@SlyNine I give a standing ovation to slippymicky for being one hilarious bastard, and a gigantic middle finger to the sorry son of a bitch named SlyNine for being such a fucking moronic douchecopter and fighting such a sorry losing battle against this genius.
In all honesty, you really need to speed the video up by approx. 245% to get it right. Drop an object from a height of 1 meter and it will take 1.11 seconds to fall on the Moon and 0.45 seconds on the Earth. This difference of 245% remains constant, no matter what the height to fall. Speed up ANY moon video by 245% to get the 'fall rates' right, and tell me that all the other motion is not highly exaggerated. Now how in the world do you explain that?
I can't but wonder why the Hoax-believers think that NASA, when the president asked them to do something to show the world that USA was at least equal to Soviet in space, set out to hire the most incompetent idiots they could find, to create hoaxes that every amateur could reveal. And, that they at the same time hired the most competent aerospace companies in the world to design and build gigant rockets and complicated spaceships...
@YDDES yooo buddy wake upp look at some footage moons gravity is 1/6th of are planet dat means u can almost fly if u jump high enough dis is all part of the plan to brain wash uuu we had to show other contries or fake to other countries dat we went up there so we can look intelligent ... and oh yea answer this question .. when dey arrived at sea there was 3 astronauts and in vids u only see 2 .. how come????
@Elbabyboy69 Are You joking, or are You TOTALLY ignorant? Try to get some facts before making totally stupid comments.
If they had been naked, they could have jumped higher. But in those clumsy, stiff spacesuits they could hardly move at all. Much less make any high jumps.
Don't You even know that 1 man orbited the Moon in the CSM-module while 2 landed in the LEM??? So, they where actually 3!
I'm not sure if this footage proves much, but if you go to moonmovie (dot com), you can buy a copy of Was It Just a Paper Moon. That movie shows a lot more Rover footage, and should wake up some people.
But humor me, Tell me, if the same side of the moon always points at the earth. And the moon takes 28 days to orbit the earth, why should the stars move faster in the lunar sky.
Further Say it spins at 1 RPM ( M being month) how would a star move faster, that would mean it would appear and disappear more frequently in the night sky, If the moon was spinning EVEN SLOWER then the earth.
Unless you can respond with a higher IQ then a 8 yo don't bother.
Actually the KNOWEN laws of the universe say it doesn't move much at all.
The laws of silly moan hoax believers however are different. They conform to no knowen laws of the universe. That's why they can make the claim the moon landing didn't happen, and believe it!
Of course not knowen laws of the universe! Only KNOWN laws of the universe. That's why we KNOW, no one landed on the moon. Thus believe it. You should as well and end your torment of believing a lie. Come back to reality.
Your argument lacks any qualifiers to make it valid and you're comments on spelling are pathetic. Spelling is not the issue, the fact that you resort to that should show you how irrelevant your point is.
Spelling is an issue. Without it how could you say what you mean or mean what you say. Trying to distract away from the real issue are you? Now that pathetic! LOL!
No spelling isn't the issue, The issue is what proof do you have they didn't land on the moon. But by turning to a spelling error, which is an ad-hominem attack. You are trying to avoid the issue.
No you are trying to avoid the issue claiming spelling means nothing when it does. Quit trying to avoid the issue of duck tape in space. It's never been in space by the way for we have never taken it. The claim it was used is strictly to explain why it is seen in the film. When is was discovered by those that have seen through the lie of us landing on the moon.
Wow you are retarded. Your reasoning is flawed, Somehow, you think this argument was about spelling, even though you have misspelled things as often as anyone.
Now you are talking about duct tape in space. I'm done with this debate, as you obviously do not have the analytical skills to carry one on.
No I don't. You keep going on about spelling and are just mad that I proved it! LOL! Na na Nah na Nahhh! Your efforts to distract and mis-inform have been exposed for the whole internet to see! ha ha ha! LOL! Now what are you going to do? The gig is up about landing on the moon and you efforts at mis-informing!
Its tiny particles thrown in to the air. What ever it is, it should be trapped in the vortex created by the car, exp. if its going twice as fast as shown.
Also you'll notice that the "Earth" and "Sun"in all the "moon footage" are not moving at all. Seeing as how the moon is smaller. It would move across the moon's sky very fast compared to us seeing the Sun and Moon from Earth. Because it's a sound stage. Not the moon. Other wise "day and night" would come a go a lot faster than the footage shows. The jig is up. Buzz needs to come clean in his life time about being a an...well lets be generous and say actor! LOL!
I've watched this bit of footage elsewhere on Youtube.
Could you explain why the camera movement appears to move and shake etc. very naturaly as you'd expect but the buggy and the dust are moving in a way they wouldn't normaly do on earth?
If this is being played at closer to "Earth speeds" why is the camerashaking around unnaturaly?!
Convincing answer please rather than fobbing me off "it's tampered with".
As far as I'm aware, movie special effects weren't up to much 40 years ago.
More than likely they are using a mixture of volcanic ash, talcum powder, flour and sand or such things. To give it an other worldy look on camera. So it appears to fall fast but also hand there. Plus sticking to the boots.
Yea... You are. Or you'd have an explanation for all the evidence against you, instead of just ignoring what doesn't fit in to your bubble and changing the subject.
The Moon takes 28 days for it to orbit the earth. A day on the moon would be 28 days. THEREFORE THE STARS WOULD MOVE IN THE LUNAR NIGHT SKY SLOWER THEN THEY DO ON EARTH.
My guess is you're daddy doesn't believe in the moon landing and since you still think he's superman he must be right and all the idiots online are wrong.
You're in for a lifetime of disappointments because of where you take your information from.
