It requires all of 9 entire minutes to go from earth’s surface to earth’s orbit. How in HELL does it require ½ hour for LEM to return to Kitty Hawk if she uses constant acceleration to reach escape velocity?
Why are no stars visible surrounding Kitty Hawk as filmed from LEM?
Why are no thruster shots visible when *massive* Kitty Hawk with fuel for a home burn turns sharply, then crisply halts its angular momentum.
You can see God damn wires in the flash of glare between 02:00 to 02:01.
@abatheswedishdude02 I have seen still photography & video that has stars, and everything else that ought to be visible to the naked eye. That means that it is doable.
Astronauts are LIARS when they say that they never saw or do not remember seeing any stars. They said that because they never went to the moon, and plenty of video ought to have had tons of stars especialy the darkside LEM docking/undocking video.
ANYONE who claims that the dust kicked up by the rover is shaped like a perfect parabola is lying right through their teeth, and does not believe for a minute that man landed on the moon. This proves these trolls defending Apollo do not believe man landed on the moon --- an example is "monokhem" below
Search on youtube for : JIM COLLIER WAS IT ONLY A PAPER MOON.
At the beginning, or part 2, if you get it broken up, Jim Collier gives an excellent explanation for the rooster tail. From an official NASA documentary about the moon landing, Jim Collier takes a clip showing a rooster tail, and the astronauts themselves describe it as a rooster tail, AND a defender of Apollo, who hung up on Jim Collier. In slow motion, it is really, REALLY obvious that it is a rooster tail.
White nationalists like David Duke believe the moon landing was a great White achievement, as all of the astronauts involved were White men, and the scientists at the top were former Nazis. Emotion is more important than rationality, and because they WANT to believe it was a great achievement, they believe it actually happened, and they close their eyes to the obvious truth. The dust kicked up is OBVIOUSLY in a rooster tail shape, and was described that way by the astronauts themselves.
Show me the footage where they are jumping upward 5 feet. That hammer throw was VERY unimpressive. The sand is being kicked up as they are walking EXACTLY as on the Earth, on the beach, and they are often deliberately shuffling their feet to kick up the sand. That motion should be sending the sand at least up to their waist, if not over their heads. Projectiles would go six times higher on the moon than on Earth --- this is stated in physics books written before this supposed event.
@mooninquirer ... not sure if you saw my post elsewhere about wind and sand at beaches ... I am currently living in hermosa beach, and on days of strong wind, when the orange flags are furling straight out, the sand does not move, which answers the apollogists claims why doesnt the sand/dirt move when the cloth flaps on my "definitive proof" video... its sand and too heavy to move like the Dustbowl top soil; if the lunar surface was chalky dirt, like stated by Nots, it would blow in wind
The condition of 1/6 gravity on the moon should not appear only for certain scenes, and disappear for others, if it were true. It should be clearly manifest in every second on the footage. You mention "20 other things" Are you referring to gravity ? I can think of 20 other reasons the moon landing is a hoax. Gravity was the FIRST thing I ever thought of.
The hammer drop was purported to show an airless environment, and not 1/6 gravity, but it fails that too.
@mooninquirer .... why do the Nots kangy hop instead of walking normally? is it to show they can do things diff on moon, like jump at most lift one foot on their absurd Kangies while aided by wires? in the end it's just a psyop to program viewers they are somewhere else when in reality they are on earth
Even to consider the possibility that the moon landing actually happened is absurd, because it is so overwhelmingly obvious that it was a hoax. SELENA GOMEZ could lift on the moon as much as can be lifted on Earth by an NFL all-pro linebacker. And these macho test pilots could have easily descended the ladder with just their hands ---- indeed, that would be a more natural motion, after spending days in zero gravity.
@mooninquirer I pick Selena Gomez for her prettiness, thinness, and baby doll cuteness, and not her name sounding like the moon ( check out her "maid song" on youtube ! ) The astronauts could have easily done one-armed pull ups on the rung of the ladder, even given the weight of the pack. Combined, they weighed 62 lbs ---- that would be EASIER than doing 120 lbs on a lat pulldown, especially because one could concentrate the side.
HAHAHAHAHA... i cant remember seeing the docking footage before.. is this suppose to be the real footage ?... hahahaha fuck off this is from thunderbirds..
FEB 4, 2011 -Using two high-resolution LROC images taken from two separate orbits, scientists have formed a stereo image pair for 3D measurements at the Apollo 14 landing site. Among the visible objects are the descent stage of the Apollo 14 lunar module Antares, the ALSEP, a rock nicknamed Turtle Rock, & multiple astronaut traverse footpaths clearly indicated by disturbed soils. Data processing methods can be used to identify the objects and measure their sizes and shapes. Game over hoaxturds
"All this moon walk crap only happened under 1 criminal President named Nixon and STOPPED when his ass left office. Ironic huh?"
So it was a Nixon conspiracy? You mean, the guy who couldn't cover up a third-rate burglary at the Watergate Hotel? The guy who couldn't keep Vice-President Agnew's tax indiscretions under wraps. But this guy kept everyone quiet about Apollo huh? Suuuuure...
The evidence of a hoax is crushing. I posted a partial summary of it on a science forum. To see it, google "The Naked Scientist". In the "New Theories" section there's a thread entitled "Did we land on the moon?". The post is on page 15. It's the 7th one from the top.
@fundiebasher That is different, because there was a political partisan motivation to bring down Nixon. But if any politician revealed the moon hoax, it would be like opening up other hoaxes, like the USS Liberty cover-up, or the holocaust. And the Zionist Lobby, which controls both parties, would not like that.
@mooninquirer There was no partisan movement to "Bring down Nixon". There was a media investigation by a democrat and a republican that uncoverd his criminality, and once it was uncovered a bi partisan effort to Impeach him began and he quit because he knew he was going to be removed from office.
