Added: 3 years ago
From: tonlitt
Views: 17,550
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (96)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Aha, the smoking gun is provided by the hot-dog Buzz Aldrin lifting his leg as he climbs down the ladder?

    IF Percy is correct that the 'video' does not match the 'still', that in itself is damning evidence.

  • check one page news d com for the entire story. 

  • Why does the moon have a fucking no-fly zone?!?!?!?

  • All very real.

  • There is no moon. The Moon, space and even the stars are all a government conspiracy!

  • @dprague well you cant even say you belive it so shut up ...

  • @receiver69 I love it when we can agree on something in YT land. Peace

  • @receiver69 you still think I am arguing FOR the conspiracy, you don't get it. Never mind.

  • Comment removed

  • @receiver69 I'm a big fan of science, despite what my profile may suggest. I grew up in a family of scientists and artist, I'm an artist with an appreciation for science. But I realize that science is also a belief system, its just based on empirical evidence instead of faith. Unfortunately, that empirical evidence often changes and new theories arise in its wake. I guess I am just skeptical of anything or anyone who claims they know the truth. Again, Money is a powerful motivator. Peace

  • @purenergyhealing - Science does not claim to know the truth. Truth (with a capital T) the business of philosophers and theologians not scientists. Science deals with empirical facts and evidence. Its provides an account of the universe that is the most reliable one available to humankind, given it can be independently verified.

    Science is not a belief system. Scientific theories change with new evidence. Religious doctrines do not - because they are based on faith not facts.

  • @CyeOutsider Consciousness is nothing more than what you believe, thoughts becomes reality, so therefore, ANY system of thought is a belief system....reality is thought. Everything is belief. The very act of living in a mystical leap of faith. Science can not explain consciousness. That is the job of those philosophers and theologians...marrying the two belief systems (the one based on what you see and the other on what is not there) is the job of human kind. Evolve your mind.

  • @receiver69 not that I totally believe all this stuff, but money is a powerful motivator and its not every scientist and engineer have to be corrupt, only those indoctrinated into the government/military system.

  • Will we ever know what they really did & what they are hiding with all their dodgy photos.

  • Wow, I want a camera & film that can survive gamma radiation & temps that reach 260°F (hotter than boiling) on the Moon's sunlit side! (Funny how an airport X-ray will still destroy a film if you forget it in your luggage, eh).

  • @JehanneDeLys my husband says it b/c the capsule and the camera were coated with a lead lining which blocks out all radiation. I have no idea if that is actually true. I am just a curious observer. Peace

  • @JehanneDeLys The film was kept in metal containers that prevented radiation from fogging the film's emulsion.

  • @JehanneDeLys The Apollo astronauts used what was, at the time, a special transparency film produced by Eastman Kodak under a NASA contract. The photosensitive emulsions layers where placed on an ESTAR polyester film base, which had previously been used primarily for motion picture film. The melting point of Estar is 490° F, although some shrinkage and distortion can occur at around 200° F. The cameras were protected inside a special case designed to keep them cool.

  • @dfrancocci Do you have a source for this 490 degree melting point? Kodak recommends ESTAR raw stock film be stored in a refridgerated enviroment.

  • Comment removed

  • @rmstorms I have to admit, I copied it off another website! However, the film was polyester based, and the melting point of polyester is around 250-260C (480-500F). Naturally, Kodak would not recommend storing the film at this temperature! The argument that the film could not survive the temperatures on the Moon is false, as there is only radiant heat on the Moon which could be reflected by the camera's shiny surface when the cameras were not in the shade.

  • @rmstorms I'm told that the information is in the following Kodak technical bulletin:

    ...kodak.com/eknec/documents/b­b/0900688a802b35bb/ti2598.pdf

  • @rmstorms decent film should be stored in a fridge because it preserves the quality of the emulsion and chemicals, nothing to do with the base, this is only the case with better films. Amateur films are not that sensitive to temp as the are made for general use so it doesn't matter. Nothing to do with the base material.

  • Why has the moon been abandonded? Why no more trips for decades? If it could have been completed using a computer of 1/10th power than the one I have now, then would it not be so much easier now?