This video proves they did land on the moon. Look at the dust from the wheels. Lunar regolith is very fine and had this been filmed on earth, the dust would remain hovering in the air.
Mythbusters did a really nice comparison of video speeds and showed that slowing down actual footage to 1/2 its speed does not replicate actual moon footage. Check it. The moon landings were real, enough with the hoax talk it was boring 30 years ago.
I find the best way to approach the argument with idiots about 'faked moon landings' is too just not argue with them. They lack imagination, and the intelligence to investigate their claims. I hope NASA goes back there soon, although the news out of Washington with Obama's funding is not good. Wants to use the Atlas V booster for low earth orbit flight. :-(
lmao, yer i suppose moon hoaxers thinK the INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION IS A HOAX TO, LMAO go watch NASA TV... you can see the shuttles docking and leaving for earth its bleeding great.
WHAT, WHATS THAT, THE RUSSIANS OH YER THE SPACE RACE,
WHAT, WHATS THAT, THE RUSSIANS HAVE NEVER SAID A WORD ABOUT THE AMERICANS FAKING THE MOON LANDINGS, COULD THAT BE BECAUSE THEY KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THEY DID GO TO THE MOON, SEVERAL TIMES. LMAO.
even double speed the dust should fall 3 times slower than on earth - 6th the gravity.absolutely fake- u dont have to be a scientist - its pretty simple math. 2X6=3 ?????? now what? whats next?
balageindublin, Okkkkkk.... according to your math knowledge, if g_moon = (1/6)g_earth, dust would fal down 6 times slower than on Earth. Unfortunately, you are wrong. Why? Because the time it takes to any particles to fall down isn't a linear equation. The formula involving time of free fall T, the gravity g and the distance x is: T=sqrt(2x/g).
g_earth= 9,81 m/s² and g_moon=1,62m/s². So T_earth/T_moon = 2,46. That means any objects on the moon fall down 2,46 times slower than on Earth.
Sorry I made a little mistake. It is T_moon/T_earth = 2,46. So any objects on the moon fall down 2,46 times slower than on Earth.
But don't forget that on Earth, there is air resistance!! On the moon, there is no air. Thus, dust on Earth would fall slower than on the moon because of air resistance!
Where are the dust clouds you would see on Earth? I ride my dune buggy in death valley alot and it looks different than this. Looks like the rover is in a vacuum to me. Like it's on the moon.
@Smacked980 yeah there is something wrong with that sand u can see falling of the weel at the end when he hits the break. It just dont looks like is should . This have to be real or maybe nasa found the perfect camera to film this with a special frecuency that make is looks so magical. I just wanna say, if u americans faked the hole thing, pulling the biggest scam in history, ur RLY deserve some creds and dont think u fooled me. But if its real (like i hope) its awesome
@Smacked980 Nope. At 1/6th the Earth's gravity, the regolith would be flying all over the place, not just lightly turned up like it is here. Wake-up you brainwashed morons, it's ALL fake. You guys seriously sound very stupid and very ignorant.
@yesiamawizardjonny dudeee dats wha i been trying to say to everybody woulding the rover be jumping alot higher since its hitting lil bumbs? and plus were da HEMI on da dam thing lol
@yesiamawizardjonny Sand still wouldn't react like that, and sand can still cloud up. Get out of the house and experience the real world away from your computer, THEN pull your head out of your ass.
Whats the topic here Guy in space uniform driving a buggy down a beach? im looking for some Narly Surf videos and I get this crap that looks like its filmed in a studio I work at in Nevada oops sorry thats classified I shouldnt have said that Do not read this!
lol, I love that they just say "appearing to behave as if it were on earth". You notice that there's no dust cloud at all after it comes to a full stop and all the dust falls? Ever see someone driving through the desert on Earth?
And look at the dust plume that goes up at 00:05 -- if you ever see dust behaving like that on Earth, you need to set the bong down.
This is why I listen to nutter, you do research and find something cool. If I ignored lunar how nuts I would never have seen the dust (ok I think it is cool) And If I ignore creationists I would not know why Venus spins the wrong way, or the moons move away fro the earth at a much slower rate than it does now.
Or why the guy who installed the super-duper motor didn't squeal, assuming he was one of the select handful of people who knew it was a hoax, and not one of the thousands of people who were intimately involved in the project but were totally unaware that they were supporting the greatest hoax in human history.
Learn some physics. Of course if you speed it up it's going to look the same on earth. Gravity affects things more slowly when there is less of it. It's similar to why when you make tiny explosions with firecrackers, and you slow them down it looks like a large explosion. It's all about relativity. You fail.
Don't forget that new NASA maps prove the gamma radiation on the Moon is higher than the surface of the Sun. USA has outsourced Apolloscam. Communist China got caught this month faking their "new" Moon photos: PirateNews*org/hollywood*html
I've been slandered and 'corrected' by people who know nothing of physics or common aerodynamic effects. This has turned quite ridiculous, I may just give up and let them have their fun. I am glad to see that there is someone else with reason on their side here though.
Looks like all my posts about karman vortex street vortices have been removed by phanzana in this thread. Nothing like erasing all references to an argument that proves their hoax fantasy wrong.
Common you just don't have the SENSIBILITY to see how much this is different from earth haha it's si evident this was not on earth haha you make me laugh you incults
hahaha idiots this video proves it was done on earth....watch the sand from the tires fall down not up..like driving your car on the beach....HAHAHA cant beleive you all missed this fact...but im sure even though the moon doesnt have gravity you will come up with some lame excuse...
You're right the entire production budget of the filming of the Apollo missions was spent on creating acres of 3 inch thick fine grained micro-particles of heavy metals, just to fool watchers into believing Americans were on the Moon. Who is the gullible pea brain?
