When the German rocket makers couldn't work in Germany because of the country being invaded, the USA emplyed Werner Von Braun as the head of Nasa. The same with computers as the USA copied Alan Turing's work during the war.
@JJones138 What is your point? You think that those inventors didn't copy their ideas from others? Do you not copy the English language when speaking? Who gives a flying fuck. Von braun embraced America and it's culture. So did many other immigrants.
Every time I watch these videos I think to myself, what if we had a massive devastation of our population and we lost all historic data we have gained over thousands of years and only few people remained. Then thousands of years from the "wipe out" the new population of Earth somehow makes it to the moon and they see a flag there. Imagine the shock that they would feel, it's mind blowing.
@ 47 secs and thereafter.. When the astroNOT jumps why does the soil fall back before he does? Is it because his puppeteer is lifting him up? Of course it is.......
@Chev4206 When the astronaut jumps he only transfers a bit of his own kinetic energy to the soil; that's why it falls back on the ground before he does.
Have you ever tried jumping with your feet actually IN the sand?
If you do that then part of your movement will be sent to the sand and cause it to lift, and as a result you will have less kinetic energy yourself, which means you will jump lower than normal - air friction is ignored in this case, since it hardly matters.
@Laurelindo How stupid and thick-headed are you? I asked for no reply, but your massive ego got the better of you and you couldn't resist it. Your vacuous head is buried firmly in the sand, try jumping out of it.
@Laurelindo I need no respect whatsoever from brain-dead bumbling buffoons. I am NOT a conspiracy theorist, you and others of your ilk are Truth Theorists. Physics and scientific earth-based fucts are your only ammunition against common sense, perfect vision and functioning brains. Get to fuck.....
@Chev4206 moon hoax theorists are just trolls, dont feed them. I do believe however that this theory was started with the worse of intentions to keep people distracted. People seem stupid enough to go along.
@Chev4206 If you had any sort of understanding of physics then you would know that physics is in fact about DOUBTING.
Physicists are never fully satisfied with anything and constantly seek improvements, explanations etc for everything - so why haven't they questioned the moon landings, you think?
Becaaause - there is nothing to question about it.
They would instantly be able to spot inconsistencies and there's no way in hell that would've been kept a secret for over 40 years.
@Laurelindo Yet AGAIN an unrelated answer to a STATEMENT. For fucks sake are you totally stupid, you are really pissing me off and I have no alternative but to block you from seeing anything in my channel. Your loss you fool. Bless you, enjoy the rest of your pathetic life.
@Chev4206 I can post irrefutable explanations to absolutely anything you want explained if you want - just name anything you want and I will give a 100% scientific and realistic explanation to it.
@Chev4206 -- I'm still wondering why you just make up crap from your imagination (like "six feet of lead") and present it as some sort of argument.
The simple common sense that you claim to use says that six feet of lead is a silly requirement for shielding against radiation for a week-long trip to the moon.
@Laurelindo You merit the ridicule as all of you are foolish, blind, stupendously unintelligent, profoundly uneducated under-achievers with nothing more interesting in life than to research government-controlled disinformation and relay this ' truth ' to us in the vain hope that it is believed. I am sorry for you deluded idiots. When finally everything is revealed to the world you shall disappear into the obscurity that you are perfectly honing for yourselves. Be prepared for embarrassment.
@Chev4206 Wow if anyone is unintelligent and deluded here it's you brainwashed conspiracy theorists.
Your hoax theories have been debunked so many times already that you just embarrass yourselves even more when you act as if those hoax theories were something new.
I mean take that "waving flag" nonsense for instance - why the hell would it NOT move when the astronauts are pulling it a lot in a place where there is no air resistance?
Making that up as a "breeze" is extremely ridiculous.
@Laurelindo I did not mention any flag, dickhead, or anything of-sorts. Here you are a typical truth-nut adding unrelated stuff to a totally different statement. Slowly and absolutely surely you are digging a very big hole for yourself to fall into because you are losing an argument. Your fellow idiots will join you soon so may I suggest buying a spade and shovel to make the hole larger...., perhaps even a JCB digger for good measure. You will not and cannot win with the truth against you.
@vadersky94 How can the soviets prove a fake? It was so carefully and excellently orchestrated at the time that it would be difficult for anyone to prove it fake.
The Soviets had their own Deep Space Network, they monitored almost everything about Apollo and the data transmitted. The Soviets used their 32m dish in Simferopol.
Learn all about the Soviets: watch?v=dbiyAIqciU8&feature=channel_video_title
@yesiamawizardjonny Just one thing: Soviet tracked every spacecraft, manned and unmanned, just like USA did. They monitored every rocket launch from USA to ensure that they weren't under an attack. So, they followed the Apollo ships all the way to the Moon and back. Which also A LOT of radio astronomers did. Both professionals and amateurs from all over the world. It was impossible to fake. It also was impossible to fake the films with the special effects technology of those days.
@stalkervision You still haven't explained why the entire worldwide scientific community suddenly lost its moxie, including countries that would happily prove the US wrong. China. Cuba. Japan. In fact, you just keep throwing out claims without any support, and scurrying away when I ask for evidence.
@stalkervision No. Address me, not my argument, and not where I got it from. The source of information is irrelevant if the information itself holds up. I have produced multiple links, yet all you have is anacdata and statements from other people's videos, which you are remarkably reluctant to link.
He remarked that all of a sudden these signals would appear seemingly out of mid air and the way they appeared wasn't at all the way signals normally were handled.
Rob is a professional nasa apologist with many many sock puppet accounts to do his bidding here. All one has to do is look at the nasa 1/6th g simulator to see how absolutely ridiculous this jump salute is if it was really "on the moon". LMAO ! Nasa owned themselves on this one I tell you.
LOL yeah it was all faked the scientific community of every nation on earth has been fooled for 40 years until you came along and watched a couple videos on youtube you are teh SuPaR geeN-ee-Us.
@TheJomogogo Nasa is the sole evidence supplier for the moon walks child. At the time of the walks the scientific community was giving the missions exceedingly long odds. After the mission the astronauts bragged and derided the scientific community as a whole that they knew nothing because the proof it could be done was in their mission. Circular reasoning at it's best. Same as you use. Try looking up the nasa 1/6th g experiments and then look at John Young's jump salute. See for yourself.
@TheJomogogo It completely happened fool your just to much of a totally troglodyte moron to find it out for yourself. Sad..Pathetic..Loser that you are.
@stalkervision -- Where were you in 1969 when the "scientific community" was supposedly saying that Apollo couldn't go to the moon?
Do you have even one reference to a generally accepted article in the "scientific community" that says such a thing? No.
Why do you people just keep making up shit for your arguments?
You're as bad as David Percy who tells people to look the other way and fails to explain the real NATURAL sources of secondary light in his stupid "analysis."
@stalkervision Nasa's evidence, records and physical, has been corroborated several times over by various countries, including the Soviets. Scientists have been looking at said evidence for longer than many people questioning it have been alive. It holds up to scrutiny from scientific tools that didn't even exist yet at the time.
