Added: 2 years ago
From: LunarTuner
Views: 10,587
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (430)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @NasaCriminals, Did you go to the ArcAngel4Myke School of Anti-NASA Paranoia & Bumper Sticker Development? You know, ArcAngel4Myke is that guy who habitually talks about Disney & creates propaganda videos that no one can comment on. Did you study under him? Or is he your inspiration? Like you, he speaks in "bumper sticker".

  • APOLLO DISNEY MOON LANDINGS

    Nasa's TV Moon is very windy

  • I wish we could send these conspiracy nuts to the moon.

  • @mrdarcyme

    I know a conspiracy nutcase that is planning to send himself to the Moon....!

  • :) Ty for the acceptance :)

  • Pretty good video despite the sarcastic narration. Electrostatic hypothesis makes the most sense, however there has been some atmosphere detected on the moon (probably no where near that required to move a flag). It's NOT a "perfect vacuum" there.

  • @PC160 I think I am correct in saying that space itself is not a "perfect vacuum"

  • @hakeem89968, On earth, the equipment worn by the Apollo astronaut weighs 180 lbs. and their suits are stiff because of pressurization. Even so, why do they WANT to jump higher? There is video of them jumping 4 feet high, but it was dangerous because of problems with balance. Apollo didn't go to the moon to play, but to explore and do science.

  • @LunarTuner Occasionally an astronaut *did* try to high jump. Neil Armstrong jumped directly from the ground to the third rung on the LM ladder, 5-6 feet off the ground. Is that good enough?

    Charlie Duke on Apollo 16 didn't have the ladder handrails to guide him during his high jump. He fell on his backpack and for a moment thought he might have killed himself by damaging it or ripping his suit. Turns out he was okay, but he sure didn't try that again. Not hard to see why more didn't try.

  • wow you're abit of a douche

  • @LetsGoFcukingMental, who's your comment directed toward?

  • OK UR SERIOUSLY SMOKING SOMTHING! Have u actually seen a flag move? Cause if that is ur definition of a moving flag, than u need to start smoking stronger ish

  • The "moon landing" is one of the government's greatest skeems of all, coming close to 9/11, etc.

    All hoaxes.

  • @AndyHarglesis I hope you're just trolling laughs, if not you need to get some "skooling." It's "scheme" not "skeem."

    So, the whole world is just going to let the US lie about something like that for the past FORTY years? The Russians??? They would have LOVED to have caught us faking it but they can't, because it happened folks.

    Ask yourself, why don't rational scientists from anywhere in the world talk about this? (and not some crackpot on the 'net or on youtube either, legit scientists)

  • @ElroyMcDuff, if you check Andy's channel, you'll see that he thinks great things are accomplished w/o education. In fact, he seems to believe education causes more problems than it solves. What a "legit scientist" is to you and me is some sort of lemming without the capacity for independent or critical thinking. Nevermind that the very internet he uses to push such drivel wasn't created by unschooled goons. Patience. One day he & his family will take a joy ride in an airplane he designs.

  • @AndyHarglesis-I see that you made 12 accounts and thumbed up your comment.

  • @AndyHarglesis, that's it...use one theory to hold up another. How scientific. Oh, I forgot--science has no value to you. (apparently neither does spelling or any other discipline of study)

  • This is a great scientific look at the old blowing flag theory. Thank you for taking the time to break it down for everyone. Great narrator voice. Good job debunking.

  • Quite possibly the most condescending video about one of those "debunkings" of the Moon hoax theories...

  • @Simboiss, You trying to flatter me? :D

  • @BIakDragon, I'm not certain, but I think the Oxygen Purge System (on top of the PLSS) had a vent for CO2, heat and water vapor, but it was operated manually. In later suits, lithium hydroxide was used to absorb the CO2. So, I can't say if a vent played a role in this or not.

  • This is one of my favourite videos on YT, I come back for more every few months. It's your radio/TV voice that does it for me... as well as the technical content. A nice simple concept explained simply with good humour.

  • @lukequixotesanjose, coming from you, that's a great compliment. I wish I had your grasp of the math. I showed your lunar gravity video to my son, an engineer student, and he loved it. He walked me through the calculations. I'm a communicator by trade, but I need to brush up on my math. Thanks for the encouragement. I'm scripting some new things now.

  • SO... DID MAN GO TO THE MOON OR NOT?

    damn you crab man :"P

  • Why there is no astronauts living there? I will believe the day China got there and show us a picture of hte flag.

  • @mrganchos, Why believe China's & not the US LRO orbiter or the Japanese Selene/Kaguya? How would we know the Chinese won't fake it?