Why is it that you cannot throw a speck of dust 100 feet into the air? The answer is, AIR. Without atmosphere the laws of physics dictate that objects with very tiny mass can go very high in low gravity situations. Armstrong described the moon's surface as a very fine powder--not like sand, but much tinier. Those tiny particles spun by the rover's wheels should have shot into the air not just a few feet, but 20, 40, even 100 feet. Is that what you see here? That's not what I see.
Gravity is the reason you cannot throw a speck of dust 100 feet in the air. Air causes friction but is not (much of)an attractive force. Take a fucking course in physics. The Dust from the rovers does not drift because there is no air, but it falls because of gravity. A fine powder on earth would blow all over the place.
I've taken several courses in physics and I know the formulas which compute how high that speck of dust goes. And guess what--they all have "m" in it--the MASS of the goddamn dust particle. And when "m" is very very low, the height gets very very high. I suppose now you're going to tell me that even the lightest speck of moon dust is really very heavy??
You are an absolute idiot. The M does not matter. Only the V, g, and theta. The acceleration due to gravity is the same on every object regardless of their mass. You have either not taken any courses in physics, or perhaps you have but failed them absolutely. You make me laugh, thank you.
So let me get this straight. You have a see-saw on the moon. On one end you put a bowling ball, and a tiny marble. On the other end, you drop a 10 ton weight. Obviously both the marble and the bowling ball fly upward very quickly. You're saying that the bowling ball will travel up just as far, and at the same speed, as the marble? Please clarify.
Gravity is an acceleration that effects things of all weights equally. As long as the objects are moving at the same initial velocity they will. It is not dependent on mass whatsoever. Please review basic physics.....
I'm not asking about two objects which begin at the same velocity. I'm asking about two objects which undergo the same force. Forget about the conspiracy theories for a minute and answer my question regarding the fulcrum, if you can.
The two objects are accelerated at the same acceleration, by the seesaw not the same force, for the same amount of time. Therefore the velocities are the same at the release point.
Haw haw, so how do you explain the dust moving in nice parabolas indicatin the lack of any atmosphere! Yup, this was shot somewhere where there is no air..... hmmmm... where could that be do you think?
looks like a perfect parabolic path to me. I see very little that would suggest an atmosphere, as the particles were not caught in a vortex at the back of the vehicle.
alittle common sense + 8th grade science taught me that.
You still don't explain the lack of aerodynamic properties. Why the dust made it so far up when sand on Earth would only come up a few inches and then billow, or how a Moon Rover with a combined horsepower of 1 could possibly travel at such a high speed according to the reduced film speed theory. You have no business talking shadows until you've proven any of these to be normal Earth properties.
It looks fine at 1.5 speed, better than at normal speed. The material is damp, it can been seen clumping at the end. At high speed it is thrown in the air and behaves like dust, is caught in the atmosphere and stopped.
Also, check out the original video the poster links to. As well as being sped up, the video has been desaturated and horribly, horribly reduced in quality. One can only assume it didn't look earthlike enough for the conspiracy nuts when you could see it properly.
The video was speed up and saved. No intentional degradation was added. I'm undecided on whether we went to the moon or not, but because one may have a different view than you, this makes one a "nut"? Perhaps it also gives you the right to make unfounded claims. I of the believe half of what you see and none of what you hear generation. I would rather have facts in front of me before making a firm decision. So far, I don't have enough to decide one way or the other.
You also appear to be of the "every opinion is of equal value" generation. I don't think moon hoaxers are nuts because their opinion differs from mine, I think they're nuts because their opinion completely contradicts all reason and evidence - they choose to hold up some tiny portion of evidence that looks funny and declare it conclusive proof that the moon landings didn't happen, while ignoring overwhelming evidence that they did.
There doesn't exist such as thig as "evidence". It is all a matter of proabability. The most perfect evidence can be faked. Now, if you look at all the footage, the rocks and the pictures, there's not a single indicator that they are fake. No, there isn't. All the supposed "errors" are misinterpretation by people that don't know physics or optics. That means that either the NASA knew what they were doing when they faked the evidence, or that we did indeed land on the moon.
to its credit, the dust particles fly in a perfect ballistic trajectory and they do not form dust clouds. This movie was AT LEAST clearly filmed in a vaccum environment.
Only a first sight. Do some measurements, project trajectories and calculate speeds and you'll conclude that this was NOT filmed on earth (or it was filmed on a giant vaccumm chamber).
How come the Horizon ALWAYS looks like it's only like 20 metres away?
ManOfOZ2011 5 months ago
@ManOfOZ2011 Because the moon is about 1/4 the size of earth. So the horizon is much closer.
TheFluffyDuck 2 months ago
And by the way, the moon landing was fake. Poorly acted too.
JMM316 6 months ago
@SlyNine I give a standing ovation to slippymicky for being one hilarious bastard, and a gigantic middle finger to the sorry son of a bitch named SlyNine for being such a fucking moronic douchecopter and fighting such a sorry losing battle against this genius.
JMM316 6 months ago
moon fake
yourmajezty 7 months ago
Lunar Rally Competition, 1970.