    It's all bs.

  • @dprague because it costs a lot of money, you idiot.

    where do you think that money would come from? the american government doesn't give a shit about advancing science, not unless it can kill more people more efficiently.

  • IT's amazing how people were naive at the end of the 60'!! NASA liers! Great video!

  • What the conspiracy theorists fail too say is: The lunar surface is absorbing as much light as a lump of coal in comparison. The space suits are man-made WHITE. Enough with the shite!

  • @irishchrisc

    watch

    A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE MOON

  • @LifeRegenRevolution Watched it. Holes all over that also. This program is bollocks too. They are a bunch of morons. It seems that people who whole heartily want to believe this crap, Have no faith in human ingenuity. Have a poor grasp of physics.

  • @irishchrisc

    theres just you and me and we happen to  disagree

  • @LifeRegenRevolution Amen brother. i hope you find what you are looking for

  • If the radiation on the moon is much higher than on Earth would the radiation interfer with the film? Like Madam Curi's radiation discovery?

  • Some of these things they are picking at, like the pool of light, might just be things that were done during the printing of the photo. If you want to lighten up an area, you just shade the photographic paper with your hand for a small fraction of the time you're exposing it. This creates an effect just like the pool, and would be something you'd do if the photo had some exposure / contrast problems.

  • @sjh7132 watch the mythbusters episode on the moon hoax,there are rational explanations for these alleged anomalies.

  • @psycoelement

    I think you misunderstood my post, I was proposing a rational explanation for some of the things in this video. I don't believe it's a hoax.

  • @sjh7132 Sorry mate i should of been clearer,i am saying that though your explanation has merit, mythbusters came up with a simpler one for the photo anomalies.Glad to talk to a fellow skeptic

  • @psycoelement

    the myth busters show is a Bust

  • @sjh7132 The photograph with the supposed pool of light has been manipulated by Percy and the other liars sitting around that table. If you go and look at the actual original photo there is no fall off or pool of light. The entire picture is bright and clear. Percy has altered the photograph making it darker. Percy is nothing but a lair.

  • @CusterApollo

    you need  to watch

    APOLLO ZERO

  • @LifeRegenRevolution I don't think a hoax vid on Youtube is going to prove anything, but the vid itself is the hoax...

  • @CusterApollo

    i think you are bat shit crazy and Insane if you seriously think way back in 69 these 3 stooges jumped in a craft and traveled over 480,000 miles to the moon and back to earth with pinpoint precision and not a scratch on em' and everything is just ideally perfect ! Yay we went to the Moon yay , BULLSHIT

    its totally ridiculous and completely unrealistic , This was merely the set up for the Great 911 fraud in 01' also a hoax

  • @LifeRegenRevolution Actually they did go to the Moon and did return alive. They did that several times in fact. Neil Armstrong is a very private person and his demeanor has always been the same. No smoking gun there. Your supposition proves nothing. Name calling gets you nowhere. Grow Up. 911 was not an inside job. Terrorists did hijack planes and kill Americans. I suggest you actually present evidence to back your opinions next time you post.

  • @CusterApollo

    On 911, Please explain the Physics and Science to me on how Fragile Aluminum hollow Planes can pass through dense thick Steel bldgs as if the bldgs were made of paper and the plane suffers No deceleration, we see NO parts bending creaking or breaking off etc.

    explain that mr. know it all ? Moon landing vids were faked just as 911 plane vids were fake

  • @LifeRegenRevolution Why are hoaxers so angry? And why do you people have to attack and name call? Grow up! As for 911, it was not a hoax. It did happen. All the questions you have should be researched and answered by the person asking the questions, i.e. YOU. Try that, then get back to me...

  • @LifeRegenRevolution force is equal to mass times acceleration. planes are super massive objects moving at hundreds of miles an hour on impact. everyone saw the planes hit the buildings.

