it looked like something was bending over..but i think it was the other astronauts cuff/equipment while he was filming...like when i take apic of my stupid thumb!
"He worked forjohnson space center" No he didn't "Ok he knew a guy that worked worked forjohnson space center" No he didn't " No but you can imagine what it would be like if he did"
looks to me like he was worried that whatever that was standing there was going to interfear with his ride home and he tackled it.Then switched channels
They knew aliens where watching them the whole time of the mission. On the radio NASA deleted parts of the radio conversation which reveals aliens exist. If the astronauts saw a extra terrestrial craft the code name would be badsanta.
yes there was a guy in a black outfit there... they where under enormous pressure and equipment failure was common place so having the Cameras on the Moon fail was a possibility also Suit Failure too Astronauts to this day Rehearse and train in Tanks and in Zero Gee Simulators for Months Before Launch this was a Training film DUhhhh they could switch between studio shots and Moon seamlessly if a Catastrophe occurred that is what I would do to avoid mass panic Remember War of the Worlds.
@Dunndeer Why would there be "mass panic" if some astronauts died on Moon? Was there any panic when they almost died in Apollo 13? When they actually died in Challenger and Columbia?
If the astronauts had died on Moon, what could a studio film have helped? The whole world knew the astronauts names. They couldn't have "hidden" a fatal accident.
wtf was that. looked like just a pair of legs were following him around. or a little lizard looking thing. idk. i hate youtube, never know what is real.
@Lip135 -- only hoax-believers cult members who just believe made-up stories because they like to hear fantasies think it was a "hoax."
Anyone who can think for himself and who understands some basic physics can prove that the hoax-cult leaders (the main published self-proclaimed "experts" promoting the hoax-theory) are all frauds.
well the chinese are going to the moon in 2020 so we will know because if they dont find the lunar rover or the usa flag then we know they faked it and technology was shit in 1969 id have been surprised if they even made it into orbit with that old technology
@prosperomage Ahh, he's just one of those dumb kids who think all these new computers are the first ones, invented in this very year, lol...just ignore him :D
i dont doubt it i would trust the chinese even less than i trust the usa but does it matter if we fake missions to the moon or mars i mean look at star trek they made that so well some people couldnt figure out how the tricks in the series like the sliding doors and the view screen and communicators were done and besides it will give people some excitement from thier boring work lives
@shredmaster100 the real difference is what people should have in mind, and that is that Star trek is openly known as a science fiction tv show and apollo was sold as a true event, and what´s worse, was sold to you with your money and the money of millions of naive taxpayers who were deceited for their growing proud of being american, the land where dreams come true.. give a fucking break.
oh yeah i wouldnt trust anything the american government tells u and the mission to mars will be the most expensive faked mission in history the only good thing is average people today can buy a telescope so powerfull that they can prove whether its on the way to mars or not hopefully
technology was crap in 1969 and a car today has more computer power than the tin can spacecraft and how do you account for the fact that the landscapes are exactly the same in all the moon missions i mean theres footage of a hill from one mission and in the next mission its the same hill and yet they were supposed to be in a different are also theres footage of an astronaut on the moon removing his sun visor he should be dead from the radiation and heat of the sun itsfaked accept it
1. The landscapes ARE NOT the same on all 6 missions, you're just talking shit.
2. "Dead from radiation and heat"...because he took the dark visor up for a moment? Again, you're just talking shit, you don't have a clue. Raising the dark visor didn't let in a deadly flood of radiation or heat in as you claim.
I assume you're in school, try asking a science teacher.
how can a pice of tin foil like the spacecraft was made from stop gamma radiation going through it duh i mean its as if u stepped into a nuclear reactor when you leave the earths magnetic field why do you suppose the space station orbits below the field because otherwise the people on board would be dead in hours and if they really went to the moon theyd have needed 1foot thick layers of lead shielding to stop the radiation
Look kid, all your claims of gamma radiation, etc....where THE FUCK are you getting that from? Are you pulling the numbers out of your ass? Did Elvis tell you that?
Get an education before making all those silly shit claims.
well who are u how do i know your not a 8 year old kid and wheres your science degree if you know so much have you been to mit princeton or harvard i dont think so m8
OK fair enough my credentials are a question mark to you, so you tell me....WHERE are you getting all these "facts" from about the radiation & heat exposure? Tell me WHAT exactly the figures are. Please don't fall back on "durhhh...a lot, it would be teh deadly".
Some actual numbers that you can back up, or STFU.
i admit im not a scientist im getting my info from nasa itself which has stated that if they are to send a man to the moon or mars they would need to give the astronauts special injections of a substance that could block the radiation and stop them from getting a dangerous dose of radiation exposure they also need to generate their own magnetic field to block cosmic rays as i said earlier why did none of the astronauts get cancer from their exposure to cosmic rays doesnt make sense
@shredmaster100 Oh you read a "what if" article about going to Mars? I have to ask again "cancer from cosmic rays"...what level of exposure are we talking about that would cause cancer,how much are you saying they recieved? You are making up shit with no numbers to back up your claims.Of the 9 flights to the moon with 27 men, I think 20 of them did get early stage cataracts from their radiation exposure when they got older..the exact number escapes me, YOU look it up if you're that interested.
i dont bloody know man as i said im just going on what they said but in my opinion the mission to the moon must have been faked because of one important video i saw on youtube of neil armstrong testing the lunar landing craft he had to eject because the craft was so unstable he could not fly it without it wanting to tip over so what chance was there he could have made the perfectly controlled landing we saw in 1969
Oh my you saw a prototype in early test where Armstrong ejected, that means they never improved on it so it must be fake, that's PERFECT reasoning and logic.
My...God.
You really are too stupid to have an opinion.
Leave the thinking to others and get a job in the fast food business kid.
heres one for you is it coincidence that one of the 3 original apollo astronauts who died in a fire in the simulator was going to talk and expose the whole scam and his family think thats what happened as well they were deliberatley killed
@Eddytje1 well take it like that what u see on mythbusters is they actually do tests under the same conditions as on the moon "Flag in vacuum and so on shadows with only one light source and so on" have u ever seen one of the hoax videos where they do the same thing under equally exact circumastances?? Of course not because all conspiracy videos about the moon are not about facts. they are all about taking a thing out of the subject dont tell u the whole story and make it sound logical
@bushbasher46 Stop believing in self preclaimed scientists and try to face the truth. The moon conspiracy is really THE WORST FAMOUS CONSPIRACY THERE IS. everything they state or show u is either obviously alterd or a half-truth from the REAL story. Sorry but they tell u about the stars about the flag about pictures and so on. This is bullshit. YOU CANT PAY OF MORE THAN 400'000 PEOPLE!! AND U CANT FAKE MOONSTONE. EVERYONE who KNOWS about GEOLOGY can confirm that.
if you have seen Apollo 18 the movie its base on a true story about 3 guys who went to the moon and came back dead. this is because they were "infected by the rock formed crab aliens"
@djwondermike And another guy thinks he knows shit about radiation just because he watched a video on youtube of some self preclaimed idiot who want people to believe his foolish ideas while all facts of our physics and biology say it works and u will survive. and if u dont believe in physics ask urself why we have lights and cars and trains and planes and nuclear reactors or are they all just a hoax :O???
lmao, no one will ever leave the earth to head for another planet, if it would be possible we would already have colonies on the moon or other planets, Please don´t tell me fifty years in space exploration have passed without any action because of another reason.
P.S.: Greets to the scuba divers in the ISS pools watch?v=rvo1svbyLbM
@djwondermike You are either ill-informed, gullible, delusional, full of shit, or all of the above.
There is a rather significant difference between low-gravity and slow-motion, and as well a significant difference between the vacuum of space and a swimming pool.
Well, we don't have colonies or cities on the ocean floor, despite sending the equivalent of astronauts (divers and aquanauts) spaceships (submersibles and submarines) and even space stations (SEALAB I and II), yet no cities and colonies.
Their lack is not evidence or proof of such efforts been a hoax, so why should their lack be evidence or proof of Apollo been such?
@Cosmostrevor because you say so? ha good joke, I agree with you on something here, theres an impossible thing in this matter and that is travelling beyond Van allen belts with current technology, hence going to the moon. The russian that were beating your sorry asses big time knew that as well US government and NASA corrupt team. GET OVER IT. happy new year
@petrone2006rosario Do you have any evidence to support the claim that no man has walked on the moon? NASA proved the moon landings to be real on July 20th 1969. The burden of proof that it was all fake is on the hoaxers whom can't identify low gravity form slow motion.