AManNamedCM2 10 months ago
In all honesty, you really need to speed the video up by approx. 245% to get it right. Drop an object from a height of 1 meter and it will take 1.11 seconds to fall on the Moon and 0.45 seconds on the Earth. This difference of 245% remains constant, no matter what the height to fall. Speed up ANY moon video by 245% to get the 'fall rates' right, and tell me that all the other motion is not highly exaggerated. Now how in the world do you explain that?
awizardalso 1 year ago
There were trees exploding in the woods.
loonmaniac 1 year ago
ffs man landed on the moon, but try saying they didnt to the people who actually went up there cause someone did and the astronaut punched him ^^
spo666tty 1 year ago
@spo666tty lol your an idiot there is a ton of evidence that says we didn't (well the first time anyway)
lance30038 1 year ago
I can't but wonder why the Hoax-believers think that NASA, when the president asked them to do something to show the world that USA was at least equal to Soviet in space, set out to hire the most incompetent idiots they could find, to create hoaxes that every amateur could reveal. And, that they at the same time hired the most competent aerospace companies in the world to design and build gigant rockets and complicated spaceships...
YDDES 1 year ago
@YDDES yooo buddy wake upp look at some footage moons gravity is 1/6th of are planet dat means u can almost fly if u jump high enough dis is all part of the plan to brain wash uuu we had to show other contries or fake to other countries dat we went up there so we can look intelligent ... and oh yea answer this question .. when dey arrived at sea there was 3 astronauts and in vids u only see 2 .. how come????
Elbabyboy69 1 year ago
@Elbabyboy69 Are You joking, or are You TOTALLY ignorant? Try to get some facts before making totally stupid comments.
If they had been naked, they could have jumped higher. But in those clumsy, stiff spacesuits they could hardly move at all. Much less make any high jumps.
Don't You even know that 1 man orbited the Moon in the CSM-module while 2 landed in the LEM??? So, they where actually 3!
Give me a breake...
YDDES 1 year ago
The CIA, the Catholic Church, the Bavarian Illuminati, the Greys from Zeta Reticuli, and Elvis Presley were all in on the moon hoax.
loonmaniac 1 year ago
I'm not sure if this footage proves much, but if you go to moonmovie (dot com), you can buy a copy of Was It Just a Paper Moon. That movie shows a lot more Rover footage, and should wake up some people.
Watchdis44 1 year ago
I would have been the idiot to flip it XD
peepeevagi 1 year ago
Learned his lesson! LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
I almost feel sorry for SlyNine. Or should I say: @SlyNine! LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
But humor me, Tell me, if the same side of the moon always points at the earth. And the moon takes 28 days to orbit the earth, why should the stars move faster in the lunar sky.
Further Say it spins at 1 RPM ( M being month) how would a star move faster, that would mean it would appear and disappear more frequently in the night sky, If the moon was spinning EVEN SLOWER then the earth.
Unless you can respond with a higher IQ then a 8 yo don't bother.
SlyNine 2 years ago
Blame Caesar.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
But humor me, Tell me, if the same side of the moon always points at the earth, How does the earth move significantly in the lunar sky.
SlyNine 2 years ago
Because of the laws of the universe silly.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Actually the KNOWEN laws of the universe say it doesn't move much at all.
The laws of silly moan hoax believers however are different. They conform to no knowen laws of the universe. That's why they can make the claim the moon landing didn't happen, and believe it!
SlyNine 2 years ago
Of course not knowen laws of the universe! Only KNOWN laws of the universe. That's why we KNOW, no one landed on the moon. Thus believe it. You should as well and end your torment of believing a lie. Come back to reality.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
lol thats it, you attack my spelling of a word, Theirfor you are correct.
You're an idiot man.
SlyNine 2 years ago
Your spelling is incorrect. Whos ethe idiot now? LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
@Slippymicky
Your argument lacks any qualifiers to make it valid and you're comments on spelling are pathetic. Spelling is not the issue, the fact that you resort to that should show you how irrelevant your point is.
SlyNine 2 years ago
Spelling is an issue. Without it how could you say what you mean or mean what you say. Trying to distract away from the real issue are you? Now that pathetic! LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
@Slippymicky
No spelling isn't the issue, The issue is what proof do you have they didn't land on the moon. But by turning to a spelling error, which is an ad-hominem attack. You are trying to avoid the issue.
SlyNine 2 years ago
No you are trying to avoid the issue claiming spelling means nothing when it does. Quit trying to avoid the issue of duck tape in space. It's never been in space by the way for we have never taken it. The claim it was used is strictly to explain why it is seen in the film. When is was discovered by those that have seen through the lie of us landing on the moon.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
@Slippymicky
Wow you are retarded. Your reasoning is flawed, Somehow, you think this argument was about spelling, even though you have misspelled things as often as anyone.
Now you are talking about duct tape in space. I'm done with this debate, as you obviously do not have the analytical skills to carry one on.
SlyNine 2 years ago
No I don't. You keep going on about spelling and are just mad that I proved it! LOL! Na na Nah na Nahhh! Your efforts to distract and mis-inform have been exposed for the whole internet to see! ha ha ha! LOL! Now what are you going to do? The gig is up about landing on the moon and you efforts at mis-informing!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
But he couldn't resist one last effort to distract. By brining up " analytical skills". Caught in the act again! LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Safe to say he gave up in the face of logic and facts.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
@Slippymicky
BTW I think you meant, that's pathetic, Now how can you comment on someone else's grammar when your own is in question.
SlyNine 2 years ago
That was just a false leed to prove you are trying to distract from the real issue.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Question is, why do you continue to delude yourself? The moon landing happened.
You have no defense that makes any sense, No reason behind your argument, just face it man.
SlyNine 2 years ago
So why doesn't the dirt vortex behind the disturbed air, if its a fake. Tell me that!
SlyNine 2 years ago
It's not real dirt that's why. LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Its tiny particles thrown in to the air. What ever it is, it should be trapped in the vortex created by the car, exp. if its going twice as fast as shown.
