If I ever got to be on the moon you bet the first thing I would do is screw around and have fun! I wounder if the guys thought to themselves ..."Well the taxpayers just spent 100 billion dollars to get us here ... might as well enjoy it!".
@johnnyone9 It was folded in the descent stage. There's actually films, even here on Youtube, showing both when they tested to unfold it on Earth and when they did it on Moon. Sorry, I havent't got the address for the moment, but I know they are there. Search!
@20jklm How is the rover traveling at Trans Lunar Injection speed? Many retro burns were executed to slow them down before landing... They were moving at only a few miles an hour relative to the moon.
@unparallelshadows I was not making reference to the rover, I was pointing in some conspiracy theories, which state that the lunar landings were fake because the inability to cross the Van Hallen belts, I was only saying that the belt crossing is possible, by several causes including the speed in which the craft is traveling, that make the radiation levels bearable for human beings to accomplish that out.
ok you're talking about the Van Hallen belts, there is one way to probe that men can get through the belts, as set an example the new probes that are launch into space "new horizon", etc. to set an example, have an electronics based on silicon chips, as we know silicon chip are faulty working in a radioactive enviroment, then if a silicon based space probe can get through the belts without malfunction, and are more sensitive to radiation than men then is possible to acomplish the belt crossing.
@iXelsior NASA is killing you from the inside out. Watch the original black and white footage, who zoomed out after 0.13 onwards and the cameraman at 1:20, I am calling you dumb idiot for being fooled by NASA
@Area51WasOurMoon the people on earth? because were advanced enough to land a man on the moon so im pretty sure we can make a cameria zoom and move without actually being there....
The solar constant. 1.95 langleys Ly per minute. one langley is 41840.00 J/m². 41840 joules per meter squares or 41840 joules per kilogram = 4184000 rads. We never went anywhere then for the same reason we can't go to the moon now. Radiation. They can't even shield against the solar constant.
@XoXoStephhBbbyXoXo Being the space-nut that i am, i've even said things like: "i would make the trip, even if it meant a one way ticket." Do i really mean that? Not sure. But the thought that someone actually got to go to the moon and even drive around a little bit, is just so inspiring. Imagine yourself standing on the moon! I mean, how do you process that mentally? Talk about "pinch my arm, am i dreaming?" kind of moment. Space is so facinating! :)
@XoXoStephhBbbyXoXo Maybe it's the combination of shining daylight and a pitch black sky? Standing on the surface of the moon, looking up at the beautiful blea earth, must be amazing. Sad to think i'll never get the chance :(
If I could have gone romping on the moon, I totally would have brought a shovel and made sweet ramp and jumped that shit all day long!! woohoo! I'm so jealous...
@hughezee Just try to get some knowledge about radio technology. The even You may understand that communication with spaceprobes and spaceships doesn't need gigantic antennas.
@hughezee "Parabolic antennas" are the kind of "dish" the lunar rover was equipped with. It was more than adequate to keep the astronauts in contact with Earth. When the rover was stationary.
@hughezee Ever heard of the Voyager spaceprobes? They communicated with Earth even after they had left the Solar system. With small antennas. Or Gallileo, which parabolic antenna failed to deploy as it should, but it still recieved commands from Earth and sent back data and a lot of pictures from Jupiter.
As I said; Study the basic facts before throwing out guesses about how You think it SHOULD be...
@hughezee It's a tremendous difference between communicating from beyond Plutos orbit or Jupiter and from the Moon. Also: A GPS needs no external antenna at all to communicate with satellites. Give it up: It was NO problem for the astronauts to communicate from the Moon. Not from the LEM, nor from the Rover.
@H123Laci Yes, but they still don't need any external antennas. Even TV recievers "communicate" (one way) with satellites. But, they need parabolic antennas. For some obvious resons.
@hughezee A very small house in that case... The Voyager probes had 3.7-meter parabolic, high-gain antennas to communicate with mission control back on earth... Fairly small considering the distances we are talking about!
@YDDES like i said ...also the saterlite dish on the moon.. Voyager spaceprobes are far greater in sizes about the size of a small house.... explain?
@hughezee Sorry, I don't understand what You mean with Your last remark about "saterlite" (satellite) dish, photos and Jupiter. Can You explain, please?
@hughezee "Satellite dish"??? It's a parabole antenna to keep in contact with the Earth. Could only be used when the Rover stood still. And, the dust beaves exactly as expected in a vacuum and 1/6 g.
@hughezee Do You know ANYTHING about radio? Already in 1959 Soviet lunar probes communicated with Earth with much smaller antennas.
An advice: Study at least the most basic things about a subject before You try to discuss it. Otherwise You risk to make a fool of Yourself. Good luck!
@37 secs. Look at the size of the rover next to the tiny lander and compare the distance and perspective of both. It's a fucking little Disney model, the rover is 10 times as large.
Wait for the truthers to pounce, and then I'll have some fun.
@Chev4206 Ignorant comment. You can't determine the relative sizes of the Lander and the Rover on this video, since it isn't a totally flat floor, and You never see the two objects side by side at the same distance.
@YDDES You said floor instead of ground, dicko..... Studios have floors. The moon does not. I don't remember The Rover Company sending a vehicle either. You may be able to spell English but your punctuation is poor. Oh wait... Do you understand It by any chance ??
@Chev4206 Yes, it's an uneven ground and not a flat floor. Therefore You can't determine the relative size. It's a Lunar Rover. What do You gain to make silly remarks on my writing? Does that lessen Your ignorance of the matters discussed in this forum?
Not every one here has English as his/hers native language, You laughable one.
@YDDES Your channel is SO popular, after three years............, and you are a tool. Studios have floors........, a floor is the walking surface of a room.
@Chev4206 ... Yes You are right 0:37 proves that the lander is just a model.