@Cosmostrevor You can see that the flag is moving, its impossible because its a vacuum space there. Notice the sand when they jump, it falls down like it does in earth, it must falls down slowly. and lastly, watch the video, banned in america: proof of fake moonlanding. They fake almost everything. I do believe that they are succesful in getting to outerspace but not in the moon.
@Cosmostrevor yes, all books that fisically and mathematically prove that crossing the radiation belts require several meters thick of shielding to any craft with living being onboard for avoiding being fried.It has been studied and proveed. watch jarrah white´s vids or ufotv documentary as well.
@petrone2006rosario -- There are no books which prove that crossing the radiation belts with living beings on board requires several meters thick of shielding.
If you think there are, give me a SPECIFIC reference. Please do not just refer to a multiple-hour long series of Jarrah White bullshit. I've seen enough of his crap. He fills up time with lots of irrelevant sensationalism.
If you think one of his videos gives the relevant information, then refer me to the specific time point in it.
@petrone2006rosario -- This video was created by a guy who did a green-screen overlay of himself walking into a clip from an old Apollo video just to see how many people would believe it was something really weird.
He has another video around someplace where he explains how he did it.
And the original NASA video (which has been available for 40 years) doesn't have the weird guy walking into it.
@hunchbacked -- Yeah. I saw the original someplace.
I also saw the green-screen video overlay that he used.
Look for them if you think it's important. I'm just here for entertainment and don't have much time for this Apollo stuff.
(Oh ... but if I do get some time, I'll take a series of photos of models to prove my point about that diagram ... and about perspective in photos in general.)
@hunchbacked -- Why do you give me advice that I should "take photos with models" after what I said? I guess it may be because English is not your first language.
No, that cannot be it. My statement was too simple for even that explanation. It must be that you don't bother to read what I write.
My words were: "if I do get some time, I'll TAKE A SERIES OF PHOTOS OF MODELS to prove my point about that diagram."
Some time you might try actually reading what I write.
@NASAvsPETE1 -- You make such a positive statement about who did what, you must have access to the U.S. intelligence alterations, with references to who did them.
Post your information, with references, or else it must be assumed that you're just making it up.
@DRMusicRoom 12 men were on the moon always 2 at a time. And if i was u i wouldnt believe every video u see on youtube this one for instance is a fake. Greenscreen and photoshop and so on make a lot of things possible.
@DRMusicRoom theres an astro-not running behind the fake module and on the right you´ll see the moonset janitor picking up a bottle of Coke, the one that the lady from australia saw.
Ahhh the internet...where the ignorant hoaxers can get on a soap box and delcare their stupidity. By the way, most of the hoaxers are KIDS. Beware, they may actually graduate from middle school and be the guy who cooks your burger or digs your ditches!
@charliegoodboy The internet is where all the hoaxers are to declare their stupidity, but you continue to fight and debate with KIDS allll day, everyday, ((((WHY??)))) This makes your lowlife ass even more stupider to even acknowledge them. I'm not a HOAX believer, as a matter of a fact, the only thing that I call a HOAX is the fake ass moon landings, because it is TRULY FAKE. MOST events that involves killing by the government, like Kennedy or 911, is not a HOAX, it is cold-blooded murder...
NASA PLAYING YOU ALWAYS Earth Humans got no right to leave out of orbit, this is universal law , not American, or Russian left orbit ever in our history......
The solar constant is 1.361 kilowatts per square meter.1.361 kW/m², is equivalent to 1.95 calories per minute per square centimeter, or 1.95 langleys (Ly) per minute. 1 watt (W) is equal to one joule per second (J/s or m2kgs-3). 1361 watts is 1361 joules per second. 1361 joules per second = 13610000000 ergs per second. 1 erg = 6.24150974 × 10^11 electron volts. Is this correct? Do the conversion yourself and see if it checks out. We never left low earth orbit then and we can't do it now.
NASA's version of science doesn't count clown. I would burn your ass alive on the subject to even think to challenge it, you are a Wikifreak. A real scientist will question everything that is questionable to be conclusive. I experiment, I don't deal with fake ass NASA bullshit that you and your likes be ripping off to people. Copied and pasted evidence from fake ass websites. Neutrino faster than Speed of Light? If this is true, Einstein's theories are eradicated. What about physics fool?
@GUARDIANtrooper Just for the record: I don't relay on Youtube or any other websites, hoax-promoting or not. I relay on 50 years of scientifical journals from all over the world.
I don't have prejudices (like You about evil governments controlling and lying about EVERYTING). So, I don't have to desperately call everything that goes against any prejudicies a LIE.
@YDDES What would you say if half of the 50 years of scientific journals were WRONG? The nature of science is change, which means, 50 years of old research may much be inconclusive to that change. Scientist make new discoveries and mistakes everyday. But old obsolete material are your reliable sources. My reliable sources are experimental, science has no ending, nor do stupidity. If one lies about everything, what do you call them? Do you trust people that keep secrets about everything?
@GUARDIANtrooper I didn't say I relay on 50 year old scientifical journals. I say I relay on scientifical journals written during the last 50 years (when it comes to space travel). Scientifical theories may change sometime, yes. But, every theory or discovery has to be consistent with knowledge which is proven beyond any doubt.
I've not heard any renowned scientist from any country say that the lunar landings were faked. And, I've never seen any "hoaxer" describe HOW it was all faked. Cont...
@YDDES How are you going to prove something that is inconsistent? Science can't be totally proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, because scientific changes are constantly. If you don't believe me, look at E=mc2, it is about to be eradicated. If so, what the fuck do you think about physics? And this time answer the question, you are doing the same bullshit that AB2 do when he don't want to answer the questions. And videos were shown on how all the bullshit moon landings were all faked....
@GUARDIANtrooper E=mc2 is not "about to be eradicated". A couple of scienists believe they MAY have discovered something that may change it a bit. Not proven yet. E=mc2 is a base for the GPS system. Without Einsteins relativity theory it wouldn't function. If the physical theories were "wrong", You wouldn't sit in front of a computer spreading more or less ignorant comments around the world. Nor would You travel by air or car.
@YDDES No idiot it is, nothing is faster than the speed of light, time cannot bend. Don't try to through curve balls, that shit don't work with me fool. Einstein said nothing could travel faster than the speed of light. It wasn't a couple of scientist, it was a host of scientists (CERN <--IS NOT A FEW) and the Americans have/had the option of testing it long with the many thousands of behind checks. And about is very possible and you still didn't answer the question as usual Mr. AB2 Evader...
@GUARDIANtrooper Well, You haven't answered MY questions, so why should I answer Yours? Besides, I have no interest talking to individuals resorting to namecalling and bad language.
@YDDES I guess you calling me a HOAXER is not calling names and insults. Up to this point my language never stopped you until I backed you stupid ass in a corner punching the living shit out of you making your ass submit. FINE... Run bitch, runaway just like the rest when I cut your lying ass in half AB2. You know you have no chance with me with your bullshit. You hide behind your puppets to avoid me, I will destroy your fucking pride. Only two channels, IMAGINE IF I CHEATED LIKE YOU DO...
@GUARDIANtrooper ...cont: It's not enough to say: They lied about everyting. You must also be able to explain HOW they did what they actually did. For example: Where did the rockets/spaceships go after launch? How could people from all over the world track them all the way to Moon and back? Exactly how did they fake the vast landscape, the sunlight from a black sky, the vacuum and 1/6g? You must be able to answer ALL of those questions, plus a lot more, and not just say: They lied about it.
It's amazing what you can Photoshop In and Out of things to make them look real..... There is never smoke without fire and their is so much smoke around the moon landings.
@glenwoofit First of all it's mostly dust and second of all rockets use hydrogen and liquid oxygen which of course is going to create exhaust gasses.Study before flapping your gums over rubbish.
@MrCriticOfAll The Saturn V used liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen in its second and third stage. The lunar lander used Aerozine 50 and nitrogen tetroxide. All rockets of course create exhaust gasses, but most of them are not visible in vacuum.
@YDDES You lie everywhere you go... A plume should show up in any environment. You can see them in space very visibly on every vessel even when they are just trying to keep the vessel in it's orbit. You are completely full of shit and I didn't even call you a bitch this time motherfuckers, LMAO!!
@GUARDIANtrooper Oh, I'm glad to see You are alive and well, at least physically...
Look at "Saturn 5! Part Four" about 3:50 here on Youtube. There You'll see how a Saturn throws it's lower stages away. Only when the main engines exhaust gasses hit rocketparts they are visible. Otherwise they are totally invisible in vacuum.
Clearly, it's not me who is a liar and full of it here...
@YDDES It's ok to say shit, stop being a pussy, lol!! Remember dude, we are talking about a HOAX versus the TRUTH, don't forget that... They blot out stars they blotted out the plume trying to blot out the stars. Did that make any sense to you at all or do you just refuse to swim in clean water versus a gigantic toilet with shit in it? If you see shit in a toilet what would you do when it is broken? Would you try to fix it like I do? Would you just ignore it? Or would you just, COVER IT UP...?
@GUARDIANtrooper I cite You: " A plume should show up in any environment. You can see them in space very visibly on every vessel even when they are just trying to keep the vessel in it's orbit." I just showed You to a video showing a Saturn rocket firing its main engines in vacuum with NO visible exhaust gasses. Can You admit You were wrong?
I cite You again: "They blot out stars they blotted out the plume trying to blot out the stars." Where? What do You actually mean?
@YDDES How are you going to see a plume sometimes, it a fucking plume, WTF? LMAO! You can't have it both was dude, you could either see it or not, just google all videos with visible plumes and there you have it. NASA is blotting out the stars and in their attempt to do so, it is affecting everything else that supposed to be visible. Too many questions make too many anomalies for the skeptic, which creates a HOAX in question. Would you question an obvious anomaly? Don't lie you have no choice...
@GUARDIANtrooper So, You mean that NASA somehow "erased" the plumes from the Saturns engines? Why? And HOW??? In the 60's that wasn't possible to do on films an videos. Maybe on stills. Understand this: MOST, but not ALL rocket fuels create exhaust plumes that are invisible in vacuum. Depends on the chemicals used. Just as simple as that. Check facts. No evil doings by NASA and every other space rocket launcher. Continued...
@YDDES It is call video manipulation, the same shit they did to your brain, which is the reason why you are here. If it was impossible to change the contrast and dapper videos in the 60s, then it was impossible to go to the moon... We are talking about main engines dude, don't run it off you know what I mean. Understand this: If you can see the plume on small engines, the main should be very visible, especially during take off, just as simple as that, check your fiction.
@GUARDIANtrooper ...continuing: "Blotting out the stars"??? Where? On every film shot in outer space? How? And why? Haven't You understood that stars can't be seen on a photograph/film where there is a properly exposed, big sunlit object in the field of view? I can't believe that You are so uneducated, and still think You know more than all experts who have seen these films and photos for 50 years.
@YDDES WHERE, HOW, WHY the stars are blotted? WTF? Why are there debates about the stars? In how many videos do you see stars? You would think by now if they could clone a human without a head they could build a fucking camera that could record stars in any condition whatsoever. I guess your ignorant ass don't understand that you are debating against experts that contest your stupid bullshit. If you were right and all you say is true then why is there even any debates, experts vs experts fool?
@GUARDIANtrooper There are "debates" because there are so many totally ignorants like You, without the slightest knowledge about physics, photography, astronomy and many other things.
Ignorants who believe those who sell lies in books and videos to the gullible, more than scientists with real education and knowledge.
@YDDES If I don't know anything about physics, photography and astronomy like your fake ass NASA statistics suggest, then why in the fuck do you con't to challenge the shit? I'm a hazardous to your bullshit schemes, which is the reason why you clowns have no choice but to get your knees dirty. Keep sucking, the truth will eventually cum...
@GUARDIANtrooper Yes let's talk truth - You have little evidence, beyond your own speculation, to support your claim that they blotted out anything, .. if you want to debate something real.. try the scientific evidence, 3 minerals first discovered on the Moon by Apollo missions, with many studies done on them by institutions around the world. Some done in the early 70s, I challenge you to disprove these conclusive studies, otherwise..you lack any ability to reason or weigh evidence.
@death0metal You can use all the accounts you want, your shit still stink and a HOAX is too evident, that is why you bozos are here defending it. The truth needs no defense at this magnitude fool... Your evidence is conjured from the perpetrators that sent you here. Debaters versus bullshit believes the moon landing was a HOAX, understand now? Your claimed minerals discovered is petrified wood, meteorite rocks modified from the arctics, DECLASSIFIED. Too many anomalies arouse the skeptic mind...
@GUARDIANtrooper "Your evidence is conjured..." And yet you cannot disprove the science as I challenged you to, can you ? You have nothing really against it.. It is interesting with hoax believers, they won't present any evidence, they will just demand explanations for anomalies or what they interpret as odd or they can't explain... weak weak arguments when put up against the science.
@death0metal First of all clown, I don't believe in Hoaxes, I believe the ones that we call our leaders are liars and schemers, their works are tagged as Hoaxes. I don't trust them or those who support their bullshit. If there wasn't any evident dumb ass there wouldn't be a debate now would it? You sound like a complete fool. If you have so much proof then why debate on this videos, especially this stupid ass video? That is why I followed you here, you are a fucking troll YDDES, fool yourself...
ok, people thinking this is all a hoax, why don't you buy a really good telescope, and look at the moon.....you WILL see proof from flags, and even footprints. i know this because my friend has a $4,000 telescope, and he showed me.
@skotkim0129 So this telescope has a mirror with a diameter of 200 m? Wow, this must be a big garden.
Do not get me wrong, I am no hoax believer. But there is no Earth-bound telescope with the used resolution to see the Apollo artifacts. Even Hubble can not take images of these small objects.
But now we have the newest LRO pictures presenting detailed photos of the landingsites.
@skotkim0129 do you know how big of a telescope you'd need to be able to see flags and shit on the surface? it would have to be the size of you friends house
prosperomage and CHsaraBs, tell me you ain't serious, future journeys will last much longer, why then not establish a base on the moon to facilitate this, after all we went once, NOT, the astronauts were shy, I have never, in my whole life ever heard such a pathetic excuse for three obvious liars, Elvis was described as a shy country boy but he could go on stage and give a knockout performance every time and he didn't ''fly to the moon, did he?'' or maybe we could make him, we have the means.
@rudbrps You seem to think you're pretty clever, messing with people to prove a point. You're the only person who knows for certain the video is a fake, so suddenly you are the enigma of intelligence and objective thinking. Nice work - you found a few nutjobs on youtube who ate your reinforcing bullshit. You're no better than a ufo hoaxer or a guy dressed up as bigfoot. But I'm sure your reasoning is a lot more sophisticated than those guys. Have a nice day.
ur link didnt work, send it again, i ll have a look, and i looked at my evidence and i said all abt it what it think. now send me ur link. this time a bit better one.
"oh good greif" lol. and i m being silly? listen to ur self man " dust speed was so fast thats why it didnt land on the pads" ? what is that suppose to mean. now look the neil's foot print pic. it was right next to the ship wasn't it. but arround the foot print u dont see and smooth dusted surface, u c his foot print and rough small stones arround it. if a big amount of dust was blown that surface would have been nice and smooth.
@robinkhaira1 -- The photos that I gave a link to (and yes, the link DOES work) are from Apollo 11. But they are close-up views. Your view at 2:35 in your referenced video is too far away to see the differences in the surface texture.
Look at my photo if you want to discuss the difference in the surface. Or else make your own comparison of CLOSE-UP views.
(Everything I say can be independently verified. I cannot make up any of it. Anyone can check it out for themselves.)
u r just not gonna believe it r u? there u can clearly see that there is no difference in the surface, that module has been placed there. u live in the fanatasy, m done mate, there is no point banging my head to the wall.
@robinkhaira1 --You are refusing to look closely at your own evidence.
My photos are close-ups of the same area from the same mission.
Did you look at them or not?
This has NOTHING to do with mere "belief" for anyone who actually LOOKS at the evidence and thinks for himself.
Either look at the close up photos or else you are admitting that you don't want to actually understand the differences in surface texture. The difference is clearly visible.
How come we made 6 journeys of 230 thousand miles without loss of life and since then with all our advanced technology have never gone higher than 400 miles and lost 14 astronauts, people who believe the moon landings are deluding themselves, look at the first interview with Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins, do they look like men who have just achieved mankinds greatest ever feat, no sir, embarassed, just like little kids who have been caught lying, I would have been dancing on the desk top.