    Living on the moon is infinitely more complex than visiting for a day or 2. Apollo avoided solar radiation storms, but the longer the stay, the more risk. It's also expensive & look at the global economy. You wanna pay for guys living on a dead rock?

    Similarly, submarines 1st sailed in the 1600s but only submerged for more than a few days in the 1940s.

  • @LunarTuner China is going in 2015 that why. Money never was, never will be a problem. Moreover, it shouldn’t be a problem to go to the Moon for someone that is planning to go to Mars. The other point is that all those difficulties that you spoke about are actually more reason for them to go. Imagine how those new technologies could have been in use today on aviation industry? My last point is that when US were on the middle of a Cold War with the race to the Moon was a matter of honour.

  • @mrganchos, try convincing the American taxpayer that money is not a problem. The US debt is monstrous now. No one here is eager to pay 100s of billions of dollars to repeat what was already done.

  • @LunarTuner with a defence budget of US$630 billion which US$130 for the Iraq and Afghanistan war plus a plan to go to Mars, I am sure there is money, however I am not sure the money have been used on the right way.

    After all, you will not repeat what’s been done. The idea is create a NASA base there so research can be done right there. Tourism would certainly help to pay the bill.

    These are some of the reasons I doubt the history. But I know I might be wrong...

  • @mrganchos, but NASA is not a part of the defense budget. Again, a base on the moon is MUCH more complicated. Radiation is more of a concern and so is the supply of water and other perishables. There is simply not the incentive that there was during the Cold War to be first.

  • Lunartuner is a propaganda Troll

    This waste of oxygen has been spamming govt disnformation

    on the Nasa Fake Moon Landings on youtube videos for 4 years now

    Low life traitor

    Too dumb to get a real government job

    so she SHILLS

  • "The only breeze that I note is the one blowing in the heads of those unwilling to do a little research and except the known laws of physics"

    Well said my good sir. Well said.

  • @cbennz514

    Nasa Fake Science is not physics

  • The authur'v this video sadly reveals his shilful quolities when saying that the US flag was not plantid because'v territorial claims since that wud violate UN decrees. The US violating the UN decrees? - God frfend! How unthinkabl is that! Perish the very thot!

    An excellent book on the subjict which ixamins the 'moon' landings in sedulus siantifik

    detail is that by Alexander Popov, a Russian physicist. Unfortunatly - it's only avalab on the web in Russian at the mo. It's 'shill-shocking'!

  • @AdamSeeb (are you having keyboard problems?) The author of this video has revealed a plain truth--the US signed a UN treaty which states that no part of the moon may be territorially claimed. The US made no such claim--PERIOD.

    Did the US claim to achieve their goals? Of course. Did they beat the Soviets to the moon? Yes. The flag acknowledged the investment of time, money and manpower made by the US to bring mankind to the moon.

  • Spelling system has a problem: It's rubbish.

    but that's by-the-bye. It is sumwhot disinjenuous to think the US upholds UN treaties. U truly ar a gratr arshol'v a shill than peepl giv u credit for. the US has the bigist stockpile'v kemical wepnz. the US wil act in its own interest regardlis. Nasa's chartr underscore's its propaganda rol. plz inverstigat fr urself. I urj u t read Alexander Popov's wurk. plz. The fake dutch moon rock; LRO pixlz that pas fr evidens..anamoly galor..Dearie me!

  • @AdamSeeb, I don't recall calling you insulting names. I have not treated you unkindly. Why do you insist on insulting me? On this page, you are my guest. I don't have to let you stay. Is this how your mother taught you to speak about people when you are invited to enjoy their homes? An apology would be welcome or expect to be blocked.

    A fake dutch moonrock doesn't nullify 100s of others verified by independent geologists. You may not like US politics, but they don't own the moon.

  • @LunarTuner I apollogise. Regardlis'v parental upbringing, that was gratuitusly uncouth'v me. My apollogy is sincere tho I can't resist the pun.

  • @AdamSeeb, not to worry. I accept your Apollo-gy. Enjoy the video and press on! ;)

  • I like how you say a surprising number of people don't know that the Moon has no atmosphere, like they are morons, but then you concede that it actually has one, just not one worth "speaking of". Lol. The rest of your science was more sound.

  • @Justwannalogon The moon's atmosphere is just a few centimeters above the surface of the regolith, but technically, it qualifies as an atmosphere. Put it this way, no animal anyone knows can survive in that trace of an atmosphere. I probably shouldn't have mentioned it because it's not...worth "speaking of."

