im not going to discuss the whole matter as i have before BUT LISTEN UP YOU FUCKING RETARDS! listen CLEARLY TO WHAT I AM SAYING ILLITERATE UNEDUCATED FUCKWITS ASTRONAUTS CROSS THE RADIATION OF THE VAN ALLEN BELTS IN 3 HOURS! now if you were exposed to the radiation of the belts for a day ass naked you would literally suffer from NOTHING
they do emit radiation but not that much for fuck sake. THAT IS A SCIENTIFIC FACT SO STOP FOLLOWING RETARDS LIKE BART SEBRIL WHO THINKS THE LANDING WAS FAKE!!!!!
With all the amazing photos and images transmitted to earth, this always makes me laugh. I just want to know who thought to play a little golf while they were doing the landings and the research. This golf moment made a big splash at the time. For those who are too young to remember the days of Pres.John Kennedy, try the NASA site by googling.
the average moon temp at night time on the dark side is -153°C ; anything even halfway to absolute zero man made would shatter with a toothpick struck against it ; much less a golf club.
@fvgdfbdokd It's a pretty disconcerting thought how their only way back home was the lander, and that the only ignition was a mixture of chemicals strong enough to blast it out of the moon's gravitational field.
Incredibly impressive, and a definite proof of mankind's intelligence.
Hmmm. It would seem the moon must be pretty damn boring. I mean, look at it! After only TWO trips, astronauts were telling each other "Oh, you're going to the moon? You'd better bring something to do"
@rborders12 We actually had unmanned aerial vehicles already back during WW2. Never heard of the B-17 and B-24 "Drones", unmanned bombers, loaded with explosives that were flown into German heavy fortified installations, for example?
@rborders12 What would soldiers do in a military base on the Moon? It's too far away to use as a spybase (satellites are more effective) and missiles sent from the Moon could easily be destroyed on their way.
So, WHY do You think that USA should have had a base on the Moon?
@rborders12 The ICBM missiles in the 60's could hit small target areas on the other side of the globe. Why would it be so hard to "hit" the Moon with a rocket? Just pure, simple Newtonian ballistics.
Why would they have needed such powerful computers?
Think for Yourself too, but think a little "deeper"...
FEB 4, 2011 -Using two high-resolution LROC images taken from two separate orbits, scientists have formed a stereo image pair for 3D measurements at the Apollo 14 landing site. Among the visible objects are the descent stage of the Apollo 14 lunar module Antares, the ALSEP, a rock nicknamed Turtle Rock, & multiple astronaut traverse footpaths clearly indicated by disturbed soils. Data processing methods can be used to identify the objects and measure their sizes and shapes. Game over hoaxturds
@SoldierSide77, take along Buzz Aldrin. He actually punched a guy for being a little too persistent about the moon hoax thing. To all you moon hoax guys, I suggest getting together, raising some funds and recreating one of the Apollo flights that landed on the Moon. If you find nothing at the Sea of Tranquility or the other landing sites, I'll believe you.
China will be there in ten years, maybe they will bring the golf ball back. You young kids missed it, back when the US could build something well and fast and do great things.
Does anyone really think going to the moon was beyond the realm of what we could technologically achieve? For fuck's sake take a look at all the technology that we have...stealth planes, smart missiles, lasers, nuclear physics, night vision, unmanned aerial vehicles, computing power. You're insulting the entire human race if you think we weren't smart enough to make it to the moon. "Faked" my ass...what would be the point? I'm gonna bring Neil Armstrong to your house to kick you in the nuts!
@SoldierSide77 lets go back then. why not keeo reliving memories from fuckin 1969. lets see it in high definition bud can it be done with all the money and technologytoday lets go back but no fuck that and fuck u
@ryantheriote - What are you rambling about? Put down the crack pipe and make some sense, man. In case you haven't noticed, the government is trillions of dollars in debt, worse than ever in our history. We have lots of better things to focus on than going back to the moon. Please.
@SoldierSide77 in ebt by trillions of dollars. smrt givernment eh to let them get in that situation. name 3 things ti send there money on. enjoy your footage from 1969. your worse than the toronto maple elafs havent won a stanley cup in the color tv era
@killa19122 - Technically I'm sure they could afford to, yes...that wasn't my argument...my point was that in my opinion we have loads of better things we could use the money for, and it's rather pointless to go back to the moon, since we've already been there many times. What exactly would be gained from it? I for one would much rather have a cure for cancer, end homelessness, or find a decent alternative to oil before we decide to throw a bunch of money at a stupid moon mission.
@SoldierSide77 Ignorance. Wanna know how much NASA costs? Around 0.56% of the federal budget, less than 6/10ths of a percent. All those things you listed would cost magnitudes of difference more than it costs to fund NASA for a year. Secondly, the technology development required to get back to the moon may be exactly what this country needs. Advances in materials science, computing and rocket technology will all be required which will benefit the entire economy as a whole.
@dunhillny Actually, you made me curious about that so I went and looked it up. Surprising! Stealth technology started in world war II, the smart bomb's been around since 1968, lasers - 1957, nuclear physics - 1800's, night vision - 1939, computing - 1940's. The first unmanned aerial vehicle - 1916. So actually that's a viable argument. =)
@SoldierSide77 i lived a few houses away from Charlie Duke for like over a decade. he talked a lot of shit about the "faker" people, he got a real kick out of how dumb they are :D
@SoldierSide77 your tech isn't really working... stealth plane was shot in Serbia... lasers are not used in the way yor small soldiery brain thinks - it's still just surgery and you're long way to go to make it that strong... as for nuclear phisics - you only know of nukes how smart U R... but i'm glad someone can be happy being this ignorant and non informed (as well as the 27 likes)
@sasham02 Lasers are already in standby mounted on large long-distance planes as a system to track & defend against missile launches. Tanks use a local electromagnetic field that detonates projectiles in mid-air before they impact. Take a look at New Scientist every now and then before you make sweeping statements, or stay how you are; hypocritical.
So, if this is all such cut and dry science, why do five different people have five different explanations for it? You should at least get on the same page when trying to blow smoke up people's behinds.
@TheJomogogo Oh, no need. I watched the video. It must be real. How could they have faked it if it was on t.v.? The "facts" that would use to try and convince me are only what you've been told to believe. So, you go on following blindly and I'll go on questioning "the facts". I'd rather be a "fool" because I was wrong than a sucker because I couldn't think for myself.
@TheJomogogo Great response. Way to throw out facts and information. It's okay lemming, you're just doing what you were told. I suppose you think Jesus and the Easter Bunny are real too.
What a load of crap. I like how the astronauts bounce around with minimal footing because of the "lack of gravity", yet the golf ball falls directly on the ground just like it would here on Earth. I guess that's because it was here on Earth. Do people still actually believe this was real?