@thecubanism After Apollo the priorities have changed to operate in LEO. There is no benefit to reply a short trip to the Moon. Future moon missions will last much longer, so there are many things to develop and design (rocketry, equipment, radiation shielding for long duration). This is expensive and needs time.
The three astronauts look like men, who only want to go home to meet their families. They all, especially Armstrong, were shy. They were astronauts and pilots (cont.)
They were not trained to speak in public. They were trained to do their job.
It is not a real proof to compare the actions or the behavior of some people with actions you would do. You are not the astronaut, you can only speculate.
@thecubanism -- Distance has nothing to do with loss of life.
Shuttle had accidents that could not happen with Apollo because it was made differently.
Challenger was destroyed by bad o-rings on solid booster motors. Apollo did'nt have solid boosters or o-rings.
Columbia was destroyed by debris from the rocket hitting its wing. Apollo didn't have wings and didn't have the space ship hung underneath the front of the rocket motor.
Suggestion: Learn something before you say stupid stuff.
@thecubanism -- I've known lots of engineers over the past 50 years. None of them are very good at speaking in front of any kind of an audience. And espeically an audience that includes the whole world.
In fact, most people are kind of shy about speaking in front of such a large audience.
Thank you for this pertinent reminder of how easy it is to fake things.
On the subject of faking things..
I still can't see how an airliner managed to fit in it's entirety through the 16 foot diameter hole that I saw in the live footage that appeared just after the pentagon strike 10 years ago. one has to conclude, that fakery is not only the province of youtube posters...
@Swallabat -- You're right. It would be completely unreasonable for an approximately 16 foot diameter cylinder to make an approximately 16 foot diameter hole in something that it hits.
Thank you for this pertinent reminder of how easy it is to fake things.
On the subject of faking things..
I still can't see how an airliner managed to fit in it's entirety through the 16 foot diameter hole that I saw in the live footage that appeared just after the pentagon strike 10 years ago. One might conclude, that fakery is not only the province of youtube posters... What a complicated world we live in nowadays...
Also I have seen this footage used on a Discovery Channel special about the Apollo missions, and they use this footage. Not the footage of rudbrbs stepping near the LEM, but you can see him running across the landscape in the background. I don't know how you got your doctored footage to Discovery, but congrats rudbrbs, your a star!!
Hey rudbrbs, last time you posted this video you said it belonged to someone's grandfather who worked at NASA, it might have been yours. Now you claim this is still NASA footage just with you inserted into it. Why didn't you include the footage of "you" running across the landscape in the background? Actually you took the time to show "yourself" running across the landscape in slow motion and you even magnified it for us. Why the change of story, someone talk to you or send you a message?...
@robinkhaira1 -- Just because someone is a U.S. citizen doesn't mean they follow everthing the lying overly-aggressive, power-hungry U.S. government says. We've got a bunch of corrupt bastards in power. And I've been in opposition to pretty much everything the U.S. government has done ever since they ramped up the war in Vietnam (that's before Apollo went to the moon, in case you don't know your history.)
it looked like something was bending over..but i think it was the other astronauts cuff/equipment while he was filming...like when i take apic of my stupid thumb!
Rapierfighter 1 day ago
why is there a "national geographic" logo in the corner when the static is on screen? 0:31
AmericaTheEnslaved 1 day ago
"He worked forjohnson space center" No he didn't "Ok he knew a guy that worked worked forjohnson space center" No he didn't " No but you can imagine what it would be like if he did"
Koffee87 3 days ago
looks to me like he was worried that whatever that was standing there was going to interfear with his ride home and he tackled it.Then switched channels
allanshoafrocks 5 days ago
Comment removed
YDDES 6 days ago
@YDDES cool story bro!
XRACER113 6 days ago
TOP SECRET
not anymore.... :)
lMagina1 1 week ago
God.. It's amazing how much these people know about some shit they watched
sreinvention 1 week ago
They knew aliens where watching them the whole time of the mission. On the radio NASA deleted parts of the radio conversation which reveals aliens exist. If the astronauts saw a extra terrestrial craft the code name would be badsanta.
ProGamersi 1 week ago
@ProGamersi lol
usaeagle1776 1 week ago
))
fuckyorutube 2 weeks ago
yes there was a guy in a black outfit there... they where under enormous pressure and equipment failure was common place so having the Cameras on the Moon fail was a possibility also Suit Failure too Astronauts to this day Rehearse and train in Tanks and in Zero Gee Simulators for Months Before Launch this was a Training film DUhhhh they could switch between studio shots and Moon seamlessly if a Catastrophe occurred that is what I would do to avoid mass panic Remember War of the Worlds.
Dunndeer 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Dunndeer Why would there be "mass panic" if some astronauts died on Moon? Was there any panic when they almost died in Apollo 13? When they actually died in Challenger and Columbia?
If the astronauts had died on Moon, what could a studio film have helped? The whole world knew the astronauts names. They couldn't have "hidden" a fatal accident.
Don't understand how You think...
YDDES 5 days ago
i'm pre sure there are Nazi Zombies on the "MOON"!. ;D cause of "Samantha!.
CODeers 3 weeks ago
It's fake
CHODRIK 3 weeks ago
@prosperomage Assume what ever you wish, remember one fact if Von Brauns Nazi association was covered up, what else could they "cover up"?
NASAvsPETE1 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Laurelindo 3 weeks ago
wtf was that. looked like just a pair of legs were following him around. or a little lizard looking thing. idk. i hate youtube, never know what is real.
cardiffGIANT067 4 weeks ago
if technology was reaally shitty? how was it that they made it "to the moon" -___________- its a hoax fuck that.
Lip135 4 weeks ago
@Lip135 -- only hoax-believers cult members who just believe made-up stories because they like to hear fantasies think it was a "hoax."
Anyone who can think for himself and who understands some basic physics can prove that the hoax-cult leaders (the main published self-proclaimed "experts" promoting the hoax-theory) are all frauds.
prosperomage 4 weeks ago
What did i see? What was strange about this?
DeATHMeTALSCooBYDoo 4 weeks ago
well the chinese are going to the moon in 2020 so we will know because if they dont find the lunar rover or the usa flag then we know they faked it and technology was shit in 1969 id have been surprised if they even made it into orbit with that old technology
shredmaster100 1 month ago
@shredmaster100 -- It's always kind of humorous to see someone who knows absolutely nothing about tihe history of technology.
If technology was "shit" back then, then why is it that in 1970 there was a super-sonic passenger transport jet but no such thing exists today?
And your statement about what it would prove if the Chinese don't visit an old Apollo site is great! Have any more good jokes?
prosperomage 4 weeks ago
@prosperomage Ahh, he's just one of those dumb kids who think all these new computers are the first ones, invented in this very year, lol...just ignore him :D
Obelisong 4 weeks ago
@shredmaster100 chinese will also fake their program.
petrone2006rosario 3 weeks ago
i dont doubt it i would trust the chinese even less than i trust the usa but does it matter if we fake missions to the moon or mars i mean look at star trek they made that so well some people couldnt figure out how the tricks in the series like the sliding doors and the view screen and communicators were done and besides it will give people some excitement from thier boring work lives
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100 the real difference is what people should have in mind, and that is that Star trek is openly known as a science fiction tv show and apollo was sold as a true event, and what´s worse, was sold to you with your money and the money of millions of naive taxpayers who were deceited for their growing proud of being american, the land where dreams come true.. give a fucking break.
petrone2006rosario 3 weeks ago
wasnt my money they used m8 im british we dont have a space programme lol
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100 in any case, is clear you share my opinion.is good to have you onboard.
petrone2006rosario 3 weeks ago
oh yeah i wouldnt trust anything the american government tells u and the mission to mars will be the most expensive faked mission in history the only good thing is average people today can buy a telescope so powerfull that they can prove whether its on the way to mars or not hopefully
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100
kid, never tell your parents you think the Apollo landings were faked they will cry when they see how weird and stupid you are
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
technology was crap in 1969 and a car today has more computer power than the tin can spacecraft and how do you account for the fact that the landscapes are exactly the same in all the moon missions i mean theres footage of a hill from one mission and in the next mission its the same hill and yet they were supposed to be in a different are also theres footage of an astronaut on the moon removing his sun visor he should be dead from the radiation and heat of the sun itsfaked accept it
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100
OK kid I'll answer those two questions:
1. The landscapes ARE NOT the same on all 6 missions, you're just talking shit.
2. "Dead from radiation and heat"...because he took the dark visor up for a moment? Again, you're just talking shit, you don't have a clue. Raising the dark visor didn't let in a deadly flood of radiation or heat in as you claim.