  • Comment removed

  • @LunarTuner It should be spoken of, I should think, since it exists in an absolute kind of way. You mention the atmosphere a few times like it's part of the subject matter and set up the contrast of Earth having an atmosphere. Aren't you a little bias and unscientific to say the Moon's atmosphere is not worth speaking of? I'll be the judge of what's worth speaking of. Lol.

  • @Justwannalogon , suit yourself. I only mentioned it because someone will say that the thin layer of elements near the lunar surface may have something to do with the flag movement, but in my opinion it couldn't. I haven't hear anyone suggest it could.

  • @LunarTuner Why is it your opinion that the atmosphere would have nothing to do with the flag movement? Because it is so thin? It seems to me that the atmosphere, no matter how minute, would lend credence to your stance that the flags movements makes sense.

  • @Justwannalogon, I'm no expert on atmospheres but the moon's atmosphere has less than 1/100,000,000,000,000th of earth's atmospheric density at sea level. Uh, that's pretty thin! A lot of what is outgassed from the regolith ends up escaping into space and what's left is only cms from the surface. I can't see that causing this flag to move. I'm open-minded, but I have limits.

  • @LunarTuner You certainly sound like an expert. I didn't realize it was that thin. I see now why it's easy for you to say it would not move the flag. Thank you.

  • @Justwannalogon, no problem. On the other hand, despite the lack of a significant atmosphere, there are "conditions" on the moon, like the electrostatic energy, that could be a factor. Ultimately, no one knows definitively what caused this flag to move because the astronaut obscures our view.

  • @LunarTuner Even if the view wasn't obscured, we'd probably be scratching our heads about why it moved. That's the fun of science, I think. :P

  • the astronaught running by the flag is the biggest smoking gun. your video is bullshit.. the flying dust of the moon must be what i get covered in when i go out on my motocrosser then ?? douche! and mythbusters do experiments in nasa facilities.. wake up fat american morons!!

  • @nutsack1888, you haven't seen me, but I'm fat?

    Chill! Can you explain why you don't like this video? Can you articulate a specific objection?

    It's hard to take a flamer seriously. Calling names & exploding in a bigoted, nationalistic rant is pointless & accomplishes nothing. If you think I'm a moron, state why! "Your video is bullsh**" doesn't say anything! Explain to us why we should listen to a self-proclaimed "nutsack" from Glasgow and not listen to scientists around the world.

  • @nuts

    "astronaught" says it all, really. You're just another hoaxhead thinking he's smarter than 41 years worth of science and engineering.

  • @Rob260259 If all your scientists and engineers etc have as much personalities as you, there is only a handfull of them.

  • Give it up for Tesla sound wave transmission from static motions.

  • I've always believed that much of the mainstream hype surrounding moon conspiracy theories came from the Capricorn One, a conspiracy/espionage thriller film made in 1977 (back in the 70's when these types of films were popular and sat bums on theatre seats). The concept of the film came from the small bunch of antiestablishment folks of the 60's who believed the Apollo program was all faked The film itself wasn't terrible, some parts were entertaining. But it was still just a work of fiction.

  • Wow, I would think those conspiracy theorists would run out of excuses by now. Unfortunately, they still think we never went there, and yet somehow, they still have excuses. I'd like to learn some their tricks! I'm serious!

  • Wow, I'm convinced we went there now.

  • SHANDK has a video that you should watch lunartuner. He recreates the scene where the astronaut pass between the flag and camera. Turn out you don't need even need electromagnetic fields. It is very possible that the astronauts suit touches the flag. Turns out he is closer to the flag then he appears in the camera.

  • ...this guy's attitude kinda ticks me off.

  • @whiteash002 Nothing personal ;)

  • @LunarTuner Yeah, yeah yeah, the flag moves because electrostatic charges and because it's nylon and because the pendulum effect and... we are all stupid and you are clever and have done the "appropriate" research and all of that. That's why NASA and people like you keep insisting and defending something that cant be defended: people are "stupid and should believe what any asshole who talks like he is in a class of 5 year old kids say. The flag moved because of the simplest reason... AIR.

  • @leonzioooo "people like you keep insisting and defending something that cant be defended: people are "stupid and should believe what any asshole who talks like he is in a class of 5 year old kids say."

    Funny. That describes, quite perfectly, my opinion of people who proclaim the Apollo missions to be faked.

  • Comment removed

  • what no air on the moon you dont say and its not made of cheese shit thats bad ,, so we what be going bad then..

  • OK why not put the space suites on a couple guys and send then to three mile island and sort out the shit in it... if they went to the moon and passed though the famous belt

  • The astronauts went through the radiation belt in a spacecraft, not just in space suits.