But only if the person presenting the "proof" is less than 6 years old ... which seems to be the case based on the fact that you (just like basically all the hoax-theory cult memebers) have no particular argument except to leave a pile of insults and run away.
You use the word "truth" to mean "that which you like to believe based on what you imagine to be true without actually attempting to understand anything."
Your insane belief that a rocket in a vacuum would be "pushing against nothing" speaks for itself. As I said, the only way you can hold that belief is if you believe that the exhaust does not exist.
Until you start believing in things that are real, you'll be, well, out of touch with reality.
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- Yes. Of course you can believe whatever you want to based on what things "seem" like. But I have watched cars on a dirt track or road. I have driven on dirt roads behind them. I have measured the timing of the rise and fall of dirt as it is kicked up. And the Apollo video of dust that is kicked up is consistent with 1/6 gravity. It is easy to not notice the difference between it and the action of dirt on Earth, but if you time it accurately, it is obvious.
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- Besides, the entire "hoax theory" is full of nonsense. Right from the original "there should have been a blast crater" argument which can only be promoted by people who can't do (or don't bother to do) basic arithmetic.
@nesokretep i am interested, how did you measure the rise and fall of dirt, being kicked up by a vehicle, I just looked at videos, and the height seems the same as "on the Moon" which ipso facto, must be wrong, so how did you do your measurement Kind Regards Roger
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- OK. I think it would be fun to make a video of the complete physics of the thing but I don't have that much time at the moment. For a quick comparison: /watch?v=bcrEgL0Pc1g
How high is the dust being kicked up?
NOW: How fast are the wheels spinning to kick up dust?
The Apollo lunar rover had a TOP speed of about TEN miles per hour. You can (if you're in good shape) RUN faster than that.
For a bit of math see the other video I referenced: watch?v=BKpZM0gqugs
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- A month or so ago, I drove my car along the sand & dirt at park by a local bay. Limiting the speed to 10 mph, sand only was kicked up a couple inches.
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- The other video I referenced (with the math) doesn't show a comparison eactly. But it shows the timing of the fall of the dust. On the moon everything falls with an acceleration of 1.63 m/s^2. Compare this to how fast things fall on Earth (9.8 m/s^2).
The point of that guy's video is that hoax-theory promoters say that slow motion of a particular percentage must have been used. But the action of the dust is inconsistent with that motion speed in Earth gravity.
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- But the best comparison is where you see the dust kicked up when the astronaut is running. His forward motion is extended unnaturally far because in the low gravity his rate of fall is slower. Hoax-theory promoters say he must be on wires.
But the dust follows the same parabolic trajectory as his feet, so if the astronaut must be "on wires," then the dust must also be on wires (which, of course, is impossible.)
@DeadJesus100 <------Don't fall for this NASA, NAZI, MORON SHILL, "DeadJesus100" is a FAKE, he really thinks men walked on the moon, he's just doing an excellent job making moon hoaxers look retarded, he's really a NASA, NWO agent.
All you have is speculation and a few of the right people being taken out of contex.
By the way, you have more chance of getting Cancer from living next to a Cell phone tower than you are from the few hours of travelling through "van Allen radiation".
Why else would scientists be trying for a manned mars mission when they apparently can even leave earth orbit? The whole assertion is a joke.
All you have is speculation and people being taken out of context.
Speaking in 2002 the following Apollo "astronauts" stated.
A.Bean: "I'm not sure we went far out to encounter the Van Allen radiation belts..maybe we did"
E.Gernan :"I don't know the distance to the Van Allen radiation belts"
The above statements recorded on the documentary "astronauts gone wild" are as good as if these two clowns have said " the Moon landing was a hoax " - It's just the same.The American people and their country are already the biggest joke for next 5 million years.
i know these are all fake because everytime they film themselves being on the moon. they never once show the earth? wouldnt they think that we might want to see what it looks like ? so either their just a bunch of douche bags, or its all fake.
@bingggbonggg17 The photo of the Earth taken from the moon is the most famous photo in history! Every time you`ve seen a photo of the "blue marble" Earth,where do you think that was taken from?
@bingggbonggg17 you make a good point,maybe it was because the missions were constricted by time,and the experiments took priority.I do however believe that the lack of video footage does not mean the missions were faked,not when compared to the evidence contained in the apollo data,footage and samples.842 pounds of samples were taken by apollo.1000s of experts in astronomy and geology from universities and research facilities all over the world have studied these samples.No hoax has been found
This was a manufactured political distraction to the war during 1969.. look up "VAN ALLEN BELT" proof of a hoax .. thats why the USA cancelled their recent space launch ..
@1234helium Van Allen himself went on record repeatedly to refute these theories about the "deadly belts". I would expect the man himself to know his subject.What evidence do you have for your assumption about the cancellation? I mean real proof,traceable to a source,not factless theories repeated from a "truth" site!
@swfcocs The lunar ranging experiment (Retroreflectors) set up by the Apollo missions (I forgot which ones right now. I think Apollo 11.) reflect beams sent from earth back to a computer (In EXTREME lamen's terms).
Also, post apollo "probes" have taken pictures of the landing sites. Look it up.
@PowerOfMontage You misunderstood my remark.It was intended as a reply to the idiot hoaxer"the devoll" who refered to apollo as the "greatest joke in human history" I am a passionate defender of apollo,I think we`re on the same side!
@swfcocs1 So sorry. I just get so upset when those guys start screaming about the moon landing being a hoax, then, when asked for their "proof," they give lousy, non-proof (mistaken film artifacts, etc.).
@PowerOfMontage Hey,don`t worry about it,I`ve made the same "friendly fire" mistake myself! These guys are enough to annoy anyone.The spouting of inane statements with no thought of providing evidence,the tactic of quickly resorting to abuse(I`m sure you`ve been called a "shill" before by these idiots),the fascist-like intolerance of opposing views(It`s telling that the "truth" movement is awash with holocaust deniers and other fascist types!)Theoir mentality reassures us all that we`re correct!