SlyNine 2 years ago
i dunno... it was going pretty slow to get such a huge roost at the end. I think it's legit. and ur all looney
MarcBassoFilms 2 years ago
Also you'll notice that the "Earth" and "Sun"in all the "moon footage" are not moving at all. Seeing as how the moon is smaller. It would move across the moon's sky very fast compared to us seeing the Sun and Moon from Earth. Because it's a sound stage. Not the moon. Other wise "day and night" would come a go a lot faster than the footage shows. The jig is up. Buzz needs to come clean in his life time about being a an...well lets be generous and say actor! LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
The same part of the moon always faces earth. Since the earth spins faster then the moon can orbit the earth. The moon has longer days.
How the hell does the moon being smaller make the planets move across its sky faster. How the hell did you come up with that half baked idea.
SlyNine 2 years ago
It's the truth. LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Typical moon hoax believer logic. Self evident and nothing else to back it up.
You can create questions. But you cannot answers anything or explain your theories.
SlyNine 2 years ago
*hums Yakety Sax, Benny Hil theme*
loperspest 2 years ago
Almost but not quite. The dust in this
seems to fall quicker while the buggy still bounces around slightly slower than it naturaly would on earth.
MOTORMOUTH2009 2 years ago
That's because the speed has been tampered with twice. Once by Nasa and once by speeding it up. We didn't land on the moon.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
I've watched this bit of footage elsewhere on Youtube.
Could you explain why the camera movement appears to move and shake etc. very naturaly as you'd expect but the buggy and the dust are moving in a way they wouldn't normaly do on earth?
If this is being played at closer to "Earth speeds" why is the camerashaking around unnaturaly?!
Convincing answer please rather than fobbing me off "it's tampered with".
As far as I'm aware, movie special effects weren't up to much 40 years ago.
MOTORMOUTH2009 2 years ago
More than likely they are using a mixture of volcanic ash, talcum powder, flour and sand or such things. To give it an other worldy look on camera. So it appears to fall fast but also hand there. Plus sticking to the boots.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Never tell your parents that it will make them cry to see how weird and stupid you are.
TheJomogogo 2 years ago
Nonsense! I'm an Anthropologist! I'm not the one believing in modern myths. LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Yea... You are. Or you'd have an explanation for all the evidence against you, instead of just ignoring what doesn't fit in to your bubble and changing the subject.
The Moon takes 28 days for it to orbit the earth. A day on the moon would be 28 days. THEREFORE THE STARS WOULD MOVE IN THE LUNAR NIGHT SKY SLOWER THEN THEY DO ON EARTH.
SlyNine 2 years ago
The Earth never moves in the lunar sky, Its always in pretty much the same spot, because the same part of the moon always faces the earth.
SlyNine 2 years ago
Oh yes it does. LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
You're just mad that your heros are all liars. LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
lol ohh noo. phhht. really man, is that the best you got.
oh yes it does, and your just mad.
ok man, If you just wanted to show everyone what an idiot you are, you just did a good job.
SlyNine 2 years ago
My guess is you're daddy doesn't believe in the moon landing and since you still think he's superman he must be right and all the idiots online are wrong.
You're in for a lifetime of disappointments because of where you take your information from.
SlyNine 2 years ago
Superman is not from earth. I deal in reality. LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
@Slippymicky
You THINK you deal in reality, when all you do is ignore facts. Somone will debunk somthing, you won't contest it.
Yet you will start using it again in another debate. Isn't that a sign of ignoring reality.
SlyNine 2 years ago
No. It's sticking to the facts. LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
Nonsense! They're not American! LOL!
Slippymicky 2 years ago
I pity you.
pacificguitarist 2 years ago
Or it could have been iron fillings made even finer.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
It most likely is attached to wires as well.
Slippymicky 2 years ago
This video proves they did land on the moon. Look at the dust from the wheels. Lunar regolith is very fine and had this been filmed on earth, the dust would remain hovering in the air.
rcblob 2 years ago
I spent ages looking at paris-dakar and sandrail footage. Couldn't find anything where the dust acted like this.
drewid88 2 years ago 2
its even harder to fake a moon landing than beeing on the moon
MatthiasBaconcock 2 years ago 2
LMAO Good call!!!!
Preacher60 3 years ago
Mythbusters did a really nice comparison of video speeds and showed that slowing down actual footage to 1/2 its speed does not replicate actual moon footage. Check it. The moon landings were real, enough with the hoax talk it was boring 30 years ago.
juane414 3 years ago 4
Hey juane414,
I find the best way to approach the argument with idiots about 'faked moon landings' is too just not argue with them. They lack imagination, and the intelligence to investigate their claims. I hope NASA goes back there soon, although the news out of Washington with Obama's funding is not good. Wants to use the Atlas V booster for low earth orbit flight. :-(
Preacher60 3 years ago
Play a moon-hoaxer at double speed and you get stupid twice as fast too.
TheJediCharles 3 years ago 24
lmao, yer i suppose moon hoaxers thinK the INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION IS A HOAX TO, LMAO go watch NASA TV... you can see the shuttles docking and leaving for earth its bleeding great.
WHAT, WHATS THAT, THE RUSSIANS OH YER THE SPACE RACE,
WHAT, WHATS THAT, THE RUSSIANS HAVE NEVER SAID A WORD ABOUT THE AMERICANS FAKING THE MOON LANDINGS, COULD THAT BE BECAUSE THEY KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THEY DID GO TO THE MOON, SEVERAL TIMES. LMAO.
WATCH SUM DAKAR RALLY SEE HOW DUST ACTS ON EARTH.
HOAXERS LMAO
TheeBaker 3 years ago 4
americans are faking the world peace protectors(hehehehe).....faking a moon landing is nothing for them
faetofagitosou 2 years ago
defo true, and possibly possible! but not
TheeBaker 2 years ago
yeah right
they did 9/11 now they can colonize mars :D
partxone 2 years ago
LMAO Good Call!!!
