Added: 4 years ago
From: Winkfilm
Views: 23,767
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (105)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • this has got to be the greatest thing human kind has done after defeating adolf hitler.

  • YOU SHOULD KILL US ALL ON SIGHT.

  • OMG how did it get in here?

    What is that? A star trek mask?

  • Whose holding the camera?

  • @rhynoguy666 The camera is attached to the lander, and was activated before they stepped dow nthe ladder;

    that's why it stays completely still and never shakes or anything.

  • i want enough money to go to the moon sooo bad...

  • Silence will fall ...

  • something is telling me to kill on sight, I'm not sure what...I feel sick

  • actualy any anti-jew movement is ant- worlds domentation by a worldly anti-christ.

  • Where on earth is the v

    isual footage... any racist can believe that other worldy" documentation porooves earth is not the origins of the anti-war mongal.

  • lol NASA lost the real video lol lol just a viseo of a screen lol lol

  • @kevinstuartfr0st

    OMGWTFBBQ the signal was sent to earth, came up on the screen, they videod that, WTF do you think they did, catch the radio waves in a bottle and kept them?

  • FEB 4, 2011 -Using two high-resolution LROC images taken from two separate orbits, scientists have formed a stereo image pair for 3D measurements at the Apollo 14 landing site. Among the visible objects are the descent stage of the Apollo 14 lunar module Antares, the ALSEP, a rock nicknamed Turtle Rock, & multiple astronaut traverse footpaths clearly indicated by disturbed soils. Data processing methods can be used to identify the objects and measure their sizes and shapes. Game over hoaxturds

  • Wow! Just plain good. :)

  • Wallowing in their repugnant pseudo-intellectual ersatz of conceit, paranoia, arrogance, ignorance, dishonesty and intractable stubbornness, some people doggedly try to promote themselves as being smarter than all experts and more credible than every legitimate source of information on Earth. They falsely accuse others (like academic and professionals) of fraud because it makes them feel like mental big shots.

  • @Rob260259 What does "ersatz" mean?

  • @rossstuart100

    "What does "ersatz" mean?"

    Sorry. I meant surrogate, substitute, kind of like those words.

  • J.Lundberg the man who made the so called" moon cameras" spotted that Aldrin is standing under a spot light.

    But according to NASA no artificial lighting was taken on the" landing" spot..

    Later when pressed with the question Mr Lundberg said the historic " perhaps you should find Armstrong and ask him"...hahahaaaa!!

  • So how is it that no other country to date have sent men to the moo???????

  • @elghazoli because it's not profitable. The U.S. did this mission during the height of the cold war essentially to flaunt their wealth. The U.S. wanted to give a signal to the world that it was the leader in science and technology and had the most wealth and not the Soviet Union

  • How did the Camera get there? Did Neil get out, place the camera then climb back up?

  • @Isomnophilia No, they deployed it from the side of the lander, it was strapped to an equipment bay that folded out.

  • Comment removed

  • ?????????? i couldnt see anything it was so fucking bliry -.-

  • Neil was asked again and again what his first words would be, but he was cagey and never said ahead of time. I recommend reading his biography "First Man" for tons more information about his life, NASA, and the Apollo program.

  • Deos anyone know were i could get one of those headsets they used in mission control used? And what they are?

  • look at radio shack or military surplus !

  • This is awesome. I wish I could've been alive to see this when it happened.

    I hope we've got a base there in my life time and have sent people to Mars...

  • lol moment. rdicilious moment.

  • Thanks for posting this. I wasn't born then so all I've ever seen are lousy 10 second news clips which are too short to really get a feel for what it must have felt like.

  • I was 8 years old at the time and my bloody parents woke me up in the middle of the night (In Denmark here) to watch it unfold live.

    I still recall it as one of the great moments of history.

  • I had just turned 7 two days before.  Fantastic moment!

  • he dosent seem very excited to say hes just stepped on the MOON, and someone obviously told him to say that famous saying

  • he had alot of time in between the earth and the moon to think of something memorable...

    he was probably planning something ever since he was chosen to go to the moon

  • well he was probally nervous becuase it was the F I R S T time someone wallked on moon it could of been dangoures or something

  • I don't believe he was given the famous first words because he gets it wrong - he leaves out the "a" before man. Seems like he made it up and didn't get it quite right. If it had been a prepared statement it would have been more precise.

