Added: 4 years ago
From: Squarkino
Views: 24,173
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (138)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Your video is a favorite on India

    

  • And a final observation, if these images were presented as part of a modern day film depicting man's first landing on the moon they would be laughed out of the cinema, for example, an astronaut falls over amongst razor sharp rocks any one of which could render him history from a tear in his suit, and his friend comes over and says, quite unconcerned, ' Let me help you there buddy' , 1969 US land on the moon, 2011 no further than 400 miles up with 14 deaths, that's progress? kiss my arse

  • Apollowasreal, you call this Walt Disney-like cartoon real? and why, for God's sake would they load the rover for the journey back? it is like I have said to other believers and never had a sensible answer, in the 1960's -70's we [so-called] went to the moon 6 times,240 thousand miles, since then we have never ventured more than 400 miles and lost 14 astronauts, granted we had a staged will we wont we Apollo 13 to keep NASA's money rolling in, are you stupid or what?

  • @thecubanism Yes he is stupid. Profoundly stupid

  • @thecubanism They took it back??? That´s why I haven´t seen a trace of the rrover anywhere! But what about the flag? Is there a chance of me taking a picture of it with a nice telescope?

  • @thecubanism Of course they didn't take the Rover back. It was the Rovers camera which filmed the lift-off.

    Is there any scientifical reason to go higher than 400 miles if one is not going to proceed to Moon or Mars? No, nothing there in the empty space that isn't better researched by automatic sonds.

    What has the Shuttles 14 deaths in TWO accidents got to do with Apollo? Do the tens of thousands who have died in air crashes mean that the Wright brothers didn't fly?

  • lol, at the first car assembly plant on the Moon. COME BACK. I Helped make it too!

    I couldn't for the life of me understand how they carried the thing.

    There was very high Solar activity that time to the moon. If they truly hit open space then they would of been well messed up.

    Thanks for posting this.

  • lol running after it. funny shit.. COME BACK!!!

  • Well, there's one lie the conspiracy guy told. Said there was no such video. Obviously, he lied.

  • I think this is the only filmed deployment of the rover. They should have done it for all the missions.

  • Cool vid! I always wondered where the rover was on the LEM. Had no idea the astronauts had to basically put it together.

  • This video makes it look like the rover magically appeared! Searching for a non-sped up version....

  • Could we get some Benny Hill theme music on this, please?

  • I love the fact they put a sun compass on the 'dash' just in case they got lost. Imagine that. Lost on the moon!

    As for the dregs on here: Don't feed the trolls!

  • Actually the crew of Apollo 14 got lost in the highlands as they could not see great distances all the time due to the rolling terrain. They could not find their primary objective which was Cone Crater. Their time ran out and they had to head back to the LM before locating the objective.

  • Please, nasafekedit, stop spamming around! You made your point.

  • LOL. YOU are a crime against humanity.

  • Why is the camera zooming in and out?

  • Fake it Nasa

    LM Toy space craft

  • A toy spacecraft will have no depth, photographically, and stands out like a sore-thumb. Ask any ILM effects technician.

  • LM toy space craft made of tin foil, what a sick joke

  • No, it was made from Aluminium, by Grumman Aerospace out on Long Island, NY, and I remember when that was, I was a kid.

  • You are still a kid and a rather stupid one

    Lead shielding is essential dikhead

  • No, lead shielding is not essential. THe particles involved, unless there is a Solar Flare, will not penetrate double-walled alumnium, and especially Gold foil. That is why Gold foil is used as a tamper-reflecter in the pit of a nuclear device, from Trinity, to today.

  • America. My home sweet home for 48 and 1/2 years, and the greatest and most advanced nation on the planet. Namaste. I watched this all happen 40-years ago on TV, and in science-class in school.

  • Americas and the US NWO Govt

    FAKING IT as usual

  • This is not faked. If it was, how was it done, with 1960s special effects: Traveling mattes, blue screen, optical printers? Animation? Models on wires? Give me a break. You know NOTHING about aerospace technology since 1959.

  • Since 1969 nasa has been editing and photoshopping the fake moon pics each year until 2009

  • Talk to NASA, and go to Houston, Alabama, or Florida, and find out for yourself, what they do with technology. THey do airbrush out UFOs, and othr alien artifacts, as you know. We are not alone in space.

  • Nasa are fucking LIARS

  • when it was deployed it went...... boeing!!!

  • A nice piece of an American Marvel!

  • A nice piece of TV fakery

  • if confederate soldiers were able to make submarines,

    if two bicycle repair men were able to make airplanes,

    if Nazis were able to make rockets and jet fighters,

    then we certainly are capable of going to the moon

  • excellent point!!!!