@stalkervision It's not self-assertion. The USSR would've had every reason to prove Apollo 11 a fake. They didn't. JAXA and India sent probes up the moon, and their results matched NASA's. Heck, even the moon rocks have been examined by, literally, thousands of scientists. NASA is remarkably open about presenting what they found to the world, which would only increase the odds that someone would find a hole in it if there were a conspiracy. Someone besides CTs with their gut instincts.
@EGRJ Actually they wouldn't have contrary to popular folklore.Kennedy and the Russian's were involved in massive wheat deals do to Soviet Crop failures. The probes "match" because the moon was mapped MASSIVELY and PHOTOGRAPHED before the apollo missions. What did you expect? Moon rocks examined by thousands of scientists? Actually it's a limited group that have examined them and If you look up what moon rocks are actually made of they can be quite easily on earth.
@stalkervision The Soviets take the wheat, then backstab America and expose capitalist Perfidy. Win-win.
Scans from JAXA, IIRC, were identical to photos taken on the moon by the astronauts, just a few feet over.
The moon rocks have several characterisitcs meteorites don't, such as microscopic dust impacts which would be blocked by the armosphere, and minerals not found on Earth. They are also older than any rocks on Earth.
@EGRJ It was a series of continuing wheat shipments. Not just one massive boat hmmm...As i said about the jax photos before. What do you expect ? Moon rock material CAN be duplicated and those materials embedded also. There also has been and on going nasa program to find moon rocks in the Antarctic which has been very successful.
@stalkervision No, moon rocks cannot be duplicated. Millenia of solar radiation exposure and meteorite impacts that can't be duplicated even today, much less 40 years ago. The Soviet rock samples collected by probe matched those of NASA. Thousands of geologists have examined said rocks.
Also, there were 400K people working on Apollo 11 alone. You'd have to deceive or suppress most of those people, including literal rocket scientists, for, oh, nearly 42 years now.
@EGRJ In point of fact they absolutely can. You had better do some research into this further. Soviet samples matching Apollos? Sources please. Pretty easy to do considering we had arctic metorite moon rocks samples before apollo. Thousands of geologists again? Actually I personally found and read a paper from a geologist that examined a earth sourced moon rock meteorite that said this "moon rock" showed significant differences to the apollo samples.
@stalkervision Also, can you please provide a link to someone actually faking a scientifically-verified "moonrock" with 1969 technology? Or even 2011? Someone who was able to take it to a scientist, ask them to look at it without telling them what it was, and then they declared it was a moonrock? You'd think the hoax believers would've gotten around to that at some point since 1969.
@EGRJ Your links are worthless. Try giving me useful ones first will you? Moon rock faking is indeed possible. Try doing some of your own research instead of being a childish snot. Look up the "NEW" "moon minerals" named for apollo astronauts. LOL !
400,00 working on apollo? Do you know how many people worked on the Manhattan project without any cue what it actually was? Do you know that the people that worked monitoring apollo mission control data displays that you see in all the mission photos wouldn't have even know if it was a ACTUAL MISSION because the simulation displays looked Exactly the same and were designed to be this way?
@EGRJ So what ? It's irrelevant.. Actually it was a Manhattan project scientist that didn't want to see one side get a huge advantage over the other that made that all possible for the soviets. You think the apollo hoax was kept totally quite? Bill Kaysing worked for a while on the apollo simulation project which was in reality a cover story/plan to fake the moon missions till he retired from rocket dyne.
Do you know that the Soviets sent up up laser Star Wars battle stations into orbital tests and this has only recently been discovered because of the fall of the soviet union? The government and nasa knew nothing of there real purpose and these projects were HUGE !
@stalkervision The US was working on a Space Defense Initiative too. I don't think either program ever really went anywhere. Any "laser battle stations" were experimental.
What does this have to do with the moon landing?
What about the radio operators who monitored the missions in real time? Some people in Australia even spliced into the cable Apollo 11 was using to send info back from Aussie radio 'scopes. They had access to the video before NASA did.
@EGRJ It was a HUGE and totally secret project as i said involving thousands of Russians as I said and as the Manhattan project also was. That was one of you objections that projects like this couldn't be kept secret remember? Spliced into the aussie's cables? :-) I have a nice story about that. It a video of a technician that WORKED at those aussie facilities and distinctly remembers how very odd the apollo signals came into the facilities. They seemed to appear from no where.
Actually the moon rocks "angle" is the weakest link of proof pal. As i sad if your interested jarrah white has a excellent series on all this. He also is coming out with a BRAND new series on apollo moon rocks soon.
@stalkervision Also, many of the rocks have been stolen, meaning that people outside of gov't control are free to examine them. Not one has said, "yes, I stole the moon rock, but it's a fake!" Heck, with the money they'd get from the book deal, they could hire a good enough lawyer to get a slap on the wrist.
Also, the Soviet space program lost heart after Soviet 11. If they knew it was fake, why would they stop?
@EGRJ Do you believe anyone who stole a moon rock would have it scientifically analyzed pal? :-) What do you think would happen to them? Soyuz 11... The Soviets knew that reaching the moon through the Van Allen belts wasn't possible do to dangerous radiation. They had a mission ready that could have predated the apollo moon fly by and a group of soviet cosmonauts requested it be flown no matter what the hazards. The Soviet highers ups denied that request . Why would they do that?
@stalkervision If someone stole a diamond, they would've have a crooked jeweler look at it for them. Moon rocks, by weight, are more valuable than diamonds. Heck, some of the thieves might have been scientists themselves.
BTW: Van Allen himself said the belts wouldn't kill anyone. The guy the belts are named for.
Oh, and the Soyuz astronauts died of asyphyxiation. I can't find anything about hazards or higher ups. Source?
@EGRJ So a person that stole a moon rock would take it to a jeweler for testing? LOL ! No, Van allen never said that. He stuck to his paper and original conclusions till he died. He called his own major paper on the belts "popular science" when asked which it obviously wasn't but never did a adjustment to the conclusions EVER. His remarks on the belts radiation dangers were always very obtuse and strange in later life. The source is a program about the soviet space program.
@stalkervision I pointed out that people take stolen diamonds to be tested and that some of the people stealing it may actually be qualified scientists. Your only response is flat denial.
bit ly/l6bFKg
bit ly/mrMZw2
There, Van Allen's quote. What "paper" are you referring to? Where did he specifically say the exposure would be fatal?
It's a pbs show. There are also interview with sir Bernard Lovell who had direct talks with the soviets on their space program and always asked them this same question.." when will you be going to the moon?" Their response was always the same.."when we can get our astronauts back alive" This was because they couldn't see anyway around the space radiation problem whatsoever.
@stalkervision What "PBS show", exactly? Do you actually know, or are you just quoting Jarrah? Do you actually check what Jarrah says? I looked up that interview, incidentally;
thetim[dot]es/aVIQ69
Note how the very next paragraph specifically refers to the safety margins, not the radiation. The Soviets lowered their standards so they could "win" the Space Race. The radiation claim is an unsupported conclusion. It's a cherry-picked quote, just like Jarrah always does.
@EGRJ Jarrah has a video excerpt on his site It isn't a quote from jarrah whatsoever. It's personal interviews with these people pal. That's what they actually said. Btw your links are completely worthless. And in all actuality if you look this up one up it was OUR government and nasa that lowered THEIR standards on radiation.
