And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.
It was Dr Frank N. Furter. A sweet transvestite from Transsexual Transylvania. HAHA! No really, I think there's aliens up there, down here, over there, and everywhere. We ain't alone. They have a thing for socks. Not pairs, just singles. (Jerksocks?) Which is why all my socks are the same color. I'm being a fucking asshole, but SO WHAT!!
Only one problem - none of the Apollo astronauts ever left Earth orbit, because of the intense cosmic radiation in deep space beyond the Earth's protective magnetic fields. The astronauts in the highest Shuttle flight reported severe retinal flashes from cosmic rays passing through the ship's hull, through their skulls, and hitting their optic nerves. This was only about 400 miles up, still well within the Earth's magnetic field. The Apollo astronauts would have all been DOA on splashdown.
I have an advanced degree in common sense, which you apparently lack. What's your background? "ApolloWasReal." LOL! You're obviously very heavily invested in the Apollo moon hoax. NASA employee, by any chance? I can tell by the hostile comments on your channel that you're a NASA shill, trying to keep the hoax alive. You're ticking off many people by posting stupid comments about Apollo. Here you go - try to explain these videos:
@Quazzga Well, I'm afraid your advanced degree in common sense is no match for actual knowledge in space physics or electrical engineering. I know you don't have a clue how NASA got to the moon, and I know you'd much rather pretend they faked it than to accept that the 400,000 people who worked on Apollo were so much smarter than you. But you won't be able to pretend forever; someday you have to just wake up and accept painful facts, such as you're not the smartest guy who ever lived.
Nearly all of those 400,000 people were aerospace contractors for NASA, who had no involvement in mission operations. Only a handful of trusted NASA employees, many of them former Apollo astronauts, were mission control staffers, so a coverup would have been relatively easy. I never claimed to be the smartest guy who ever lived - that's obviously your self-appointed title. I like how you didn't answer any of my questions, or address the videos I posted. You're just a troll.
@Quazzga So you really think NASA just sprinkled a little "compartmentalization" pixie dust over the Apollo program, and voila -- none of those 400,000 people saw or even suspected a thing, right? How convenient.
Try learning something about the program before you make such silly statements.
Did you even read my comment? Yes - the hardware was built to NASA's specifications by your 400,000 aerospace contractors, thus generating a lot of revenue for the aerospace industry and government insiders. But only a handful of trusted NASA employees were in mission control, and most likely fake telemetry was also used, so even of those handful, only a few people probably knew the real story - that the Apollo astronauts never left Earth orbit, and prerecorded video was used.
@Quazzga Yes, I read your comment. Believe me, I've heard it all before. As I said, YOU might not know how to go to the moon but these people did; they weren't stupid. Apollo wasn't secret. They had a good idea of how it all worked and how their own part fit in. If there had been a technical showstopper somewhere, they would have known. And if they knew we had a workable system, then why wouldn't NASA have used it?
Prerecorded comms, huh? Does that include current events and sports?
You've heard it all before, huh? So, in other words, it's your JOB to try to discredit anyone who points out that the Apollo moon landings were a Cold War hoax designed to trick and demoralize the Soviet Union into believing that our aerospace technology was more advanced than it was. NASA fully intended to send men to the moon, but intense cosmic radiation was a show-stopper. Rather than renege on JFK's promise and admit defeat, they decided to hoax the moon landings.
@Quazzga My job, huh? What's my hourly rate? Who's my supervisor? How come I haven't gotten a single paycheck from NASA or the CIA yet?
I'm utterly fascinated by those like you who refuse to accept the reality of the most thoroughly documented large engineering project in modern human history. I'm an engineer, I've studied Apollo, and I have a very good idea how it all worked. But the mysteries of the human mind, especially its capacity for self delusion, utterly baffle me.
Why are you asking me who your supervisor is? You're supposedly a strictly rational engineer, yet as my other comment stated, you're hanging out at a video about the Apollo astronauts detecting alien bases and alien music on the moon. Doesn't sound very engineer-like to me. The most self-deluded people are those who are heavily invested in some historical event which later turns out to be a hoax. You can try to show these people the truth, but they refuse to see it. 1st vid!
@Quazzga Well, since you seem certain that it's my "job" to discredit the moon hoax -- something that's a surprise to me -- I thought you might be able to tell me who my supervisor is, because *I* sure don't know. If you could tell me who he is, I could go ask why I haven't gotten a single paycheck yet.
Even engineers like to have fun sometimes. Slumming with UFO and hoax nuts on Youtube is one of life's guilty pleasures.
"Hoax nuts." Ah, yes - now the name-calling begins. True to form for you NASA shills. You can't refute the clear visual evidence of an Apollo 11 hoax shown in the first video I posted, so you are dancing all around it, and stepping up the personal insults. Since you seem to be brain-dead, here's that video again:
/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM
What is your explanation for the above video, NASA shill boy? Avoiding my question doesn't make it go away.
@Quazzga Well, if you actually had some evidence I would actually be willing to consider your claims. Unfortunately for you, what passes for 'evidence' for the moon 'hoax' is pretty laughable. Most can be shot down in a few minutes by anyone who remembers their high school physics.
And that's leaving out human nature, such as the fact that two can keep a secret if at least one is dead. Or that the USSR would have instantly blown the whistle on NASA - if Apollo actually had been a hoax.
You're the one who has shown no evidence - only your unsubstantiated claims. Apollo was fully funded through Apollo 20, yet stopped abruptly after Apollo 17, because the Soviet Union had developed a high-power radar system which would have detected the Apollo astronauts still in Earth orbit when they were supposed to be on their way to the moon. In the full-length video, Edgar Mitchell's son is heard saying, "Should we call the CIA to have him whacked?" referring to Mr. Sibrel.
@Quazzga Ask Congress why they pulled funding for the last three Apollo missions. It was hardly "abrupt", the writing had been on the wall for years.
Believe me, the Russians didn't need a "high power radar system" to detect an Apollo craft in earth orbit. Their unaided eyes would have been plenty.
Yeah, that was a great line from Mitchell's son. Too bad conspiracy kooks seem utterly devoid of a sense of humor; my fellow Apollogists were rolling on the floor after that one.
So, you're expert at rewriting history, too. Any interpretation of why Apollo was cancelled can be given in hindsight. The fact is that Apollo was fully funded through Apollo 20, yet was cancelled.
The Russians wouldn't have known where to look or when. They also wouldn't have known whether it was a military satellite. During daylight hours it wouldn't have been seen at all.
No, he was totally serious - they were both very angry at Mr. Sibrel, as can be seen in the video.
@Quazzga Bullshit. The Russians were listening to every word. So were several radio hams. The transmissions were on published radio frequencies, analog and unencrypted.
Yes, I would also have been very angry at "Mr." Sibrel. I'd be angry at anyone who stalks me for years, who gets into my house under false pretenses and then accuses me of lying about the biggest achievement in my life. I'd probably be even more pissed than the astronauts were.
@Quazzga Even if I could take you to the moon and show you the Apollo hardware, you'd still claim it was unsubstantiated. Either it had all been recently planted, or I'd implanted the memory of your trip on your brain as in the movie "Total Recall".
Don't insult me by claiming it's unsubstantiated just because I can't fit the entire history of the Apollo program into 500 characters.
I'm under the same 500-character limitation as you, yet I am proving my points, while you have proven nothing. You've only proven that you're a NASA shill in total denial, who refuses to see the truth when it is presented to you. Because you have no facts to back up your assertions, you resort to character defamation and name-calling. Those are classic Marxist, Saul Alinsky tactics - I'll bet you voted for Obama, too.
@Quazzga I pointed you to a site, clavius, that fully answers (and trashes) Sibrel's movie nonsense. You handwaved it away as "disinfo". Of course you did, "disinfo" is the hoax nuts' mantra, makes you sound cool. Then you can claim I've shown no evidence.
This stuff has been discredited countless times, I'm not about to repeat it for the hundredth time in little 500 char chunks. Go look at the damn website.
I DID look at the damn website, and it was garbage, just like your specious arguments. Like you, they merely set up straw man arguments which no one makes, then knock them down, like the Ian Fleming nonsense. But they don't address things like the first video I posted - an official NASA outtake video which inadvertently reveals their hoax.
@Quazzga You obviously didn't arrive at your current beliefs through facts and logic, so facts and logic aren't likely to sway you now. You're determined to believe whatever you want to believe, so have a good life. Just remember that nature doesn't give a damn what you believe or want; it operates according to its own laws. Those who understand them tend to do better than those who waste their lives banging their heads against the wall.
You haven't offered any facts or logical arguments, just opinions, character defamation, and name calling. I am very logical and fact-based, and I recognize a hoax when I see one. The Apollo moon landings were hoaxed - deal with it. As one of NASA's former biggest fans, this realization was a heavy blow to me, and I'm still very angry about being lied to and deceived. Nature's physical laws, which I respect, have nothing to do with NASA's lies and deceit.
@Quazzga I'm afraid you haven't offered any facts or logical arguments, just name calling and character assassination. It probably irks you that 400,000 other people were smart, talented and hard working enough to do something you don't have a clue about. But it's just childish to attack the accomplishments of others out of spite. The Apollo landings were completely real - deal with it.
You repeated what I just said about you. Congratulations, you can read and type. And then you're back to your original comment about the 400,000 aerospace contractors, who had no involvement in Apollo mission control. You've run out of lies to tell, eh? I'm not attacking their accomplishments - I admire their accomplishments. I'm attacking the lies and deceit of NASA's bosses, who deceived them, and us.
@Quazzga As I said, YOU might not have had a clue how Apollo worked but you weren't one of those 400,000 who did. Apparently unlike you, they actually had brains that could think, ask questions and understand how the various systems fit together. Just because YOU can't understand how the government could actually do something right for a change doesn't mean they didn't do it. Accidents do happen, you know.
Like I said, you've run out of specious arguments, and you are now just repeating yourself. You are a pathetic troll - you're not even good at being a troll. I also don't believe that you're an engineer - your lack of common sense, illogical thought patterns, and refusal to see the obvious would make you a very incompetent and dangerous engineer. But accidents do happen, and incompetents abound. BTW, your A.S. degree from Rolondo Bibbs Technical School doesn't count for much.
Here's more moon landings hoax evidence for you. Go to rense (DOT) com, then paste in the links below.