@amor987654321 You misunderstood my remark,it was a reply to a hoaxster( the devoll !) who had called apollo "the biggest joke in history". I`m a passionate defender of apollo and these hoaxsters,and conspiracy theorists in general, infuriate me, so you`ve got the wrong guy,I`m afraid!
@swfcocs1 haha sorry man, thought you were a hoax believer, wanting evidence. i misunderstood. my bad. lol looks like u got some other people who misunderstood too.
@amor987654321 I know, these hoaxsters are so annoying that friendly fire is inevitable I suppose! they need confronting however as this nonsense spreads like toxic waste.Hoaxsters are like fungi(you know,in the dark and fed on shit!)
@BOBSAGATification yep a record of attainment was nessesary to drive the beast(seriously), but i think the lunar road user's and rule manual is all that is nessesary to drive on the moon,
The so called "Lunar landing"is the biggest joke in history. Nations maybe have their ups and lows but nobody has ever been such a ridiculous as the Americans are now.
Yeh, where THE FUCK do you see it man? Ive watched it now ten times at 0:18, cant see shit... You know that spaceguy have a comradio antenna on the back of his backpack? Maybe thats your FUCKING wire?
He is fucking crazy. The car could have broken. Brakes exists ok? It doesn't looks like a trained astronaut............... Smells like fake.. But I don't know. I believe USA went to moon. But there's a lot of discrepancies
@isuddenatt The sun is too bright. Check out photos of the space shuttle or the ISS in orbit, or pics of other planets, and you'll see the same effect. No stars because the sunlight on the object in the foreground is too bright.
Yeah, what these retards fail to understand is, even though the sky is dark in the footage, does not mean it is night time. Does anyone see any stars from the viewing port of the ISS? No. Because the earth is too bright, hence "washes out" any other source of light.
Moon bats, debunking themselves since the dawn of the internet.
Google "why the sky is blue" then smack yourself in the face for being so ridiculous.
"More light than that" the sun is as bright in the footage (all be it 40 year old footage) as it is on earth on a cloudless day.
If you are still in denial of the apollo missions today, you may as well believe Hitler just took 6 million Jews out to dinner and had some terrible accident on the train ride...
Can you provide your definition of education? Your post doesn't make sense if you use 'education' as people who speak English would use it. Is English not your primary language?
What the fuck are you on about? I don't matter what language you speak, education's education, everywhere u go. Definitions don't lie. I was merely stating the obvious to a dip shit. Now, why are you trolling me for again?
Education comes from the latin 'educo' meaning "to develop or draw out from within." An educated individual is not necessarily one who has an abundance of general or specialized knowledge. An educated individual is one who has so developed the faculties of their mind to where they can attain anything they want or its equivalence without violating the rights of others.
I'm not trolling you, i'm providing an argument that is correct.
Lol, your point is completely irrelevant. Stupid people need to be educated, hence my statement, "educate yourself". Now go troll someone else's comments.
cool, thanks! - I always wondered but never got around to asking, I just assumed light would get into the lens and you would see at least the brightest stars... you learn something new every day.
CHECK OUT "2012 UFOs Connections and Revelations" ON YOUTUBE This is a compilation of evidence revealed by former and present American presidents, astronauts, military personnel, politicians along with credible aired UFO footage. This compilation also contains planned revelations regarding knowledge of life beyond Earth along with it's current and ever ongoing presence which is being hidden from the public. This knowledge has been hidden from the public for over 50 years. + MORE.
@lazygenius123 Because the Camera is exposing for the bright lunar surface and the stars are much duller and can't be seen without a longer exposure -which would therefore over-expose the lunar surface.
Stars are in the sky during day time on Earth too you know, and you can't see them for exactly the same reason.
Remember, the Moon has 1/6 earth gravity, so upturned dust will not just go floating off into space. There will still be an influence and objects will tend to go down when falling. Did you get a look at the horizon? There are distances involved in the film that could not have been contained inside a hangar or movie studio. Why can't hoax advocates just stop to view the footage of men cruising around on the Moon? But look at the dust rooster tail.The 'paper mache' particles are most convincing.
@dhudson369 No, your just a complete idiot. The rover was folded(5'x20") and only weighed 400-500 LBS and it was stored in quad with the underside of the chassis of the modified ELM descent stage, facing out. Collapsed size was aggressively conformal and weight was never an issue in space. Now go kill yourself, dumbfuck.
If I ever got to be on the moon you bet the first thing I would do is screw around and have fun! I wounder if the guys thought to themselves ..."Well the taxpayers just spent 100 billion dollars to get us here ... might as well enjoy it!".
SauceCaptain 21 hours ago
Comment removed
20jklm 3 days ago
Where exactly was the rover stored during the journey to the moon? Was it packed in the LEM? Did they assemble it there?
johnnyone9 6 days ago
@johnnyone9 It was folded in the descent stage. There's actually films, even here on Youtube, showing both when they tested to unfold it on Earth and when they did it on Moon. Sorry, I havent't got the address for the moment, but I know they are there. Search!
YDDES 6 days ago
22 people are trapped in space
Intoxekated 3 weeks ago 2
what kind of fuel did that thing run on? i bet those guys were like "Damn, we got a hot rod up here but no babes."
Wolfboy183 1 month ago
@Wolfboy183 ran off of lithium batteries
fishlips99 1 month ago
I think he looks bad crusing round the moon in his little space buggy to the rockn roll music hahah :)
thehandylightman 1 month ago
Let's not forget that they are travelling at TLI speed
20jklm 2 months ago
@20jklm How is the rover traveling at Trans Lunar Injection speed? Many retro burns were executed to slow them down before landing... They were moving at only a few miles an hour relative to the moon.
unparallelshadows 6 days ago
Comment removed
20jklm 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@unparallelshadows I was not making reference to the rover, I was pointing in some conspiracy theories, which state that the lunar landings were fake because the inability to cross the Van Hallen belts, I was only saying that the belt crossing is possible, by several causes including the speed in which the craft is traveling, that make the radiation levels bearable for human beings to accomplish that out.
