Armstrong himself said they had 30 seconds of fuel to burn to get that baby down, they talk about huge dust being blown around and the deafening noise/silence depending on which astro u believe, simple fact is u need way more than the 10, 000 ilbs they claimed it had, and werner von braun was he wrong about the amount of rocket fuel he used, you come across as someone who would never accept the evidence against something they believe in, a bit like individual religious belief and that's how I see the moon hoax, no problems at all with it but evidence points elsewhere imo
I think you have me pegged all wrong - I'm more than happy to change my position, but only with sufficient evidence. I don't think any such evidence exists, let alone been offered up on this thread.
I believe (rightly or wrongly) that we did land on the moon. I've provided links to support the mathematical physics involved in such a feat. These calculations come from multiple sources have been peer-reviewed countless times. They're complex, not force = mass x acceleration, with respect.
Ironically, you come across as the type of person you're suggesting I am, unwavering in the face of overwhelming mathematical evidence. If you don't understand what's involved, it would be more reasonable for you to say:
"I don't understand the complexities involved as they've been presented to me, so I choose to believe the lunar landing is a hoax."
In keeping with your religious motif in the previous post, it was be tantamount to a "believer" saying "I don't understand the quantum theory surrounding the Big Bang, therefore I choose to believe that God created the universe."