Added: 3 years ago
From: MoonMythBusted
Views: 34,427
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (284)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Film was very fragile in that it could not take hot or cold. It could not take radiation either as they passed through the radiation belt. Maybe they had a lead container on board.

    They did not deal with the hidden markings on the camera lenses as being behind the objects.

    Did they land on the moon. I have no idea, maybe. BUT there is no way they could have had the pics they did.

  • This is a terribly executed attempt at debunking the moon hoax theory. My 12 year old cousin made a more commendable attempt. Then again, Mythbusters is almost always pseudo-science.

    I'm not saying we didn't go to the moon, quite the contrary. I have a close personal friend that worked on Apollo 9 - 14 and he knows we went to the moon. He also knows about many real government conspiracies such as Project Montauk and Bluebeam first hand.

    This is just a pathetic excuse for definitive. SHAME.

  • @The4LA2Baker0 Well, keep in mind that it is just a segment from a longer show that addresses many different parts of the moon hoax myth, so I wouldn't say that by itself it is definitive. I think the "Slowed Film Fakery" segments is far more interesting since they do something original. They put on space suits, weigh them down to the proper weight, and they walk them in REAL 1/6 Gravity. And they get the unique gait of the astronauts on the first try. I found that much more definitive.

  • @tpgphotog What is 250- 270 degrees? The air on the moon? oh no wait, there is no air. What heat do the film canisters need to be protected from?

    You are confusing something. Just because the ground on the moon, which has been sitting in direct sunlight for a week or so. *that* is what might get hot. The cameras are out for a few hours, and even then are not constantly in direct sunlight since the astronauts are moving around constantly. Shielding against the sunlight isn't difficult.

  • @tpgphotog "with no meter reading on a MANUAL camera adjusted with big bulky Space gloves. My ASS!"

    Yeah, and of the THOUSANDS of photos which were taken and were under or over exposed, blurry, oft-center, poorly composed.

    I know it's strange that they didn't make the shitty photos the ones they released to the public..

    oh no, wait, that's not strange at all, that's what ALL PHOTOGRAPHERS DO.

    You can't take ONE PHOTO out of literally nearly 10,000, call it perfect and say IMPOSSIBLE!

  • Leave the fighting to people who actually study these things. Seriously, you guys aren't really scientists that work in the field of astronomy. Why are you still fighting over something that happened over 40 years ago.

  • BUSTED? If N.A. was the first man on the moon who set up the camera to take the shot of him taking that first step? If they only had one of those old 35 mm film cameras to take stills like they showed here; Why wasn't the film fogged from the cosmic radiation? They would have been out of the earths protective magnetosphere. How did they carry enough lead to shield the film and men when they passed though the deadly Van Allen belts? The suits are NOT lead shielded to prevent death in hrs.

  • @emailmemrstara "If N.A. was the first man on the moon who set up the camera to take the shot of him taking that first step?" Wow, that's actually a pretty easy answer, did you even look in to it, or are you just parroting hoaxtard talking points? No one set up the camera on the moon, the camera was part of the spacecraft which had just landed there. The film is very easy to shield, as are the astronauts from the "cosmic radiation". Lead is not the only way to shield against the radiation.

  • 1:23 Funny how the "myth busters" spotlight looks just like Apollo's SUN. lol

    we never went to the moon & these special effects assholes prove NOTHING. lol

  • this doesn't bust the moon hoax.

    if you're going to try and bust the "moon" myth; find something conclusive to support; they went

    a complete failure at busting the "moon" myth

  • @301001082 "a complete failure at busting the "moon" myth" I wasn't very impressed with the episode, but the "Slowed Film Fakery Part 2" is VERY impressive. They do something no one had ever done before (filmed the space suit walking in REAL 1/6 G) and they get it right on the first time, it looks EXACTLY like the footage on the moon.

  • @301001082 But in our society the burden of proof lies with the accuser - in other words, with the conspiracy theorists. Yet all they have done is exploit the scientific ignorance of a large number of people to give their conspiracy theories apparent "credence" in popular culture. They have no evidence (much less "proof").

    Mythbusters did a great job of busting those theories WIDE open, and yet this would have come as no suprise to anyone with knowledge of basic high school physics.

  • The moon is really not THAT far, its an amazing achievement but if the moon was as far away as say Titan is from Saturn, then we would have had a hell of a time getting to it.

  • Comment removed

  • Although the photos were probably faked. We have been to the moon, and there is atmosphere and ice on the moon. Hence why a flag would wave. There also is gravity.