20jklm 3 days ago
or are they fake too?, or are their electronics system based on vacuum valves? please correct any misspelling.
20jklm 2 months ago
ok you're talking about the Van Hallen belts, there is one way to probe that men can get through the belts, as set an example the new probes that are launch into space "new horizon", etc. to set an example, have an electronics based on silicon chips, as we know silicon chip are faulty working in a radioactive enviroment, then if a silicon based space probe can get through the belts without malfunction, and are more sensitive to radiation than men then is possible to acomplish the belt crossing.
20jklm 2 months ago
Epic!!!
20jklm 2 months ago
Hokiest. Fraud. Evah!
nameofthepen 2 months ago
@iXelsior NASA is killing you from the inside out. Watch the original black and white footage, who zoomed out after 0.13 onwards and the cameraman at 1:20, I am calling you dumb idiot for being fooled by NASA
Area51WasOurMoon 2 months ago
@Area51WasOurMoon the people on earth? because were advanced enough to land a man on the moon so im pretty sure we can make a cameria zoom and move without actually being there....
lol so anymore theorys kid?
with33 2 months ago
@Daddyo930 -- The "Solar Constant" is almost 100% visible light & heat.
Since when can anyone not shield against light & heat with simple shade?
prosperomage 3 months ago
Lol big fake NASA
Area51WasOurMoon 4 months ago
@Area51WasOurMoon You are an idiot.
iXelsior 2 months ago 2
The solar constant. 1.95 langleys Ly per minute. one langley is 41840.00 J/m². 41840 joules per meter squares or 41840 joules per kilogram = 4184000 rads. We never went anywhere then for the same reason we can't go to the moon now. Radiation. They can't even shield against the solar constant.
Daddyo930 4 months ago
@XoXoStephhBbbyXoXo Being the space-nut that i am, i've even said things like: "i would make the trip, even if it meant a one way ticket." Do i really mean that? Not sure. But the thought that someone actually got to go to the moon and even drive around a little bit, is just so inspiring. Imagine yourself standing on the moon! I mean, how do you process that mentally? Talk about "pinch my arm, am i dreaming?" kind of moment. Space is so facinating! :)
aigg 4 months ago
@XoXoStephhBbbyXoXo Maybe it's the combination of shining daylight and a pitch black sky? Standing on the surface of the moon, looking up at the beautiful blea earth, must be amazing. Sad to think i'll never get the chance :(
aigg 4 months ago
¡¡¡NO ¡¡ ES APOLLO 16 ES APOLLO 15 LINEAS ROJAS EN EL CASCO DEL ASTRONAUTA.....
jinetefantasma67 5 months ago
''FCUK DER ALENS''
1invalidROBLOXIAN 5 months ago
I bet Ferrari owners are now pissing blood their ride can't be as epic as that
NazarovVv 5 months ago
Just imagine what the asking price for that rover will be when someone brings it back to Earth.
chiefton52 6 months ago
@chiefton52 It will never be profitable to bring a moonbuggy back. It will cost billions...
YDDES 6 months ago
no top coments &
TheMortonRainey 6 months ago
If I could have gone romping on the moon, I totally would have brought a shovel and made sweet ramp and jumped that shit all day long!! woohoo! I'm so jealous...
mrdrumsauce 7 months ago
your trying to wind me up
hughezee 7 months ago
maybe they gotta masive cheque and ot set up for life... who knows ; <
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee Just try to get some knowledge about radio technology. The even You may understand that communication with spaceprobes and spaceships doesn't need gigantic antennas.
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES dur............ im talking about dishes
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee Oh, I thought You was talking about parabolic antennas...
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES sorry mate : >
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee "Parabolic antennas" are the kind of "dish" the lunar rover was equipped with. It was more than adequate to keep the astronauts in contact with Earth. When the rover was stationary.
YDDES 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YDDES your trying to wind me up
hughezee 7 months ago
its too flimmsy
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee Ever heard of the Voyager spaceprobes? They communicated with Earth even after they had left the Solar system. With small antennas. Or Gallileo, which parabolic antenna failed to deploy as it should, but it still recieved commands from Earth and sent back data and a lot of pictures from Jupiter.
As I said; Study the basic facts before throwing out guesses about how You think it SHOULD be...
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES also the saterlite dish on the moon.. Voyager spaceprobes are far greater in sizes about the size of a small house....
.....
google it and see
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee It's a tremendous difference between communicating from beyond Plutos orbit or Jupiter and from the Moon. Also: A GPS needs no external antenna at all to communicate with satellites. Give it up: It was NO problem for the astronauts to communicate from the Moon. Not from the LEM, nor from the Rover.
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES "A GPS needs no external antenna at all to communicate with satellites."
a gps does not communicate with satellites... they are only receivers...
H123Laci 7 months ago
@H123Laci Yes, but they still don't need any external antennas. Even TV recievers "communicate" (one way) with satellites. But, they need parabolic antennas. For some obvious resons.
YDDES 7 months ago
@hughezee A very small house in that case... The Voyager probes had 3.7-meter parabolic, high-gain antennas to communicate with mission control back on earth... Fairly small considering the distances we are talking about!
HolmAngel 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YDDES like i said ...also the saterlite dish on the moon.. Voyager spaceprobes are far greater in sizes about the size of a small house.... explain?
hughezee 7 months ago
@YDDES,,,,,,,,, the saterlite dish and where are all the pictures and why just jupiter
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee Sorry, I don't understand what You mean with Your last remark about "saterlite" (satellite) dish, photos and Jupiter. Can You explain, please?