@monokhem Hmmmm. Nixon was a good man, basically, but involved in some petty corruption, like his criteria for an IRS Commissioner. I am sorry if I brought down Nixon. The moon hoax was a bipartisan effort of government corruption and cover-up, like the USS Liberty. I think Nixon would have had more integrity than LBJ, and not have completely white washed the obvious fact that Israel did it intentionally.
@mooninquirer The moon hoax was very petty corruption, compared to covering up Israel's intentional attack upon the USS Liberty just two years earlier.
@mooninquirer Nixon rigged a presidential election, and tried to cover it up. Only the kind of fool that would disbelieve the moon landing would mislable that "petty". Nixon had no integrity, at all. He was a liar, and a thief, and if Ford wasn't a pice of shit too Nixon would have died in jail like he should have.
@monokhem I assume you are talking about the election of 1972, in which Nixon won a huge landslide ---- McGovern only won Massachusetts. I have never heard this election described as "rigged." There was an enormous backlash over the Civil Rights Acts, the intense rioting ( evidence of this can still be seen in the architecture of buildings built during this time ), assassinations, crime, hippie culture etc. Nixon was correct that the "silent majority" was was against these things.
@mooninquirer Nixon was not the most lovable man and people did not so much vote for him, as vote against the legacy of LBJ. This happened again in 1980, and 1984, when the public voted not so much as FOR Reagan ( although he was more likable than Nixon ), as against the Democrats. This has NOTHING to do with the moon landing. I leave that up to Selena Gomez, and the watercolor illustrations of children's books showing men on the moon EASILY and gleefully lifting HUGE boulders.
Nixon made no use of any info gained from the Watergate break-in, which I acknowledge he approved of. So it was not a rigged election. This is in contrast to the election of 1960, which was extremely close, and in which historians acknowledge there was massive voting irregularities in both Illinois and Texas, which tipped the election in JFK/LBJ's favor. Watergate was petty corruption, just like Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.
@mooninquirer Nixon's was petty corruption, because no one was killed, no election was effected, money was not stolen from the public, no war was unnecessarily fought. This in in contrast to LBJ, Wilson, FDR, and even Washington ( even if he did not realize what was going on ), who approved of the First Bank of the US ( which stole money from the American public ).
@mooninquirer Well you haven't talked to anyone that knows anything about that election. I see that you believe the Nixon campaign rhetoric of 1972. How quaint.
If the plumbers hadn't hadn't have torn down Musky, Nixon would have been running against a better candidate. Even with the weaker candidate Nixon's men still conducted illeagle survailance and sabotage against the McGovern campaign.
Trying to act like the Democrats were somehow for assassination of thier own people is idiotic.
@monokhem It is obvious that LBJ was involved in the assassination of JFK, although there were others. His own extreme ambition was a great motivation, as well as the fact that JFK was going to drop him from the ticket in 1964. Kennedy was hostile to Jews and Israel, but LBJ was the most pro-Jewish president in US history, which is why the Jewish media act appalled at the mention of LBJ and the JFK assassination. Jackie Kennedy has said the LBJ was the mastermind --- recently disclosed.
Back to the moon landing......... had it been real, the astronauts could easily have descended the ladder with just their hands, and, indeed, this would be a more natural motion, one they were accustomed to, from days in zero gravity only using their hands for locomotion. They could have easily banged out sets of one-armed pull-ups on the rung of the ladder, and been able to lift huge boulders, making it look like the world's strongest man competition, except without the grunting.
@mooninquirer That isn't even a point, and it's wrong. They weighed way to much in those 200+ lb. space suits to want to try and lower themselves down by thier hands. Bring me something worth refuting. If this this Hoax BS was true you would definatly be able to find some proof.
@monokhem No, no, they didn't weigh too much. On average, the astronauts weighed 185 lbs, and so did the spacesuits. On the moon, the astronauts would have weighed 62 pounds in the suits. This is admitted by NASA, citing the number "62 pounds" specifically, in one of these videos with this ominous narrator's voice, just like in this video. Check out APOLLO 11 FLIGHT OF THE EAGLE
@mooninquirer The space suits weighed over two hundred pounds, and 62 pounds is still to much to want to try and lower yourself down a ladder with no feet. It's just stupid on the face of it. "I would have done (this other thing) if I was on the moon" isn't an arguement. It's a diversion.
You're afraid you're going to find out you are wrong about the moon hoax just like you found out you were wrong about the 1972 election, so you are refusing to bring anything of substance up.
@monokhem You're afraid that other people are going to read this and realize that the moon landing doesn't make sense, which is why you keep changing to a very much off topic discussion of the 1972 election, in which you claim that Nixon was able to achieve a landslide and win in every state except Massachusetts, because of a character assault on Muskie. I brought it up in response to what this other guy fundiebasher said, and decided that Nixon contributes nothing to the moon hoax.
@mooninquirer The notion that some one is going to read anything you've posted and disbelieve the moon landing is truely funny and I thank you for that, but you are nothing to be afraid of. The subject was Nixon when I came in, and when you lost that one you went back to the moon not knowing you were going to make a fool of yourself again. I gave you plenty of opportunity to come up with one piece of proof the landing didn't happen and you came up with nothing.
@monokhem I didn't lose that one; I reverted to the TOPIC of this video, and I DID sincerely change my views on Nixon in the meantime. I provided proof that the footage ( and even the still photos ) do not show anywhere NEAR the one-sixth gravity that was expected and promised to be gleefully and eagerly demonstrated by ANY astronaut on the moon. A 200 pound spacesuit is a lot, but division by 6 is far more significant, which is why I brought up Selena Gomez as an appropriate contrast.
@mooninquirer No you didn't. One sixth gravity is clearly displayed all over these videos. Where do you think you proved that?
The hammer/ feather drop, and Schmit's hammer throw are the most consipious examples and then there are the ruitine 3 to 5' hops, Schmit's fall while trying to get the drill out, and twenty other things.
