Thank you Sir for this wonderful, irrefutable video against the idiotic (whoops, so sorry) fools (darn it!) that insist on slandering the incredibly brave and brilliant men that made those incredible journeys, and the 400.000 plus people that enabled them to do it.
Gee, one wonder how NASA managed to keep those 400,012 people silent about the hoax all of these years. Even the handful of folks at Roswell could not keep from running their mouths. What gives with these NASA types?
All you guys that like the word idiot so much: an idiot is a person with an IQ below 50 and is hardly able to speak. Calling people with other opinions than the mainstream media's idiots is all up to you. I will never call anyone an idiot before I have seen them make an IQ test, that's because I go with the facts.
Good day everyone, good luck with all your swearing, humiliating and other pathetic behaviour.
I'M SO HAPPY NOT KNOWING YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@topneorej "Idiot" isn't being used in the clinical sense. It's just a pejorative for people who make stupid arguments. Sometimes people are willing to learn, but we have had to deal with so many ill-inforrmed, self-promoting, pretentious conspiracy theorists that it has come into common use.
Many hoax nuts are what people would generally call idiots, especially those who persist after their arguments are thoroughly refuted.
Well, your spelling and English grammar is terrible. You wrote, I no want to call someone an idiot. Sounds like bad grammar to me. And for speaking 4 languages, it doesn't impress me. Hit a 90 mph fastball and you will impress me. Also, explain the smartass remark you calling me a "real American ". I believe I am. I served my country and state for 25 years. You don't have the right to bash America.
@JoeC4950 I looked it up, I wrote: I'm no calling anyone an idiot. It's fast typing, and I forgot the t. I'm very impressed you hit a 90 mph fastball, don't get me wrong. I'm very interested in sports, I play of 6 handicap in golf, played international pool tournaments and was part of the atletic team when I served the armee.
@JoeC4950 Where exactly did I make this mistake? Always looking to improve my languages. I'm from Holland, speaking 4 languages sometimes a mistake will slip in, sorry for that. My Dutch is ok though, but I don't think I'll reach many people with that:) Vandaar dat ik het in het Engels doe, snap je? See what I mean?
@topneorej Shows like that typically misrepresent the truth. They're in the business of making money with extraordinary claims. For example, Buzz Aldrin has explained repeatedly what they saw, but the film didn't show that, did it? It was one of the panels from the S-IV-B. And it was NOT that clip the film kept showing.
Mitchell never claimed a personal UFO experience. So we're left with only one: Cooper. And I think he just fell off the edge.
@Astrobrant2 Pt 2. But there's another problem. People like to holler that Apollo was faked and then turn around and claim that Apollo astronauts saw UFOs or took photos of alien artifacts on the moon. In your eagerness to act like you have special "inside information," you present two mutually contradictory conspiracy theories. Hoax nuts never seem to have a problem with this, which is a good demonstration of their inability to think.
@topneorej Yes, he has believed in alien visitation for a long time. There are many people with impressive credentials who came to believe in some weird stuff. I've studied this quite a bit over the last 40 years. How can we explain someone like William Crookes believing in seances, Sir A.C. Doyle believing in fairies, or John Mack believing in alien abductions? Jack Schmitt is a staunch global warming denier.
It happens, unfortunately, and usually to the discredit of those who go that route.
@topneorej The only truth is what is supported by a mountain of irrefutable evidence. You fell for a dumb conspiracy theory because you just didn't know any better, not because these people are revealing any kind of worthwhile evidence against Apollo.
@topneorej Large pieces of debris hit the front of the building. Fires got started, one of them from diesel generator fuel. After several hours, the structure collapsed.
All the conspiracist stories I have seen about bldg 7 are pure uneducated or deliberately deceptive bullshit, just because CTs think they sound so COOL spreading that garbage around. Most of those fantasies are about as demonstrably stupid as most Apollo hoax claims. Don't try to pull any of them here. I know them.
@topneorej I've seen it dozens of times and from all the angles... (something conspiracy theorists won't do, because it blows holes in their theories)..
The interior supports started collapsing first. That's when we see part of the penthouse caving in. Then the rest of the central supports start to fail. The building collapses from the inside out and finally drops from the fourth floor up. YES, all at once.
So what? That subject pisses me off too much. I don't want it here.
@topneorej "footprint" Yes, thats what happened. And since 99.9% of the engineers and architects agree, the 0.1% minority who you prejudicially believe are obvious ostracized idiots.
But you betray yourself here. This is ANOTHER dumb conspiracy. Using dumb conspiracy #1 as your "proof" of dumb conspiracy #2 only proves how stupid your evidence is for both. Its just making up your story as you go, and proving you'll believe any dumb thing you read online.
@topneorej WTC 7 was hit by several hundred tons of flaming debris from the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. That was on camera. Thats a no-brainer. But you read a dork conspiracy page that left that part out and you believed it sight unseen never checking it for yourself.
Lunar landings must be genuine. After all the Chinese are going there soon and they will blow the whistle for sure if there are no U.S vehicle remnants! ....That does not mean NASA could not glam it up a bit with nice Hollywood set takes.... Does it? Anyone that thinks we can trust the Govt or Govt agencies has obviously never heard of building 7 or should I say given building 7 the investigation it deserves by every thinking American. Rest of the world is laughing at US citizens gullibility
On the photo's there is no wire, only on the video-stills. If the photo;s -as claimed by Persey- were taken in a studio, there's no need for wire. The wire is only used in the video's to fake 1/6 gravity. Look at the quality difference between the photo's and the video's.
@topneorej Are you seriously comparing the image quality of a 1969 compact *video* camera and the Hasselblad still cameras? Talk about credibility out the window.
@aigg Well, I've seen Kennedy been shot in full color. This was 1963, and with an amature camera. So why did they use black and white tg film the biggest event possible 6 years later?
@topneorej Zapruder filmed the Kennedy assassination on a small home video camera. The cameras on Apollo weren't film cameras, they were TV cameras that needed to be capable of live broadcast. These are two vastly different things. Black and white was easier and pretty much necessary for making viable live TV cameras that could send images back to Earth. I really can't stress the difference between colour 8mm film and a live analogue TV broadcast. Very different.
@topneorej They did bring a 16 mm film camera too on apollo 11, which was set up inside the lander to film the astronaut activities from an elevated perspective. Can be found on youtube. Here I will link to high quality footage taken during the apollo 16 mission. It shows the rover in action (watch in HD): watch?v=5cKpzp358F4
@aigg OK, but why did they wait so long to bring one?
I watched the footage. Look at the dust: at 1/6 gravity shouldn't it stay airborn a bit longer?
The first mission is the one that is mostly critisized. Would the proud US take the chance of, for instance, showing an astronaut vomiting and dying life on televisions all over the world? They had no certainty at all someting like this wouldn't happen. Even the biggest optimists realized chance of failure was high.
@topneorej Actually, the way the dust behaves is the clearest sign in the video that it was shot in a vacuum. There is no way to have little particles behave that way where there is an atmosphere. Also, the speed at which it falls is absolutely consistent with 1/6g. As I stated, they did bring a 16 mm camera on 11. There are hours upon hours of color footage from the Apollo missions in existence. Never trust stupid hoaxtard claims, do your own research. Conspiratards always lose against facts.
@topneorej Here is one of many clips. The camera was partially set to take time-lapse footage of the operations, running only at 1 fps to conserve film. Details in video description: watch?v=d73jCthcAok
@topneorej Not much. Aldrin have stated that " the documentary cut the crew's conclusion that they were probably seeing one of four detached spacecraft adapter panels. Their S-IVB upper stage was 6,000 miles away, but the four panels were jettisoned before the S-IVB made its separation maneuver so they would closely follow the Apollo 11 spacecraft until its first midcourse correction"- wikipedia. Just another rather cheap attempt at making sensation out of nothing.
@Astrobrant2 And that was a lot more optimisctic than a lot of other experts. A low percentage gamble with the only risk being humiliated by the USSR.
That would/could have been a motive to have a back-up plan.
Anyway, for the truth we'll have to wait for a next manned mission. I think within a decade they will have the technology to go there again.