  • seems there are just a few of us that know that he left off that one word, i knew he forgot that word too

  • @ejg2290 yeah you're right.. what he basically said was one small step for mankind one giant leap for mankind... i agree not a prepared statement.

  • he was supposed to of said, "one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind" but instead he left off that one word, oooops maybe he was a little excited?

  • are you kidding about the torture? Press was kept in dark like everyone else. War, hard to ignore the bombs heh? Press has no clue but what is fed them

  • where did you get that lie from, or did you believe their garbage, only an hour and a half in the x ray machine, try that here where the dose is controlled. who was at the switch out there, Dr. No?

  • Rob,

    Your questions are interesting. You want to know where the press is in this whole mess. Where has the press been in the past 8 years while this govt. has lied us to war, lied about torture, fleeced Billions from us, taken away our rights....Apathy. But if you would honestly ask.. How could we have gone to do the things they said we did. Van Allens Radiation Belt? How could we have accomplished that w/out being fried? .

  • How do you know about the wars, torture, human rights?

    YES! by the press. They informed you. Because in Iraq people were indeed tortured by USMilitary.

    Why does the press NOT inform you about Moonhoax? because it is CRAP.

    VAB does have enough radiation to kill a man. Only if he stayed there long enough.

    The astronauts were exposed to an average radiation dose of 0.167 mSv per second. 30 days days would have killed them. But they passed through the VAB in less than an 90 mins.

  • when is NASA going to come clean and tell the truth, most of the data and physical feats are impossible given their own pictures, equipment, and astronauts.

  • WB

    it was a 60 billion dollar bleeding of taxpayer funds, why not spend a few milllion to fake some film and threaten or kill nauts from talking. same old M.O. by the gov. = bilk the sheep and laugh behind their back.

  • So Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin, Charles Conrad, Alan Bean, Alan Shepard, Edgar Mitchell, David Scott, James Irwin, John Young, Charles Duke, Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt and a few thousand others are liars?

    Where are the REAL scientists worldwide subscribing this ridiculous hoaxtheory? Where are the shocking publications and interviews in the Washington Post? Why are there no documentaries on NBC? Don't tell me they are all payed by NASA.

  • @Rob260259 ..... i think you mean "paid"

  • @rossstuart100

    You're right.

  • Comment removed

  • @Rob260259

    Ummm...I think I'll think for myself, rather than listen to someone who has gobbled up every government sanctioned hoax and piece of propaganda, hook, line and sinker. Shit, you can't even spell "paid".

    You're a hoaxhead, and that's all you'll ever be.

  • @jelinto

    Bye Jelinto, keep 'thinking'....

    LOL

    

  • Comment removed

  • @Rob260259

     Okay, I will. You should try it some time, you crazy hoaxhead. LMFAO!

  • @jelinto

    You will keep 'thinking'...? How predictable.

    TLMFAOTOTHLSY

    

  • @jelinto

    What's very weird is that conspiracists claim anyone with an understanding of physics could easily see through the lies of NASA. Yet they still haven't produced any vaguely plausible reason as to why scientists the WHOLE WORLD OVER fail to see what is incredibly 'obvious'. Seriously, don't you think that’s odd? Are they all mind controlled? Is the band of hoaxers the only ones who can see the 'twoof'? Why can't they come up with any coherant reason for this?

    THINK about that...

  • @Rob260259 Okay lets try this again; In the last second of the Nix film - watch?v=EumW5anRa10 - there is a woman wearing a dark hat, long coat carrying a handbag, in the foreground. She is clearly on the grass between Elm & Main Streets. Yet when you look at the original Zapruder film - watch?v=kq1PbgeBoQ4 - by the time the couple with the young boy come into view, you can see all the way across to Main St. Where is the woman in the long coat from the Nix film?...

  • ...You can offer no explanation to what is obvious to the rest of us, so the way you respond is to do like Buzz Aldrin does and run away - watch?v=RMYyTjyWWlI We're not even getting into any complex science...just simple observation.

    To make the claim that there's all kinds of "evidence" that supports your position, all the while running away from, and not addressing any evidence that proves your position is a lie, in no way means you have won any debate. In fact, quite the opposite.

