared should always help align us with His purpose for our lives.
As with that 17th-letter anonymous group, we've been given long enough life and been set upon a benevolent path that it should be clear God and others intend that we each dig in to see for ourselves about what's really going on behind the scenes. We do that so we can best "remove the tares without uprooting and destroying the valuable crop" of man in God's image. Those swamp rats and 13-family types kill kids by the hundreds of thousands yearly while we've allowed it to happen "under our noses" as they evilly have been able to keep things hidden and us off-balance.
The skills and viewpoints we need to have such that we be properly equipped for the Ephesians 6:12-20 work should not allow us to be polluted with the devil's own methodology of labeling exposures of the Deep State's covert plans as "conspiracy theories." How out-of-control the swamp has grown when given that kind of cover at so many turns. At this point in time there's such a marketplace escalation of people losing their jobs and livelihoods for merely voicing skepticism (e.g., the firing of social studies teacher, Jeanne Hedgepeth). I believe such things are clear DS attacks on our God-intended freedoms, as embodied in this case, in our Constitution's First Amendment.
To round out two topics of Apollo fakery, firstly, here are two pictures of Buzz Aldrin's space suit, side-by-side. There was no chance for a wardrobe change once on the moon and predictably none are noted in the logs. Furthermore, the lack of PLSS glove-finger dexterity would not have allowed the changes that can plainly be seen between the two pictures of Buzz's suit. IOW, fail!
On the Hasselblad camera, it was a standard model, only changed by the addition of the suit chest mounting bracket. It was not an automatic adjustment camera. Everything was manual, yet, for an incredibly large number of varying lighting and focal length situations, the settings were somehow sophisticated and "perfect", even though glove-finger dexterity could not have allowed either astronaut's manipulation of the cameras' adjustments, someone took uniformly great shots, as if there was a professional photographer on-site. Hmmmmmmmm.
But further, since there was no temperature control for the essentially-always-in-the-sun Hasselblad cameras, the temperature inside the cameras would have quickly risen from sunlight electro-magnetic radiation and rendered the film as reels of slippery mush or crispy bacon. Once any magazine's film would have melted inside the camera, the camera would almost certainly have been useless for the rest of the mission. Yet, there is nothing in any of Apollo's logs concerning problems with film melting. So, "Why didn't that dog bark?".