  • ..there is no atmosphere on the moon.

  • @cheezecakeV2 lies..the moon has an atmosphere

  • @165NB It does. Its about 50 atoms thick and is about 225,900,000,000,000,000,000 times thinner than our air at sea level.

    For all practical purposes, the moon does not have an atmosphere.

  • @cheezecakeV2 The moon does have an atmosphere, not much and probably not worth mentioning, but it is there.

  • yes there is , its jsut a fraction of what we have here on earth. I didnt say we had the same amount of gravity, I only said there was gravity.

  • Bahahahaha.

  • You IDIOT, there is gravity on the moon.. It's 1\6 that of Earth.

  • Comment removed

  • i wish the moon really was made of cheese... and mars was a giant cracker. then we would never run out of snacks haha

  • but how will we get enough rockets to ship them over?

  • just have to go there once and ancor it to earth, the could take little pods there and back along a cable

  • The conformity is really perfect. This means that these scenes were made in the sandbox. Or could this demonstration to prove otherwise?

  • It's not trying to, it is showing that a single light source can produce non-parallel shadows. Which proves the claim by conspiracy theorists that the non-parallel shadows need two light sources is so much hooey.

  • yeah, but we know that the moon is made from cheese and uranium and both of them birght assholes so stop discussing!!! XD

  • agreed. on top of that, how on earth could they keep EVERYONE quiet about faking a moon landing? ridiculous.

  • You guys are idiots. There is no reason why NASA would fake going to the moon.

  • I still think it's a hoax. I agree, with their given data, that the shadows could eb manipulated due to typography. But if you look at the possibilities of going outside the earths atmosphere past a powerful radiation which even penetrated past thick lead walls, it would render the journey impossible. All current space crafts are UNDER that area. Also, there no hole on the moon surface where their jets should have made one based on the studied and expected repurcussion of the jets.There's none

  • "All current space crafts are UNDER that area."

    Actually the ISS passes through the South Atlantic Anomonly (a part of the Van Allen Belt) and yet they aren't fried.... but lets just ignore this inconvenient fact. Just like we should ignore the inconvenient fact that the Apollo astronauts have an unusually high rate of cataracts (often a result of high levels of radiation)...

  • mythbusters rock

  • 0:37 Pokeball SFX x3!

  • the mythbusters fooled you.

    3:56

    notice the elongated darkspot on the right.  That does not exists in NASA's picture. They cleverly covered part of the shadow with ground.

    Also made a false assumption of the supposed myth that the astronaut will obliterate in total darkness. The assumption was it was well lit that almost resemble the light casted on the ground.

    8:09

    Compare the left NASA's is well lit. Right is not so well lit. in fact shadow starts near knee level of toy.

  • By the way, it's the mythbusters who said their recreated albedo is accurate.

    :D

  • rofl, moron. you need a punch in the face, like Bart Sibrel

  • yeah,, calling nut-case moron is the most effective way of proving your point.

    Look closely....

    The mythbuster are concerned replicating what is in the photo and not prove parallel shadows using the sun.

    watch?v=znnObZcUNb8

    get educated.

  • the point is he was illuminated, obviously he wont be as bright, the mythbusters had a stage light, apollo had the SUN as a light source

  • Correct, he was illuminated.

    My point being though is that we compare it to the ground light.

    The Astronaut is brighter than the ground while the mythbuster is the opposite. Remember, the Astronaut is receiving bounced light from the moon. Moreover, if high objects become bright because of bounced light from the moon's surface; that seems not to be the case of other boulders (big stone). So something is indeed not right in all this pictures.

    Good day! :)

  • "The Astronaut is brighter than the ground while the mythbuster is the opposite. Remember, the Astronaut is receiving bounced light from the moon."

    But don't forget, there is a WHOLE lot more moon within the line of site of the astronaut than there is astronaut. While an astronaut sized plot of moon might not be as bright as the astronaut, there is literally hundreds of such plots reflecting back to the moon.

  • "quite a bit lower than the material of the astronauts' suits, and as such they aren't going to reflect as much light."

    Correct you are. Since the albedo is lower and cannot reflect much light it then the astronaut would not be brighter than the ground.

  • please check 8:09

    Look at the right .. you can clearly see that the model used by the mythbusters is "filled with shadow".

    The mythbusters exaggerated the claim of the Conspiracy Theorists to mean it should be "pitch black".

    Look closely again at right picture ... the ground is brighter than the model astronaut.