Preacher60 3 years ago
even double speed the dust should fall 3 times slower than on earth - 6th the gravity.absolutely fake- u dont have to be a scientist - its pretty simple math. 2X6=3 ?????? now what? whats next?
balageindublin 3 years ago
balageindublin, Okkkkkk.... according to your math knowledge, if g_moon = (1/6)g_earth, dust would fal down 6 times slower than on Earth. Unfortunately, you are wrong. Why? Because the time it takes to any particles to fall down isn't a linear equation. The formula involving time of free fall T, the gravity g and the distance x is: T=sqrt(2x/g).
g_earth= 9,81 m/s² and g_moon=1,62m/s². So T_earth/T_moon = 2,46. That means any objects on the moon fall down 2,46 times slower than on Earth.
GrifOli 3 years ago
Sorry I made a little mistake. It is T_moon/T_earth = 2,46. So any objects on the moon fall down 2,46 times slower than on Earth.
But don't forget that on Earth, there is air resistance!! On the moon, there is no air. Thus, dust on Earth would fall slower than on the moon because of air resistance!
GrifOli 3 years ago
Where are the dust clouds you would see on Earth? I ride my dune buggy in death valley alot and it looks different than this. Looks like the rover is in a vacuum to me. Like it's on the moon.
Smacked980 3 years ago 21
i have an answer to all of this "moon landing" thing : they build a stage right in the moon so they could make their fake landing footages.
(a lot more convenient for those "physics behavior" things)
So everybody is right, they went to the moon AND made a fake landing.
ubob3 3 years ago
lol.... nice one dude, i like it!!!
TheeBaker 2 years ago
nah they built a stage on MARS cos the moon dint look mooney enough on film, i should know i was there, im the guy in the white suit thingy. :)
beeejay2 2 years ago
@Smacked980 yeah there is something wrong with that sand u can see falling of the weel at the end when he hits the break. It just dont looks like is should . This have to be real or maybe nasa found the perfect camera to film this with a special frecuency that make is looks so magical. I just wanna say, if u americans faked the hole thing, pulling the biggest scam in history, ur RLY deserve some creds and dont think u fooled me. But if its real (like i hope) its awesome
VicJLo 1 year ago
@VicJLo It is real you fucking dork. Humans did land on the moon. Anyone who thinks otherwise is mentally defective.
loonmaniac 1 year ago
@loonmaniac Ur a dork telling me im a dork
VicJLo 1 year ago
@loonmaniac No, you're mentally defective. Tell me how the LEM created fire on the moon in a vacuum you fucking moron.
yesiamawizardjonny 1 year ago
@yesiamawizardjonny It was from a method perfected by The Mothman and Jim Morrison's ghost.
loonmaniac 1 year ago
@loonmaniac umm apperently ur mentally defective your self .. your name says it all LOON MANIAC lol
Elbabyboy69 1 year ago
@Smacked980 Nope. At 1/6th the Earth's gravity, the regolith would be flying all over the place, not just lightly turned up like it is here. Wake-up you brainwashed morons, it's ALL fake. You guys seriously sound very stupid and very ignorant.
yesiamawizardjonny 1 year ago
@yesiamawizardjonny dudeee dats wha i been trying to say to everybody woulding the rover be jumping alot higher since its hitting lil bumbs? and plus were da HEMI on da dam thing lol
Elbabyboy69 1 year ago
@yesiamawizardjonny
'You guys seriously sound very stupid and very ignorant.'
Speak for yourself. Your comments show a nearly complete lack of understanding of physics, chemistry and civil behavior.
Monkeyboysdontknow 11 months ago
@Smacked980 ur comment did not make sence bro but if u were trying to be funny... not happening buddy
Elbabyboy69 1 year ago
@Smacked980 Sand was used so there would be no clouds off dust. Use your head, but only after you pull it out of your ass...
yesiamawizardjonny 11 months ago
@yesiamawizardjonny Sand still wouldn't react like that, and sand can still cloud up. Get out of the house and experience the real world away from your computer, THEN pull your head out of your ass.
James76255 8 months ago
Comment removed
James76255 8 months ago
@yesiamawizardjonny Whoops. That was for someone else. Maybe I need to pull my head out of my ass. lol
James76255 8 months ago
That jittery, cranked up video of the LRV does NOT look at all like the natural speed for anything on earth.
satweavers 3 years ago 4
It looks exactly like on Earth
Cacadore 3 years ago
With this kinda dust there should be a dust cloud trail behind the vehicle for a coupla seconds
Also, the dust is going anormaly high for the speed of the vehicle (as if it was 1/6 of the weight).
How would they have staged this, i dunno.
That being said i dunno where to put myself about this "fake" thing
ubob3 3 years ago
stereoscopy. learn about it. moon hoaxers have no grounds against progressively receding landscapes towards infinity.
britoca 3 years ago
Whats the topic here Guy in space uniform driving a buggy down a beach? im looking for some Narly Surf videos and I get this crap that looks like its filmed in a studio I work at in Nevada oops sorry thats classified I shouldnt have said that Do not read this!
hurricanewinzz 3 years ago
lol, I love that they just say "appearing to behave as if it were on earth". You notice that there's no dust cloud at all after it comes to a full stop and all the dust falls? Ever see someone driving through the desert on Earth?
And look at the dust plume that goes up at 00:05 -- if you ever see dust behaving like that on Earth, you need to set the bong down.