You've got nothing. Move onto something that when it is refuted you will give up on this lame belief. Stop playing around and put some skin in the game.
@monokhem I might give up on debating it on youtube, because of all of the troll channels like yours, who don't believe the moon landing themselves, but I will NEVER give up my belief that the moon landing is a hoax. I used to believe it even though the gravity and many other things didn't make sense, and even though I had many teachers and physics professors saying it was a hoax. I handed over my heart and mind to the media, and let them dictate to me.
@monokhem ... the hammer throw, how far did it go? and the feather drop, who verified it was a feather and theres another video here that does same exp. on earth and feather and hammer hit ground at same time, so whats that prove ... check out my "shotput" video, the Not is jerked up by a wire keeping him from falling to dirt
@mooninquirer Search on youtube : THE EAGLE HAS LANDED: THE FLIGHT OF APOLLO 11 1969 NASA DOCUMENTARY
At 13:57 exactly in this video, the narrator says that Aldrin together with his suit weighed 383 pounds on Earth, and on the moon he weighed 66 pounds. OK, so I forgot the exact figure. Still, doing a lat pulldown of 66 pounds would be very easy, for a man REQUIRED to be able to do SETS of pullups freestyle, as per the physical fitness requirements for a test pilot.
@mooninquirer Not only could the astronauts have descended the ladder with just their hands, they could have ascended the ladder with just their hands, and not only that, they could have banged out a set of 10 one armed pull ups with the right hand, and then switched to the left and banged out a set of 10, and not only that, it would not be showing off, but they would feel a NEED for this type of exercise after hardly any exercise for three days and being cramped and couped up.
@mooninquirer ANYONE who works out regularly, who trains regularly, feels a STRONG urge to keep up his training. This is true for runners, as well as for weight lifters. It is true for ANYONE, when they stretch upon waking up after a long sleep. They should have NATURALLY done resistance pushes ( to exercise their thighs ) as they got to the bottom of the ladder, and have made a comment about their need to stretch and exercise their thighs after the days of zero gravity.
@monokhem Thank you for admitting "they weighed way too much in those 200 lb suits to want to try to lower themselves down with their hands." That is why we never see that, and they are planting their feet on the rungs of the ladder like a physical therapy patient, and TIGHTLY grasping the hand rails. They really ARE encumbered by the weight ! Which proves they were not on the moon, because on the moon, their weight would be only ONE THIRD of the weight on Earth, WITHOUT the suits !
@mooninquirer I admitted nothing. I stated the facts of the moon landing. It's obvious that you are way to afraid of losing the Moon Hoax fantasy you cling to to try to debate this. After i demolished your long term belief in some ancient idiotic republican propaganda, you've realized that i have the knowledge and reasoning skills to get through to the part of your brain that makes you realize you got something wrong. The only thing that you have proven is you are afraid of the truth.
@monokhem You undermine your own argument, because instead on talking about the physics, you make it depend on a political opinion of Nixon's legacy. You have no response to why the astronauts were ALWAYS so heavily encumbered descending the ladder ---- something you even stated yourself, that they weighed "way too much" Had they really been on the moon, the astronauts with their suits would have weighed only 66 pounds, ONE THIRD of their weight on Earth.
@monokhem I didn't exactly repeat it. I pointed out that since you have no response for this proof that it was in Earth gravity ( you yourself even admitted that the astronauts are weighed "way too much" ), you change the discussion back to opinion's of Nixon's legacy. You don't offer any evidence of 1/6 gravity. They never jump high, the sand is kicked up exactly as on Earth, but on the moon, the sand should go up at least to their waists, if not over their heads.
@monokhem We were PROMISED that astronauts on the moon would be able to lift a MASS six times greater than a mass on Earth. This is in illustrations in children's books about the moon published before this supposed event. The difference between MASS and WEIGHT is important, and gravity on the moon is an important teaching tool in explaining it, which is why teachers have no choice but to say the moon landing is a hoax, or implying that very strongly, and with great anger.
@monokhem Give an example of an astronaut lifting a great mass that would be very heavy on Earth. There is a scene where the astronauts are kicking a rock ( playing football with it ), about the size of a basketball. The rock just rolls on the ground. That certainly was not showing 1/6 gravity. Alan Bean is encumbered by carrying a barbell with tool boxes at the end. On the moon, it should have weighed 30 pounds, tops, and have been VERY easy to carry.
@mooninquirer Why bother? If I name any of those you will just claim the heavy thing is made of styrofoam. Most of your problem is a basic lack of understanding of physics. Your toolbox example, it's stupid. Just because something weighs less on the moon doesn't make it not cumbersum. The inertia is the same what ever planet you are on.
Why don't you tell me where they built this 5 square mile vacume chamber with the hundred foot tall ceiling and no interior structural supports?
@monokhem I can't deny it ---- yes, that is exactly what I would say. It would be just like the 3 foot diameter boulder carried by a stage hand in the moon scene at the end of the music video ---- type into youtube : RAMMSTEIN AMERIKA
But it is ALSO true that the astronauts NEVER even attempt to lift a large boulder. They kick around a boulder about the size of a basketball, and it just rolls gently on the ground, as it would on Earth.
@monokhem Yes, I know very well about the difference between the inertial measurement of mass, and the gravitational definition, and that is another reason science teachers bring up a hypothetical case of someone lifting something on the moon ---- and THEN have to admit the Apollo landings were a hoax, because the physics is exactly the same as on Earth. Unlike Selena Gomez, P!nk ( Get the Party Started, and Moulin Rouge ) is athletic, as well as beautiful.
@monokhem On Earth, the difference between inertial mass and gravitational mass is a big deal for men lifting a lot of weight, ESPECIALLY IF DONE VERY FAST. P!nk could lift a 80 pound barbell from the ground FAST to a curled position, bringing it toward her chest on Earth, but on the moon, that maneuver with a 480 pound Earth mass would send her backwards and knock her on her pretty ass. It would be dangerous. But the astronaut does NOT lift the toolboxes fast.