Now were going into your childish view of"mental state" hmm.. well that figures since your losing so bad on every turn you try. Guess parroting others words doesn't always work hmm?
Jarrah miscalculates the radiation exposure at around 6:16. He calculates the unshielded exposure, according to the very paper he is referencing. That's basically the same as the astronauts would get floating in space naked.
@EGRJ The apollo shielding was minimal at best. Actually it was worse then no shielding according to a nice nasa science radation expert lady that rightly pointed out that aluminum protection in outer space actually causes much deadlier secondary particles to be sprayed off from space radiation collisions with a aluminum hull.
@stalkervision The Apollo shielding was more than adequate over the short term. The concern about Al causing secondary particles is a concern for deep space, not a round-trip to the moon.
islandone org/Settlements/MagShield.html
I like how you ignore the fact that Jarrah was out and out wrong. James Van Allen, whom the belts were named after, said they would survive. The astronauts' suits provided even more shielding, as did the inside of the pods.
@EGRJ So your just repeating what OTHER people say. What's the difference? All these arguments they use have been busted pal. I saw this immediately. Do some of your OWN research into the subject. Then you will learn something. Don't just parrot old busted apologist supporters arguments.
@stalkervision The forum thread in question includes people arguing for jarrah AND against. You just automatically assumed it was against, which says something about your mental state. A lot of the HB arguments are decades old as well. What makes them so virtuous? And how was the gov't able to fool most of the world's scientists for four decades, but not some random Joe Blow?
I distinctly said I did my own research. Looks like you're the one who "only hears what he wants to hear".
@stalkervision Doesn't matter. What matters is the evidence, more than its source. The forum was Clauvius, or BAUT, I'll tell you that much. In fact, it's a general conspiracy theorist website. The reason I'm not telling you is because I argue under a pseudonym on there.
@EGRJ LMAO ! But didn't you SAY you NEVER read Clavis as I recall ? You use their forum though..! Naive Apollo skeptics go on clavis where they are all immediately SHOT DOWN by both the moderators and the members no matter what they say. You know that already though don't you? It's FAR from a OPEN FORUM dude as you well know. I don't care what your pseudonym is there pal. I would never become a member of that little roach motel.
@stalkervision Also, how were thousands of lettered scientists fooled for 40 years, yet someone can just look at something and go "that's wrong" and they're right?
@EGRJ Actually BEFORE the apollo missions the vast majority of the scientific community didn't believe apollo would work whatsoever because ITO the odds were so high for a success.. After " the missions" what could they say? The singularly supplied nasa evidence proved them wrong. Ever hear what Hiler said about "the Big Lie" look it up..and do you know what the astronauts said after the first missions? They derided the whole scientific community for doubting it, that's what.
@stalkervision That's nice. Please source. And yet, after the missions were a success, scientists eagerly pored over the information and samples returned.
To openly or even privately criticize the landings as being possibly being faked by any "lettered scientist' would be academic career suicide. Understand now?
@stalkervision So they were perfectly willing to speak out against the missions before, but afterwards, they unanimously decided to lose their collective pairs. Okay.
So why didn't some scientist just send their proof to Wikileaks? I mean, we're talking rocket scientists here. Why aren't they able to figure out some way to disseminate the truth anonymously?
Most of the people directly involved in this cover up are either dead or still covering it up. I remember Ralphe Renne saying he had one of the astronauts of apollo willing to tell him the truth behind the missions and the man died of a heart attack a few days later strangely. These people are being WATCHED. Look for the Bart Sibral video where the son says to his apollo astronaut father..."You want the to call the cia and have him wacked dad?" and the apollo dad says..."no.."
@stalkervision So most of the people who covered it up are dead, which means they can't suppress everyone anymore. Yet no whistleblowers have come forward.
Thanks for undermining your own argument.
Say, how many people would it take to watch the 400,000 people working on Apollo 11 alone, much less all of the moon landings? Keep in mind it takes two cops just to watch a house. Keeping very just one very smart person from leaking anything would call for dozens.
@stalkervision And why wouldn't one or two of the 1,000s of scientists worldwide value the billions of dollars of taxpayer money more than their own career?
How would it be "academic suicide"? The people who would be blackballing them would be, well, the other scientists. Anyone who could prove NASA was BS would promptly end up on talk shows.
All the scientists in the world? Even those in countries who would screw the US over in a heartbeat?
I always LOVE how people say the academic community has always been behind and believed in these missions. It's total garbage. Hell 30 % of the public at the time didn't even but what could they say? It was all a nasa/government/mass media controlled show
@EGRJ Find YOU the evidence pal? LOL! I was there and I know! If your interested try looking that up yourself. The scientific community in general gave it very very slim odds indeed. I ain't lying to you as you did with me.
and a lot of what people believe turns out to be in reality true..The people of that era were natural healthy skeptics having been lied too over vietnam. They don't exist to that extent anymore.
Any academician that openly came out as not believing in the landings would be pilloried. It's a really really simplistic argument people always try to use.
Nasa is "far from open" on anything pal. They control their resources and message very carefully. Always have. In fact WITHIN nasa there is massive compartmentalization. I watched a video right on YT where many new nasa engineers were complaining about just that.
@stalkervision You might want to head on over to Nasa's website and look at the massive amount of videos, photos, and records they've placed out in the open for all to see.
The best researched apollo skeptic I have found is Jarrah White Look up his "moonfaker series" The "Lunarcy" series here is also very good. Lots of great video to watch there. Far better then arguing it all with me ! LOL !
@stalkervision I'm familiar with Jarrah. Simply put, he's a farce. He misrepresents and misquotes evidence and creatively misunderstands everything. Like when he quotes Kovalev's data on radiation exposure in space, but he somehow uses the unshielded dosage, not the one the astronauts would get behind a 1.27cm hull. In another video, he makes the same mistake, except the portion he highlights onscreen actually SAYS it's unshielded. Useless unless the astronauts were floating naked in space.
five times they send man to moon and why they didn't go after 1970s to moon and now only they discovered water in moon without man in moon. if they send man to moon on 1969 means i'm sure now there will be one space station in moon , IT IS SAHARA DESERT .nothing is true
Why would a government spend billions of dollars to take pictures of stars,These guys were test pilots not photographers.The moon landings happened,Get over it.
@jafar7523629 No stars. It is normal. Bright surface and faint light of stars. Take a photo and you can not see stars. Longer exposure time, then you can see stars but nothing more, because the surface would be a white area without any contours.
@jafar7523629 This short exposure time is not for taking photos of stars with their faint light. For taking photos of them you need an exposure time of some minutes. Why do you think there are no stars on ISS photos? Or on Shuttle-photos? Or on photos with the earth? Same effect. Photos with stars were shot from the moon surface with UV (Apollo 16).
The so-called wire-technology does not work. So each dust particle had to be wired.
Why is the low gravity, no atmosphere environment, not kicking the dust in an extreme way, like it would do on earth, with more gravity, and resistances?
