Apollo 20 Mona Lisa Video Is Fake Because The Camera Falls Instead Of Floating Away?

[Nextbigthingg]

I like the title.

My rule is, stupid questions get stupid answers.

Yes, the camera would float away.

That's why the moon landing was faked since the astronauts kept floating away every time they tried to land.

^ Please don't take that seriously folks.

[Ribal7]

Stupid, the moon does have a gravity but it's so light, is something light is at the surface of the lunar, it will hit the ground, but if it was higher than the lunar surface in about 6-10m , it will float away !!!

[Platerpus7]

wait a second. you cant say that. if you are on the moon you will get pulled back down. who knows if this is fake or not, but you cant call it fake because of that because the moon has a gravitational field too and will pull things towards it. its not like gravity on earth because the moon is much smaller. thats why the astronauts did not float away, they would hop around and get pulled back down. people will say anything to try and disprove something even without thinking about what they say.

[rosekarenify]

Thank you.tell this to the palm bay police.maybe you could help them solve this rape crime for me.

[UtherPendragan]

These objects fall pretty fast for low gravity. When you watch the films of them jumping around on the moon they seem to fall back slowly to the ground. Maybe some smart fellow should do the math. As for the feather for all we know its made of lead. But the gravity would effect everything the same in no atmosphere just as Galileo's theory claims. I sure would like to have seen him jump up then drop the items so that we could see him the hammer and the feather fall.

[MsAnimeGamer]

@UtherPendragan gravitational acceleration is the same for all objects. the cause of the feather falling slower on earth is it's form and how the air goes around it... for the air it is easier to stop a feather because of it's small mass but harder to stop a hammer.

i bet if u drop a car and a feather from the same height in no atmosphere they would fall at the same speed

[BluesHarp60]

I believe the ship to be real!! No one would build a fake this huge! For what?? They don't come out and say: " Here this is what we found"! These Images were leaked out and now we know that there is this thing up on the Moon! Amazing! People who still claim that Alien Intelligences are not in Existence are extremely uneducated and are getting to be a real Pain for many who know better and who are doing their research! NASA is a Nazi Agency! Why would they tell us the Truth???

[Losdouble]

Q. Why would you be tossing a camera around in space

A. To test gravity

[axconac]

THIS VIDEO IS NOT FROM APOLLO 20, NASA HAS BEEN HIDING A LOT OF THINGS ABOUT ALL INCLUDING MOON, MARS, EARTH, JUPITER, SATURN, ETC., IN THE MOON EXIST GRAVITY, THE PORK EXCUSE OF NASA TO SEND THE 2 THINGS TO SEE IF THERE'S GRAVITY AND THE ACTIVITY OF THE MOON, THE MOON MONA LISA WAS "RESCUED" FROM THE GIGANTIC SPACE SHIP IN THE MOON, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT NASA HAS BEEN HIDING...THE SHIP!!!

[TheNewBlackster]

@axconac

Read the video's description please...

[MsAnimeGamer]

@axconac EVERYTHING WITH MASS HAS A GRAVITY and there is no need proving it

[kernzyp]

i reckon that the "no atmosphere" scenario has no credibility here. what matters is the gravity of the moon. those two objects weigh differently. the gravity would cause the heavier object to fall quicker, as per newtons laws...

[bomack105]

@kernzyp WRONG!! PLEASE READ THE VIDEO DESCRIPTION! This whole exercise was to prove "Galileo's theory that, in the absence of air resistance, all objects fall with the same acceleration." READ . . . LEARN!

[kernzyp]

@bomack105 it's confusing.

[lundymaphone]

@kernzyp Your sort of missed the point, both ARE accelerating at the same time due to gravitation law. That being said all three objects involved (feather-moon, hammer-moon) are moving towards the center of gravity. So although both objects are accelerating towards the moon at the same speed the moon is accelerating towards the more massive object (hammer most likely) "faster". That being said the difference is so fantastically small it is almost not worth mentioning in casual conversation.

[crazyhugs]

@kernzyp High school physics, gravitational constant on Earth is 9.81m/s^2, meaning that all objects will accelerate at that speed if you ignore air resistance, regardless of size, shape, weight, ect. Same concept can be applied on the moon.