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES dont care anymore and how can we prove or disprove all the pictures from jupiter ...
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee Well, in that case, how can You prove or disprove ANY picture? And, why would all the astronomers lie to us?
YDDES 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
when dust is kicked up on a tiny model the dust will looks different.
.same as the thunderbird models, have a look at the waves they look slower too
and whats that saterlite dish on the buuggy for ..this looks all too corny
hughezee 7 months ago
moon.... space...geta life and live in the real world, everyones thinks your a joke...
have you ever watched the big bang theory ..that you lot...har har
hughezee 7 months ago
when dust is kicked up on a tiny model the dust will looks different.
.same as the thunderbird models, have a look at the waves they look slower too
and whats that saterlite dish on the buuggy for ..this looks all too corny
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee "Satellite dish"??? It's a parabole antenna to keep in contact with the Earth. Could only be used when the Rover stood still. And, the dust beaves exactly as expected in a vacuum and 1/6 g.
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES that little thing ha ha ..keep in contact with earth.
1 it was made in the 60's
2 my saterlite dish is ten times more advance and can only pic up siginals from the orbit not double the miles from moon ..pleazeee
You must think the same?
hughezee 7 months ago
@hughezee Do You know ANYTHING about radio? Already in 1959 Soviet lunar probes communicated with Earth with much smaller antennas.
An advice: Study at least the most basic things about a subject before You try to discuss it. Otherwise You risk to make a fool of Yourself. Good luck!
YDDES 7 months ago
@hughezee
My God........that statement displays the reasoning of a small child. You must be very stupid.
Blahblobify 6 months ago
@Blahblobify not as stupid as you... we all know theres people like you who troll the internet calling names insulting people but know real argument.
What is the point of your cowardly life ?....hide behind a key board insulting people....
grow up for god sake.... your an embarasment
hughezee 6 months ago
@37 secs. Look at the size of the rover next to the tiny lander and compare the distance and perspective of both. It's a fucking little Disney model, the rover is 10 times as large.
Wait for the truthers to pounce, and then I'll have some fun.
Chev4206 7 months ago
@Chev4206 Ignorant comment. You can't determine the relative sizes of the Lander and the Rover on this video, since it isn't a totally flat floor, and You never see the two objects side by side at the same distance.
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES You said floor instead of ground, dicko..... Studios have floors. The moon does not. I don't remember The Rover Company sending a vehicle either. You may be able to spell English but your punctuation is poor. Oh wait... Do you understand It by any chance ??
Chev4206 7 months ago
@Chev4206 Yes, it's an uneven ground and not a flat floor. Therefore You can't determine the relative size. It's a Lunar Rover. What do You gain to make silly remarks on my writing? Does that lessen Your ignorance of the matters discussed in this forum?
Not every one here has English as his/hers native language, You laughable one.
YDDES 7 months ago
Comment removed
Chev4206 7 months ago
@YDDES Your channel is SO popular, after three years............, and you are a tool. Studios have floors........, a floor is the walking surface of a room.
Chev4206 7 months ago
@Chev4206 Since You just can produce silly remarks instead of something worthwile, I'll make You happy: I'll block You from my mail. Bye!
YDDES 7 months ago
@YDDES But not from any Youtube video, idiot......
Chev4206 7 months ago
@Chev4206 ... Yes You are right 0:37 proves that the lander is just a model.
But only if the person presenting the "proof" is less than 6 years old ... which seems to be the case based on the fact that you (just like basically all the hoax-theory cult memebers) have no particular argument except to leave a pile of insults and run away.
nesokretep 7 months ago
@nesokretep Dear nesocretin
You believe the shit your eyes and brain perceive as fact, I'll stick with truth. Get me?
Chev4206 7 months ago
@Chev4206 -- Yes. I understand you perfectly.
You use the word "truth" to mean "that which you like to believe based on what you imagine to be true without actually attempting to understand anything."
Your insane belief that a rocket in a vacuum would be "pushing against nothing" speaks for itself. As I said, the only way you can hold that belief is if you believe that the exhaust does not exist.
Until you start believing in things that are real, you'll be, well, out of touch with reality.
nesokretep 7 months ago
Your going to tell me we went to the Moon. When space shuttle has never gone any farther then 385 miles from earth?
erikchandy 7 months ago
@erikchandy Of course, since the Space shuttle is much smaller than the Saturn V, and never was meant to go any higher than to a low Earth orbit.
YDDES 7 months ago
lets shoot button
KidMalone 8 months ago
このバギーのタイヤの材質は、なにで出来ているんですか？
この風景、まったく月面には見えませんね。
jennys15 8 months ago
@imdoubtful LOL
I want to see Nazi Nasa send a manned space mission 700 miles into space
and watch the astronauts being incinerated on LIVE TV
Wouldnt that be cool :)
DeadJesus100 8 months ago
@imdoubtful YEAH! this time with CGI !
aaron1a12 8 months ago
CLASSIC FAKERY
NASA STYLE
DeadJesus100 8 months ago
この映像を見て、月面で撮られた映像でないことがはっきり分かる。
色々な科学者に聞いてみたいです。この映像は正しいですか？と。
jennys15 8 months ago
@jennys15 -- What about it makes you think it might not be taken on the moon?
Look at the action of the dust. It acts exactly like it is in 1/6 gravity with no air to make it billow & float.
Some people say it is just slow-motion. But that does not explain it.
For a fairly complete scientific analysis of the action of the dust in these videos look at this one:
watch?v=BKpZM0gqugs
nesokretep 8 months ago
@nesokretep wrong the dust is not acting like it would in 6th Gravity, it's is like dust coming off wheels on earth.
Go and watch a rally car race. or follow someone driving slow down a dirt track, This was not on the moon
Rogerlowrey2222 8 months ago
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- Yes. Of course you can believe whatever you want to based on what things "seem" like. But I have watched cars on a dirt track or road. I have driven on dirt roads behind them. I have measured the timing of the rise and fall of dirt as it is kicked up. And the Apollo video of dust that is kicked up is consistent with 1/6 gravity. It is easy to not notice the difference between it and the action of dirt on Earth, but if you time it accurately, it is obvious.
nesokretep 8 months ago
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- Besides, the entire "hoax theory" is full of nonsense. Right from the original "there should have been a blast crater" argument which can only be promoted by people who can't do (or don't bother to do) basic arithmetic.
nesokretep 8 months ago
@nesokretep i am interested, how did you measure the rise and fall of dirt, being kicked up by a vehicle, I just looked at videos, and the height seems the same as "on the Moon" which ipso facto, must be wrong, so how did you do your measurement Kind Regards Roger
Rogerlowrey2222 8 months ago
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- OK. I think it would be fun to make a video of the complete physics of the thing but I don't have that much time at the moment. For a quick comparison: /watch?v=bcrEgL0Pc1g
How high is the dust being kicked up?
NOW: How fast are the wheels spinning to kick up dust?
The Apollo lunar rover had a TOP speed of about TEN miles per hour. You can (if you're in good shape) RUN faster than that.
For a bit of math see the other video I referenced: watch?v=BKpZM0gqugs
nesokretep 8 months ago
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- A month or so ago, I drove my car along the sand & dirt at park by a local bay. Limiting the speed to 10 mph, sand only was kicked up a couple inches.
nesokretep 8 months ago
@nesokretep And you accurately measured it did you, what with? Your mother's dick?
Chev4206 7 months ago
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- The other video I referenced (with the math) doesn't show a comparison eactly. But it shows the timing of the fall of the dust. On the moon everything falls with an acceleration of 1.63 m/s^2. Compare this to how fast things fall on Earth (9.8 m/s^2).
The point of that guy's video is that hoax-theory promoters say that slow motion of a particular percentage must have been used. But the action of the dust is inconsistent with that motion speed in Earth gravity.
nesokretep 8 months ago
@Rogerlowrey2222 -- But the best comparison is where you see the dust kicked up when the astronaut is running. His forward motion is extended unnaturally far because in the low gravity his rate of fall is slower. Hoax-theory promoters say he must be on wires.
But the dust follows the same parabolic trajectory as his feet, so if the astronaut must be "on wires," then the dust must also be on wires (which, of course, is impossible.)
nesokretep 8 months ago
No stars? Sun's Out.
Moving Flag? Energy.
Footprint? Happens in vacuum's
Hollywood Shadow? Optical illusion.
donttazemebro3434 8 months ago
@donttazemebro3434 lol
DeadJesus100 8 months ago
How about you moon landing hoaxters remake this scene right here? Can't? Stupid animals...
ParaglidingManiac 9 months ago
@ParaglidingManiac retard
DeadJesus100 8 months ago
FAKE IT TO THE MOON
NASA STYLE
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
FAKE IT TO THE MOON
NAZI NASA STYLE
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
@DeadJesus100
I blocked after your first reply. If i could keep blocking you, I would.
ScienceIsKnowledge 9 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge why do you send me perverted messages faggot?
You infected coward
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
NASA FAKED 6 MOON LANDINGS
NASA = US NWO CRIMINAL GOVERNMENT
THE SAME SCUM WHO ARE BUSY DESTROYING THE USA TODAY
WITH THE BAIL OUTS
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 <------Don't fall for this NASA, NAZI, MORON SHILL, "DeadJesus100" is a FAKE, he really thinks men walked on the moon, he's just doing an excellent job making moon hoaxers look retarded, he's really a NASA, NWO agent.
Qhater 9 months ago
Classic NASA FAKE Film - Apollo 16
Nasa's Motto
"If we cant make it
WE FAKE IT"
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
@DeadJesus100
All you have is speculation and a few of the right people being taken out of contex.
By the way, you have more chance of getting Cancer from living next to a Cell phone tower than you are from the few hours of travelling through "van Allen radiation".
Why else would scientists be trying for a manned mars mission when they apparently can even leave earth orbit? The whole assertion is a joke.
All you have is speculation and people being taken out of context.
Educate yourself.
ScienceIsKnowledge 9 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge you mentally retarded sad lying bastard
LMASO @! man missions to mars, when is that fuckhead?
No man has ever been out of the EMF
Hang yopurself you lying sicko
Educate yourself with US NWO Government bullshit called Nasa
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Speaking in 2002 the following Apollo "astronauts" stated.
A.Bean: "I'm not sure we went far out to encounter the Van Allen radiation belts..maybe we did"
E.Gernan :"I don't know the distance to the Van Allen radiation belts"
The above statements recorded on the documentary "astronauts gone wild" are as good as if these two clowns have said " the Moon landing was a hoax " - It's just the same.The American people and their country are already the biggest joke for next 5 million years.
potrodsas 9 months ago
i know these are all fake because everytime they film themselves being on the moon. they never once show the earth? wouldnt they think that we might want to see what it looks like ? so either their just a bunch of douche bags, or its all fake.
bingggbonggg17 9 months ago
@bingggbonggg17 The photo of the Earth taken from the moon is the most famous photo in history! Every time you`ve seen a photo of the "blue marble" Earth,where do you think that was taken from?
swfcocs1 9 months ago
@swfcocs1 yeah but, i know that if i was on the moon. and had a video camera in my hands, i would point it at the EARTH! at least once!
bingggbonggg17 9 months ago
@bingggbonggg17 you make a good point,maybe it was because the missions were constricted by time,and the experiments took priority.I do however believe that the lack of video footage does not mean the missions were faked,not when compared to the evidence contained in the apollo data,footage and samples.842 pounds of samples were taken by apollo.1000s of experts in astronomy and geology from universities and research facilities all over the world have studied these samples.No hoax has been found
swfcocs1 9 months ago
Stars are not visible when the sun is out. Go outside and see for yourself you fucking idiot!