@ldanley72 You've actually hit on a point that demonstrates that this film is REAL. On Earth, dust disturbed from the surface tends to hang suspended in the air for a time (as behind a car on a dusty road). In Apollo films, the dust goes up and straight back down on a parabolic arc, even behind the moving Lunar Rover. That says load and clear that, wherever this was filmed, there was no atmosphere to hold the dust in suspension. What wide open spaces do we know of with no atmosphere? Hmmm......
@eventcone Well according to what you just sai,d the astronauts would do the same, and would not seem to float. They would come down faster then the dust.
Charlie Duke . . . he left a picture of his family in basically a ziplock baggie on the surface of the moon, man I envy that. The thought is so awesome. It will last, barring meteor impact, for a lonnnnnnnng time.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
so fake.. Look at 0:52 to 0:56, you can see the wire reflect the light above the guy on the right. There is sevral clips with wires reflecting above them.
@TheJomogogo yeah, i'm sure you pulled that one right out of your fat ass, show me 1 space suit picture from that moon landing that has an antena. If you can't then stfu
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Flight to the moon, as the court. If NASA acknowledged that some of the film as a fake and some soil fake, judge and jury might think that the accused is innocent like oj simpson
When the German rocket makers couldn't work in Germany because of the country being invaded, the USA emplyed Werner Von Braun as the head of Nasa. The same with computers as the USA copied Alan Turing's work during the war.
JJones138 2 months ago
@JJones138 What is your point? You think that those inventors didn't copy their ideas from others? Do you not copy the English language when speaking? Who gives a flying fuck. Von braun embraced America and it's culture. So did many other immigrants.
tehatemachine 1 month ago
Kubrick footage
MyLibelSuit 5 months ago
I'm going to meet Charles Duke next week!! :O
EuropeanSpaceAgency1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The moon missions were faked in a studio. Here's a link to some of the evidence.
politicalforum (dot) com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio (dot) html
Cosmicmoron 5 months ago
Why don't they just walk?? Why do they hop?
crookedgun 6 months ago
@crookedgun The astronauts found that in the 1/6th gravity environment it was easier and quicker to get around like this.
TheFACTSRUS 6 months ago
Every time I watch these videos I think to myself, what if we had a massive devastation of our population and we lost all historic data we have gained over thousands of years and only few people remained. Then thousands of years from the "wipe out" the new population of Earth somehow makes it to the moon and they see a flag there. Imagine the shock that they would feel, it's mind blowing.
buerm009 6 months ago
Kubrick, best film maker ever!!!
Aumann1 6 months ago
@Aumann1 Yes SK was a great filmmaker...and the moon landings were real and SK did not film footage of fake landings.
edbermac56 5 months ago
Boy...I dont believe in aliens but if they do exist I sure hope female aliens have big hooters!!!
dhbiza 6 months ago
All these people that claim they didn't make it to the moon should say exactly what they can't believe.
Do they believe they can put a man around orbit = Apollo 4 was real ? If yes,
Do they believe they can send a man in orbit around the moon = Apollo 8 is real ? If yes,
Do they believe that two spacecrafts can dock and undock while in orbit = Apollo 10 was real ? If yes again....
THEN WHAT CANT THEY BELIEVE ?? THAT ONE ON THESE SPACECRAFT CAN MAKE A CONTROLLED DESCENT ????
VangelisAthens 7 months ago
@ 47 secs and thereafter.. When the astroNOT jumps why does the soil fall back before he does? Is it because his puppeteer is lifting him up? Of course it is.......
Chev4206 7 months ago
Comment removed
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Chev4206 When the astronaut jumps he only transfers a bit of his own kinetic energy to the soil; that's why it falls back on the ground before he does.
Have you ever tried jumping with your feet actually IN the sand?
If you do that then part of your movement will be sent to the sand and cause it to lift, and as a result you will have less kinetic energy yourself, which means you will jump lower than normal - air friction is ignored in this case, since it hardly matters.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Laurelindo What a load of horse shit. Read your tripe again, don't bother with a reply.
Chev4206 6 months ago
@Chev4206 Haha wow, so you object against accepted laws of physics now?
You conspiracy theorists are unbelievable.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Laurelindo How stupid and thick-headed are you? I asked for no reply, but your massive ego got the better of you and you couldn't resist it. Your vacuous head is buried firmly in the sand, try jumping out of it.
Chev4206 6 months ago
@Chev4206 I don't care what you think, you conspiracy theorists deserve no respect whatsoever.
I have tried being polite to several of you hoaxers before, and you always respond with immature flaming and bitching.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Laurelindo I need no respect whatsoever from brain-dead bumbling buffoons. I am NOT a conspiracy theorist, you and others of your ilk are Truth Theorists. Physics and scientific earth-based fucts are your only ammunition against common sense, perfect vision and functioning brains. Get to fuck.....
Chev4206 6 months ago
@Chev4206 moon hoax theorists are just trolls, dont feed them. I do believe however that this theory was started with the worse of intentions to keep people distracted. People seem stupid enough to go along.
DVAFP 6 months ago
@Chev4206 If you had any sort of understanding of physics then you would know that physics is in fact about DOUBTING.
Physicists are never fully satisfied with anything and constantly seek improvements, explanations etc for everything - so why haven't they questioned the moon landings, you think?
Becaaause - there is nothing to question about it.
They would instantly be able to spot inconsistencies and there's no way in hell that would've been kept a secret for over 40 years.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Laurelindo Yet AGAIN an unrelated answer to a STATEMENT. For fucks sake are you totally stupid, you are really pissing me off and I have no alternative but to block you from seeing anything in my channel. Your loss you fool. Bless you, enjoy the rest of your pathetic life.
Chev4206 6 months ago
@Chev4206 I can post irrefutable explanations to absolutely anything you want explained if you want - just name anything you want and I will give a 100% scientific and realistic explanation to it.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Laurelindo Ok clever cunt. How long is a piece of string?
Chev4206 6 months ago
@Chev4206 Piece of string?
What does that have to do with anything?
I obviously meant questions about the moon landings, because that was the topic.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Chev4206 -- I'm still wondering why you just make up crap from your imagination (like "six feet of lead") and present it as some sort of argument.
The simple common sense that you claim to use says that six feet of lead is a silly requirement for shielding against radiation for a week-long trip to the moon.
nesokretep 6 months ago 2
Comment removed
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Laurelindo You merit the ridicule as all of you are foolish, blind, stupendously unintelligent, profoundly uneducated under-achievers with nothing more interesting in life than to research government-controlled disinformation and relay this ' truth ' to us in the vain hope that it is believed. I am sorry for you deluded idiots. When finally everything is revealed to the world you shall disappear into the obscurity that you are perfectly honing for yourselves. Be prepared for embarrassment.
Chev4206 6 months ago
Comment removed
Chev4206 6 months ago
@Chev4206 Wow if anyone is unintelligent and deluded here it's you brainwashed conspiracy theorists.
Your hoax theories have been debunked so many times already that you just embarrass yourselves even more when you act as if those hoax theories were something new.
I mean take that "waving flag" nonsense for instance - why the hell would it NOT move when the astronauts are pulling it a lot in a place where there is no air resistance?
Making that up as a "breeze" is extremely ridiculous.