@monokhem Well there is a very good view of that soundstage, with the ceiling, in this video ---- type into youtube : DAVE HOOK MOON HOAX SONG
( Although I had objected to the line " And [ Kennedy ] even banged Marilyn Monroe" Although, as the recently released tapes of the late Jackie Kennedy Onassis reveals, Kennedy DID have extramarital affairs, as well as the fact that LBJ was involved in his assassination. Jackie says LBJ was the mastermind. )
@monokhem The set or soundstage was certainly not 5 square miles; in fact, an astronaut almost walks into the fake background and has to change direction Watch this, by moon hoax researcher pt1gard --- type into youtube : WIZARD SHUFFLE
Also, it was NOT a vacuum, either. The fact that the moon rover kicks up dust in a ROOSTER TAIL shape, and not in a perfect parabola, proves there was air. The dust moves backward, but it slows down in the air and falls down, in a rooster tail shape.
@monokhem In Dave Hook's song, and the video by Jarrah White, the soundstage I am talking about appears at 6:10, although Dave Hook has the lyric "soundstage" several times in the song, as the fact that the moon landing was faked is very thoroughly brought to light in the lyrics of this song ! Jarrah White, a great moon hoax researcher, uploaded it. Type into YT : DAVE HOOK'S "THE MOON SONG" JW STUDIOS
@monokhem I never said thee WAS a 5 mile soundstage, and there is no evidence whatsoever looking at the Apollo footage that is is very big. It is smaller than a football field, and an astronaut is about to walk into the background, but then pretends he is walking by walking in place, and he changes direction. Search on youtube for : WIZARD SHUFFLE
Also, the footage clearly shows there is air, because of the rooster tail shape of the dust kicked up by the rover
@mooninquirer You're wrong about that. The footage clearly shows perfect prabolic arcs impossible without a vacume. It also clearly shows a 5 mile area they are working in, unless you are claiming the rover could change size. If you can't some up with a way for it to be plausable for a 5 squre mile vacume chamber to exist in secret in 1969 you have already lost.
@monokhem Are you a great fan of David Duke ? Does the song by SAGA ( search for it on youtube ) called "An Ode To a Dying People" really resonate with you ?
@monokhem ... you are like all apollogists, you insult by saying people dont understand "basic physics" like all your ilk are stephen hawkings and von brauns .... pal, you can't even spell simple words: .i.e. "vacuum" .... one would think a crack scientific mind like yours would be well acquainted with such an industry-linked word ... I rest my case right there.
@pt1gard There are no apologists, and you have no case to rest. Speeling corrections are for assholes with no point to make, and what the hell are all those elipsis supposed to represent anyway? All the points that you wish you had?
I didn't insult anybody. The guy literaly had no concept of Newtonian physics. It doesn't take a genious to understand the physics in play, but it certainly takes a fool to not understand them and try to rationalize why the moon landing couldn't have happened.
@monokhem ... you dont think spelling "vacuum" wrong is queer by someone professing science, yet you hypocritically mention "ellipses?" as not being kosher .... you are one interesting shill who then goes on to insult people. I stated several other things you might wanna tackle. Thanks :)
@pt1gard I didn't insult anybody, and pounding the same inane device into the ground isn't comperable to a spelling error. You don't seem to be able to get anything right.
@monokhem ... there's tons of proof all over the Net the moon landings were faked .... edgar mitchell cant even recall them, visiting with shrink robert masters many times to take him back so he could recall being there .... go watch all of jarrah white's videos, i have ... DYK, windley and plait are afraid to debate him?
Does NASA claim that this is the actual video of the docking, or is this an animation or re-construction ? Nasa had a a documentary in which the docking was animated, and took much, much longer than this; however, this has been deleted in the video that one can see on video google.
@mooninquirer In any event, this MUST be proported to be an animation, because this module looks nothing like the one that lifted off the moon. Also, there is no reason for it to spin like that, AND we see a flash at 2:00, revealing that this is an animation, like much of NASA's work is an animation.
It requires all of 9 entire minutes to go from earth’s surface to earth’s orbit. How in HELL does it require ½ hour for LEM to return to Kitty Hawk if she uses constant acceleration to reach escape velocity?
Why are no stars visible surrounding Kitty Hawk as filmed from LEM?
Why are no thruster shots visible when *massive* Kitty Hawk with fuel for a home burn turns sharply, then crisply halts its angular momentum.
You can see God damn wires in the flash of glare between 02:00 to 02:01.
centurion180ad 1 month ago
@centurion180ad You havent been on the moon so dont fucking complain.
abatheswedishdude02 4 weeks ago
Why are there no stars ever visible?
Why is there no nozzle blast or thruster shots ever visible?
Wouldn’t astronauts suffer radiation poisoning?
How could astronauts remain cool without vacuum suits shooting out steam being seen?
Why is there no dust-blast or surface burn & blast crater ever visible?
Why can’t you hear a rocket motor running and why don’t the astronauts’ voices shudder in the LEM radio?
You can’t use vacuum suit gloves on delicate LEM controls?
centurion180ad 1 month ago
@centurion180ad Fuck you g out on a clear night with stars and take pictures with tour cam will you see stars?No dum bitch.Stop complaining.
abatheswedishdude02 4 weeks ago
@abatheswedishdude02 I have seen still photography & video that has stars, and everything else that ought to be visible to the naked eye. That means that it is doable.
Astronauts are LIARS when they say that they never saw or do not remember seeing any stars. They said that because they never went to the moon, and plenty of video ought to have had tons of stars especialy the darkside LEM docking/undocking video.
centurion180ad 4 weeks ago
hey gang, they faked this better than moon ... and these sheep think there are no conspiracies .... /watch?v=YyuQMtq1MkE&feature=related
pt1gard 3 months ago
ANYONE who claims that the dust kicked up by the rover is shaped like a perfect parabola is lying right through their teeth, and does not believe for a minute that man landed on the moon. This proves these trolls defending Apollo do not believe man landed on the moon --- an example is "monokhem" below
mooninquirer 3 months ago
Search on youtube for : JIM COLLIER WAS IT ONLY A PAPER MOON.