    Also, the radiation in the belt is different than the radiation you get from a reactor.

  • Comment removed

  • no air in space means no dragging. so yes, it will move, and alot

  • Excellet video

  • I often wonder if Authors of Books aren't just writting conspiracy stories just to make money off of gullible people so they play on their curiosity and some people buy books and DVDs and believe in it. If 20% of Americans think the moon landings are hoaxed, then 20% of Americans are gullible.

  • Rye, the small group of individuals who profit from this Moonhoax theories with their crappy books, videos and websites do not care. They will still have their miserable little audience of uneducated idiots. These people are fodder for the Jerry Springer show, not intellects that can listen to reason.

  • @Rob260259 Oh really? how many intellectuals, from ex-NASA engineers to Astronomers and also astronauts, physicists, high tech photographers, film makers and a long list of people had already realized what you are too dumb to still believe? Not to mention that the Russians - who at the time had more advanced space technology than us - said that they abandoned the idea of going to the moon because of the lethal Van Allen ring and smirked in every interview when the "moon landing was mentioned.

  • @leonzioooo

    "many intellectuals, from ex-NASA engineers to Astronomers and also astronauts, physicists, high tech photographers, film makers and a long list of people"

    I don't need a long list Leonzi. Just name three of each.

    "Not to mention"

    Indeed. Don't mention it. Because it's nonsense.

  • @leonzioooo

    Well Leonzi, still waiting for your list. How about it?

  • @RyeGrog Don't wonder. They do.

  • if a flag is on the moon, the falg with not move, cuz theres no air, so wen the flag was on the moon, the design of the moon looked like as if its moving

  • Bravo lunar tuner this was a very informative video

  • Showing scientific proof to a "Moon Truther" (or a 9/11 Truther) is like showing a Cross to Vampire.

  • TonyN737

    What "scientific proof"?

  • Any and all scientific proof.

  • love the statement starting at 3:10,

    and the videos starting from 4:35.

    i also like, that you say all of these, being scientifically, deserve equal attention, ive said that before.

  • Excellent video

  • Never happened......

  • For those of you how like to findout more about radiation in space.

    The ALTEA project at the ESA website will give you good information.

  • Lunar Turner

    When Gene Cernan doesnt even know what the van Allen belt is how did he go to the moon?

    Keep spreding the propaganda is more important than a critical tought on the moon landing.

    peace

  • travel, you asked the question. Perhaps I naively assumed you really wanted an answer. Instead, it seems you've already answered the question for yourself. Cernan very well knows what the VABs are. He worked for NASA, the people who discovered the VABs. He listened to the wisdom of Dr. Van Allen, himself, rather than listening to you. And he apparently saw stars from the moon, but only "with difficulty."

  • LT,

    I will upload a response to you where Gene Cernan tells how much he knows about the van Allen radiation belt? As you claim he was listened to DR van Allen???

    Well if he did he didnt understand it at all.

    peace to you

  • travel, not necessary. I don't expect Cernan to understand what he didn't need to understand--the complexities of radiation science, because he's a pilot, astronaut, military man and trained to do lunar geology. He understood what he needed to understand. I'm curious about what you think Dr. Van Allen understood and why I should trust your assessment rather than his and that of NASA, the scientists of the Russian Space Agency, JAXA and thousands of other astrophysicists.

  • travel, saw your vid.

    The ESA FULLY AGREES with NASA on radiation protection. The article cited agrees with NASA. Radiation beyond the VABs is dangerous. DUH! The concern is not a short-term mission like Apollo. It's long-duration! In low earth orbit, all astronauts will encounter the Southern Atlantic Anomaly (part of the VABs) several times a day. At that time, they can see sparks in their eyes. Nothing new.

    To expect astronauts to know what astronomers know is barking up the wrong tree!

  • I dont know if you misinform people on purpose or you to lazy to read ESA reports?

    ESA

    "We still do not know if seeing a flash means that cells in the retina or even the brain are being damaged."

    You claim that there is no danger in space, but ESA is still not sure.

    First contradicting NASA

    And Dr Eric M Jones.

    Now you contradict ESA, where are you links to backup your stories?

    Thank you ESA

    peace brother

  • travelstickcouk, you're putting words in my mouth. I have NEVER, EVER claimed that there is no danger in space!! The ESA is NOT contradicting NASA! I am among the first to say THERE IS danger in space! I watched the Challenger blow up with my own eyes! You kidding?

    But to equate "significant social problems" with "they would fry instantly"? To compare an open question about some brain damage from the VABs with stating that 40 minutes in the VABs is lethal? Come on! No contradiction at all!