I assume you're in school, try asking a science teacher.
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
how can a pice of tin foil like the spacecraft was made from stop gamma radiation going through it duh i mean its as if u stepped into a nuclear reactor when you leave the earths magnetic field why do you suppose the space station orbits below the field because otherwise the people on board would be dead in hours and if they really went to the moon theyd have needed 1foot thick layers of lead shielding to stop the radiation
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100
omgwtfbbq....ARE YOU RETARDED?"
Look kid, all your claims of gamma radiation, etc....where THE FUCK are you getting that from? Are you pulling the numbers out of your ass? Did Elvis tell you that?
Get an education before making all those silly shit claims.
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
well who are u how do i know your not a 8 year old kid and wheres your science degree if you know so much have you been to mit princeton or harvard i dont think so m8
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100
OK fair enough my credentials are a question mark to you, so you tell me....WHERE are you getting all these "facts" from about the radiation & heat exposure? Tell me WHAT exactly the figures are. Please don't fall back on "durhhh...a lot, it would be teh deadly".
Some actual numbers that you can back up, or STFU.
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
i admit im not a scientist im getting my info from nasa itself which has stated that if they are to send a man to the moon or mars they would need to give the astronauts special injections of a substance that could block the radiation and stop them from getting a dangerous dose of radiation exposure they also need to generate their own magnetic field to block cosmic rays as i said earlier why did none of the astronauts get cancer from their exposure to cosmic rays doesnt make sense
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100 Oh you read a "what if" article about going to Mars? I have to ask again "cancer from cosmic rays"...what level of exposure are we talking about that would cause cancer,how much are you saying they recieved? You are making up shit with no numbers to back up your claims.Of the 9 flights to the moon with 27 men, I think 20 of them did get early stage cataracts from their radiation exposure when they got older..the exact number escapes me, YOU look it up if you're that interested.
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
i dont bloody know man as i said im just going on what they said but in my opinion the mission to the moon must have been faked because of one important video i saw on youtube of neil armstrong testing the lunar landing craft he had to eject because the craft was so unstable he could not fly it without it wanting to tip over so what chance was there he could have made the perfectly controlled landing we saw in 1969
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100
Oh my you saw a prototype in early test where Armstrong ejected, that means they never improved on it so it must be fake, that's PERFECT reasoning and logic.
My...God.
You really are too stupid to have an opinion.
Leave the thinking to others and get a job in the fast food business kid.
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
heres one for you is it coincidence that one of the 3 original apollo astronauts who died in a fire in the simulator was going to talk and expose the whole scam and his family think thats what happened as well they were deliberatley killed
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100
Oh christ.
More bullshit you "read" somewhere and swallowed whole without question..
The three Apollo astronauts were all professional military men looking forward to going to the moon.
None of them were going to "expose the whole scam".
Do you believe everything you hear another CT tells you?
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
0h well im getting bored of this now im gonna watch something for educated people guns n roses lol
shredmaster100 3 weeks ago
@shredmaster100
yes go watch some cartoons and get more "facts"
Blahblobify 3 weeks ago
I certified the aliens axiste eeally: I was married with one duriong five years, and when she desapears I lost all my money, my children...
KailisJuan 1 month ago 2
a mexican, looking for work??
KailisJuan 1 month ago
UFOPORNO!
IdaCooki3Monst3r 1 month ago
Clearly moon rock lobsters.
ricochet188 1 month ago
???
pipper07 1 month ago
Hmm the mysterious stranger has a different look about him, a different pixellation perhaps. It's fake..
benthejrporter 1 month ago
@RAHALLEN5 Please seek mental health or check yourself into a home.
whanethewhip 1 month ago
Sorry,but these pictures ARE authentic. The squakle at 0:42 is just a interference of the elctronic camera with the BORG teleporting to moon surface
yutjub123 1 month ago
So mythbusters are lieing?
Eddytje1 1 month ago
@Eddytje1 well take it like that what u see on mythbusters is they actually do tests under the same conditions as on the moon "Flag in vacuum and so on shadows with only one light source and so on" have u ever seen one of the hoax videos where they do the same thing under equally exact circumastances?? Of course not because all conspiracy videos about the moon are not about facts. they are all about taking a thing out of the subject dont tell u the whole story and make it sound logical
o0Manfi0o 1 month ago
going to the moon was a fake
bushbasher46 1 month ago
@bushbasher46 Stop believing in self preclaimed scientists and try to face the truth. The moon conspiracy is really THE WORST FAMOUS CONSPIRACY THERE IS. everything they state or show u is either obviously alterd or a half-truth from the REAL story. Sorry but they tell u about the stars about the flag about pictures and so on. This is bullshit. YOU CANT PAY OF MORE THAN 400'000 PEOPLE!! AND U CANT FAKE MOONSTONE. EVERYONE who KNOWS about GEOLOGY can confirm that.
o0Manfi0o 1 month ago
@ringbarked. It does look like someone not in a space suit doesn't it?
toosousand 1 month ago
if you have seen Apollo 18 the movie its base on a true story about 3 guys who went to the moon and came back dead. this is because they were "infected by the rock formed crab aliens"
( this is my theory )
Watch the movie at projectfreetv(dot)com
VolumedPaulJed 1 month ago
@VolumedPaulJed
At the end of the movie it tells you a website which is about the mission ( i think ) and there some more "classified" letter. the website is called
lunartruth(dot)com
I believed that there is other species out there... that yet been seen by NASA and hidden it or not but yet to be discovered.
VolumedPaulJed 1 month ago
@VolumedPaulJed
sorry, but astronauts can´t arrive alive on the moon because of the van allen belt
djwondermike 1 month ago
@djwondermike And another guy thinks he knows shit about radiation just because he watched a video on youtube of some self preclaimed idiot who want people to believe his foolish ideas while all facts of our physics and biology say it works and u will survive. and if u dont believe in physics ask urself why we have lights and cars and trains and planes and nuclear reactors or are they all just a hoax :O???
o0Manfi0o 1 month ago
@djwondermike The Van Allen radiation belts were no obstacle for the Apollo astronauts.
Cosmostrevor 1 month ago
@Cosmostrevor
lmao, no one will ever leave the earth to head for another planet, if it would be possible we would already have colonies on the moon or other planets, Please don´t tell me fifty years in space exploration have passed without any action because of another reason.
P.S.: Greets to the scuba divers in the ISS pools watch?v=rvo1svbyLbM
djwondermike 1 month ago
@djwondermike You are either ill-informed, gullible, delusional, full of shit, or all of the above.
There is a rather significant difference between low-gravity and slow-motion, and as well a significant difference between the vacuum of space and a swimming pool.
Dumbfuck.
Cosmostrevor 1 month ago
@djwondermike
Well, we don't have colonies or cities on the ocean floor, despite sending the equivalent of astronauts (divers and aquanauts) spaceships (submersibles and submarines) and even space stations (SEALAB I and II), yet no cities and colonies.
Their lack is not evidence or proof of such efforts been a hoax, so why should their lack be evidence or proof of Apollo been such?
loperspest 1 month ago
@Cosmostrevor ha ha ha, and Santa Claus visited you last saturday to tell you that, I assume. Get over it, Apollo is USA disgrace.
petrone2006rosario 1 month ago in playlist Moon Hoax and conspirancies
@petrone2006rosario The moon landings were impossible to fake. They are impossible to fake today, and will be forever impossible to fake.
12 men have walked on the moon.
Cosmostrevor 1 month ago
@Cosmostrevor because you say so? ha good joke, I agree with you on something here, theres an impossible thing in this matter and that is travelling beyond Van allen belts with current technology, hence going to the moon. The russian that were beating your sorry asses big time knew that as well US government and NASA corrupt team. GET OVER IT. happy new year
petrone2006rosario 1 month ago
@petrone2006rosario Do you have any evidence to support the claim that no man has walked on the moon? NASA proved the moon landings to be real on July 20th 1969. The burden of proof that it was all fake is on the hoaxers whom can't identify low gravity form slow motion.