@Astrobrant2 I'm not easily convinced on anything, that's why I'm sceptic on a lot of matters. I find the Apollo matter interesting, cause I wonder why after the seventies no human being was sent into deep space anymore. Secondly I've always found Armstrongs behaviour very odd. But I'm not a fanatic, nor will I ever call anyone with an other opinion dump. What if some people don't believe in the moonlandings? What do you care, you won't earn a penny less.
Going to the moon was one goal, and we did it 6 times, great. Then we made OTHER goals: 6 shuttles, 2 space stations, 12 mars rovers, etc etc. You learn new things by doing new things, not wasting 40 years repeating yourself.
There's only so much money to spend on NASA, so they build NEW stuff for new missions. If you think we've accomplished nothing since 69 then you honestly dont have one newb clue about the modern space program.
@topneorej "what do you care" Because ignorance does not go away if you ignore it. And its contagious.
And I wont tolerate it. The "hoax" is based entirely on assumption and ignorance. You say "Armstrong is odd." Says who? A conspiraholic obviously tilted towards wild assumption? Do you have ANY qualification to say "odd?" or just spouted it out?
See, I DONT find it odd. And I have psych experience. Neither does anyone else find it "odd" except other hoax pushers.
@Astrobrant2 I'm not easily convinced on anything, that's why I'm sceptic on a lot of matters. I find the Apollo matter interesting, cause I wonder why after the seventies no human being was sent into deep space anymore. Secondly I've always found Armstrongs behaviour very odd. But I'm not a fanatic, nor will I ever call anyone with an other opinion dump. What if some people don't believe in the moonlandings? What do you care, you won't earn a penny less.
@topneorej Every single hoax claim presented by hoax believers have been busted into dust, again and again. What's striking is just how unbelievably ridiculous these claims are. With all the evidence in existence to support the fact of the moon landings, I honestly don't know what it would take to have you convinced. If you really are open to the possibility that it was a hoax, then what difference would it make to go back?How would you trust that to be real? Look at the evidence, ignore idiots.
@aigg I always want as much information as possible. Ignoring people will give you less information, besides, how do you know when someone is an idiot? See, when everyone thought the earth was flat, some idiot said it was round.
Film and photo footage are never proof of anything. If you show one person moon photo's he could say it's fake, if you show another person an alien photo, he could say the same.
@ytmoog Do you go by the rule accurate information can only come from maintream media, or scientific sources?
On some subjects you can't know if the information is accurate. For example, someone claiming to have been kidnapped by aliens, you can discredit as unaccurate, but this is mainly because you don't believe in aliens. If there were alien abductions (which I'm not claiming, just an example) you could never find out if you dismiss on base of disbelieve.
No you are wrong in the words of James Randi, you are confusing “skepticism” and “cynicism.” A skeptic doubts, and requires evidence rather than the silver tongue of a charming presenter. A cynic believes that no one says or does anything that yields neither profit nor advantage.
@topneorej If you are insinuating that you think there is "evidence" to disprove the moon landings and Apollo, why don't you bring it on. I have seen most claims made by hoaxheads, and never have I seen one that was not easily busted. What evidence is it you want people to see?
Many times I have challenged them to give a viable over view of how such a hoax was done. Not once has one come back and attempted to answer the question. .... just the usual tired old cliches about sheeple etc etc ...YAWN.
@topneorej Sceptic comes from the latin scepticus meaning thoughtful, inquiring, they consider and examine ideas. Sceptics simply doubt the claims made by others and demand evidence before they accept them. Religion works on faith, not doubt. The earth wasn't flat during the dark ages, and most people knew it was spherical by then. Do some research before making yourself look such a clueless ignoramus.
@topneorej When people said the world was flat, they didn't know any better and really didn't have much reason to know better. Then when people like Eratosthenes came along, (I dare you to call him "some idiot"), and not only PROVED it was round, but fairly accurately determined its size, THEN it was ignorance for the next 1500 years when people kept saying it was flat.
Just like it's ignorance for people to say we never went to the moon.
@Astrobrant2 Before you're offended, I'm no calling anyone an idiot, you obviously didn't understand my example. Anyway, it's now past 2 am in Holland, so I going to hit the pillow. I don't what time it is over there, but good day/night to you and thanks for the converstion.
@topneorej You have to draw the line somewhere, and I am more than willing to draw that line well before I let the moronic ideas of conspiracy theorists have the slightest influence on my position. If I want a worthy opinion on, say, astrophysics, I don't go to the nearest gas station cashier for consultation. Go where the expertise is. Please notice that you will not find a single serious scientist who believes we didn't go to the moon. The Soviets didn't doubt it. Why? Rock solid evidence.
@topneorej "never proof of anything" So says ten out of ten ignorant hoax pushers? Baloney. Pictures prove EVERYTHING, and therefore we expect the hoax idiots to crawl out of the cracks to whine about them. If they didnt they'd forfeit the argument. What did you expect them to say? "Yes the pics prove it and we're idiots?" of course they'll smudge the fact.
Cause they dont have any. OUR experts work as photographers. Yours are youtard newbs.
@topneorej Being humilated by Russia was a HIGH risk. Their space experience was every bit the match to ours til about 68. They never would have been fooled. Especially since all the hoax "evidence" can apparently be found by amatuer internet idiots with no education. If they could find all these alleged "flaws," how could professional russian engineers and photographers possibly have EVER missed them?
I was a photographer and developed all my negs and prints.
Now, do you remember the radium dials on watches? Well if paced down on photo paper, when developed the imprint of the watch face would expose the paper.
On the Moon the amount of radiation would have completely fogged the film. The near standard Hasselblads would offer no protection against the X-rays continually bombarding the moons surface and camera, let alone the men in fabric suits. The whole things was a joke..
@1stMrSceptical Youre right, and the evidence in this video is non-existing. He only shows the photo's that were taken in a studio. They didn't need wire for those, just for the video's to fake 1/6 gravity.
@topneorej No, he's not right, and neither of you has any idea what you're talking about. There are hours of video, (which I'm sure you haven't seen), and much of it shows astronauts at great distances from the camera. And tell me how they use wires to make dust behave like it's in 1/6 gravity and a vacuum.
You support each other's idiocy, thinking you're so smart, but have no idea how moronic you people look.
@Astrobrant2 I've seen these video's. When you speed them up 2x the astronauts and the dust behave lake on earth. By the way, what's with the insults all the time? I'm not going to insult you, because I don't know anything about you.
@1stMrSceptical "On the Moon the amount of radiation would have completely fogged the film"
You don't have a single clue what you're talking about. You're just parroting what some other ill-informed, gullible conspiracy theorist said. I don't suppose you'd care to compare the type and flux of radiation on the moon compared to the dial of a watch?
@1stMrSceptical The Hasselblad camera's Nasa used have thicker film housings and thicker cassetes holding the film specificly to protect the film from excesive radiation.
They are one off camera's unavailable to the public.
@1stMrSceptical I believe the cameras were to use Kodak Ektachome 160 asa
G type 120 film, nothing special about it, the only trouble is, it's not stable in extremes of temperature as on the Moon, Max temp +123 to in shadow - 233!
Ether temp would render the film unless at the lower end it would be so brittle the transport gears would rip the film track away as for max temps? Well just think about film in boiling water, As for camera control from the chest, no chance !
Nice evidence. Sometimes I like to think we never went to the moon, because I love fantasy, as many of us (humans) do. I dream of that day when it is finally discovered that it was an hoax, but that day will never come, because we did go to the moon. This all will end when some future generations get back there.
I'm a real American. I believe we land on the moon. I remember as alittle boy my dad sat my brother and me down in front of a small TV and said " watch this boys, its going to be history.
OH yeah and the moving flag in no atmoshpere.. proven that a flag would move as if its being waved by wind as its being twisted in. Also why does it never move when they walk past the flag?
@Zach150394 It actually did once. ONCE. A very slight motion as the astronaut walked between the flag and the video camera. But there are two competing, and I believe equally plausible, reasons for it.
Other than that, we can see minutes on end of the flags solid as a rock. And in still photos, we see wrinkles in the flags on the second or third day looking exactly as they did on the first.