Laurelindo 6 months ago
@Laurelindo I did not mention any flag, dickhead, or anything of-sorts. Here you are a typical truth-nut adding unrelated stuff to a totally different statement. Slowly and absolutely surely you are digging a very big hole for yourself to fall into because you are losing an argument. Your fellow idiots will join you soon so may I suggest buying a spade and shovel to make the hole larger...., perhaps even a JCB digger for good measure. You will not and cannot win with the truth against you.
Chev4206 6 months ago
The soil on the moon is lighter than the earth's. that's why!!!
13grahsc 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The whole 'alleged' moon walks were faked.... Heres the PROOF!!!
EVIDENCE: If the Moons gravity is a sixth of the Earths, then that explaind why the Astronauts jump and land in 'SLOW MOTION'.....
IF THAT IS A FACT.... THEN WHY DOESN'T THE DUST AT HIS FEET RISE AND FALL IN SLOW MOTION????
THATS BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO FAKE!!!.... THIS IS THE ONLY EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE NEEDS TO PROVE THAT THE MOON LANDINGS WERE FAKED!!!!!!!!!
jonnyd13768 7 months ago
If the Soviets couldn't prove we didn't do it then that's evidence enough that we were on the moon.
vadersky94 7 months ago 16
@vadersky94 How can the soviets prove a fake? It was so carefully and excellently orchestrated at the time that it would be difficult for anyone to prove it fake.
yesiamawizardjonny 6 months ago
@yesiamawizardjonny
The Soviets had their own Deep Space Network, they monitored almost everything about Apollo and the data transmitted. The Soviets used their 32m dish in Simferopol.
Learn all about the Soviets: watch?v=dbiyAIqciU8&feature=channel_video_title
Rob260259 6 months ago 5
@yesiamawizardjonny Just one thing: Soviet tracked every spacecraft, manned and unmanned, just like USA did. They monitored every rocket launch from USA to ensure that they weren't under an attack. So, they followed the Apollo ships all the way to the Moon and back. Which also A LOT of radio astronomers did. Both professionals and amateurs from all over the world. It was impossible to fake. It also was impossible to fake the films with the special effects technology of those days.
YDDES 5 months ago
@vadersky94 Nice idiot logic. I just ran across America in 3 hours, if you cant prove I didnt do it, then I must have done it
jerichomutant 5 months ago
@vadersky94 is good for me :D
echozgus 2 months ago
YT.. Operation: Dirty Trick watch..
stalkervision 8 months ago
The father and son were TOTALLY being serous here. They wen't joking around in the least.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision And you're basing this claim on...what? Did someone go up and ask them "hey, are you being serious?" And did they go "yes?"
EGRJ 8 months ago
I have to go buddy. look into what the science community was saying BEFORE apollo and the odds they were giving it if your interested.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision You still haven't explained why the entire worldwide scientific community suddenly lost its moxie, including countries that would happily prove the US wrong. China. Cuba. Japan. In fact, you just keep throwing out claims without any support, and scurrying away when I ask for evidence.
EGRJ 8 months ago
you want to see how fast a group of people can turn on you just ask any skeptical question about apollo and argue your side there a bit.
stalkervision 8 months ago
"Your so predictable." Like the Rolling Stones song..
stalkervision 8 months ago
The most research you have ever done is parroting that site buddy. Btw what site is that exactly again? ;-)
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision No. Address me, not my argument, and not where I got it from. The source of information is irrelevant if the information itself holds up. I have produced multiple links, yet all you have is anacdata and statements from other people's videos, which you are remarkably reluctant to link.
EGRJ 8 months ago
He remarked that all of a sudden these signals would appear seemingly out of mid air and the way they appeared wasn't at all the way signals normally were handled.
stalkervision 8 months ago
Every time I look at this and think of the 1/6th g simulator results it cracks me up.
stalkervision 9 months ago
Rob is a professional nasa apologist with many many sock puppet accounts to do his bidding here. All one has to do is look at the nasa 1/6th g simulator to see how absolutely ridiculous this jump salute is if it was really "on the moon". LMAO ! Nasa owned themselves on this one I tell you.
stalkervision 9 months ago
@stalkervision
LOL yeah it was all faked the scientific community of every nation on earth has been fooled for 40 years until you came along and watched a couple videos on youtube you are teh SuPaR geeN-ee-Us.
TheJomogogo 9 months ago 3
@TheJomogogo Nasa is the sole evidence supplier for the moon walks child. At the time of the walks the scientific community was giving the missions exceedingly long odds. After the mission the astronauts bragged and derided the scientific community as a whole that they knew nothing because the proof it could be done was in their mission. Circular reasoning at it's best. Same as you use. Try looking up the nasa 1/6th g experiments and then look at John Young's jump salute. See for yourself.
stalkervision 9 months ago
@stalkervision
OMGWTFBBQ you are so full of shit do you just make up any old silly crap and believe it?
Nothing of the sort happened.
You are clearly a delusional asshat.
TheJomogogo 9 months ago
@TheJomogogo It completely happened fool your just to much of a totally troglodyte moron to find it out for yourself. Sad..Pathetic..Loser that you are.
stalkervision 9 months ago
@stalkervision -- Where were you in 1969 when the "scientific community" was supposedly saying that Apollo couldn't go to the moon?
Do you have even one reference to a generally accepted article in the "scientific community" that says such a thing? No.
Why do you people just keep making up shit for your arguments?
You're as bad as David Percy who tells people to look the other way and fails to explain the real NATURAL sources of secondary light in his stupid "analysis."
nesokretep 8 months ago
@stalkervision Nasa's evidence, records and physical, has been corroborated several times over by various countries, including the Soviets. Scientists have been looking at said evidence for longer than many people questioning it have been alive. It holds up to scrutiny from scientific tools that didn't even exist yet at the time.
You're wrong.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Sorry but your blanket statement of self assertion doesn't hold water. Would you be more specific please.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision It's not self-assertion. The USSR would've had every reason to prove Apollo 11 a fake. They didn't. JAXA and India sent probes up the moon, and their results matched NASA's. Heck, even the moon rocks have been examined by, literally, thousands of scientists. NASA is remarkably open about presenting what they found to the world, which would only increase the odds that someone would find a hole in it if there were a conspiracy. Someone besides CTs with their gut instincts.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Actually they wouldn't have contrary to popular folklore.Kennedy and the Russian's were involved in massive wheat deals do to Soviet Crop failures. The probes "match" because the moon was mapped MASSIVELY and PHOTOGRAPHED before the apollo missions. What did you expect? Moon rocks examined by thousands of scientists? Actually it's a limited group that have examined them and If you look up what moon rocks are actually made of they can be quite easily on earth.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision The Soviets take the wheat, then backstab America and expose capitalist Perfidy. Win-win.
Scans from JAXA, IIRC, were identical to photos taken on the moon by the astronauts, just a few feet over.