  • @Rob260259 my god...this is worse then i imagined

    i knew there were a lot of people the think the moon landing was fake...but really? you legitimately think NASA is paying off the whole country?

    thats worse then Fox Mulder from the X-Files

  • @bassmansta

    Yes it's bad. Many hoax heads claim anyone with an understanding of science could easily see through NASA's lies. Yet they still haven't produced any vaguely plausible reason as to why scientists the WHOLE WORLD OVER fail to see what is incredibly obvious. They don't think that’s a little odd. They think all those people were mind controlled. I have to laugh at these 'twoofers', really. Why can't they come up with any coherent proof of fakery?

  • 1:45, no time delay from neil to Nasa??? i guess that makes sense, sound only needed to travel 500K miles

    3:49 "like powdered charcoal" i guess it toughened up on later missions when the LR wouldnt leave tracks....

  • The time delay of Audio and video recording on the moon to playback at ground control would be little as both would be traveling as radio waves. Since radio waves are electromagnetic waves they travel at the speed of light, ~299,792 km/s.

    The moon is closest to the Earth at ~350,000 km and farthest at ~400,000 km. Only 2 seconds would pass for the radio waves to reach earth plus delay to Houston.

    that's it, I won't say if I believe the lunar landing occurred or not as arguing on here is childish

  • ive timed some responses at .53 secs

  • "1:45, no time delay from neil to Nasa?"

    There wouldn't be there, as the audio was recorded at the earth end.

    So here you are hearing the communications as mission control would have.

    "when the LR wouldnt leave tracks.... "

    Wierdly there are lots of pictures with tracks on from the LR.

    But not when astronauts have been walking all over them.

  • shill elsewhere ... did the nauts walk under the rover and remove those tracks?... there would be time delays, take your lies to sheep, we dont buckle to nonsense

  • "there would be time delays"

    Not in that section you pointed at.

    The communications from the moon were recorded when they were received at mission control. So there would be no delay between the astronauts speaking and the capcom responding in the recordings.

    I take it you did not think this through?

  • really?? so on live transmissions with Nixon there would be no delays too? like i said, if you think we went to the moon either you are a shill or you have not looked into it enough ... only a myth mind would succumb to such lies

  • "...or you have not looked into it enough"

    The communication went something similar to this:

    Neil speaks -> 1s delay -> received (recorded), capcop responds (recorded) -> 1s delay -> back to the moon

    Please explain why you think there should be a large delay between the signal getting back to mission control and mission control responding?

    I take it you did not look into this or think it through?

  • so live recordnings from the moon direct to our TV with Nixon take no time, i gotcha, you win, now explain where the tracks UNDER THE ROVER WENT????

  • "now explain where the tracks UNDER THE ROVER WENT"

    The tracks from the LR which are shown in a number of pictures are fairly shallow, easily covered by dust kicked about by moving astronauts.

    And they did kick a lot of that stuff about when moving.

  • btw, why are you bringing Nixon into it?

    We were talking about the section you pointed out at 1:45.

  • Actually there is a better way to calculate what audio delay there was in communications on the tapes.

    At 1:36 mission control speaks, but later you hear an echo where Neil's microphone is open (you can hear the beep from it opening/closing). If you calculate the time difference between the echo you should get about 2.7 seconds.

    There are a lot of these 'echos' in the comms.

  • why cant you answer everything, i gave you one lie, now answer mine or get lost

  • You don't have an answer for everything either, so get off your high horse!! I don't know enough science to explain the lunar landings either way, but neither do you, at least I admit it! the best you can do is admit that you have no idea either way. You have not been given enough information either way to be this adamant nor do any of these other conspiracy theorists. NASA lies, the government lies and conspiracy theorists lie! any video claiming hoax can be convincing if you beleive it all.

  • hey, sheep shit, start researching, how bout no tracks under the LR and no craters and no dust on landing legs for starters ... get off your own midget donkey, dumbfuk

  • there arent craters ALL OVER the moon, its things like this that go to show you get al your logic from cartoons.

    Even if this was faked, NASA would have thought, 'ooh what about tracks under the LR' then no doubt they would have done a bit more research, then realised that scientificaly there would have been a reason NOT to have tracks there so to be convincing, they left the tracks out.