Photographic evidence of a studio lamp mounted on the Apollo 17 lunar rover. The author, much like you, is still in denial, and despite this clear photographic evidence of a hoax, says at the end that the Apollo moon landings happened, but were hoaxed because of "evil aliens on the moon," which is nonsense:
@Quazzga It's the same old hoax crap. His "studio lamp" is actually a map holder mounted on the LRV console. It can be seen for what it is in other pictures. Congratulations on his imagination.
By the way, you DO know that the French mockumentary "Dark Side of the Moon" that posited that Kubrick "directed" the Apollo landings was a joke, right? Maybe you didn't watch all the way through the end credits, so you got taken.
A tall, dark-colored map holder which faces outward, away from the astronaut driving the rover, is mounted on an adjustable pole, and has a rounded back, just like a studio lamp? Bullshit. I've looked at many other photos of the Apollo 17 LRV just now, and there is nothing on it which looks anything like the object pictured. Give me the link to those other pictures you mentioned.
I've never seen the "mockumentary" you mentioned, so you assume too much about me.
@Quazzga Obviously you haven't looked at very many other Apollo pictures. Nor are you very familiar with the LRV and its structures.
He says some pretty funny other things too, like a Hasselblad camera supposedly being unable to focus the background and foreground. He really ought to take a basic course on photography and learn how "depth of field" is increased by such things as stopping down the lens (as on a sunny day) and a short focal length lens (like those cameras had).
And you STILL haven't provided the links to those supposed LRV "map holder" photos that you mentioned! Most likely because there are no such photos! You also haven't come close to refuting that first video I posted of the small circle Earth. I grow tired of your evasiveness and your superiority complex, troll. This is obviously your job, but I've got better things to do. You've proven nothing except that you're a disingenuous, lying troll who specializes in personal attacks.
@Quazzga I'm not surprised you haven't seen "Dark Side of the Moon". Maybe if you saw it you would recognize where a lot of that Kubrick crap came from.
And what video might you be referring to??? Just another example of your lazy and illogical thought processes - I guess I'm supposed to read your mind. You've also still not given a link to those supposed photos of the LRV's "map holder" you mentioned, because they don't exist! You're a shameless shill and a liar.
@Quazzga Check out the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal for Apollo 16 at MET 149:00:26. The remote-controlled camera on the front of the LRV pans past the seats of the rover. On the right side of the console between the seats is the map holder where it was left during the stop.
I'm sorry if I embarrassed you by finding in two minutes what your friend never even bothered to look for. But that's your fault for uncritically accepting just what you wanted to hear.
@Quazzga Mission Elapsed Time in hours, minutes and seconds. It's given on every entry in the transcripts.
It's amazing what you can learn from the ALSJ. Such as the fact that many hoax proponents are extremely selective with their evidence, deliberately distorting it or taking it out of context, because they know they have no case otherwise.
3w's(DOT)hq(DOT)nasa(DOT)gov, and then: /alsj/a16/a16v.1490026.mpg
..and watched the short video you described. However, there is NOTHING on the rover in that video which looks anything like the tall, dark-colored object in rense(DOT)com, and then: /general94/Kubricked.pdf which I posted earlier. Apparently, you didn't think I would take the time to look at that video, and would just accept your lies as the truth. Nice try, but no dice.
@Quazzga I told you the map holder is on the right side of the console where it was left during the stop. Maps are usually picked up and consulted when people need them, you know.
I have to say, claiming that a map holder is a stage light does take some imagination. I always find such claims highly amusing.
You really should see "Dark Side of the Moon", you'll recognize your Kubrick-directed-Apollo claims from there. And yes the credits make it quite clear it was a JOKE.
@Quazzga Remember, the guy who claims he saw a "stage light" also claimed that a core tube could be a flagpole but no one could tell. Hoaxers are always so quick to pick some part of a picture out of context, assuming that no one will cross-check thousands of other Apollo pictures.
Tell me why you think it so strange that the astronauts might need and use a map while driving on the moon. Remember, no GPS nav systems in those days. Certainly not on the moon.
Dissemble all you want, but the tall, dark-colored, pole-mounted object at rense(DOT)com, then: \general94\Kubricked.pdf is not visible anywhere in the movie clip you provided. Its shape, size and dark color, and the fact that it's mounted high on an adjustable pole, has a rounded back like a studio lamp, and is facing AWAY from the astronauts, tells me that it's certainly not a map holder. A map holder would be much smaller and flatter, like a clipboard, and set much lower.
@Quazzga See also AS17-133-20342. Note the two adjustable map holders, one on each side of the central console PLUS what looks like a square utility bag mounted on the right side of the console. The pole is the mount for the low gain antenna. AS17-141-21530 is a closeup of the charts in the holder, a little out of focus. Note the 3-ring punch holes in the charts. This is what your buddy thought was a "studio light". Bah.
How many more do you need to show your friend is full of it?
Okay, I hate to admit it, but you're right - the square map holder with the horizontal metal bar at the bottom and the two clip-holders is PART of what's being shown in Twietmeyer's photo. AS17-141-2153 is the only photo that convinced me of this. And the pole is from the high-gain antenna forward of the map holder. However, there's still something with a rounded back which partially obscures the map holder. 3 objects - you can see the shadow on the clipholder.
@Quazzga Thanks, I figured it out anyway. But I still can't figure out what you mean by "something with a rounded back which partly obscures the map holder. 3 objects"
There are three objects overlapping each other, one behind the other, with the "rounded back object" nearest to the camera (the object with Twietmeyer's added red circle), then behind it, the square clipboard with the horizontal metal bar at its bottom and upward-curving clipholder, and then behind it, the pole for the high-gain antenna. So, a total of 3 overlapping objects. The nearest "rounded back object" (with the red circle) casts a shadow on the clipholder.
@Quazzga Those large objects are simply charts that have been stuck haphazardly into the clip holder. The one in front is sitting at an angle with its corner down, the one behind it is more square. There are two curved clips in the holder, the other one is to the left of the image. You can see these charts in other pictures, though they seem to be consulted a lot so they move around.
So what's the big deal about these charts? Everything is consistent with the LRV diagrams.
Okay - you're probably right. I can barely make out what looks like some darkened topographical features on the map, probably indicating craters. The map does appear to be folded under the right-side clipholder, thus making its lower right corner bulge up.
So, Twietmeyer is full of shit - I shouldn't have used his photos as examples. But you still can't explain the "small Earth" video, which is an obvious hoax attempt by the Apollo 11 astronauts in Earth orbit.
@Quazzga Thank you for your gracious comments; you seem very unusual among hoax believers in being amenable to rational arguments.
What *about* the small earth video? I see exactly what I'd expect to see from a spacecraft in cislunar space. We see a full hemisphere with correct weather; the earth doesn't look anything like it would from LEO through a cutout. I can steer you to any number of analyses that back this up so I don't have to duplicate them here.
I'm an honorable man - when I'm wrong about something, I admit it. Ted Twietmeyer's bogus interpretations of those NASA photos had me fooled. However the "small Earth" video here: /watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM
...is an official NASA outtake video, and is the "smoking gun" for evidence of a moon landing hoax, as far as I'm concerned. I've watched it carefully many times, and it is very clear that they are hoaxing a long-distance shot of Earth while in low-Earth orbit.
I doubt that this URL will post here on YouTube, but here's a link to a photo of the Apollo 11 command module after splashdown. Note the circular window on the command module's hatch. This is probably the window they used to hoax the long-distance shot of Earth (D=DOT, no spaces, also note the underscore):
i D dailymail D com D uk/i/pix/2009/07/17/article-1200308-05BC23A2000005DC-514 UNDERSCORE 634x468.jpg
Note that the guy reflected in the visor is NOT wearing a backpack or helmet, is NOT facing towards the astronaut in the photo, and is NOT aiming a handheld camera. It's the high-res version of AS17-141-21608. The video's creator says he's a NASA stagehand, but I think it's the other astronaut, just taking a break from wearing the heavy backpack and helmet while he's off-camera. The white on his head is the white underlayer.
@Quazzga Oh god, not this one again. This was debunked a year ago. A closer look at the visor shows it's badly smudged from lunar dust; the same marks appear in many other pictures of Cernan and match up perfectly with his fingers while saluting the flag. Simple geometry shows that he should NOT be facing the camera since he's off in the corner of a wide-angle shot. And a look at his shadow shows his backpack is indeed present. Bzzzzzt. But thanks for playing (again).
Okay, I do see what looks like a backpack in his shadow, and there do appear to be some smudges on the helmet visor right where the reflection is. It sure doesn't look like a wide-angle shot to me. But I'll admit that this photo is not conclusive evidence of a hoax.
You once again avoided addressing the "small Earth" video. You said it looks like Earth from cislunar orbit, but it clearly does not. The clouds are GIGANTIC, and stretch across the entire planet.
@Quazzga The standard lunar surface Hasselblad used 60 mm lenses on 70mm film with a 60mm square active area. The fiducials are 10mm apart. The usual rule of thumb is that a "standard" lens has a focal length equal to the image diagonal, e.g., for 24x36mm (35mm film) the diagonal is 43mm, reasonably close to the 50mm that's used. For 60mm square, the standard would be 85mm, so 60 is moderate wide angle. He's also in the corner, which gives the maximum angle from center.
A good 5-part video - part 3 is about the many Apollo lunar photographic anomalies, including astronauts who are well-lit but in deep shadow, identical "lunar" backgrounds on different days and different locations, and photographic cross-hairs which are behind the items being photographed, when they should always be in front of them. Note that the DESIGNER of the Hasselblad lunar camera can't explain the well-lit astronaut in deep shadow.
@Quazzga What about the video? Zoom in on the earth and you see continents. The cloud patterns match the weather satellite images for the day, adjusted for the greater altitude and non-equatorial viewpoint. I don't know what you mean by "gigantic" clouds, but at any given time the earth has an awful lot of clouds.
The Apollo images CERTAINLY don't match cutting a circle and holding it over images of the earth from LEO. That's just utterly laughable, a typical Sibrel brain fart.
That's not how they did it - I misspoke. The above film explains how they positioned the camera far back from the circular hatch window, covered up all the other windows, then turned off all cabin lights so that the hatch window was completely filled with the large Earth outside, appearing as a distant Earth floating in dark space. How do you explain the irregularly-shaped Earth shown from 4:46 to 5:54?
@Quazzga They specifically refer to window 1, which is square. None of the windows are circular.
BTW, you're still ignoring the fact that the view of the earth is consistent with their reported position and NOT with a circular cutout on the earth from LEO.
That has to be one of Sibrel's most idiotic claims to date. The guy is just contemptible.