  • Ok there is danger in space so much that During the Apollo missions of the 1960s70s, the astronauts were simply lucky not to have been in space during a major solar eruption that would have flooded their spacecraft with deadly radiation.

    think about that

  • Yes, they could be considered lucky in that respect, and NASA and the Astronauts have acknowledge this. But let's not act as if solar eruptions of that magnitude happen on a weekly basis, since they don't. The frequency of such eruptions is once every 10-11 years, which means in fact the Astronauts would have been unlucky if the WERE caught in it. We see the results of this on Earth as an increase in the size and intensity of the Northern Lights, where it can be seen further south than usual

  • MTMind2,

    Solar flares (eruptions) happen almost every day. The problem are the Major Flares, they are Deadly.

    They go in a cicle of 11 years indeed, But the major flares are from a few a day till les than one a week depanding on the 11 year cicle. 1968 was a peak year, All apollo fligts where out during major solar flares, except Apollo 16. So please get your fact right mate.

    Peace to you.

  • Travel, you have simply repeated much of what I already said! I said solar eruptions of THAT MAGNITUDE happens once every 10-11 years. And no travel, I'm talking about the really big eruptions, the ones which are capable of knocking out satellites and giving news worthy Aurora Borealis. Those are the eruptions for Astronauts to worry about, not the regular eruptions which take place at the height of the Solar cycle. So please get your facts right mate. :-)

    Waiting for your reply on the stars.

  • And in addition to that, over the years we've had numerous reports whenever a major solar flare hits the Earth, from news reports regarding satellites to reports of very impressive Northern Lights, and how far South it's being seen. Now perhaps I missed it, but where are the reports of such an event occuring during one of the Apollo missions?

  • Mate with all respect, all solar flames are dangerous to Apollo(and they happen daily), outside the van Allen belts.

    The National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC)

    Is a good place to start your quest for solar flares.

    It is not hard to find out with a little research, to me I dont care if they where on the moon or not I search for facts.

    peace mate

  • With all due respect, I'm not the one implying or suggesting the moon landings were a hoax. Hence for those suggesting the Apollo Astronauts couldn't have landed on the moon because they would have been subjected to lethal radiation from solar flares, then the enthasist is on them to provide proof of this. And if you're not questioning man landing on the moon or you don't care, then why did you challenge me by asking "Do you see stars as you stand on the moon?" and then ignore the response?

  • travelstickcouk, yes, solar flares occur often. No, they are NOT always lethal to astronauts or spacecraft outside the VABs! Incorrect!

  • Lunar turner,

    You only talk about X class flares lt. Remenmber that the vab protect us from this raiation most the time. after the vab ther is no protection against any flares. NASA knows this as any other space agency.

  • travel, yes, NASA knows as much as anyone! They will be the first to tell you that every flare is not lethal nor will it knock out every spacecraft.

  • Mate new NASA scientist are coming, they will not be abele to deffend the man on the moon. Lethal radiation is out there constantly. We can protect ourself from it, but that is the Apollo problem, there was no protection at all against radiation. 10 misions went out there and all where that lucky?? you know the number dont add up.

    peace brother

  • travelstick, I beg your pardon? New NASA scientists just took photos of the moon's surface showing the Apollo spacecraft exactly where they were left! I don't know what you're referring to. To say Apollo had no protection is to ignore the massive study and engineering that went into doing just that! Numbers? present your numbers.

  • Funny, I thought you said you didn't care either way. Seems to me you do care, and you care very much. Your passionate support for the view that the Apollo landings were a hoax are very clear in your post.

  • Well a great contribution to the moon debate MT?

    This are the people that claim to be on the moon.

    Fact

    They dont know what or where the van Allen belts are. Sorry maybe you didnt want to hear it.

  • Oh dear, I believe I touched a nerve. ;-)

    Still waiting on your response regarding no stars btw.

  • And regarding the Van Allen belts, it seems to me that some people assume the Apollo crafts MUST have had a trajectory which headed straight through the middle of the doughnut shaped Van Allen belts, whilst others act as if the whole journey to the moon is impossible because the Astronauts would be 'zapped' by lethal radiation like a scene out of a bad science fiction movie (I wonder if the Astronauts have special powers now? But then, you probably don't want to hear that ;)).

    Interesting.

  • "Didn't know???" WRONG! This one could have been looked up with google or wikipedia very easily. The Van Allen Belts were discovered by Explorer 1 and 3 in 1958. 11 years before the moon landings. They were then mapped with Explorer 4, Pioneer 3 and Luna 1 in 1958 (Explorer and Pioneer) and 1959 (Luna 1). They had plenty of time to gather data and plan a course of action. This information is also all very easy to find. This idea has even been refuted by Dr James Van Allen Himself.