  • @LifeRegenRevolution 9 11 was all done by holographic projections and detonators

  • @LifeRegenRevolution sorry ime a bit late dont usually comment on you tube but though now would be appropriate

  • @CusterApollo

    Neil Armstrong is obviously a very depressed, dejected emotionally disturbed man, and the reason is hes carrying around a ton of guilt about what he did by Lying to us

  • @LifeRegenRevolution Once again your opinion and supposition into the psychological makeup of Neil Armstrong is in error. Your bias may also be playing a role in your conclusions.

  • @CusterApollo

    Neil Armstrong is a Liar, and the man appears in Public as clinically depressed, angry, irritable , dejected and disturbed. He does NOT exhibit in any way manner or form the normal behavior  youd expect from a man who performed one of the most historic events in mankind and positive achievments.

    He looks dower, and down, like a guy who at any moment wants to slit his wrists or something. He presents himself as a total sour pus.

  • @CusterApollo

    Armstrong defintiely does NOT display the normal human characteristics of a man who walked on the Moon. He drags himself out in public and at his press conference like a man who just killed his best friend and its eating him up inside

    he looks very troubled and disturbed, think what you want about the Moon landing, but NO ONE can deny Armstrongs behavior since this event has been absolutely downright bizarre and inconsistent

  • @CusterApollo

    and by the way that famous Press conference where all 3 men spoke about the event at the time, looks like more like a trial for murder, than a few national heroes greeting the public and sharing what they witnessed. its completely OBVIOUS they didnt want to be there at all, and displayed NO enthusiasm or excitement whatsoever in sharing the info.

    Totally abnormal and inconsistent with supposedly 3 men that changed history ? of course

  • @CusterApollo

    Interesting how BILL KAYSING was right the entire time ; ) Turns out guys like YOU are the real true ' kooks ' , you believe anything and everything thats ' official '

    You are the same kind of intellectual lightweight and dolt that fully believes also that 911 was merely due to nothing but 19 crazy Arab video game nerds waving box cutters flying planes.

    another official story MYTH and scam done for Money, power

  • @CusterApollo

    i would urge you to watch

    A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE MOON

  • it was faked, research. nixon ordered it.

  • In my lifetime I witnessed, first-handedly, one Ukrainian moviemaker, putting little clues in a Soviet propaganda film, he was directing, to let the viewers know, that he did not take the matter seriously. For once, the distances on the mile posts along the road were denominated in prices of popular kinds of bottled Russian vodka. He-he.

  • So where are the people today that faked it? Why put little clues in the photographs as Percy claims if you can't just later say "We faked it, here's how we faked it"? These people need to step back and look at the bigger picture.

  • How can you be higher than 6ft? There are no hils and craters on the moon ?

    WTF.

  • According to Jarrah, the only people who could receive the signal which was

    2ghhz, were the people at Honeysuckle Creek who were had nasa employees in Australia, according to Jarrah even Jordrell bank could not have received the signal, nor ham radio owners either, Im sure Jordrell Bank did receive the tracking signall from Apollo 11as they have a graph of the landing itself, surely the notion they could have Faked the landing is Far Fetched

  • Just a thought but if its really that radioactive wouldn't it have spoiled the film in that camera?

    What means did they have to protect them?

  • I started to watch this program with an open mind but they do not know what they are talking about.

    The second photograph was a processed image issued by NASA with a note saying "Processed image. Not to be used for research". The original image shows the whole background landscape. This is a fundamental error on behalf of these self-appointed experts. How can they be taken seriously after that? They either didn't know or they were deliberately trying to mislead. Shameful

  • Hi WalterWabbit,

    that's interesting, but: how do You know? Could it be seen in this film or do You know because of information from somewhere else?

    Thanks for answering!

  • Hi Wollmamaguckn.

    The original image is common knowledge. The one they used is a publicity shot altered by NASA. It's not a secret. That's why I was shocked almost that a program like this can not be aware of such a thing. These people are talking as if they are the definitive knowledge on the lunar landings when really they are not at all. This program has probably fuelled many conspiracists over the years, yet it is based on false info. Very poor TV

  • Hi WalterWabbit,

    thanks for Your quick answer and the Info.