@mrbobawesome Of course the ball falls directly on the ground, just like the feather and hammer fell straight down at the same rate when Dave Scott dropped them on the surface on Apollo 15, because the Moon has no atmosphere. 1/6 Earth's gravity is still gravity, thus the ball falls straight down.What was different was the amazing distance it traveled when Shepard hit it one-handed with a puny geologists' hammer.
I like how the astronauts overstate everything while they are faking it. When they throw the hammer it's the same bullshit. It flies only a few seconds and they say, "WOW I thought it was going to go forever!" Here he says "miles and miles and miles" as if his golf ball flew away to the horizon in the two seconds he actually watched it.
@krisdevalle I agree. If they are overstating everything, like I claimed, it proves nothing. Overstating things could simply be a characteristic of someone not used to being on television or in front of an audience. I'm guessing he at least watched the ball until it has landed, though, and it looked like he got a solid hit on it. How far could it have flown in ~4 seconds at 1/6 gravity? Fifteen feet?
@krisdevalle I would think that most children could putt 100 yards in 1/6 gravity, even in an astronaut suit. And I don't think the ball could travel very far in only 4 seconds.
@Justwannalogon Tough conditions! It was a 9 iron on the end of a geology hammer, and he had to hit it one handed because the suit was so restrictive he couldn't do a two-handed swing... we'll never know.
As said in Mass Effect 2: "I dare to assume you ignorant jackasses know that space is empty.......it keeps going 'til it hits something. That can be a ship, or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in 10,000 years....... you are ruining someones day! Somewhere and sometime!"
sadly the ball kept going till it hit the moon again about 50 feet downrange. Al should have brought the burner bubble or some other "frying pan on a stick" type club to get it farther. but. nobody can hit a golfball off of the moon.
@BlackHawk38 You think that that golf ball hit some space alien kid doing his homework? I do agree that the apollo astronauts treated the moon like it was a garbage dump. I mean at least leave all your fuckiing shit organized. Like, they could have re-used some of that stuff. Go to the last landing site and drive their old crap over to the new one. Did they ever do that?
@MrDarcyzPP If You had left some used gear in Texas and landed in Alaska, would You take an electric car with no possiblities to recharge it, and drive to Texas to fetch that old gear?
They wouldn' even have come a tenth of the distance to a former landing site before running out of oxygen and power in the Rover
The evidence that the moon missions were faked is crushing. There's a partial summary of it on a science forum. To see it google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon?". The summary is on page 15. It's the 7th post from the top.
guys have you ever heard the conspiracy theory,,,,i think this mission is fake,,,why??? they said that there is no wheather on the moon but why is it that the flag is waving with the air????
Kinetic force resulting from being placed running through the fabric with nowhere to go but to ripple the material. Lack of gravity equivalent to Earth resulting in less obstacle to its flow so last longer than it would on earth.
the astronauts didn't have time to watch the starred sky fro the moon so they could later describe it..but they had the time to play stupid game of golf and to to have car races with the moon-buggy? Who is so stupid to believe the moon landing was real.
The astronauts would not have been able to see any stars so there would be nothing to describe, as the the golf they smuggled the golf club and ball on board, NASA did not know about it. and there was only one buggy so how could they have a race?
"he astronauts would not have been able to see any stars so there would be nothing to describe"
this is a bullshit and shows how retard are people who believe in the nasa hoax.
"NASA did not know about it" yes sure and I am Peter Pan.
"and there was only one buggy so how could they have a race"
one buggy for each mission yes. You go to the moon and you do not think to bring a telescope but rather a moon buggy each time you go there. Right and I am Peter Pan again.
I wish it was. Over the 3 trips to the moon they took 5,200 pictures. And not one of them has any stars in it. I'd just like a press conference for NASA to explain all this. My brother was a Navy test pilot & says I am nuts to question it. Maybe he's right but still....
Why would you expect to see stars? They were on the moon during daylight can you see stars in the daylight on earth? just because the "sky" is black it does not mean you will see stars, the camera and human eye were working in bright sunlight it would be impossible to see a dim star, do you live in a city? look up at the sky at night how many stars can you see? there are millions of stars yet I bet you wont see many.
Earth has atmo which diffuses the light. There are great pictures of the stars from the ISS yet none from the moon. You can see stars in pictures from the mars rovers, but none from the moon & Mars has atmo. Just doesn't add up.
You completely fail to realize that on earth we have a thick atmosphere that diffuses the sun light..that's why we cant see the stars in the day. On the moon there is no atmosphere.
Even the most convinced apollogist (like Phil Plait) will tell you that you would see a lot of stars in the sky from the moon.
The objection was never against seeing the stars with eyes, but with the camera exposure settings that were used.
You are the idiot, atmospere while it would make a difference has nothing to do with the fact that our eyes would NOT be able to see tiny dots of light against the brightly lit lunar surface, and if you slowed the shutter speed enough to take pics of stars then it would be well over exposed, what would be the point of bringing a telescope, what would you look at? I was there when all this happend and there was a discussion on TV as to why you wont see stars, everybody understood.
" and there was a discussion on TV as to why you wont see stars,."
You're right this is what I call a hard evidence, a discussion on the tube
maybe you do not understand how the human eye works. first of all, human vision has a dynamic range that is much wider than any camera. Second without atmosph. the light reflected from the moon will not have any effect whatsoever on the vision of the starred sky. You're a dumb-ass
I cannot believe you have the brains to turn on your PC, the human eye is better than a camera, but if the iris is closed up then you wont see tiny stars just the same as you wont on earth during the day, and dont give me the atmosphere argument unless you can explain where the atmosphere goes at night because you can see them at night no diffusion there!
"but if the iris is closed up then you wont see tiny stars"
the tiny stars can easily be seen by the human eye even when it is half closed, and if you're looking at a 45 degree angle from the moon surface your eye will be perfectly able to see even the faintest stars.
the atmosphere argument is still valid at night on earth if you live in a town because if the lights of the city are diffused from the sky you may end up seeing very few stars in the night
"the atmosphere argument is still valid at night on earth if you live in a town because if the lights of the city are diffused from the sky you may end up seeing very few stars in the night ".... and if you dont live in a city, what if you live in a desert, how is your argument valid then?
If you look up at a 45 degree angle in the space suit you would see the inside of the helmet which does not move with your head, and who said their eyes were half closed, did you see their iris's?
Then you learned from books or from a teacher, the guy on the TV was Patrick Moore, he is a famous astronomer he said you would not be able to see stars.
