What's the point of arguing about the moon landing? We stopped going to the moon because its a waste of money, when are people going to stop wasting time arguing about it?
Your skepticism was implanted by this stupid conspiracy theories. If you look carefully there is no way that these astronauts would walk this very distinct moon walk on planet earth. Even the most advanced technology in filmmaking will not match to this type of walk, or fall. Have you seen how they fall...or leap back?
Stop bullshitting yourself, with unnecessary skepticism. Humans visited the moon, its a sheer fact....and any effort to refute it, is dumb...way beyond ignorance.
@akastoriano Way beyond ignorance is putting it mildly!
I've been sparring with these Apollo hoax people for years and I don't know why they do this to themselves. Maybe it's just natural human stubbornness. Or maybe it's more. I wish I knew.
@ApolloWasReal, its an American phenomenon, that mixes within a decent amount of paranoia. This is one of the side effects of Hollywood. This is part of a culture.
in You Tube, there are 4 chapters of the Mythbusters, and they refute every conspiracy theory that was made about the Apollo missions. Whether it's photos, the moving flag, the moon walk, leaving footsteps on the moon etc'.
Its ok to be skeptic and question things, however too much doubt might lead
@akastoriano That's an understatement. For the hoaxheads here, I'd say it most definitely has led to paranoia. Anything and everything from NASA is automatically dismissed as fake without any evidence -- but only when it supports the moon landings; when they can twist information from NASA into seeming support for their paranoia, it's accepted as gospel.
E.g., radiation. They're convinced it's an impenetrable barrier, but where does their (misinterpreted) info come from? NASA!
@ApolloWasReal : You are sooooo, ugh. The radiation, called the Van Allin Belts, is so strong it would fry an egg if it was there for a while. That radiation has fried many sateltes too and I know because I have a friend who words for Verizon Wireless and he said that sometimes you lose reception because another satellite gets zapped by the belts and it's really expensive to have to put up another satellite. It's not as simple as saying "let's just fly another one up there."
@ymi2b Your VZW friend is seriously misinformed. NASA doesn't have a monopoly on scientific information about the Van Allen belts; if the published data were wrong, scientists and engineers all over the world would know because their own satellites would fail. They don't.
In fact, I have personal experience with an amateur radio satellite, launched 1983, that flies directly through the belts 4 times/day. It failed after 3 years, just as I predicted from the published radiation data.
@ApolloWasReal : no offense, but your "amateur radio stellite" is just that, it's not for people who pursue real science (like me and my fellow members), Your "amateur" radio is meant for people who have a limited rudimentary knowledge of space, there is much more to know than what you get from that.
And, my Verizon friend is not stupid, he does store sales but he actually also writes up the orders to VZW headquarters requesting new satellites be flown up to replace bad ones he determines.
@ymi2b Are you seriously saying that there's a different physics for radio hams than for everyone else? I think not. Our satellite had 16Kx1 dynamic RAMs with a 3 kilorad tolerance. I used the standard models to calculate the dose, and I predicted a lifetime of maybe 2-5 years. It died in 3. I'd say that backs up the figures; they're certainly not off by orders of magnitude.
No offense, but your Verizon friend doesn't know space physics.
Of course he doesn't know everything about space, but he knows enough to state definatively that a human cannot live passing through the van allen belt.
case closed.
He works for Verizon, he's not just some dumb schmuck!
I am sorry if I offended your amateur radio satellite. What I meant was that my Verizon friend dealer showed me math that was quite conclusive that ham radio has no comparison to Verizon's CDMA technology, that's all.
@ymi2b It's pretty funny that you would bring up Verizon's CDMA technology because I happen to work for the company that developed it. I joined specifically to have the opportunity to contribute to it. Quite a few of my colleagues who contributed major elements are themselves radio hams, and several have also been heavily involved in the design, construction and operation of several amateur satellites.
There's a lot of overlap between amateur and commercial, to both sides' benefit.
@ymi2b You can look up the satellite yourself; it's AMSAT-OSCAR-10, NORAD catalog 14129. We didn't plan that orbit; a problem with the kick motor gave it to us. Note that it crosses the VABs twice per orbit, with 2 orbits/day. It therefore is exposed to far more radiation than an Apollo mission, which avoided the densest parts of the belts.
Radiation simply wasn't a serious problem for Apollo. Period.
Sigh, you guys have to grow up. Stop trying to pick fights. I'm just sharing scientific information and rather than face the evidence and mathimatical facts, you just cry "fowl."
It's so childish and non-scientific to call someone names.
I checked the history in my youtube mailbox and it seems that the good ol' government may've been at play again tampering with my mails. I have long held suspicions and have some irrefutable evidence of their monitoring me since my revealing "certain" facts against the moon landing. Unfortunately they'd been harassing colleagues and friends too.. now they're in my mailbox I think.. Too much heat at the moment..
Noooo, Tremor, I'm not a coward. I thought I mentioned here before about how I think the US government has been messing with my email and phone calls. Sometimes mails are not in my inbox but then I find them in the "junk" folder and I never put them there. I also sometimes have inbox mails that look like they were read already. I've also sent mails and get rejections, and I have other strong suspicions about the Gov. spying on me
@ymi2b Wow! Between your email problems and somehow getting a porn site instead of the ham radio organization you asked for, it could be that the government is really ticked off at you and they're playing with your Internet connection to mess up your mind.
Or maybe, just maybe, they couldn't care less about you. And you're not nearly as competent with computers as you think you are. Ever give that possibility a thought?
I looked up Amsat and it's a porn site. I don't appreciate being told to look up dirty things! You may think your funny but maybe old people are on here and will be offended at pictures of butts and stuff. Man. We're all trying to have science discussions. And you, Really!? Amsat pics of butts.. grow up.
@ymi2b Sorry to disappoint you, but no, the AMSAT site I was talking about isn't a porn site. I haven't a clue how you got porn unless you invoked one of your bookmarks by mistake. The site I'm talking about is amsat dot org, since it's a nonprofit.
@ymi2b What? So you conspiracy theorists say any official source can't be listened to because they just lie. Then you say amateurs don't count either because they aren't smart, and you say you know better because your friend works with Verizon satellites. So the only source that you think logically counts is yourself. Do you see why people say you guys are crazy?
@Ragnarok222R Actually, you're just brainwashed by the fascist government system of Bush, I don't mean that offensively, just being analytical. I'm not going to get into Big Foot here, but it's similar, we've hair samples, foot prints, women who've been pursued and groped, schoolbus loads of children that have witnessed him, etc. I've not seen him myself, but I know a trustworthy lumberjack who did a couple of times, oh, but "he's just a lumberjack," you would probably say.
@ymi2b What does that have to do with anything I said, and yes I looked up my post. So now I suppose your trying to rationalize discrediting me by saying "you believe something other than what I do, so you must be brain washed." And then you tried to distract me with bigfoot who I honestly don't care about. I don't know if he exists, I heard about people getting blood samples and I thought it was weird the mass media hadn't jumped on it, but I know it's a possibility because the gorilla wasn't
@ymi2b discovered until the 1920's or so, and those things live in large groups.
Did you think maybe whoever convinced you to believe the government is an evil organization who will fake the moon landings, murder 3000 people on 911, yet only mess with your e-mails could have brain washed you into accepting no other possibility, such as a bad junk folder, or that someone in your house could be looking in your mail. With mine if you even open it accidently it opens a letter and marks as read
I never said anything about 9/11. See, this is what you people do, you go and try to discredit someone with stuff like that... As for the email, well, believe what you want, I know they're tapping my mails and sniffing my tranmittal codes and frequencies on the Internet. Bush had forced congress to give him the Patriot act and if you think that Obama can stop him then you're crazy. Obama tried, but he has his hands tied, hence Guantanamo remaining.
@ymi2b Okay, sorry. There's a guy on here called 2nasafakedit among other names who has a whole list of conspiracies like 9/11, I kind of let the line between him and other's blur. But that still doesn't answer why they don't just kill you. I'm certain it'd cost less to trick some gang into thinking your a rival and killing you than to pay at least a portion of a department of people to constantly monitor your e-mails. They really must not think of you as a threat, or even wirthy of attention
@Ragnarok222R Appology accepted, thanks for being cordial. I ask myself that question a lot too, "why don't they just assassinate me?" It really is quite confusing... I'm sure they could make it look like an accident, and who knows maybe I will have cut brake lines one day and crash off the edge of a ravine into a river, I wouldn't put it past the gov. Maybe they think i'm more valuable alive, I guess, because they can sniff into my network but I'm not that high up the ladder...
@ymi2b Perhaps you should see a psychiatrist and be evaluated for possible paranoid schizophrenia. I don't mean that offensively. In fact, I'm absolutely serious. Schizophrenia afflicts something like 1% of the human population, a very large number for such a horrible, debilitating illness. Maybe it's the price we humans pay for having quickly evolved such large brains; they don't always work right.
We all would be grateful if you could actually address what you see in this video.
If it was faked, prove it, but don't just say you know it, or that some lumberjack knows it.
Analyze motion of the astronaut, his backpack and dust. Take into account the distance covered.
Present light analysis.
Since all real experts I've heard about have no doubt about authenticity of footage from the Moon, maybe you would be kind to enlighten us with all-seeing wisdom of your genius mind...
@ymi2b Hey, guess what? I agree with you that the Bush II administration is probably the closest this country has ever come to fascism. We probably agree that he deliberately lied us into a war, and that he and his cronies should stand trial for war crimes. But that doesn't mean the US is incapable of ever doing anything right. I think you, like most hoaxheads, think of the US government as such an unmitigated evil that they're incapable of ever doing good, ergo Apollo could not have happened.
@ymi2b How many functioning, orbiting satellites of any kind, amateur, scientific, commercial or military, have involved you in their engineering design, construction or operation? Setting up a DirecTV dish doesn't count.
That's what I thought.
The laws of physics are exactly the same for every spacecraft, amateur or not. Several technologies originally pioneered by AMSAT are now widely used in the satellite industry, including onboard computers and micro satellites.
Ok, I know I mentioned this before, but yes, I was kicked out of my MIT's electronics program but that was because Mississippi's government didn't like what I was teaching in my class presentations related to government programs and the theft of tax dollars. I was working towards a position within the NRAO in New Mexico for listening to intelligent receptions until that. So, that's why I have a science club.
@ymi2b I see. Well, pardon me if I'm skeptical about anything the state of Mississippi may or may not have done to you. Anyway, your degree or lack thereof doesn't really matter to me. What matters is that you know what you're talking about. Earning a degree can help, but it's no guarantee. Even if you had one I'd say it's already apparent that you don't know what you're talking about.
@ymi2b Since you don't think highly of amateur spacecraft people, perhaps you can name some professional spacecraft engineers who believe that the Apollo program was a hoax?
"Spacecraft engineer" doesn't mean technical writer, journalist or technician. I mean a professional with at least a bachelors degree from a major university in aerospace, electrical, or mechanical engineering actually involved in the design, test or operation (not the mere use) of real spacecraft in space.
@akastoriano Mythbusters didn't actually refute every one of the hoax "theories"; they didn't have time, and not every one of them would have made good television. But they sampled enough of them (and refuted every one they sampled) to give the viewers a good feel for how utterly bogus they are. I especially enjoyed their 0/reduced gravity flights, something I hope to do myself someday. How anyone could see that and not realize the utter bogosity of the 'moon hoax' is beyond me.
@Asphaltard Haw! You sounded so much like one of them I didn't realize you were joking,,, but that is their fault, not yours. Just thought I'd share the following link. Nothing about the Moon or people who know less about it than I did when I was 8...
@Asphaltard And every library, archive, news organization, private collector, and person with a good memory, along with it. On the entire planet Earth.
I would love to live in a country whose government had the competence and godlike power to do all the nonsense hoaxbuffs ascribe to them on a daily basis.
Such a government would, of course, have had no trouble getting to the Moon.
@Pygar2 The government can do some amazing things, huh? They can maintain a massive, airtight hoax for over 40 years. They can make whistleblowers disappear in a flash (yet the conspiracy theorists are never concerned for their lives - why?)
They can even land huge robots on the moon to make the footprints and deploy the artifacts we now see in the LRO pictures.
But despite near-god-like powers, they can't put humans and their life support systems on those robot landers...
@ApolloWasReal : Look, I never said we didnt' land on the moon. And, yes, for real, there were people who were and still are staking out my house and you can laugh all you want, but I know. Too many people have begun to open their eyes and had too many problems from the feds due to my evidence and now the CIA and NASA have gotten a deluge of freedom of information acts and they're scrambling, it seems.
All the worlds scientists, engineers, astronomers and physicists have been sleeping the past 40 years but TATAAAA! there is Wiggle, fortunately pointing us all out that he (based on his military experience in a desert) discovers a grand hoax. With a little help from his conspiracy friends ofcourse.
@TremorHellborn : I scientifically addressed the shockwave phenomenon long ago, which disproved the possibility of this taking place on the moon. SHOCKWAVES are produced from compression of air. Ta-da. Case closed. You claim it was on the moon and the moon is almost a total vacuum, for the layman, you can say it is a vacuum.
Wiggley, there are no huge clouds of dust in low gravity because they depend on air. If atmosphere is dense, it can take small particles suspended against gravity, for a short time. Particles like that are called aerosols. For instance. smoke and dust are both solid aerosols. Particles dust are heavier than smoke particles, so they settle out faster. Both show the movement of air that is carrying them. You can see billows and curls in the clouds of smoke and dust.
That does not happen on the Moon because there is nothing to keep the dust particles suspended. (Galileo showed that gravity accelerates all objects the same, regardless any difference in mass).
On earth, air prevents some objects from falling as fast as others, especial very small objects like particles of dust. But on the Moon only gravity affects them. So the dust will fall immediately to the lunar surface.
you guys are all dumb, dumbies. in the "vacuum" of the "moon" there would've been PARTICLES OF AIR from the supposed exhaust on which the dust could've "floated" down upon. Man, you guys are all brainwashed by Bush and his cronies.
Yes Ymi, we are all dumb. Together with some 40 years worth of scientists, engineers, astronomers and astronauts. Only you (and some other monkeys) have found the 'truth' and are going to save the world from all these lies.
Bush has been orchestrating this and many of the other "conspiracies" to take $ away from taxpayers for his ranch, plane, etc. along with his other cronies! Open your eyes, you fools!
And, no, I do not believe in the conspiracies you mentioned above, asice from Bigfoot (we cannot deny the evidence of footprints and hair and skull cap), and to some extent, JFK (where'd his brain disappear to, and the pristine bullet and multi-shots heard).
You Dutch is better than your common sense Ymi2b. Why do you have to be?
LOL
You are just another hoaxer that thinks he is smarter than 40 years worth of science and engineering. Trying to look smart and look like a insider or hero for it.
Try Bigfoot, NWO, Illuminati, Freemasons and 2012, too. Have fun. Try a hoax. Real life is boring.
Actually, I think the 40 years of "scientists" are smarter than most of you blind sheep. They've fooled you all into willingly giving up trillions of dollars for their so-called experiments and advancements. When, In fact, they're buying condos in Florida and sports teams and eating at expensive restaurants.
@ymi2b You know, you're right! Apollo spent huge sums developing the first computer made entirely from integrated circuits. That project ultimately bootstrapped the entire personal computer industry. And from that, the Internet.
And what did THAT get us? Hoax idiots, sitting in front of one of the Apollo program's biggest spinoffs, telling the world that it was all a scam.
And, I do NOT blieve in the Freemason conspiracy (I'm a freemason myself and there is no magic, it's just a group of people who work together towards common goals in closed meetings).
The NWO (new world order) has been in effect, but we freemasons are not behind it...
The illuminati, no, don't believe it.
Bigfoot, yes, the evidence abounds, but is surpressed by the still existant Bush administration that continues to control things here in the USA.
So Wriggley, the behaviors of dust in this video is one of the most compelling reasons we have to assume it was made in a vacuum. Yes, the dust is clearly dry, but falls immediately to the surface and does not form clouds. Exactly what one can expect on the moon.
Oh my goodness! Seriously?! The dust falling pattern PROVES it was on the moon?! They could/ve used a ultra light talcum powder that is highly humidified to get that effect on Earth. I've replicated an identical pattern of dust fall using a pan of baby talcum poweder over a steaming pot in an vacuum and then pressing a boot in the pan of "dust"
I posted this on your channel page and you deleted it.
"There's a partial summary of hoax evidence posted on a science forum. To see it, google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon". The summary is on page 15. It's the seventh post from the top."
If you thought hoax evidence didn't have any merit, you wouldn't censor it.
"Well Cosmofred, someone must have pushed the 'spam' button. Which ofcourse is quite rightly. "
Translation-
I deleted the post because I don't want people to see summaries of hoax evidence as, once people have seen the evidence, there's nothing any of us shills can do to make people think they went to the moon.
You know, I'm getting SO sick and tired of you proponents that I'm going to make a compilation video of all MY RESEARCH to show YOU why you are WRONG!
After seeing the undisputable evidence, you'll find yourselves finally taking a moment to consider WHY you let Bush and his cronies brainwash all of you so easily!
Ohboy we'll be anxiously waiting to see the cool video of your fuckass retarded research proving the Apollo missions were fake. Is it gonna be a cartoon?
OK, unbelievable, so i posted my "proof of a faked moon landing" video here on YouTube and after just several hours it was removed for "youtube violations" but then I got an email a few days later from an unknown email address (a Google search gave no results on the address) that told me that I'm in violation of some governmental secrecy law and that I was being watched. Well "investigated" was their wording. And they knew my REAL NAME! I'm not posting it now.. not after this.
Wow that's so sad you are in the final stages of moon hoax deleria now you got Men In Black chasing you ....GET...HELP....see a shrink before it's too late.
Man, it is sad to see people believing in this stuff. On the one hand you've got these guys who believe in the moon landing, they've accepted a body of evidence as true. On the other you've got these guys who disbelieve it, and they've got a body of evidence. And they both think the other is delusional, and because they think that way they hate each-other.
And then, of course, the truth is just a metaphysical theory. It's silly to hate and distrust each-other over this nonsense.
" On the other you've got these guys who disbelieve it, and they've got a body of evidence"
@Jcolinsol, I really don't know what "body of evidence" you're talking about.
There is no evidence supporting Moon hoax theory. Do not call sheer lies, pseudo-science or speculations the evidence.
If you disagree, please do some research and talk to physics teacher. There are many good videos on YT which debunk lies of hoax advocates scientifically.
"my evidence is real evidence. Their evidence is lies, pseudo-science, and speculation."
Clearly they have evidence, that doesn't mean it's good evidence that proves their point.
If you can be so sure that the missions were real (never mind that "reality" is an unsupported metaphysical concept) then you must know of at least one piece of concrete physical evidence. Not photos, videos, testimonials, or expert testimony. A piece of physical evidence.
@Jcolinsol, show me one example of that evidence for hoax. Provide precise reference (mission, time, images, videos, publications, whatever relates to your claim) and we will take it from there.
I will gladly discuss it with you and show you how much that "evidence" is worth.
That's not how it works. I'm not the one positing that it was a hoax, I'm not the one positing that it happened. You wouldn't ask the agnostic to prove the non-existence of God.
If you are so confident in what you have come to believe that you can make an absolutist statement about it, then surely you must have some pretty conclusive evidence.
In case you didn't notice, Apollo missions are accepted facts, accepted all over the world. Those events took place and were witnessed by thousands of people directly.
400 thousand people worked in Apollo program, including parents of one of my friends.
If you want me to prove it really happened, then you should also try to ask yourself if Beatles ever existed, if WWI and WWII took place, if French Revolution took place etc... >
Wrong again. It is not logical fallacy. We know what visual technology was available 40 years ago. We have tens of hours of footage and thousands of pictures.
Don't hide behing those cheap arguments. Show me the facts.
How all that could've been possibly faked 40 years ago?
Quick question. Have you seen one complete lunar EVA in your life? I doubt it. I think you base your theory of fanatical scepticism and distrust, and very little knowledge.
Oh my gosh, the FRENCH are the most prominant deniers of the moon landing! There are literally thousands of publications in France debunking the moon landing itself. They also present numerous ties of George W. Bush to the deception regarding the moon landing, the Kennedy assasination, as well as to Bigfoot.... and don't laugh, sigh, I am so SICK AND TIRED of people who don't UNDERSTAND ANYTHING about bigfoot just instantly dismissing it.
The backpack and dust can be replicated simply by slowing down film. Maybe you Americans need to read some French publications because France has shown the deception of the Bush administration from the start going way back to after the 1940s. And GW Bush is the worst of them, groomed and tailored to be the one to fool you all so easily.
"The backpack and dust can be replicated simply by slowing down film."
- really, ymi2b?
1. Can you achieve effect of vacuum by slowing down the film too?
2. Do you realize what happens when we restore alleged original frame rate? At that rate astronauts move like puppets, and only and idiot can believe something like that could've been faked.
3. Why no hoax advocate, including video producers like David Percy, who has access to large studios, was able to replicate even one short lunar EVA?
You're quite confused person, and it is you who is mistaken about the logic of proof.
If you accuse others of fraud or lie, you have to prove their guilt. They don't have to prove they are innocent when there are thousands of witnesses confirming what they say.
First of all, do some effort and actually learn something about Apollo program. You probably know very little, but you think you know the truF... Well, you don't.
I don't care whether the majority agrees that it's true or not, that's irrelevant. The majority of people claim a God exists, or that souls exist, it's not a proof of anything.
I never claimed to know the truth, in fact I was lamenting that other people seem to think that they do.
I showed you short scene with Lunar Rover. Then we have this video here.
You can't even start proving those videos are not authentic, but you send me off to issue of God and religion. Is that really the best you have? LOL!
What can you actually show? Nothing.
Discussing anything with you is waste of time. You know what? Prove to yourself that you exist first. After all, you could be just in some matrix. That should keep you busy for some time.
No, it's no obsession. I showed you two examples of evidence. All video professionals and professional photographers will tell you the same: it's authentic, impossible to fake 40 years ago.
Just because you don't understand it, and have no knowledge of the subject, does not mean you have a point.
Unfortunately for delusional cases like you, it's real knowledge that matters, not delusions.
Again, I really can't consider these photos and videos to be strong evidence, at least not until you explain why it is that it would be impossible to fake them. I've asked again and again for some physical evidence, but you just go back to these videos, or the opinions of experts. None of this is physical evidence.
I'm not delusional at all, why don't you calm down, step back, and approach this discussion without talking down to me or insulting people. Like grown ups.
Quick question about just one small piece of EVA footage from Apollo 16 mission.
Watch this: watch?v=CYPGopJ6ciI and tell me how something like that could be possibly faked 40 years ago. Pay attention to motion of astronaut, his backpack, dust under his feet, scale of the scenery and uniform lighting.
Remember, it's just one small piece of evailable evidence, and obviously you don't have much idea how much more is out there.
It's ironic, but somebody actually directed me to THIS video as a proof, and as I said to him, I don't see anything in this video that couldn't be recreated with a stretch of desert, a matte painting, and some filming equipment.
So don't talk down to me, either prove the point, or stop claiming the truth.
You don't see anything that couldn't be recreated? Well, if you knew something about history of technology, you'd know how idiotic that claim is.
If you think it was faked, prove it. I'm afraid you can prove nothing.
Obviously, your knowledge of history of space exploration is as little as knowledge of film and photography.
I don't have time to waste. Maybe you should talk directly to professional photographer first, but let me know when you think you can prove something.
Well, again BlisterHiker, I'm not the claiming anything, you are. So if it's impossible to fake these videos, then how? How do you support that claim.
I'm still waiting for something besides videos and photos. Show me some physical evidence.
@Jcolinsol, for the last time, do not twist my words. I didn't say it's impossible to fake it. Maybe it is possible today, but it would be very difficult, much more challenging than creating all animations for Avatar.
I said it was impossible to fake 40 years ago.
Do you get it finally? If you disagree, show the evidence. It's the evidence that matters, not your sceptical delusions.
Well, first you should realize the scale of your ignorance. Then, learn something. I don't have time to teach you what could take months to learn.
What I know and what I learned is not a result of some delusional views like in your case. It's a result of years of work.
.
What do you think you are? Do you think your dumb skepticism means something, that it benefits anybody? Sorry to let you know, but it means exactly nothing, and it's worth nothing.
I my skepticism keeps me from behaving like you, that's enough of a benefit for me.
Yes, I'm pretty ignorant on this subject, it's not an area that I've studied. That's not a proof of your argument though, a proof of your argument would be the physical evidence that I've been asking for all along.
You've shown me videos, and claimed that they were impossible to fake, and then never explained why they were impossible to fake.
I'm not speaking with a video expert, I'm speaking with you, and so far all you've done is insult and dismiss me for earnestly requesting evidence, and trying to debate the subject matter. Why not act like an adult, it would be more convincing.
Your views are again the results of your ignorance of history, science and physics in particular.
Simulating the effects of 1/6 g gravity and vacuum was impossible on such scale 40 years ago. Again: watch motion of the astronaut, his backpack and dust.
Also, the lighting on that large area is so uniform and directional at the same time, not showing any signs of multiple or dispersed light sources, that it can be only explained by one light source: the Sun.
Maybe it could be faked today with very advanced cgi technology, but it would be very challenging, much more challenging that Avatar movie, for example.
Remember: that scene is just one piece from hours of lunar EVA footage you have probably never seen in your life.
Your ignorance mixed with your delusional skepticism makes me sick. I don't have time for that, and frankly, it's your problem, not mine.
@BlisterHiker I don't think it can be faked even today. As evidence I cite "Magnificent Desolation". By all accounts they tried very hard to make it as realistic as possible. Even used Apollo still photography. But it's still easy to tell it apart from genuine Apollo coverage. That tells me it's just not possible to fake, even today.
If it can be faked at all, it's only the complete CGI that could make that possible, but scale of the task of animating those hours of EVA footage would be truly astronomical.
Even movies like "Avatar", which took work of hundreds of artists and thousands of computers, would pale in comparison. Certainly, organizing such task force for some secret project would be impossible to hide either.
Well, that's how bad things look for Moon hoax theory, which goes back 40 years ago.
@BlisterHiker I think the CTs vastly underestimate the difficulty of creating convincing humans with CGI even today, and even astronauts in their spacesuits. Humans are really good at detecting "fake" people in CGI; read about the "uncanny valley".
Hey, it just occurred to me. I wonder if the "uncanny valley" is what causes some people to think Apollo was fake. The motions don't look fully "real" because of the reduced gravity field and the restrictions of the suit. What do you think?
Even with the latest technology, including Maya software, artists still rely heavily on motion capture to improve their computer models. It's used both for body motion as well as for facial expressions, when motion of actors wearing special suits marked with series of dots, or with dots attached to their faces, is captured and used later to animate digital characters. Even with that technology, viewers still feel something is not always natural.
@BlisterHiker Yes. I wonder: could you somehow combine motion capture on a actor in 1g to get his limb movements with CGI to simulate his overall 1/6 g ballistics? Probably not, because they interact far too much. Let's see, how about an actor in a motion capture suit on a wire rig, with CGI removing the unwanted torquing applied to the actor by the wire when he's off the ground. Maybe, but it would be quite tricky. And nothing like that existed in 1969!
"could you somehow combine motion capture on an actor in 1g to get his limb movements with CGI to simulate his overall 1/6 g ballistics? Probably not"
exactly, "you wouldn't ask the agnostic to prove the non-existence of God." and that is why I cannot trust the government because 1/2 the people here are probably government agents anyways. Again, I have presented solid evidence that Bush is the one controlling the entire moon landing and supression of other "conspiracies". GO TO EUROPE, you'll see how much they know that we do not!!!! Our government hides things from us, man.
..and we are supposed to just "trust" you? it's people like you who I distrust the most, good sir. You try, like any good government agent, to plant seeds of truth or commonality/cooperation in the hopes that you can gradually silence the evidence. This is EXACTLY the tactics Bush used to start the Iraq war in order to get the USA very cheap oil while the rest of the world went to the brink of starvation.
It's not funny, Jomogogo. When I arrived home today there was a guy working on the telephone box post in my front yard. I've never seen this guy before and aside from that I've never seen anyone in that box before. I briskly entered my house and drew the curtains shut and watched him from my upstairs windows. He was messing with the wires and I am pretty sure that they have my phone line tapped now because I sometimes hear clicking or calls are quieter at times.
"I am pretty sure that they have my phone line tapped now"
- oh, what a terrible truF, ymi2b... You are being watched... I can't believe it!
Seriously, you all conspiracy theorists should finally wake up from your "importance dream". Do you really believe you reveal some terrible truth? It's not the truth. It's just your truF.
No serious, grown-up people think about you, losers, seriously.
Look around. None of the hoax advocates ever suffered any repressions.
I'm sure all you mindless creatons are in denial as to what's going on. But yes, my videos were removed. What's more, days later, my hard drive on my computer "myseriously" crashed and was unrecoverable. What is more, my neighbor, who also does scientific research on the moon landing with me in our spare time, told me that the "garbage truck" cam through the neighborhood unscheduled. Coincidence? You guys are in DENIAL! You mess with Bush's secrets and they'll get to you too.
Pay attention at 0:39. In most lunar footage we can see a white "shockwave" of fine material such as this following boot impacts in the regolith. This does not happen with heavy beach sand as Jarrah would have us believe was used by NASA to fake regolith disturbances.
sigh... a "shockwave" would only happen in atmosphere, my good sir, from air compressed under the descending foot, sigh... How can you guys all ignore the coverup Bush has so cunningly constructed?!!
May be your 'experience' in the fields of Somalia can help me out?
Do I need to send you some more information through a PM Wiggle? YouTube has little opportunity to explain about the behavior of solid aerosols in a vacuum, about dustclouds, gravity and acceleration.
Do you happen to know WHAT study I was ending in 1983?
You talk shit and your reading is even worse. I said the TWENTY years after 1983 I was researching and getting experienced. Your Marine-history in Somalia and the PTSS is interfering again Wiggle.
Wiggle, I don't watch Media a lot and I don't like television especially. My studies began in 1977 and ended around 1983. The twenty years that came were experiences and research. Not only both sides, but on many sides. National and international research, ESA/ESTEC, military, civil, NASA and a lot of interviews and even more reading.
Over the past decade, moonhoax advocates have brought up many intriguing points regarding the Apollo missions to the moon. None of them, however, are indisputable evidence of fraud, and most are misunderstandings of basic physics or mission specifications. Several lines of solid & scientific evidence point to an actual moonlanding. The 880 pounds of moonrocks brought back to earth are the most obvious evidence. More than 30,000 pictures were brought back and hours of video.
Seriously? No sound stage big enough? Get real. Have you ever seen a football stadium? Bush's cronies could've easily constructed one, created the vaccum inside, and then created the fake moon landing and just slowed the video to 1/2 speed. This accounts for EVERYTHING you blind sheep state to try to counteract the so-call conspiracy theorisits.
@ymi2b No such structure is possible. Every square inch would have 15 lbs. of air pressure pushing against it from the outside. Now calculate how many square inches of outside wall it would have. Even a door on an airliner has to be braced, as it is holding more than a ton of air pressure against the partial vacuum outside at altitude.
Actuly, atmusperic presure is 14.7 pounds, so if you want to argue science with me then Im happy to ablige.
I didn't literaly mean it was a football stadium. He could have used one of the many underground secret compounds the US government has, perhaps even at area 51 or one of the many underground nuclear explosion residual caverns.
Being underground, creating a vacuum would be relitively simple.
@ymi2b I rounded up to the nearest significant figure in a casual conversation. So sue me.
You might go visit one of the many underground nuclear explosion residual caverns. Include me out, along with anyone else with sense.
I don't care if you build it underground or anywhere else. Neither rock nor any other known material would take the stress of a stadium-sized vacuum chamber 'full of vacuum' so to speak. Why not calculate the load of a 10' square at 14.7 psi?
147 pounds is something even a timber house frame can support. Surely Bush's cronies either used a stone cavern or metal framing. I've even heard that it was a solid steel chamber that was used, but I have never been able to verify from the leads I investigated..
@ymi2b Not 147 pounds, 14.7 (fourteen point seven) on *every square inch* on the outside, no matter what it is made of, and zero on the inside. That means a segment of wall only one inch across and 10 inches long, would have to support 147 lbs. It is doable over small areas, but you are pretending an impossible stadium-sized building with wide-open spaces long enough for LRV trips many minutes long, adding up to 17 total miles of travel. Calculate the exterior surface and multiply by 14.7. Ouch!
Sigh... Bush is part of the whole one-world-government scheme.
His coup of illegally stealing the 2001 ellections shows how they manipulated everything to place him as power head over the US government, running things behind the scenes as a dictatorship. You think your vote matters? No. The BP oil leak in the gulf of Mexico isn't Obama's responsibility nor fault, nothing he can do about it, it's all G.W. Bush's control, operating in the dark. Remember, he was & remains an oil czar.
@ymi2b Plenty of oil co. execs then and now. Who was Bush *IN 1969* that anyone would commit treason on his account? Again, you are letting your BDS get the better of you... at this rate, by next week you'll be blaming the lousy weather at Valley Forge on him.
I suppose you are also one of those people who believe everything is a Illuminati Reptilian Skull and Bones Trilateral Rothchilds Bilderberger CFR Zionist Nazi Mafia CIA NWO Stonecutters No Homers plot?
@Ravenflight104 And to make matters worse, the hoaxbuffs would have us believe this huge studio was a vacuum chamber. That's tight, one larger than the Astrodome, with no internal supports, and 14.7 PSI pushing on every square inch of the exterior. You try to explain things like that to people, and they just ignore the fact they've been proven wrong.
@Pygar2 : I've not been proven wrong in the least, in fact, your statement only confirms my point! Do the math, 14.7 PSI and a stadium has an exterior shell volume of 216.090.000 square inches (oh America and her inches and pounds) = 3.176.523.000 pounds to support. Well, guess what you idiots, we live in 14.7 PSI every day, and we have stadiums and structures supporting this EVERY DAY. The tensile strength of the materials is far greater than this.
@ymi2b You are not taking into account that a vacuum chamber would have these massive stresses put on it from one side and not the other. Yes, every stadium in the world today is experiencing 14.7 psi (we inherited pounds from our beloved mother England), but it is also 14.7 psi on the inside, countering it. That much from the outside with vacuum inside, would crush any imaginable structure like a beer can. Remember, you couldn't even have interior braces as the fakery would need open spaces.
@Pygar2 : I did technical scientific research and testing with my neighbor this weekend and created a partial vacuum in a can by lowering it upside down into a pan of boiling water, thereby causing an expansion of the atmospheric gasses within said can. I then allowed the submerged can having reduced atomic gasses to cool, after time the can promptly imploded. By my calculations, if the can wall was 9.5 times thicker @ ~1mm it could not crush, so if a stadium had 1mm walls it would work.
@ymi2b Only if the stadium had the same square inches of surface as the can. Find the square inches of the can, times 14.7. That is how many PSI the can would take with a vacuum inside. Then calculate your Vomit Comet/Flying Stadium TV studio. The walls would have to be many feet thick. At a guess, the planet's entire steel production for several years. All to save them the trouble of putting people inside moonbound gear, when we and the Russians had a proven ability to send gear to the Moon.
This has been flagged as spam show
It's pretty clear that Apollo was a hoax. Here's a link to a partial summary of the evidence.
spurstalk (dot) com/forums/showthread (dot) php?t=144487
Cosmored 2 months ago
where are the mooninites
PrunVeIes 2 months ago in playlist Apollo 16
cool video thanks for sharing.
echozgus 4 months ago
What's the point of arguing about the moon landing? We stopped going to the moon because its a waste of money, when are people going to stop wasting time arguing about it?
7Hook 1 year ago
Your skepticism was implanted by this stupid conspiracy theories. If you look carefully there is no way that these astronauts would walk this very distinct moon walk on planet earth. Even the most advanced technology in filmmaking will not match to this type of walk, or fall. Have you seen how they fall...or leap back?
Stop bullshitting yourself, with unnecessary skepticism. Humans visited the moon, its a sheer fact....and any effort to refute it, is dumb...way beyond ignorance.
akastoriano 1 year ago
@akastoriano Way beyond ignorance is putting it mildly!
I've been sparring with these Apollo hoax people for years and I don't know why they do this to themselves. Maybe it's just natural human stubbornness. Or maybe it's more. I wish I knew.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal, its an American phenomenon, that mixes within a decent amount of paranoia. This is one of the side effects of Hollywood. This is part of a culture.
in You Tube, there are 4 chapters of the Mythbusters, and they refute every conspiracy theory that was made about the Apollo missions. Whether it's photos, the moving flag, the moon walk, leaving footsteps on the moon etc'.
Its ok to be skeptic and question things, however too much doubt might lead
to paranoia.
akastoriano 1 year ago
@akastoriano That's an understatement. For the hoaxheads here, I'd say it most definitely has led to paranoia. Anything and everything from NASA is automatically dismissed as fake without any evidence -- but only when it supports the moon landings; when they can twist information from NASA into seeming support for their paranoia, it's accepted as gospel.
E.g., radiation. They're convinced it's an impenetrable barrier, but where does their (misinterpreted) info come from? NASA!
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal : You are sooooo, ugh. The radiation, called the Van Allin Belts, is so strong it would fry an egg if it was there for a while. That radiation has fried many sateltes too and I know because I have a friend who words for Verizon Wireless and he said that sometimes you lose reception because another satellite gets zapped by the belts and it's really expensive to have to put up another satellite. It's not as simple as saying "let's just fly another one up there."
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Your VZW friend is seriously misinformed. NASA doesn't have a monopoly on scientific information about the Van Allen belts; if the published data were wrong, scientists and engineers all over the world would know because their own satellites would fail. They don't.
In fact, I have personal experience with an amateur radio satellite, launched 1983, that flies directly through the belts 4 times/day. It failed after 3 years, just as I predicted from the published radiation data.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal : no offense, but your "amateur radio stellite" is just that, it's not for people who pursue real science (like me and my fellow members), Your "amateur" radio is meant for people who have a limited rudimentary knowledge of space, there is much more to know than what you get from that.
And, my Verizon friend is not stupid, he does store sales but he actually also writes up the orders to VZW headquarters requesting new satellites be flown up to replace bad ones he determines.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b It has been 15 hours since I posted my last comment, and 4 hours since you posted your last.
You have not accecpted my challenge to combat my notice.
Are you incapable of scientifically proving that Apollo was fake? I certainly think so.
TremorHellborn 1 year ago
@ymi2b Are you seriously saying that there's a different physics for radio hams than for everyone else? I think not. Our satellite had 16Kx1 dynamic RAMs with a 3 kilorad tolerance. I used the standard models to calculate the dose, and I predicted a lifetime of maybe 2-5 years. It died in 3. I'd say that backs up the figures; they're certainly not off by orders of magnitude.
No offense, but your Verizon friend doesn't know space physics.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal
Of course he doesn't know everything about space, but he knows enough to state definatively that a human cannot live passing through the van allen belt.
case closed.
He works for Verizon, he's not just some dumb schmuck!
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b As the saying goes, your Verizon friend knows just enough to be dangerous.
So do you, it would seem.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal
I am sorry if I offended your amateur radio satellite. What I meant was that my Verizon friend dealer showed me math that was quite conclusive that ham radio has no comparison to Verizon's CDMA technology, that's all.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b It's pretty funny that you would bring up Verizon's CDMA technology because I happen to work for the company that developed it. I joined specifically to have the opportunity to contribute to it. Quite a few of my colleagues who contributed major elements are themselves radio hams, and several have also been heavily involved in the design, construction and operation of several amateur satellites.
There's a lot of overlap between amateur and commercial, to both sides' benefit.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ymi2b You can look up the satellite yourself; it's AMSAT-OSCAR-10, NORAD catalog 14129. We didn't plan that orbit; a problem with the kick motor gave it to us. Note that it crosses the VABs twice per orbit, with 2 orbits/day. It therefore is exposed to far more radiation than an Apollo mission, which avoided the densest parts of the belts.
Radiation simply wasn't a serious problem for Apollo. Period.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal This "ymi2b" character is a coward and an idiot. Perhaps, though, more a coward.
I left him 2 comments 15 hours apart and he stopped debating with me after the first.
TremorHellborn 1 year ago
@TremorHellborn I guess he's not one to let facts stand in the way of a good story. Or conspiracy theory.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal
Sigh, you guys have to grow up. Stop trying to pick fights. I'm just sharing scientific information and rather than face the evidence and mathimatical facts, you just cry "fowl."
ymi2b 1 year ago
@TremorHellborn
It's so childish and non-scientific to call someone names.
I checked the history in my youtube mailbox and it seems that the good ol' government may've been at play again tampering with my mails. I have long held suspicions and have some irrefutable evidence of their monitoring me since my revealing "certain" facts against the moon landing. Unfortunately they'd been harassing colleagues and friends too.. now they're in my mailbox I think.. Too much heat at the moment..
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b You are a paranoid attention-seeker.
TremorHellborn 1 year ago
@TremorHellborn
I second that. However... he's worse.
Rob260259 1 year ago
@ymi2b You really ought to consult a shrink. Paranoid schizophrenia *is* treatable.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ymi2b Chrchrchrchrchr...go see a doctor...your brain is coocked.
stevehislop 1 year ago
@ymi2b Wow, you must be one important dude for the government to feel so threatened by you.
Or maybe they couldn't care less about you or your emails and you hit the wrong keys.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@TremorHellborn
Noooo, Tremor, I'm not a coward. I thought I mentioned here before about how I think the US government has been messing with my email and phone calls. Sometimes mails are not in my inbox but then I find them in the "junk" folder and I never put them there. I also sometimes have inbox mails that look like they were read already. I've also sent mails and get rejections, and I have other strong suspicions about the Gov. spying on me
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Wow! Between your email problems and somehow getting a porn site instead of the ham radio organization you asked for, it could be that the government is really ticked off at you and they're playing with your Internet connection to mess up your mind.
Or maybe, just maybe, they couldn't care less about you. And you're not nearly as competent with computers as you think you are. Ever give that possibility a thought?
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal
I looked up Amsat and it's a porn site. I don't appreciate being told to look up dirty things! You may think your funny but maybe old people are on here and will be offended at pictures of butts and stuff. Man. We're all trying to have science discussions. And you, Really!? Amsat pics of butts.. grow up.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Sorry to disappoint you, but no, the AMSAT site I was talking about isn't a porn site. I haven't a clue how you got porn unless you invoked one of your bookmarks by mistake. The site I'm talking about is amsat dot org, since it's a nonprofit.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ymi2b What? So you conspiracy theorists say any official source can't be listened to because they just lie. Then you say amateurs don't count either because they aren't smart, and you say you know better because your friend works with Verizon satellites. So the only source that you think logically counts is yourself. Do you see why people say you guys are crazy?
Know-it-all Dick
Ragnarok222R 1 year ago
@Ragnarok222R Actually, you're just brainwashed by the fascist government system of Bush, I don't mean that offensively, just being analytical. I'm not going to get into Big Foot here, but it's similar, we've hair samples, foot prints, women who've been pursued and groped, schoolbus loads of children that have witnessed him, etc. I've not seen him myself, but I know a trustworthy lumberjack who did a couple of times, oh, but "he's just a lumberjack," you would probably say.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b What does that have to do with anything I said, and yes I looked up my post. So now I suppose your trying to rationalize discrediting me by saying "you believe something other than what I do, so you must be brain washed." And then you tried to distract me with bigfoot who I honestly don't care about. I don't know if he exists, I heard about people getting blood samples and I thought it was weird the mass media hadn't jumped on it, but I know it's a possibility because the gorilla wasn't
Ragnarok222R 1 year ago
@ymi2b discovered until the 1920's or so, and those things live in large groups.
Did you think maybe whoever convinced you to believe the government is an evil organization who will fake the moon landings, murder 3000 people on 911, yet only mess with your e-mails could have brain washed you into accepting no other possibility, such as a bad junk folder, or that someone in your house could be looking in your mail. With mine if you even open it accidently it opens a letter and marks as read
Ragnarok222R 1 year ago
@Ragnarok222R
I never said anything about 9/11. See, this is what you people do, you go and try to discredit someone with stuff like that... As for the email, well, believe what you want, I know they're tapping my mails and sniffing my tranmittal codes and frequencies on the Internet. Bush had forced congress to give him the Patriot act and if you think that Obama can stop him then you're crazy. Obama tried, but he has his hands tied, hence Guantanamo remaining.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Okay, sorry. There's a guy on here called 2nasafakedit among other names who has a whole list of conspiracies like 9/11, I kind of let the line between him and other's blur. But that still doesn't answer why they don't just kill you. I'm certain it'd cost less to trick some gang into thinking your a rival and killing you than to pay at least a portion of a department of people to constantly monitor your e-mails. They really must not think of you as a threat, or even wirthy of attention
Ragnarok222R 1 year ago
@Ragnarok222R Appology accepted, thanks for being cordial. I ask myself that question a lot too, "why don't they just assassinate me?" It really is quite confusing... I'm sure they could make it look like an accident, and who knows maybe I will have cut brake lines one day and crash off the edge of a ravine into a river, I wouldn't put it past the gov. Maybe they think i'm more valuable alive, I guess, because they can sniff into my network but I'm not that high up the ladder...
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Perhaps you should see a psychiatrist and be evaluated for possible paranoid schizophrenia. I don't mean that offensively. In fact, I'm absolutely serious. Schizophrenia afflicts something like 1% of the human population, a very large number for such a horrible, debilitating illness. Maybe it's the price we humans pay for having quickly evolved such large brains; they don't always work right.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ymi2b
"I don't mean that offensively".
Damn... you are a true hoaxhead. A conspiritard. Hey, I don't mean this offensively. I just mean it.
Rob260259 1 year ago
@ymi2b
We all would be grateful if you could actually address what you see in this video.
If it was faked, prove it, but don't just say you know it, or that some lumberjack knows it.
Analyze motion of the astronaut, his backpack and dust. Take into account the distance covered.
Present light analysis.
Since all real experts I've heard about have no doubt about authenticity of footage from the Moon, maybe you would be kind to enlighten us with all-seeing wisdom of your genius mind...
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@ymi2b Hey, guess what? I agree with you that the Bush II administration is probably the closest this country has ever come to fascism. We probably agree that he deliberately lied us into a war, and that he and his cronies should stand trial for war crimes. But that doesn't mean the US is incapable of ever doing anything right. I think you, like most hoaxheads, think of the US government as such an unmitigated evil that they're incapable of ever doing good, ergo Apollo could not have happened.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ymi2b How many functioning, orbiting satellites of any kind, amateur, scientific, commercial or military, have involved you in their engineering design, construction or operation? Setting up a DirecTV dish doesn't count.
That's what I thought.
The laws of physics are exactly the same for every spacecraft, amateur or not. Several technologies originally pioneered by AMSAT are now widely used in the satellite industry, including onboard computers and micro satellites.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal
Ok, I know I mentioned this before, but yes, I was kicked out of my MIT's electronics program but that was because Mississippi's government didn't like what I was teaching in my class presentations related to government programs and the theft of tax dollars. I was working towards a position within the NRAO in New Mexico for listening to intelligent receptions until that. So, that's why I have a science club.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b I see. Well, pardon me if I'm skeptical about anything the state of Mississippi may or may not have done to you. Anyway, your degree or lack thereof doesn't really matter to me. What matters is that you know what you're talking about. Earning a degree can help, but it's no guarantee. Even if you had one I'd say it's already apparent that you don't know what you're talking about.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ymi2b Since you don't think highly of amateur spacecraft people, perhaps you can name some professional spacecraft engineers who believe that the Apollo program was a hoax?
"Spacecraft engineer" doesn't mean technical writer, journalist or technician. I mean a professional with at least a bachelors degree from a major university in aerospace, electrical, or mechanical engineering actually involved in the design, test or operation (not the mere use) of real spacecraft in space.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@akastoriano Mythbusters didn't actually refute every one of the hoax "theories"; they didn't have time, and not every one of them would have made good television. But they sampled enough of them (and refuted every one they sampled) to give the viewers a good feel for how utterly bogus they are. I especially enjoyed their 0/reduced gravity flights, something I hope to do myself someday. How anyone could see that and not realize the utter bogosity of the 'moon hoax' is beyond me.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this is not real
TylerRocksGuitarhero 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this is not real
TylerRocksGuitarhero 1 year ago
@Asphaltard Haw! You sounded so much like one of them I didn't realize you were joking,,, but that is their fault, not yours. Just thought I'd share the following link. Nothing about the Moon or people who know less about it than I did when I was 8...
watch?v=rgQqSVrkkag
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Asphaltard And every library, archive, news organization, private collector, and person with a good memory, along with it. On the entire planet Earth.
I would love to live in a country whose government had the competence and godlike power to do all the nonsense hoaxbuffs ascribe to them on a daily basis.
Such a government would, of course, have had no trouble getting to the Moon.
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Pygar2 The government can do some amazing things, huh? They can maintain a massive, airtight hoax for over 40 years. They can make whistleblowers disappear in a flash (yet the conspiracy theorists are never concerned for their lives - why?)
They can even land huge robots on the moon to make the footprints and deploy the artifacts we now see in the LRO pictures.
But despite near-god-like powers, they can't put humans and their life support systems on those robot landers...
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal : Look, I never said we didnt' land on the moon. And, yes, for real, there were people who were and still are staking out my house and you can laugh all you want, but I know. Too many people have begun to open their eyes and had too many problems from the feds due to my evidence and now the CIA and NASA have gotten a deluge of freedom of information acts and they're scrambling, it seems.
ymi2b 1 year ago
the moon is not far. hadley rille is a real place folks. humans have been there. it is not far from earth....in fact, it is very close to earth.
ai6276 1 year ago
All the worlds scientists, engineers, astronomers and physicists have been sleeping the past 40 years but TATAAAA! there is Wiggle, fortunately pointing us all out that he (based on his military experience in a desert) discovers a grand hoax. With a little help from his conspiracy friends ofcourse.
Sure Wiggle.
Rob260259 2 years ago 8
Christ you're an idiot. Haven't you seen the photographs of dust disturbance under the LM?
And why did you ignore my mentioning of the white shockwave?
TremorHellborn 2 years ago 3
@TremorHellborn : I scientifically addressed the shockwave phenomenon long ago, which disproved the possibility of this taking place on the moon. SHOCKWAVES are produced from compression of air. Ta-da. Case closed. You claim it was on the moon and the moon is almost a total vacuum, for the layman, you can say it is a vacuum.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b "Shockwave" was simply my dictive description of the visual phenomenon. Clearly, you are an idiot.
I dare you to respond to this comment.
TremorHellborn 1 year ago
"Or do you just make stuff up?"
No, beach sand was JARRAH's idea, not mine.
So tell me, how fine would YOU say the "fake" regolith was used to "fake" the lunar footage?
TremorHellborn 2 years ago 5
Wiggley, there are no huge clouds of dust in low gravity because they depend on air. If atmosphere is dense, it can take small particles suspended against gravity, for a short time. Particles like that are called aerosols. For instance. smoke and dust are both solid aerosols. Particles dust are heavier than smoke particles, so they settle out faster. Both show the movement of air that is carrying them. You can see billows and curls in the clouds of smoke and dust.
-cont-
Rob260259 2 years ago 4
That does not happen on the Moon because there is nothing to keep the dust particles suspended. (Galileo showed that gravity accelerates all objects the same, regardless any difference in mass).
On earth, air prevents some objects from falling as fast as others, especial very small objects like particles of dust. But on the Moon only gravity affects them. So the dust will fall immediately to the lunar surface.
-cont-
Rob260259 2 years ago 3
you guys are all dumb, dumbies. in the "vacuum" of the "moon" there would've been PARTICLES OF AIR from the supposed exhaust on which the dust could've "floated" down upon. Man, you guys are all brainwashed by Bush and his cronies.
ymi2b 2 years ago
@ymi2b
Yes Ymi, we are all dumb. Together with some 40 years worth of scientists, engineers, astronomers and astronauts. Only you (and some other monkeys) have found the 'truth' and are going to save the world from all these lies.
Sure.
Are you another Wiggle or what?
Rob260259 2 years ago
Wellicht je bent dom, de Amerikan Bush heeft toch jullie in Europe blind.
ymi2b 2 years ago
@ymi2b
What has Bush have to do with the landing on the Moon in 1969? Tell me, do you do NWO, Freemasons, Illuminati, 2012, Bigfoot and JFK too?
Rob260259 2 years ago
Bush has been orchestrating this and many of the other "conspiracies" to take $ away from taxpayers for his ranch, plane, etc. along with his other cronies! Open your eyes, you fools!
And, no, I do not believe in the conspiracies you mentioned above, asice from Bigfoot (we cannot deny the evidence of footprints and hair and skull cap), and to some extent, JFK (where'd his brain disappear to, and the pristine bullet and multi-shots heard).
ymi2b 2 years ago
You Dutch is better than your common sense Ymi2b. Why do you have to be?
LOL
You are just another hoaxer that thinks he is smarter than 40 years worth of science and engineering. Trying to look smart and look like a insider or hero for it.
Try Bigfoot, NWO, Illuminati, Freemasons and 2012, too. Have fun. Try a hoax. Real life is boring.
Rob260259 2 years ago
Actually, I think the 40 years of "scientists" are smarter than most of you blind sheep. They've fooled you all into willingly giving up trillions of dollars for their so-called experiments and advancements. When, In fact, they're buying condos in Florida and sports teams and eating at expensive restaurants.
ymi2b 2 years ago
@ymi2b
Aha. You are just jealous.
Rob260259 2 years ago
@ymi2b You know, you're right! Apollo spent huge sums developing the first computer made entirely from integrated circuits. That project ultimately bootstrapped the entire personal computer industry. And from that, the Internet.
And what did THAT get us? Hoax idiots, sitting in front of one of the Apollo program's biggest spinoffs, telling the world that it was all a scam.
You're right, it WAS a taxpayer rip-off.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
And, I do NOT blieve in the Freemason conspiracy (I'm a freemason myself and there is no magic, it's just a group of people who work together towards common goals in closed meetings).
The NWO (new world order) has been in effect, but we freemasons are not behind it...
The illuminati, no, don't believe it.
Bigfoot, yes, the evidence abounds, but is surpressed by the still existant Bush administration that continues to control things here in the USA.
ymi2b 2 years ago
So Wriggley, the behaviors of dust in this video is one of the most compelling reasons we have to assume it was made in a vacuum. Yes, the dust is clearly dry, but falls immediately to the surface and does not form clouds. Exactly what one can expect on the moon.
Rob260259 2 years ago
Oh my goodness! Seriously?! The dust falling pattern PROVES it was on the moon?! They could/ve used a ultra light talcum powder that is highly humidified to get that effect on Earth. I've replicated an identical pattern of dust fall using a pan of baby talcum poweder over a steaming pot in an vacuum and then pressing a boot in the pan of "dust"
ymi2b 2 years ago
@ymi2b
Talking about dust...? Watch my Cernan vs Superman video.
Rob260259 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey Rob260259
I posted this on your channel page and you deleted it.
"There's a partial summary of hoax evidence posted on a science forum. To see it, google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon". The summary is on page 15. It's the seventh post from the top."
If you thought hoax evidence didn't have any merit, you wouldn't censor it.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
Well Cosmofred, someone must have pushed the 'spam' button. Which ofcourse is quite rightly.
Rob260259 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Well Cosmofred, someone must have pushed the 'spam' button. Which ofcourse is quite rightly. "
Translation-
I deleted the post because I don't want people to see summaries of hoax evidence as, once people have seen the evidence, there's nothing any of us shills can do to make people think they went to the moon.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
I saw no "Cernan vs Superman" video?
You know, I'm getting SO sick and tired of you proponents that I'm going to make a compilation video of all MY RESEARCH to show YOU why you are WRONG!
After seeing the undisputable evidence, you'll find yourselves finally taking a moment to consider WHY you let Bush and his cronies brainwash all of you so easily!
ymi2b 2 years ago
Please make that video Ymi2b. Or ask Jawa to do another and 'prove' that we are all wrong. I will be looking forward.
And please do not watch my videos. You may wake up from your dream of ridiculous moonhoax conspiracy crap.
Rob260259 2 years ago
@ymi2b
Ohboy we'll be anxiously waiting to see the cool video of your fuckass retarded research proving the Apollo missions were fake. Is it gonna be a cartoon?
TheJomogogo 2 years ago
@TheJomogogo
OK, unbelievable, so i posted my "proof of a faked moon landing" video here on YouTube and after just several hours it was removed for "youtube violations" but then I got an email a few days later from an unknown email address (a Google search gave no results on the address) that told me that I'm in violation of some governmental secrecy law and that I was being watched. Well "investigated" was their wording. And they knew my REAL NAME! I'm not posting it now.. not after this.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b
Wow that's so sad you are in the final stages of moon hoax deleria now you got Men In Black chasing you ....GET...HELP....see a shrink before it's too late.
TheJomogogo 1 year ago
@TheJomogogo
Man, it is sad to see people believing in this stuff. On the one hand you've got these guys who believe in the moon landing, they've accepted a body of evidence as true. On the other you've got these guys who disbelieve it, and they've got a body of evidence. And they both think the other is delusional, and because they think that way they hate each-other.
And then, of course, the truth is just a metaphysical theory. It's silly to hate and distrust each-other over this nonsense.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
" On the other you've got these guys who disbelieve it, and they've got a body of evidence"
@Jcolinsol, I really don't know what "body of evidence" you're talking about.
There is no evidence supporting Moon hoax theory. Do not call sheer lies, pseudo-science or speculations the evidence.
If you disagree, please do some research and talk to physics teacher. There are many good videos on YT which debunk lies of hoax advocates scientifically.
Apollo missions were real.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
"my evidence is real evidence. Their evidence is lies, pseudo-science, and speculation."
Clearly they have evidence, that doesn't mean it's good evidence that proves their point.
If you can be so sure that the missions were real (never mind that "reality" is an unsupported metaphysical concept) then you must know of at least one piece of concrete physical evidence. Not photos, videos, testimonials, or expert testimony. A piece of physical evidence.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
"Clearly they have evidence"
@Jcolinsol, show me one example of that evidence for hoax. Provide precise reference (mission, time, images, videos, publications, whatever relates to your claim) and we will take it from there.
I will gladly discuss it with you and show you how much that "evidence" is worth.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
That's not how it works. I'm not the one positing that it was a hoax, I'm not the one positing that it happened. You wouldn't ask the agnostic to prove the non-existence of God.
If you are so confident in what you have come to believe that you can make an absolutist statement about it, then surely you must have some pretty conclusive evidence.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
In case you didn't notice, Apollo missions are accepted facts, accepted all over the world. Those events took place and were witnessed by thousands of people directly.
400 thousand people worked in Apollo program, including parents of one of my friends.
If you want me to prove it really happened, then you should also try to ask yourself if Beatles ever existed, if WWI and WWII took place, if French Revolution took place etc... >
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Um, an accepted fact isn't a piece of empirical evidence. A fact is just a piece of data agreed to be "true" by authorities.
It's irrelevant in this case, a form of "argument from authority" which is a logical fallacy.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
Wrong again. It is not logical fallacy. We know what visual technology was available 40 years ago. We have tens of hours of footage and thousands of pictures.
Don't hide behing those cheap arguments. Show me the facts.
How all that could've been possibly faked 40 years ago?
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol >
Quick question. Have you seen one complete lunar EVA in your life? I doubt it. I think you base your theory of fanatical scepticism and distrust, and very little knowledge.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Yeah, when I was in astronomy class. What's your point? How is that a proof that they actually made the trip and back.
Is this what you do, you go around picking fights with people and trying to belittle them for doubting your beliefs?
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Oh my gosh, the FRENCH are the most prominant deniers of the moon landing! There are literally thousands of publications in France debunking the moon landing itself. They also present numerous ties of George W. Bush to the deception regarding the moon landing, the Kennedy assasination, as well as to Bigfoot.... and don't laugh, sigh, I am so SICK AND TIRED of people who don't UNDERSTAND ANYTHING about bigfoot just instantly dismissing it.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b >
For the start, why don't you watch this very video clip carefully and tell me how something like that could've been faked 40 years ago.
Pay attention not only to motion of the astronaut, but also his backpack and dust around his boots.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
The backpack and dust can be replicated simply by slowing down film. Maybe you Americans need to read some French publications because France has shown the deception of the Bush administration from the start going way back to after the 1940s. And GW Bush is the worst of them, groomed and tailored to be the one to fool you all so easily.
ymi2b 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The backpack and dust can be replicated simply by slowing down film."
- really, ymi2b?
1. Can you achieve effect of vacuum by slowing down the film too?
2. Do you realize what happens when we restore alleged original frame rate? At that rate astronauts move like puppets, and only and idiot can believe something like that could've been faked.
3. Why no hoax advocate, including video producers like David Percy, who has access to large studios, was able to replicate even one short lunar EVA?
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@ymi2b >
I've made a video recently which proves how much that slow-motion theory is worth.
It's worth as much as the rest of that hoax garbage.
Please watch it:
watch?v=JBICR4PTLfc
When you are actually able to provide even one shred of evidence for those lies you're posting, let everybody know.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol >
You're quite confused person, and it is you who is mistaken about the logic of proof.
If you accuse others of fraud or lie, you have to prove their guilt. They don't have to prove they are innocent when there are thousands of witnesses confirming what they say.
First of all, do some effort and actually learn something about Apollo program. You probably know very little, but you think you know the truF... Well, you don't.
>
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
I don't care whether the majority agrees that it's true or not, that's irrelevant. The majority of people claim a God exists, or that souls exist, it's not a proof of anything.
I never claimed to know the truth, in fact I was lamenting that other people seem to think that they do.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
I showed you short scene with Lunar Rover. Then we have this video here.
You can't even start proving those videos are not authentic, but you send me off to issue of God and religion. Is that really the best you have? LOL!
What can you actually show? Nothing.
Discussing anything with you is waste of time. You know what? Prove to yourself that you exist first. After all, you could be just in some matrix. That should keep you busy for some time.
I have better things to do.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Um, I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything, you seem to be the one with the obsession over this matter?
Provide some physical evidence, something tangible that can't falsified. A video is not enough of a concrete proof.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
No, it's no obsession. I showed you two examples of evidence. All video professionals and professional photographers will tell you the same: it's authentic, impossible to fake 40 years ago.
Just because you don't understand it, and have no knowledge of the subject, does not mean you have a point.
Unfortunately for delusional cases like you, it's real knowledge that matters, not delusions.
Live in your fantasy land. Later.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Again, I really can't consider these photos and videos to be strong evidence, at least not until you explain why it is that it would be impossible to fake them. I've asked again and again for some physical evidence, but you just go back to these videos, or the opinions of experts. None of this is physical evidence.
I'm not delusional at all, why don't you calm down, step back, and approach this discussion without talking down to me or insulting people. Like grown ups.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol >
Quick question about just one small piece of EVA footage from Apollo 16 mission.
Watch this: watch?v=CYPGopJ6ciI and tell me how something like that could be possibly faked 40 years ago. Pay attention to motion of astronaut, his backpack, dust under his feet, scale of the scenery and uniform lighting.
Remember, it's just one small piece of evailable evidence, and obviously you don't have much idea how much more is out there.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
It's ironic, but somebody actually directed me to THIS video as a proof, and as I said to him, I don't see anything in this video that couldn't be recreated with a stretch of desert, a matte painting, and some filming equipment.
So don't talk down to me, either prove the point, or stop claiming the truth.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
You don't see anything that couldn't be recreated? Well, if you knew something about history of technology, you'd know how idiotic that claim is.
If you think it was faked, prove it. I'm afraid you can prove nothing.
Obviously, your knowledge of history of space exploration is as little as knowledge of film and photography.
I don't have time to waste. Maybe you should talk directly to professional photographer first, but let me know when you think you can prove something.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Well, again BlisterHiker, I'm not the claiming anything, you are. So if it's impossible to fake these videos, then how? How do you support that claim.
I'm still waiting for something besides videos and photos. Show me some physical evidence.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
"So if it's impossible to fake these videos"
@Jcolinsol, for the last time, do not twist my words. I didn't say it's impossible to fake it. Maybe it is possible today, but it would be very difficult, much more challenging than creating all animations for Avatar.
I said it was impossible to fake 40 years ago.
Do you get it finally? If you disagree, show the evidence. It's the evidence that matters, not your sceptical delusions.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Well, why would it be impossible to fake those videos 40 years ago? What is your proof for that belief?
I'm only being skeptical because you aren't providing very solid evidence.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
Well, first you should realize the scale of your ignorance. Then, learn something. I don't have time to teach you what could take months to learn.
What I know and what I learned is not a result of some delusional views like in your case. It's a result of years of work.
.
What do you think you are? Do you think your dumb skepticism means something, that it benefits anybody? Sorry to let you know, but it means exactly nothing, and it's worth nothing.
Read my comments below again.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
I my skepticism keeps me from behaving like you, that's enough of a benefit for me.
Yes, I'm pretty ignorant on this subject, it's not an area that I've studied. That's not a proof of your argument though, a proof of your argument would be the physical evidence that I've been asking for all along.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol >
The link I provided is just this video here, but also take a look at this one showing Lunar Rover ride:
watch?v=m-6dWPf0LXE
How something like that could've been possibly faked 40 years ago?
Waiting for your precise answer. I wouldn't mind facts and details, not usual vague hoax bs.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
Um, I'm not a hoax believer, so I don't see why it's my job to prove their beliefs. I'm asking you to prove yours.
So far, you haven't proved anything, you've made a bunch of claims, and insulted me for no reason. Very mature, and indicative of your intellect.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
Yes, I have showed you proof. You're just too dumb to get it because you don't understand the subject.
Again, talk to a video expert or professional photographer near you who knows the history of Apollo program. You don't have to believe me.
I suggest you google "delusional disorder" as well.
Study the subject. Rent "Apollo 15: Man Must Explore" series on DVDs.
Read one book about Apollo program.
It should help to cure your ignorance.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker
You've shown me videos, and claimed that they were impossible to fake, and then never explained why they were impossible to fake.
I'm not speaking with a video expert, I'm speaking with you, and so far all you've done is insult and dismiss me for earnestly requesting evidence, and trying to debate the subject matter. Why not act like an adult, it would be more convincing.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
Your views are again the results of your ignorance of history, science and physics in particular.
Simulating the effects of 1/6 g gravity and vacuum was impossible on such scale 40 years ago. Again: watch motion of the astronaut, his backpack and dust.
Also, the lighting on that large area is so uniform and directional at the same time, not showing any signs of multiple or dispersed light sources, that it can be only explained by one light source: the Sun.
>
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol >
Maybe it could be faked today with very advanced cgi technology, but it would be very challenging, much more challenging that Avatar movie, for example.
Remember: that scene is just one piece from hours of lunar EVA footage you have probably never seen in your life.
Your ignorance mixed with your delusional skepticism makes me sick. I don't have time for that, and frankly, it's your problem, not mine.
Bye.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker I don't think it can be faked even today. As evidence I cite "Magnificent Desolation". By all accounts they tried very hard to make it as realistic as possible. Even used Apollo still photography. But it's still easy to tell it apart from genuine Apollo coverage. That tells me it's just not possible to fake, even today.
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal
If it can be faked at all, it's only the complete CGI that could make that possible, but scale of the task of animating those hours of EVA footage would be truly astronomical.
Even movies like "Avatar", which took work of hundreds of artists and thousands of computers, would pale in comparison. Certainly, organizing such task force for some secret project would be impossible to hide either.
Well, that's how bad things look for Moon hoax theory, which goes back 40 years ago.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker I think the CTs vastly underestimate the difficulty of creating convincing humans with CGI even today, and even astronauts in their spacesuits. Humans are really good at detecting "fake" people in CGI; read about the "uncanny valley".
Hey, it just occurred to me. I wonder if the "uncanny valley" is what causes some people to think Apollo was fake. The motions don't look fully "real" because of the reduced gravity field and the restrictions of the suit. What do you think?
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
" I think the CTs vastly underestimate the difficulty of creating convincing humans with CGI even today"
- I agree, AWR. They look at everything with their Earth-bound eyes.
Not knowing or not understanding what to expect from lunar environment, they see no problem with judging pictures and footage from different world.
I think the source of that problem is lack of education.
With good education comes respect. In hoaxers' heads, space for respect got filled with conceit.
>
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@ApolloWasReal >
Even with the latest technology, including Maya software, artists still rely heavily on motion capture to improve their computer models. It's used both for body motion as well as for facial expressions, when motion of actors wearing special suits marked with series of dots, or with dots attached to their faces, is captured and used later to animate digital characters. Even with that technology, viewers still feel something is not always natural.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@BlisterHiker Yes. I wonder: could you somehow combine motion capture on a actor in 1g to get his limb movements with CGI to simulate his overall 1/6 g ballistics? Probably not, because they interact far too much. Let's see, how about an actor in a motion capture suit on a wire rig, with CGI removing the unwanted torquing applied to the actor by the wire when he's off the ground. Maybe, but it would be quite tricky. And nothing like that existed in 1969!
ApolloWasReal 1 year ago
"could you somehow combine motion capture on an actor in 1g to get his limb movements with CGI to simulate his overall 1/6 g ballistics? Probably not"
- very good point, @ApolloWasReal.
Most of the factors involved, like mobility of space suits, are non-linear.
Combining all that to create decent simulation of an astronaut in lunar environment would be extremely tricky even today.
When we add motion and characteristics of lunar dust, it is obvious faking it perfectly would be impossible.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
exactly, "you wouldn't ask the agnostic to prove the non-existence of God." and that is why I cannot trust the government because 1/2 the people here are probably government agents anyways. Again, I have presented solid evidence that Bush is the one controlling the entire moon landing and supression of other "conspiracies". GO TO EUROPE, you'll see how much they know that we do not!!!! Our government hides things from us, man.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
..and we are supposed to just "trust" you? it's people like you who I distrust the most, good sir. You try, like any good government agent, to plant seeds of truth or commonality/cooperation in the hopes that you can gradually silence the evidence. This is EXACTLY the tactics Bush used to start the Iraq war in order to get the USA very cheap oil while the rest of the world went to the brink of starvation.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@TheJomogogo
It's not funny, Jomogogo. When I arrived home today there was a guy working on the telephone box post in my front yard. I've never seen this guy before and aside from that I've never seen anyone in that box before. I briskly entered my house and drew the curtains shut and watched him from my upstairs windows. He was messing with the wires and I am pretty sure that they have my phone line tapped now because I sometimes hear clicking or calls are quieter at times.
ymi2b 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I am pretty sure that they have my phone line tapped now"
- oh, what a terrible truF, ymi2b... You are being watched... I can't believe it!
Seriously, you all conspiracy theorists should finally wake up from your "importance dream". Do you really believe you reveal some terrible truth? It's not the truth. It's just your truF.
No serious, grown-up people think about you, losers, seriously.
Look around. None of the hoax advocates ever suffered any repressions.
>
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@ymi2b >
Bill Kaysing, so called father of that hoax idiocy, died recluse in his trailer.
Bart Sibrel is gaining weight, doing well selling his lies to gullibles like you. YT is full of hoax idiots making hundreds of videos.
Oh, the government and NASA are so afraid of your truF... LOL!
I suggest a few things:
1. Get proper education. There are mountains of evidence for Apollo missions, and no real evidence for hoax, as well as for 9/11 inside job bs etc.
2. Grow up.
>
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@ymi2b >
All grown up people know that politics has been dirty business since people started walking on two feet.
That, however, does not mean that any ignorant or loser with attention deficit who comes up with some conspiracy theory is right.
If you disagree, please present one valid argument for Moon hoax. I will gladly discuss it with you and show you how much it's worth.
BlisterHiker 1 year ago
@ymi2b Delusional bullshit.
Synthetrix 1 year ago
@Synthetrix
I'm sure all you mindless creatons are in denial as to what's going on. But yes, my videos were removed. What's more, days later, my hard drive on my computer "myseriously" crashed and was unrecoverable. What is more, my neighbor, who also does scientific research on the moon landing with me in our spare time, told me that the "garbage truck" cam through the neighborhood unscheduled. Coincidence? You guys are in DENIAL! You mess with Bush's secrets and they'll get to you too.
ymi2b 1 year ago
Well it's clear to me Wiggle. You have been in the deserts too often. Your brains still are.
Go see a doctor. It's called PTSD.
Rob260259 2 years ago 2
Pay attention at 0:39. In most lunar footage we can see a white "shockwave" of fine material such as this following boot impacts in the regolith. This does not happen with heavy beach sand as Jarrah would have us believe was used by NASA to fake regolith disturbances.
TremorHellborn 2 years ago
sigh... a "shockwave" would only happen in atmosphere, my good sir, from air compressed under the descending foot, sigh... How can you guys all ignore the coverup Bush has so cunningly constructed?!!
ymi2b 2 years ago
Wiggle, try this for a start. It is a very good example.
watch?v=23-x3inJz5E
.
Rob260259 2 years ago
What 'errors' would that be marine?
May be your 'experience' in the fields of Somalia can help me out?
Do I need to send you some more information through a PM Wiggle? YouTube has little opportunity to explain about the behavior of solid aerosols in a vacuum, about dustclouds, gravity and acceleration.
By the way; Who is Polly?
Rob260259 2 years ago
Do you happen to know WHAT study I was ending in 1983?
You talk shit and your reading is even worse. I said the TWENTY years after 1983 I was researching and getting experienced. Your Marine-history in Somalia and the PTSS is interfering again Wiggle.
At ease.
Rob260259 2 years ago
Wiggle, I don't watch Media a lot and I don't like television especially. My studies began in 1977 and ended around 1983. The twenty years that came were experiences and research. Not only both sides, but on many sides. National and international research, ESA/ESTEC, military, civil, NASA and a lot of interviews and even more reading.
I do not repeat bullshit.
Rob260259 2 years ago
Do some REAL research Wiggle. Don't just shout "fake!".
Rob260259 2 years ago
Yes. This is a really nice panoramic view on the moon.
Rob260259 2 years ago 3
Interesting how conspiracists, after 3 years, have yet to comment on this video, eh? lol
TremorHellborn 2 years ago 7
Wonder why....
Rob260259 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Over the past decade, moonhoax advocates have brought up many intriguing points regarding the Apollo missions to the moon. None of them, however, are indisputable evidence of fraud, and most are misunderstandings of basic physics or mission specifications. Several lines of solid & scientific evidence point to an actual moonlanding. The 880 pounds of moonrocks brought back to earth are the most obvious evidence. More than 30,000 pictures were brought back and hours of video.
The hoax is a hoax.
dopje31857 3 years ago 5
Boy, that's one big sound stage.
Only one problem. No sound stage in the world is big enough, not even the James Bond one in England.
And you know what that means....
This video must be for real.
Ravenflight104 3 years ago 9
@Ravenflight104
Seriously? No sound stage big enough? Get real. Have you ever seen a football stadium? Bush's cronies could've easily constructed one, created the vaccum inside, and then created the fake moon landing and just slowed the video to 1/2 speed. This accounts for EVERYTHING you blind sheep state to try to counteract the so-call conspiracy theorisits.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b No such structure is possible. Every square inch would have 15 lbs. of air pressure pushing against it from the outside. Now calculate how many square inches of outside wall it would have. Even a door on an airliner has to be braced, as it is holding more than a ton of air pressure against the partial vacuum outside at altitude.
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Pygar2
Actuly, atmusperic presure is 14.7 pounds, so if you want to argue science with me then Im happy to ablige.
I didn't literaly mean it was a football stadium. He could have used one of the many underground secret compounds the US government has, perhaps even at area 51 or one of the many underground nuclear explosion residual caverns.
Being underground, creating a vacuum would be relitively simple.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b I rounded up to the nearest significant figure in a casual conversation. So sue me.
You might go visit one of the many underground nuclear explosion residual caverns. Include me out, along with anyone else with sense.
I don't care if you build it underground or anywhere else. Neither rock nor any other known material would take the stress of a stadium-sized vacuum chamber 'full of vacuum' so to speak. Why not calculate the load of a 10' square at 14.7 psi?
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Pygar2
147 pounds is something even a timber house frame can support. Surely Bush's cronies either used a stone cavern or metal framing. I've even heard that it was a solid steel chamber that was used, but I have never been able to verify from the leads I investigated..
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Not 147 pounds, 14.7 (fourteen point seven) on *every square inch* on the outside, no matter what it is made of, and zero on the inside. That means a segment of wall only one inch across and 10 inches long, would have to support 147 lbs. It is doable over small areas, but you are pretending an impossible stadium-sized building with wide-open spaces long enough for LRV trips many minutes long, adding up to 17 total miles of travel. Calculate the exterior surface and multiply by 14.7. Ouch!
Pygar2 1 year ago
@ymi2b Oh, and by the way... who was George Bush in 1969 that anyone would build a doghouse for him? You are letting your BDS run away with you.
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Pygar2
Sigh... Bush is part of the whole one-world-government scheme.
His coup of illegally stealing the 2001 ellections shows how they manipulated everything to place him as power head over the US government, running things behind the scenes as a dictatorship. You think your vote matters? No. The BP oil leak in the gulf of Mexico isn't Obama's responsibility nor fault, nothing he can do about it, it's all G.W. Bush's control, operating in the dark. Remember, he was & remains an oil czar.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Plenty of oil co. execs then and now. Who was Bush *IN 1969* that anyone would commit treason on his account? Again, you are letting your BDS get the better of you... at this rate, by next week you'll be blaming the lousy weather at Valley Forge on him.
I suppose you are also one of those people who believe everything is a Illuminati Reptilian Skull and Bones Trilateral Rothchilds Bilderberger CFR Zionist Nazi Mafia CIA NWO Stonecutters No Homers plot?
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Ravenflight104 And to make matters worse, the hoaxbuffs would have us believe this huge studio was a vacuum chamber. That's tight, one larger than the Astrodome, with no internal supports, and 14.7 PSI pushing on every square inch of the exterior. You try to explain things like that to people, and they just ignore the fact they've been proven wrong.
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Pygar2 : I've not been proven wrong in the least, in fact, your statement only confirms my point! Do the math, 14.7 PSI and a stadium has an exterior shell volume of 216.090.000 square inches (oh America and her inches and pounds) = 3.176.523.000 pounds to support. Well, guess what you idiots, we live in 14.7 PSI every day, and we have stadiums and structures supporting this EVERY DAY. The tensile strength of the materials is far greater than this.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b You are not taking into account that a vacuum chamber would have these massive stresses put on it from one side and not the other. Yes, every stadium in the world today is experiencing 14.7 psi (we inherited pounds from our beloved mother England), but it is also 14.7 psi on the inside, countering it. That much from the outside with vacuum inside, would crush any imaginable structure like a beer can. Remember, you couldn't even have interior braces as the fakery would need open spaces.
Pygar2 1 year ago
@Pygar2 : I did technical scientific research and testing with my neighbor this weekend and created a partial vacuum in a can by lowering it upside down into a pan of boiling water, thereby causing an expansion of the atmospheric gasses within said can. I then allowed the submerged can having reduced atomic gasses to cool, after time the can promptly imploded. By my calculations, if the can wall was 9.5 times thicker @ ~1mm it could not crush, so if a stadium had 1mm walls it would work.
ymi2b 1 year ago
@ymi2b Only if the stadium had the same square inches of surface as the can. Find the square inches of the can, times 14.7. That is how many PSI the can would take with a vacuum inside. Then calculate your Vomit Comet/Flying Stadium TV studio. The walls would have to be many feet thick. At a guess, the planet's entire steel production for several years. All to save them the trouble of putting people inside moonbound gear, when we and the Russians had a proven ability to send gear to the Moon.