[zenko247]

@kernzyp NO NO ALL thing fall at the same speed as per newtons laws 9.8m/s/s on earth. Who the F""K was your science teacher (Sarah Palin ?) Time the fall of the objects in the clip this shows not on earth

[enifulvio88]

Moon has a small amount of gravity, that's why the camera falls instead of floatnig away.. stupid donkey :)

[TheNewBlackster]

@enifulvio88

That's what the point of the videos about... Read the video's derscription... stupid donkey :)

[1s1e1a1n11]

dude its also this thing cause artifisial gravity

[xEricDCx]

@dcb1138 I’m 20 yrs old and yes they do still teach physics in school, but it isn't mandatory anymore. I took the major sciences (Bio, Chem, Physics) and found that physics actually is used the most in the real world. It helps u better understand how things work and why things act the way they do

@dcb1138 You're wrong actually. U said Force = mass x accel, but it's actually only Force of Earth or FE that equals m x a. If you are talking about the moon then it would be a whole different equation

[purplepimpernel]

@xEricDCx The equation is correct for all situations: F= mass x g(the acutal gravitational effect of gravity of anybody regardless of size. Mass is the same amount of say a rock anywhere in the Universe; mass is NOT weight. G is gravitational accelleration of any given body. So again "F=mass(in grams, kilograms, slugs) x Gravitational accelleration. On Earth the G accel is 32ft/sec/sec. Gravity accel on Earth is not the same on Mars, the Moon, Jupiter, Sun. That is the variable in the equation.

[MrJohnrombi]

The Moon has 1/6th the gravity of Earth. If The Moon had no gravitational influence, the astronaut + the equipment would drift off into space.....

[Nu2Daintrnet33]

Im so happy the guy who put this up is an educated beleiver like myself and isnt out there making us seem like dumb butts. :)

[sakuragi141]

they dont know what is cosmology,,they are so low on iq

[sakuragi141]

peoples who are not yet went on moon always disagree on theory like this,,know y?because they have lo iq,LOL!!

[DVAFP]

of course there's gravity on the moon, i usually ignore comments that are too stupid even to respond...

[Mayazdad]

Nothing would "float away". The moon has 1/6th the gravity of Earth.

[hypnotycul]

OF COURSE IT IS A FAKE !The cosmonauts were not allowed to touch and analyze  the pobes or the bodies..only the earth scientists,isn't it! So...how come lexei leonid(the soviet cosmonaut) unfixed the eyes device???What if that devise was something to keep alive that alien body????? huh???I AM A BELIEVER BUT THIS IS JUST A BIG FAKE!IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FRENCH SCULPTOR OR ARTIST WHO DID THIS!HE WORKS IN CLAY...!!!ANYWAY..GREAT WORK FOR A NICE AND DECENT FAKE!!!

[1stopgeekshop]

@TheAluzinha... if you study cosmology, you will know that the radiation levels on the moon are well within human limits, about 1 to 2 particles per cm... if you people honestly dont believe we went to the moon, i beg you to buy a telescope and look at the damn rover tracks... we have an observatory just out of town and go a few times a year, you can clearly see the landing site...

[Puck2442]

@1stopgeekshop

You are misinformed if you believe anyone can look, through a telescope and see the rover tracks. Nor can anyone see any piece of equipment left behind. Where are you getting your facts?

[masterjarred32]

@Puck2442 are you dumb? Your able to see equipment left over, yes, it will cost you a 2,000 dollar telescope, but you can see stuff left over. And the rover trails are clear as day.

[adrianmoore222]

@masterjarred32 ....I'm afraid it's not possible to see equipment left behind on the moon. Not even the most powerful telescope made presently can see these objects, so a 2000 dollar telescope ain't gonna see jack sh*t. You would need telescopes with massive diameters (80 metres or more) to see this abandoned equipment. The biggest presently is about 10 metres.

[pickthis80]

@masterjarred32 Not even the most powerful telescopes ever made are able to see these objects. The flag on the moon is 125cm long. You would require a telescope around 200 meters in diameter to see it. The largest telescope now is the Keck Telescope in Hawaii at 10meters in diameter the lunar rover, which is 3.1 meters in length, would require a telescope 75 meters in diameter. So our backyard telescopes are not even going to come close to seeing any of that on the moon

[xxdayelxx]

@pickthis80 the moon is not as the same size to earth .. so you may see rover tracks cause the earth compared to the moon the moon is small :)

[CaptainScarlet2006]

@pickthis80

....and with the hubble that is more closer to the moon?

[swolf85]

@masterjarred32 well, show some pictures then.

[swolf85]

@1stopgeekshop take some pictures and post them.

[zenko247]

@1stopgeekshop dont lie even the Huble carn't do that it tried

[hijackednation]

the moon has gravity 

[MsAnimeGamer]

@hijackednation You don't say...