So as the earth has an atmosphere the star light should be diffused, unlike on the moon, then stars on earth should not be visible in a desert, or on the high sea's should they? because the atmosphere should diffuse it as you said! but it does not, does it?
the star-light is the thing that we want to see, it is not the one that will cause the problem of diffusion.
the sun light is what is diffused on earth and at night there is no sun light so no diffusion. You like to mix and twist the words, trying to find a logical flaw in my arguments but you fail miserably.
The guy on the tv may as well have been paid to say what he said. Astronauts from the iss could see lot of stars from the lower earth orbit. The light coming from the earth (in daylight) did not disturb their eyes.
Now Phil Plait is an astronomer that actually defends nasa, still he states that you will be able to see a lot of stars from the moon's surface. He justifies the lack of interest for the stars, saying the astronauts were there to take rock samples only..
"Astronauts from the iss could see lot of stars from the lower earth orbit. The light coming from the earth. . .did not disturb their eyes."
Source please.
Look out a window with the lights off at night, then have someone turn a light on. The stars will 'disappear'. How much more bright is the Earth or Moon lit by the sun.
Even if they did see stars by turning their back to the Earth, that's much easier to do with 3 axis of rotation then trying to block out the moons sunlit surface.
"Look out a window with the lights off at night, then have someone turn a light on. The stars will 'disappear'"
Are you even serious??? Did you try the experiment yourself??? Did the stars disappear cause you switch on the light in your room??? I don't know if I live in a world of stupid people or it's just they are all pretending..
your remind me of those stupid people that when they take a photo at night with their camera are expecting the flash light to be so powerful that it will illuminate the all landscape.
@fresniak Yes, I did. I have looked outside, standing away from the window so that the lit walls are in view. Stars just weren't visible.
It doesn't matter if the whole landscape is illuminated, though it would be on the moon in the sun, the point is your night vision is being desensitized by the lit objects in view. In the experiments case, the walls of your home. In the moons case, by the landscape is being lit by the sun.
Maybe your eyes are just better then mine, because I know what I saw, or rather didn't see. And the Sun is far brighter then any house lamp, as anyone who has walked inside after been outside knows.
This is ludicrous, if they were going to lie about some alleged hoax, why didn't they lie and say they saw stars, if they were supposed to? Both Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong were veteran astronauts and Aldrin had done EVA in Earth orbit.
the moon reflects only a small percentage (around 5%) of the sun-light. If the moon was really such a bright place as you want to imply, then why the pictures from the hasseblad cameras show a very good dybamic range covering all the range from the darkest tones to the lightest ones?? IF you ever took pictures with a camera you should know that on a brighty day you will not be able to have both the shadows and the highlights in range on both film and digital cameras.
"This is ludicrous, if they were going to lie about some alleged hoax, why didn't they lie and say they saw stars"
here it is the usual "why not.." question.
First of all astronauts were really ashamed of what they were doing, but there was no choice for them, other than lying. Second if they would mention the stars, the public opinion would have demanded many more stars pictures in the next missions, and they would have been forced to find a way to do that, which obviously they didn't want to.
You have to resort to name calling, that is the last bastion of a bullshitter, you are ignorant, the astros have to have smoked visors on the moon because it is so bright yet you expect them to see stars! have a look for pictures taken of the earth from space how many stars can you see? none! why is that? put your brain into gear and think.
" smoked visors on the moon because it is so bright "
the brightness of the moon wasn't certainly the concern, making the visors. UVA and UVB rays together with radiation were the concerns. If it was so bright to disturb the astronauts then it would have been impossible to take photos with a full dynamic range showing both shadows and high-lights on the surface, so or you're wrong about the brightness or the pictures were taken in a studio on earth or both things apply.
Clear plastic visor will stop UV no problem, they dont have to be darkened, and why would it be impossible to take pictures on the moon in bright light? you simply adjust the camera setting! are you saying that if it is so bright a day on earth that you need sunglasses you cannot take a picture? I put it to you that you are the one who is wrong. BTW welders are subjected to a lot higher UV levels than the astros and a thin piece of glass and plastic protects their eyes.
"why would it be impossible to take pictures on the moon in bright light? you simply adjust the camera setting! "
This shows that you know nothing about photography. Please first learn what is a dynamic range, and then try to read again my comment and understand it. I never stated it is not possible to take pictures in very bright light. What I stated it's you can't cover all the range with photographs from darkest tones to the high-lights if you are in very bright conditions.
(continue) if you underexpose to retain the bright details then you will loose much if not all the dark details. That's a very well known limit in photography. You're just an ignorant trying to look smarter than you are, speaking of things you know nothing about.
We landed on the moon. It happened several times. Find something else to bitch about . It was cool we should go back just to prove all the crazy conspiracy theorist wrong. GET OVER IT
How about the third-party photographic evidence of amateur astronomers photographing stage separations and burns out of orbit toward the moon.
Or the ham radio guys who set up dishes and were able to receive communications from the astronauts on the moon. When they stopped pointing their arrays at the moon, the signal was lost.
These people have published their data to the web.
I think the hit of a gold ball during a space shuttle EVA had even more coolness in it. I guess the ball is still flying and has passed Pioneer alread. Hope the astronaut who has hit the ball painted a smiley on it :)
ok heres wat i dont really understand if its fake then how did he come back and go back up there becase there was peps watching his retern.becase peps think it was in a studio
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
How can you think that almost 40 years ago, a man was playing golf on the moon?
It just ridiculous, it has nothing to do with reality. Imagine the risks of being fooling at the moon.
Not even talk about the fact that thier computers were of 256 kb.If they only need that to go to the moon 40 years ago, then now, it would be as simple as eating a cake.
It's taken for granted that the Apollo missions were hideously expensive, and in some ways it became almost matter-of-fact that the missions continued, despite each one being a remarkable feat. As for the golfing, I guess if someone finishes their experiments and has a 5-min window, why not have a bit of fun? You'd certainly get only one chance. I recall it was difficult for Mission Control to get the first American spacewalker back in the pod because he was having such a good time out there.
You may be thinking of Ed White, on Gemini 4. I thought you meant Neil Armstrong at first but he was the first moonwalker, not spacewalker (though of course you can't walk in space, in zero gravity). Chris Kraft had to get on the capcom circuit and order White to get back in.
Alan Shepard had more balls than most people who walk the face of the earth...and when he played golf on the moon ...so be it...God bless you Alan...and Godspeed
According to an astronaut who visited our high school, Alan Shepard got in a lot of trouble for that at home. He had snuck it on and so the extra weight hadn't been accounted for. But he was never formally "scolded" because the PR was too good!
1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.
But if the club face is open your going to push the ball right therefore resulting in mission control not knowing the correct term and saying he sliced the ball.