    Btw: Your answer gave You one "thumbs down" within 3 hours already ;-)

    I am not since long in this "moonlanding-hoax-business, that's why I didn't know about it.

    I will go looking for the fotos in the net.

    I also watched some films of this guy, who is playing JamesBond at the beginning of his "reports". To be honest: I wasn't shure, if he's serious all the time.

  • (had to make a second post, as the first one was too long):

    Some of his experiments, to show, that the landings were hoaxes are almost funny- he doesn't even care about the difference of the movement of a flag in air or in a pure vacuum. Almost seems like a practical joker to me.

    Thanks again.

  • The conspiracists don't like it when people argue against them. They may show a thumbs down but they won't give any argument why.

    I'll try and find the original shots and let you know

  • I personally think that the mission to the moon has been planned out, and carried out. But I don't think they managed to get there and therefore had a backup plan (the makettes of the moon) in case the mission failed. Which think it did. All the radio signalling was real. All the dudes at the monitors screen their adventure thought that it was real. But I strongly think it was a cover screen for their failure.

  • Hahaha. I like the bull in thebeginning falling over.

  • It was a cow.

  • No I think you are right.

  • ha ha ha. You never know. It could be a lesbian cow. They can get confused sometimes. Not too bright creatures.

  • Well let me put out this little predicament. If man has never landed on the moon than how is it you can point a super powerful information laser at the moon and pick up a reflection from the retro reflector placed on the moon by the Apollo 15 mission.

  • How thick are you? Going all the way to the moon is the achievement. Taking a photo is not.

  • The exposure, in the shadows, must've been difficult especially.

  • I bet that manual exposure with no meter must've been a bitch.

  • I Would love to sit all these People especially, Marcus & Mary (Make A Nice Couple) & let them discuss all this with Aeronautical & Aerospace Engineers, Scientists Astronomers & maybe the men who built Apollo, who put it together, Than See how well there "Findings" fair out.

    The Shuttle even skims the Allen Belts on earth orbital Missions today, Its all about how long your exposed to the Radiation, the Apollo Astronauts simply didn't stay in the belts long enough.

  • Sorry, skoole13, but Apollo 13 was nothing more than a sham.

    Apollo 13 never went anywhere near the moon. At best each flight was nothing more than a venture into low earth orbit, and Apollo 13 was used as a ploy to get the general public re-interested in Apollo, so that the sham artists at NASA could bilk another couple of billion dollars out of the suckers out there. It worked superbly because the funding was there for the fake Apollos 14-17!

    We never put men on the moon..Live with it!

  • So if you cant survive the radiation in space does that mean Apollo 13 was a fake because they got damn close to the moon.

  • What does he mean when he says you can make a two hour programme about what's in the visor.

    I'd love to know more about that aspect of the conspiracy theory. The only thing obviously strange is the footprints in the dust. surely the landing itself would have blasted the dust meters away.

    Can any conspiracy buffs out there elaborate?

  • people people, make fucking playlists, and respond to the video AFTER the current clip, not BEFORE it. thanks

  • Go fuck yourself in the face, MEpenis.

  • I don't even know what that means, but I'm glad you check your own comments after seven months. Fruit loop...

  • you get an email informing you of comments, like the one you've just read.

  • Again, listen to Marcus Allen's comment here.. THIS is why the Pro Apollo Nutters have a hard time realizing that it was a sham! PRIDE!

  • Well...sure, it's a hoax if you're going to resort to logic. I say believe in N.A.S.A., pay your taxes and pray for the best.

  • Please explain how the Soviets were also duped? Not once but on all the manned landings? Height of the Cold War and yet we are led to believe by the Moon Hoax nutters that the U.S. fooled the Soviets monitoring every moon landing?.

  • TNA400 aerial at Simferopol was used to track Apollo 8 /10/11/12 including telemetry, and crew audio.

    But the hoaxers don't want to talk about the fact that the russians have substantiated the fact that the Apollo landings were genuine. David Percy discounting the suns reflection from lunar regolith in a vacuum is hilarious. These people are fools.

  • @oswego22,

    Thanks for the info.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more