RussellHorwood 9 months ago
This was a manufactured political distraction to the war during 1969.. look up "VAN ALLEN BELT" proof of a hoax .. thats why the USA cancelled their recent space launch ..
1234helium 10 months ago
@1234helium Van Allen himself went on record repeatedly to refute these theories about the "deadly belts". I would expect the man himself to know his subject.What evidence do you have for your assumption about the cancellation? I mean real proof,traceable to a source,not factless theories repeated from a "truth" site!
swfcocs1 9 months ago
where`s the evidence?
swfcocs1 10 months ago
@swfcocs The lunar ranging experiment (Retroreflectors) set up by the Apollo missions (I forgot which ones right now. I think Apollo 11.) reflect beams sent from earth back to a computer (In EXTREME lamen's terms).
Also, post apollo "probes" have taken pictures of the landing sites. Look it up.
PowerOfMontage 10 months ago
@PowerOfMontage You misunderstood my remark.It was intended as a reply to the idiot hoaxer"the devoll" who refered to apollo as the "greatest joke in human history" I am a passionate defender of apollo,I think we`re on the same side!
keep up the good work debunking these twoofers1
swfcocs1 10 months ago
@swfcocs1 So sorry. I just get so upset when those guys start screaming about the moon landing being a hoax, then, when asked for their "proof," they give lousy, non-proof (mistaken film artifacts, etc.).
PowerOfMontage 10 months ago
@PowerOfMontage Hey,don`t worry about it,I`ve made the same "friendly fire" mistake myself! These guys are enough to annoy anyone.The spouting of inane statements with no thought of providing evidence,the tactic of quickly resorting to abuse(I`m sure you`ve been called a "shill" before by these idiots),the fascist-like intolerance of opposing views(It`s telling that the "truth" movement is awash with holocaust deniers and other fascist types!)Theoir mentality reassures us all that we`re correct!
swfcocs1 10 months ago
@swfcocs1 dont just sit there believing the landings were fake, waiting to be spoon fed the evidence. its out there, SOOOOO much of it. go research.
amor987654321 10 months ago
@amor987654321 You misunderstood my remark,it was a reply to a hoaxster( the devoll !) who had called apollo "the biggest joke in history". I`m a passionate defender of apollo and these hoaxsters,and conspiracy theorists in general, infuriate me, so you`ve got the wrong guy,I`m afraid!
swfcocs1 10 months ago
@swfcocs1 haha sorry man, thought you were a hoax believer, wanting evidence. i misunderstood. my bad. lol looks like u got some other people who misunderstood too.
amor987654321 10 months ago
@amor987654321 I know, these hoaxsters are so annoying that friendly fire is inevitable I suppose! they need confronting however as this nonsense spreads like toxic waste.Hoaxsters are like fungi(you know,in the dark and fed on shit!)
swfcocs1 10 months ago
This may sound Pants-On-Head retarted,but I wonder if you need a liscence to drive the moon buggy?
BOBSAGATification 10 months ago
@BOBSAGATification yep a record of attainment was nessesary to drive the beast(seriously), but i think the lunar road user's and rule manual is all that is nessesary to drive on the moon,
rocketman1976able 10 months ago
The so called "Lunar landing"is the biggest joke in history. Nations maybe have their ups and lows but nobody has ever been such a ridiculous as the Americans are now.
thedevoll 10 months ago
Comment removed
powntus94 10 months ago
@powntus94
Yeh, where THE FUCK do you see it man? Ive watched it now ten times at 0:18, cant see shit... You know that spaceguy have a comradio antenna on the back of his backpack? Maybe thats your FUCKING wire?
BittaSomethingExtra 10 months ago
Wow, what a big studio! What a low gravity! What an atmosphere without dust-clouds after the rover! :D
vargaendre 11 months ago
He is fucking crazy. The car could have broken. Brakes exists ok? It doesn't looks like a trained astronaut............... Smells like fake.. But I don't know. I believe USA went to moon. But there's a lot of discrepancies
Luckzzz 11 months ago
watch?v=BnKlHgDBjUI DID YOU KNOW?
BUZZ ALDRIN THE LIE
READ THE COMMENTS
NASAHOAX 11 months ago
where r the stars at the bk ground
isuddenatt 11 months ago
@isuddenatt The sun is too bright. Check out photos of the space shuttle or the ISS in orbit, or pics of other planets, and you'll see the same effect. No stars because the sunlight on the object in the foreground is too bright.
krisdevalle 11 months ago
@krisdevalle
Yeah, what these retards fail to understand is, even though the sky is dark in the footage, does not mean it is night time. Does anyone see any stars from the viewing port of the ISS? No. Because the earth is too bright, hence "washes out" any other source of light.
Moon bats, debunking themselves since the dawn of the internet.
ScienceIsKnowledge 11 months ago
where did this light come from ? it's night at moon , earth can't reflect light to have such a light in the moon
brahim121985brahim 11 months ago
@brahim121985brahim
It's the middle of the day u fucking goon.
Did the sun turn off while they were there?
Put the tinfoil back on your head and move along.
ScienceIsKnowledge 11 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge haha middle of the day with no atmosphere, we should have more light then this
brahim121985brahim 11 months ago
@brahim121985brahim
Google "why the sky is blue" then smack yourself in the face for being so ridiculous.
"More light than that" the sun is as bright in the footage (all be it 40 year old footage) as it is on earth on a cloudless day.
If you are still in denial of the apollo missions today, you may as well believe Hitler just took 6 million Jews out to dinner and had some terrible accident on the train ride...
Anything else for me to debunk there sparky?