That's interesting, as most people at University or in sicence or research positions, who use their brains a lot, never seem to be conspiracy theorists. Somehow it always seems to be people who take their evidence from poorly-constructed documentaries, who are unable to do their own reseach.
im not going to discuss the whole matter as i have before BUT LISTEN UP YOU FUCKING RETARDS! listen CLEARLY TO WHAT I AM SAYING ILLITERATE UNEDUCATED FUCKWITS ASTRONAUTS CROSS THE RADIATION OF THE VAN ALLEN BELTS IN 3 HOURS! now if you were exposed to the radiation of the belts for a day ass naked you would literally suffer from NOTHING
they do emit radiation but not that much for fuck sake. THAT IS A SCIENTIFIC FACT SO STOP FOLLOWING RETARDS LIKE BART SEBRIL WHO THINKS THE LANDING WAS FAKE!!!!!
derpman112 9 hours ago
All of the moon footage was shot by Ed Wood.
johnnyrocksable 1 month ago
hrle ripped that 1 i bet it is still flying around lol
xXxTupac4everxXx 1 month ago
@canadastreetmedia why do you think it is fake?
WhiteTrashSingers 2 months ago
Van Allen radiation belt.
Maybe we make it to the moon in about 2020 If Then ?
Theses videos where made in a studio with bad movie lighting.
ITS A FRAUD.
Minorities with Union seniority still do not have to be hired in Canada in 2012.
Dont Believe What There telling you. LOOK AT THE FACTS , STATS ETC...
Nazism is still alive and well :
A SENIOR UNION (JEWISH) MEMBER CAN STILL BE STARVED OUT And NOT HIRED.
canadastreetmedia 2 months ago
My granfather devolped those golfballs. He worked with alan Sheperd and finally helped have the first golf ball hit on the moon.
RIP James J. Shea
buckeyeprincess1 2 months ago 4
Alan Shepard drove a golf ball further than Tiger Woods ever did. FACT.
haupper 4 months ago
@haupper
He had the benefit of no wind and less gravity.
AmericanNohbuddy 3 months ago
With all the amazing photos and images transmitted to earth, this always makes me laugh. I just want to know who thought to play a little golf while they were doing the landings and the research. This golf moment made a big splash at the time. For those who are too young to remember the days of Pres.John Kennedy, try the NASA site by googling.
gcpropertymanagement 5 months ago
The LRO pictures of the Apollo 14 landing site are obviously fake. Where are Alan Shepard's balls?
John27346 6 months ago
@John27346 Not exactly a question one asks every day.
unbrokenjack 5 months ago
the average moon temp at night time on the dark side is -153°C ; anything even halfway to absolute zero man made would shatter with a toothpick struck against it ; much less a golf club.
monkadelic13 6 months ago
@monkadelic13 Man is mostly water. Golf clubs are not.
unbrokenjack 5 months ago
0:30 to 0:39 - That would be the greatest commercial ever, if they put tiger woods up there...
Embraer091 7 months ago
@Embraer091 I think they did once
unbrokenjack 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Golf- the only sports played on the moon!
TheGolfdaily 7 months ago
just imagine finding that balls when you get to the moon
leemanovski 7 months ago
Imagine how dumb he would have felt if he accidentally damaged the LM on his swing, lol.
fvgdfbdokd 7 months ago
@fvgdfbdokd It's a pretty disconcerting thought how their only way back home was the lander, and that the only ignition was a mixture of chemicals strong enough to blast it out of the moon's gravitational field.
Incredibly impressive, and a definite proof of mankind's intelligence.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
Passion of golf game...thumbs up
dawasumi 9 months ago
u guys are dumbass how else could we put a mirror up there to reflect lasers off of
AustinPowers4444 10 months ago
@sixsixseveneight LIFE IS PEACHY FAG
NASAHOAX 11 months ago
FAKE BY LIARS
watch?v=BnKlHgDBjUI
NASAHOAX 11 months ago
Hmmm. It would seem the moon must be pretty damn boring. I mean, look at it! After only TWO trips, astronauts were telling each other "Oh, you're going to the moon? You'd better bring something to do"
Props to anyone who knows where that's from.
Thanks for the upload!
Valiordruid 11 months ago
thanks for the uploads - I love your taste
pensiontransfer 1 year ago
@rborders12 We actually had unmanned aerial vehicles already back during WW2. Never heard of the B-17 and B-24 "Drones", unmanned bombers, loaded with explosives that were flown into German heavy fortified installations, for example?
YDDES 1 year ago
@rborders12 What would soldiers do in a military base on the Moon? It's too far away to use as a spybase (satellites are more effective) and missiles sent from the Moon could easily be destroyed on their way.
So, WHY do You think that USA should have had a base on the Moon?
YDDES 1 year ago
@rborders12 The ICBM missiles in the 60's could hit small target areas on the other side of the globe. Why would it be so hard to "hit" the Moon with a rocket? Just pure, simple Newtonian ballistics.
Why would they have needed such powerful computers?
Think for Yourself too, but think a little "deeper"...
YDDES 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FEB 4, 2011 -Using two high-resolution LROC images taken from two separate orbits, scientists have formed a stereo image pair for 3D measurements at the Apollo 14 landing site. Among the visible objects are the descent stage of the Apollo 14 lunar module Antares, the ALSEP, a rock nicknamed Turtle Rock, & multiple astronaut traverse footpaths clearly indicated by disturbed soils. Data processing methods can be used to identify the objects and measure their sizes and shapes. Game over hoaxturds
Synthetrix 1 year ago
tHE FIRST AMERICAN IN SPACE AND THE FIRST MAN TO PLAY GOLF ON THE MOON, ALAN SHEPERD WAS THE MAN!
markbassman1 1 year ago 2
Nasa astronaut traitors fucking around on earth
pretending to be on the moon
Nasa is a Nazi disease
2nasafakedit 1 year ago
@SoldierSide77, take along Buzz Aldrin. He actually punched a guy for being a little too persistent about the moon hoax thing. To all you moon hoax guys, I suggest getting together, raising some funds and recreating one of the Apollo flights that landed on the Moon. If you find nothing at the Sea of Tranquility or the other landing sites, I'll believe you.
squidoogeek 1 year ago 2
China will be there in ten years, maybe they will bring the golf ball back. You young kids missed it, back when the US could build something well and fast and do great things.
beowulf342000 1 year ago
Does anyone really think going to the moon was beyond the realm of what we could technologically achieve? For fuck's sake take a look at all the technology that we have...stealth planes, smart missiles, lasers, nuclear physics, night vision, unmanned aerial vehicles, computing power. You're insulting the entire human race if you think we weren't smart enough to make it to the moon. "Faked" my ass...what would be the point? I'm gonna bring Neil Armstrong to your house to kick you in the nuts!
