Re: Dumbest = religiously dumb. ;-)
1) You have now redefined Brehmsstrahling as only producing low flux or soft Xrays that don't affect the ASA 160 film. Well done, but you realise your evidence free definition is rejected by Kodak in their guide to protect film from X-ray scanners at airports and basic physics which does not specify that Brehmsstrahling only produces soft Xrays. You are visibly altering facts here to suit your narrative.
2) Here again you are arguing a subject in which you have scant knowledge with the view of professional photographers. The lunar photos do not contain merely 2 levels of light as you claim, it contains all levels of light as a photoshop analysis of the NASA photos will rapidly tell you. The sky makes an enormous lighting difference to a scene, to remove the sky and take a perfectly exposed image right off the bat is unlikely. Then to repeat is multiple times is like throwing 'Tails' of a coin a hundred photos in a row.
Buzz wasn't a famous photographer either before or after: so how did he hit them every time on a new alien lighting environment?
4) You ignore the fact even the LEM's ladder was too weak for 1g. You can see in the Apollo 11 'One step' video they beefed up the sides of the ladder for the studio.
The LRV added at least 210kg yet they seemed to have no trouble implementing the heavy 1g ready winch system, it is inconsistent with the weight issues. They didn't suddenly gain more thrust for the LRV missions. There is no logical explanation for the winch being used on 15,16,17 unless it was for the studio. There's a good chance it was actually the very same winch BTW, on the very same LM. It is unlikely the 15,16,17 LMs and LRVs are 3 different ones, it would have all been a single 'training' LM and LRV.
5) You need to research just how a car behaves with 1/6th of the grip available. Multiply that to the fact it's 1/6 of the grip of loose dust and you have the same grip as estimated for ice. You can see the LRV gains speed rapidly to the terminal velocity (around 8mph) which again shows there is too much grip. The LRV appears to be a model with a rigid dummy 'driving' in sand filmed at double speed.
Also note in 15,16,17 the 'Pool of light' effect fails to reappear anywhere in any photo, indicating that they moved from a spotlamp lit soundstage of 11 to the desert, which is why the lighting is far more even and consistent and the area of land in the photos increases from the size of a small garden to the size of a desert.
6) Nope, that has more cuts in it than a Ninja fruit salad!
The Apollo 11 press film shows all the relevant parts of a ground based camera showing lift of and staging to the J-2 (although their J-2 has an orange flame for some reason). All we need is the original film from NASA that the the press cut into their news segment.
However as you discovered NASA doesn't want to show that single-take film from ANY Saturn V liftoff.
That's right, NASA hasn't published a SINGLE continuous film (less than 3 minutes worth) of ANY Apollo mission.
If they did show the Apollo 11 one we could time the cloud pierce scene to get a datum point of 'speed at N seconds' and compare it to their fictional flight plan. This 50 year long convenient oversight is just a coincidence right?
7) About those splashdowns, there was continuous training for the parachute drop and recovery during that period. Dropping CMs from planes was a standard training job - nothing unusual about that. Also note that in NO SINGLE LANDING does ANY astronaut remove their helmet, they simply appear like a Paul Daniels show in the quarantine box. When you LOOK for the evidence that Neil, Buzz, Collins were in the CM there is none. Collins was blind BTW, after questioning by our Patrick Moore he said he didn't see any stars at all. This is from a man who had orbited the shadow side of the moon in a rolling craft with multiple windows in it.
There is no way that Apollo 13 could get such an accurate splashdown. It's like throwing darts with a blindfold after being spun around a few times and getting the center of the bull.
This is the problem with the Apollo story, it relies on so many improbably and unlikely events all lining up - not just once, but mission (11) after mission (12) after mission (13) after mission (14) after mission (15) after mission (16) after mission (17).
The best proof of fakery is however still the giant evidence lovingly captured in the later missions, of glorious big detailed rocks buried in the dust of millions of years, yet all having been washed clean by the earth weather. Even on the earth training images from NASA of the LRV etc, all the rocks are like that: it simply never occurred to them that the rocks should have been covered in dust just like after a giant snowstorm. Look at this and note how unlike the moon photos it is: