@WhiteJarrah Way to go, comparing apples to oranges again. I ask you to prove that all of those GeoEye images aren't fake, as I believe them to be. I believe that god is a flying spaghetti monster. And you are a worm.
@WhiteJarrah I see NSA, I mean NASA has just released new LRO photoshops, I mean images.
Apparently, first LRO images were purposely taken at higher altitude to see how many propagandists would buy the 1 pixel. Now it's at a lower altitude to see how many will buy 3. Now with almost visible footprints.
If NASA can land a tinfoil covered, warped cardboard paneled, imprecisely manufactured tool shed on the moons surface that is too cold to sleep in, theres nothing they can't do.
why should we all worry dont we have the hubble space telescope, i mean it sees deep into space the moon surface shouldn't be too hard, should it? they can just take pics of everything and archive it coz some of us where not there to see the landings so it would be great to see it on great images. i mean NASA is the world's intelligent guys and got the best technology right?right?
I wonder what WhiteJarrah makes, of the independent verification of the LRO images of the Apollo landing sites, which was provided by the Indian Chandrayaan-1 mission???
Pardon me, but Chandrayaan-1 imaged all the Apollo landing sites in 2009 and found identical artifacts to those imaged by the LRO.
At the Apollo 15, 16 & 17 landing sites, Chandrayaan-1 was able to capture the tracks left by the lunar rovers.
This has to be the final nail in the coffin of the Apollo Hoax Conspiracy Theory: independent verification of the landing sites, by a foreign space agency.
Man walked on the Moon and will walk there again, probably in the next 10-15 years.
Correction #1: the cameras aboard Chandrayaan-1 did not have a high enough resolution to show artifacts, all it showed was moonscape.
Correction #2: Chandrayaan-1 is a JOINT project with NASA & ISRO, and therefore is clearly not an independent.
Correction #3: At the rate United States keeps proposing and canceling "return" missions to the moon, they might as well set the return date for the year 2100.
So... Your reponse to the Chandrayaan-1 images, is to deny their existence and publication in the World's press???
Chandrayaan-1 may have carried NASA experiments, but it also carried European ones and was totally an Indian project; part of their commitment to put a Man back on the Moon by 2020.
On Christmas Day 2009, you said in your video, watch?v=OPk-UBMiV9c, that we'd "be looking at photos from Lunar Orbiter, Chandrayaan-1 and Apollo 15" but I see nothing about the Indian pics.
No. What I saw was you being selective over your choice of evidence and presenting it in a slanted way.
Whatever. One day, in your lifetime, you will see Man back on the Moon; with hi-res images of the Apollo sites; but I doubt you'll believe even then - you've invested way to much of your life in all these videos.
Not to worry. Your wild claims and attacks on those who disagree with you, do more to discredit the hoaxtards, than any scientist could ever hope to.
Oh and another thing: The Terrain Mapping stereo Camera and Hyper Spectral Imaging camera which took the Chandrayaan-1 pictures, were Indian components. NASA contributed the Miniature Synthetic Aperture Radar (for detecting water ice) and the Moon Mineralogy Mapper (which speaks for itself).
2 out of 11 experiments - hardly a majority share in the project (which was launched using an Indian-built rocket, BTW - no NASA involvement there, either - sorry ;-)
This video is a joke. Sure I can see some car shapes, but I could not tell you make or model. They just look like little squares, much as the Apollo LM ascent modules do in the LRO images. THe rovers were fairly skeletal without a solid body surrounding them to minimize weight, so they are much harder to see.
To listen to Mr. White, the pictures of the Apollo descent stages with their four landing pads must be disregarded out of an inadequate sharpness in the photographs. We must therefore ignore the striking photographic proof of man's walking on the Moon because Mr. White feels the proof falls short of his self-imposed and quicksilver standards. Could these images, faulty by his standards as they may be, at least render some reasonable doubt about his claims?
The blurry images and strange spots on the pictures from the LRO could be explained by the fact that the light hitting the Moon's surface is direct sunlight, which is different from Earth's surface, which is hit by sunlight scattered by the atmosphere.
Just a point to take into consideration.
I don't mean to confirm or infirm anything with that.
Remember, we must all keep in mind that the pictures generated by the LRO are not typical photographs in the way we are used to. It's a single CCD scanner array. It's not like the LRO is taking snapshots at periodical times, like the GeoEye does.
@Simboiss I'm curious what the reason is then, that they did not use one like the GeoEye.....not that I'm suggesting there isn't a reason. I'm just curious as to what that reason is.
I went to the geoeye site and downloaded some of their satelite imagery and its just as Jarrah shows. details of cars and people on the ground on the .5 M/pixel resolution.. same as LRO, which's images were horrendous!
Man has a point the images are poor, but still, 0.5m per pixel? That means the smallest thing that can be resolved has to be (presumably) over 25cm to average out the pixel to show up. Not sure how well the lander legs would show - would depend on the algorithm NASA's using to sort the data, one would presume.
If they're using shit cameras and shit software then what the fuck are you Yanks paying them to send junk into space for?! lol
You're a cock. Here is a video showing images from the Geoeye satalite - watch?v=Xs_eFKM12sU& - As you can see, they're no where NEAR as good as the photos you show. Why? Because THEY ARE ARIEL PHOTOS! Taken with a plane, NOT a satalite. It's well know that Google uses Geoeye data for the larger data and ariel shots for the close ups. You FAIL. lmao.
@vandal2k6 Also answer me this. WHY sens up a satalite to show they were never there!? They could've just left it. Also, even though they're not very clear, there is something there, as they said there would be. What are they?
This certainly seems like just another "NASA's 500 000 employees are retarded" videos.
"Perfectly resolved, cars, busses and people" in Rome you say? The resolution of those objects sure look as crummy as the perfectly natural objects in the LRO photos.
I don't know why I was so hard on you in the past, Jarrah. You're just a guy who needs a bit of help. 20 milligrams of fluanxol over 2 years did me wonders. I'm sure the same or a similar medication can help you too.
Great work - thanks for posting! Lots of other evidence to add to the NASA fakery! Keep it up!
Just how many fake images have NASA put out? Some people have suggested the Mars rovers are in the Arizona Desert!! Now, I think they really are on Mars, but there are sure some interesting images from there too - and from the Phoenix Lander - do a Youtube search for "Ron Bennett Mars"
if the really wanted to fake it i think they would have planted some equipment on the moon before the orbiter got there its pretty easy for them to do that these days! i dont think they would try and convince people that a boulder is a lunar lander lol nasa know we aint that stupid!
@receiver69 the optics on board the LRO are state-of-the-art. This is not disputed. regardless of your opinion of how NASA should prioritize its time, the fact is, they DID photograph the landing sites, with resolutions far lower than expected. you never made a single logical point resembling a rebuttal in that rant.
You can't compare the cars on earth to the cars on the moon, if there are no cars on the moon... I feel this vid is a pointless waste of time for whoever watches it!
@dreamsolutions oh thank you because without you i would know what is pointless.
funny thing though your the jackass that watched it first. tell me how does it feel knowing eveyone will read this comment and think yea you know what, he may not know what he is talking about.
Funny how no one but FUCKTARDS & ASTRONOTS are the only ones that bother posting here,SHILL-TARDS r the only ones.
I guess everyone else knows WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON.Funny how the only president in office at the time of these supposed moon landings was TRICKY DICK.
"What's priceless is the fact that you believe the sun has no effect in photography! LOL!! "
On Earth the Sun has an effect on the atmosphere, which prevents us from seeing and photographing stars. On the Moon there is no atmosphere for the Sun to effect, thus stars can be easily seen, and also photographed during the day, just by using a 30 second exposure.
You need to talk a professional photographer and an astonomer, and then try to get it thru your thick skull why you're wrong.
"On the Moon there is no atmosphere for the Sun to effect, thus stars can be easily seen, and also photographed during the day, just by using a 30 second exposure."
On the moon, the sun still has an affect on the camera...
"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."
...on the channel pages of about 20 pro-Apollo people with my Cosmored account. All but about 2 were gone the next day and I was blocked.
Then, in the comment sections of videos, I started asking those pro-Apollo people why they'd deleted my posts and blocked me. Suddenly, I was blocked on almost all YouTube videos--even hoax-believer videos.
What else could I do but open another account? I posted the message again and it didn't get deleted in about half of the videos; Phil Plait didn't delete his the second time to my surprise.
you know how insane you sound when you have a conversation with yourself ? everyone knows you use multiple accounts to agree with yourself. i have the screenshot to prove it
kooldog .. .Who's having conversations with themselves? .. The Apollogists do that all the time .. svector uses many different sockuppets to back up his pathetic nonsense and so does ApolloWasReal / ApolloWasReallyReal/ philkarn and I forget the several other names he's admitted to using here to back up his lame Apollogist nonsense.
Rob259260 does the same thing, as do many other Apollo Hoax deniers.. So don't be such a hypocrite.
I still do what? .. If you're accusing me of using sockpuppets like most of the Apollogists do, you're very much mistaken .. I have one user name and you're looking at it.
What's embarrassing is your complete ignorance about everything.
Maybe we need to start looking at what the Japanese ( and Chinese ?) moon orbiters are sending back. The last time I looked for stuff from the Japanese orbiter, I couldn't find much of anything. Maybe after all this time there's something more and at better resolution.
Yet those same Apollo revisionists post on structures on the moon videos that any odd shadow is a base formed by great aliens that are in cahoots with the NWO.
Jarrah and other knuckleheads need to remember that nobody built the LRO to satisfy Apollo revisionists. You demand proof, then admit you can see footpads, then say that it is not enough!!!!
You do know it is against the rules to disagree with anything Jawa White says! You must repeat "wake up sheeple" 50 times without thinking for a second!
Most posts by Apollo believers as so lame that I want people to see them. I would never dream of thumbing them down. I think they posted some stuff and thumbed it down themselves to they could say hoax-believers did it.
Truth-seekers don't thumb down anything; it's only the pro-Apollo people who thumb stuff down because they don't want people to see the hoax evidence.
I think YouTube bent to government pressure and started to use this "Thumb down" voting system so that government shills could censor hoax evidence without there being the appearance of censorship.
My posts routinely get thumbed down on classic Apollo videos such at this one.
I knew I forgot something. I meant to disable the comment voting when I posted this. It's never too late to correct one's mistake. I've disabled the comment voting.
@GTP-"The conspiracy believers take delight in censoring people who don't "believe" in their conspiracy theories."
That's a laugh. Have you googled "moon hoax" lately? The propagandists have plenty of websites espousing their views without censorship. In fact, JW often quotes those sites. BUT, if you started your own censorship-free website, you couldn't play the victim card anymore, could you?
You cannot see the logic behind this debunking? Lets see... NASA has lied its face off for over 40 years now, and you cannot see the lie?
It is so obvious that NASA is criminal for lying to people about Apollo by the evidence presented here and elsewhere..... Why are you living with the lies?
I don't understand the logica about this debunking. The LRO and GeoEye shows the same thing, the resolution is there. The only difference is that on the LRO the very bright surface of the lander overexposes the image.
Also the GeoEye images are far more digitally inhanced.
Also the job of LRO is not to show the apollo but to map the Moon. The apollo is a bonus they got.
Sadly, that's the world HBs inhabit. Healthy distrust and skepticism of government has translated into automatically believing the opposite the government says. Why automatically believe everything JW says? If they took the time to do some basic research they'd see why his arguments, while prettily packaged, are fundamentally flawed. I wish they'd have a more inquisitive nature and a propensity to learn and understand, rather than blindly follow. THEN they'll know the truth and be free.
HLAR ... None of the CT's just automatically believe anything Jarrah says..What a disingenuous claim to make.. People who have the ability to think for themsleves, believe most of Jarrah's hoax evidence for the simple reason that he provides the extensive research that not only backs up his claims, but also proves the official government version of Apollo is bogus.. He also has the ability to cross reference the claims of his opposition and prove when they have been caught in their many lies.
what about the people who still have the ability to think for themselves, and believe the landings happened? oh, they're just propagandists, apologists and shills.
"None of the CT's just automatically believe anything Jarrah says."
and none of us automatically believe what NASA tells us. we believe what we learnt in school. remember school? or did you never go
kooldog.. If you believe everything you "learnt" in school, then I feel sorry for you, as most of what is taught as truth is not. History has been very carefully edited and altered by those with certain agendas. NASA's agenda was to have everyone believe they sent 27 humans to the Moon, landing and launching 12 of them from the lunar surface, using 40 year old technology. That might be believable if any space agency could accomplish today what was allegedly accomplished then .. but they can't.
Have you considered that if this kind of thinking would become mainstream, the chaos that could ensue would destroy what people believe about themselves and society. Imagine the social upheaval, denial, and panic. Children are weaned on this space stuff being real. Who will be blamed? The republicans, the liberals, the Jews, the neocons, etc. Then what with the nuts who will take the law into their own hands? This is fire.....
Jarrah, I am going to fully debunk this latest LRO video series of yours. Unlike the LRO team which merely published quickly enhanced versions of the raw photos, the resolution of which is degraded by both spacecraft jitter and no calibration data for the narrow angle camera's CCD, I will publish fully enhanced versions of the photos. The enhanced photos will be fully deconvolved (removing jitter) and fully enhanced. The difference in detail will be striking.
Unfortunately, no one care of YOUR enhanced photos, only the raw file from the source does matter, and these sux, who do you think you are with YOUR enhanced photos anyway?
"I will publish fully enhanced versions of the photos"
I have seen your so-called enhanced LRO photos. All you did was blur the original image, sharpen it again, and then adjust the contrast and brightness.
That is hardly what I do. First, I deconvolve the images to remove the spacecraft jitter from the image. Look up image deconvolution and see what it is all about. Next, I perform an image stretch before then running an FFT (fast Fourier transform) in order to quantify and remove any remaining jitter and periodic electrical interference which is present in the photo. Then I enhance the photo to my liking and then use a special filter to remove CCD noise from the uncalibrated image.
Oh so now you have a way of making the picture resolution greater than the raw files from NASA... This is impossible. You cannot add or subtract data from the file and "enhance to your liking" Get over it man. They are faking it and have been faking it for years. You seem to be someone who could come to discern this. There is no use lying to yourself man.
The conspiracy believers take delight in censoring people who don't "believe" in their conspiracy theories. I didn't post anything nasty, hateful, or racial, yet of course those sons of bitched censored me.
That should tell you all that you need to know about those conspiracy theorists. They all are delusional, and none of them will tolerate any comments which don't "support" their delusional ideas. And yet, amazingly I let them rant on my YT channel.
Oh, poooooor little kitty, the evil "conspiracy believers" are censoring your deconvoluted post, and you are not posting anything nasty of course, just that we are "sons of bitched" (if that mean anything anyway)
Didn't it crossed your mind, that maybe, just maybe, peoples have read your comment, find it ridiculous and for this reason have thumbed it down? Just so you know, it is the reason why I thumbed it down, your comment is still there, you just have to change preferences to display it.
It's unfortunate that people (from both sides) abuse the voting system. If everyone who disagrees with everyone else "thumbed down", we'd rapidly end up with no visible comments. All very childish. I wish Youtube would get rid.
HLAR .. I agree with you about the comment voting .. Jarrah should disable it here like he had to on some of his other videos...It's obsurd that we take the time to post comments on any video, just to have them either voted down or completely deleted, like Rob260259, svector, shane, SpreadingTheMuse, ImTheSecretSquare, and several of the other Apollogists do on their chanels, when they can't refute our hoax evidence or win an argument.
I posted some hoax evidence on your channel page and you deleted it. I posted the same evidence on GoneToPlaid's channel page and he didn't delete it. Don't you want people to see hoax evidence? It it's wrong, it'll fall by it's own lack of merit. Censorship is only necessary when evidence has merit and the government doesn't want people to see it.
I just tried to post some hoax evidence on your channel page and it was impossible. Here's what I tried to post.
"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."
What's the problem with your channel page? Why doesn't your channel page accept my posts?
I am Cosmored. See the 2nd and 3rd replies on my channel pages for an explanation.
I just tried to post that summary on your channel page again and it was impossible. Would you mind posting it for me?
"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."
It disappeared from every page and now YouTube has blocked me from posting on channel pages. Would you mind posting that link on your channel page for me as I can't? Thanks.
YT doesn't allow links in comments. You could create a quick video and post the link either in the video or in the information section about the video.
Thanks for pointing that out. I'm able to post links on my own channel page so I thought I could post links on all channel pages. I just posted instructions on how to find that summary of hoax evidence on your channel page. I hope you don't delete it.
I can't post there. Do you have any idea why I'd be blocked there? If the person who made the video is an objective truth-seeker, why would he block a hoax-believer? Doesn't the truth prevail in the end if everybody can simply speak freely?
OK then, how about you show us what the image looked like after each step. Then we can see if there was any reduction of image quality during a step. When you've done that perhaps you can explain why the spacecraft was jittering when it took the 4-times annotated A-17 image but not when it took the raw image.
I will create a video which shows the image processing, step by step. Look carefully at the A17 raw image after first strongly increasing its contrast. You will see that every really bright pixel similar yet less bright pixels one and two pixels to the right. Really dark pixels do the same thing -- a pair of less dark pixels to the right. The LRO team says that this is caused by spacecraft jitter, but I am not sure. It could be caused by the CCD's readout circuitry.
@blank000blank Have you basic knowledge of scientific digital image processing? Maybe you should start learning a bit how scientifically images are processed. You can find many resources on the internet.
Arh yes, I developed for 5 years X=ray CT scanner images an reconstructed 3D objects out of it, so I have some basic knowledge of deconvolving. GTP does it scientifically right.
blank .. Don't hold your breath for any high resolution LRO photos, clearly showing the suppossed Apollo debris on the Moon... The low res, Adobe Photoshopped "LM" blobs and "footpaths" are most likely all the world will ever get to see of the "landing" sites.
Funny how NASA has the technology to image cars on Earth and objects down to the size of a beachball on Mars, but refuses to use that same technology to image the alleged Apollo trash on the Moon.
What utter nonsense .. Aproximately 28% of the population believes Apollo was a Hoax .. Everyone on both sides of this debate have been anxiously awatiing the photos that would prove if Apollo astronots landed on the Moon or not .. Yet all NASA can muster up are a few pathetic looking, low res, blurry blobs, and we're all suppossed to accept that garbage as proof of the landings!?!?
28% - do you have a reference for that figure? last i read it was 6%. it seems all you can muster up is fabricated statistics. besides, there is far more evidence of the moon landings than the LRO photos
The alleged 6% is just the typical propaganda that's spewed all over the internet to make it look like fewer people believe in the hoax than really do.
those percentages include people who were undecided on the matter. the gallup poll of 1999 states only 6% said the moon landings were fake, while 5% had no opinion and 89% said the landings were real.
furthermore, almost all of the links in the references to those polls on that site offer no credibility other than "X amount of people believe the landings were fake"
You only beleive those sources are unreliable because you don't want to believe them.. You obviously prefer to buy into the typical 6 % lie.
Furthermore, why don't you read the rest of the web site, which explains in great detail why Apollo was faked.. Even a few Russian scientists have proven that the Saturn V didn't do what NASA claimed it did.
The hoax evidence is overwhelming now ...Which is why more than 6% of the people believe we have not been told the truth about Apollo.
funny stray, I know a lot of black people and way more of them think the moon is a hoax then whites ... they are used to being lied to by the MAN ... and even admit it ... but they are also used to looking into things and being more opened minded due to prejudice and dealing with it
pt .. I've read the statics recently of the real percentage of the population that believe Apollo was faked, and the polls not only show that it's closer to 28% than 6 % ( NASA's propaganda lie) but that the percentage was higher among black people.
Here's more from that article concerning the recent photoshopped LRO photos.
"Photos showing those objects can be made on a printed lunar surface photos with rough models of the objects added, or using a computer.
Earth satellites can now reveal licence plate numbers on cars. Then why a satellite cannot provide much better images of the Moon which has no atmosphere? "
You might need to work for the NSA to be able to read a licence plate, but us regular folks can see cars and even people, just by looking at the Google Earth satellite images.
Don't be such a closed minded fool .. If NASA really wanted us to see what's on the Moon, we would have a long time ago.. but instead they're contiuning the cover up by showing us blurry, low res, photoshopped nonsense.
Face it my Apollogist friend, the LRO photos are GARBAGE that have proven NOTHING.
We have seen whats on the moon, it's in the thousands of publicly available surface photographs. You only believe they're fake because you don't want to believe they're real.
kooldog .. If you think those cheesy looking, staged Apollo photos have shown us what's on the Moon, then you're dumber than a box full of petrified wood "moon" rocks.
You're wasting your time defending NASA's new LRO photos ... Especially since they've already admitted to having the imagining technology to resolve an object down to the size of a beachball on Mars.
The LRO photos are an embarrassment, even to the Apollogists.
NICE TO KNOW STRAY, i had heard 7% most of life and i dont think its really 25% + .... most every sheep i know thinks we went, but when i show them things i have found they either go MAYBE or many start delving and come around and figure out the scam and start telling others, its hilarious!
isnt is ironic once you see the truth you never go back to other side in any of it ... 9/11, holohoax, iraq, moon, the fed, diebold etc etc
pt ...Here's the real statics, showing that 28 % of the population believes Apollo was a Hoax... Check ot this article.. This also has peer reviewed Russian scientists who've proven that the Saturn V didn't do what NASA claimed it did.
sourcewatch*org/index*php?title=Moon_Hoax
With evidence like this, it's amazing that so many blind fools still defend the Apollo Myth.
LR had inflatable tires which would have exploded if pre-inflated, and there was no air on the Moon to inflate them. Pro Apollo NUTTERS claim the rover had solid wire mesh tires. Yes the rover in the museum had these fitted in the mid 70s when they realized pneumatic tires could not have functioned on the Moon. NASA has had 40 years to clear up the plainly obvious mistake and they cannot say why the anomaly was there in the first place.
You're welcome.. Most people have never bothered to view the multitude of evidence which proves Apollo was faked. Instead, they just allow themselves to be swayed by the majority, who have bought into the official story and have been made to believe that all hoax believers are "hoaxtards". NASA's program of ridicule has worked very well for 40 years but now more people are seeing through that type disinformation tactic and also seeing that something is very wrong with the official Apollo record.
this "multitude" of evidence lacks any scientific credibility. simply dismissing something as fake is not evidence. when questioned about the thousands of Apollo photos your response was, in simple terms, "they're fake, you're an idiot". that sourcewatch site links to bloggers and pro hoax advocates who all respond in the same way. face it - you cant prove it was fake, you can only prove it may have been fake.
Several people have proven that many aspects of Apollo were faked.. Even some NASA astronauts like Brian OLeary have doubts about whether men landed on the moon during Project Apollo.. Several researchers have proven that some of the photos are fake, and if one aspect of Apollo is proven to be fake, then it calls the entire program into question.
You're free to believe whatever you choose about Apollo, but if you believe it hasn't been proven to have been faked, then you're sadly mistaken.
Many aspects of apollo have been proven without any doubt that it was real. Like the filming of activity in a 1/6th gravity, vacuumed environment which cannot be reproduced on earth with wires and slow motion.
"...astronauts like Brian OLeary have doubts..."
thats all they ever have. Doubts. no real evidence though.
Many aspects of Apollo have proven without any doubt that it was faked..The Apollo videos are the main proof that it was NOT filmed in 1/6g ..The movements and jump heights of the astronots don't even come close to what would have taken place in 1/6 g, even with the use of slow motion and the occasional wires that were used for those seldom higher jumps, mostly hidden behind the Rover or done in the shadows at a distance. Like the A16 Duke & Young stunt and the Armstrong leap up the LM ladder.
I don't need to be on the Moon.. All I have to do is to read the Langley 1/6g test results to know that the data doesn't match what is seen in the Apollo videos.
Sorry, but John Young was hiding behind the Rover, not holding onto it, when his wire man jerked him up one too many times, catching him off guard.. Both Duke and Young forgot to even bend their knees for their ridiculous high jump stunt.
I tried to post this on your channel page too HeadLikeARock.
"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."
Well you didn't try hard enough, I've just checked the security and it hasn't been changed, anyone can post comments. I guess the problem lies somewhere between your computer screen and your chair. Of course I'm not surprised.
"Well you didn't try hard enough...I'm not surprised."
When I post it, it appears. When I leave your channel page and go back, it's gone. It's impossible for me to post this...
"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."
Look at the clip again ..Young had already started to walk away when the wire man jerked him up one last time for that high jump stunt behind the Rover .. He never went in a downwards direction before being pulled up.. It's very evident in the last "jump" that he never bent his knees.
I have done, many times. You need to look at his starting position before the first jump, and compare it to subsequent jumps, especially the last one. His helmet is much lower in the frame before the last jump compared to the first. After the 4th jump he straightens up an inch, then down an inch, the jumps again, but he's still noticeably lower than before the 1st jump when he was standing upright.
If you've looked at the clip many times then you know that Young's last jerk, er I mean "jump" took him by surprise .. The guy was actually starting to walk away as the wire man pulled him up a few feet off the ground again .. It's actually pretty comical looking.. So is Charlie's backwards prat fall, right next to him.
You're still not analysing the footage properly. His helmet is noticeably lower before the last jump than the first, so he must have bent his knees on landing. Also, he moves up an inch, then down an inch, immediately before his last jump. No proof at all that someone was yanking him up with a wire, pure supposition. Look at the footage more closely. At least admit I'm right about the sequence of events, regardless of what you think caused it (jumping or wires).
"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."
...on your channel page and the word "Spam" appeared. Tell us what you've done.
Do you really believe that a possible one inch knee bend could produce a several foot jump height?
I've analysed the footage properly and it's a no brainer that those silly, behind the Rover, stunt jumps were done with the use of wires.. Even when Young wasn't taken off guard (as in his last jerk/jump) his knees didn't bend enough to jump that high.
Even in 1/6 g it takes more than a one inch bend of the knees to jump any height.
But he is already lower than in the first frame after he lands for the penultimate time! In other words, his knees MUST be bent. THEN he moves up then down an inch (with his knees already bent), before making his last jump.
Here's the proof, check it on the video on the ALSJ.
tinyurl * com/a16jump
He is noticeable lower after the 4th jump than before the 1st, agree or disagree?
When are you going to explain why I can't post hoax evidence on your channel page? You can post on my channel page all you want. If your theory is wrong, it'll fall by its own lack of merit; I don't need to delete it. You pro-Apollo people need to delete hoax evidence because you know it has merit and you'll look silly if you try to obfuscate it.
I've already told you, no-one is blocked from posting on my channel. Probably another flaky YT problem.
Although why you think it is your god-given right to post on my channel I don't know. Firstly, I can't imagine there's a great deal of traffic as I've only posted one video. Secondly, freedom of speech doesn't extend to spraying graffiti all over someones windows, no doubt you would consider it censorship if someone cleaned it off.
"I've already told you, no-one is blocked from posting on my channel. Probably another flaky YT problem."
I post it and it appears. I go back 30 seconds later and it's gone.
"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."
The video you made that can be seen on your channel page was meant to support the idea that Apollo was real. Doesn't that mean that we can post counter-arguments on your channel?
You know that the hoax evidence is so clear that the only way you can actually sway public opinon is to keep people from seeing it. That's why you blocked me.
No, it was meant to demonstrate that you can't rely on the apparent direction of a shadow on a surface to determine the direction of the light source, which it does rather well.
No-one is blocked. There are 8 comments, but none are visible. The only setting I have access to is who can write a comment, not whether the comments are visible, so clearly there's a bug in the YT website. No doubt you'll see this as part of some vast conspiracy against you. Do I care? Nope.
I just manages to post it with my Cosmored3 account. I went back to check and it was still there. I wonder why it didn't work with my FatFreddy acount. Anyway, I hope you don't delete it as I was very polite.
If it hadn't been for censorship, I'd still have only one account. So far I've had to open three more just to keep posting everywhere.
@WhiteJarrah Way to go, comparing apples to oranges again. I ask you to prove that all of those GeoEye images aren't fake, as I believe them to be. I believe that god is a flying spaghetti monster. And you are a worm.
tyrred 1 week ago
@WhiteJarrah I see NSA, I mean NASA has just released new LRO photoshops, I mean images.
Apparently, first LRO images were purposely taken at higher altitude to see how many propagandists would buy the 1 pixel. Now it's at a lower altitude to see how many will buy 3. Now with almost visible footprints.
If NASA can land a tinfoil covered, warped cardboard paneled, imprecisely manufactured tool shed on the moons surface that is too cold to sleep in, theres nothing they can't do.
bpbiv31 5 months ago
why should we all worry dont we have the hubble space telescope, i mean it sees deep into space the moon surface shouldn't be too hard, should it? they can just take pics of everything and archive it coz some of us where not there to see the landings so it would be great to see it on great images. i mean NASA is the world's intelligent guys and got the best technology right?right?
azraelblame 11 months ago
I wonder what WhiteJarrah makes, of the independent verification of the LRO images of the Apollo landing sites, which was provided by the Indian Chandrayaan-1 mission???
GlowWorm1962 11 months ago
@GlowWorm1962 What are you talking about? Chandrayaan-1 did not photograph any artifacts.
WhiteJarrah 11 months ago
@WhiteJarrah
Pardon me, but Chandrayaan-1 imaged all the Apollo landing sites in 2009 and found identical artifacts to those imaged by the LRO.
At the Apollo 15, 16 & 17 landing sites, Chandrayaan-1 was able to capture the tracks left by the lunar rovers.
This has to be the final nail in the coffin of the Apollo Hoax Conspiracy Theory: independent verification of the landing sites, by a foreign space agency.
Man walked on the Moon and will walk there again, probably in the next 10-15 years.
GlowWorm1962 11 months ago
@GlowWorm1962
Correction #1: the cameras aboard Chandrayaan-1 did not have a high enough resolution to show artifacts, all it showed was moonscape.
Correction #2: Chandrayaan-1 is a JOINT project with NASA & ISRO, and therefore is clearly not an independent.
Correction #3: At the rate United States keeps proposing and canceling "return" missions to the moon, they might as well set the return date for the year 2100.
WhiteJarrah 11 months ago
@WhiteJarrah
So... Your reponse to the Chandrayaan-1 images, is to deny their existence and publication in the World's press???
Chandrayaan-1 may have carried NASA experiments, but it also carried European ones and was totally an Indian project; part of their commitment to put a Man back on the Moon by 2020.
On Christmas Day 2009, you said in your video, watch?v=OPk-UBMiV9c, that we'd "be looking at photos from Lunar Orbiter, Chandrayaan-1 and Apollo 15" but I see nothing about the Indian pics.
GlowWorm1962 11 months ago
@GlowWorm1962 Try here: watch?v=PghriIPdATM
As you can see it showed nothing.
WhiteJarrah 11 months ago
@WhiteJarrah
No. What I saw was you being selective over your choice of evidence and presenting it in a slanted way.
Whatever. One day, in your lifetime, you will see Man back on the Moon; with hi-res images of the Apollo sites; but I doubt you'll believe even then - you've invested way to much of your life in all these videos.
Not to worry. Your wild claims and attacks on those who disagree with you, do more to discredit the hoaxtards, than any scientist could ever hope to.
Keep it up >=p
GlowWorm1962 11 months ago
@WhiteJarrah
Oh and another thing: The Terrain Mapping stereo Camera and Hyper Spectral Imaging camera which took the Chandrayaan-1 pictures, were Indian components. NASA contributed the Miniature Synthetic Aperture Radar (for detecting water ice) and the Moon Mineralogy Mapper (which speaks for itself).
2 out of 11 experiments - hardly a majority share in the project (which was launched using an Indian-built rocket, BTW - no NASA involvement there, either - sorry ;-)
GlowWorm1962 11 months ago
@GlowWorm1962 Obviously, the truth is not beneficial to JW's income.
edmfw 5 months ago
This video is a joke. Sure I can see some car shapes, but I could not tell you make or model. They just look like little squares, much as the Apollo LM ascent modules do in the LRO images. THe rovers were fairly skeletal without a solid body surrounding them to minimize weight, so they are much harder to see.
Synthetrix 1 year ago
To listen to Mr. White, the pictures of the Apollo descent stages with their four landing pads must be disregarded out of an inadequate sharpness in the photographs. We must therefore ignore the striking photographic proof of man's walking on the Moon because Mr. White feels the proof falls short of his self-imposed and quicksilver standards. Could these images, faulty by his standards as they may be, at least render some reasonable doubt about his claims?
Purpleplanetar17 1 year ago
The blurry images and strange spots on the pictures from the LRO could be explained by the fact that the light hitting the Moon's surface is direct sunlight, which is different from Earth's surface, which is hit by sunlight scattered by the atmosphere.
Just a point to take into consideration.
I don't mean to confirm or infirm anything with that.
Simboiss 1 year ago
Remember, we must all keep in mind that the pictures generated by the LRO are not typical photographs in the way we are used to. It's a single CCD scanner array. It's not like the LRO is taking snapshots at periodical times, like the GeoEye does.
Simboiss 1 year ago
@Simboiss I'm curious what the reason is then, that they did not use one like the GeoEye.....not that I'm suggesting there isn't a reason. I'm just curious as to what that reason is.
frankensteinmoneymac 1 year ago
I went to the geoeye site and downloaded some of their satelite imagery and its just as Jarrah shows. details of cars and people on the ground on the .5 M/pixel resolution.. same as LRO, which's images were horrendous!
scottson2 1 year ago
Thank you both, Mike & WhiteJarrah for highlighting this video.
Exploring the MATRIX's rabbit hole continues...
ronmamita 1 year ago
Excellent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
msam1970 1 year ago
Man has a point the images are poor, but still, 0.5m per pixel? That means the smallest thing that can be resolved has to be (presumably) over 25cm to average out the pixel to show up. Not sure how well the lander legs would show - would depend on the algorithm NASA's using to sort the data, one would presume.
If they're using shit cameras and shit software then what the fuck are you Yanks paying them to send junk into space for?! lol
wicky42 1 year ago
@wicky42 best comment ever and very true, hahahaha
azraelblame 11 months ago
people like you make me laugh, the world does need crazies
MudkipLieker37 1 year ago
You're a cock. Here is a video showing images from the Geoeye satalite - watch?v=Xs_eFKM12sU& - As you can see, they're no where NEAR as good as the photos you show. Why? Because THEY ARE ARIEL PHOTOS! Taken with a plane, NOT a satalite. It's well know that Google uses Geoeye data for the larger data and ariel shots for the close ups. You FAIL. lmao.
vandal2k6 1 year ago
@vandal2k6 Also answer me this. WHY sens up a satalite to show they were never there!? They could've just left it. Also, even though they're not very clear, there is something there, as they said there would be. What are they?
vandal2k6 1 year ago
This certainly seems like just another "NASA's 500 000 employees are retarded" videos.
"Perfectly resolved, cars, busses and people" in Rome you say? The resolution of those objects sure look as crummy as the perfectly natural objects in the LRO photos.
I don't know why I was so hard on you in the past, Jarrah. You're just a guy who needs a bit of help. 20 milligrams of fluanxol over 2 years did me wonders. I'm sure the same or a similar medication can help you too.
TremorHellborn 1 year ago
Great work - thanks for posting! Lots of other evidence to add to the NASA fakery! Keep it up!
Just how many fake images have NASA put out? Some people have suggested the Mars rovers are in the Arizona Desert!! Now, I think they really are on Mars, but there are sure some interesting images from there too - and from the Phoenix Lander - do a Youtube search for "Ron Bennett Mars"
adjuk 1 year ago
i dont see how geo can get earth photos of cars with out getting 2x 4 pixel cars.
datzfast 1 year ago
@receiver69 all together. what does that pharse mean? all together now sing?
i dont understand the concept of adding all together to What a nonsense.
datzfast 1 year ago
if the really wanted to fake it i think they would have planted some equipment on the moon before the orbiter got there its pretty easy for them to do that these days! i dont think they would try and convince people that a boulder is a lunar lander lol nasa know we aint that stupid!
dogshagga2 1 year ago
If anything the LRO 'images' fiasco is one of the strongest indications for the hoax.
The LRO 'imaging' also reveals the worrying issue of NASA's power to manipulate society in general even in our days.
potrodsas 1 year ago
The information in this video is too important.
Thanks!
rodri11tube 1 year ago
Interesting information!
hansjalv 1 year ago
@receiver69 the optics on board the LRO are state-of-the-art. This is not disputed. regardless of your opinion of how NASA should prioritize its time, the fact is, they DID photograph the landing sites, with resolutions far lower than expected. you never made a single logical point resembling a rebuttal in that rant.
zapproowsdower 1 year ago
easy - the LRO's camera simply sucks. that's all there is to it.. :D
imarchello 1 year ago
You can't compare the cars on earth to the cars on the moon, if there are no cars on the moon... I feel this vid is a pointless waste of time for whoever watches it!
dreamsolutions 1 year ago
@dreamsolutions
"You can't compare the cars on earth to the cars on the moon, if there are no cars on the moon..."
NASA claims they left three cars on the moon - the Lunar Rovers.
WhiteJarrah 1 year ago
@WhiteJarrah Still, its not really proving anything. Would be nice to see a pic of the Lunar Rovers though.
dreamsolutions 1 year ago
@dreamsolutions u are a moron
3rdeye1983 1 year ago
@dreamsolutions oh thank you because without you i would know what is pointless.
funny thing though your the jackass that watched it first. tell me how does it feel knowing eveyone will read this comment and think yea you know what, he may not know what he is talking about.
datzfast 1 year ago
@dreamsolutions wow you an idiot
trexx32 1 year ago
Funny how no one but FUCKTARDS & ASTRONOTS are the only ones that bother posting here,SHILL-TARDS r the only ones.
I guess everyone else knows WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON.Funny how the only president in office at the time of these supposed moon landings was TRICKY DICK.
LOL
ed11561 1 year ago
we must trust NASA sirs,,,they know things
johnsmdm 1 year ago
Jarrah are you going to kill yourself when another country photographs the lunar modules on the moon?
monkeyboytheshill 2 years ago
It certainly is fun exposing what complete morons hoaxers are.
kooldog98 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"It certainly is fun exposing what complete morons hoaxers are."
Since you're the only moron in this debate, that comment is priceless!
straydog02 2 years ago
What's priceless is your complete lack of knowledge in simple, high school level topics.
kooldog98 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"What's priceless is your complete lack of knowledge in simple, high school level topics."
What's really priceless is no matter how many times you're proven WRONG, you keep repeating your stupidity.
straydog02 2 years ago
"What's really priceless is no matter how many times you're proven WRONG, you keep repeating your stupidity. "
What's priceless is the fact that you believe the sun has no effect in photography! LOL!!
kooldog98 2 years ago
"What's priceless is the fact that you believe the sun has no effect in photography! LOL!! "
On Earth the Sun has an effect on the atmosphere, which prevents us from seeing and photographing stars. On the Moon there is no atmosphere for the Sun to effect, thus stars can be easily seen, and also photographed during the day, just by using a 30 second exposure.
You need to talk a professional photographer and an astonomer, and then try to get it thru your thick skull why you're wrong.
straydog02 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"On the Moon there is no atmosphere for the Sun to effect, thus stars can be easily seen, and also photographed during the day, just by using a 30 second exposure."
On the moon, the sun still has an affect on the camera...
kooldog98 2 years ago
What a great video. Thanks!
SidJustice1 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I posted this...
"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."
...on the channel pages of about 20 pro-Apollo people with my Cosmored account. All but about 2 were gone the next day and I was blocked.
continued...
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
...continued
Then, in the comment sections of videos, I started asking those pro-Apollo people why they'd deleted my posts and blocked me. Suddenly, I was blocked on almost all YouTube videos--even hoax-believer videos.
What else could I do but open another account? I posted the message again and it didn't get deleted in about half of the videos; Phil Plait didn't delete his the second time to my surprise.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
you know how insane you sound when you have a conversation with yourself ? everyone knows you use multiple accounts to agree with yourself. i have the screenshot to prove it
img41 * imageshack * us / img41/7922/92308446 jpg
kooldog98 2 years ago
kooldog .. .Who's having conversations with themselves? .. The Apollogists do that all the time .. svector uses many different sockuppets to back up his pathetic nonsense and so does ApolloWasReal / ApolloWasReallyReal/ philkarn and I forget the several other names he's admitted to using here to back up his lame Apollogist nonsense.
Rob259260 does the same thing, as do many other Apollo Hoax deniers.. So don't be such a hypocrite.
straydog02 2 years ago
who cares? it doesnt disguise the fact that you still do it, and you look like an idiot when you do. its embarrassing
kooldog98 2 years ago
I still do what? .. If you're accusing me of using sockpuppets like most of the Apollogists do, you're very much mistaken .. I have one user name and you're looking at it.
What's embarrassing is your complete ignorance about everything.
straydog02 2 years ago
stalker .. If all I was ever exposed to was clavius disinformation and NASA propaganda, I would believe the Apollo fairy tale too.
straydog02 2 years ago
Maybe we need to start looking at what the Japanese ( and Chinese ?) moon orbiters are sending back. The last time I looked for stuff from the Japanese orbiter, I couldn't find much of anything. Maybe after all this time there's something more and at better resolution.
Elhardt 2 years ago
Yet those same Apollo revisionists post on structures on the moon videos that any odd shadow is a base formed by great aliens that are in cahoots with the NWO.
Jarrah and other knuckleheads need to remember that nobody built the LRO to satisfy Apollo revisionists. You demand proof, then admit you can see footpads, then say that it is not enough!!!!
AbelMagwitch73 2 years ago
Can't see footpads or even the lander - i can see white blobs
blank000blank 2 years ago
You do know it is against the rules to disagree with anything Jawa White says! You must repeat "wake up sheeple" 50 times without thinking for a second!
AbelMagwitch73 2 years ago
If you read all of their comments, ItalianoAmericano, their excuses are absolutely grasping at straws...On the cusp of desperation indeed.
Those blurs are the landers? Give us all a break, propagandists....
northerntruthseeker 2 years ago
brilliant, as usual.
MathiusX 2 years ago
I just made a post on this video.
/watch?v=M26dVtnnci0
"NASA extreme engineering"
Let's see how fast it gets voted down.
Cosmored 2 years ago
Love your work !
virgogreg 2 years ago
Most posts by Apollo believers as so lame that I want people to see them. I would never dream of thumbing them down. I think they posted some stuff and thumbed it down themselves to they could say hoax-believers did it.
Truth-seekers don't thumb down anything; it's only the pro-Apollo people who thumb stuff down because they don't want people to see the hoax evidence.
Cosmored 2 years ago
I think YouTube bent to government pressure and started to use this "Thumb down" voting system so that government shills could censor hoax evidence without there being the appearance of censorship.
My posts routinely get thumbed down on classic Apollo videos such at this one.
/watch?v=pCp2jTtay0w
"Apollo 11 40th anniversary"
My posts disappear and then I get blocked.
Cosmored 2 years ago
Hmmm, you can speak for all "truth-seekers" now can you? How naive.
Truth is, some HBs thumb down some comments, some ABs thumb down some comments.
I'll give you a thumbs up so it's more likely your comment will remain for others to see how unobjective you truly are.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
I knew I forgot something. I meant to disable the comment voting when I posted this. It's never too late to correct one's mistake. I've disabled the comment voting.
WhiteJarrah 2 years ago
@GTP-"The conspiracy believers take delight in censoring people who don't "believe" in their conspiracy theories."
That's a laugh. Have you googled "moon hoax" lately? The propagandists have plenty of websites espousing their views without censorship. In fact, JW often quotes those sites. BUT, if you started your own censorship-free website, you couldn't play the victim card anymore, could you?
nekotech 2 years ago
You cannot see the logic behind this debunking? Lets see... NASA has lied its face off for over 40 years now, and you cannot see the lie?
It is so obvious that NASA is criminal for lying to people about Apollo by the evidence presented here and elsewhere..... Why are you living with the lies?
northerntruthseeker 2 years ago
I don't understand the logica about this debunking. The LRO and GeoEye shows the same thing, the resolution is there. The only difference is that on the LRO the very bright surface of the lander overexposes the image.
Also the GeoEye images are far more digitally inhanced.
Also the job of LRO is not to show the apollo but to map the Moon. The apollo is a bonus they got.
obaeyens 2 years ago
Are those GeoEye images really 40 cm resolution? They look better than that to me.
If so, perhaps the GeoEye images have processing applied to them that has not been applied to the LRO photos. Yet.
apollotls 2 years ago
Really? Is it not better for people to live free by knowing the truth rather than be in a delusional world based on lies?
northerntruthseeker 2 years ago 7
Sadly, that's the world HBs inhabit. Healthy distrust and skepticism of government has translated into automatically believing the opposite the government says. Why automatically believe everything JW says? If they took the time to do some basic research they'd see why his arguments, while prettily packaged, are fundamentally flawed. I wish they'd have a more inquisitive nature and a propensity to learn and understand, rather than blindly follow. THEN they'll know the truth and be free.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
HLAR ... None of the CT's just automatically believe anything Jarrah says..What a disingenuous claim to make.. People who have the ability to think for themsleves, believe most of Jarrah's hoax evidence for the simple reason that he provides the extensive research that not only backs up his claims, but also proves the official government version of Apollo is bogus.. He also has the ability to cross reference the claims of his opposition and prove when they have been caught in their many lies.
straydog02 2 years ago
what about the people who still have the ability to think for themselves, and believe the landings happened? oh, they're just propagandists, apologists and shills.
"None of the CT's just automatically believe anything Jarrah says."
and none of us automatically believe what NASA tells us. we believe what we learnt in school. remember school? or did you never go
kooldog98 2 years ago
How do you know that those running the school systems have/had your best interests at heart?
How do you know that every single subject and detail they taught you is absolutely correct?
Where does the money to run schools come from? - The same place that sends money to NASA
blank000blank 2 years ago
@kooldog98 Conspiracy theorists and school? Most of them are way to smart of school, that is why most of then just drops out.
obaeyens 2 years ago
obaeyens ... Do you believe that Professor Colin Rourke, who wrote the paper... 'Hadley : A Study in Fakery', is a school dropout ?
The new LRO photos are photoshopped garbage and finally a brave professional has stepped forward to expose the original faked Apollo photography.
straydog02 2 years ago
kooldog.. If you believe everything you "learnt" in school, then I feel sorry for you, as most of what is taught as truth is not. History has been very carefully edited and altered by those with certain agendas. NASA's agenda was to have everyone believe they sent 27 humans to the Moon, landing and launching 12 of them from the lunar surface, using 40 year old technology. That might be believable if any space agency could accomplish today what was allegedly accomplished then .. but they can't.
straydog02 2 years ago
Have you considered that if this kind of thinking would become mainstream, the chaos that could ensue would destroy what people believe about themselves and society. Imagine the social upheaval, denial, and panic. Children are weaned on this space stuff being real. Who will be blamed? The republicans, the liberals, the Jews, the neocons, etc. Then what with the nuts who will take the law into their own hands? This is fire.....
istanbul18 2 years ago
Jarrah, I am going to fully debunk this latest LRO video series of yours. Unlike the LRO team which merely published quickly enhanced versions of the raw photos, the resolution of which is degraded by both spacecraft jitter and no calibration data for the narrow angle camera's CCD, I will publish fully enhanced versions of the photos. The enhanced photos will be fully deconvolved (removing jitter) and fully enhanced. The difference in detail will be striking.
GoneToPlaid 2 years ago
GTP .. Do you use the same photoshop program to "debunk" the hoax evidence that NASA does?
If so, the Apollo Hoax debate will continue for the next 40 years.
straydog02 2 years ago 6
Unfortunately, no one care of YOUR enhanced photos, only the raw file from the source does matter, and these sux, who do you think you are with YOUR enhanced photos anyway?
Fivemorex5 2 years ago 7
"I will publish fully enhanced versions of the photos"
I have seen your so-called enhanced LRO photos. All you did was blur the original image, sharpen it again, and then adjust the contrast and brightness.
I hardly call that photo enhancing.
WhiteJarrah 2 years ago
That is hardly what I do. First, I deconvolve the images to remove the spacecraft jitter from the image. Look up image deconvolution and see what it is all about. Next, I perform an image stretch before then running an FFT (fast Fourier transform) in order to quantify and remove any remaining jitter and periodic electrical interference which is present in the photo. Then I enhance the photo to my liking and then use a special filter to remove CCD noise from the uncalibrated image.
GoneToPlaid 2 years ago
Oh so now you have a way of making the picture resolution greater than the raw files from NASA... This is impossible. You cannot add or subtract data from the file and "enhance to your liking" Get over it man. They are faking it and have been faking it for years. You seem to be someone who could come to discern this. There is no use lying to yourself man.
burlbark 2 years ago 2
GTP, these people here have no clue what you are talking about and never will. Because if they were, then they would not doubt the landing any more.
obaeyens 2 years ago
Unfortunately you previous comment has been censored by the thumbs down brigade. Do you have a link to your enhanced images? Thx.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
@HeadLikeARock
The conspiracy believers take delight in censoring people who don't "believe" in their conspiracy theories. I didn't post anything nasty, hateful, or racial, yet of course those sons of bitched censored me.
That should tell you all that you need to know about those conspiracy theorists. They all are delusional, and none of them will tolerate any comments which don't "support" their delusional ideas. And yet, amazingly I let them rant on my YT channel.
GoneToPlaid 2 years ago
Oh, poooooor little kitty, the evil "conspiracy believers" are censoring your deconvoluted post, and you are not posting anything nasty of course, just that we are "sons of bitched" (if that mean anything anyway)
Didn't it crossed your mind, that maybe, just maybe, peoples have read your comment, find it ridiculous and for this reason have thumbed it down? Just so you know, it is the reason why I thumbed it down, your comment is still there, you just have to change preferences to display it.
Fivemorex5 2 years ago
It's unfortunate that people (from both sides) abuse the voting system. If everyone who disagrees with everyone else "thumbed down", we'd rapidly end up with no visible comments. All very childish. I wish Youtube would get rid.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
HLAR .. I agree with you about the comment voting .. Jarrah should disable it here like he had to on some of his other videos...It's obsurd that we take the time to post comments on any video, just to have them either voted down or completely deleted, like Rob260259, svector, shane, SpreadingTheMuse, ImTheSecretSquare, and several of the other Apollogists do on their chanels, when they can't refute our hoax evidence or win an argument.
straydog02 2 years ago
HLR - I agree totally. Personnally, I never use thumbs down.
apollotls 2 years ago
Hey apollotls
I posted some hoax evidence on your channel page and you deleted it. I posted the same evidence on GoneToPlaid's channel page and he didn't delete it. Don't you want people to see hoax evidence? It it's wrong, it'll fall by it's own lack of merit. Censorship is only necessary when evidence has merit and the government doesn't want people to see it.