SoldierSide77 1 year ago 36
@SoldierSide77 lets go back then. why not keeo reliving memories from fuckin 1969. lets see it in high definition bud can it be done with all the money and technologytoday lets go back but no fuck that and fuck u
ryantheriote 11 months ago
@ryantheriote - What are you rambling about? Put down the crack pipe and make some sense, man. In case you haven't noticed, the government is trillions of dollars in debt, worse than ever in our history. We have lots of better things to focus on than going back to the moon. Please.
SoldierSide77 11 months ago
@SoldierSide77 in ebt by trillions of dollars. smrt givernment eh to let them get in that situation. name 3 things ti send there money on. enjoy your footage from 1969. your worse than the toronto maple elafs havent won a stanley cup in the color tv era
ryantheriote 11 months ago
@SoldierSide77 Considering they launch probes and satellites every year, they can afford to send another expedition to the moon.
killa19122 10 months ago
@killa19122 - Technically I'm sure they could afford to, yes...that wasn't my argument...my point was that in my opinion we have loads of better things we could use the money for, and it's rather pointless to go back to the moon, since we've already been there many times. What exactly would be gained from it? I for one would much rather have a cure for cancer, end homelessness, or find a decent alternative to oil before we decide to throw a bunch of money at a stupid moon mission.
SoldierSide77 10 months ago
@SoldierSide77 Ignorance. Wanna know how much NASA costs? Around 0.56% of the federal budget, less than 6/10ths of a percent. All those things you listed would cost magnitudes of difference more than it costs to fund NASA for a year. Secondly, the technology development required to get back to the moon may be exactly what this country needs. Advances in materials science, computing and rocket technology will all be required which will benefit the entire economy as a whole.
fvgdfbdokd 7 months ago
@SoldierSide77 not in 1969 lol
dunhillny 11 months ago
@dunhillny Lol! Good point!
SoldierSide77 10 months ago
Comment removed
SoldierSide77 10 months ago
@dunhillny Actually, you made me curious about that so I went and looked it up. Surprising! Stealth technology started in world war II, the smart bomb's been around since 1968, lasers - 1957, nuclear physics - 1800's, night vision - 1939, computing - 1940's. The first unmanned aerial vehicle - 1916. So actually that's a viable argument. =)
SoldierSide77 10 months ago
@dunhillny yes. in 1969.
amor987654321 10 months ago
Do some research please, because there is a "point" for them to fake it. This took place in 1969, not 2011.
killa19122 10 months ago
@SoldierSide77 Buzz Aldrin would be the better choice to take on that visit...
disorganizedorg 8 months ago
@SoldierSide77 i lived a few houses away from Charlie Duke for like over a decade. he talked a lot of shit about the "faker" people, he got a real kick out of how dumb they are :D
KymeraGR7 8 months ago
@SoldierSide77 your tech isn't really working... stealth plane was shot in Serbia... lasers are not used in the way yor small soldiery brain thinks - it's still just surgery and you're long way to go to make it that strong... as for nuclear phisics - you only know of nukes how smart U R... but i'm glad someone can be happy being this ignorant and non informed (as well as the 27 likes)
sasham02 7 months ago
@sasham02 Lasers are already in standby mounted on large long-distance planes as a system to track & defend against missile launches. Tanks use a local electromagnetic field that detonates projectiles in mid-air before they impact. Take a look at New Scientist every now and then before you make sweeping statements, or stay how you are; hypocritical.
unbrokenjack 5 months ago
@SoldierSide77 You have a good point. That is why I think we should send our nuclear waste to the moon instead of under the mountains of Nevada.
shasha1873 4 months ago
is he hitting with one hand? :D
RaideNNx11 1 year ago
@RaideNNx11 - He sure did!
SoldierSide77 1 year ago
that looks like a slice to me
adddul1 1 year ago
So, if this is all such cut and dry science, why do five different people have five different explanations for it? You should at least get on the same page when trying to blow smoke up people's behinds.
mrbobawesome 1 year ago
@TheJomogogo I learned long ago not to argue with idiots. They just bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. Thanks for playing.
mrbobawesome 1 year ago 6
@TheJomogogo Oh, no need. I watched the video. It must be real. How could they have faked it if it was on t.v.? The "facts" that would use to try and convince me are only what you've been told to believe. So, you go on following blindly and I'll go on questioning "the facts". I'd rather be a "fool" because I was wrong than a sucker because I couldn't think for myself.
mrbobawesome 1 year ago
@TheJomogogo Great response. Way to throw out facts and information. It's okay lemming, you're just doing what you were told. I suppose you think Jesus and the Easter Bunny are real too.
mrbobawesome 1 year ago
What a load of crap. I like how the astronauts bounce around with minimal footing because of the "lack of gravity", yet the golf ball falls directly on the ground just like it would here on Earth. I guess that's because it was here on Earth. Do people still actually believe this was real?
mrbobawesome 1 year ago
@mrbobawesome Of course the ball falls directly on the ground, just like the feather and hammer fell straight down at the same rate when Dave Scott dropped them on the surface on Apollo 15, because the Moon has no atmosphere. 1/6 Earth's gravity is still gravity, thus the ball falls straight down.What was different was the amazing distance it traveled when Shepard hit it one-handed with a puny geologists' hammer.
galoon 1 year ago
they need to film that with a better camera
MageAtYou 1 year ago
too bad they didn't play a little moon hockey...
Trund27 1 year ago
I like how the astronauts overstate everything while they are faking it. When they throw the hammer it's the same bullshit. It flies only a few seconds and they say, "WOW I thought it was going to go forever!" Here he says "miles and miles and miles" as if his golf ball flew away to the horizon in the two seconds he actually watched it.
Justwannalogon 1 year ago
@Justwannalogon they're human beings dipshit, you'd be outgoing and excited if you were walking on the moon too.
redslownight 1 year ago
@redslownight It doesn't sound like excitement to me. He sounds almost bored when he says "miles and miles and miles".
Justwannalogon 1 year ago
@Justwannalogon not bored.
redslownight 1 year ago
@Justwannalogon Fair enough, but the way someone says something is no indicator of where they are at the time.
krisdevalle 1 year ago
@krisdevalle I agree. If they are overstating everything, like I claimed, it proves nothing. Overstating things could simply be a characteristic of someone not used to being on television or in front of an audience. I'm guessing he at least watched the ball until it has landed, though, and it looked like he got a solid hit on it. How far could it have flown in ~4 seconds at 1/6 gravity? Fifteen feet?
Justwannalogon 1 year ago
@krisdevalle I would think that most children could putt 100 yards in 1/6 gravity, even in an astronaut suit. And I don't think the ball could travel very far in only 4 seconds.