  • If you can't make sense of that, look at it this way, there were people going 'ooh but theres no stars'. You think IF NASA had faked it, they wouldn't have thought about the fuckin stars?? they would have thought about the stars, then realised that they wouldnt be seen. What I mean is, NASA are a lot more intelligent than you are, if they faked it, they would have thought of everything, if there were ANY give aways that it was fake, it would be far beyond you to ever catch them out!

  • either ur a shill or a moron who doesnt enjoy research ,... why would there be NO TRACKS UNDER THE LR, why do nauts gets jerked up from the ground without exerting any pressure to their feet ... manu talking to dolts like u gets old ... who was yuri g.? when was he selected to be the first man in space, how many days before launch? do some homework and connect some dots

  • I'm not gonna keep arguing with you, you're just reenforcing my opinion that you're incapable of analysing your way out of a paper bag.

  • hey myth mind google AS17-140-21354 .... FIND WALDO LMFAO

  • now  we see the onthe moon through powerfull telescopes?and why dont show flag through hubble telescope in ever july 4th?

  • Because its the Hubble Space TELESCOPE, not the Hubble Space Microscope. Telescopes are designed to see large objects like planets and galaxies. Their optics cannot be changed. There's an implied physics rule that says telescopes cannot focus on any object thats smaller than they are.

    And the Hubble is as big as a bus.

    Thats why telescopes and microscopes are not interchangeable.

  • The output of the camera was transmitted and simultaneously recorded on magnetic disc. The disc recording was then played back a further five times and transmitted. While the disc recorder was playing back, the monitor screen was blacked out and the next frame started displaying. The monitor had enough persistence that it retained the picture, and RCA built special circuits to adjust for any loss of brightness between the top and bottom of the picture.

  • For Apollo 11 an RCA scan-converter was used, which operated on an optical conversion principle. The pictures were displayed on a 10inch black&white monitor and a Vidicon TK22 camera was pointed at the screen. As each frame of the 10 frames per second picture was received, it was displayed on the monitor. The camera was gated to scan a single field at the EIA (NTSC) rate of 1/60th of a second, that is it did not take a picture until the 10-inch monitor had completed displaying a full frame.

  • The relay inverted the picture by the simple expedient of reversing the vertical scans. Richard Holl, who was a Bendix Field Engineering Corporation engineer responsible for television ground support, helped design and implement the inverter switch.

  • While the TV camera was upside-down in the MESA, the pictures were also upside-down. When Armstrong removed the camera to plant it on the lunar surface, the pictures would be the right way up again. A simple technique was employed to invert the images during the scan-conversion process on the Earth. This involved modifying the scan-converter by installing a toggle switch on its front panel. The switch was connected to the deflection coils of the Vidicon camera by means of a relay.

  • In this way, a 30 frames per second (60 interlaced fields per second) TV was produced - with only one in six fields being live.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • i dont know ??if this is real then why did they fake this exact senario and the timing was all to convinent dont u think??

  • OMGGG y would u people think this is fake!! i mean y on EARTH ( well y on MOON :P) would the governament lie to the whole wide world about something like this. Soviets started this rumor just cuz they were upset that the US won the space race

  • How is it that we managed to fly aaaaaalllllll the way to the moon, land on its surface, fuck around for a while and then fly aaaaaaaalllllll the way back without so much as a slight computer error, bumpy landing or anything. First time we went to the moon, we had no real idea what was in store but we managed a flawless trip, landing, visit and return. Fuck me, they were good in those days. Or maybe, just maybe--- ITS ALL BULLSHIT

  • "much as a slight computer error"

    I see you never read anything. There WERE computer errors, adjusted by the pilots mid flight.

    Since you couldnt be bothered to read that, you're likely not informed on anything else either.

  • haha yah well put

  • when we(mankind) will land again on the moon all those idiots will see that it was no fake!! (but then they will say we fake the first landing on the new landing again -.-) bunch of r tards

  • wow ! just as I remembered it as a 12 year old on live tv, how can any moron think this was faked !!

  • lol me -_-

  • u'll kill urself when u'd realise that they are fooling u

  • this is so fake

  • That is awesome! I love Armstrong's initial observations. It's an amazing and beautiful memory from my childhood to see this. Can't wait to return soon.

  • i can't belive people of to day expect the film to be perfect. it's grainy so it is fake fuck me.

  • Wow! Can you put the other parts, too?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more