Persuter 3 years ago 5
This is why I listen to nutter, you do research and find something cool. If I ignored lunar how nuts I would never have seen the dust (ok I think it is cool) And If I ignore creationists I would not know why Venus spins the wrong way, or the moons move away fro the earth at a much slower rate than it does now.
lamnaa 3 years ago
Yes, learn some physics. To get this to appear as it it would be on earth you'd have to speed it up. 2.44949x.
Jimbacsi 4 years ago 2
4 .25hp electric motors =/= 30mph sand driving
Shuttle128 4 years ago
The hoaxer can simply claim the motors were stronger than what was publicised.
SirMildredPierce 4 years ago
True, but he cannot provide a good argument for where the 75 hp or greater engine could possibly be placed.
Shuttle128 4 years ago
Or why the guy who installed the super-duper motor didn't squeal, assuming he was one of the select handful of people who knew it was a hoax, and not one of the thousands of people who were intimately involved in the project but were totally unaware that they were supporting the greatest hoax in human history.
SirMildredPierce 4 years ago 2
Keep in mind many types of dirt dust and gravel being used. Volcanic rock dust and grit behaves in the way the lunar rover kicked it up!
EGMAG 4 years ago
Learn some physics. Of course if you speed it up it's going to look the same on earth. Gravity affects things more slowly when there is less of it. It's similar to why when you make tiny explosions with firecrackers, and you slow them down it looks like a large explosion. It's all about relativity. You fail.
StephenTCooney 4 years ago 3
Don't forget that new NASA maps prove the gamma radiation on the Moon is higher than the surface of the Sun. USA has outsourced Apolloscam. Communist China got caught this month faking their "new" Moon photos: PirateNews*org/hollywood*html
apolloscam 4 years ago
I've been slandered and 'corrected' by people who know nothing of physics or common aerodynamic effects. This has turned quite ridiculous, I may just give up and let them have their fun. I am glad to see that there is someone else with reason on their side here though.
Shuttle128 4 years ago 5
Thank you! A fellow aerodynamicist! Or at least someone who knows something about separation vorticies.
Shuttle128 4 years ago
Looks like all my posts about karman vortex street vortices have been removed by phanzana in this thread. Nothing like erasing all references to an argument that proves their hoax fantasy wrong.
Grommo 4 years ago
I'd like to see a Moon rover, with a grand total of 1 HP drive like that on Earth. Didn't think about that one did ya?
Shuttle128 4 years ago
Common you just don't have the SENSIBILITY to see how much this is different from earth haha it's si evident this was not on earth haha you make me laugh you incults
pascalbrutal 4 years ago
hahaha idiots this video proves it was done on earth....watch the sand from the tires fall down not up..like driving your car on the beach....HAHAHA cant beleive you all missed this fact...but im sure even though the moon doesnt have gravity you will come up with some lame excuse...
mech0199 4 years ago
Wait....you think the moon doesn't have gravity?
-
Hahahahahahahahahaha! Wow, that's a good one!
-
The moon has 1/6 the gravity of Earth. Mass creates gravity. What you suggest is the Moon has no mass.
-
Actually this video proves there's no atmosphere in the location it was filmed since there is no clouds from the dust.
Shuttle128 4 years ago
I reckon there's something like a leaf blower on the back that's forcing the particles to the ground.
smellyturdface 4 years ago
Only a gullible pea brain would think that the US made it to the Moon, in fact it's only Americans that actually believe that shit.
What makes you think that is fine dust and not some sort of heavy metal particles?
This is as real as when the Martians invaded America in the 1930s during the Orson Wells radio play!
smellyturdface 4 years ago
You're right the entire production budget of the filming of the Apollo missions was spent on creating acres of 3 inch thick fine grained micro-particles of heavy metals, just to fool watchers into believing Americans were on the Moon. Who is the gullible pea brain?
Shuttle128 4 years ago 2
Why is it that you cannot throw a speck of dust 100 feet into the air? The answer is, AIR. Without atmosphere the laws of physics dictate that objects with very tiny mass can go very high in low gravity situations. Armstrong described the moon's surface as a very fine powder--not like sand, but much tinier. Those tiny particles spun by the rover's wheels should have shot into the air not just a few feet, but 20, 40, even 100 feet. Is that what you see here? That's not what I see.
Snootwaller 4 years ago
Gravity is the reason you cannot throw a speck of dust 100 feet in the air. Air causes friction but is not (much of)an attractive force. Take a fucking course in physics. The Dust from the rovers does not drift because there is no air, but it falls because of gravity. A fine powder on earth would blow all over the place.
kev3d 4 years ago
I've taken several courses in physics and I know the formulas which compute how high that speck of dust goes. And guess what--they all have "m" in it--the MASS of the goddamn dust particle. And when "m" is very very low, the height gets very very high. I suppose now you're going to tell me that even the lightest speck of moon dust is really very heavy??
Snootwaller 4 years ago
You are an absolute idiot. The M does not matter. Only the V, g, and theta. The acceleration due to gravity is the same on every object regardless of their mass. You have either not taken any courses in physics, or perhaps you have but failed them absolutely. You make me laugh, thank you.
Shuttle128 4 years ago 2
So let me get this straight. You have a see-saw on the moon. On one end you put a bowling ball, and a tiny marble. On the other end, you drop a 10 ton weight. Obviously both the marble and the bowling ball fly upward very quickly. You're saying that the bowling ball will travel up just as far, and at the same speed, as the marble? Please clarify.
Snootwaller 4 years ago
Gravity is an acceleration that effects things of all weights equally. As long as the objects are moving at the same initial velocity they will. It is not dependent on mass whatsoever. Please review basic physics.....
Shuttle128 4 years ago
I'm not asking about two objects which begin at the same velocity. I'm asking about two objects which undergo the same force. Forget about the conspiracy theories for a minute and answer my question regarding the fulcrum, if you can.