The moon rocks have several characterisitcs meteorites don't, such as microscopic dust impacts which would be blocked by the armosphere, and minerals not found on Earth. They are also older than any rocks on Earth.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ It was a series of continuing wheat shipments. Not just one massive boat hmmm...As i said about the jax photos before. What do you expect ? Moon rock material CAN be duplicated and those materials embedded also. There also has been and on going nasa program to find moon rocks in the Antarctic which has been very successful.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision No, moon rocks cannot be duplicated. Millenia of solar radiation exposure and meteorite impacts that can't be duplicated even today, much less 40 years ago. The Soviet rock samples collected by probe matched those of NASA. Thousands of geologists have examined said rocks.
Also, there were 400K people working on Apollo 11 alone. You'd have to deceive or suppress most of those people, including literal rocket scientists, for, oh, nearly 42 years now.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ In point of fact they absolutely can. You had better do some research into this further. Soviet samples matching Apollos? Sources please. Pretty easy to do considering we had arctic metorite moon rocks samples before apollo. Thousands of geologists again? Actually I personally found and read a paper from a geologist that examined a earth sourced moon rock meteorite that said this "moon rock" showed significant differences to the apollo samples.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision I like how you make a bald assertion, and ask me to back up my sources on another point.
bit ly/iGnc5v
I know, I know, Wikipedia, but they source nearly everything.
Meteorites from the Moon which reach Earth have to pass through the atmosphere, and hence exhibit different qualities from ones found on the Moon.
You said only a "small amount" of scientists have examined the moon rocks. Care to back that up? What paper are you referring to?
EGRJ 8 months ago
@stalkervision Also, can you please provide a link to someone actually faking a scientifically-verified "moonrock" with 1969 technology? Or even 2011? Someone who was able to take it to a scientist, ask them to look at it without telling them what it was, and then they declared it was a moonrock? You'd think the hoax believers would've gotten around to that at some point since 1969.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Your links are worthless. Try giving me useful ones first will you? Moon rock faking is indeed possible. Try doing some of your own research instead of being a childish snot. Look up the "NEW" "moon minerals" named for apollo astronauts. LOL !
stalkervision 8 months ago
400,00 working on apollo? Do you know how many people worked on the Manhattan project without any cue what it actually was? Do you know that the people that worked monitoring apollo mission control data displays that you see in all the mission photos wouldn't have even know if it was a ACTUAL MISSION because the simulation displays looked Exactly the same and were designed to be this way?
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision Actually, the Soviets penetrated the Manhattan Project and used their info in their own research. So...not the best comparison.
bit ly/Af6Rj
The "simulation" bit can't explain the parabolic arc of the dust, which can only be achieved in vacuum. Slow motion film? watch?v=pAqF3MOKDTg
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ So what ? It's irrelevant.. Actually it was a Manhattan project scientist that didn't want to see one side get a huge advantage over the other that made that all possible for the soviets. You think the apollo hoax was kept totally quite? Bill Kaysing worked for a while on the apollo simulation project which was in reality a cover story/plan to fake the moon missions till he retired from rocket dyne.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@EGRJ I've seen the rover videos. Boy did you miss a lot ! There is a definite "stopping" of the dust in mid air as of they hit earth atmosphere.
stalkervision 8 months ago
Do you know that the Soviets sent up up laser Star Wars battle stations into orbital tests and this has only recently been discovered because of the fall of the soviet union? The government and nasa knew nothing of there real purpose and these projects were HUGE !
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision The US was working on a Space Defense Initiative too. I don't think either program ever really went anywhere. Any "laser battle stations" were experimental.
What does this have to do with the moon landing?
What about the radio operators who monitored the missions in real time? Some people in Australia even spliced into the cable Apollo 11 was using to send info back from Aussie radio 'scopes. They had access to the video before NASA did.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ It was a HUGE and totally secret project as i said involving thousands of Russians as I said and as the Manhattan project also was. That was one of you objections that projects like this couldn't be kept secret remember? Spliced into the aussie's cables? :-) I have a nice story about that. It a video of a technician that WORKED at those aussie facilities and distinctly remembers how very odd the apollo signals came into the facilities. They seemed to appear from no where.
stalkervision 8 months ago
Actually the moon rocks "angle" is the weakest link of proof pal. As i sad if your interested jarrah white has a excellent series on all this. He also is coming out with a BRAND new series on apollo moon rocks soon.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision Also, many of the rocks have been stolen, meaning that people outside of gov't control are free to examine them. Not one has said, "yes, I stole the moon rock, but it's a fake!" Heck, with the money they'd get from the book deal, they could hire a good enough lawyer to get a slap on the wrist.
Also, the Soviet space program lost heart after Soviet 11. If they knew it was fake, why would they stop?
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Do you believe anyone who stole a moon rock would have it scientifically analyzed pal? :-) What do you think would happen to them? Soyuz 11... The Soviets knew that reaching the moon through the Van Allen belts wasn't possible do to dangerous radiation. They had a mission ready that could have predated the apollo moon fly by and a group of soviet cosmonauts requested it be flown no matter what the hazards. The Soviet highers ups denied that request . Why would they do that?
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision If someone stole a diamond, they would've have a crooked jeweler look at it for them. Moon rocks, by weight, are more valuable than diamonds. Heck, some of the thieves might have been scientists themselves.
BTW: Van Allen himself said the belts wouldn't kill anyone. The guy the belts are named for.
Oh, and the Soyuz astronauts died of asyphyxiation. I can't find anything about hazards or higher ups. Source?
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ So a person that stole a moon rock would take it to a jeweler for testing? LOL ! No, Van allen never said that. He stuck to his paper and original conclusions till he died. He called his own major paper on the belts "popular science" when asked which it obviously wasn't but never did a adjustment to the conclusions EVER. His remarks on the belts radiation dangers were always very obtuse and strange in later life. The source is a program about the soviet space program.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision I pointed out that people take stolen diamonds to be tested and that some of the people stealing it may actually be qualified scientists. Your only response is flat denial.
bit ly/l6bFKg
bit ly/mrMZw2
There, Van Allen's quote. What "paper" are you referring to? Where did he specifically say the exposure would be fatal?
EGRJ 8 months ago
It's a pbs show. There are also interview with sir Bernard Lovell who had direct talks with the soviets on their space program and always asked them this same question.." when will you be going to the moon?" Their response was always the same.."when we can get our astronauts back alive" This was because they couldn't see anyway around the space radiation problem whatsoever.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision What "PBS show", exactly? Do you actually know, or are you just quoting Jarrah? Do you actually check what Jarrah says? I looked up that interview, incidentally;
thetim[dot]es/aVIQ69
Note how the very next paragraph specifically refers to the safety margins, not the radiation. The Soviets lowered their standards so they could "win" the Space Race. The radiation claim is an unsupported conclusion. It's a cherry-picked quote, just like Jarrah always does.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Jarrah has a video excerpt on his site It isn't a quote from jarrah whatsoever. It's personal interviews with these people pal. That's what they actually said. Btw your links are completely worthless. And in all actuality if you look this up one up it was OUR government and nasa that lowered THEIR standards on radiation.
stalkervision 8 months ago
Now were going into your childish view of"mental state" hmm.. well that figures since your losing so bad on every turn you try. Guess parroting others words doesn't always work hmm?