Cosmored 2 years ago
@cosmored
I haven't deleted anything.
apollotls 2 years ago
Hey apollotls-
I just tried to post some hoax evidence on your channel page and it was impossible. Here's what I tried to post.
"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."
What's the problem with your channel page? Why doesn't your channel page accept my posts?
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
I have no idea.
Cosmored accused me of removing a post of his the other day. I didn't.
apollotls 2 years ago
Ah. I see. I just visited your channel and I see Rob seems to think you're Cosmored...
apollotls 2 years ago
@apollotls
I am Cosmored. See the 2nd and 3rd replies on my channel pages for an explanation.
I just tried to post that summary on your channel page again and it was impossible. Would you mind posting it for me?
"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."
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
"And yet, amazingly I let them rant on my YT channel."
I posted this link on your channel page and the channel pages of some other pro-Apollo people.
3W's (dot) thenakedscientists (dot) com/forum/index (dot) php?topic=232 (dot) 350
(check link for gaps)
It disappeared from every page and now YouTube has blocked me from posting on channel pages. Would you mind posting that link on your channel page for me as I can't? Thanks.
Cosmored 2 years ago
Hi Cosmored,
YT doesn't allow links in comments. You could create a quick video and post the link either in the video or in the information section about the video.
GoneToPlaid 2 years ago
Thanks for pointing that out. I'm able to post links on my own channel page so I thought I could post links on all channel pages. I just posted instructions on how to find that summary of hoax evidence on your channel page. I hope you don't delete it.
Cosmored 2 years ago
Hey GoneToPlaid-
I want your opinion on something.
I'm blocked on this new video-
/watch?v=L8uQePaO2EE
"Moonlandings. Faked?"
I can't post there. Do you have any idea why I'd be blocked there? If the person who made the video is an objective truth-seeker, why would he block a hoax-believer? Doesn't the truth prevail in the end if everybody can simply speak freely?
Cosmored 2 years ago
OK then, how about you show us what the image looked like after each step. Then we can see if there was any reduction of image quality during a step. When you've done that perhaps you can explain why the spacecraft was jittering when it took the 4-times annotated A-17 image but not when it took the raw image.
WhiteJarrah 2 years ago
@WhiteJarrah
Hi Jarrah,
I will create a video which shows the image processing, step by step. Look carefully at the A17 raw image after first strongly increasing its contrast. You will see that every really bright pixel similar yet less bright pixels one and two pixels to the right. Really dark pixels do the same thing -- a pair of less dark pixels to the right. The LRO team says that this is caused by spacecraft jitter, but I am not sure. It could be caused by the CCD's readout circuitry.
GoneToPlaid 2 years ago
Here GTP.
I found your silly mountain backdrops in the Apollo 15 hd footage I was looking for.
I'm fairly sure that image was used for flight simulations but I'll need to double check that.
greenmagoos 2 years ago
deconvolve is used to remove blurring effects on images. The LRO pics aren't what i would would consider blurry, they are just low resolution.
Deconvolving won't increase the resolution.
i want to see high res pics of the landing sites. All we get is low res pics with white blobs.
blank000blank 2 years ago
Image deconvolution is used to restore the image to its maximum possible entropy. Deconvolving an image inherently increases the resolution.
GoneToPlaid 2 years ago
@blank000blank Have you basic knowledge of scientific digital image processing? Maybe you should start learning a bit how scientifically images are processed. You can find many resources on the internet.
Arh yes, I developed for 5 years X=ray CT scanner images an reconstructed 3D objects out of it, so I have some basic knowledge of deconvolving. GTP does it scientifically right.
obaeyens 2 years ago
blank .. Don't hold your breath for any high resolution LRO photos, clearly showing the suppossed Apollo debris on the Moon... The low res, Adobe Photoshopped "LM" blobs and "footpaths" are most likely all the world will ever get to see of the "landing" sites.
Funny how NASA has the technology to image cars on Earth and objects down to the size of a beachball on Mars, but refuses to use that same technology to image the alleged Apollo trash on the Moon.
straydog02 2 years ago
they dont refuse to, they just dont see the point in spending millions of dollars imaging what we know is already there
kooldog98 2 years ago
What utter nonsense .. Aproximately 28% of the population believes Apollo was a Hoax .. Everyone on both sides of this debate have been anxiously awatiing the photos that would prove if Apollo astronots landed on the Moon or not .. Yet all NASA can muster up are a few pathetic looking, low res, blurry blobs, and we're all suppossed to accept that garbage as proof of the landings!?!?
The LRO photos are photoshopped crap.
straydog02 2 years ago
28% - do you have a reference for that figure? last i read it was 6%. it seems all you can muster up is fabricated statistics. besides, there is far more evidence of the moon landings than the LRO photos
kooldog98 2 years ago
Gallup, Inc. 1976 USA — 28%
Washington Post 1994 USA — 30%
Public Opinion Fund 2000 Russia — 28%
Fox TV 2001 USA — 20%
Dittmar Associates, Inc. 2006 USA 27%
Not specified 2008 USA — 28
sourcewatch*org/index*php?title=Moon_Hoax
The alleged 6% is just the typical propaganda that's spewed all over the internet to make it look like fewer people believe in the hoax than really do.
straydog02 2 years ago
those percentages include people who were undecided on the matter. the gallup poll of 1999 states only 6% said the moon landings were fake, while 5% had no opinion and 89% said the landings were real.
kooldog98 2 years ago
Those percentages are much more acurate than the standard 6% that Wiki and a few other pro NASA sites promote.
straydog02 2 years ago
furthermore, almost all of the links in the references to those polls on that site offer no credibility other than "X amount of people believe the landings were fake"
kooldog98 2 years ago
You only beleive those sources are unreliable because you don't want to believe them.. You obviously prefer to buy into the typical 6 % lie.
Furthermore, why don't you read the rest of the web site, which explains in great detail why Apollo was faked.. Even a few Russian scientists have proven that the Saturn V didn't do what NASA claimed it did.
The hoax evidence is overwhelming now ...Which is why more than 6% of the people believe we have not been told the truth about Apollo.
straydog02 2 years ago
I stopped reading when I read "Mythbusters" was an Australian TV program.
kooldog98 2 years ago
@straydog02
funny stray, I know a lot of black people and way more of them think the moon is a hoax then whites ... they are used to being lied to by the MAN ... and even admit it ... but they are also used to looking into things and being more opened minded due to prejudice and dealing with it
pt1gard 2 years ago
pt .. I've read the statics recently of the real percentage of the population that believe Apollo was faked, and the polls not only show that it's closer to 28% than 6 % ( NASA's propaganda lie) but that the percentage was higher among black people.
straydog02 2 years ago
Here's more from that article concerning the recent photoshopped LRO photos.
"Photos showing those objects can be made on a printed lunar surface photos with rough models of the objects added, or using a computer.
Earth satellites can now reveal licence plate numbers on cars. Then why a satellite cannot provide much better images of the Moon which has no atmosphere? "
straydog02 2 years ago
i have still yet to see a satellite image of a license plate on a car.
kooldog98 2 years ago
You might need to work for the NSA to be able to read a licence plate, but us regular folks can see cars and even people, just by looking at the Google Earth satellite images.
Don't be such a closed minded fool .. If NASA really wanted us to see what's on the Moon, we would have a long time ago.. but instead they're contiuning the cover up by showing us blurry, low res, photoshopped nonsense.
Face it my Apollogist friend, the LRO photos are GARBAGE that have proven NOTHING.
straydog02 2 years ago
We have seen whats on the moon, it's in the thousands of publicly available surface photographs. You only believe they're fake because you don't want to believe they're real.
kooldog98 2 years ago
kooldog .. If you think those cheesy looking, staged Apollo photos have shown us what's on the Moon, then you're dumber than a box full of petrified wood "moon" rocks.
straydog02 2 years ago
well my argument here is finished, since you quite obviously concede defeat with that insult
kooldog98 2 years ago
You'd think if a multi million dollar satellite could take a picture of a license plate on a car it would do so at the first possible opportunity
kooldog98 2 years ago
wait.. that's not what it was designed for was it?
kooldog98 2 years ago
You're wasting your time defending NASA's new LRO photos ... Especially since they've already admitted to having the imagining technology to resolve an object down to the size of a beachball on Mars.