ScienceIsKnowledge 11 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge thnks, i though it's dangerous to be on the sunny side of the moon , because of sun rays (UV....) even with a suit
brahim121985brahim 11 months ago
@brahim121985brahim
Do u see the ISS Astronauts catching on fire when they are spacewalking?
No. EVEN IN A SUIT!!!
Please, for your own sake, educate yourself.
ScienceIsKnowledge 11 months ago 3
@ScienceIsKnowledge lol thumbs up
alienhunter36 11 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge
Can you provide your definition of education? Your post doesn't make sense if you use 'education' as people who speak English would use it. Is English not your primary language?
SadegoGG 11 months ago
@SadegoGG
As defined in the Oxford English dictionary.
What the fuck are you on about? I don't matter what language you speak, education's education, everywhere u go. Definitions don't lie. I was merely stating the obvious to a dip shit. Now, why are you trolling me for again?
ScienceIsKnowledge 11 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge
Education comes from the latin 'educo' meaning "to develop or draw out from within." An educated individual is not necessarily one who has an abundance of general or specialized knowledge. An educated individual is one who has so developed the faculties of their mind to where they can attain anything they want or its equivalence without violating the rights of others.
I'm not trolling you, i'm providing an argument that is correct.
SadegoGG 11 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge
Lol, your point is completely irrelevant. Stupid people need to be educated, hence my statement, "educate yourself". Now go troll someone else's comments.
ScienceIsKnowledge 11 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge the ISS is 250 miles from earth idiot
The moon is 240,000 miles from earth
Between them is deadly Radiation
Fake it Nasa
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge is genuinely retarded
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
@DeadJesus100
The great thing is, the more time you waste by trolling me, the more views your "propaganda" gets....
You can go back under your bridge now.
ScienceIsKnowledge 9 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge the money brain, take your medication retard
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge the perverted queer idiot
Stop sending me pervert messages and then blocking me coward
Get a brain transplant you infected monkey
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
@DeadJesus100
perverted for debunking ignorant trolls?
Whatever.....dig dig dig.
Obvious counter troll is obvious.
ScienceIsKnowledge 9 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge there is only one TROLL here ats its you
brain damaged cocksucker
DeadJesus100 9 months ago
@brahim121985brahim
THE SUN YOU FUCKING MORON!!!!!!THE SUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!
ScienceIsKnowledge 11 months ago
@ScienceIsKnowledge fuck you
brahim121985brahim 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You must be really stupid to believe that man went on the moon
brahim121985brahim 11 months ago
You must be really stupid to believe that man went on the moon.Ha,Ha,Ha,Peace.
nano63a 11 months ago
@nano63a lol fail
GigaMushroom 11 months ago
this so bullshit the thing dont move like the guy bunny hopping wheels dont even move of the ground
oh no cable on this vehicle hey
still no stars the universe would be white
blackmork 11 months ago
cool, thanks! - I always wondered but never got around to asking, I just assumed light would get into the lens and you would see at least the brightest stars... you learn something new every day.
lazygenius123 11 months ago
CHECK OUT "2012 UFOs Connections and Revelations" ON YOUTUBE This is a compilation of evidence revealed by former and present American presidents, astronauts, military personnel, politicians along with credible aired UFO footage. This compilation also contains planned revelations regarding knowledge of life beyond Earth along with it's current and ever ongoing presence which is being hidden from the public. This knowledge has been hidden from the public for over 50 years. + MORE.
Futurecop2012 1 year ago
Pause it at 1:10 really quick, and look at that blue planet/star XD
kaven6197 1 year ago
@kaven6197 thats not a star or a planet. . . Its a lens flair
baisden77 1 year ago
@kaven6197 Or let the film roll and notice it moves with the camera? Lens Flair anyone? lol
MrKeybind 11 months ago
any reason why you can't see any stars in the sky?
lazygenius123 1 year ago
@lazygenius123
I'd imagine it's all to do with camera exposures, the reflective nature of the moons surface etc.
paulosio 1 year ago
@lazygenius123 Because the Camera is exposing for the bright lunar surface and the stars are much duller and can't be seen without a longer exposure -which would therefore over-expose the lunar surface.
Stars are in the sky during day time on Earth too you know, and you can't see them for exactly the same reason.
It's the extreme basics of normal photography.
PooManchoo2 11 months ago
any of you have seen sand.thats sand
tresampio 1 year ago
have you ever been to the beach with an fourtrack.no dust just sand those are dunes you moron .i live steps from the beach thats why i know. no dust
tresampio 1 year ago
Remember, the Moon has 1/6 earth gravity, so upturned dust will not just go floating off into space. There will still be an influence and objects will tend to go down when falling. Did you get a look at the horizon? There are distances involved in the film that could not have been contained inside a hangar or movie studio. Why can't hoax advocates just stop to view the footage of men cruising around on the Moon? But look at the dust rooster tail.The 'paper mache' particles are most convincing.
Purpleplanetar17 1 year ago
Comment removed
dhudson369 1 year ago
@dhudson369 No, your just a complete idiot. The rover was folded(5'x20") and only weighed 400-500 LBS and it was stored in quad with the underside of the chassis of the modified ELM descent stage, facing out. Collapsed size was aggressively conformal and weight was never an issue in space. Now go kill yourself, dumbfuck.
Imat00l 1 year ago
@dhudson369
The lunar Rover folded up into a very small compartment on the Lunar module and was spring loaded to be easily deployable on the moon.
There are videos of the deployment on earth during development and the moon here :
watch?v=-ShauSWcTC4
watch?v=ObEjEEfnBj8
There is a great 6 part documentary series titled "moon vehicles". EP 6 is all about the Lunar rover. You should watch it.
As with all moon hoax fools... you have no facts. Just silly ill informed comments.
paulosio 1 year ago
this is actually a amination its good how they do it isnt it
confuse 1 year ago