Also, how do you explain an astronaut's arm coming in front of the "distant Earth floating in black space" from 6:19 to 7:45, when Armstrong said that the camera was pressed right up against the only window which had a view of Earth. How do you explain what happens from 7:45 to 8:33, when they disassemble their trickery, and the intense brightness from the large Earth outside floods in through that all windows after they uncover them?
@Quazzga Between 6:19 and 7:45, aside from a few cuts apparently put in by Sibrel, I see the earth moving past the window edge - not an arm. Obviously the camera lens is not in actual contact with the window, it's just very close and whoever is holding the camera is trying to keep it on the earth while watching a clumsy separate monitor. Remember that the Apollo stack was in a passive thermal roll at 3 rev/hr that caused the earth to move slowly from one window to the next.
@Quazzga Correction: The earlier test TV broadcast was made while the stack was in passive thermal roll, but it is stopped at 33:48, before the segment with the supposed arm. It is obvious that the camera is not up against the window, but is being held or allowed to float near it and it drifted off to the edge of the square window, specifically window #1, the small window next to the left seat. Those CM windows are pretty small; have you ever seen them?
@Quazzga As for 7:45, that's absolutely trivial. They moved the camera back from the window, along its line of sight to the earth, toward the middle or right seat while still looking generally at the earth through tiny window #1. Because the camera is stopped way down to see the very bright earth, only the inside fluorescent light appears with it. Then the iris is opened and we see the CM interior. Now the light and the earth both overexpose the camera. What's the big deal?
@Quazzga Every photographer knows that when you shoot into an overexposed light source, it will bloom in the image. That was especially true for old TV cameras like these. Here it happens to both the inside light and the earth, though because the camera had been backed away from window #1 the earth already filled much of that small window. It should also be obvious that the crew often blocks the view of the earth since the camera is looking across most of the crowded cockpit.
@Quazzga Oh, btw, just for completeness the map holder apparently has a rectangular plate against which the two curled clips at the bottom press. I didn't mention it earlier because it's apparently hidden by the larger charts, but it shows up in other pictures.
Judging from recent movies like Apollo 13 and especially the IMAX film Magnificent Desolation, Hollywood still can't fake the moon well enough to fool space nuts like me. The Apollo pictures and videos are genuine.
@Quazzga Wow, so we're making progress. I would have thought that by now Twietmeyer's credibility is so shot that you'd just drop the whole thing. But if you're still not convinced the horse is entirely dead yet, I'll gladly keep on flogging it. In what picture are you seeing your "three objects" casting shadows? In 20637, all I see is the map holder mounted on the right hand support with several charts stuffed into it at various angles, with some charts partly shading others.
@Quazzga Here's another view of the maps in the holder: AS17-136-20760. In front is a sample collection bag and a core tube. And yet another: A17-146-22296. It even shows in a training shot on earth: ap17-72-H-1227. These objects were moved a lot so they wouldn't appear the same in all photos. Still, either your friend is very lazy and missed these other pictures, or he saw but didn't mention them because they undermined his claim, which is dishonest. You decide.
@Quazzga Let's trash some more of Twietmeyer's claims while we're at it. In fig 4 he's mystified as to why the ladder doesn't go all the way to the ground. Maybe the fact that they were ON THE MOON in reduced gravity? No, too obvious I suppose. (BTW, the ladder was shortened in case the legs had to telescope to absorb landing shock.) Fig 5 is the old, trashed "there's no crater" claim. Fig 3 shows he doesn't know photography AT ALL. Certainly not depth of field. And Fig 7 shows the mapholder!
YouTube censored my last comment, so I'll try again. Dissemble all you want, but the tall, dark-colored, pole-mounted object seen in my document is not visible anywhere in your movie. Also, its shape, size, its rounded back like a studio lamp, the fact that it's mounted high on an adjustable pole, and is facing AWAY from the astronauts, tells me that it's certainly not a map holder. A map holder would be much smaller and flatter, like a clipboard, and mounted much lower.
@Quazzga A "smoking gun", huh? Well, at least I give him credit for originality; this is one of the very few hoax claims I haven't already seen a dozen times. But his research is still pretty sloppy. That's a core sampling tube, not a flag pole. Apollo 16 landed in the lunar highlands, not the mare like the other 5 missions, where the geology is quite different. And the core tubes were substantially redesigned after earlier missions when they had a lot of trouble getting them in.
He says quite clearly in the beginning of his article that "It MAY be a flagpole, but cannot be determined by this photo." His point is, how did they drive the core sampling tube into the ground when no footprints are near it? And why does the ground nearest the sampler tube look as if it has been brushed clean of footprints?
Are you going to provide the links to those so-called LRV "map holder" photos you mentioned or not?
@Quazzga Okay, either he's being dishonest or he's just plain lazy because I could tell from 2 minutes of looking at other pictures exactly what it is. That was far less time than I'm sure it took him to write that nonsense. Of course, I suppose it's not nearly as much fun to say that NASA was right after all.
@Quazzga You know, all you have to do is to read the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal and you can find out exactly what they were doing when they took each of those so-called smoking gun pictures. The ground was soft enough in that spot for Charlie Duke to easily push it part way in with the handle on top. He took the picture before he pounded it the rest of the way You can even see him on video. Is that such a big deal?
@Quazzga Those video clips are by the shameless Bart Sibrel, the astronaut stalker who finally got what was coming to him when he harassed Buzz Aldrin once too often. Only utter idiots take Sibrel seriously, but in case you're one of them, check out 3w clavius org.
ALL of the Apollo astronauts, not just Aldrin, refused to swear on the Bible that they walked on the moon, and most of them acted downright psychotic, like criminals who had been caught. That disinfo website you supplied is just proof of how desperate NASA and its shills are to continue the moon hoax. You didn't address the first video, which shows the Apollo 11 astronauts faking a long-distance shot of Earth with a cardboard cutout, when they were clearly in low Earth orbit.
@Quazzga Wow, you're not even up on your hoax mythology! Several Apollo astronauts DID swear on Sibrel's bible: Bean, Cernan and Mitchell, at least. For all the good it did them. It was just like an old fashioned witchcraft trial - if they denied being witches they were burned for perjury, and if they admitted being witches they were burned for witchcraft.
Yes, because the Bible means nothing to them - like Aldrin and many other Apollo astronauts, they're Freemasons, not Christians. If you'll notice, one of them (Cernan, I think), when asked to swear on the Bible, said, "I don't give a damn about any of that shit" ( meaning the Bible), then raised his hand to "swear" on it.
@Quazzga I see. First you make a blatantly false statement - that all of the Apollo astronauts refused to swear on Sibrel's bible. Then when I point out that you're wrong, you brush it off and say it didn't matter even though they did. You couldn't have done a better job of proving my point that it was a no-win situation.
And what's this weird obsession that all you conspiracy kooks seem to have with Freemasons?
I had forgotten that a few of the Apollo astronauts did perjure themselves before God, and off-handedly "swore" on the Bible while cursing, like Eugene Cernan did. Then I remembered that many of the astronauts are Freemasons, for whom the Bible means nothing. Buzz Aldrin is a 33rd degree Freemason. Freemasons are great at keeping secrets, which is probably why they were selected for the Apollo missions.
@Quazzga Oh, but I *DID* address your first video -- that was one of Sibrel's looniest claims ever. But just for grins and giggles, to say nothing of beating a dead horse, I can point you to a comparison of the Apollo 11 closeups of earth with the weather satellite photos for the same day. They're a perfect match.
Besides, do you have any idea what the earth looks like from low orbit vs cislunar space? I didn't think so.
"Looniest claims ever." It's an official NASA outtake video that NASA mistakenly released to Mr. Sibrel upon his request for all Apollo footage, you shameless shill. The Apollo 11 astronauts are clearly shown placing a piece of cardboard with a small circular cutout into the command module's window to make it appear that the huge Earth visible outside was a small circle viewed from a great distance. The clouds in the small circle were GIGANTIC in relation to Earth's diameter.
@Quazzga Oh give me a break, would you? That footage has been public since day one even if the TV networks didn't bother running it live. No, the astronauts are not clearly seen placing a piece of cardboard with a hole on the window. And their closeup of the earth shows the whole hemisphere with the correct weather.
Sibrel's delusions must be contagious or something.
Actually, I doubt Sibrel is actually deluded. It's just his job, selling his books and DVDs to gullible people like you.
Blanket denial of facts, followed by more character defamation. No, that footage was never "public" prior to Mr. Sibrel releasing it. Yes, the astronauts are seen blocking out their window so that only a small circular section of Earth remains. The clouds stretch from pole to pole, which is impossible, due to the Coriolis force and strong atmospheric convection at the equator. Weather systems do not cross the equator, dimwit. That must have been one hell of a cold front, eh?
I also think it's highly ironic and telling that you portray yourself as a rational scientist / engineer type, yet you are hanging out at a video which is about the Apollo astronauts detecting alien bases on the moon. You obviously have no problem with that nonsense, because you haven't attacked anyone else here, yet you singled out my comment among 415 comments as the one to attack, because I threatened the official moon landings hoax, and it's your job to defend that hoax.
@Quazzga Actually, this video is about the supposed "music" heard during Apollo 10. Sure, a few UFO loonies like to paint that as some sort of evidence for space aliens, but I'm familiar with Apollo communications and so I know the most probable explanation for the "music".
But when somebody shows up having bought Bart Sibrel's hoax garbage hook, line and sinker I can't resist. I admit it, it's a weakness. It's like watching a horrible train wreck and being unable to look away.
If your purpose here was to discredit this "alien music" video, then you've failed miserably, because you've only been attacking me, and the comment I made about the Apollo moon landings being hoaxed. And, you STILL haven't addressed the first video I posted! Can't think of any good lies, eh? That video speaks for itself, and everyone here should watch it.
@Quazzga Okay, fine. Then everyone should study enough electronics to understand the Apollo avionics, get some experience in radio, and then study the VHF ranging system and decide for themselves where the "music" was coming from. Given that they were talking over the same radios that were carrying a series of automatically chosen tones for measuring distance, that seems a far more likely cause than unknown space aliens, don't you think? Then again, I don't see a conspiracy under every bed.
I don't dispute that the "alien music on the moon" stuff is nonsense - I already said that. So, all you're doing now is setting up straw man arguments which I never made, and knocking them down. You think you're pretty clever, but you're not.
Am I correct in assuming that in the opening dialogue, "Two minutes to L.O.S." LOS means "Loss of signal" (from the craft as it traverses the far side) Can someone tell me if I'm right please? Thanks in advance.