Justwannalogon 1 year ago
@Justwannalogon Tough conditions! It was a 9 iron on the end of a geology hammer, and he had to hit it one handed because the suit was so restrictive he couldn't do a two-handed swing... we'll never know.
krisdevalle 1 year ago
fake
nykytne13 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Apollo moon missions were faked in a studio. The evidence is crushing. Here's a link to a partial summary of it.
3W's (dot) brainsturbator (dot) com/forums/viewthread/1335/
(check link for gaps)
Also, do a YouTube search on "MarsFaker".
FatFreddy88 1 year ago
As said in Mass Effect 2: "I dare to assume you ignorant jackasses know that space is empty.......it keeps going 'til it hits something. That can be a ship, or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in 10,000 years....... you are ruining someones day! Somewhere and sometime!"
BlackHawk38 1 year ago 10
@BlackHawk38
sadly the ball kept going till it hit the moon again about 50 feet downrange. Al should have brought the burner bubble or some other "frying pan on a stick" type club to get it farther. but. nobody can hit a golfball off of the moon.
sparf314 1 year ago
@BlackHawk38 You think that that golf ball hit some space alien kid doing his homework? I do agree that the apollo astronauts treated the moon like it was a garbage dump. I mean at least leave all your fuckiing shit organized. Like, they could have re-used some of that stuff. Go to the last landing site and drive their old crap over to the new one. Did they ever do that?
MrDarcyzPP 1 year ago
@MrDarcyzPP "Go to the last landing site and drive their old crap over to the new one. Did they ever do that?"
That would have taken days, by which time it would be time to go home lol.
genericmember1 1 year ago
@MrDarcyzPP If You had left some used gear in Texas and landed in Alaska, would You take an electric car with no possiblities to recharge it, and drive to Texas to fetch that old gear?
They wouldn' even have come a tenth of the distance to a former landing site before running out of oxygen and power in the Rover
YDDES 1 year ago
@BlackHawk38
Appropriate then, that the man playing golf is called "shephard".
TheJboy88 1 year ago
@BlackHawk38 They named Shepard after Alan Shepard. You probably already knew that, though. "Newton is the meanest son of a bitch in space!"
StephenNTrotta 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The evidence that the moon missions were faked is crushing. There's a partial summary of it on a science forum. To see it google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon?". The summary is on page 15. It's the 7th post from the top.
Cosmored 2 years ago
@Cosmored No one cares about your stupidity. Go sell your crazy elsewhere. We're all stocked uphere.
captwasabi 1 year ago
guys have you ever heard the conspiracy theory,,,,i think this mission is fake,,,why??? they said that there is no wheather on the moon but why is it that the flag is waving with the air????
ejcorilloful 2 years ago
Kinetic force resulting from being placed running through the fabric with nowhere to go but to ripple the material. Lack of gravity equivalent to Earth resulting in less obstacle to its flow so last longer than it would on earth.
HoneyBBare 2 years ago
cool, i could imagine him saying, FOUR! *beep* that would be awsome :)
clayzee001 2 years ago
the astronauts didn't have time to watch the starred sky fro the moon so they could later describe it..but they had the time to play stupid game of golf and to to have car races with the moon-buggy? Who is so stupid to believe the moon landing was real.
fresniak 2 years ago
@fresniak
The astronauts would not have been able to see any stars so there would be nothing to describe, as the the golf they smuggled the golf club and ball on board, NASA did not know about it. and there was only one buggy so how could they have a race?
musicbruv 2 years ago
"he astronauts would not have been able to see any stars so there would be nothing to describe"
this is a bullshit and shows how retard are people who believe in the nasa hoax.
"NASA did not know about it" yes sure and I am Peter Pan.
"and there was only one buggy so how could they have a race"
one buggy for each mission yes. You go to the moon and you do not think to bring a telescope but rather a moon buggy each time you go there. Right and I am Peter Pan again.
fresniak 2 years ago
a 'slice' is caused by uneven air flow over a golf ball's surface in flight. If they are in the vacuum of space how can that happen?
danisronin 2 years ago
Could it be that it was just a joke comment?
musicbruv 2 years ago
I wish it was. Over the 3 trips to the moon they took 5,200 pictures. And not one of them has any stars in it. I'd just like a press conference for NASA to explain all this. My brother was a Navy test pilot & says I am nuts to question it. Maybe he's right but still....
danisronin 2 years ago
Why would you expect to see stars? They were on the moon during daylight can you see stars in the daylight on earth? just because the "sky" is black it does not mean you will see stars, the camera and human eye were working in bright sunlight it would be impossible to see a dim star, do you live in a city? look up at the sky at night how many stars can you see? there are millions of stars yet I bet you wont see many.
musicbruv 2 years ago
Earth has atmo which diffuses the light. There are great pictures of the stars from the ISS yet none from the moon. You can see stars in pictures from the mars rovers, but none from the moon & Mars has atmo. Just doesn't add up.
danisronin 2 years ago
@musicbruv
You completely fail to realize that on earth we have a thick atmosphere that diffuses the sun light..that's why we cant see the stars in the day. On the moon there is no atmosphere.
Even the most convinced apollogist (like Phil Plait) will tell you that you would see a lot of stars in the sky from the moon.
The objection was never against seeing the stars with eyes, but with the camera exposure settings that were used.
You are UTTERLY IGNORANT
fresniak 2 years ago
@fresniak,
You are the idiot, atmospere while it would make a difference has nothing to do with the fact that our eyes would NOT be able to see tiny dots of light against the brightly lit lunar surface, and if you slowed the shutter speed enough to take pics of stars then it would be well over exposed, what would be the point of bringing a telescope, what would you look at? I was there when all this happend and there was a discussion on TV as to why you wont see stars, everybody understood.
musicbruv 2 years ago
@music
" I was there when all this happend"
oh you were there? on the moon?
" and there was a discussion on TV as to why you wont see stars,."
You're right this is what I call a hard evidence, a discussion on the tube
maybe you do not understand how the human eye works. first of all, human vision has a dynamic range that is much wider than any camera. Second without atmosph. the light reflected from the moon will not have any effect whatsoever on the vision of the starred sky. You're a dumb-ass
fresniak 2 years ago
@fresniak
I cannot believe you have the brains to turn on your PC, the human eye is better than a camera, but if the iris is closed up then you wont see tiny stars just the same as you wont on earth during the day, and dont give me the atmosphere argument unless you can explain where the atmosphere goes at night because you can see them at night no diffusion there!
musicbruv 2 years ago
"but if the iris is closed up then you wont see tiny stars"
the tiny stars can easily be seen by the human eye even when it is half closed, and if you're looking at a 45 degree angle from the moon surface your eye will be perfectly able to see even the faintest stars.
the atmosphere argument is still valid at night on earth if you live in a town because if the lights of the city are diffused from the sky you may end up seeing very few stars in the night
fresniak 2 years ago
"the atmosphere argument is still valid at night on earth if you live in a town because if the lights of the city are diffused from the sky you may end up seeing very few stars in the night ".... and if you dont live in a city, what if you live in a desert, how is your argument valid then?