  • Thanks for that information. In fact, I misread his post assuming he was talking about the moon landing believers, it just didn't occur to me that he was talking about those involved with the moon landings themselves, which is just ridiculous. :-|

  • Glad I could help. I find this situation interesting really. In some twisted way I can understand people having doubts about the flag. To the untrained eye I guess it does sort of look like its moving in the breeze (Please note I do NOT think it is!!!!). My problem is more things like the Van Allen Belt argument. This is one that could be looked up INDEPENEDENT OF NASA with no effort but no one does. These people wouldn'T find the truth nomatter what it is.

  • And since when did the Astronauts plot their own journey from the Earth to the moon and back? Why would THEY need to be experts on the Van Allen belts when they would only briefly skim through it's outer regions on their way to and from the moon?

    As for Neil Armstrong, how well do you suppose you would see stars through a filtered visor whilst standing on the brightly illuminated surface of moon? In fact, if I were standing on the moon, stars would be the LAST thing I'd be interested in.

  • nasa calculated the effect of the vab and prepared for that, they were protected. 2nd of all, ok...you going to the fucking moon, you land on the fucking moon, first man there, 238,000miles from earth, on a desolate planet, u have 1 hour to do what u need before leaving, your going to fucking stargaze?!?!?! ok, good for you man...

  • Comment removed

  • I have watched the response. First rule of research, check your sources. Buzz Aldrin was an astroNAUT, not an astroNOMER! He is trained as a piIot and an engeneer and is not trained in this subject. You will find the same dates in ever astronomy text book on the planet. If you disagree, fine, then it should be easy to prove me wrong. Just tell me when they were discovered. That's all you have to do. Look it up and let me know what you find.

  • Still waiting on an answer. When were the Van Allen Belts discovered?

  • sorry mate,

    I can spend my time beter than talking to you.

    Peace to you.

  • fine don't talk to me, but feel free to post the discovery dates here for the others so they can know the truth. Again, a quick look in an Astonomy book should have the dates for you. For that matter, if you search Van Allen Belts Discovery on the European Space Agency web site the answer will be in the first page you find. Actually the year is clearly stated in their space glossery if you look (Listed under Radiation belts) Feel free to tell the truth to the world. It won't take long.

  • This would be known as a mistake. I simply mistook the astronauts in your video. Argument still stands that astronauts and astonomers are not the same. Again to proove me wrong just let me know when the Van Allen Belts were discovered. If it was After 1969 then you would be right.

  • You right you never claimed that there was no lethal radiation out there, I was wrong, sorry for that.

    But was apollo just lucky than? or did they stay in orbit or even on earth?

  • travel, cataclysmic solar events that are lethal enough to kill astronauts while on the moon would occur about every 10 years or so. It happens that one such event occurred in August of '72, but there was no Apollo mission at the time. Was Apollo lucky? One could say that the same way one could say I was lucky not to be killed by a drunk driver on my commute home from my office yesterday.

    Space travel will always include risk. Risk does not equal impossibility.

  • And just to update you JAXA.

    "The other reason was that satellite malfunctions caused by high-energy particles in the radiation belts became a significant social problem."

    So add JAXA too your controdictions.

    You need to read this JAXA website about van Allen belt.

    you want the rusians, chinees and India on the van Allen belts and space radiation.

    the ground is sinking under your feet mate. dont worry keep believing ignore the independ facts.

    peace

  • Wow man, this is great stuff, I'm gonna have to check out all your vids! I was worried you wouldn't cover the whole Apollo 15 flag moving by a few pixels, but not only did you cover it, you introduced a lot of new info I never knew about, i.e. the materials having different charges, why the pendulum is shorter than what might be assumed..! Great stuff! Great presentation. You've got a real voice for it too! Hope you keep up the good work!

  • Well Well still hanging out here, good to see that most off you are not sure NASA dit put a man on the moon. Except the propagandists are 100% sure of it.

    The ESA website has some good information about deep space travel.

  • Sigh, not the wires flashing nonsense again. :-)

    The backpacks have an aerial on them, and the location of that aerial is clearly seen in numerous movies and photographs. Hence given that the flashing just so happens to occur exactly where the aerial is located, wouldn't the most logically explanation be that the sun is reflecting off the aerial?

    This is the same nonsense seen with many conspiracy theories, where EVERYTHING becomes suspect, even those with obvious answers (like no stars). :-|

  • MTMind, yeah, but tell that to a real conspiracist. The only things these delusionals have is their faith in the conspiracy. As usual, every time a main event or drama occurs, the conspiracy theories pop up like weeds.