@SteveGad YES. LOS is Loss Of Signal. Or, we could be creative and use military use 'LINE OF SIGHT'. However, In this particular case, "Loss of Signal" is my final answer.
@SteveGad Yes, LOS meant Loss of Signal. This particular LOS occurred just as Apollo 10 reached the moon. It preceded LOI, lunar orbit insertion, the firing of the big SPS engine on the rear of the CSM to decelerate Apollo 10 into lunar orbit. LOI occurred on the far side of the moon out of contact with earth. That's why Charlie Duke (Capcom) wishes them "godspeed" and Stafford (the commander) says they'll see them on the other side (i.e., at AOS) in orbit.
They obviously heard something. The source is open for debate. But they obviously heard something that was foreign to them and not coming from either of the spacecraft.
I would be interested in knowing if the other Apollo missions experienced similar sounds on the dark side.
I find it really funny that a crowd of armatures seem to believe that the moon landings were faked, but yet all the worlds scientist and people with functioning brain cells haven't questioned it. Doesn't the fact that all three leading space nations, the USA, russia and china have taken recent photos of the LMs left on the moon prove that they actually have landed on the moon? NASA even offered to show the 'lead conspiracy theorist' the left behind decent stages through powerful telescopes, but
Of course they had a ready explanation, they're technicians who've run into this problem before. But the main issue I have is the fact that people seem to assume they heard sounds from outside the craft, which is impossible. I try not to "twist things" in my video rebuttal but present things I've found by working with a/v equipment professionally and by consulting an aerospace engineering friend. Try watching both our vids fully if you want to form a better opinion about this subject.
Is it possible to find out what is the explanation for making that recording tape not for public? If there's nothing to hide then why? ( audio recordings from lunar's far side)
@Qmolpoland Its not even possible to hear a sound comming from outside the vehicle cause there is no sound in space ! I think it must have been a sound from within the craft itself .
@Qmolpoland It's very simple, actually: astronaut privacy. The Apollo voice system worked just like that in an airplane cockpit. You transmit to the ground only when you push a button or enable VOX, but your headsets operate continuously as an intercom so you can talk to each other with your helmets on. The tape recorded this intercom, so with it running they had no privacy at all. As I understand it the astronauts eventually agreed to let these recordings be made public.
@ApolloWasReal Yeah, but author of this video says that tapes were highly censored which means we hear what gov wants us to know or maybe I'm wrong. Thank for taking time to reply anyway. Cheers!
I make these videos because of freedom of speech (and argument) and my own personal enjoyment (and hopefully enjoyment for others). I find Luna's videos intriguing but false and I just feel like countering them. I greatly appreciate Luna letting me post here. As far as professionalism goes, Luna's guilty of acting like he knows all also. Apologies if my speaking style and snarky tone was annoying to you. If you don't agree with my chosen style, why don't you stop watching my vids? ;)
@thatcakeisalie Interestingly he does that right after he states that "We have to find out about that...nobody will believe us." and then hes states "Yes...VHF-A"
It's a weird twist goin from "nobody will believe us" to "VHF-A". It's obviously an assumption he made.
And yes, it was mentioned in the debriefing sessions as well, where the technicians had "a ready explanation" for it, which abviously was VHF-A.
@thatcakeisalie ...Again no investigation, just assumptions or "ready explenations" are all we have...it might have been swamp gas for all we know.
I just love how you "debunkers" are always painstaikingly sure about everything... never ready to leave some room for questioning and exploration.
Serisouly, we already have had former astronauts come forth and state that YES they have experienced UFO encounters. Austronaut Edgar Mitchell even stated that YES, NASA has had encounters with E.T.s
@thatcakeisalie Could they have been wrong? Could the UFOS have been a natural phenomenon that we don't know about? Could it have been aliens? Well, we don't know, cause there's no investigation, cause we're way too sure about our view of the world and we dont wanna change that. And maybe that's the biggest problem we have in our contemporary, oh so enlightend world - that we are too afraid to face the fact that we DON'T KNOW SHIT about most things in this universe.
@RhythmShapes One thing I will have to disagree strongly about is the notion that we are too afraid to face what may be out there. To say this would be to discredit all the decades of passion and hard work astronauts, astronomers and scientists put into studying the universe. They are not afraid, they seek answers by pushing further and further into space exploration and communication. Also, just because astronauts encounters a UFO, it doesn't mean aliens. U=Unidentified (check out Neil Tyson)
@thatcakeisalie I respect all the hard work thats been done in the name of science, what I don't appreciate is the vast suppression of information that has taken place (at least in my opinion,or what from what I have gathered) It's just in the last couple years (especially in the last 2) that the mainstream media started presenting information that has been out there all along -people have been talking about this kind of stuff for a very long time,but it was always discredited, laughed at etc.
@thatcakeisalie And as you say: It's not nice descrediting the work of people... so why is the work of astronauts and other respectable people who actually come forth and talk about "UFO's" and "suppression of information" discredited?? Seems like the line between "respectable" and " pure lunatic" is really thin. To me, it seems that we appreciate peoples "scientific work" only to a certain degree. As soon as "UFO" or anything of the like is mentioned your credibility goes down the drain.
@thatcakeisalie I'm very well aware that "U" means "Unidentified". There has been a considerable amount of cases were a UFO has actually turned out to be a UFO - have there been any sophisticated investigations to find out what it actually was? ...Well, do your reasearch sir, you tell me.
And yes, UFO doesn't necessarily mean "alien", I think I mentioned that myself before. It could be natural phenomena that we don't understand yet, or a new source of energy etc.
@thatcakeisalie Yes I know of Neil Tyson, very repsectable person and scholar, might not necessarily agree with everything he says, but still very interesting and I like his work - but when it comes to this topic he talks like somenone who has never actually bothered to do any kind of sophisticated research into the matter.
@thatcakeisalie I agree with Tyson whe nhe says "UFO's... if you don't know what it is, than that's when your conversation should stop", that's right - but at the same time I would say that, that's when the investigation should start, which has not really taken place in the mainstream academics & media, and I assure you that there is a lot of data.
@thatcakeisalie You might want to check out the website "redicecreations" as well, quite a range of info and interviews on there. Maybe you wanna reevaluate what you know. Maybe it's gonna strengthen the beliefs you already have, maybe quite the opposite. You'll only find out if you put a considerable amount of effort into it, cause let's not kid ourselves, there's a lot of BS out there. But that's no reason to discredit the whole topic.
In regards to the UFO's seen by astronauts, I agree that it would be great to investigate further into them. However, UFO's are seen all the time during space travel. Ice chunks, debris, etc.
I agree there is a lot of BS out there, thank you for being rational.
I will check out those site for sure, thank you for the links.
@thatcakeisalie Maybe it's just me, and I'm all wrong, and I will very well accept it if it turns out that I am, but that hasn't happend to date. I try to re-evaluate everything I know ,everyday - and I'll continue doing that.
Thank you for at least being understanding. I fully agree with you that rational discussion with presented facts is a much better method of debate than sensationalism. In regards to my video, I made it mostly for entertainment purposes for myself and others as well as to counter the methods used by Luna. Also, if my videos or style has offended you in any way, I do apologize. I'm just a video editor merely putting out his opinion against a video with some extraordinary claims.
And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.
flotsam417 5 days ago
Sounds to me like "you wont believe this THING"
MrTaylor8799 1 week ago
To me, it sounds more "HANK" than "FRANK".... :/
TheGreatMalefic 2 weeks ago
Hey LC....Whata' think it was ? Solar wind, cosmic rays ?
I wonder if any of the other mission had the same phenomenon?
Could've been Alpha Centauri's version of "I Love Lucy".
Tweekerhead 1 month ago
I think it was FRANK ZAPPA and CAPTAIN BEEFHEART....
moonboy 3 months ago
It was Dr Frank N. Furter. A sweet transvestite from Transsexual Transylvania. HAHA! No really, I think there's aliens up there, down here, over there, and everywhere. We ain't alone. They have a thing for socks. Not pairs, just singles. (Jerksocks?) Which is why all my socks are the same color. I'm being a fucking asshole, but SO WHAT!!
TheCrimsonification 3 months ago
I have looked for these transcripts and cannot find them. Is there a link to where you got them?
SibyleCO1979 4 months ago
@SibyleCO1979
Nevermind! I am having a Blonde moment.
SibyleCO1979 4 months ago
@SibyleCO1979 Try the Apollo Flight Journal. It doesn't have every mission yet, but it does have Apollo 10.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
it sounded more like he said, 'you wouldn't believe this THING' not 'you wouldn't believe this, FRANK.' at least that's what i heard.
legitenoughtoquit 4 months ago
Only one problem - none of the Apollo astronauts ever left Earth orbit, because of the intense cosmic radiation in deep space beyond the Earth's protective magnetic fields. The astronauts in the highest Shuttle flight reported severe retinal flashes from cosmic rays passing through the ship's hull, through their skulls, and hitting their optic nerves. This was only about 400 miles up, still well within the Earth's magnetic field. The Apollo astronauts would have all been DOA on splashdown.
Quazzga 4 months ago
@Quazzga And what is your professional background in space physics?
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I have an advanced degree in common sense, which you apparently lack. What's your background? "ApolloWasReal." LOL! You're obviously very heavily invested in the Apollo moon hoax. NASA employee, by any chance? I can tell by the hostile comments on your channel that you're a NASA shill, trying to keep the hoax alive. You're ticking off many people by posting stupid comments about Apollo. Here you go - try to explain these videos:
/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM
/watch?v=9arbAsN6MCE
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Well, I'm afraid your advanced degree in common sense is no match for actual knowledge in space physics or electrical engineering. I know you don't have a clue how NASA got to the moon, and I know you'd much rather pretend they faked it than to accept that the 400,000 people who worked on Apollo were so much smarter than you. But you won't be able to pretend forever; someday you have to just wake up and accept painful facts, such as you're not the smartest guy who ever lived.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
Nearly all of those 400,000 people were aerospace contractors for NASA, who had no involvement in mission operations. Only a handful of trusted NASA employees, many of them former Apollo astronauts, were mission control staffers, so a coverup would have been relatively easy. I never claimed to be the smartest guy who ever lived - that's obviously your self-appointed title. I like how you didn't answer any of my questions, or address the videos I posted. You're just a troll.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga So you really think NASA just sprinkled a little "compartmentalization" pixie dust over the Apollo program, and voila -- none of those 400,000 people saw or even suspected a thing, right? How convenient.
