Dave Homer wrote

The text corresponding to the rover picture CLEARLY states the final resting place which is cochise crater. This is a considerable distance from the alleged landing site.

If you think these pictures where genuinely taken on the Moon, then you must be "on something" as you are not in touch with the real world, ie, you cannot distinguish between fact and fantasy. You are also in the minority, as over 90% of world population now know that Apollo was a fake.

You have also forgotten Dan Goldin's slip of the tongue statement to a CH 4 journalist when he stated that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit until they can overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He must have forgot that it was his organisation which supposedly sent 27 astronauts 250,000 miles outside Earth orbit 30 years ago.

Can you explain to me why, in 1999, NASA are still trying to get a rocket to land, and take off again, 30 years after Apollo was supposed to have done just that. You may like to discuss this topic with the fairies at the bottom of your garden. With your disorientated thoughts I would think this is possible.

DAVE HOMER (Living in the real world, not a fantasy one)

To which I replied

Thanks for the swift response, however, is that it? Is that the way you argue your case? I must admit I'm as impressed with your statistics (90% of the WORLD KNOW it's a hoax) as I am in your research, did you read that statistic somewhere or did you just make it up?

Anyway before we descend into just slagging each other off, here's a few things to think about.

• You were right (Yes I did say that). The photo of the rover at cochise crater does say that it was the final resting place. BUT, had you looked further into the puzzle then you would have gone the route that I followed. Further research showed that the picture in question was taken at between 166:53 and 166:56 (elapsed time) whilst at the cochise crater. It wasn't until 3 hours later that Cernan drove the rover to the last resting place approx 450 feet from the LEM were the camera continued to be operated by Fendell at mission control. See picture AS17-143-21932 in the Apollo surface journal site, this picture was taken at 169:59. I have e-mailed the picture library to point out that the picture IS labelled wrong.
• Dan Goldin was probably talking about LONG TERM space exploration e.g. a two year mission to Mars.
• On your last point, if my memory serves me correctly: The lander in question is part of research into a reuseable spacecraft that can takeoff and be robust enough to withstand the forces of getting out of the atmosphere and then re-enter and land VERTICALLY. The LEM was never designed to work in an atmosphere and therefore didn't require the ultra strong chassis of something like the Space Shuttle. In a vacuum the main requirement was to hold a pressurised environment. The LEM was basically that and two engines.