If you're still Not convinced, try typing These Words on GOOGLE! (... Go and read up on the first site on the list That Gives You GOOGLE!) ...... THE MOON LANDING HOAX ....
HOW TO WIN IN A COURT OF LAW ... WITHOUT A LAWYER!
LEARN HOW TO KEEP YOUR PRIVACY
---------
GIA EH '....! - As the proverb teaches: "THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS" (... even outrageous balderdash, of course!)
@Suzuki1776 "There are really that many people that think hes wrong... wow".
I think most of them may like to claim they believe he is wrong. But his arguments strike right at the heart of their beliefs (often accompanied by withering sarcasm) and that hurts. I think that's really why they dislike him. It's a backhanded compliment.
Conspiracy theories are often much more elaborate than what's commonly believed about something. And they usually require the listener to expand his understanding to accept the possibility of a conspiracy. Those who casually examine photographs of the lunar landings are impressed when they are led to discover discrepancies. This inflates the ego and gives one the impression that he is smarter than the dozens who look at the same photographs and see nothing special.
@tapu32 Maybe you should have put "discrepancies" in quotes. It always turns out that those discrepancies aren't discrepancies at all. They are only things that the conspiracy theorist can't, (or won't), explain.
@SpreadingtheMuse No, it isn't. I'm not an SA (yet), but I've been through all phases of the SASS vetting process; the FBI is an extension of the Justice Department, always has been, and is a mostly autonomous entity attached to the executive. Get your facts straight, Mr. Conspiracy.
@benno291980 Ok so the FBI isnt an integral part of one US Department, its a part of ANOTHER US Department. Wasnt the point here that the FBI wasnt part of the USA at all? For that was my original retort.
@rhazzard100 The "F" in FBI stands for "Federal," and I do think the boss is an appointed position (might be wrong), so that pretty well makes it controlled by the gov.
Hey Mr Messersmith, you totally forgot the Van Allen belt radiation,
they would have been cooked trying to pass it !!
End of story.
// I was once a truly convinced we went after I saw it on TV in the 60s and having been to many NASA exhibitions I was a big fan of the Astronauts ,
but after having seing more and more of the new Hoax evidence it has totally changed my opinion ! Especially regarding the obvious radiation problems, its just impossible.
@bluestargalaxy "cooked" says who? Some hoax retard whose never held a Gieger counter in their life? How about Dr Van Allen himself who said "Any claim of hoax is ridiculous?" Maybe we should listen to someone who actually works for a living.
I work in radiation. And I know for a fact whatever you read online by some 40 year -old virgin is certifiable manure. You cant even name the rad per hour dose of the belts.
There is no hoax "evidence" that hasnt been refuted.
I saw plenty of wires on the nasa site that shows the original footage...just cause you cant see them dont man they arent there.. I also seen about six photos that show wires. Steven Spielberg makes a killer fake moon landing. The End.
@defcon5iveeee ; So where are these pics then? Perhaps you were looking at training simulations released before each flight taken at Houston? I wish people would STOP guessing or just making stuff up. This hoax stuff will then just blow away in the lunar dust.
@defcon5iveeee Then link those sites. For we've heard this all before from a hundred other hoax dorks and they never mentioned your webpages. So Im calling your bluff. Its made-up BS. There is no footage.
Are you serious about Spielberg? Seeing as how he was only a teenager at the time? Or were you trying to make a bad joke?
@SpreadingtheMuse Spielburg would have been 23 at the time of the moon landings, but yeah, he wouldn't have had access to any advanced movie effects at that time. So now the hoaxtards have Spielburg AND Kubrick 'faking' the Apollo missions, so they're adding more movie producers and directors to their idiotic fantasy all the time. Might as well throw George Lucas in there too and say the whole of Hollywood were 'in on it'. Conspiracies thus inflate until they burst apart!
@Astrobrant2 That's what is so funny and self-pwning about conspiracy theories, in order to make them 'work' the believers have to start including more and more agencies and people until there are millions or billions 'involved' until it must seem to the conspiratard that everyone on earth (except them) is 'in on it'. That's why conspiracies are mostly believed by paranoid delusionals who are hysterically over-emotional about them, using arguments that are all heat and no light.
@astrophonix That's why I call conspiracy theories the fast track to schizophrenia. If these people weren't schizo when they started, they probably will be after doing this for awhile. As they are presented with more and more evidence that refutes them, they dig deeper and deeper into their hole of delusion and loss of touch with reality.
I would feel sorry for them if not for the fact that this is self-inflicted. It's all based on their conceit and inability to admit they're wrong.
@Astrobrant2 The funny thing is I have two friends who are diagnosed schizophrenics and they laught at conspiracy theories, but have other, apparently sane mates who believe everything from HAARP to chemtrails, and their main thing is asking questions but then totally ignoring the answers and even pretending they never heard them, treating mere suspicion (based on ignorance of the subject) as if it is evidence.
@Astrobrant2 was you there no was you taking the pictures no was there strings who gives a fuck, you must be one of these guys who sucks big red white and blue cocks proudly even though this country is one of the biggest blights on planet earth, next time you decide to post a useless video go on google images and type goblins when a picture comes up of a goblin you tell me if its real or not because you obviously use pictures as definitive truth, have YOU been to the moon.... NO.
@Ryanoh44 Even if I was there, you still wouldn't believe we went. I'm just glad I don't live in your ill-informed, semi-literate, obscene, paranoid, delusional dungeon of a mind.
@Ryanoh44 The problem is, you're simply wrong. Even if Brant had gone and could analyze lunar photography more accurately, you would continue to peddle your disproven arguments.
@Ryanoh44 "use pics as truth" As opposed to what? Using inane ramblings of ignorant conspiratards who've never worked a technical job in their life? Good luck there.
Fact is, pics are, and always have been, more credible than any moronic "FAKE!" rant that you gullibly believed on some dork webpage.
@SpreadingtheMuse 20,000 pictures plus hours of video and reels of 16 mm film. And that's just the photographic evidence. Yet, not one sign of fakery anywhere. These newbie hoax nuts seem to think they just got in on the ground floor with this hoax business. They don't realize that almost every claim they make was debunked before most of them were born, and they've been getting debunked ever since. Yet almost none of them ever express any embarrassment when they discover that.
@defcon5iveeee Your type often claims they can 'see things' no-one else can. It's called delusional psychosis. See a shrink before they section you into a mental hospital.
@defcon5iveeee I'm Jimmy Hoffa, and I'm here to tell you that D.B. Cooper and I landed on your mother at quarter to ten last night. Burned-up on re-entry.
@mattcory619 "You can never go down, never go down, never go down the drain...unless you believe Apollo was faked and don't have a thing called a brain."
@Astrobrant2 oh hell no... i do believe they went up thier..
people are stupid, and you laugh at them the whole video. being calm voiced the whole time. i LOVE it!.............BUT, i do believe aliens were on the moon when they went thier.. cuz they havent went back since the 70s, when our technology has improved intensively
@mattcory619 We went "back" to the moon 5 times. So how many times does it take? Name a number and justify it.
Going to the moon was ONE goal, and we did it, great. Then we made OTHER goals: 6 shuttles, 2 space stations, 12 mars rovers, etc etc etc. You learn new things by doing new things, not spinning your wheels repeating yourself for 40 years. If you think we've accomplished nothing in 40 years, then you havent one foggy clue about the space program
These conspiracy fools want us to all believe the world is ruled by illuminati and I bet they even believe its going to end this year on december 21st. If you left it to them wed all still be living in caves.
@komputerprezeeza Not in 1969. The gravity moon walk cannot be faked. Even Neil Armstrongs famous words. You would never hear that sound on earth. Nobody has ever been able to duplicate that sound on earth. It sounds a quarter million miles away because it WAS.
And that reflector was placed on the moon by human hands. They are struggling to control manmade crafts today in 1969 the tech simply wasnt there for automation. Know your history.