Try learning something about the program before you make such silly statements.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
Did you even read my comment? Yes - the hardware was built to NASA's specifications by your 400,000 aerospace contractors, thus generating a lot of revenue for the aerospace industry and government insiders. But only a handful of trusted NASA employees were in mission control, and most likely fake telemetry was also used, so even of those handful, only a few people probably knew the real story - that the Apollo astronauts never left Earth orbit, and prerecorded video was used.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Yes, I read your comment. Believe me, I've heard it all before. As I said, YOU might not know how to go to the moon but these people did; they weren't stupid. Apollo wasn't secret. They had a good idea of how it all worked and how their own part fit in. If there had been a technical showstopper somewhere, they would have known. And if they knew we had a workable system, then why wouldn't NASA have used it?
Prerecorded comms, huh? Does that include current events and sports?
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
You've heard it all before, huh? So, in other words, it's your JOB to try to discredit anyone who points out that the Apollo moon landings were a Cold War hoax designed to trick and demoralize the Soviet Union into believing that our aerospace technology was more advanced than it was. NASA fully intended to send men to the moon, but intense cosmic radiation was a show-stopper. Rather than renege on JFK's promise and admit defeat, they decided to hoax the moon landings.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga My job, huh? What's my hourly rate? Who's my supervisor? How come I haven't gotten a single paycheck from NASA or the CIA yet?
I'm utterly fascinated by those like you who refuse to accept the reality of the most thoroughly documented large engineering project in modern human history. I'm an engineer, I've studied Apollo, and I have a very good idea how it all worked. But the mysteries of the human mind, especially its capacity for self delusion, utterly baffle me.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
Why are you asking me who your supervisor is? You're supposedly a strictly rational engineer, yet as my other comment stated, you're hanging out at a video about the Apollo astronauts detecting alien bases and alien music on the moon. Doesn't sound very engineer-like to me. The most self-deluded people are those who are heavily invested in some historical event which later turns out to be a hoax. You can try to show these people the truth, but they refuse to see it. 1st vid!
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Well, since you seem certain that it's my "job" to discredit the moon hoax -- something that's a surprise to me -- I thought you might be able to tell me who my supervisor is, because *I* sure don't know. If you could tell me who he is, I could go ask why I haven't gotten a single paycheck yet.
Even engineers like to have fun sometimes. Slumming with UFO and hoax nuts on Youtube is one of life's guilty pleasures.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
"Hoax nuts." Ah, yes - now the name-calling begins. True to form for you NASA shills. You can't refute the clear visual evidence of an Apollo 11 hoax shown in the first video I posted, so you are dancing all around it, and stepping up the personal insults. Since you seem to be brain-dead, here's that video again:
/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM
What is your explanation for the above video, NASA shill boy? Avoiding my question doesn't make it go away.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Well, if you actually had some evidence I would actually be willing to consider your claims. Unfortunately for you, what passes for 'evidence' for the moon 'hoax' is pretty laughable. Most can be shot down in a few minutes by anyone who remembers their high school physics.
And that's leaving out human nature, such as the fact that two can keep a secret if at least one is dead. Or that the USSR would have instantly blown the whistle on NASA - if Apollo actually had been a hoax.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
You're the one who has shown no evidence - only your unsubstantiated claims. Apollo was fully funded through Apollo 20, yet stopped abruptly after Apollo 17, because the Soviet Union had developed a high-power radar system which would have detected the Apollo astronauts still in Earth orbit when they were supposed to be on their way to the moon. In the full-length video, Edgar Mitchell's son is heard saying, "Should we call the CIA to have him whacked?" referring to Mr. Sibrel.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Ask Congress why they pulled funding for the last three Apollo missions. It was hardly "abrupt", the writing had been on the wall for years.
Believe me, the Russians didn't need a "high power radar system" to detect an Apollo craft in earth orbit. Their unaided eyes would have been plenty.
Yeah, that was a great line from Mitchell's son. Too bad conspiracy kooks seem utterly devoid of a sense of humor; my fellow Apollogists were rolling on the floor after that one.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
So, you're expert at rewriting history, too. Any interpretation of why Apollo was cancelled can be given in hindsight. The fact is that Apollo was fully funded through Apollo 20, yet was cancelled.
The Russians wouldn't have known where to look or when. They also wouldn't have known whether it was a military satellite. During daylight hours it wouldn't have been seen at all.
No, he was totally serious - they were both very angry at Mr. Sibrel, as can be seen in the video.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Bullshit. The Russians were listening to every word. So were several radio hams. The transmissions were on published radio frequencies, analog and unencrypted.
Yes, I would also have been very angry at "Mr." Sibrel. I'd be angry at anyone who stalks me for years, who gets into my house under false pretenses and then accuses me of lying about the biggest achievement in my life. I'd probably be even more pissed than the astronauts were.
At least Mitchell's son had the right idea.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@Quazzga Even if I could take you to the moon and show you the Apollo hardware, you'd still claim it was unsubstantiated. Either it had all been recently planted, or I'd implanted the memory of your trip on your brain as in the movie "Total Recall".
Don't insult me by claiming it's unsubstantiated just because I can't fit the entire history of the Apollo program into 500 characters.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I'm under the same 500-character limitation as you, yet I am proving my points, while you have proven nothing. You've only proven that you're a NASA shill in total denial, who refuses to see the truth when it is presented to you. Because you have no facts to back up your assertions, you resort to character defamation and name-calling. Those are classic Marxist, Saul Alinsky tactics - I'll bet you voted for Obama, too.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga I pointed you to a site, clavius, that fully answers (and trashes) Sibrel's movie nonsense. You handwaved it away as "disinfo". Of course you did, "disinfo" is the hoax nuts' mantra, makes you sound cool. Then you can claim I've shown no evidence.
This stuff has been discredited countless times, I'm not about to repeat it for the hundredth time in little 500 char chunks. Go look at the damn website.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I DID look at the damn website, and it was garbage, just like your specious arguments. Like you, they merely set up straw man arguments which no one makes, then knock them down, like the Ian Fleming nonsense. But they don't address things like the first video I posted - an official NASA outtake video which inadvertently reveals their hoax.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga You obviously didn't arrive at your current beliefs through facts and logic, so facts and logic aren't likely to sway you now. You're determined to believe whatever you want to believe, so have a good life. Just remember that nature doesn't give a damn what you believe or want; it operates according to its own laws. Those who understand them tend to do better than those who waste their lives banging their heads against the wall.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
You haven't offered any facts or logical arguments, just opinions, character defamation, and name calling. I am very logical and fact-based, and I recognize a hoax when I see one. The Apollo moon landings were hoaxed - deal with it. As one of NASA's former biggest fans, this realization was a heavy blow to me, and I'm still very angry about being lied to and deceived. Nature's physical laws, which I respect, have nothing to do with NASA's lies and deceit.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga I'm afraid you haven't offered any facts or logical arguments, just name calling and character assassination. It probably irks you that 400,000 other people were smart, talented and hard working enough to do something you don't have a clue about. But it's just childish to attack the accomplishments of others out of spite. The Apollo landings were completely real - deal with it.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
You repeated what I just said about you. Congratulations, you can read and type. And then you're back to your original comment about the 400,000 aerospace contractors, who had no involvement in Apollo mission control. You've run out of lies to tell, eh? I'm not attacking their accomplishments - I admire their accomplishments. I'm attacking the lies and deceit of NASA's bosses, who deceived them, and us.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga As I said, YOU might not have had a clue how Apollo worked but you weren't one of those 400,000 who did. Apparently unlike you, they actually had brains that could think, ask questions and understand how the various systems fit together. Just because YOU can't understand how the government could actually do something right for a change doesn't mean they didn't do it. Accidents do happen, you know.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
Like I said, you've run out of specious arguments, and you are now just repeating yourself. You are a pathetic troll - you're not even good at being a troll. I also don't believe that you're an engineer - your lack of common sense, illogical thought patterns, and refusal to see the obvious would make you a very incompetent and dangerous engineer. But accidents do happen, and incompetents abound. BTW, your A.S. degree from Rolondo Bibbs Technical School doesn't count for much.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
Here's more moon landings hoax evidence for you. Go to rense (DOT) com, then paste in the links below.
Photographic evidence of a studio lamp mounted on the Apollo 17 lunar rover. The author, much like you, is still in denial, and despite this clear photographic evidence of a hoax, says at the end that the Apollo moon landings happened, but were hoaxed because of "evil aliens on the moon," which is nonsense:
/general94/Kubricked.pdf
Flagpole on moon:
/general80/smoking.htm
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga It's the same old hoax crap. His "studio lamp" is actually a map holder mounted on the LRV console. It can be seen for what it is in other pictures. Congratulations on his imagination.
By the way, you DO know that the French mockumentary "Dark Side of the Moon" that posited that Kubrick "directed" the Apollo landings was a joke, right? Maybe you didn't watch all the way through the end credits, so you got taken.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
A tall, dark-colored map holder which faces outward, away from the astronaut driving the rover, is mounted on an adjustable pole, and has a rounded back, just like a studio lamp? Bullshit. I've looked at many other photos of the Apollo 17 LRV just now, and there is nothing on it which looks anything like the object pictured. Give me the link to those other pictures you mentioned.
I've never seen the "mockumentary" you mentioned, so you assume too much about me.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Obviously you haven't looked at very many other Apollo pictures. Nor are you very familiar with the LRV and its structures.
He says some pretty funny other things too, like a Hasselblad camera supposedly being unable to focus the background and foreground. He really ought to take a basic course on photography and learn how "depth of field" is increased by such things as stopping down the lens (as on a sunny day) and a short focal length lens (like those cameras had).
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
And you STILL haven't provided the links to those supposed LRV "map holder" photos that you mentioned! Most likely because there are no such photos! You also haven't come close to refuting that first video I posted of the small circle Earth. I grow tired of your evasiveness and your superiority complex, troll. This is obviously your job, but I've got better things to do. You've proven nothing except that you're a disingenuous, lying troll who specializes in personal attacks.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga I'm not surprised you haven't seen "Dark Side of the Moon". Maybe if you saw it you would recognize where a lot of that Kubrick crap came from.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@Quazzga You can even see the map holder hanging alongside the LRV console as the camera pans by.
Geez, if I can debunk this crap in less than 2 minutes each, what does that say about the care of the people who find these "smoking guns"?
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
And what video might you be referring to??? Just another example of your lazy and illogical thought processes - I guess I'm supposed to read your mind. You've also still not given a link to those supposed photos of the LRV's "map holder" you mentioned, because they don't exist! You're a shameless shill and a liar.
