Look, I'm open to either position here but all you're doing is talking shit and attacking the poster. So, Mr. Science, use your deep well of knowledge to address the points raised. For example, the no stars from the moon photographs is addressed in the documentary - it's not a valid criticism. What is valid about the film material itself is that there is no possible way it could be used in -250 degree temperatures. It would shatter when cycled. Also true is that the commercial camera they used would be incapable of operation in that temperature range due to the effect of temperature on the mechanical internals. Also of interest is the lack of radiation artifacts of the film itself which should be present and was present on early unmanned photographs. It's really not all so easily dismissed and that is why I'm interested in understanding why some of the questions raised have no apparent counters. I don't want to be in doubt whether we landed on the moon, but I am. You can keep being an ass, or you can offer source that can help address these issues.