Cosmostrevor 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cosmostrevor You can see that the flag is moving, its impossible because its a vacuum space there. Notice the sand when they jump, it falls down like it does in earth, it must falls down slowly. and lastly, watch the video, banned in america: proof of fake moonlanding. They fake almost everything. I do believe that they are succesful in getting to outerspace but not in the moon.
rockinfetus916 4 weeks ago
@Cosmostrevor yes, all books that fisically and mathematically prove that crossing the radiation belts require several meters thick of shielding to any craft with living being onboard for avoiding being fried.It has been studied and proveed. watch jarrah white´s vids or ufotv documentary as well.
petrone2006rosario 4 weeks ago
@petrone2006rosario -- There are no books which prove that crossing the radiation belts with living beings on board requires several meters thick of shielding.
If you think there are, give me a SPECIFIC reference. Please do not just refer to a multiple-hour long series of Jarrah White bullshit. I've seen enough of his crap. He fills up time with lots of irrelevant sensationalism.
If you think one of his videos gives the relevant information, then refer me to the specific time point in it.
prosperomage 4 weeks ago
@petrone2006rosario -- This video was created by a guy who did a green-screen overlay of himself walking into a clip from an old Apollo video just to see how many people would believe it was something really weird.
He has another video around someplace where he explains how he did it.
And the original NASA video (which has been available for 40 years) doesn't have the weird guy walking into it.
prosperomage 4 weeks ago
@prosperomage
But which Apollo video did he start from?
This is the question!
We would like to see the original video without the man who appears on the side.
If he really created this video from an existing video and added the man on it, this video must exist, and he must be able to show it to us.
If he can't, that means he is lying.
hunchbacked 3 weeks ago
@hunchbacked -- Yeah. I saw the original someplace.
I also saw the green-screen video overlay that he used.
Look for them if you think it's important. I'm just here for entertainment and don't have much time for this Apollo stuff.
(Oh ... but if I do get some time, I'll take a series of photos of models to prove my point about that diagram ... and about perspective in photos in general.)
prosperomage 3 weeks ago
@prosperomage
Then, why doesn't he post this video?
As long as he has not posted the original video, we have no reason to believe him!
hunchbacked 3 weeks ago
@prosperomage
If I have an advice, it is this one: Don't just draw your diagrams, but take real photos with models.
hunchbacked 3 weeks ago
@hunchbacked -- Why do you give me advice that I should "take photos with models" after what I said? I guess it may be because English is not your first language.
No, that cannot be it. My statement was too simple for even that explanation. It must be that you don't bother to read what I write.
My words were: "if I do get some time, I'll TAKE A SERIES OF PHOTOS OF MODELS to prove my point about that diagram."
Some time you might try actually reading what I write.
Just a suggestion.
prosperomage 3 weeks ago
@prosperomage
I read that, but what I'm telling you is to actually do it, not just talk about it.
hunchbacked 3 weeks ago
@prosperomage actually that Green screen video was the Tampered version, US intelligence changed it afterwards, similar to the original wire images
NASAvsPETE1 3 weeks ago
@NASAvsPETE1 -- You make such a positive statement about who did what, you must have access to the U.S. intelligence alterations, with references to who did them.
Post your information, with references, or else it must be assumed that you're just making it up.
prosperomage 3 weeks ago
@prosperomage give SPECIFIC reference of that "someplace around video" for my perusal.
petrone2006rosario 3 weeks ago
@petrone2006rosario -- Find it yourself if this Apollo crap is so important to you.
I guess you didn't bother to read my whole post ... it figures. Hoax-cult members never do. That's why I'm tired of them.
(And then go dig yourself a "blast crater" with a 0.7 psi pressure stream while you're at it. You guys are a joke.)
prosperomage 3 weeks ago in playlist Moon
How many astronauts were there? This video shows three entities.
DRMusicRoom 1 month ago
@DRMusicRoom 12 men were on the moon always 2 at a time. And if i was u i wouldnt believe every video u see on youtube this one for instance is a fake. Greenscreen and photoshop and so on make a lot of things possible.
o0Manfi0o 1 month ago
@DRMusicRoom theres an astro-not running behind the fake module and on the right you´ll see the moonset janitor picking up a bottle of Coke, the one that the lady from australia saw.
petrone2006rosario 1 month ago
@petrone2006rosario I think it was faked but i also think we went there. There is evidence for and against both sides of the argument.
DRMusicRoom 1 month ago
It's full of stars!
DRMusicRoom 1 month ago
isnt this video showing someone walking into view and picking something up? Bottom right and not in a spacesuit.
Ringbarked 1 month ago
eat a schlong
pockmarkedbuttocks 1 month ago
dont u hate when there is some debate in the comments and there are no simple comments
BeanTownKid97 1 month ago
LOL! I hope you made some people feel as stupid as they are!
KMPaz4op 2 months ago
Thats a pretty sweet backyard you got there... its outta this world.
SpikeThePussySlayer 2 months ago
Ahhh the internet...where the ignorant hoaxers can get on a soap box and delcare their stupidity. By the way, most of the hoaxers are KIDS. Beware, they may actually graduate from middle school and be the guy who cooks your burger or digs your ditches!
charliegoodboy 2 months ago
@charliegoodboy The internet is where all the hoaxers are to declare their stupidity, but you continue to fight and debate with KIDS allll day, everyday, ((((WHY??)))) This makes your lowlife ass even more stupider to even acknowledge them. I'm not a HOAX believer, as a matter of a fact, the only thing that I call a HOAX is the fake ass moon landings, because it is TRULY FAKE. MOST events that involves killing by the government, like Kennedy or 911, is not a HOAX, it is cold-blooded murder...
GUARDIANtrooper 2 months ago
you got a really cool back yard bro
illusion5444 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
a good conspiracy theory website: ItWasTyped. com
Rational, intelligent people welcome!
culturebully3 2 months ago
I always sad in public, that they showed us a false film of landing on the moon taken before on purpose but not the real filming
7to777 2 months ago
c est quoi on dirait un homme civil sans combinaison
MrGil57050 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NASA PLAYING YOU ALWAYS Earth Humans got no right to leave out of orbit, this is universal law , not American, or Russian left orbit ever in our history......
TOMISLAV6608 3 months ago
'
haha this land is on the earth land,,,
not real moon land at all
bestamerica 3 months ago
he is on the fucking moon
Igorgitirana 3 months ago
The solar constant is 1.361 kilowatts per square meter.1.361 kW/m², is equivalent to 1.95 calories per minute per square centimeter, or 1.95 langleys (Ly) per minute. 1 watt (W) is equal to one joule per second (J/s or m2kgs-3). 1361 watts is 1361 joules per second. 1361 joules per second = 13610000000 ergs per second. 1 erg = 6.24150974 × 10^11 electron volts. Is this correct? Do the conversion yourself and see if it checks out. We never left low earth orbit then and we can't do it now.
Daddyo930 3 months ago
NASA's version of science doesn't count clown. I would burn your ass alive on the subject to even think to challenge it, you are a Wikifreak. A real scientist will question everything that is questionable to be conclusive. I experiment, I don't deal with fake ass NASA bullshit that you and your likes be ripping off to people. Copied and pasted evidence from fake ass websites. Neutrino faster than Speed of Light? If this is true, Einstein's theories are eradicated. What about physics fool?
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Just for the record: I don't relay on Youtube or any other websites, hoax-promoting or not. I relay on 50 years of scientifical journals from all over the world.
I don't have prejudices (like You about evil governments controlling and lying about EVERYTING). So, I don't have to desperately call everything that goes against any prejudicies a LIE.
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES What would you say if half of the 50 years of scientific journals were WRONG? The nature of science is change, which means, 50 years of old research may much be inconclusive to that change. Scientist make new discoveries and mistakes everyday. But old obsolete material are your reliable sources. My reliable sources are experimental, science has no ending, nor do stupidity. If one lies about everything, what do you call them? Do you trust people that keep secrets about everything?
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper I didn't say I relay on 50 year old scientifical journals. I say I relay on scientifical journals written during the last 50 years (when it comes to space travel). Scientifical theories may change sometime, yes. But, every theory or discovery has to be consistent with knowledge which is proven beyond any doubt.
I've not heard any renowned scientist from any country say that the lunar landings were faked. And, I've never seen any "hoaxer" describe HOW it was all faked. Cont...
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES How are you going to prove something that is inconsistent? Science can't be totally proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, because scientific changes are constantly. If you don't believe me, look at E=mc2, it is about to be eradicated. If so, what the fuck do you think about physics? And this time answer the question, you are doing the same bullshit that AB2 do when he don't want to answer the questions. And videos were shown on how all the bullshit moon landings were all faked....