At the beginning, or part 2, if you get it broken up, Jim Collier gives an excellent explanation for the rooster tail. From an official NASA documentary about the moon landing, Jim Collier takes a clip showing a rooster tail, and the astronauts themselves describe it as a rooster tail, AND a defender of Apollo, who hung up on Jim Collier. In slow motion, it is really, REALLY obvious that it is a rooster tail.
mooninquirer 3 months ago
White nationalists like David Duke believe the moon landing was a great White achievement, as all of the astronauts involved were White men, and the scientists at the top were former Nazis. Emotion is more important than rationality, and because they WANT to believe it was a great achievement, they believe it actually happened, and they close their eyes to the obvious truth. The dust kicked up is OBVIOUSLY in a rooster tail shape, and was described that way by the astronauts themselves.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
Show me the footage where they are jumping upward 5 feet. That hammer throw was VERY unimpressive. The sand is being kicked up as they are walking EXACTLY as on the Earth, on the beach, and they are often deliberately shuffling their feet to kick up the sand. That motion should be sending the sand at least up to their waist, if not over their heads. Projectiles would go six times higher on the moon than on Earth --- this is stated in physics books written before this supposed event.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer ... not sure if you saw my post elsewhere about wind and sand at beaches ... I am currently living in hermosa beach, and on days of strong wind, when the orange flags are furling straight out, the sand does not move, which answers the apollogists claims why doesnt the sand/dirt move when the cloth flaps on my "definitive proof" video... its sand and too heavy to move like the Dustbowl top soil; if the lunar surface was chalky dirt, like stated by Nots, it would blow in wind
pt1gard 3 months ago
The condition of 1/6 gravity on the moon should not appear only for certain scenes, and disappear for others, if it were true. It should be clearly manifest in every second on the footage. You mention "20 other things" Are you referring to gravity ? I can think of 20 other reasons the moon landing is a hoax. Gravity was the FIRST thing I ever thought of.
The hammer drop was purported to show an airless environment, and not 1/6 gravity, but it fails that too.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer .... why do the Nots kangy hop instead of walking normally? is it to show they can do things diff on moon, like jump at most lift one foot on their absurd Kangies while aided by wires? in the end it's just a psyop to program viewers they are somewhere else when in reality they are on earth
pt1gard 3 months ago
Even to consider the possibility that the moon landing actually happened is absurd, because it is so overwhelmingly obvious that it was a hoax. SELENA GOMEZ could lift on the moon as much as can be lifted on Earth by an NFL all-pro linebacker. And these macho test pilots could have easily descended the ladder with just their hands ---- indeed, that would be a more natural motion, after spending days in zero gravity.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer I pick Selena Gomez for her prettiness, thinness, and baby doll cuteness, and not her name sounding like the moon ( check out her "maid song" on youtube ! ) The astronauts could have easily done one-armed pull ups on the rung of the ladder, even given the weight of the pack. Combined, they weighed 62 lbs ---- that would be EASIER than doing 120 lbs on a lat pulldown, especially because one could concentrate the side.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
VIVA the space for exploration is the future of .. human specie
1elgalle1 5 months ago
HAHAHAHAHA... i cant remember seeing the docking footage before.. is this suppose to be the real footage ?... hahahaha fuck off this is from thunderbirds..
KungFriedChicken 10 months ago
Why did they spin the Command Module 360 degrees? Is a large burst to line up the thing just easier than tiny adjustment bursts?
Tustin2121 11 months ago
@Tustin2121 They were checking it for damage. It's pretty common when they have two space craft within sight of each other.
monokhem 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FEB 4, 2011 -Using two high-resolution LROC images taken from two separate orbits, scientists have formed a stereo image pair for 3D measurements at the Apollo 14 landing site. Among the visible objects are the descent stage of the Apollo 14 lunar module Antares, the ALSEP, a rock nicknamed Turtle Rock, & multiple astronaut traverse footpaths clearly indicated by disturbed soils. Data processing methods can be used to identify the objects and measure their sizes and shapes. Game over hoaxturds
Synthetrix 1 year ago
you deniers are a bunch dumbasses. God, where did you nitwitted dolts come from?
uzimodem 1 year ago 5
"All this moon walk crap only happened under 1 criminal President named Nixon and STOPPED when his ass left office. Ironic huh?"
So it was a Nixon conspiracy? You mean, the guy who couldn't cover up a third-rate burglary at the Watergate Hotel? The guy who couldn't keep Vice-President Agnew's tax indiscretions under wraps. But this guy kept everyone quiet about Apollo huh? Suuuuure...
fundiebasher 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
The evidence of a hoax is crushing. I posted a partial summary of it on a science forum. To see it, google "The Naked Scientist". In the "New Theories" section there's a thread entitled "Did we land on the moon?". The post is on page 15. It's the 7th one from the top.
Cosmored3 2 years ago
Dont you see it you blind fish, there is a video infront of you that proves anything, How can that be faked 40 years ago, they couldnt even
predatortheme 2 years ago
@fundiebasher That is different, because there was a political partisan motivation to bring down Nixon. But if any politician revealed the moon hoax, it would be like opening up other hoaxes, like the USS Liberty cover-up, or the holocaust. And the Zionist Lobby, which controls both parties, would not like that.
mooninquirer 1 year ago
@mooninquirer There was no partisan movement to "Bring down Nixon". There was a media investigation by a democrat and a republican that uncoverd his criminality, and once it was uncovered a bi partisan effort to Impeach him began and he quit because he knew he was going to be removed from office.