You haven't debunked anything, troll. Get a life.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Check out the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal for Apollo 16 at MET 149:00:26. The remote-controlled camera on the front of the LRV pans past the seats of the rover. On the right side of the console between the seats is the map holder where it was left during the stop.
I'm sorry if I embarrassed you by finding in two minutes what your friend never even bothered to look for. But that's your fault for uncritically accepting just what you wanted to hear.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I found the website for the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, and its link for Apollo 16, but what is "MET 149:00:26"? Please clarify.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Mission Elapsed Time in hours, minutes and seconds. It's given on every entry in the transcripts.
It's amazing what you can learn from the ALSJ. Such as the fact that many hoax proponents are extremely selective with their evidence, deliberately distorting it or taking it out of context, because they know they have no case otherwise.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I went to MET 149:00:26 at this link:
3w's(DOT)hq(DOT)nasa(DOT)gov, and then: /alsj/a16/a16v.1490026.mpg
..and watched the short video you described. However, there is NOTHING on the rover in that video which looks anything like the tall, dark-colored object in rense(DOT)com, and then: /general94/Kubricked.pdf which I posted earlier. Apparently, you didn't think I would take the time to look at that video, and would just accept your lies as the truth. Nice try, but no dice.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga I told you the map holder is on the right side of the console where it was left during the stop. Maps are usually picked up and consulted when people need them, you know.
I have to say, claiming that a map holder is a stage light does take some imagination. I always find such claims highly amusing.
You really should see "Dark Side of the Moon", you'll recognize your Kubrick-directed-Apollo claims from there. And yes the credits make it quite clear it was a JOKE.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga Remember, the guy who claims he saw a "stage light" also claimed that a core tube could be a flagpole but no one could tell. Hoaxers are always so quick to pick some part of a picture out of context, assuming that no one will cross-check thousands of other Apollo pictures.
Tell me why you think it so strange that the astronauts might need and use a map while driving on the moon. Remember, no GPS nav systems in those days. Certainly not on the moon.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
Dissemble all you want, but the tall, dark-colored, pole-mounted object at rense(DOT)com, then: \general94\Kubricked.pdf is not visible anywhere in the movie clip you provided. Its shape, size and dark color, and the fact that it's mounted high on an adjustable pole, has a rounded back like a studio lamp, and is facing AWAY from the astronauts, tells me that it's certainly not a map holder. A map holder would be much smaller and flatter, like a clipboard, and set much lower.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga See also AS17-133-20342. Note the two adjustable map holders, one on each side of the central console PLUS what looks like a square utility bag mounted on the right side of the console. The pole is the mount for the low gain antenna. AS17-141-21530 is a closeup of the charts in the holder, a little out of focus. Note the 3-ring punch holes in the charts. This is what your buddy thought was a "studio light". Bah.
How many more do you need to show your friend is full of it?
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
Okay, I hate to admit it, but you're right - the square map holder with the horizontal metal bar at the bottom and the two clip-holders is PART of what's being shown in Twietmeyer's photo. AS17-141-2153 is the only photo that convinced me of this. And the pole is from the high-gain antenna forward of the map holder. However, there's still something with a rounded back which partially obscures the map holder. 3 objects - you can see the shadow on the clipholder.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga
Typo - meant to say AS17-141-21530.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga Thanks, I figured it out anyway. But I still can't figure out what you mean by "something with a rounded back which partly obscures the map holder. 3 objects"
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
There are three objects overlapping each other, one behind the other, with the "rounded back object" nearest to the camera (the object with Twietmeyer's added red circle), then behind it, the square clipboard with the horizontal metal bar at its bottom and upward-curving clipholder, and then behind it, the pole for the high-gain antenna. So, a total of 3 overlapping objects. The nearest "rounded back object" (with the red circle) casts a shadow on the clipholder.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga Those large objects are simply charts that have been stuck haphazardly into the clip holder. The one in front is sitting at an angle with its corner down, the one behind it is more square. There are two curved clips in the holder, the other one is to the left of the image. You can see these charts in other pictures, though they seem to be consulted a lot so they move around.
So what's the big deal about these charts? Everything is consistent with the LRV diagrams.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
Okay - you're probably right. I can barely make out what looks like some darkened topographical features on the map, probably indicating craters. The map does appear to be folded under the right-side clipholder, thus making its lower right corner bulge up.
So, Twietmeyer is full of shit - I shouldn't have used his photos as examples. But you still can't explain the "small Earth" video, which is an obvious hoax attempt by the Apollo 11 astronauts in Earth orbit.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga Thank you for your gracious comments; you seem very unusual among hoax believers in being amenable to rational arguments.
What *about* the small earth video? I see exactly what I'd expect to see from a spacecraft in cislunar space. We see a full hemisphere with correct weather; the earth doesn't look anything like it would from LEO through a cutout. I can steer you to any number of analyses that back this up so I don't have to duplicate them here.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
I'm an honorable man - when I'm wrong about something, I admit it. Ted Twietmeyer's bogus interpretations of those NASA photos had me fooled. However the "small Earth" video here: /watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM
...is an official NASA outtake video, and is the "smoking gun" for evidence of a moon landing hoax, as far as I'm concerned. I've watched it carefully many times, and it is very clear that they are hoaxing a long-distance shot of Earth while in low-Earth orbit.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
I doubt that this URL will post here on YouTube, but here's a link to a photo of the Apollo 11 command module after splashdown. Note the circular window on the command module's hatch. This is probably the window they used to hoax the long-distance shot of Earth (D=DOT, no spaces, also note the underscore):
i D dailymail D com D uk/i/pix/2009/07/17/article-1200308-05BC23A2000005DC-514 UNDERSCORE 634x468.jpg
Quazzga 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
/watch?v=xLanUT5ldrQ&feature=related
Note that the guy reflected in the visor is NOT wearing a backpack or helmet, is NOT facing towards the astronaut in the photo, and is NOT aiming a handheld camera. It's the high-res version of AS17-141-21608. The video's creator says he's a NASA stagehand, but I think it's the other astronaut, just taking a break from wearing the heavy backpack and helmet while he's off-camera. The white on his head is the white underlayer.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga Oh god, not this one again. This was debunked a year ago. A closer look at the visor shows it's badly smudged from lunar dust; the same marks appear in many other pictures of Cernan and match up perfectly with his fingers while saluting the flag. Simple geometry shows that he should NOT be facing the camera since he's off in the corner of a wide-angle shot. And a look at his shadow shows his backpack is indeed present. Bzzzzzt. But thanks for playing (again).
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
Okay, I do see what looks like a backpack in his shadow, and there do appear to be some smudges on the helmet visor right where the reflection is. It sure doesn't look like a wide-angle shot to me. But I'll admit that this photo is not conclusive evidence of a hoax.
You once again avoided addressing the "small Earth" video. You said it looks like Earth from cislunar orbit, but it clearly does not. The clouds are GIGANTIC, and stretch across the entire planet.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga The standard lunar surface Hasselblad used 60 mm lenses on 70mm film with a 60mm square active area. The fiducials are 10mm apart. The usual rule of thumb is that a "standard" lens has a focal length equal to the image diagonal, e.g., for 24x36mm (35mm film) the diagonal is 43mm, reasonably close to the 50mm that's used. For 60mm square, the standard would be 85mm, so 60 is moderate wide angle. He's also in the corner, which gives the maximum angle from center.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
/watch?v=PhLzMQKyYPQ
A good 5-part video - part 3 is about the many Apollo lunar photographic anomalies, including astronauts who are well-lit but in deep shadow, identical "lunar" backgrounds on different days and different locations, and photographic cross-hairs which are behind the items being photographed, when they should always be in front of them. Note that the DESIGNER of the Hasselblad lunar camera can't explain the well-lit astronaut in deep shadow.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga What about the video? Zoom in on the earth and you see continents. The cloud patterns match the weather satellite images for the day, adjusted for the greater altitude and non-equatorial viewpoint. I don't know what you mean by "gigantic" clouds, but at any given time the earth has an awful lot of clouds.
The Apollo images CERTAINLY don't match cutting a circle and holding it over images of the earth from LEO. That's just utterly laughable, a typical Sibrel brain fart.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM
That's not how they did it - I misspoke. The above film explains how they positioned the camera far back from the circular hatch window, covered up all the other windows, then turned off all cabin lights so that the hatch window was completely filled with the large Earth outside, appearing as a distant Earth floating in dark space. How do you explain the irregularly-shaped Earth shown from 4:46 to 5:54?
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga They specifically refer to window 1, which is square. None of the windows are circular.
BTW, you're still ignoring the fact that the view of the earth is consistent with their reported position and NOT with a circular cutout on the earth from LEO.
That has to be one of Sibrel's most idiotic claims to date. The guy is just contemptible.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM
Also, how do you explain an astronaut's arm coming in front of the "distant Earth floating in black space" from 6:19 to 7:45, when Armstrong said that the camera was pressed right up against the only window which had a view of Earth. How do you explain what happens from 7:45 to 8:33, when they disassemble their trickery, and the intense brightness from the large Earth outside floods in through that all windows after they uncover them?
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga
Typo last sentence - should have been "...floods in through all windows after they uncover them."
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga Between 6:19 and 7:45, aside from a few cuts apparently put in by Sibrel, I see the earth moving past the window edge - not an arm. Obviously the camera lens is not in actual contact with the window, it's just very close and whoever is holding the camera is trying to keep it on the earth while watching a clumsy separate monitor. Remember that the Apollo stack was in a passive thermal roll at 3 rev/hr that caused the earth to move slowly from one window to the next.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga Correction: The earlier test TV broadcast was made while the stack was in passive thermal roll, but it is stopped at 33:48, before the segment with the supposed arm. It is obvious that the camera is not up against the window, but is being held or allowed to float near it and it drifted off to the edge of the square window, specifically window #1, the small window next to the left seat. Those CM windows are pretty small; have you ever seen them?
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga As for 7:45, that's absolutely trivial. They moved the camera back from the window, along its line of sight to the earth, toward the middle or right seat while still looking generally at the earth through tiny window #1. Because the camera is stopped way down to see the very bright earth, only the inside fluorescent light appears with it. Then the iris is opened and we see the CM interior. Now the light and the earth both overexpose the camera. What's the big deal?
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga Every photographer knows that when you shoot into an overexposed light source, it will bloom in the image. That was especially true for old TV cameras like these. Here it happens to both the inside light and the earth, though because the camera had been backed away from window #1 the earth already filled much of that small window. It should also be obvious that the crew often blocks the view of the earth since the camera is looking across most of the crowded cockpit.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga Oh, btw, just for completeness the map holder apparently has a rectangular plate against which the two curled clips at the bottom press. I didn't mention it earlier because it's apparently hidden by the larger charts, but it shows up in other pictures.