I love the stupidity of conspiracy believers. How about those who believe the government is dumbing us down with “Chem trails”? Gee I guess all those chemicals they spew into our atmosphere only affect the general public and not those who are putting them there; must be some genetically specific poison. Or people who work for the government are immune. Brilliant! Come get some Catspit~! ☠
Heres a question for these idiotic hoax conspiritors. If man never landed on the moon HOW DID THE MANMADE REFLECTORS GET THERE??????????? I have never seen such stupid people. Add to that the fact that at this period in history the Russians were watching the moon landings very closely. If they had seen any foul play. They would have immediately exposed the hoax.
These kind of people have no life. They just sit around denying anything ever happenned.
@fender1000100 What about unmanned crafts? If you're able to put men on the Moon, you can send an unmanned craft there. Same thing applies to Russians. They don't have any pictures of your boys walking out of LMs, made by themselves. Just saying... In addition nearly all conspiracy arguments were refuted, what makes you happy. But you forget one thing, they were refuted on Earth, kind of proving it all could have happened on Earth... I'm not a believer and these things make me wonder...
use ur own logic, look closely at all footage from nasa. remeber nasa wouldnt let the networks take footage nasa was in complet control of films .if we went there we would still be going there and by now we would be there in some hotel gambleing and so on but no.. i think we sent a rover to thr moon for footage the nasa put ppl on the footage
@jok325635 Facts and a unanimous worldwide consensus of *real* experts over the last 40 years are considerably better than "ur own logic."
Walsh and Piccard went to the bottom of the Mariana Trench, (36,000 feet), in the Trieste in 1960. Nobody has come close to doing that since then. The reason we aren't still going to the moon is because the questionable benefits are totally outweighed by the expense and risk. Unmanned exploration of the solar system has been a FAR better pursuit.
@Astrobrant2 - Yes, I have seen the photos and videos and they are not from the equipment specified but wonderful telescopic references. In he age of the Pinto we broke the bonds of space and traveled to the moon through the radiation no men can survive (then nor now even with modern technology and knowledge). Many deny there is no God nor Devil, heaven nor hell. You believe what you do so stop criminalizing me for what I believe.
@usmcoth WHO says no man can survive travelling trough the radiation? Van Allen, credited of discovering the "Van Allen belts", said himself that the radiation wouldn't stop humans from going to Moon.
Which scientifical institutions have stated that the radiation is unsurvivable? Or, heaven forbid, are You just making that up yourself?
This was my first thought when I saw that guy's video. It was an antennae + lens flare. Suspicions confirmed!
windowzombie 4 hours ago
They are not useing wires
asheltonanthony 1 day ago
Thank you Sir for this wonderful, irrefutable video against the idiotic (whoops, so sorry) fools (darn it!) that insist on slandering the incredibly brave and brilliant men that made those incredible journeys, and the 400.000 plus people that enabled them to do it.
Gee, one wonder how NASA managed to keep those 400,012 people silent about the hoax all of these years. Even the handful of folks at Roswell could not keep from running their mouths. What gives with these NASA types?
Kapindur 1 day ago
There is a book to sell ? Lost of time...
zardoz1961 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hey, no, is no hidden wires, entire costume and the tank from the back is filled with hydrogen or helium, so they float like an lower gravity
aurelianchannel 1 day ago
All you guys that like the word idiot so much: an idiot is a person with an IQ below 50 and is hardly able to speak. Calling people with other opinions than the mainstream media's idiots is all up to you. I will never call anyone an idiot before I have seen them make an IQ test, that's because I go with the facts.
Good day everyone, good luck with all your swearing, humiliating and other pathetic behaviour.
I'M SO HAPPY NOT KNOWING YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
topneorej 2 days ago
@topneorej "Idiot" isn't being used in the clinical sense. It's just a pejorative for people who make stupid arguments. Sometimes people are willing to learn, but we have had to deal with so many ill-inforrmed, self-promoting, pretentious conspiracy theorists that it has come into common use.
Many hoax nuts are what people would generally call idiots, especially those who persist after their arguments are thoroughly refuted.
Astrobrant2 2 days ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej
Facts?
I have seen nothing but speculation and assumptions in all your posts.
ytmoog 2 days ago
@topneorej Common sense, this one lacks.
windowzombie 4 hours ago
That comment was for topeno
JoeC4950 3 days ago
Well, your spelling and English grammar is terrible. You wrote, I no want to call someone an idiot. Sounds like bad grammar to me. And for speaking 4 languages, it doesn't impress me. Hit a 90 mph fastball and you will impress me. Also, explain the smartass remark you calling me a "real American ". I believe I am. I served my country and state for 25 years. You don't have the right to bash America.
JoeC4950 3 days ago
@JoeC4950 I looked it up, I wrote: I'm no calling anyone an idiot. It's fast typing, and I forgot the t. I'm very impressed you hit a 90 mph fastball, don't get me wrong. I'm very interested in sports, I play of 6 handicap in golf, played international pool tournaments and was part of the atletic team when I served the armee.
And i'm certainly not bashing America!
topneorej 2 days ago
Not you Astrobrant2, its for topneorej
JoeC4950 3 days ago
@JoeC4950 Okay, because I didn't see where he did that.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
topneorej, before you do anything, check your grammar. Incorrect usage of "has" and "have".
JoeC4950 3 days ago
@JoeC4950 "topneorej, before you do anything, check your grammar. Incorrect usage of 'has' and 'have'."
Were you directing that at topneorej or me?
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@JoeC4950 Where exactly did I make this mistake? Always looking to improve my languages. I'm from Holland, speaking 4 languages sometimes a mistake will slip in, sorry for that. My Dutch is ok though, but I don't think I'll reach many people with that:) Vandaar dat ik het in het Engels doe, snap je? See what I mean?
topneorej 3 days ago
There's also a theory they went to the moon, but encountered other 'visitors'
At least three astronauts thought so: watch?v=V5GdDx3qLPE&feature=bored
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej Shows like that typically misrepresent the truth. They're in the business of making money with extraordinary claims. For example, Buzz Aldrin has explained repeatedly what they saw, but the film didn't show that, did it? It was one of the panels from the S-IV-B. And it was NOT that clip the film kept showing.
Mitchell never claimed a personal UFO experience. So we're left with only one: Cooper. And I think he just fell off the edge.
(Cont'd)
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 Pt 2. But there's another problem. People like to holler that Apollo was faked and then turn around and claim that Apollo astronauts saw UFOs or took photos of alien artifacts on the moon. In your eagerness to act like you have special "inside information," you present two mutually contradictory conspiracy theories. Hoax nuts never seem to have a problem with this, which is a good demonstration of their inability to think.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 Well, at least Mitchell is quite serious about the subject on 4:30.
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej Yes, he has believed in alien visitation for a long time. There are many people with impressive credentials who came to believe in some weird stuff. I've studied this quite a bit over the last 40 years. How can we explain someone like William Crookes believing in seances, Sir A.C. Doyle believing in fairies, or John Mack believing in alien abductions? Jack Schmitt is a staunch global warming denier.
It happens, unfortunately, and usually to the discredit of those who go that route.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 So the only truth is what we learn in school or via the mainstream media?
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej The only truth is what is supported by a mountain of irrefutable evidence. You fell for a dumb conspiracy theory because you just didn't know any better, not because these people are revealing any kind of worthwhile evidence against Apollo.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 Ok, so what's your opinion about how building 7 in New York came down?
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej Large pieces of debris hit the front of the building. Fires got started, one of them from diesel generator fuel. After several hours, the structure collapsed.
All the conspiracist stories I have seen about bldg 7 are pure uneducated or deliberately deceptive bullshit, just because CTs think they sound so COOL spreading that garbage around. Most of those fantasies are about as demonstrably stupid as most Apollo hoax claims. Don't try to pull any of them here. I know them.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 Watch this footage, just the collapse, no comments, no claims, no conspiracy remarks, just the collapse: watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A
Do you really believe a building being hit by debris would collapse perfectly straight down in its footprint?
And even if you do, did you know the 9/11 Commission's final report does not mention the collapse of Building 7?
The building does not pancake, so how do you think it went down?
topneorej 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej
Can you answer my previous question before you dive off into other random conspiracy fantasies....
"Which experts and when did they come up with these estimates?"
ytmoog 3 days ago
@topneorej I've seen it dozens of times and from all the angles... (something conspiracy theorists won't do, because it blows holes in their theories)..