Everything that has mass has a force of gravity even you even me 

[dcb1138]

Don't they teach basic physics in school anymore. ? Its scary how dumb people are !

[natedoggdoggydogg]

Apollo 17, launched December 7, 1972, was the last Apollo mission to the moon. Mission commander Eugene Cernan was the last person to leave the Moon's surface. The crew returned safely to Earth on December 19, 1972.

[Puck2442]

@natedoggdoggydogg

Yes, of course. And you know it's true because Daddy and Mommy and the nice man on the TV said so. And fat men with magical flying reindeer bring you presents each christmas. What else do you believe?

[bomack105]

@natedoggdoggydogg And this is the truth. It has to be because that's what NASA has told the public, right?

[coreym472]

@bomack105 nasa lies more den a hooker to her husband

[coreym472]

@bomack105 nasa likes to tell the truth

[natedoggdoggydogg]

Originally three additional lunar landing missions had been planned, as Apollo 18 through Apollo 20. In light of the drastically shrinking NASA budget and the decision not to produce a second batch of Saturn Vs, these missions were canceled to make funds available for the development of the Space Shuttle, and to make their Apollo spacecraft and Saturn V launch vehicles available to the Skylab program.

[timberlandtim1]

@natedoggdoggydogg APOLLO 20 WASNT CANCELLED IT WAS CONTINUED IN COLLABORATION WITH THE RUSSIANS AS A SECRET SPACE PROGRAM SPECIFICALLY TO EXPLORE THE SHIP ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON WHICH WAS FIRST DICOVER WHILE APOLLO 11 ASTRONAUT WERE IN THE MOONS ORBIT.

THE JOINT MISSIONS WITH THE RUSSIANS WERE CARRIED OUT BECUASE IT WOULD SPREAD OUT THE COST.

[1973Hybrid]

Is the absence of atmosphere that allows any type of object to touch the lunar surface at the same time. Gravity is non influent.

[ykl1206000]

search~"Official NASA images of the derelict alien spaceship on the far side of the Moon"

[TheAluzinha]

its fake because spacesuit cant randle that much radiation, they all would die before landing in the moon, that is why as today with more tec. no other contry tried to go outside of earth´s protection field, hence no1 did go to the moon, they dont even go to hot spots here on earth, that tiny lunar module is a bad nasa joke, how come grow up ppl can believe it can have any protection against cosmic radiation...

[bomack105]

@TheAluzinha If this were true then how is it we were and are capable of safely performing EVA's (Space Walks) for extended periods of time? The environment on the moon is essentially the same as outer space. And as far as the capsules and modules go, they were specifically designed for protection from radiation where as the shuttles were not. The shuttles were designed only for low earth orbit where levels are much less, so the added expense of additional protection was easily avoided.

[mrcharlyasap]

1,62 m/s2

[raimo56]

I absolutely agree with allojz ! 1/6 of Earths gravity is still gravity, but one question remains: What exactly is that astronaut doing with that camera ?

Juggling with it seems a bit strange considering the circumstances...Some spring-driven movie-cameras were wound up by rotating the handle, but this one seems to be some kind of Hasselblad still-photo camera.

Wish we could se the shots Leonov took with it - they would have been crystal-clear !

[allojz1986]

It would be weird if the hammer hit the ground first, violating the laws of Physics... If the astronaut from Apollo 20 dropped the camera it would have fallen but this is not what he did. He made the camera slightly spin and kept it slightly hold at the same time (otherwise it would have fallen the same way as the hammer and the feather).

[mintwithahole]

Now that's just weird. . . Gravity on the moon is 1/6th that of what it is on earth so even with that amount of gravity acting on the hammer and the feather the hammer should have hit the ground first.

[nor888vast695]

In a vacuum any 2 or more objects witl hit the floor at the same time. You gotta listen to the film again. He tells you that. I understand how this misconception might occur but they hit at the same time. A lot of people have been trying to change physics on this topic.

[mintwithahole]

@nor888vast695

I understand the physics (now) but I just thought that the little gravity available on the moon would still Interact with the object with the most mass, namely the hammer. I still think it's weird but I accept I'm wrong. Thanks for clearing it up.

[nor888vast695]

You'll never be wrong with F=mass x acceleration. The special case W=m x a which is the weight at any point = mass x acceleration. These formulae are good for the entire universe though it can get kinda messy dealing with an object in 2 or 3 fields. Now I've learned that NASA doesn't exactly know where the common gravitational point is between earth & moon. It's getting messy.