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper E=mc2 is not "about to be eradicated". A couple of scienists believe they MAY have discovered something that may change it a bit. Not proven yet. E=mc2 is a base for the GPS system. Without Einsteins relativity theory it wouldn't function. If the physical theories were "wrong", You wouldn't sit in front of a computer spreading more or less ignorant comments around the world. Nor would You travel by air or car.
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES No idiot it is, nothing is faster than the speed of light, time cannot bend. Don't try to through curve balls, that shit don't work with me fool. Einstein said nothing could travel faster than the speed of light. It wasn't a couple of scientist, it was a host of scientists (CERN <--IS NOT A FEW) and the Americans have/had the option of testing it long with the many thousands of behind checks. And about is very possible and you still didn't answer the question as usual Mr. AB2 Evader...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Well, You haven't answered MY questions, so why should I answer Yours? Besides, I have no interest talking to individuals resorting to namecalling and bad language.
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES I guess you calling me a HOAXER is not calling names and insults. Up to this point my language never stopped you until I backed you stupid ass in a corner punching the living shit out of you making your ass submit. FINE... Run bitch, runaway just like the rest when I cut your lying ass in half AB2. You know you have no chance with me with your bullshit. You hide behind your puppets to avoid me, I will destroy your fucking pride. Only two channels, IMAGINE IF I CHEATED LIKE YOU DO...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper ...cont: It's not enough to say: They lied about everyting. You must also be able to explain HOW they did what they actually did. For example: Where did the rockets/spaceships go after launch? How could people from all over the world track them all the way to Moon and back? Exactly how did they fake the vast landscape, the sunlight from a black sky, the vacuum and 1/6g? You must be able to answer ALL of those questions, plus a lot more, and not just say: They lied about it.
YDDES 3 months ago 2
Did any one else see that Cosmonaught?
ryanlxs 4 months ago
It's amazing what you can Photoshop In and Out of things to make them look real..... There is never smoke without fire and their is so much smoke around the moon landings.
glenwoofit 4 months ago
@glenwoofit There was more smoke around the moonrocket lift offs...
YDDES 4 months ago
@glenwoofit First of all it's mostly dust and second of all rockets use hydrogen and liquid oxygen which of course is going to create exhaust gasses.Study before flapping your gums over rubbish.
MrCriticOfAll 4 months ago
@MrCriticOfAll The Saturn V used liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen in its second and third stage. The lunar lander used Aerozine 50 and nitrogen tetroxide. All rockets of course create exhaust gasses, but most of them are not visible in vacuum.
YDDES 4 months ago
@YDDES You lie everywhere you go... A plume should show up in any environment. You can see them in space very visibly on every vessel even when they are just trying to keep the vessel in it's orbit. You are completely full of shit and I didn't even call you a bitch this time motherfuckers, LMAO!!
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Oh, I'm glad to see You are alive and well, at least physically...
Look at "Saturn 5! Part Four" about 3:50 here on Youtube. There You'll see how a Saturn throws it's lower stages away. Only when the main engines exhaust gasses hit rocketparts they are visible. Otherwise they are totally invisible in vacuum.
Clearly, it's not me who is a liar and full of it here...
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES It's ok to say shit, stop being a pussy, lol!! Remember dude, we are talking about a HOAX versus the TRUTH, don't forget that... They blot out stars they blotted out the plume trying to blot out the stars. Did that make any sense to you at all or do you just refuse to swim in clean water versus a gigantic toilet with shit in it? If you see shit in a toilet what would you do when it is broken? Would you try to fix it like I do? Would you just ignore it? Or would you just, COVER IT UP...?
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper I cite You: " A plume should show up in any environment. You can see them in space very visibly on every vessel even when they are just trying to keep the vessel in it's orbit." I just showed You to a video showing a Saturn rocket firing its main engines in vacuum with NO visible exhaust gasses. Can You admit You were wrong?
I cite You again: "They blot out stars they blotted out the plume trying to blot out the stars." Where? What do You actually mean?
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES How are you going to see a plume sometimes, it a fucking plume, WTF? LMAO! You can't have it both was dude, you could either see it or not, just google all videos with visible plumes and there you have it. NASA is blotting out the stars and in their attempt to do so, it is affecting everything else that supposed to be visible. Too many questions make too many anomalies for the skeptic, which creates a HOAX in question. Would you question an obvious anomaly? Don't lie you have no choice...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper So, You mean that NASA somehow "erased" the plumes from the Saturns engines? Why? And HOW??? In the 60's that wasn't possible to do on films an videos. Maybe on stills. Understand this: MOST, but not ALL rocket fuels create exhaust plumes that are invisible in vacuum. Depends on the chemicals used. Just as simple as that. Check facts. No evil doings by NASA and every other space rocket launcher. Continued...
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES It is call video manipulation, the same shit they did to your brain, which is the reason why you are here. If it was impossible to change the contrast and dapper videos in the 60s, then it was impossible to go to the moon... We are talking about main engines dude, don't run it off you know what I mean. Understand this: If you can see the plume on small engines, the main should be very visible, especially during take off, just as simple as that, check your fiction.
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper ...continuing: "Blotting out the stars"??? Where? On every film shot in outer space? How? And why? Haven't You understood that stars can't be seen on a photograph/film where there is a properly exposed, big sunlit object in the field of view? I can't believe that You are so uneducated, and still think You know more than all experts who have seen these films and photos for 50 years.
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES WHERE, HOW, WHY the stars are blotted? WTF? Why are there debates about the stars? In how many videos do you see stars? You would think by now if they could clone a human without a head they could build a fucking camera that could record stars in any condition whatsoever. I guess your ignorant ass don't understand that you are debating against experts that contest your stupid bullshit. If you were right and all you say is true then why is there even any debates, experts vs experts fool?
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper There are "debates" because there are so many totally ignorants like You, without the slightest knowledge about physics, photography, astronomy and many other things.
Ignorants who believe those who sell lies in books and videos to the gullible, more than scientists with real education and knowledge.
YDDES 3 months ago
@YDDES If I don't know anything about physics, photography and astronomy like your fake ass NASA statistics suggest, then why in the fuck do you con't to challenge the shit? I'm a hazardous to your bullshit schemes, which is the reason why you clowns have no choice but to get your knees dirty. Keep sucking, the truth will eventually cum...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper -- You're probably right.
There is no way different chemicals could possibly burn with different colors in different environments.
prosperomage 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Yes let's talk truth - You have little evidence, beyond your own speculation, to support your claim that they blotted out anything, .. if you want to debate something real.. try the scientific evidence, 3 minerals first discovered on the Moon by Apollo missions, with many studies done on them by institutions around the world. Some done in the early 70s, I challenge you to disprove these conclusive studies, otherwise..you lack any ability to reason or weigh evidence.
death0metal 3 months ago
@death0metal You can use all the accounts you want, your shit still stink and a HOAX is too evident, that is why you bozos are here defending it. The truth needs no defense at this magnitude fool... Your evidence is conjured from the perpetrators that sent you here. Debaters versus bullshit believes the moon landing was a HOAX, understand now? Your claimed minerals discovered is petrified wood, meteorite rocks modified from the arctics, DECLASSIFIED. Too many anomalies arouse the skeptic mind...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper "Your evidence is conjured..." And yet you cannot disprove the science as I challenged you to, can you ? You have nothing really against it.. It is interesting with hoax believers, they won't present any evidence, they will just demand explanations for anomalies or what they interpret as odd or they can't explain... weak weak arguments when put up against the science.
death0metal 3 months ago
@death0metal First of all clown, I don't believe in Hoaxes, I believe the ones that we call our leaders are liars and schemers, their works are tagged as Hoaxes. I don't trust them or those who support their bullshit. If there wasn't any evident dumb ass there wouldn't be a debate now would it? You sound like a complete fool. If you have so much proof then why debate on this videos, especially this stupid ass video? That is why I followed you here, you are a fucking troll YDDES, fool yourself...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@YDDES Thanx for that.Cheers mate.
MrCriticOfAll 3 months ago
I too luvz movie maker fx
emarum 4 months ago
Whats the FPS????
rrafw 4 months ago
asshole
RuledByMars65 4 months ago
ok, people thinking this is all a hoax, why don't you buy a really good telescope, and look at the moon.....you WILL see proof from flags, and even footprints. i know this because my friend has a $4,000 telescope, and he showed me.
skotkim0129 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@skotkim0129 So this telescope has a mirror with a diameter of 200 m? Wow, this must be a big garden.