The interior supports started collapsing first. That's when we see part of the penthouse caving in. Then the rest of the central supports start to fail. The building collapses from the inside out and finally drops from the fourth floor up. YES, all at once.
So what? That subject pisses me off too much. I don't want it here.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@topneorej "footprint" Yes, thats what happened. And since 99.9% of the engineers and architects agree, the 0.1% minority who you prejudicially believe are obvious ostracized idiots.
But you betray yourself here. This is ANOTHER dumb conspiracy. Using dumb conspiracy #1 as your "proof" of dumb conspiracy #2 only proves how stupid your evidence is for both. Its just making up your story as you go, and proving you'll believe any dumb thing you read online.
SpreadingtheMuse 3 days ago
@topneorej WTC 7 was hit by several hundred tons of flaming debris from the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. That was on camera. Thats a no-brainer. But you read a dork conspiracy page that left that part out and you believed it sight unseen never checking it for yourself.
SpreadingtheMuse 3 days ago
@topneorej The "mainstream media" is infinitely more trustworthy than the ignorant high-school drop-outs who hoax pushers gullibly believe.
SpreadingtheMuse 3 days ago
yeah whatever
TheStone5152 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Lunar landings must be genuine. After all the Chinese are going there soon and they will blow the whistle for sure if there are no U.S vehicle remnants! ....That does not mean NASA could not glam it up a bit with nice Hollywood set takes.... Does it? Anyone that thinks we can trust the Govt or Govt agencies has obviously never heard of building 7 or should I say given building 7 the investigation it deserves by every thinking American. Rest of the world is laughing at US citizens gullibility
COLDFUSION695 4 days ago
On the photo's there is no wire, only on the video-stills. If the photo;s -as claimed by Persey- were taken in a studio, there's no need for wire. The wire is only used in the video's to fake 1/6 gravity. Look at the quality difference between the photo's and the video's.
topneorej 4 days ago
@topneorej Are you seriously comparing the image quality of a 1969 compact *video* camera and the Hasselblad still cameras? Talk about credibility out the window.
aigg 4 days ago
@aigg Well, I've seen Kennedy been shot in full color. This was 1963, and with an amature camera. So why did they use black and white tg film the biggest event possible 6 years later?
topneorej 4 days ago
@topneorej very good question
COLDFUSION695 4 days ago
@topneorej Zapruder filmed the Kennedy assassination on a small home video camera. The cameras on Apollo weren't film cameras, they were TV cameras that needed to be capable of live broadcast. These are two vastly different things. Black and white was easier and pretty much necessary for making viable live TV cameras that could send images back to Earth. I really can't stress the difference between colour 8mm film and a live analogue TV broadcast. Very different.
britishguitar 4 days ago
@topneorej They did bring a 16 mm film camera too on apollo 11, which was set up inside the lander to film the astronaut activities from an elevated perspective. Can be found on youtube. Here I will link to high quality footage taken during the apollo 16 mission. It shows the rover in action (watch in HD): watch?v=5cKpzp358F4
aigg 3 days ago
@aigg OK, but why did they wait so long to bring one?
I watched the footage. Look at the dust: at 1/6 gravity shouldn't it stay airborn a bit longer?
The first mission is the one that is mostly critisized. Would the proud US take the chance of, for instance, showing an astronaut vomiting and dying life on televisions all over the world? They had no certainty at all someting like this wouldn't happen. Even the biggest optimists realized chance of failure was high.
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej
"Look at the dust: at 1/6 gravity shouldn't it stay airborn a bit longer?"
With no air to hold it up why would it?
"I believe the cameras were to use Kodak Ektachome 160 asa"
You should actually check.
They actually used a special film using a polyester base intended for use in far lower temperature environment.
"Max temp +123 to in shadow - 233"
Max temp of what exactly?
ytmoog 3 days ago
@topneorej Actually, the way the dust behaves is the clearest sign in the video that it was shot in a vacuum. There is no way to have little particles behave that way where there is an atmosphere. Also, the speed at which it falls is absolutely consistent with 1/6g. As I stated, they did bring a 16 mm camera on 11. There are hours upon hours of color footage from the Apollo missions in existence. Never trust stupid hoaxtard claims, do your own research. Conspiratards always lose against facts.
aigg 3 days ago
@aigg where can I find color footage of the apollo 11 mission?
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej Here is one of many clips. The camera was partially set to take time-lapse footage of the operations, running only at 1 fps to conserve film. Details in video description: watch?v=d73jCthcAok
aigg 3 days ago
@topneorej 1 fps time-lapse: watch?v=X8J2XPBfxk0
Apollo 11 onboard film: watch?v=fDvsjwRgexs
aigg 3 days ago
Comment removed
aigg 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej Here is a 1 fps 16mm film of the famous flag salute: watch?v=nBlIyy_VTIo
aigg 3 days ago
@aigg What do you make of this video: watch?v=V5GdDx3qLPE&feature=bored
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej Not much. Aldrin have stated that " the documentary cut the crew's conclusion that they were probably seeing one of four detached spacecraft adapter panels. Their S-IVB upper stage was 6,000 miles away, but the four panels were jettisoned before the S-IVB made its separation maneuver so they would closely follow the Apollo 11 spacecraft until its first midcourse correction"- wikipedia. Just another rather cheap attempt at making sensation out of nothing.
aigg 3 days ago
@topneorej "Even the biggest optimists realized chance of failure was high."
Yes, even Neil Armstrong estimated his odds of returning alive at 50%.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 And that was a lot more optimisctic than a lot of other experts. A low percentage gamble with the only risk being humiliated by the USSR.
That would/could have been a motive to have a back-up plan.
Anyway, for the truth we'll have to wait for a next manned mission. I think within a decade they will have the technology to go there again.
topneorej 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej
Which experts and when did they come up with these estimates?
ytmoog 3 days ago
@topneorej You can wait if you want to. I already know the truth.
I don't suppose you're very convinced by the LRO images of the landing sites, either. Why would those fail to convince you?
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 I'm not easily convinced on anything, that's why I'm sceptic on a lot of matters. I find the Apollo matter interesting, cause I wonder why after the seventies no human being was sent into deep space anymore. Secondly I've always found Armstrongs behaviour very odd. But I'm not a fanatic, nor will I ever call anyone with an other opinion dump. What if some people don't believe in the moonlandings? What do you care, you won't earn a penny less.
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej "anymore" Its obvious
Going to the moon was one goal, and we did it 6 times, great. Then we made OTHER goals: 6 shuttles, 2 space stations, 12 mars rovers, etc etc. You learn new things by doing new things, not wasting 40 years repeating yourself.
There's only so much money to spend on NASA, so they build NEW stuff for new missions. If you think we've accomplished nothing since 69 then you honestly dont have one newb clue about the modern space program.
SpreadingtheMuse 3 days ago
@topneorej "what do you care" Because ignorance does not go away if you ignore it. And its contagious.
And I wont tolerate it. The "hoax" is based entirely on assumption and ignorance. You say "Armstrong is odd." Says who? A conspiraholic obviously tilted towards wild assumption? Do you have ANY qualification to say "odd?" or just spouted it out?
See, I DONT find it odd. And I have psych experience. Neither does anyone else find it "odd" except other hoax pushers.
SpreadingtheMuse 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Astrobrant2 I'm not easily convinced on anything, that's why I'm sceptic on a lot of matters. I find the Apollo matter interesting, cause I wonder why after the seventies no human being was sent into deep space anymore. Secondly I've always found Armstrongs behaviour very odd. But I'm not a fanatic, nor will I ever call anyone with an other opinion dump. What if some people don't believe in the moonlandings? What do you care, you won't earn a penny less.
topneorej 3 days ago
@topneorej Every single hoax claim presented by hoax believers have been busted into dust, again and again. What's striking is just how unbelievably ridiculous these claims are. With all the evidence in existence to support the fact of the moon landings, I honestly don't know what it would take to have you convinced. If you really are open to the possibility that it was a hoax, then what difference would it make to go back?How would you trust that to be real? Look at the evidence, ignore idiots.
aigg 3 days ago
@aigg I always want as much information as possible. Ignoring people will give you less information, besides, how do you know when someone is an idiot? See, when everyone thought the earth was flat, some idiot said it was round.