The LRO photos are an embarrassment, even to the Apollogists.
straydog02 2 years ago
NICE TO KNOW STRAY, i had heard 7% most of life and i dont think its really 25% + .... most every sheep i know thinks we went, but when i show them things i have found they either go MAYBE or many start delving and come around and figure out the scam and start telling others, its hilarious!
isnt is ironic once you see the truth you never go back to other side in any of it ... 9/11, holohoax, iraq, moon, the fed, diebold etc etc
pt1gard 2 years ago
pt ...Here's the real statics, showing that 28 % of the population believes Apollo was a Hoax... Check ot this article.. This also has peer reviewed Russian scientists who've proven that the Saturn V didn't do what NASA claimed it did.
sourcewatch*org/index*php?title=Moon_Hoax
With evidence like this, it's amazing that so many blind fools still defend the Apollo Myth.
straydog02 2 years ago
Oops .. statistics .. Sorry for the typo.
straydog02 2 years ago
LR had inflatable tires which would have exploded if pre-inflated, and there was no air on the Moon to inflate them. Pro Apollo NUTTERS claim the rover had solid wire mesh tires. Yes the rover in the museum had these fitted in the mid 70s when they realized pneumatic tires could not have functioned on the Moon. NASA has had 40 years to clear up the plainly obvious mistake and they cannot say why the anomaly was there in the first place.
pt1gard 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"LR had inflatable tires"
where in the hell did you get that nonsense?
kooldog98 2 years ago
just read the articles .. hmm very good.. it's a really new to me.. thanks for sharing :D
Sheilfalkyr 2 years ago
You're welcome.. Most people have never bothered to view the multitude of evidence which proves Apollo was faked. Instead, they just allow themselves to be swayed by the majority, who have bought into the official story and have been made to believe that all hoax believers are "hoaxtards". NASA's program of ridicule has worked very well for 40 years but now more people are seeing through that type disinformation tactic and also seeing that something is very wrong with the official Apollo record.
straydog02 2 years ago
this "multitude" of evidence lacks any scientific credibility. simply dismissing something as fake is not evidence. when questioned about the thousands of Apollo photos your response was, in simple terms, "they're fake, you're an idiot". that sourcewatch site links to bloggers and pro hoax advocates who all respond in the same way. face it - you cant prove it was fake, you can only prove it may have been fake.
kooldog98 2 years ago
Several people have proven that many aspects of Apollo were faked.. Even some NASA astronauts like Brian OLeary have doubts about whether men landed on the moon during Project Apollo.. Several researchers have proven that some of the photos are fake, and if one aspect of Apollo is proven to be fake, then it calls the entire program into question.
You're free to believe whatever you choose about Apollo, but if you believe it hasn't been proven to have been faked, then you're sadly mistaken.
straydog02 2 years ago
Many aspects of apollo have been proven without any doubt that it was real. Like the filming of activity in a 1/6th gravity, vacuumed environment which cannot be reproduced on earth with wires and slow motion.
"...astronauts like Brian OLeary have doubts..."
thats all they ever have. Doubts. no real evidence though.
kooldog98 2 years ago
Many aspects of Apollo have proven without any doubt that it was faked..The Apollo videos are the main proof that it was NOT filmed in 1/6g ..The movements and jump heights of the astronots don't even come close to what would have taken place in 1/6 g, even with the use of slow motion and the occasional wires that were used for those seldom higher jumps, mostly hidden behind the Rover or done in the shadows at a distance. Like the A16 Duke & Young stunt and the Armstrong leap up the LM ladder.
straydog02 2 years ago
"...don't even come close to what would have taken place in 1/6 g.."
how would you know? have you been on the moon?
"Like the A16 Duke & Young stunt and the Armstrong leap up the LM ladder. "
on both occasions the astronauts had something to hold onto to spring them up higher.
kooldog98 2 years ago
"how would you know? have you been on the moon?"
No... Have you?
I don't need to be on the Moon.. All I have to do is to read the Langley 1/6g test results to know that the data doesn't match what is seen in the Apollo videos.
Sorry, but John Young was hiding behind the Rover, not holding onto it, when his wire man jerked him up one too many times, catching him off guard.. Both Duke and Young forgot to even bend their knees for their ridiculous high jump stunt.
straydog02 2 years ago
"Both Duke and Young forgot to even bend their knees for their ridiculous high jump stunt."
Look at the clip in slow motion. You can clearly see his helmet moving down before he leaps, evidence that he's bending his knees.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
I tried to post this on your channel page too HeadLikeARock.
"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."
I couldn't do it. Of course I'm not surprised.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
Well you didn't try hard enough, I've just checked the security and it hasn't been changed, anyone can post comments. I guess the problem lies somewhere between your computer screen and your chair. Of course I'm not surprised.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
"Well you didn't try hard enough...I'm not surprised."
When I post it, it appears. When I leave your channel page and go back, it's gone. It's impossible for me to post this...
"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."
...so would you mind doing it for me?
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
Look at the clip again ..Young had already started to walk away when the wire man jerked him up one last time for that high jump stunt behind the Rover .. He never went in a downwards direction before being pulled up.. It's very evident in the last "jump" that he never bent his knees.
straydog02 2 years ago
I have done, many times. You need to look at his starting position before the first jump, and compare it to subsequent jumps, especially the last one. His helmet is much lower in the frame before the last jump compared to the first. After the 4th jump he straightens up an inch, then down an inch, the jumps again, but he's still noticeably lower than before the 1st jump when he was standing upright.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
If you've looked at the clip many times then you know that Young's last jerk, er I mean "jump" took him by surprise .. The guy was actually starting to walk away as the wire man pulled him up a few feet off the ground again .. It's actually pretty comical looking.. So is Charlie's backwards prat fall, right next to him.
straydog02 2 years ago
You're still not analysing the footage properly. His helmet is noticeably lower before the last jump than the first, so he must have bent his knees on landing. Also, he moves up an inch, then down an inch, immediately before his last jump. No proof at all that someone was yanking him up with a wire, pure supposition. Look at the footage more closely. At least admit I'm right about the sequence of events, regardless of what you think caused it (jumping or wires).
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
Hey HeadLikeARock-
I just tried to post this..
"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."
...on your channel page and the word "Spam" appeared. Tell us what you've done.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
Moves up and down an inch???
Do you really believe that a possible one inch knee bend could produce a several foot jump height?
I've analysed the footage properly and it's a no brainer that those silly, behind the Rover, stunt jumps were done with the use of wires.. Even when Young wasn't taken off guard (as in his last jerk/jump) his knees didn't bend enough to jump that high.
Even in 1/6 g it takes more than a one inch bend of the knees to jump any height.
One inch???
LOL
straydog02 2 years ago
But he is already lower than in the first frame after he lands for the penultimate time! In other words, his knees MUST be bent. THEN he moves up then down an inch (with his knees already bent), before making his last jump.
Here's the proof, check it on the video on the ALSJ.
tinyurl * com/a16jump
He is noticeable lower after the 4th jump than before the 1st, agree or disagree?
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
Hey HeadLikeARock
When are you going to explain why I can't post hoax evidence on your channel page? You can post on my channel page all you want. If your theory is wrong, it'll fall by its own lack of merit; I don't need to delete it. You pro-Apollo people need to delete hoax evidence because you know it has merit and you'll look silly if you try to obfuscate it.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
I've already told you, no-one is blocked from posting on my channel. Probably another flaky YT problem.
Although why you think it is your god-given right to post on my channel I don't know. Firstly, I can't imagine there's a great deal of traffic as I've only posted one video. Secondly, freedom of speech doesn't extend to spraying graffiti all over someones windows, no doubt you would consider it censorship if someone cleaned it off.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
"I've already told you, no-one is blocked from posting on my channel. Probably another flaky YT problem."
I post it and it appears. I go back 30 seconds later and it's gone.
"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."
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
The video you made that can be seen on your channel page was meant to support the idea that Apollo was real. Doesn't that mean that we can post counter-arguments on your channel?
You know that the hoax evidence is so clear that the only way you can actually sway public opinon is to keep people from seeing it. That's why you blocked me.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
@FatFreddy88
No, it was meant to demonstrate that you can't rely on the apparent direction of a shadow on a surface to determine the direction of the light source, which it does rather well.
No-one is blocked. There are 8 comments, but none are visible. The only setting I have access to is who can write a comment, not whether the comments are visible, so clearly there's a bug in the YT website. No doubt you'll see this as part of some vast conspiracy against you. Do I care? Nope.
HeadLikeARock 2 years ago
I just manages to post it with my Cosmored3 account. I went back to check and it was still there. I wonder why it didn't work with my FatFreddy acount. Anyway, I hope you don't delete it as I was very polite.
If it hadn't been for censorship, I'd still have only one account. So far I've had to open three more just to keep posting everywhere.
FatFreddy88 2 years ago
When are you going to publicly apologise to all the people you falsely accused of blocking you? I