    On left photo, there is concentrated light at the shoes of the astronaut. That's what we call highly uneven concentrated dispersion of light.

    Good day! ;-)

  • well, at least you 2 are engaging in debate instead of name calling. Good for you.

  • While there are many kinds of boulders to be found on the moon, overall the albedo would be quite a bit lower than the material of the astronauts' suits, and as such they aren't going to reflect as much light.

    Also, that the mythbusters photo didn't turn out exactly like the moon one in terms of illumination. Remember the claim they were busting was that the astronaut wouldn't be lit at all. There are many unknown and subtle variables that would result in a picture that wasn't exactly right.

  • The point being is that the brightness of the illumination is an anomaly.

  • @FaithRationale I love how you point out irrelevant stuff when you don't have any good arguments.

    I was unsure at first, but after reading and seeing evidence, any intelligent person would accept the moon landing.

    Let it go, you lost.

  • Open your mind, if you think it was faked. Do your own research, using your own money. And get to the moon yourself, till then you cant prove anything worth dirt and anyone else. Do it, prove it. And show REAL evidence, and get them also. Then you can say anything you want, if not. You can go to your corner and think of what you said, lol.

  • It's funny when people who are certain with narrowed tunnel vision as to how something was done tell you to open your mind lol. Idiot.

  • the van allen belts are not a "very low dosage". they are deadly!! there isnt even a ship made today that can get us through them. so how did they do it in an aluminum capsule in 1969? they didnt... and until they find a way to get a ship with enough lead in it, without blowing up another shuttle.....we'll be stuck here..they wanted to believe we landed, so they arranged thier test to show they were right....lame

  • deadly radiation in the van alan belts.

  • I'm sure the people who think the moon landings fake also believes in ghosts and god. Because they justtt have to go the non scientific route of thinking? PROOF? PAH!

  • Ghosts are just age-old superstition, God is the traditional anthropomorphic imaginings of our species developed for control & gain by some groups for thousands of years, UFOS are a myth developed from the backfire of a cover story designed to hide the trappings of operation paperclip...did you mention ufos? anyways, the politically motivated PR cold war win of Apollo could be a staged event, don't be patriotic, don't be closed off, think... will the LRO show us the Apollo landing sites? hmmm

  • Can u say "straw man"?

    If Jay Windley (consultant of MythBusters) slapped you, you said it right.

  • I have not seen the entire series, but from what I've seen, I don't see that. When they did the pyramid myths, they may have gone to a few urban legend experts, but they didn't bring any pyramid power believers. As for the facilities, the only myths that they used NASA facilities were the ones involving vacuum chambers. The plane was owned by a private company, the shadow test was done in the shop, and they have used the warehouse where they did the gravity rig before, the lead balloon I think.

  • That isn't the usual Mythbusters format. Why should they start now?

  • bust the fact that the radiation in outter space would penitrate their space suits and kill them

  • They recieved a very low dose going through the Van Allen belt, equivelent to a chest X-ray. Busted. Happy now hoaxturd?

  • Oh yeah you really busted it wide open there lol.

  • I can prove it was fake cause if they drove through the Van Halen Belt they'd a all got supar powers like the Fantatstic Four but they didn't even get Xray vision so they didn't go. Simple logic. Me an my hoax friends all agree. Tomorrow we're gonna build a fort.

  • Oh my, picking a fight with an eighteen year-old and insulting her maturity level... wow. You're nearly three times my age, way to be a great role model!

  • I like how they went to nasa for information! nasa would be the one most likely to lie and falsify the facts!

  • I'm just basing it off the facts... you've got four thumbs-downs already. Have you ever considered that if perchance your little conspiracy is incorrect, you're being a complete jerk to the people who devoted their lives to getting people onto the moon?

    And congrats, you're the very first person outside of my age group to ever call me a jerk-off.

  • You realize you sound like a fool, correct?

  • Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong performed a "communion" ceremony "33"minutes after landing on the Moon and that Buzz

    carried a Masonic flag with him to the

    moon, and that he brought it back to Earth and presented it to the "Sovereign Grand Commander" Smith who was the Supreme Commander of the Supreme Council of the World. The flag Is hung in the Library Museum in the Scottish Rite Temple in Washington, DC located at 1733 Sixteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC

  • @MasonicMovements what the hell does that have to do with anything???

  • Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong performed a "communion" ceremony "33"minutes after landing on the Moon and that Buzz

    carried a Masonic flag with him to the

    moon, and that he brought it back to Earth and presented it to the "Sovereign Grand Commander" Smith who was the Supreme Commander of the Supreme Council of the World. The flag Is hung in the Library Museum in the Scottish Rite Temple in Washington, DC located at 1733 Sixteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC

  • Stop posting that, you have done it now something like five or six times that I've seen and it's a straight-up copy/paste from a conspiracy site, you didn't even type that out yourself. It makes you seem like a goddamned brainwashed robot and really makes it difficult for me to treat you like a legitimate person and not an idiot.

  • Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong performed a "communion" ceremony "33"minutes after landing on the Moon and that Buzz

    carried a Masonic flag with him to the

    moon, and that he brought it back to Earth and presented it to the "Sovereign Grand Commander" Smith who was the Supreme Commander of the Supreme Council of the World. The flag Is hung in the Library Museum in the Scottish Rite Temple in Washington, DC located at 1733 Sixteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC

  • I am told that the communion ceremony was dramatized in the excellent HBO miniseries From the Earth to the Moon, by the guy that played Malcolm in the Middle's dad.

  • Wow, not only are you just repeatedly c/ping that from a conspiracy website, but I can find no sources that reference either the flag or Buzz Aldrin's alleged freemason connections that are not conspiracy websites. That's insufficient for me, I need someone with at least a veneer of neutrality before I'll buy it. The communion seems to have been Presbyterian, so unless the Scots are running the conspiracy, I don't find it particularly meaningful.

  • What do you mean no links?

    All you information is in the 1st comment clear as day, go look.

    NASA go look

    Scottish rite temple in DC go look

    Draconian maybe you should stick with draco's code.

  • Are you suggesting I head to DC to look for a flag that allegedly was on the moon?

    Because I'm not bloody well doing that. Even if they produce the flag, I have no more than their word that it was on the moon. That's not proof at all. I could make a little Prussian flag and tell people I had that on the moon, would you believe that too?

  • Okay , then nothing will be prof to you. So go find your conspiracies out there in hearsay land.

    Do you believe they went to the moon?

  • If I don't believe the wild bullshit you're spewing, I clearly don't believe anything.

    You have produced no evidence that this flag was on the moon. You haven't actually proven that it exists, but I'll humor you and grant that one. But for what reason should I believe it's not just a flag on a wall? Has Buzz Aldrin publicly stated so? Are there pictures? Has any reputable newspaper, journal, TV show, or any other source said so? What cause is there to believe it?

  • Yes there is, instead of asking me to point you to direct links. Why don't you do something you obviously have never done and go look for yourself.

    Suggestion type in NASA BUZZ and or Masonic Flag.

    Yes, I bet if you do that you will find more evidence you can deny.

    Newspaper yes

    Journal yes

    TV show yes

    Other sources yes

  • BTW

    newspapers, journals, and TV never lie.

    Haha, if you want truth, I suggest you go look for it and don't depend on biased sources.

    So as I have told you over and over again

    GO LOOK.

  • "newspapers, journals, and TV never lie."

    I didn't say that. I said it would count as evidence, which is something you have damned well not given me yet. No evidence = no reason to believe. It's quite simple.

    The problem with you damned conspiracy theorists is that you never give evidence, you just get pissed off when people don't believe your unsupported claims.

  • Comment removed

  • Not pissed just don't have time to hold your hand and walk you through the evidence.

    Go LOOK or don't believe, I really don't care.

    The problem is every source will be biased to you, that is why you need to find out for yourself.

    This is documented FACT go look or go away.

    I could care less.

    Why did you comment to me to start with? Oh that's right it had noting to do with the masonic flag on the moon it was because

  • And I tried to tell you, I went and looked and found nothing reasonable. I found websites from open conspiracy theorists claiming it, but without support. That is clearly meaningless. You'd think there would be one single source that had even shaky evidence, like "a friend of his told me so" or "I met his mom in a mall once and she said it", but no, it's all state and no support. You allege that he openly put it in a museum, why wouldn't he make some recorded statement to someone about it?

  • I was in the Library museum and saw it with my own eyes.

    A friend of mine dad was at the ceremony.

    My neighbors dog bit the man that encased the flag.

    Is that what you want to believe, Okay there you go.

    Or you can use something more viable.

    It was in the DC paper the day it happened, check the archives.

    It was in the masonic journal, twice. Watch the HBO miniseries from earth to the moon.

    Check the Freemason sites, not the conspiracy sites but their own sites.