Film and photo footage are never proof of anything. If you show one person moon photo's he could say it's fake, if you show another person an alien photo, he could say the same.
topneorej 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej
"I always want as much information as possible"
Does it matter to you if it is accurate or not?
"See, when everyone thought the earth was flat"
When was that?
ytmoog 3 days ago
@ytmoog Do you go by the rule accurate information can only come from maintream media, or scientific sources?
On some subjects you can't know if the information is accurate. For example, someone claiming to have been kidnapped by aliens, you can discredit as unaccurate, but this is mainly because you don't believe in aliens. If there were alien abductions (which I'm not claiming, just an example) you could never find out if you dismiss on base of disbelieve.
topneorej 3 days ago
@ytmoog Sceptics are the same as religious people. They have a strong believe certain things don't exist.
Earth was flat during the dark ages.
topneorej 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej
Only to the religious fanatics of the time. It was known since long before then it was spherical.
And the diameter of the earth was even measured back in 200 BC.
But it is a common myth you hold there.
And are you going to answer my question?
Simple one I thought....
"Which experts and when did they come up with these estimates?"
ytmoog 3 days ago
@topneorej
No you are wrong in the words of James Randi, you are confusing “skepticism” and “cynicism.” A skeptic doubts, and requires evidence rather than the silver tongue of a charming presenter. A cynic believes that no one says or does anything that yields neither profit nor advantage.
MrBillyBalfour 3 days ago
@MrBillyBalfour True and very poetic. But many call themselves skeptic, but refuse to look at the evidence.
topneorej 2 days ago
@topneorej If you are insinuating that you think there is "evidence" to disprove the moon landings and Apollo, why don't you bring it on. I have seen most claims made by hoaxheads, and never have I seen one that was not easily busted. What evidence is it you want people to see?
aigg 2 days ago
@aigg
Many times I have challenged them to give a viable over view of how such a hoax was done. Not once has one come back and attempted to answer the question. .... just the usual tired old cliches about sheeple etc etc ...YAWN.
TheSpiritof1969 2 days ago
@topneorej Sceptic comes from the latin scepticus meaning thoughtful, inquiring, they consider and examine ideas. Sceptics simply doubt the claims made by others and demand evidence before they accept them. Religion works on faith, not doubt. The earth wasn't flat during the dark ages, and most people knew it was spherical by then. Do some research before making yourself look such a clueless ignoramus.
astrophonix 3 days ago
Comment removed
aigg 3 days ago
@topneorej When people said the world was flat, they didn't know any better and really didn't have much reason to know better. Then when people like Eratosthenes came along, (I dare you to call him "some idiot"), and not only PROVED it was round, but fairly accurately determined its size, THEN it was ignorance for the next 1500 years when people kept saying it was flat.
Just like it's ignorance for people to say we never went to the moon.
Astrobrant2 3 days ago
@Astrobrant2 Before you're offended, I'm no calling anyone an idiot, you obviously didn't understand my example. Anyway, it's now past 2 am in Holland, so I going to hit the pillow. I don't what time it is over there, but good day/night to you and thanks for the converstion.
topneorej 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej You have to draw the line somewhere, and I am more than willing to draw that line well before I let the moronic ideas of conspiracy theorists have the slightest influence on my position. If I want a worthy opinion on, say, astrophysics, I don't go to the nearest gas station cashier for consultation. Go where the expertise is. Please notice that you will not find a single serious scientist who believes we didn't go to the moon. The Soviets didn't doubt it. Why? Rock solid evidence.
aigg 3 days ago
@topneorej "never proof of anything" So says ten out of ten ignorant hoax pushers? Baloney. Pictures prove EVERYTHING, and therefore we expect the hoax idiots to crawl out of the cracks to whine about them. If they didnt they'd forfeit the argument. What did you expect them to say? "Yes the pics prove it and we're idiots?" of course they'll smudge the fact.
Cause they dont have any. OUR experts work as photographers. Yours are youtard newbs.
SpreadingtheMuse 3 days ago
@topneorej Being humilated by Russia was a HIGH risk. Their space experience was every bit the match to ours til about 68. They never would have been fooled. Especially since all the hoax "evidence" can apparently be found by amatuer internet idiots with no education. If they could find all these alleged "flaws," how could professional russian engineers and photographers possibly have EVER missed them?
SpreadingtheMuse 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej
"And that was a lot more optimisctic than a lot of other experts. "
Which experts? And when were these estimates made?
ytmoog 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Astrobrant2
I have heard that figure in connection with Apollo 8 but when did Armstrong estimate that?
ytmoog 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@topneorej
"So why did they use black and white tg film the biggest event possible 6 years later?"
They did use colour film, the 16mm film was colour, the film for the Hasselblad cameras has a mixture of colour and black and white film.
ytmoog 3 days ago
I was a photographer and developed all my negs and prints.
Now, do you remember the radium dials on watches? Well if paced down on photo paper, when developed the imprint of the watch face would expose the paper.
On the Moon the amount of radiation would have completely fogged the film. The near standard Hasselblads would offer no protection against the X-rays continually bombarding the moons surface and camera, let alone the men in fabric suits. The whole things was a joke..
1stMrSceptical 4 days ago
@1stMrSceptical Youre right, and the evidence in this video is non-existing. He only shows the photo's that were taken in a studio. They didn't need wire for those, just for the video's to fake 1/6 gravity.
topneorej 4 days ago
@topneorej No, he's not right, and neither of you has any idea what you're talking about. There are hours of video, (which I'm sure you haven't seen), and much of it shows astronauts at great distances from the camera. And tell me how they use wires to make dust behave like it's in 1/6 gravity and a vacuum.
You support each other's idiocy, thinking you're so smart, but have no idea how moronic you people look.
Astrobrant2 4 days ago
@Astrobrant2 I've seen these video's. When you speed them up 2x the astronauts and the dust behave lake on earth. By the way, what's with the insults all the time? I'm not going to insult you, because I don't know anything about you.
topneorej 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1stMrSceptical
One question, what do you think protects Astronauts in earth orbit from these X-rays you think would be lethal?
ytmoog 4 days ago
@1stMrSceptical "On the Moon the amount of radiation would have completely fogged the film"
You don't have a single clue what you're talking about. You're just parroting what some other ill-informed, gullible conspiracy theorist said. I don't suppose you'd care to compare the type and flux of radiation on the moon compared to the dial of a watch?
Astrobrant2 4 days ago
@1stMrSceptical The Hasselblad camera's Nasa used have thicker film housings and thicker cassetes holding the film specificly to protect the film from excesive radiation.
They are one off camera's unavailable to the public.
jimmywrangles 4 days ago
@1stMrSceptical I believe the cameras were to use Kodak Ektachome 160 asa
G type 120 film, nothing special about it, the only trouble is, it's not stable in extremes of temperature as on the Moon, Max temp +123 to in shadow - 233!
Ether temp would render the film unless at the lower end it would be so brittle the transport gears would rip the film track away as for max temps? Well just think about film in boiling water, As for camera control from the chest, no chance !
1stMrSceptical 4 days ago
This video rocks. but the dude that posted this is a fucking retard to think we never went to the fucking moon.
farley34 4 days ago
@farley34 The dude who posted what? The video? I know we went to the moon. Or were you talking about Jarrah White?
Astrobrant2 4 days ago
@Astrobrant2 I say again we never went to the moon in 1969 ! 1969!
Dorisequador 4 days ago
@farley34
topneorej 4 days ago
We did not go to the moon in 1969 SO F U.
Dorisequador 4 days ago
@Dorisequador Another ill-informed drive-by from someone who saw a couple of hoax videos, or are you going to stick around and back up your claim?
Astrobrant2 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Astrobrant2 "or are you going to stick around and back up your claim"
Now, THAT is comedy! :-) I think Apollo deniers should be granted disabled status, since they don't have a leg to stand on.