Judging from recent movies like Apollo 13 and especially the IMAX film Magnificent Desolation, Hollywood still can't fake the moon well enough to fool space nuts like me. The Apollo pictures and videos are genuine.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga Wow, so we're making progress. I would have thought that by now Twietmeyer's credibility is so shot that you'd just drop the whole thing. But if you're still not convinced the horse is entirely dead yet, I'll gladly keep on flogging it. In what picture are you seeing your "three objects" casting shadows? In 20637, all I see is the map holder mounted on the right hand support with several charts stuffed into it at various angles, with some charts partly shading others.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga Here's another view of the maps in the holder: AS17-136-20760. In front is a sample collection bag and a core tube. And yet another: A17-146-22296. It even shows in a training shot on earth: ap17-72-H-1227. These objects were moved a lot so they wouldn't appear the same in all photos. Still, either your friend is very lazy and missed these other pictures, or he saw but didn't mention them because they undermined his claim, which is dishonest. You decide.
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@Quazzga Let's trash some more of Twietmeyer's claims while we're at it. In fig 4 he's mystified as to why the ladder doesn't go all the way to the ground. Maybe the fact that they were ON THE MOON in reduced gravity? No, too obvious I suppose. (BTW, the ladder was shortened in case the legs had to telescope to absorb landing shock.) Fig 5 is the old, trashed "there's no crater" claim. Fig 3 shows he doesn't know photography AT ALL. Certainly not depth of field. And Fig 7 shows the mapholder!
ApolloWasReal 1 month ago
@ApolloWasReal
YouTube censored my last comment, so I'll try again. Dissemble all you want, but the tall, dark-colored, pole-mounted object seen in my document is not visible anywhere in your movie. Also, its shape, size, its rounded back like a studio lamp, the fact that it's mounted high on an adjustable pole, and is facing AWAY from the astronauts, tells me that it's certainly not a map holder. A map holder would be much smaller and flatter, like a clipboard, and mounted much lower.
Quazzga 1 month ago
@Quazzga A "smoking gun", huh? Well, at least I give him credit for originality; this is one of the very few hoax claims I haven't already seen a dozen times. But his research is still pretty sloppy. That's a core sampling tube, not a flag pole. Apollo 16 landed in the lunar highlands, not the mare like the other 5 missions, where the geology is quite different. And the core tubes were substantially redesigned after earlier missions when they had a lot of trouble getting them in.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
He says quite clearly in the beginning of his article that "It MAY be a flagpole, but cannot be determined by this photo." His point is, how did they drive the core sampling tube into the ground when no footprints are near it? And why does the ground nearest the sampler tube look as if it has been brushed clean of footprints?
Are you going to provide the links to those so-called LRV "map holder" photos you mentioned or not?
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Okay, either he's being dishonest or he's just plain lazy because I could tell from 2 minutes of looking at other pictures exactly what it is. That was far less time than I'm sure it took him to write that nonsense. Of course, I suppose it's not nearly as much fun to say that NASA was right after all.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@Quazzga You know, all you have to do is to read the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal and you can find out exactly what they were doing when they took each of those so-called smoking gun pictures. The ground was soft enough in that spot for Charlie Duke to easily push it part way in with the handle on top. He took the picture before he pounded it the rest of the way You can even see him on video. Is that such a big deal?
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@Quazzga Those video clips are by the shameless Bart Sibrel, the astronaut stalker who finally got what was coming to him when he harassed Buzz Aldrin once too often. Only utter idiots take Sibrel seriously, but in case you're one of them, check out 3w clavius org.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
ALL of the Apollo astronauts, not just Aldrin, refused to swear on the Bible that they walked on the moon, and most of them acted downright psychotic, like criminals who had been caught. That disinfo website you supplied is just proof of how desperate NASA and its shills are to continue the moon hoax. You didn't address the first video, which shows the Apollo 11 astronauts faking a long-distance shot of Earth with a cardboard cutout, when they were clearly in low Earth orbit.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Wow, you're not even up on your hoax mythology! Several Apollo astronauts DID swear on Sibrel's bible: Bean, Cernan and Mitchell, at least. For all the good it did them. It was just like an old fashioned witchcraft trial - if they denied being witches they were burned for perjury, and if they admitted being witches they were burned for witchcraft.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
Yes, because the Bible means nothing to them - like Aldrin and many other Apollo astronauts, they're Freemasons, not Christians. If you'll notice, one of them (Cernan, I think), when asked to swear on the Bible, said, "I don't give a damn about any of that shit" ( meaning the Bible), then raised his hand to "swear" on it.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga I see. First you make a blatantly false statement - that all of the Apollo astronauts refused to swear on Sibrel's bible. Then when I point out that you're wrong, you brush it off and say it didn't matter even though they did. You couldn't have done a better job of proving my point that it was a no-win situation.
And what's this weird obsession that all you conspiracy kooks seem to have with Freemasons?
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I had forgotten that a few of the Apollo astronauts did perjure themselves before God, and off-handedly "swore" on the Bible while cursing, like Eugene Cernan did. Then I remembered that many of the astronauts are Freemasons, for whom the Bible means nothing. Buzz Aldrin is a 33rd degree Freemason. Freemasons are great at keeping secrets, which is probably why they were selected for the Apollo missions.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Oh, but I *DID* address your first video -- that was one of Sibrel's looniest claims ever. But just for grins and giggles, to say nothing of beating a dead horse, I can point you to a comparison of the Apollo 11 closeups of earth with the weather satellite photos for the same day. They're a perfect match.
Besides, do you have any idea what the earth looks like from low orbit vs cislunar space? I didn't think so.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
"Looniest claims ever." It's an official NASA outtake video that NASA mistakenly released to Mr. Sibrel upon his request for all Apollo footage, you shameless shill. The Apollo 11 astronauts are clearly shown placing a piece of cardboard with a small circular cutout into the command module's window to make it appear that the huge Earth visible outside was a small circle viewed from a great distance. The clouds in the small circle were GIGANTIC in relation to Earth's diameter.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Oh give me a break, would you? That footage has been public since day one even if the TV networks didn't bother running it live. No, the astronauts are not clearly seen placing a piece of cardboard with a hole on the window. And their closeup of the earth shows the whole hemisphere with the correct weather.
Sibrel's delusions must be contagious or something.
Actually, I doubt Sibrel is actually deluded. It's just his job, selling his books and DVDs to gullible people like you.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
Blanket denial of facts, followed by more character defamation. No, that footage was never "public" prior to Mr. Sibrel releasing it. Yes, the astronauts are seen blocking out their window so that only a small circular section of Earth remains. The clouds stretch from pole to pole, which is impossible, due to the Coriolis force and strong atmospheric convection at the equator. Weather systems do not cross the equator, dimwit. That must have been one hell of a cold front, eh?
Quazzga 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I also think it's highly ironic and telling that you portray yourself as a rational scientist / engineer type, yet you are hanging out at a video which is about the Apollo astronauts detecting alien bases on the moon. You obviously have no problem with that nonsense, because you haven't attacked anyone else here, yet you singled out my comment among 415 comments as the one to attack, because I threatened the official moon landings hoax, and it's your job to defend that hoax.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Actually, this video is about the supposed "music" heard during Apollo 10. Sure, a few UFO loonies like to paint that as some sort of evidence for space aliens, but I'm familiar with Apollo communications and so I know the most probable explanation for the "music".
But when somebody shows up having bought Bart Sibrel's hoax garbage hook, line and sinker I can't resist. I admit it, it's a weakness. It's like watching a horrible train wreck and being unable to look away.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
If your purpose here was to discredit this "alien music" video, then you've failed miserably, because you've only been attacking me, and the comment I made about the Apollo moon landings being hoaxed. And, you STILL haven't addressed the first video I posted! Can't think of any good lies, eh? That video speaks for itself, and everyone here should watch it.
Quazzga 2 months ago
@Quazzga Okay, fine. Then everyone should study enough electronics to understand the Apollo avionics, get some experience in radio, and then study the VHF ranging system and decide for themselves where the "music" was coming from. Given that they were talking over the same radios that were carrying a series of automatically chosen tones for measuring distance, that seems a far more likely cause than unknown space aliens, don't you think? Then again, I don't see a conspiracy under every bed.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
@ApolloWasReal
I don't dispute that the "alien music on the moon" stuff is nonsense - I already said that. So, all you're doing now is setting up straw man arguments which I never made, and knocking them down. You think you're pretty clever, but you're not.
Quazzga 2 months ago
Comment removed
LouSoufier 4 months ago
Anyone else hearing "Vagina" at 5:30 when it says SPLICE???
Swonkneo 4 months ago 2
04 07 41 36 CDR But why should I have down -
04 07 41 38 IMP Why should you have what?
04 07 41 40 CDR Jos_ down below me.
04 07 41 46 IA{P You've got him below you? Where is he?
04 07 41 50 CDR Maybe it's a reflection. You got h_m out there?
04 07 41 54 _ No.
04 07 41 56 CDR Something's weird. Go ahead. Okay.
04 07 42 ll CDR If you didn't have an ORB rate ball, you couldn't
seems like they were seeing something that they shouldnt have been also
wiggarigga 4 months ago
Am I correct in assuming that in the opening dialogue, "Two minutes to L.O.S." LOS means "Loss of signal" (from the craft as it traverses the far side) Can someone tell me if I'm right please? Thanks in advance.
SteveGad 5 months ago
@SteveGad YES. LOS is Loss Of Signal. Or, we could be creative and use military use 'LINE OF SIGHT'. However, In this particular case, "Loss of Signal" is my final answer.
StellarBlue1 5 months ago
@SteveGad Yes, LOS meant Loss of Signal. This particular LOS occurred just as Apollo 10 reached the moon. It preceded LOI, lunar orbit insertion, the firing of the big SPS engine on the rear of the CSM to decelerate Apollo 10 into lunar orbit. LOI occurred on the far side of the moon out of contact with earth. That's why Charlie Duke (Capcom) wishes them "godspeed" and Stafford (the commander) says they'll see them on the other side (i.e., at AOS) in orbit.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
thought he was saying vagina, lol
winterlonelywolf 5 months ago
They want to meet us we want to meet them lets just take over everything
hcsuarnefeiT 6 months ago
@Mozart1220. Mmmmh ... suggest you sue the brain surgeon who mistook your sense of humour for a tumour.
fremsley001 6 months ago
They obviously heard something. The source is open for debate. But they obviously heard something that was foreign to them and not coming from either of the spacecraft.