If you look up at a 45 degree angle in the space suit you would see the inside of the helmet which does not move with your head, and who said their eyes were half closed, did you see their iris's?
musicbruv 2 years ago
".... what if you live in a desert, how is your argument valid then?"
are you stupid or what? My point was to make you understand that the moon light could not be diffused, because there is no atmosphere
"If you look up at a 45 degree angle in the space suit you would see the inside of the helmet "
no at 45 degree you would still see what is outside. check the shape of the helmet.
The half closed is the worst case, the light of the moon was not so strong to blind the astronauts that much
fresniak 2 years ago
So where did you get your moon hoax evidence from?
musicbruv 2 years ago
"moon hoax evidence" I call it science
fresniak 2 years ago
Ok, where did you learn your "science"
musicbruv 2 years ago
not in the tv musicbrv. _I have a bachelor in engineering + masters
fresniak 2 years ago
Then you learned from books or from a teacher, the guy on the TV was Patrick Moore, he is a famous astronomer he said you would not be able to see stars.
So as the earth has an atmosphere the star light should be diffused, unlike on the moon, then stars on earth should not be visible in a desert, or on the high sea's should they? because the atmosphere should diffuse it as you said! but it does not, does it?
musicbruv 2 years ago
the star-light is the thing that we want to see, it is not the one that will cause the problem of diffusion.
the sun light is what is diffused on earth and at night there is no sun light so no diffusion. You like to mix and twist the words, trying to find a logical flaw in my arguments but you fail miserably.
fresniak 2 years ago
The guy on the tv may as well have been paid to say what he said. Astronauts from the iss could see lot of stars from the lower earth orbit. The light coming from the earth (in daylight) did not disturb their eyes.
Now Phil Plait is an astronomer that actually defends nasa, still he states that you will be able to see a lot of stars from the moon's surface. He justifies the lack of interest for the stars, saying the astronauts were there to take rock samples only..
fresniak 2 years ago
@fresniak
"Astronauts from the iss could see lot of stars from the lower earth orbit. The light coming from the earth. . .did not disturb their eyes."
Source please.
Look out a window with the lights off at night, then have someone turn a light on. The stars will 'disappear'. How much more bright is the Earth or Moon lit by the sun.
Even if they did see stars by turning their back to the Earth, that's much easier to do with 3 axis of rotation then trying to block out the moons sunlit surface.
loperspest 2 years ago
"Look out a window with the lights off at night, then have someone turn a light on. The stars will 'disappear'"
Are you even serious??? Did you try the experiment yourself??? Did the stars disappear cause you switch on the light in your room??? I don't know if I live in a world of stupid people or it's just they are all pretending..
fresniak 2 years ago
your remind me of those stupid people that when they take a photo at night with their camera are expecting the flash light to be so powerful that it will illuminate the all landscape.
fresniak 2 years ago
@fresniak Yes, I did. I have looked outside, standing away from the window so that the lit walls are in view. Stars just weren't visible.
It doesn't matter if the whole landscape is illuminated, though it would be on the moon in the sun, the point is your night vision is being desensitized by the lit objects in view. In the experiments case, the walls of your home. In the moons case, by the landscape is being lit by the sun.
loperspest 2 years ago
"I have looked outside, standing away from the window so that the lit walls are in view. Stars just weren't visible."
I have done the same and I could see the stars. So now who is the liar?
Or maybe you are lighting your room with a 2GW lamp??
fresniak 2 years ago
@fresniak
Maybe your eyes are just better then mine, because I know what I saw, or rather didn't see. And the Sun is far brighter then any house lamp, as anyone who has walked inside after been outside knows.
This is ludicrous, if they were going to lie about some alleged hoax, why didn't they lie and say they saw stars, if they were supposed to? Both Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong were veteran astronauts and Aldrin had done EVA in Earth orbit.
They would know what stars in space were like.
loperspest 2 years ago
the moon reflects only a small percentage (around 5%) of the sun-light. If the moon was really such a bright place as you want to imply, then why the pictures from the hasseblad cameras show a very good dybamic range covering all the range from the darkest tones to the lightest ones?? IF you ever took pictures with a camera you should know that on a brighty day you will not be able to have both the shadows and the highlights in range on both film and digital cameras.
fresniak 2 years ago
still on a very bright days our eyes can easily have both shadows and highlights in range..that's a well known limit in photography.
So if our eyes can clearly see in bright light, do you think it would be a problem to do the same on the moon?
fresniak 2 years ago
"This is ludicrous, if they were going to lie about some alleged hoax, why didn't they lie and say they saw stars"
here it is the usual "why not.." question.
First of all astronauts were really ashamed of what they were doing, but there was no choice for them, other than lying. Second if they would mention the stars, the public opinion would have demanded many more stars pictures in the next missions, and they would have been forced to find a way to do that, which obviously they didn't want to.
fresniak 2 years ago
and btw I do not learn only by books and teachers, I learn also doing my research.
fresniak 2 years ago
@fresniak
You have to resort to name calling, that is the last bastion of a bullshitter, you are ignorant, the astros have to have smoked visors on the moon because it is so bright yet you expect them to see stars! have a look for pictures taken of the earth from space how many stars can you see? none! why is that? put your brain into gear and think.
musicbruv 2 years ago
" smoked visors on the moon because it is so bright "
the brightness of the moon wasn't certainly the concern, making the visors. UVA and UVB rays together with radiation were the concerns. If it was so bright to disturb the astronauts then it would have been impossible to take photos with a full dynamic range showing both shadows and high-lights on the surface, so or you're wrong about the brightness or the pictures were taken in a studio on earth or both things apply.
fresniak 2 years ago
Clear plastic visor will stop UV no problem, they dont have to be darkened, and why would it be impossible to take pictures on the moon in bright light? you simply adjust the camera setting! are you saying that if it is so bright a day on earth that you need sunglasses you cannot take a picture? I put it to you that you are the one who is wrong. BTW welders are subjected to a lot higher UV levels than the astros and a thin piece of glass and plastic protects their eyes.