419Films 4 days ago
Nice evidence. Sometimes I like to think we never went to the moon, because I love fantasy, as many of us (humans) do. I dream of that day when it is finally discovered that it was an hoax, but that day will never come, because we did go to the moon. This all will end when some future generations get back there.
nohaycamino 5 days ago
@nohaycamino No evidence. The photo's didn't need wire, only the video's.
topneorej 4 days ago
I'm a real American. I believe we land on the moon. I remember as alittle boy my dad sat my brother and me down in front of a small TV and said " watch this boys, its going to be history.
JoeC4950 5 days ago
@JoeC4950 You're a real American all right.
topneorej 3 days ago
OH yeah and the moving flag in no atmoshpere.. proven that a flag would move as if its being waved by wind as its being twisted in. Also why does it never move when they walk past the flag?
Zach150394 6 days ago
@Zach150394 It actually did once. ONCE. A very slight motion as the astronaut walked between the flag and the video camera. But there are two competing, and I believe equally plausible, reasons for it.
Other than that, we can see minutes on end of the flags solid as a rock. And in still photos, we see wrinkles in the flags on the second or third day looking exactly as they did on the first.
Astrobrant2 6 days ago
Most of this crap 'evidence' about us not going to the moon, has been completley proven wrong..
Two light sources because of the astronaut lighting up when he is in shaddow simply reflection
Different shadow sizes down to the moons surface being bumpy
Slow motion walk has been proven it couldn't of been done without the right gravity.
500,000 employees of NASA and no one has come forward.. I dont think so.
Good fight.
Zach150394 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you're still Not convinced, try typing These Words on GOOGLE! (... Go and read up on the first site on the list That Gives You GOOGLE!) ...... THE MOON LANDING HOAX ....
HOW TO WIN IN A COURT OF LAW ... WITHOUT A LAWYER!
LEARN HOW TO KEEP YOUR PRIVACY
---------
GIA EH '....! - As the proverb teaches: "THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS" (... even outrageous balderdash, of course!)
P. S.
Beautiful thing, it '....!
ettoremazza10 6 days ago
The dislikes on this guys videos amaze me. There are really that many people that think hes wrong... wow.
Suzuki1776 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Suzuki1776 "There are really that many people that think hes wrong... wow".
I think most of them may like to claim they believe he is wrong. But his arguments strike right at the heart of their beliefs (often accompanied by withering sarcasm) and that hurts. I think that's really why they dislike him. It's a backhanded compliment.
eventcone 6 days ago in playlist Favorite videos
Conspiracy theories are often much more elaborate than what's commonly believed about something. And they usually require the listener to expand his understanding to accept the possibility of a conspiracy. Those who casually examine photographs of the lunar landings are impressed when they are led to discover discrepancies. This inflates the ego and gives one the impression that he is smarter than the dozens who look at the same photographs and see nothing special.
tapu32 6 days ago
@tapu32 Maybe you should have put "discrepancies" in quotes. It always turns out that those discrepancies aren't discrepancies at all. They are only things that the conspiracy theorist can't, (or won't), explain.
Astrobrant2 6 days ago
Great video, annoying voice.
SmileAndHaveAWank 1 week ago
GREAT VIDEO!!
We seriously need MORE of those!
metalnat27 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thats not the evidence you fool!
Sirias74 1 week ago
Lol of all people to be, you choose Jimmy Hoffa?! You know how I know you are gay...
defcon5iveeee 1 week ago
I was easily able to successfully masturbate to this video.
OKCtactical 1 week ago
Lol lick my nuts serbiaaaaa
defcon5iveeee 1 week ago
nasa has nothing to do with the united states neither does the cia or the fbi if u dont beleve me then look it up
rhazzard100 1 week ago
@rhazzard100 "nasa has nothing to do with the united states neither does the cia or the fbi if u dont beleve me then look it up"
Huh??
(I think this might be another on for the file.)
Astrobrant2 1 week ago
@rhazzard100 I looked it up. The FBI is a sub-department in the US Department of the Treasury. So want to say something else stupid?
SpreadingtheMuse 1 week ago
@SpreadingtheMuse No, it isn't. I'm not an SA (yet), but I've been through all phases of the SASS vetting process; the FBI is an extension of the Justice Department, always has been, and is a mostly autonomous entity attached to the executive. Get your facts straight, Mr. Conspiracy.
benno291980 1 week ago
@benno291980 Ok so the FBI isnt an integral part of one US Department, its a part of ANOTHER US Department. Wasnt the point here that the FBI wasnt part of the USA at all? For that was my original retort.
SpreadingtheMuse 1 week ago
@SpreadingtheMuse i ment that they are not controled by the us government
rhazzard100 6 days ago
@rhazzard100 The "F" in FBI stands for "Federal," and I do think the boss is an appointed position (might be wrong), so that pretty well makes it controlled by the gov.
SpreadingtheMuse 6 days ago
Hey Mr Messersmith, you totally forgot the Van Allen belt radiation,
they would have been cooked trying to pass it !!
End of story.
// I was once a truly convinced we went after I saw it on TV in the 60s and having been to many NASA exhibitions I was a big fan of the Astronauts ,
but after having seing more and more of the new Hoax evidence it has totally changed my opinion ! Especially regarding the obvious radiation problems, its just impossible.
bluestargalaxy 1 week ago
@bluestargalaxy "cooked" says who? Some hoax retard whose never held a Gieger counter in their life? How about Dr Van Allen himself who said "Any claim of hoax is ridiculous?" Maybe we should listen to someone who actually works for a living.
I work in radiation. And I know for a fact whatever you read online by some 40 year -old virgin is certifiable manure. You cant even name the rad per hour dose of the belts.
There is no hoax "evidence" that hasnt been refuted.
SpreadingtheMuse 1 week ago 5
@bluestargalaxy
You forgot to give any actual evidence for this 'cooking'. I take it you do have some?
ytmoog 1 week ago
I saw plenty of wires on the nasa site that shows the original footage...just cause you cant see them dont man they arent there.. I also seen about six photos that show wires. Steven Spielberg makes a killer fake moon landing. The End.
defcon5iveeee 1 week ago
@defcon5iveeee ; So where are these pics then? Perhaps you were looking at training simulations released before each flight taken at Houston? I wish people would STOP guessing or just making stuff up. This hoax stuff will then just blow away in the lunar dust.
astroroadshow 1 week ago
@defcon5iveeee Then link those sites. For we've heard this all before from a hundred other hoax dorks and they never mentioned your webpages. So Im calling your bluff. Its made-up BS. There is no footage.
Are you serious about Spielberg? Seeing as how he was only a teenager at the time? Or were you trying to make a bad joke?
SpreadingtheMuse 1 week ago
@SpreadingtheMuse Spielburg would have been 23 at the time of the moon landings, but yeah, he wouldn't have had access to any advanced movie effects at that time. So now the hoaxtards have Spielburg AND Kubrick 'faking' the Apollo missions, so they're adding more movie producers and directors to their idiotic fantasy all the time. Might as well throw George Lucas in there too and say the whole of Hollywood were 'in on it'. Conspiracies thus inflate until they burst apart!
astrophonix 1 week ago
@astrophonix I saw somebody say Francis Ford Coppola a couple days ago. And let's not forget Disney.
(Actually, all of this seems more like Cecil B. DeMIlle, but unfortunately he died in 1959. Still, we might see a hoax nut hauling his name out.)
Astrobrant2 1 week ago
@Astrobrant2 That's what is so funny and self-pwning about conspiracy theories, in order to make them 'work' the believers have to start including more and more agencies and people until there are millions or billions 'involved' until it must seem to the conspiratard that everyone on earth (except them) is 'in on it'. That's why conspiracies are mostly believed by paranoid delusionals who are hysterically over-emotional about them, using arguments that are all heat and no light.
astrophonix 1 week ago
@astrophonix That's why I call conspiracy theories the fast track to schizophrenia. If these people weren't schizo when they started, they probably will be after doing this for awhile. As they are presented with more and more evidence that refutes them, they dig deeper and deeper into their hole of delusion and loss of touch with reality.
I would feel sorry for them if not for the fact that this is self-inflicted. It's all based on their conceit and inability to admit they're wrong.