The other stuff you said was wrong too.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem Hmmmm. Nixon was a good man, basically, but involved in some petty corruption, like his criteria for an IRS Commissioner. I am sorry if I brought down Nixon. The moon hoax was a bipartisan effort of government corruption and cover-up, like the USS Liberty. I think Nixon would have had more integrity than LBJ, and not have completely white washed the obvious fact that Israel did it intentionally.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer The moon hoax was very petty corruption, compared to covering up Israel's intentional attack upon the USS Liberty just two years earlier.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer Nixon rigged a presidential election, and tried to cover it up. Only the kind of fool that would disbelieve the moon landing would mislable that "petty". Nixon had no integrity, at all. He was a liar, and a thief, and if Ford wasn't a pice of shit too Nixon would have died in jail like he should have.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem I assume you are talking about the election of 1972, in which Nixon won a huge landslide ---- McGovern only won Massachusetts. I have never heard this election described as "rigged." There was an enormous backlash over the Civil Rights Acts, the intense rioting ( evidence of this can still be seen in the architecture of buildings built during this time ), assassinations, crime, hippie culture etc. Nixon was correct that the "silent majority" was was against these things.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer Nixon was not the most lovable man and people did not so much vote for him, as vote against the legacy of LBJ. This happened again in 1980, and 1984, when the public voted not so much as FOR Reagan ( although he was more likable than Nixon ), as against the Democrats. This has NOTHING to do with the moon landing. I leave that up to Selena Gomez, and the watercolor illustrations of children's books showing men on the moon EASILY and gleefully lifting HUGE boulders.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
Nixon made no use of any info gained from the Watergate break-in, which I acknowledge he approved of. So it was not a rigged election. This is in contrast to the election of 1960, which was extremely close, and in which historians acknowledge there was massive voting irregularities in both Illinois and Texas, which tipped the election in JFK/LBJ's favor. Watergate was petty corruption, just like Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer Nixon's was petty corruption, because no one was killed, no election was effected, money was not stolen from the public, no war was unnecessarily fought. This in in contrast to LBJ, Wilson, FDR, and even Washington ( even if he did not realize what was going on ), who approved of the First Bank of the US ( which stole money from the American public ).
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer Well you haven't talked to anyone that knows anything about that election. I see that you believe the Nixon campaign rhetoric of 1972. How quaint.
If the plumbers hadn't hadn't have torn down Musky, Nixon would have been running against a better candidate. Even with the weaker candidate Nixon's men still conducted illeagle survailance and sabotage against the McGovern campaign.
Trying to act like the Democrats were somehow for assassination of thier own people is idiotic.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem It is obvious that LBJ was involved in the assassination of JFK, although there were others. His own extreme ambition was a great motivation, as well as the fact that JFK was going to drop him from the ticket in 1964. Kennedy was hostile to Jews and Israel, but LBJ was the most pro-Jewish president in US history, which is why the Jewish media act appalled at the mention of LBJ and the JFK assassination. Jackie Kennedy has said the LBJ was the mastermind --- recently disclosed.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
Back to the moon landing......... had it been real, the astronauts could easily have descended the ladder with just their hands, and, indeed, this would be a more natural motion, one they were accustomed to, from days in zero gravity only using their hands for locomotion. They could have easily banged out sets of one-armed pull-ups on the rung of the ladder, and been able to lift huge boulders, making it look like the world's strongest man competition, except without the grunting.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer That isn't even a point, and it's wrong. They weighed way to much in those 200+ lb. space suits to want to try and lower themselves down by thier hands. Bring me something worth refuting. If this this Hoax BS was true you would definatly be able to find some proof.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem No, no, they didn't weigh too much. On average, the astronauts weighed 185 lbs, and so did the spacesuits. On the moon, the astronauts would have weighed 62 pounds in the suits. This is admitted by NASA, citing the number "62 pounds" specifically, in one of these videos with this ominous narrator's voice, just like in this video. Check out APOLLO 11 FLIGHT OF THE EAGLE
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer The space suits weighed over two hundred pounds, and 62 pounds is still to much to want to try and lower yourself down a ladder with no feet. It's just stupid on the face of it. "I would have done (this other thing) if I was on the moon" isn't an arguement. It's a diversion.
You're afraid you're going to find out you are wrong about the moon hoax just like you found out you were wrong about the 1972 election, so you are refusing to bring anything of substance up.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem You're afraid that other people are going to read this and realize that the moon landing doesn't make sense, which is why you keep changing to a very much off topic discussion of the 1972 election, in which you claim that Nixon was able to achieve a landslide and win in every state except Massachusetts, because of a character assault on Muskie. I brought it up in response to what this other guy fundiebasher said, and decided that Nixon contributes nothing to the moon hoax.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer The notion that some one is going to read anything you've posted and disbelieve the moon landing is truely funny and I thank you for that, but you are nothing to be afraid of. The subject was Nixon when I came in, and when you lost that one you went back to the moon not knowing you were going to make a fool of yourself again. I gave you plenty of opportunity to come up with one piece of proof the landing didn't happen and you came up with nothing.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem I didn't lose that one; I reverted to the TOPIC of this video, and I DID sincerely change my views on Nixon in the meantime. I provided proof that the footage ( and even the still photos ) do not show anywhere NEAR the one-sixth gravity that was expected and promised to be gleefully and eagerly demonstrated by ANY astronaut on the moon. A 200 pound spacesuit is a lot, but division by 6 is far more significant, which is why I brought up Selena Gomez as an appropriate contrast.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer No you didn't. One sixth gravity is clearly displayed all over these videos. Where do you think you proved that?
The hammer/ feather drop, and Schmit's hammer throw are the most consipious examples and then there are the ruitine 3 to 5' hops, Schmit's fall while trying to get the drill out, and twenty other things.