  • So given that I have looked and found nothing, and you either are not rational or have found something, unless you can produce it I feel it entirely reasonable to conclude that you are not worth listening to. I'm fine with that if you are.

    And yes, I do believe they landed on the moon, because that is clearly what evidence indicates. I would be willing to modify my position given good enough reason to believe otherwise, but such has never been offered to me.

  • "Unless the Scots are running the conspiracy"

    You mean like Scottish Rite Freemason?

    Or do you mean the sham Presbyterian religion invented so that Henry VIII could divorce his wife?

  • Did you know that Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong performed a "communion" ceremony "33" minutes after landing on the Moon and that Buzz

    carried a Masonic flag with him to the

    moon, and that he brought it back to Earth and presented it to the "Sovereign Grand Commander" Smith who was the Supreme Commander of the Supreme Council of the World. The flag Is hung in the Library Museum in the Scottish Rite Temple in Washington, DC located at 1733 Sixteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC

  • oh do tell and i suppose the grand master mason is wasting time on you tube you sir are a burn out nut job there is no possible way you could know this unless you were a mason if that is the case you would be dead by now masons do not divulge any secrets even to new members let me guess you read a book from another left wing nut job and believed every word it said or even worse you wrote it utter nonsense

  • Comment removed

  • Now the comment of left wing, no I did not read it in a left wing book. I also think it is sad that your Lilly white right wing ass thinks the way you do. As long as you remain left or right wing you remain a WING NUT. Why don't you look at the issues at hand before you decide if your view is left or right? You are a closed minded WHITE POWER idiot.

  • Let's see your true colors you fake neo-con asshole.

    watch?v=Bicsqqg5qaE

    The comment removed by matstout was

    "horses will fuck anything even germans"

    Why did he make this comment?

    Because he is a racist neo-con.

    Why did he remove it ?

    Because he is a coward.

  • Wow, going hardcore on the personal attacks. That surely implies that you are making legitimate points and not that you are bullying him on the Internet for disagreeing with you.

    What I always wonder is, if you guys actually discover some kind of powerful global conspiracy, why don't they kill you to shut you up? Or optionally, why do you run around yelling about it on the Internet rather than joining up and reaping the benefits of running the world from the shadows?

  • Comment removed

  • MAYBE YOU MISSED

    The comment removed by matstout was

    "horses will fuck anything even germans"

    Now I'm not German but I think that is the comment of a closed minded asshole.

    It's not a global conspiracy, it can be found on NASAs site, museum sites and many pro free mason sites. If you only take the time to look.

    Why don't I rule from the shadows? Because I am not a power hungry pig.

    Believe what you want to believe but I don't believe I asked you anyway.

  • great work u guys!

  • dude these guys are so fuckin smart its ridiculous

  • Well, that explains a lot, but it doesn't answer the question of why those blue papermate pens write better than the white papermate pens with the blue tip...perhaps another episode will solve this puzzle.

  • Dayum....

  • Comment removed

  • Good video, but the conspiracy theorists won't change their mind no matter what the facts presented.

  • You got that right! They're resistant to science and knowledge like a ducks back beads and repels water, its rediculous.

  • Great video.

  • This is a really good test. I wasn't sure how they were going to do the 2nd one. It makes sense though. Smart dudes.

  • Like your logic and education.

  • possibly the worst insult ive ever seen on youtube. how would you know anything about my education from that comment? sounds like its you with the flawed logic

  • Lol. Sounds like you don't seem to understand logic itself, or debate. Not only did you fail to prove why mythbusters is shit; but also why scientifically they are incorrect. So, in not providing any of those things, it was apparent that you didn't have anything to refute with, other than your opinion. So, my logic was flawless, because I called out your bullshit, and only your bullshit.

  • lol idiot saying "mythbusters is shit" is not the same as saying "mythbusters is scientifically incorrect" or are you a complete retard?

  • Aaaaw isn't that adorable. You butthurt? :D

  • you could be a politician with those question dodging skills youve got

  • Comment removed

  • Can you rephrase that statement in english, please?

  • The biggest thing that contradict the conspiracy around the moon landing is that the Russians would never except it.

  • yeah? and did the gov pay you to be an idiot, or are you always that way

  • I'm all for the mythbusters, but something tells me proving something wasn't done in a studio by testing in a studio is a horribly idea.

  • Would you suggest they have gone to the moon to test it? Can you cite specifically how the test was flawed? Pay very close attention to the specific claim they are testing.