  • Do you see stars as you stand on the moon?

  • "Do you see stars as you stand on the moon? "

    Ask Buzz Aldrin and say he's a liar. You will see stars instantly.

  • travelstickcouk, I've never stood on the moon, but Gene Cernan did. Here's his debriefing comment.

    ""It was also generally true that, when you were on the surface in the LM's shadow, there were too many bright things in your field-of-view for the stars to be visible...there were times out on the surface when I found that, if you allowed yourself to just focus and maybe even just shielded your eyes...even outside the LM shadow you could see stars in the sky. not easily, but it can be done."

  • The Apollo 11 astronauts said they didn't notice stars, but their only EVA was very short and extremely scripted for them, so they had not opportunity to even give it a thought.

  • And do you see stars in the hd movies and photos taken by the Japanese probe, Kaguya, which orbited the moon for 17 months?

    (Remove brackets and spaces from the link)

    w(w)w3(.)nhk(.)or(.)jp/kaguya/­archive

    We also don't see stars in the closeup photos of the Planets and moons from the Voyager probes. We also don't see stars in close up Astronomical photographs of the moon.

    Go to Google images and search for "Space+walk". Again, where's the stars?

    Oh that's right, they ALL must be fake. ;-D

  • So enough already. :)

    Most professional photographers will understand why there are no stars seen in those images, and hence the Apollo images would have been suspicious IF there WERE STARS! As I've shown, even with today's superior camera technology, the huge difference in luminosity between the moon and stars means there are still no stars to be seen in such images.

    So whilst you may feel there are many things in support of your conspiracy theory, no stars in the images is not one of them.

  • @MTMind2, i see wat u'r saying. its true, the sun's light could be reflecting off the aerial, however, it is also possible that there were actually "wires" there which were placed by the aerial so that they could claim that its light reflecting off the aerial. but, its not proven so any of us may be right.. :D

  • ganz einfach...

    Die Amerikaner, haben in die Flagge ein Stahlstange reingemacht... Das hab ich bei BBC gesehen...

  • Do you think Alen Bean Apollo 12 knows what the van Allen radiation belt is?

    See my video response.

  • Travel, this is what James Van Allen himself said about the VAB: "the recent Fox TVshow is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense."

    My father is as old as Alan Bean. He was an engineer in semiconductors. As Alan Bean, my father has very different interests nowadays. He doesn't know too much about electronics anymore.

  • Yeah, those brilliant scientists at NASA who can't figure out how to "get back" to the moon in less than 20 years after the first time they "went" and seem to be unable to get a space shuttle into earth orbit on a regular basis. Yeah, they're brilliant. Just look at those great pictures of the landing modules that just came out. Sweet! You make out all the wee details.

  • Faustulus777, indeed those scientists at NASA would have been brilliant if they had gone back to the moon WITH NO MONEY AND NO PERMISSION FROM CONGRESS! What incentive is there to go back to the moon when long-duration mission study was necessary first! That's what the Shuttle and the ISS are about. Over 125 successful Shuttle Missions have been flown, making it the single most successful manned spacecraft ever! You don't have a clue!

  • Luna

    no the LEMon would be the safest spacecraft ever, it never crashed.

  • Ha Ha ha---when you finally got to the rel objection, your explanation was lame. Fail! I don't think I see the flag move, and the flag doesn't appear to move---IT MOVES! Face it. LOL

  • Faustulus777, Lame why? Explain!

  • New video reaction there my videos always baned here.

    moon flaggin reaction part 1

    moon flaggin reaction part 2

    to claytnstarbar

    its a damn smart bear.

  • travelstickcouk, I rejected ONE of your videos because there was no "VIDEO" to it! It was text only! What is this "my videos ALWAYS baned" crap? You have not ASKED me to approve any other videos! I can't ban what you don't ask for! Send the request. I'll consider it!

  • Fear anough lunar turner,

    My video is a old news paper style crab, but it is well researched even you can not deny that.

    Is it oke if I use parts of your video to respond on?

    peace brother

  • Travel, really, your reaction on the video of LunarTuner is an insult.

  • Rob, it doesn't bother me. Travel is basically polite and in my opinion, his weak video responses only serve to help me make my point. I trust i the power of reason to defend itself. Besides, he basically copies my videos (a form of flatter) and makes his comments. He's entitled to his opinions. I don't fear them a bit.

  • There is no reason to fear me brother.

    I just have an other opinion than you ar we agree on. In your video you talk about things you did research.

    Fare anough what are you sources? What about this magnet(super conductor) what is the point you wana make with that?