  • And Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany did the theoretical work for and design of the mightiest weapons known to man in 1943, the Atomic and Hydrogen bombs, which are still the most powerful destructive weapons known, and there is theoretically no limit to the power of an H-bomb.

  • What is not being publicised, is that technology existst fo get us to the very STARS, much faster than light, with no mass or time dialation. Now the technology is coming out, after 60-years of suppression.

  • In 2009 the technology exists to send a man 400 miles into space via the shuttles and no further

    1969 lol what a fake

  • But we have sent unmanned probes to the Moon and the planets since 1959. over half a century. To send men, you just need a life-support system, and food and water.

  • Lol beam me up scotty you certainly are retarded

  • He who resorts to insults and name calling without citing SCIENCE, has lost the battle. Game over.

  • I only insult morons like u who spend your days and nights spamming and trolling propaganda on youtube dickhead

  • You left ME a message, all I did was respond to your overture. I work on working propulsion systems. All you can do is be ignorant, and abusive, instead of studious and insightul. Make an effort. It takes no effort whatsover to not read and study, and simply hurl insults at those who do.

  • I have never left u a message, all i have done was replied to your pathetic comments

  • You certainly did leave me a message, but as you clearly do not remember doing so, you are clearly crazy. I sha'nt waste my precious down-time arguing with a crazy-mind. The conversation (if you can call it that) is ended.

  • I have never left you a message in my life you lying piece of shit

  • Than I am seeing things, and you are lying. Either way, this conversation can serve no purpose, goodbye.

  • Okay...

  • Comment removed

  • @torpcomics we have the technology to get there ya, but humans cant get there, impossible for humans to go through the van allen radiation belt, it would tear your skin clean off if attempted

  • @MrWillyMusic

    You are totally ignorant. They didn't cross the van allen belt at all, the scooted around the edge.

  • @RealityIsTheNow gahh ive explained this b4, that comment was an inside joke for my buddy, im totally aware of the van allen situation

  • @torpcomics we can send rovers there yes, but not humans, humans cannot pass through the van allen radiation belt

  • @MrWillyMusic Please explain WHICH kind of radiation in the van Allen belt (and which one of them) "would tear Your skin off"? Also what intensity that radiation has. Since You clearly claim to be a radiation expert, You must be able to explain that!

  • @YDDES lolll sorry it was sarcasm, kind of an inside joke

  • @MrWillyMusic

    good thing they went around the edges of it

    Check out videos named

    TLI Orbit Slice View

    and

    TLI_Orbit.avi

  • Kind transformes !!!

    Nasa had a lot of work to make it fill in the small space compartment of Lunar module lower section. Had to make it in a way it would reintegrate, unfold, while pulled out.

  • The "mountain of evidence" in fact is a bit like a desert fata morgana. For some souls and simpleminds it seems to be there.

    Cosmo, together with some 65 other hoaxtards, is the only one to believe this crap of a conspiracy.

    It's a big disgrace and really an insult to all the 400.000 engineers, scientists and astronauts in the Apollo programme to state it was a fake.

  • wow, it's so cool to see them do experiments and nuts+bolts things on the moon. there are some nice thought-provoking, never-before-seen photos of this more mundane kind of thing at the american museum of natural history right now. back during the cold war people would have wanted to see hype, but this seems very human over the passage of time.

  • they can just pick up the rover lol

  • It's kind of annoying, reading this space-monkey gibberish. Let's face it, the Apollo program was a major engineering triumph - and the good ol' USA deserves full credit.

    Nice try, Russkies. Second place doesn't count.

  • samoo 1,unless you dig up something of someone who is in the russian space agency who says the landings, N-1, LK lander, Russian Lunokhod probes were not real, until that time comes, you are a clown to me.

  • plus they are still qouting the long debunked, self described BRIGHT ENGINEER(w/no highschool, lol!) ralph rene.

    wow. same theorist junk found on other theorist junk-sites, only this on posted on pravda ru. an exact copy paste- then post.

  • mrsammo, why would russia not say moonalndings were fake?

    because they themselves tracked, received and scrutinized every telemetric data from all apollo missions. from translunar injection to reentry. hell, their failing luna probe crashed very near tranquility base.

  • They have.

    The reason you don't know this is the media.

    It's been controlled for a long long time.

  • "They have.

    The reason you don't know this is the media.

    It's been controlled for a long long time. "

    you have swayed topic and have not answered why russia did not cry wolf if landings were indeed fake.

    take a look, russia had a copy of then super bomber B-29. russians copied with Tu-4.

    that is proof that US cant keep secrets, technological, political, etc from the ever prying russians.

    so kindly answer my question, mr sammo.

    why have the russians not balked at anything fake?

  • Because the media controls everything.