You've got nothing. Move onto something that when it is refuted you will give up on this lame belief. Stop playing around and put some skin in the game.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem I might give up on debating it on youtube, because of all of the troll channels like yours, who don't believe the moon landing themselves, but I will NEVER give up my belief that the moon landing is a hoax. I used to believe it even though the gravity and many other things didn't make sense, and even though I had many teachers and physics professors saying it was a hoax. I handed over my heart and mind to the media, and let them dictate to me.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem ... the hammer throw, how far did it go? and the feather drop, who verified it was a feather and theres another video here that does same exp. on earth and feather and hammer hit ground at same time, so whats that prove ... check out my "shotput" video, the Not is jerked up by a wire keeping him from falling to dirt
pt1gard 3 months ago
@mooninquirer Search on youtube : THE EAGLE HAS LANDED: THE FLIGHT OF APOLLO 11 1969 NASA DOCUMENTARY
At 13:57 exactly in this video, the narrator says that Aldrin together with his suit weighed 383 pounds on Earth, and on the moon he weighed 66 pounds. OK, so I forgot the exact figure. Still, doing a lat pulldown of 66 pounds would be very easy, for a man REQUIRED to be able to do SETS of pullups freestyle, as per the physical fitness requirements for a test pilot.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer Not only could the astronauts have descended the ladder with just their hands, they could have ascended the ladder with just their hands, and not only that, they could have banged out a set of 10 one armed pull ups with the right hand, and then switched to the left and banged out a set of 10, and not only that, it would not be showing off, but they would feel a NEED for this type of exercise after hardly any exercise for three days and being cramped and couped up.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer ANYONE who works out regularly, who trains regularly, feels a STRONG urge to keep up his training. This is true for runners, as well as for weight lifters. It is true for ANYONE, when they stretch upon waking up after a long sleep. They should have NATURALLY done resistance pushes ( to exercise their thighs ) as they got to the bottom of the ladder, and have made a comment about their need to stretch and exercise their thighs after the days of zero gravity.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem Thank you for admitting "they weighed way too much in those 200 lb suits to want to try to lower themselves down with their hands." That is why we never see that, and they are planting their feet on the rungs of the ladder like a physical therapy patient, and TIGHTLY grasping the hand rails. They really ARE encumbered by the weight ! Which proves they were not on the moon, because on the moon, their weight would be only ONE THIRD of the weight on Earth, WITHOUT the suits !
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer I admitted nothing. I stated the facts of the moon landing. It's obvious that you are way to afraid of losing the Moon Hoax fantasy you cling to to try to debate this. After i demolished your long term belief in some ancient idiotic republican propaganda, you've realized that i have the knowledge and reasoning skills to get through to the part of your brain that makes you realize you got something wrong. The only thing that you have proven is you are afraid of the truth.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem You undermine your own argument, because instead on talking about the physics, you make it depend on a political opinion of Nixon's legacy. You have no response to why the astronauts were ALWAYS so heavily encumbered descending the ladder ---- something you even stated yourself, that they weighed "way too much" Had they really been on the moon, the astronauts with their suits would have weighed only 66 pounds, ONE THIRD of their weight on Earth.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer 66 pounds is to much you repeatative half wit.
"instead on talking about the physics, you make it depend on a political opinion of Nixon's legacy."
I did nothing of the sort, and you claiming otherwise shows that you have no idea what's going on.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem I didn't exactly repeat it. I pointed out that since you have no response for this proof that it was in Earth gravity ( you yourself even admitted that the astronauts are weighed "way too much" ), you change the discussion back to opinion's of Nixon's legacy. You don't offer any evidence of 1/6 gravity. They never jump high, the sand is kicked up exactly as on Earth, but on the moon, the sand should go up at least to their waists, if not over their heads.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem We were PROMISED that astronauts on the moon would be able to lift a MASS six times greater than a mass on Earth. This is in illustrations in children's books about the moon published before this supposed event. The difference between MASS and WEIGHT is important, and gravity on the moon is an important teaching tool in explaining it, which is why teachers have no choice but to say the moon landing is a hoax, or implying that very strongly, and with great anger.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem Give an example of an astronaut lifting a great mass that would be very heavy on Earth. There is a scene where the astronauts are kicking a rock ( playing football with it ), about the size of a basketball. The rock just rolls on the ground. That certainly was not showing 1/6 gravity. Alan Bean is encumbered by carrying a barbell with tool boxes at the end. On the moon, it should have weighed 30 pounds, tops, and have been VERY easy to carry.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer Why bother? If I name any of those you will just claim the heavy thing is made of styrofoam. Most of your problem is a basic lack of understanding of physics. Your toolbox example, it's stupid. Just because something weighs less on the moon doesn't make it not cumbersum. The inertia is the same what ever planet you are on.
Why don't you tell me where they built this 5 square mile vacume chamber with the hundred foot tall ceiling and no interior structural supports?
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem I can't deny it ---- yes, that is exactly what I would say. It would be just like the 3 foot diameter boulder carried by a stage hand in the moon scene at the end of the music video ---- type into youtube : RAMMSTEIN AMERIKA
But it is ALSO true that the astronauts NEVER even attempt to lift a large boulder. They kick around a boulder about the size of a basketball, and it just rolls gently on the ground, as it would on Earth.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem Yes, I know very well about the difference between the inertial measurement of mass, and the gravitational definition, and that is another reason science teachers bring up a hypothetical case of someone lifting something on the moon ---- and THEN have to admit the Apollo landings were a hoax, because the physics is exactly the same as on Earth. Unlike Selena Gomez, P!nk ( Get the Party Started, and Moulin Rouge ) is athletic, as well as beautiful.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem On Earth, the difference between inertial mass and gravitational mass is a big deal for men lifting a lot of weight, ESPECIALLY IF DONE VERY FAST. P!nk could lift a 80 pound barbell from the ground FAST to a curled position, bringing it toward her chest on Earth, but on the moon, that maneuver with a 480 pound Earth mass would send her backwards and knock her on her pretty ass. It would be dangerous. But the astronaut does NOT lift the toolboxes fast.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem Well there is a very good view of that soundstage, with the ceiling, in this video ---- type into youtube : DAVE HOOK MOON HOAX SONG
( Although I had objected to the line " And [ Kennedy ] even banged Marilyn Monroe" Although, as the recently released tapes of the late Jackie Kennedy Onassis reveals, Kennedy DID have extramarital affairs, as well as the fact that LBJ was involved in his assassination. Jackie says LBJ was the mastermind. )
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem The set or soundstage was certainly not 5 square miles; in fact, an astronaut almost walks into the fake background and has to change direction Watch this, by moon hoax researcher pt1gard --- type into youtube : WIZARD SHUFFLE
Also, it was NOT a vacuum, either. The fact that the moon rover kicks up dust in a ROOSTER TAIL shape, and not in a perfect parabola, proves there was air. The dust moves backward, but it slows down in the air and falls down, in a rooster tail shape.
