I've been clear on my reasons for doubting the moon hoax. You justify the flimsy, poorly constructed lander on basis that it wasn't necessary to go the extra mile...I simply point out that this is very flawed reasoning. - of course they would strive to make this the very best craft ever built given the risks to crew and, more importantly, reputation of a nation.
I do wonder how closely & with how much effort, you have looked at the counter positions. My mind is such that I took a look at your link, with the schematics etc., and found it lacking. Showing a battery bank on a diagram is quite different from being able to demonstrate that the same bank would be capable of powering the heating/AC necessary given it was off the shelf 60's technology...admitted in the body of the article. Ever leave the lights on in a car? Think about the amount of power which would have been required in consideration of the extreme temperatures? Other experts have done the math ie: power required vs battery capacities to provide and the two don't marry up well at all.
Foil is going to resolve this? Does AC work in a vacuum was the question...to which there were no replies. I am trying to keep this within the boundaries of which are determinable. ...some experts say no way while NASA and others maintain it is. But they lost the plans so I guess we start over with unmanned Orion missions which is fitted with sensors in order to assist in determining what the astronauts will be subjected to - in order to remain safe.
At this issues most basic...
you and Race accept what I deem to be 'the big lie'...told often enough etc., whilst I and others, originally somewhat indifferent, were swayed by the counter arguments/facts that we have shown. There are so many red flags...but you don't see any.