Snootwaller 4 years ago
They undergo the same force, thus they achieve the same velocity? That's the idea, I think.
EtherForce 4 years ago
mV=Ft
F=ma
mV=mat
V=at
The two objects are accelerated at the same acceleration, by the seesaw not the same force, for the same amount of time. Therefore the velocities are the same at the release point.
Shuttle128 4 years ago
pwned
Shuttle128 3 years ago
LOOOL,
take vacuum tube, put in there a feather and a steel ball ... see what happens :)
Volodus 4 years ago
To think men did this 40 years ago before advanced computers and polymers etc... Outstanding achievment.
koalorka1 4 years ago
This is not true. At the time of Apollo, you could find already some Nomex, Teflon or Kevlar, just to cite a few polymers.
predictorm9 4 years ago
It's still an outstanding achievement. No one else has come close.
koalorka1 4 years ago
Fine Dust is moving in perfect parabola = moon. Nice try though.
GelsamelXV 4 years ago
Hear hear!! I second that motion. I'm sick to death of this "we were never on the moon" story. We were there. Period.
olliebag 4 years ago
Notice that the dust doesn't billow up and float around. Instead, it falls right back down without dispersing. This indicates a lack of atmosphere.
Mistraker 4 years ago
fake fake..this car is NOT on the moon..it is on the top earth on the mountain..because film was half speed slowing
bestamerica 4 years ago
Haw haw, so how do you explain the dust moving in nice parabolas indicatin the lack of any atmosphere! Yup, this was shot somewhere where there is no air..... hmmmm... where could that be do you think?
sparters 4 years ago
Jesus you dumb ass.
Unfetered 4 years ago
No, Unfet'. Unlike you I use my eyes 2 C.
michaelstmark 4 years ago
Shadow stays where it is on New Rover, Unfet'
Your eyesight is sorely in need of a test.
michaelstmark 4 years ago
looks like a perfect parabolic path to me. I see very little that would suggest an atmosphere, as the particles were not caught in a vortex at the back of the vehicle.
alittle common sense + 8th grade science taught me that.
bilbobaggin3 5 years ago
The TV mast shadow still swings L to R, as the LRV gets to the rock = overhead & behind camera spotlight.
Deeply disturbing to the CDs (Conspiracy Deniers)TM, that I appreciate, bilbo'
michaelstmark 5 years ago
You still don't explain the lack of aerodynamic properties. Why the dust made it so far up when sand on Earth would only come up a few inches and then billow, or how a Moon Rover with a combined horsepower of 1 could possibly travel at such a high speed according to the reduced film speed theory. You have no business talking shadows until you've proven any of these to be normal Earth properties.
Shuttle128 4 years ago 2
It looks fine at 1.5 speed, better than at normal speed. The material is damp, it can been seen clumping at the end. At high speed it is thrown in the air and behaves like dust, is caught in the atmosphere and stopped.
eric144144 5 years ago
Could be soft springs like my oldsmobile gives it
extra springy action. But why is everything so slow.
At 1/6 th gravity things should wiz by. Show people
slow mo and they forget what Disney said about space
science.
teslaandlyne 5 years ago
Look at the air time on the front right wheel when he hits that bump, that's long even in "earth speed"
plateofshrimp 5 years ago
Also, check out the original video the poster links to. As well as being sped up, the video has been desaturated and horribly, horribly reduced in quality. One can only assume it didn't look earthlike enough for the conspiracy nuts when you could see it properly.
steevl2006 5 years ago
The video was speed up and saved. No intentional degradation was added. I'm undecided on whether we went to the moon or not, but because one may have a different view than you, this makes one a "nut"? Perhaps it also gives you the right to make unfounded claims. I of the believe half of what you see and none of what you hear generation. I would rather have facts in front of me before making a firm decision. So far, I don't have enough to decide one way or the other.
phanzana 5 years ago
You also appear to be of the "every opinion is of equal value" generation. I don't think moon hoaxers are nuts because their opinion differs from mine, I think they're nuts because their opinion completely contradicts all reason and evidence - they choose to hold up some tiny portion of evidence that looks funny and declare it conclusive proof that the moon landings didn't happen, while ignoring overwhelming evidence that they did.
steevl2006 5 years ago
There is no evidence that stands up to scrutiny. You have to be particularly dumb to believe all those rocks came from the moon.
eric144144 5 years ago
There doesn't exist such as thig as "evidence". It is all a matter of proabability. The most perfect evidence can be faked. Now, if you look at all the footage, the rocks and the pictures, there's not a single indicator that they are fake. No, there isn't. All the supposed "errors" are misinterpretation by people that don't know physics or optics. That means that either the NASA knew what they were doing when they faked the evidence, or that we did indeed land on the moon.
herbys68 4 years ago
Dust-Moist= No clouds
davrey 5 years ago
Dust-Moist= Dust sticks together in clumps and does not make a fine spray that can *clearly* and *obviously* be seen in this video.
steevl2006 5 years ago
to its credit, the dust particles fly in a perfect ballistic trajectory and they do not form dust clouds. This movie was AT LEAST clearly filmed in a vaccum environment.
rogerpenna 5 years ago
Yep, if you speed up any lunar footage to x2 it all looks very earthlike...hmmmmm
wibblywobbly1 5 years ago
Only a first sight. Do some measurements, project trajectories and calculate speeds and you'll conclude that this was NOT filmed on earth (or it was filmed on a giant vaccumm chamber).
herbys68 4 years ago
Indeed a giant vacuum chamber at about 300.000 kilometers from earth :). I really don't understand thes e conspiracy believers.
Live with it, people where on the moon.
kgoossens 4 years ago