Do not get me wrong, I am no hoax believer. But there is no Earth-bound telescope with the used resolution to see the Apollo artifacts. Even Hubble can not take images of these small objects.
But now we have the newest LRO pictures presenting detailed photos of the landingsites.
CHSarahBs 4 months ago
@skotkim0129 do you know how big of a telescope you'd need to be able to see flags and shit on the surface? it would have to be the size of you friends house
Polish9391 4 months ago
@skotkim0129 I-have-the-most-powerful-telescope-you-can-buy-and-i-can't-see-shit-on-the-moon.I-believe-the
moon-would-of-had-a-lot-more-craters-than-we-saw.
tubeyou9878 4 months ago
@skotkim0129 Please provide detailed specifications of such an instrument..
death0metal 3 months ago
prosperomage and CHsaraBs, tell me you ain't serious, future journeys will last much longer, why then not establish a base on the moon to facilitate this, after all we went once, NOT, the astronauts were shy, I have never, in my whole life ever heard such a pathetic excuse for three obvious liars, Elvis was described as a shy country boy but he could go on stage and give a knockout performance every time and he didn't ''fly to the moon, did he?'' or maybe we could make him, we have the means.
thecubanism 4 months ago
@rudbrps You seem to think you're pretty clever, messing with people to prove a point. You're the only person who knows for certain the video is a fake, so suddenly you are the enigma of intelligence and objective thinking. Nice work - you found a few nutjobs on youtube who ate your reinforcing bullshit. You're no better than a ufo hoaxer or a guy dressed up as bigfoot. But I'm sure your reasoning is a lot more sophisticated than those guys. Have a nice day.
maxpeck14 4 months ago
@maxpeck14
ur link didnt work, send it again, i ll have a look, and i looked at my evidence and i said all abt it what it think. now send me ur link. this time a bit better one.
robinkhaira1 4 months ago
"oh good greif" lol. and i m being silly? listen to ur self man " dust speed was so fast thats why it didnt land on the pads" ? what is that suppose to mean. now look the neil's foot print pic. it was right next to the ship wasn't it. but arround the foot print u dont see and smooth dusted surface, u c his foot print and rough small stones arround it. if a big amount of dust was blown that surface would have been nice and smooth.
robinkhaira1 4 months ago
@robinkhaira1
youtube com /watch?v=cSjbTN5JtL8&feature=related
u check this video and at 2.35 tell me if there is any evidence of blown dust by engine.
robinkhaira1 4 months ago
@robinkhaira1 -- The photos that I gave a link to (and yes, the link DOES work) are from Apollo 11. But they are close-up views. Your view at 2:35 in your referenced video is too far away to see the differences in the surface texture.
Look at my photo if you want to discuss the difference in the surface. Or else make your own comparison of CLOSE-UP views.
(Everything I say can be independently verified. I cannot make up any of it. Anyone can check it out for themselves.)
prosperomage 4 months ago
@prosperomage
u r just not gonna believe it r u? there u can clearly see that there is no difference in the surface, that module has been placed there. u live in the fanatasy, m done mate, there is no point banging my head to the wall.
robinkhaira1 4 months ago
@robinkhaira1 --You are refusing to look closely at your own evidence.
My photos are close-ups of the same area from the same mission.
Did you look at them or not?
This has NOTHING to do with mere "belief" for anyone who actually LOOKS at the evidence and thinks for himself.
Either look at the close up photos or else you are admitting that you don't want to actually understand the differences in surface texture. The difference is clearly visible.
Don't bother answering until you've looked.
prosperomage 4 months ago
that link of urs dosent work
robinkhaira1 4 months ago
@robinkhaira1 -- The link works. I just used it.
You need to take out all spaces.
You also need to take out any dashes that your browser might insert in the middle.
And you need to convert the (dot) to a real dot.
So go look at the difference in the surface texture.
prosperomage 4 months ago
How come we made 6 journeys of 230 thousand miles without loss of life and since then with all our advanced technology have never gone higher than 400 miles and lost 14 astronauts, people who believe the moon landings are deluding themselves, look at the first interview with Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins, do they look like men who have just achieved mankinds greatest ever feat, no sir, embarassed, just like little kids who have been caught lying, I would have been dancing on the desk top.
thecubanism 4 months ago
@thecubanism After Apollo the priorities have changed to operate in LEO. There is no benefit to reply a short trip to the Moon. Future moon missions will last much longer, so there are many things to develop and design (rocketry, equipment, radiation shielding for long duration). This is expensive and needs time.
The three astronauts look like men, who only want to go home to meet their families. They all, especially Armstrong, were shy. They were astronauts and pilots (cont.)
CHSarahBs 4 months ago
@thecubanism (cont.)
They were not trained to speak in public. They were trained to do their job.
It is not a real proof to compare the actions or the behavior of some people with actions you would do. You are not the astronaut, you can only speculate.
CHSarahBs 4 months ago
@thecubanism -- Distance has nothing to do with loss of life.
Shuttle had accidents that could not happen with Apollo because it was made differently.
Challenger was destroyed by bad o-rings on solid booster motors. Apollo did'nt have solid boosters or o-rings.
Columbia was destroyed by debris from the rocket hitting its wing. Apollo didn't have wings and didn't have the space ship hung underneath the front of the rocket motor.
Suggestion: Learn something before you say stupid stuff.
prosperomage 4 months ago
@thecubanism -- I've known lots of engineers over the past 50 years. None of them are very good at speaking in front of any kind of an audience. And espeically an audience that includes the whole world.
In fact, most people are kind of shy about speaking in front of such a large audience.
prosperomage 4 months ago
@thecubanism then how do you explain the newest LROC images from 4 different satellites over the last 10 years showing the astronauts FOOTPRINTS !! ?
1MtnBoy 4 months ago
lets face it folks ..90% of all these videos are bullshit. If your looking for real journalistic media don't look here !!!
medco1956 4 months ago
Thank you for this pertinent reminder of how easy it is to fake things.
On the subject of faking things..
I still can't see how an airliner managed to fit in it's entirety through the 16 foot diameter hole that I saw in the live footage that appeared just after the pentagon strike 10 years ago. one has to conclude, that fakery is not only the province of youtube posters...
Swallabat 4 months ago
@Swallabat -- You're right. It would be completely unreasonable for an approximately 16 foot diameter cylinder to make an approximately 16 foot diameter hole in something that it hits.
(yes ... sarcasm intended)
prosperomage 4 months ago
@prosperomage That's a little disingenuous isn't it?
Swallabat 2 months ago
Thank you for this pertinent reminder of how easy it is to fake things.
On the subject of faking things..
I still can't see how an airliner managed to fit in it's entirety through the 16 foot diameter hole that I saw in the live footage that appeared just after the pentagon strike 10 years ago. One might conclude, that fakery is not only the province of youtube posters... What a complicated world we live in nowadays...
Swallabat 4 months ago
The proof that they faked Apollo is crushing. Here's a link to some of the evidence.
politicalforum (dot) com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio (dot) html
Cosmored 4 months ago
@Cosmored hey whats that movie set doing on the moon ?
1MtnBoy 4 months ago
Also I have seen this footage used on a Discovery Channel special about the Apollo missions, and they use this footage. Not the footage of rudbrbs stepping near the LEM, but you can see him running across the landscape in the background. I don't know how you got your doctored footage to Discovery, but congrats rudbrbs, your a star!!
TheSkoozie 4 months ago
Hey rudbrbs, last time you posted this video you said it belonged to someone's grandfather who worked at NASA, it might have been yours. Now you claim this is still NASA footage just with you inserted into it. Why didn't you include the footage of "you" running across the landscape in the background? Actually you took the time to show "yourself" running across the landscape in slow motion and you even magnified it for us. Why the change of story, someone talk to you or send you a message?...
TheSkoozie 4 months ago
the real reason why nasa never went to the moon again because they have never been there at first place.
robinkhaira1 4 months ago
@robinkhaira1 -- Just because someone is a U.S. citizen doesn't mean they follow everthing the lying overly-aggressive, power-hungry U.S. government says. We've got a bunch of corrupt bastards in power. And I've been in opposition to pretty much everything the U.S. government has done ever since they ramped up the war in Vietnam (that's before Apollo went to the moon, in case you don't know your history.)
prosperomage 4 months ago