musicbruv 2 years ago
@musicbrv
"why would it be impossible to take pictures on the moon in bright light? you simply adjust the camera setting! "
This shows that you know nothing about photography. Please first learn what is a dynamic range, and then try to read again my comment and understand it. I never stated it is not possible to take pictures in very bright light. What I stated it's you can't cover all the range with photographs from darkest tones to the high-lights if you are in very bright conditions.
fresniak 2 years ago
(continue) if you underexpose to retain the bright details then you will loose much if not all the dark details. That's a very well known limit in photography. You're just an ignorant trying to look smarter than you are, speaking of things you know nothing about.
fresniak 2 years ago 2
"You have to resort to name calling"
I resort to call people for what they are..
fresniak 2 years ago
cool idea
trajicproductions 2 years ago
I read that Alan Bean on Apollo 12 wanted to take a football to throw around the moon with Pete Conrad, but he didn't think of it til afterward.
apollowoman 2 years ago
jajjaa
MaurOAkolatronic 2 years ago
except nobody getting stollen of fof street sides and murdered by the government
look at the bright side ching chong and know the only problem with people like you is you do nothing about the problems you rant about
grandmasterflash10 2 years ago
"except nobody getting stollen of fof street sides and murdered by the government"
Kennedy was murdered by the government (I should say the shadow government actually)..this is just one example I hope it's enough for you
fresniak 2 years ago
cool your beans ching chong nobody gives a fuck, your ranting on youtube.
grandmasterflash10 2 years ago
we don't get to see the ball flying? pointless!
shanehoustein 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
then stop wasting your time and fuck off!
shanehoustein 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
An old golf buddy of mine (pro) has a pretty good program out now that guarantees you'll get under 80 in two weeks. Golferbreak80dotcom
ragoer675 2 years ago
We landed on the moon. It happened several times. Find something else to bitch about . It was cool we should go back just to prove all the crazy conspiracy theorist wrong. GET OVER IT
Shelbylcobra 2 years ago 3
I'll get over it when a thrid-party (i.e. NOT Nasa) produces proof that it happened
shanehoustein 2 years ago
So wait. NASA went to the moon. That means that any proof that we went to the moon would have to come from NASA's records.
You've set up an impossible standard of evidence. How convenient.
soulbiscuit 2 years ago
How about the third-party photographic evidence of amateur astronomers photographing stage separations and burns out of orbit toward the moon.
Or the ham radio guys who set up dishes and were able to receive communications from the astronauts on the moon. When they stopped pointing their arrays at the moon, the signal was lost.
These people have published their data to the web.
krisdevalle 2 years ago
they should do baseball...its Americas past time!
lovebaby488 2 years ago
pssshhhh football is Americas past time
ACE2CATTACLIZZM 2 years ago
I think the hit of a gold ball during a space shuttle EVA had even more coolness in it. I guess the ball is still flying and has passed Pioneer alread. Hope the astronaut who has hit the ball painted a smiley on it :)
sverebom 2 years ago
They should do another moon trip, and have moon happy slapping in full HD!!!
goldplatinguk 2 years ago
ok heres wat i dont really understand if its fake then how did he come back and go back up there becase there was peps watching his retern.becase peps think it was in a studio
lighthouseman35 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
How can you think that almost 40 years ago, a man was playing golf on the moon?
It just ridiculous, it has nothing to do with reality. Imagine the risks of being fooling at the moon.
Not even talk about the fact that thier computers were of 256 kb.If they only need that to go to the moon 40 years ago, then now, it would be as simple as eating a cake.
Just bulshit!!!!FAKEEE
mamflyer 2 years ago
iam amazed how in 1969 they were able to transmit live footage from the moon back to earth, the y should do it again , this time in hd :)
no golf balls this time though, how about basket ball..one bounce.....and its into orbit
xdirtyburtyx 2 years ago
lol that would be pretty cool, either that or a football. :o
Josh420sk8er 2 years ago
It's taken for granted that the Apollo missions were hideously expensive, and in some ways it became almost matter-of-fact that the missions continued, despite each one being a remarkable feat. As for the golfing, I guess if someone finishes their experiments and has a 5-min window, why not have a bit of fun? You'd certainly get only one chance. I recall it was difficult for Mission Control to get the first American spacewalker back in the pod because he was having such a good time out there.
krisdevalle 2 years ago
You may be thinking of Ed White, on Gemini 4. I thought you meant Neil Armstrong at first but he was the first moonwalker, not spacewalker (though of course you can't walk in space, in zero gravity). Chris Kraft had to get on the capcom circuit and order White to get back in.
youvebeenthunderstru 1 year ago
Alan Shepard had more balls than most people who walk the face of the earth...and when he played golf on the moon ...so be it...God bless you Alan...and Godspeed
ffej980 2 years ago 11
According to an astronaut who visited our high school, Alan Shepard got in a lot of trouble for that at home. He had snuck it on and so the extra weight hadn't been accounted for. But he was never formally "scolded" because the PR was too good!
katme35 3 years ago
That's a lie. Golf playing was approved by NASA bosses before the mission.
AtlantisSaturn 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Well, I don't know a/b "extra weight" issues, all they did was step off the set, jump in the car and drive to the mall
medumbcat 3 years ago
Comment removed
generallzod 3 years ago
FORE!
datubaman 3 years ago 2
FORE to the 4th power lol
mikev137 2 years ago
if you had a brain, you can tell us what is so fake about it
gmjyuir 3 years ago
piss off idiot
johndanbutz 3 years ago
1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.
WeKnowYouHateUs 3 years ago 3
But if the club face is open your going to push the ball right therefore resulting in mission control not knowing the correct term and saying he sliced the ball.
hellsfist311 2 years ago
also to add the Japanese even proved the landings are real.
Dogmeat7 3 years ago 2
did they? tell me more pl0x?
Josh420sk8er 2 years ago
it's not fake dumbshit. even the top minds in the world say it's real.
Dogmeat7 3 years ago
That's interesting, as most people at University or in sicence or research positions, who use their brains a lot, never seem to be conspiracy theorists. Somehow it always seems to be people who take their evidence from poorly-constructed documentaries, who are unable to do their own reseach.
krisdevalle 3 years ago
as much as i love loking into conspiracy theries and all the stuff that is unbeleivable, this is definately real.
101Spartan117 3 years ago
Hehe! Separd is funy:-D I laughed almost 10 min:-D
Andybucker 3 years ago
Hope that ball doesn't return to earth one day with vengeance!
cdtdk 3 years ago 5
@cdtdk it would burn up before it could damage anything on earth(excluding satellites)
chooseit2 1 year ago
Should get good distance. There's no air resistance.
ffairlane57 3 years ago 2
ya but the holes are too big for it to be considered pro.
mgabrysSF 4 years ago 14
LOL!
jproducts 3 years ago 3