Astrobrant2 1 week ago
@Astrobrant2 The funny thing is I have two friends who are diagnosed schizophrenics and they laught at conspiracy theories, but have other, apparently sane mates who believe everything from HAARP to chemtrails, and their main thing is asking questions but then totally ignoring the answers and even pretending they never heard them, treating mere suspicion (based on ignorance of the subject) as if it is evidence.
astrophonix 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@astrophonix "the believers have to start including more and more agencies and people until there are millions or billions 'involved'"
Well, my father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate knew a guy whose former roommate's cousin's nephew's brother's father was in on it. :-)
419Films 4 days ago
@defcon5iveeee "I saw plenty of wires"
Really? Give us the links.
"I also seen about six photos that show wires."
Really? Give us the links.
Astrobrant2 1 week ago
@Astrobrant2 was you there no was you taking the pictures no was there strings who gives a fuck, you must be one of these guys who sucks big red white and blue cocks proudly even though this country is one of the biggest blights on planet earth, next time you decide to post a useless video go on google images and type goblins when a picture comes up of a goblin you tell me if its real or not because you obviously use pictures as definitive truth, have YOU been to the moon.... NO.
Ryanoh44 1 week ago
@Ryanoh44 Even if I was there, you still wouldn't believe we went. I'm just glad I don't live in your ill-informed, semi-literate, obscene, paranoid, delusional dungeon of a mind.
Astrobrant2 1 week ago 6
@Ryanoh44 The problem is, you're simply wrong. Even if Brant had gone and could analyze lunar photography more accurately, you would continue to peddle your disproven arguments.
Let me ask you:
Why do you believe man did not go to the moon?
unparallelshadows 1 week ago
@Ryanoh44 "use pics as truth" As opposed to what? Using inane ramblings of ignorant conspiratards who've never worked a technical job in their life? Good luck there.
Fact is, pics are, and always have been, more credible than any moronic "FAKE!" rant that you gullibly believed on some dork webpage.
SpreadingtheMuse 1 week ago
@SpreadingtheMuse 20,000 pictures plus hours of video and reels of 16 mm film. And that's just the photographic evidence. Yet, not one sign of fakery anywhere. These newbie hoax nuts seem to think they just got in on the ground floor with this hoax business. They don't realize that almost every claim they make was debunked before most of them were born, and they've been getting debunked ever since. Yet almost none of them ever express any embarrassment when they discover that.
Astrobrant2 1 week ago
@defcon5iveeee your a fucking retard...
xserbia97 1 week ago
@defcon5iveeee Your type often claims they can 'see things' no-one else can. It's called delusional psychosis. See a shrink before they section you into a mental hospital.
astrophonix 1 week ago
@defcon5iveeee I'm Jimmy Hoffa, and I'm here to tell you that D.B. Cooper and I landed on your mother at quarter to ten last night. Burned-up on re-entry.
benno291980 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GIA EH '....! - As the proverb teaches: "THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS" (... even outrageous balderdash, of course!)
P. S.
Beautiful thing, it '....!
ettoremazza10 1 week ago
hey hoax believers.. go look at a vagina, your life will change!!!
rob1rn 1 week ago
Another great video.
jrvenice1999 1 week ago
i love this guys personality... hes like the sarcastic mr rogers :D
mattcory619 1 week ago 2
@mattcory619 "You can never go down, never go down, never go down the drain...unless you believe Apollo was faked and don't have a thing called a brain."
Astrobrant2 1 week ago 3
Comment removed
aigg 1 week ago
@Astrobrant2 oh hell no... i do believe they went up thier..
people are stupid, and you laugh at them the whole video. being calm voiced the whole time. i LOVE it!.............BUT, i do believe aliens were on the moon when they went thier.. cuz they havent went back since the 70s, when our technology has improved intensively
mattcory619 1 week ago
@mattcory619 We went "back" to the moon 5 times. So how many times does it take? Name a number and justify it.
Going to the moon was ONE goal, and we did it, great. Then we made OTHER goals: 6 shuttles, 2 space stations, 12 mars rovers, etc etc etc. You learn new things by doing new things, not spinning your wheels repeating yourself for 40 years. If you think we've accomplished nothing in 40 years, then you havent one foggy clue about the space program
SpreadingtheMuse 1 week ago
@mattcory619
Not all the technology. the basics are just the same. What has changed is the economy and our need to go back.
TheSpiritof1969 1 week ago
These conspiracy fools want us to all believe the world is ruled by illuminati and I bet they even believe its going to end this year on december 21st. If you left it to them wed all still be living in caves.
fender1000100 1 week ago
@komputerprezeeza Not in 1969. The gravity moon walk cannot be faked. Even Neil Armstrongs famous words. You would never hear that sound on earth. Nobody has ever been able to duplicate that sound on earth. It sounds a quarter million miles away because it WAS.
And that reflector was placed on the moon by human hands. They are struggling to control manmade crafts today in 1969 the tech simply wasnt there for automation. Know your history.
fender1000100 1 week ago
I love the stupidity of conspiracy believers. How about those who believe the government is dumbing us down with “Chem trails”? Gee I guess all those chemicals they spew into our atmosphere only affect the general public and not those who are putting them there; must be some genetically specific poison. Or people who work for the government are immune. Brilliant! Come get some Catspit~! ☠
CatspitProductions 1 week ago
Heres a question for these idiotic hoax conspiritors. If man never landed on the moon HOW DID THE MANMADE REFLECTORS GET THERE??????????? I have never seen such stupid people. Add to that the fact that at this period in history the Russians were watching the moon landings very closely. If they had seen any foul play. They would have immediately exposed the hoax.
These kind of people have no life. They just sit around denying anything ever happenned.
fender1000100 1 week ago
@fender1000100 What about unmanned crafts? If you're able to put men on the Moon, you can send an unmanned craft there. Same thing applies to Russians. They don't have any pictures of your boys walking out of LMs, made by themselves. Just saying... In addition nearly all conspiracy arguments were refuted, what makes you happy. But you forget one thing, they were refuted on Earth, kind of proving it all could have happened on Earth... I'm not a believer and these things make me wonder...
komputerprezesa 1 week ago
use ur own logic, look closely at all footage from nasa. remeber nasa wouldnt let the networks take footage nasa was in complet control of films .if we went there we would still be going there and by now we would be there in some hotel gambleing and so on but no.. i think we sent a rover to thr moon for footage the nasa put ppl on the footage
jok325635 2 weeks ago
@jok325635 Facts and a unanimous worldwide consensus of *real* experts over the last 40 years are considerably better than "ur own logic."
Walsh and Piccard went to the bottom of the Mariana Trench, (36,000 feet), in the Trieste in 1960. Nobody has come close to doing that since then. The reason we aren't still going to the moon is because the questionable benefits are totally outweighed by the expense and risk. Unmanned exploration of the solar system has been a FAR better pursuit.
Astrobrant2 2 weeks ago
The thing that has always proved it never happened to me was there is no limit to the near earth photos but NO near moon photos/videos.
usmcoth 2 weeks ago
@usmcoth
"...but NO near moon photos/videos."
Have you actually looked for them?
ytmoog 1 week ago
@usmcoth "NO near moon photos/videos"
What do you mean? There are tons of them. I guess that means you would have to change your mind about Apollo, doesn't it?.
Astrobrant2 1 week ago
@Astrobrant2 - Yes, I have seen the photos and videos and they are not from the equipment specified but wonderful telescopic references. In he age of the Pinto we broke the bonds of space and traveled to the moon through the radiation no men can survive (then nor now even with modern technology and knowledge). Many deny there is no God nor Devil, heaven nor hell. You believe what you do so stop criminalizing me for what I believe.
usmcoth 1 week ago
@usmcoth WHO says no man can survive travelling trough the radiation? Van Allen, credited of discovering the "Van Allen belts", said himself that the radiation wouldn't stop humans from going to Moon.
Which scientifical institutions have stated that the radiation is unsurvivable? Or, heaven forbid, are You just making that up yourself?
YDDES 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
have you ever saw an antenna-wow u cant expect people to be that dumb.
mychoicesgoodnbad 2 weeks ago
have you ever saw an antenna-wow u cant expect people to be that dumb.
mychoicesgoodnbad 2 weeks ago