I would be interested in knowing if the other Apollo missions experienced similar sounds on the dark side.
Tharsis17 6 months ago
Speaking of music, what are all the songs you used for the video?
Skymouth 6 months ago
I don't hear "Frank." I hear "thing."
boardskins 7 months ago 5
I find it really funny that a crowd of armatures seem to believe that the moon landings were faked, but yet all the worlds scientist and people with functioning brain cells haven't questioned it. Doesn't the fact that all three leading space nations, the USA, russia and china have taken recent photos of the LMs left on the moon prove that they actually have landed on the moon? NASA even offered to show the 'lead conspiracy theorist' the left behind decent stages through powerful telescopes, but
kate4651 7 months ago 3
"Ratings have been disabled for this video. " Well there's a shock. Cernan's new best friend is clearly a sensitive kitteh, lolz.
MitkoChan 7 months ago
@4mberlea
Of course they had a ready explanation, they're technicians who've run into this problem before. But the main issue I have is the fact that people seem to assume they heard sounds from outside the craft, which is impossible. I try not to "twist things" in my video rebuttal but present things I've found by working with a/v equipment professionally and by consulting an aerospace engineering friend. Try watching both our vids fully if you want to form a better opinion about this subject.
thatcakeisalie 10 months ago
@thatcakeisalie Yes of course they could not hear anything from outside the craft.
Misstorys 9 months ago
Is it possible to find out what is the explanation for making that recording tape not for public? If there's nothing to hide then why? ( audio recordings from lunar's far side)
Qmolpoland 10 months ago
@Qmolpoland Its not even possible to hear a sound comming from outside the vehicle cause there is no sound in space ! I think it must have been a sound from within the craft itself .
Misstorys 9 months ago
@Qmolpoland It's very simple, actually: astronaut privacy. The Apollo voice system worked just like that in an airplane cockpit. You transmit to the ground only when you push a button or enable VOX, but your headsets operate continuously as an intercom so you can talk to each other with your helmets on. The tape recorded this intercom, so with it running they had no privacy at all. As I understand it the astronauts eventually agreed to let these recordings be made public.
ApolloWasReal 2 months ago
Comment removed
Qmolpoland 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ApolloWasReal Yeah, but author of this video says that tapes were highly censored which means we hear what gov wants us to know or maybe I'm wrong. Thank for taking time to reply anyway. Cheers!
Qmolpoland 2 months ago
@4mberlea
I make these videos because of freedom of speech (and argument) and my own personal enjoyment (and hopefully enjoyment for others). I find Luna's videos intriguing but false and I just feel like countering them. I greatly appreciate Luna letting me post here. As far as professionalism goes, Luna's guilty of acting like he knows all also. Apologies if my speaking style and snarky tone was annoying to you. If you don't agree with my chosen style, why don't you stop watching my vids? ;)
thatcakeisalie 10 months ago
i'll see you on the dark side of the moon
twig123 10 months ago
You won't believe this "thing" ... not Frank? How do you get Frank out of that?
spocksmusic 10 months ago
lÒl_i_sïgñêd_up_åt_full_tilt_pókér
_úsing_rëfèrrâl_cõdè:_YoU600_ãnd_gøt_á_600_Ðòllar_bõnûs
csauls6296646456 10 months ago
He's saying "You wouldn't believe this THING"...dumbass
wifi918 10 months ago 2
@ 5:00 it sounds like "you wouldn't believe this thing". Not frank.
cstalley 11 months ago 2
mk ultra astro nauts
pumapunku1 11 months ago
Instead of with john young I hear "VAGINA"
xtakeme2infinityx 11 months ago
he says 'you wouldn't believe this THING'. not Frank.
itstime4change13 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"You wouldn't believe what you have been missing.."
I can IMAGINE I have what I have been missing.
AlterEgoTrip 11 months ago
"outer space type music" hmmmmmm trance music? party on the moon thats nice ^_^
luwiz 11 months ago
Tldr
thomasdecohen 11 months ago
That sounds nothing like "Frank", it sounds more like "you wouldn't believe this thing"
k1ngross 11 months ago 2
"Vagina", not "...with John Young" !
BengtMartins 11 months ago 4
You think Nasa would let this getout on youtube? :D
MiroB96 11 months ago
why are that quindar tones in only radio conversation?
fumfulapenguin 1 year ago
Thank you !
bridaks 1 year ago
Sound needs air => no sound in space !
theaaabsdjtruboy 1 year ago
Comment removed
agent0sephiroth 1 year ago
@theaaabsdjtruboy no, sound needs material
guitarrELIT92 11 months ago
I tihnk he's saying, "you wouldn't believe this thing". not "you wouldn't believe this frank"
scottson2 1 year ago 3
The music was probably Pink Floyd (Dark Side of the Moon).
fremsley001 1 year ago 19
@fremsley001 they did do an impromptu jam while Apollo 11 landed....
Theris1011 11 months ago
@fremsley001 There is no Pink Floyd on this video, and Moon hoaxers are idiots.
Mozart1220 6 months ago
@fremsley001 is safe!
cosmococo 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
haha, why are that quindar tones in this audio?
sorry luna, you failed
and @thatcakeisalie already debunked this video.
fumfulapenguin 1 year ago
Comment removed
fumfulapenguin 1 year ago
Just debunked this video, check out my channel.
Interesting effort, LunaCognita, but sadly this can all be explained. It's just VHF interference and no NASA did not censor any "findings"
Just check out my video and see for yourself.
thatcakeisalie 1 year ago 13
@thatcakeisalie First of all: There is no mention in this video about Extra Terrestrials...that's an assumption YOU made.
Anyway, you serisouly think astronauts would confuse VHF-A for some kind of eerie music that seemed anything but familiar?
Collins even stating that "it would have scared the hell" out of him if he wasn't warned about it?
Yes, John Young mentions "VHF-A" in the transcripts.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie Interestingly he does that right after he states that "We have to find out about that...nobody will believe us." and then hes states "Yes...VHF-A"
It's a weird twist goin from "nobody will believe us" to "VHF-A". It's obviously an assumption he made.
And yes, it was mentioned in the debriefing sessions as well, where the technicians had "a ready explanation" for it, which abviously was VHF-A.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie ...Again no investigation, just assumptions or "ready explenations" are all we have...it might have been swamp gas for all we know.
I just love how you "debunkers" are always painstaikingly sure about everything... never ready to leave some room for questioning and exploration.
Serisouly, we already have had former astronauts come forth and state that YES they have experienced UFO encounters. Austronaut Edgar Mitchell even stated that YES, NASA has had encounters with E.T.s
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie Could they have been wrong? Could the UFOS have been a natural phenomenon that we don't know about? Could it have been aliens? Well, we don't know, cause there's no investigation, cause we're way too sure about our view of the world and we dont wanna change that. And maybe that's the biggest problem we have in our contemporary, oh so enlightend world - that we are too afraid to face the fact that we DON'T KNOW SHIT about most things in this universe.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@RhythmShapes One thing I will have to disagree strongly about is the notion that we are too afraid to face what may be out there. To say this would be to discredit all the decades of passion and hard work astronauts, astronomers and scientists put into studying the universe. They are not afraid, they seek answers by pushing further and further into space exploration and communication. Also, just because astronauts encounters a UFO, it doesn't mean aliens. U=Unidentified (check out Neil Tyson)
thatcakeisalie 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie I respect all the hard work thats been done in the name of science, what I don't appreciate is the vast suppression of information that has taken place (at least in my opinion,or what from what I have gathered) It's just in the last couple years (especially in the last 2) that the mainstream media started presenting information that has been out there all along -people have been talking about this kind of stuff for a very long time,but it was always discredited, laughed at etc.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie And as you say: It's not nice descrediting the work of people... so why is the work of astronauts and other respectable people who actually come forth and talk about "UFO's" and "suppression of information" discredited?? Seems like the line between "respectable" and " pure lunatic" is really thin. To me, it seems that we appreciate peoples "scientific work" only to a certain degree. As soon as "UFO" or anything of the like is mentioned your credibility goes down the drain.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie I'm very well aware that "U" means "Unidentified". There has been a considerable amount of cases were a UFO has actually turned out to be a UFO - have there been any sophisticated investigations to find out what it actually was? ...Well, do your reasearch sir, you tell me.
And yes, UFO doesn't necessarily mean "alien", I think I mentioned that myself before. It could be natural phenomena that we don't understand yet, or a new source of energy etc.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie Yes I know of Neil Tyson, very repsectable person and scholar, might not necessarily agree with everything he says, but still very interesting and I like his work - but when it comes to this topic he talks like somenone who has never actually bothered to do any kind of sophisticated research into the matter.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie I agree with Tyson whe nhe says "UFO's... if you don't know what it is, than that's when your conversation should stop", that's right - but at the same time I would say that, that's when the investigation should start, which has not really taken place in the mainstream academics & media, and I assure you that there is a lot of data.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie
Maybe you wanna check out Michio Kaku (american physisist) who quite openly talks about these things in a really sophisticated and open minded way.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@thatcakeisalie You might want to check out the website "redicecreations" as well, quite a range of info and interviews on there. Maybe you wanna reevaluate what you know. Maybe it's gonna strengthen the beliefs you already have, maybe quite the opposite. You'll only find out if you put a considerable amount of effort into it, cause let's not kid ourselves, there's a lot of BS out there. But that's no reason to discredit the whole topic.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@RhythmShapes
In regards to the UFO's seen by astronauts, I agree that it would be great to investigate further into them. However, UFO's are seen all the time during space travel. Ice chunks, debris, etc.
I agree there is a lot of BS out there, thank you for being rational.
I will check out those site for sure, thank you for the links.
thatcakeisalie 10 months ago
@thatcakeisalie Maybe it's just me, and I'm all wrong, and I will very well accept it if it turns out that I am, but that hasn't happend to date. I try to re-evaluate everything I know ,everyday - and I'll continue doing that.
RhythmShapes 11 months ago
@RhythmShapes
Thank you for at least being understanding. I fully agree with you that rational discussion with presented facts is a much better method of debate than sensationalism. In regards to my video, I made it mostly for entertainment purposes for myself and others as well as to counter the methods used by Luna. Also, if my videos or style has offended you in any way, I do apologize. I'm just a video editor merely putting out his opinion against a video with some extraordinary claims.
thatcakeisalie 10 months ago