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision v=4Qjt6NmSADc
Jarrah miscalculates the radiation exposure at around 6:16. He calculates the unshielded exposure, according to the very paper he is referencing. That's basically the same as the astronauts would get floating in space naked.
bit ly/iELyYK
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ The apollo shielding was minimal at best. Actually it was worse then no shielding according to a nice nasa science radation expert lady that rightly pointed out that aluminum protection in outer space actually causes much deadlier secondary particles to be sprayed off from space radiation collisions with a aluminum hull.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision The Apollo shielding was more than adequate over the short term. The concern about Al causing secondary particles is a concern for deep space, not a round-trip to the moon.
islandone org/Settlements/MagShield.html
I like how you ignore the fact that Jarrah was out and out wrong. James Van Allen, whom the belts were named after, said they would survive. The astronauts' suits provided even more shielding, as did the inside of the pods.
EGRJ 8 months ago
I believe were done here. Your repeating to me the "clavis handbook" Heared it all before. It's points have been been busted already.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision I've never read Clavius. I'm getting all my information from a thread on a forum discussing Jarrah and my own independent research.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ So your just repeating what OTHER people say. What's the difference? All these arguments they use have been busted pal. I saw this immediately. Do some of your OWN research into the subject. Then you will learn something. Don't just parrot old busted apologist supporters arguments.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision The forum thread in question includes people arguing for jarrah AND against. You just automatically assumed it was against, which says something about your mental state. A lot of the HB arguments are decades old as well. What makes them so virtuous? And how was the gov't able to fool most of the world's scientists for four decades, but not some random Joe Blow?
I distinctly said I did my own research. Looks like you're the one who "only hears what he wants to hear".
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ what FORUM is it pal ?
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision Doesn't matter. What matters is the evidence, more than its source. The forum was Clauvius, or BAUT, I'll tell you that much. In fact, it's a general conspiracy theorist website. The reason I'm not telling you is because I argue under a pseudonym on there.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ LMAO ! But didn't you SAY you NEVER read Clavis as I recall ? You use their forum though..! Naive Apollo skeptics go on clavis where they are all immediately SHOT DOWN by both the moderators and the members no matter what they say. You know that already though don't you? It's FAR from a OPEN FORUM dude as you well know. I don't care what your pseudonym is there pal. I would never become a member of that little roach motel.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision Also, how were thousands of lettered scientists fooled for 40 years, yet someone can just look at something and go "that's wrong" and they're right?
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Actually BEFORE the apollo missions the vast majority of the scientific community didn't believe apollo would work whatsoever because ITO the odds were so high for a success.. After " the missions" what could they say? The singularly supplied nasa evidence proved them wrong. Ever hear what Hiler said about "the Big Lie" look it up..and do you know what the astronauts said after the first missions? They derided the whole scientific community for doubting it, that's what.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision That's nice. Please source. And yet, after the missions were a success, scientists eagerly pored over the information and samples returned.
EGRJ 8 months ago
i remember quite distinctly that a whole lot of people believed it was a hoax even at the time they went on
stalkervision 8 months ago
To openly or even privately criticize the landings as being possibly being faked by any "lettered scientist' would be academic career suicide. Understand now?
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision So they were perfectly willing to speak out against the missions before, but afterwards, they unanimously decided to lose their collective pairs. Okay.
So why didn't some scientist just send their proof to Wikileaks? I mean, we're talking rocket scientists here. Why aren't they able to figure out some way to disseminate the truth anonymously?
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Wikileaks didn't exist then and have you actually seen the witch hunt any open wiki leaks disclosure does to the disclosure ?
stalkervision 8 months ago
Most of the people directly involved in this cover up are either dead or still covering it up. I remember Ralphe Renne saying he had one of the astronauts of apollo willing to tell him the truth behind the missions and the man died of a heart attack a few days later strangely. These people are being WATCHED. Look for the Bart Sibral video where the son says to his apollo astronaut father..."You want the to call the cia and have him wacked dad?" and the apollo dad says..."no.."
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision So most of the people who covered it up are dead, which means they can't suppress everyone anymore. Yet no whistleblowers have come forward.
Thanks for undermining your own argument.
Say, how many people would it take to watch the 400,000 people working on Apollo 11 alone, much less all of the moon landings? Keep in mind it takes two cops just to watch a house. Keeping very just one very smart person from leaking anything would call for dozens.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@stalkervision And why wouldn't one or two of the 1,000s of scientists worldwide value the billions of dollars of taxpayer money more than their own career?
How would it be "academic suicide"? The people who would be blackballing them would be, well, the other scientists. Anyone who could prove NASA was BS would promptly end up on talk shows.
All the scientists in the world? Even those in countries who would screw the US over in a heartbeat?
EGRJ 8 months ago
I always LOVE how people say the academic community has always been behind and believed in these missions. It's total garbage. Hell 30 % of the public at the time didn't even but what could they say? It was all a nasa/government/mass media controlled show
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision Okay, please find me evidence of a substantial scientific outcry over the Apollo missions. Or at least widespread dissent.
Also, the public believes a lot of nonsense. A lot of them believe homeopathy and astrology are worth something.
EGRJ 8 months ago
@EGRJ Find YOU the evidence pal? LOL! I was there and I know! If your interested try looking that up yourself. The scientific community in general gave it very very slim odds indeed. I ain't lying to you as you did with me.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision You made a claim. You back it up. That is how debating works. If you cannot prove it, I don't have to believe it.
What lie did I tell?
EGRJ 8 months ago
and a lot of what people believe turns out to be in reality true..The people of that era were natural healthy skeptics having been lied too over vietnam. They don't exist to that extent anymore.
stalkervision 8 months ago
Any academician that openly came out as not believing in the landings would be pilloried. It's a really really simplistic argument people always try to use.
stalkervision 8 months ago
I am really serious. You will get no where parroting different apollo supporters sites. You will just hear what you want to hear.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision Or they were right and you're too blinkered to admit it.
EGRJ 8 months ago
Got to go. I'll talk to you again soon some time> Take my advices and start enjoying the weekend.
stalkervision 8 months ago
Nasa is "far from open" on anything pal. They control their resources and message very carefully. Always have. In fact WITHIN nasa there is massive compartmentalization. I watched a video right on YT where many new nasa engineers were complaining about just that.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision You might want to head on over to Nasa's website and look at the massive amount of videos, photos, and records they've placed out in the open for all to see.
EGRJ 8 months ago
The best researched apollo skeptic I have found is Jarrah White Look up his "moonfaker series" The "Lunarcy" series here is also very good. Lots of great video to watch there. Far better then arguing it all with me ! LOL !
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision I'm familiar with Jarrah. Simply put, he's a farce. He misrepresents and misquotes evidence and creatively misunderstands everything. Like when he quotes Kovalev's data on radiation exposure in space, but he somehow uses the unshielded dosage, not the one the astronauts would get behind a 1.27cm hull. In another video, he makes the same mistake, except the portion he highlights onscreen actually SAYS it's unshielded. Useless unless the astronauts were floating naked in space.
EGRJ 8 months ago
and If you don't want to do that get your beer and your grilling supplies ready and have a great memorial day weekend.
stalkervision 8 months ago
@stalkervision Nope. You're wrong. Jarrah's wrong. America went to the moon.