    Its just two fare question I believe.

    peace to you

  • travel, I don't actually mention ANYTHING about a superconductor in the video. I used a simple visual of "magnetism". Electrostatic energy repels or attracts. That's the simple message by the visual. There's a great article on Wikipedia about the electrostatic nature of lunar regolith and the "fountains" and "electrostatic levetation" of dust on the moon. Just search "Lunar Soil" for the article.

  • Clayton's latest video is a great demonstration of how a book can be used as a fan. Brilliant! What's the point?

  • Re: Another topic ;)

    My most sincere apologies LunarTuner, that movie was superb! Thanks very much! It said EVERYTHING I've said before and more :D

    I thought you'd sent me yet another link to movies I've already seen in support of the conspiracy theory (yes, I'm being targeted for some strange reason ;-)), and so I quickly replied on that assumption.

    However, I saved the linked to watch later when I had more time, just in case I was wrong, and indeed I was. So thanks again my friend.

  • Lunar turner

    when do i get this NASA guy s you claim to disagree with Dr Jones?

    About this flag incident.

  • travel, where do you come up with this stuff? I never claimed there was a specific guy. My statement was, "Any NASA guy could give any number of other speculations on this." My point all along has been that the Apollo 15 video is not conclusive! One can only speculate! I don't work for NASA, so they can say whatever they want. I don't think Eric Jones is the only guy working for NASA (last time I checked).

  • Lunar turner,

    "Any NASA guy could give any number of other speculations on this."

    So my qustion was I would love to read that. But it seems just a empty statment, not backup by any guy?

    "Apollo 15 video is not conclusive!"

    I agree in that, it also means that we have to keep our mind open for every option. You talk like most conspiracists, Why.

    1 Almost nothing you say in your video is backup by NASA.

    2 You make things up.

    3 You censure, videos on your channel. peace to you

  • New video.

    Qustion NASA

    Again banned from this channel.

    There is a picture where you see buzz Aldrin's face, with his sun visor down?

  • travelstickcouk, what are you talking about, "banned from this channel." This is MY channel! No one requested anything about this video! I didn't ban anything!

    By the way, during Apollo 11, there were several moments when the UV visors were not used. The astronauts were given permission to use their own judgment as to when they had them up or down (that's why they are movable!)

  • You mean sun visor UP.

  • Terrific! Best treatment of the subject I've seen yet. I didn't know that nylon and teflon were that far apart on the electrostatic scale, and that does indeed argue for electrostatic attraction. But the ALSJ did some measurements that show Dave Scott could well have brushed it with his left arm even though it doesn't look like it at first. I did my own measurements and got much the same answer. I also note that they had checklists attached to their left wrists.

  • Your final has one of your best lines LT:

    "Just an ordinary object, in a strange place".

    Ofcourse this Apollo 15 flag is no smoking gun. There are several possibilities. Dust and electrostatics might well be possible. The opposites of Nylon and Teflon is another one. Dave Scott touching the pole and/or the flag may have been possible.

    One more for the moonhoax conspiracy crowd: "Yes, physics works. But you have to apply it precisely".

  • Dear Rob,

    here we go again over and over again.

    Dr Eric M Jones about electrostatics.

    very unlikely, since there is no evidence of similar flag motions during the Apollo 14, 16, and 17 deployments for which we have good video or - in the case of Apollo 14 - film coverage.

    If you have other information, please share it and I will read it. Till that point electrostatics is classified as very unlikely by NASA and should not be seen diffrent here.

    peace to you

  • Travel, personally I agree with you. Electrostatics could have been involved, but not likely. To my opinion the astronaut just slightly touches the flag with his elbow.

    On the other hand: Why should we discuss about a flag that moves on the soil of the moon? It does not matter to me. The moonlandings were reality. There are some more things about Apollo that I can not explain immediately. But I don't shout "fake!" instantly. I like to research WHY things happen the way they happen.

  • Rob,

    As you say you like to recearch, me to.

    You say

    "To my opinion the astronaut just slightly touches the flag with his elbow."

    Dr jones.

    Dave's elbow could have touched the flag; but just barely, if at all.

    This is what NASA tells us not me. Can you tell me where your research is based on?

    peace to you

  • travel, first of all, I'm having a hard time finding these comments you say were made by Eric Jones and second, I'm not so sure he is the final and official word on this by NASA. Any NASA guy could give any number of other speculations on this and I'm sure they have, because it's just inconclusive.

  • Please give me some links to some of this NASA guys you talk about. I would love to read there options or even solution to this flag. Not on youtube but NASA, ESA, JAXA, or other reliable website.