  • As, they explain in the video, was they were not testing whether Apollo had been filmed in a studio, but rather whether a single light source could show non-parallel shadows in photos. They showed that non-uniform terrain could distort the shadows of a single light source. And that was the conspiracy theorist claim that was busted.

  • you could have just said "one light equals one shadow from each object" each object casts one shadow, so therefore there is only one light is present

  • I'm not sure how many different ways we can re-word what is obviously a fairly simple concept that some people are either too ignorant to understand or too caught up in their own little pet theory that the refuse to entertain even the simplest of notions which might contradict that theory.

  • who cares if we went to the moon or not...if they finally admitted to faking it then i still wouldnt give a shit...my life would not be affected at all and i would still be able to live my life....i mean really...who gives a fuck

  • And yet you felt compelled to comment on this video.

  • yes because i like the mythbusters..and the video is interesting...but i still dont give a fuck if we went to the moon

  • you dont care, but this is much bigger than you.. its an achivement of mankind. you opinion doesn't matter. In the future we can land on the moon again and colonise it, and then think about landing on mars etc etc, all this will be done long after you turn to bones and dust.

  • Oh god people are now saying this was a conspiracy? Can you guys just shut the fuck up and take it as it is?

  • MYTHBUSTERS WAS HIRED TO DO THIS OMG

  • Now, our government, according to the conspiracists general consensus, knew all the things that happened and it all went according to the plan. According to them, the collapse of the buildings was staged, the jihadists were trained deliberately, the "defense systems" of the US were sabotoged and on and on.. bad enough the government *did* know the jihadists were planning something like this and blew off the idea as absurd in their arrogant dismissal of what they were capable of, but to plan it?

  • ChaseBoom, the attackers thought they were going to topple the buildings over. That was the intention. The flight paths were chosen to topple the buildings into the densest population centers. They failed for two reasons. They could not get the planes low enough and the buildings were not constructed like conventional buildings of the time. Instead of 20,000 deaths, they got 3,500 or so. Not a full success, but not total failure.

  • why should there be conspiracies for this.....simple physics will tell you the shadows are being refracted

  • The government of the US is not capable of planning something that complex. They may have had knowledge that the attack was being planned (from the papers of the time the Jihadists thought the towers would topple over.. which might have been true if they were built like conventional buildings). No, what I object to is the abuse of the memory of the dead and nearly dead by nutcases with their own agendas.

  • I'm right along with you on this one. It is a dishonor... honor is meaning less and less in this world.

    Please take into account that those who dwell on conspiracies have a certifiable psychological condition.

  • OK, I'm not taking the position that the US did it, but I have to ask. If two dozen people from the other side of the world managed to plan and carry out the attacks, why would such a plan be too complex for some people on this side of the world to plan and carry out? What is so complex about smashing planes in to buildings?

    That the event *was* planned and *did* happen would suggest, on it's face, that your assertion that it was too "complex" to carry out is flatly false, no matter who did it.

  • they didnt even try the multiple lights on a flat topography...wtf

  • Is there even a way to make that happen? If they had two lights shining on the same object you would get two different shadows (out of the 10,000 pictures from Apollo there are no such examples of that), if they were using spotlights, i.e. one light shining on one object, one light shining on the second; then you would result in areas where the lights overlapped (again, no such examples in all of the photos from the Apollo missions.)...

  • Hehe, yeah. Might want to shift the idea around, though, Akamu. Most "conspiracies" that sound sci-fi *are* nutso (I was at ground zero on 9/11, so I get a bit hot about it from time to time :P). On part 2, there *was* a second light source. Reflected light :P

  • "(I was at ground zero on 9/11, so I get a bit hot about it from time to time :P)"

    Well being at ground zero wouldn't give you any special insight in to whether or not the US gov't played a role in the attack.

    Don't confuse the theory that that the towers were brought down with bombs and stuff like that with the theory that the gov't helped plan the attack or had knowledge of the attack in advance. These two theories far too often get lumped together, but they are worlds apart.

  • .... Nerd!

  • lol, ty for the constructive comment

  • i have been steadily browsing through these mythbuster videos, and i am a firm believer in the theories that the us governement staged 9-11 and that nasa is hiding evidence of martian pyramids. I admit that i nevr had complete faith in the moon landings (judging from the us governements lies in other fields) but these videos show UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE that cannot be IGNORED. Any conspiracy nut that still refuses to believe is just being stubborn.

  • Thats awesome man.

    Lol, "Large miniatures" ...oxymoron?

  • Yea I have to admit the evidence is pretty conclusive, the hoax theories are understandable to people without a background in science.