EGRJ 8 months ago
zomg .. those jumps would do murder to ur knees >.<
TheNinjari 9 months ago
MAN ON THE MOON
THE LIE
watch?v=BnKlHgDBjUI
NASAHOAX 10 months ago
@NASAHOAX = the REAL liar.
Monkeyboysdontknow 10 months ago
@jafar7523629 you're retarded..
cabot2jville2010 10 months ago
@johnfotios omg...fucking get over urself with the "moon landings are fake" they have antenna on their suits..
cabot2jville2010 10 months ago
"The country needs that shuttle mighty bad" I hear ya buddy.
zBriGuy 10 months ago
They are awesome
youssefdahustler 11 months ago
damm da flag got bigger since armstrong planted
Elbabyboy69 1 year ago
look on the flag? it's fake!!! Bloody yanks!
avatore1 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheJomogogo 11 months ago
to all of you hoax trolls, WE WENT TO THE MOON RETARDS! Do yourself a favor and get an education, please.
bennyvega100 1 year ago
@bennyvega100 Education my ass, more like "Do us all a favor and get yourselves sterilized before you reproduce.".
EmperorofCartoons 11 months ago
Actually in reality, what most of them really need is psychiatric help...That Arizona shooter Jared Loughner was a moon-hoaxer
bennyvega100 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There's a mountain of evidence that they faked the moon landindings. Here's a link to some of it.
3W's (dot) spurstalk (dot) com/forums/showthread dot()php?t=144487
(check link for gaps)
Cosmored 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Are there sworn affidavits by anyone who claims to have worked on a fake moon landing movie for NASA? NO.
Is there a single peer-reviewed technical paper that calls the authenticity of any part of the Apollo program into question? No
Are there some really ignorant people on YouTube? Yes
Synthetrix 1 year ago
f@cking amazing!
leoncolombo 1 year ago
this is fake look at 1:06 there is a glare on the helments there is no way u get a glare on a gold plate while on the moon
RetardCloud 1 year ago
@RetardCloud Your nickname suits you fine.. I don't know about the cloud part though...
leoncolombo 1 year ago
@RetardCloud
OMGWTFBBQ "no way u get a glare on faceplate while on the moon" ?? WTF WTF WTF ? You moonturds make up any old shit don't you?
TheJomogogo 1 year ago
@RetardCloud
wow, your name lives up to your comment. Retard :)
bennyvega100 1 year ago
@RetardCloud You are joking right?
yesiamawizardjonny 10 months ago
@RetardCloud ..wtf are u talking about
cabot2jville2010 10 months ago
1:10 astronaut just hang in the air for a second, like he's on wires.
Quex01 1 year ago
@Quex01
Oh bullshit nothing of the sort happens just another hoaxturd seeing what he wants derhhhhh
TheJomogogo 1 year ago
@Quex01 At 1:30, the light catches the wire above the astronaut in the foreground :)
JohnFotios 1 year ago
great video
arkor7 1 year ago
flag swings in moon great.
five times they send man to moon and why they didn't go after 1970s to moon and now only they discovered water in moon without man in moon. if they send man to moon on 1969 means i'm sure now there will be one space station in moon , IT IS SAHARA DESERT .nothing is true
sounza 1 year ago
I knew Charles yesterday evening!!!
He's an amazing man.
Cletten 1 year ago
Why would a government spend billions of dollars to take pictures of stars,These guys were test pilots not photographers.The moon landings happened,Get over it.
arobekie 1 year ago
1:30
jafar7523629 1 year ago
1.30 the wire is shining!
jafar7523629 1 year ago
@jafar7523629
That's the antenna on their backpack. Why are moon hoaxers so goddamn stupit?
TheJomogogo 1 year ago
no stars?!
jafar7523629 1 year ago
@jafar7523629 No stars. It is normal. Bright surface and faint light of stars. Take a photo and you can not see stars. Longer exposure time, then you can see stars but nothing more, because the surface would be a white area without any contours.
CHSarahBs 1 year ago
@CHSarahBs the Atmospher is like no-atmosfer there on the moon surface thereroe small shiny dots should appear even weak light is enaugh.
i can show you another official movie provided by NASA that there is no doubt of wire-technology used in it.
jafar7523629 1 year ago
@jafar7523629 This short exposure time is not for taking photos of stars with their faint light. For taking photos of them you need an exposure time of some minutes. Why do you think there are no stars on ISS photos? Or on Shuttle-photos? Or on photos with the earth? Same effect. Photos with stars were shot from the moon surface with UV (Apollo 16).
The so-called wire-technology does not work. So each dust particle had to be wired.
CHSarahBs 1 year ago
@CHSarahBs the dust fall is normal
i can show you more normal falls also.
jafar7523629 1 year ago
Why is the low gravity, no atmosphere environment, not kicking the dust in an extreme way, like it would do on earth, with more gravity, and resistances?
ldanley72 1 year ago
@ldanley72 You've actually hit on a point that demonstrates that this film is REAL. On Earth, dust disturbed from the surface tends to hang suspended in the air for a time (as behind a car on a dusty road). In Apollo films, the dust goes up and straight back down on a parabolic arc, even behind the moving Lunar Rover. That says load and clear that, wherever this was filmed, there was no atmosphere to hold the dust in suspension. What wide open spaces do we know of with no atmosphere? Hmmm......
eventcone 1 year ago 2
@eventcone Well according to what you just sai,d the astronauts would do the same, and would not seem to float. They would come down faster then the dust.
ldanley72 1 year ago
Charlie Duke . . . he left a picture of his family in basically a ziplock baggie on the surface of the moon, man I envy that. The thought is so awesome. It will last, barring meteor impact, for a lonnnnnnnng time.
Triethylborane 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
so fake.. Look at 0:52 to 0:56, you can see the wire reflect the light above the guy on the right. There is sevral clips with wires reflecting above them.
zapbolt 1 year ago
@zapbolt
That's an antenna you idiot.
TheJomogogo 1 year ago
@TheJomogogo yeah, i'm sure you pulled that one right out of your fat ass, show me 1 space suit picture from that moon landing that has an antena. If you can't then stfu
zapbolt 1 year ago
@zapbolt
dude they're all over the place are you blind and stupid?
TheJomogogo 1 year ago
@zapbolt
There are plenty of these suits in museums around the world. Go see for yourself.
tpsossff 1 year ago
@zapbolt
If they were faking why dress them in suits that are so heavy they need wire suports??
The training suits, identical in appearance weighed only 55 pounds.
The wires you talk of were a single 15 inch antenna on the left hand top of the backpack.
Why do you people keep repeating the same old drivel when you clearly do not have a clue about anything that went on during those years?
tpsossff 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fake
user17v 1 year ago
1:05 always picking on us AF guys :)
hialeahe 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Flight to the moon, as the court. If NASA acknowledged that some of the film as a fake and some soil fake, judge and jury might think that the accused is innocent like oj simpson
Xzandon 2 years ago
Notice quadrangular spotlight reflected
on visors and how astroNots do
everything possible to avoid it!
MicaelaAlmodovar 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
great fake too. god save AMERICA
FreshGarantie 2 years ago