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem In Dave Hook's song, and the video by Jarrah White, the soundstage I am talking about appears at 6:10, although Dave Hook has the lyric "soundstage" several times in the song, as the fact that the moon landing was faked is very thoroughly brought to light in the lyrics of this song ! Jarrah White, a great moon hoax researcher, uploaded it. Type into YT : DAVE HOOK'S "THE MOON SONG" JW STUDIOS
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer This is the kind of idiotic BS you fools take as evidence? No wonder you believe such silly things. There is no 5 mile sound stage.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem I never said thee WAS a 5 mile soundstage, and there is no evidence whatsoever looking at the Apollo footage that is is very big. It is smaller than a football field, and an astronaut is about to walk into the background, but then pretends he is walking by walking in place, and he changes direction. Search on youtube for : WIZARD SHUFFLE
Also, the footage clearly shows there is air, because of the rooster tail shape of the dust kicked up by the rover
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@mooninquirer You're wrong about that. The footage clearly shows perfect prabolic arcs impossible without a vacume. It also clearly shows a 5 mile area they are working in, unless you are claiming the rover could change size. If you can't some up with a way for it to be plausable for a 5 squre mile vacume chamber to exist in secret in 1969 you have already lost.
monokhem 4 months ago
@monokhem Are you a great fan of David Duke ? Does the song by SAGA ( search for it on youtube ) called "An Ode To a Dying People" really resonate with you ?
mooninquirer 4 months ago
@monokhem ... you are like all apollogists, you insult by saying people dont understand "basic physics" like all your ilk are stephen hawkings and von brauns .... pal, you can't even spell simple words: .i.e. "vacuum" .... one would think a crack scientific mind like yours would be well acquainted with such an industry-linked word ... I rest my case right there.
pt1gard 3 months ago
@pt1gard There are no apologists, and you have no case to rest. Speeling corrections are for assholes with no point to make, and what the hell are all those elipsis supposed to represent anyway? All the points that you wish you had?
I didn't insult anybody. The guy literaly had no concept of Newtonian physics. It doesn't take a genious to understand the physics in play, but it certainly takes a fool to not understand them and try to rationalize why the moon landing couldn't have happened.
monokhem 3 months ago
@monokhem ... you dont think spelling "vacuum" wrong is queer by someone professing science, yet you hypocritically mention "ellipses?" as not being kosher .... you are one interesting shill who then goes on to insult people. I stated several other things you might wanna tackle. Thanks :)
pt1gard 3 months ago
@pt1gard I didn't insult anybody, and pounding the same inane device into the ground isn't comperable to a spelling error. You don't seem to be able to get anything right.
monokhem 3 months ago
@monokhem ... u did go check sources, and not knowing how to spell Eureka Upright is hole in dossier
pt1gard 3 months ago
@pt1gard Is this your attempt to fade into gibberish?
monokhem 3 months ago
@monokhem ... no wonder u doofs gulp the nasa Fizzies, your linear minds are ripe for DisneyWorld
pt1gard 3 months ago
@pt1gard So have you never been to Disney world or do you not know what linear means?
monokhem 3 months ago
@monokhem ... there's tons of proof all over the Net the moon landings were faked .... edgar mitchell cant even recall them, visiting with shrink robert masters many times to take him back so he could recall being there .... go watch all of jarrah white's videos, i have ... DYK, windley and plait are afraid to debate him?
pt1gard 3 months ago
Comment removed
pt1gard 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@monokhem .... do you think Nixon or any other Prez gets to do anything on their own? i.e. how does obama win the Nobel?
pt1gard 3 months ago
Notice the flash of light at 2:01? It exposed the HOAX!
JJ2000426 2 years ago
thats the reflection of the sun you stupid fool
chillosoph1984 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
Caellest89 1 year ago
Does NASA claim that this is the actual video of the docking, or is this an animation or re-construction ? Nasa had a a documentary in which the docking was animated, and took much, much longer than this; however, this has been deleted in the video that one can see on video google.
mooninquirer 2 years ago
This is speeded up, if it ran at the actual speed many viewers would fall asleep. Things only dock that quickly on Star Trek.
fundiebasher 2 years ago
@mooninquirer In any event, this MUST be proported to be an animation, because this module looks nothing like the one that lifted off the moon. Also, there is no reason for it to spin like that, AND we see a flash at 2:00, revealing that this is an animation, like much of NASA's work is an animation.
mooninquirer 1 year ago
The lack of stars has been explained ad nauseum. Are you really that dim?
fundiebasher 2 years ago
Comment removed
ribsaregood 2 years ago
never mind the stars, why were they playing easy listening lounge music. I dont think they were taking this very seriously.
mattcol99 2 years ago
What is this video from?
qsucvatz 2 years ago
Wonderful vid!
Would you know if the "rat-a-tat-tat" sound of hard-dock the astronauts describe was ever recorded?
tutankhatenll 2 years ago