    Try to buy a history book from another country.

    They aren't allowed here.

    Controlled.

    Just like the 9/11 lies.

    Controlled.

  • oh, cant you read?

    poor sammo.

    i was talking about russia not media.

    media is a typica topic diversion even from

    9-11 nuthead theorists.

  • Google Are the Russians letting the cat out of the bag?

  • i did, and you know waht? it is unsourced.

    it is a forum post.

    you know you can say everything on a forum.

    specially on a site that features stories like:

    Extraterrestrials interested in human sperm and ovules..

    got any more nice tabloid crap?

    poor sammo.

    i pity your ignorance.

  • It's sourced to russia.

    Shill peacefully!

  • not where but WHO?

    yeah, you do link tabloid crappies again.. its so funny of you!!!!!!!!

  • Pravda isn't a source?

    You said why isn't Russia speaking out about the fake Apollo.

    I point out that they are speaking out.

    Thanks to you...people will see this and google the subject.

    Thanks for helping.

    Your Shilling...... was just used against you.

  • Pravda is not RUSSIAN SPACE AGENCY

    AUTHOR of article is unreliable, just the usual theorist posting same old incoherent theorist crappo found on every theorist site.

    read fine print on their site:

    The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA Ru's editors

  • Oh! The Russian Space Agency itself.

    Haven't we done business with them in the past? You expect a partner in crime to rat?

    It's really simple.

    You can believe your eyes...or you can believe in a invisible man in the sky...and all the trimmings.

    I believe my eyes.

  • "You expect a partner in crime to rat?" like it WAS a SPACE RACE than a SPACE TEAM. lol Russia made their own N-1 rocket. even built their own LK lunar lander. "..You can believe your eyes.. I believe my eyes." yeah you may believe what YOU see, but not research about it. quit the theoreticalism. it proves no argument pravda is not russia. its an equivalent of Enquirer. so you qoute enquirer as source? whats the update on batboy, tabloid fan? lololol
  • Shill peacefully.

    Tell Agent Steve over at Langley I said "hi!"

  • shill your ass.

    all you have proven is that you believe tabloids....

    thats what you get if you dont study! you proved that you are tabloid educated.

    so what does batboy eat?

    lol you.

    any other proof or more poof?

    funny sammo.

  • What a joke. Well...at least they went out of their way to fake all this. I guess it's worth the billions we gave all those contractors.

  • well i noticed you type your theories backed up nothing less but gas.

    why would they fake apollo 13 mishap?

    why were the russians after 40+years still made no effort to expose thise "CONspiracy?"

    fact is it is all true.

  • You obviously haven't done any research into the subject.

    Graze peacefully.

  • i dont do research using bart sibrel's, ralph rene's, jarrah white's(et al) stupid, outta their ass theories proven with original lunar landing videos with audio edited byt bart sibrel.

    now go see who claims to have American filmaker's awards but didnt, and who describes self as talented engineer, and some australian long haired yak-yakker.

  • I personally know researchers who were warned by NASA not to keep looking into the moon landings.

    It's the same as the 9/11 lies.

    When you get too close to the truth the Secret Service WILL be at your door.

  • "I personally know researchers who were warned by NASA not to keep looking into the moon landings."

    is that another pulled outta the ass lie, or a spoonful of diversionary topics designed to sway off the scientific arguments?

    "Secret Service WILL be at your door."

    has there been a documented event of such, or another head stuck in sand tactic?

    all these unrelated arguments have no scientific basis. only made to sway the discussion to the theorists' favour.

  • The Lunar rover was attached just beneath the new LEM, redesigned for the Rover. The wheels, disc etc was folded in, to make it fit. So after landing, the astronauts did just a cupple of simple grips then the rest more or less unfolded automaticly. The three Rovers are still.. on the Moon.

  • stillablaze, ever the skeptic, posits:" If I said "I still don't believe afer watching the series." What would you have said then?"

    Simple. "What would it take to convince you that we did, in fact, go?" (i.e., what proof do you require?)

    It's good to Question Authority. The problem lies in the fact that when Authority answers, will you pay attention?

  • "Simple. "What would it take to convince you that we did, in fact, go?" (i.e., what proof do you require?)"

    Why don't you simply reply to my comments instead of posting them on the youtube video?

    It would take images\photo's of the 3 LRV's still left on the moon and the 6 LM decent stages also left on the moon.

    The Japanese Aerospace did orbit the moon in Nov 07 and Jan 08 and took 3D imgages of the Apollo landing site but no equipment.

    As their 3D system had 10m resolution.

  • stillablaze.... the largest piece of equipment was the descent stage of the lunar module. It is no more than 5 meters wide. The JAXA camera only has a 10 meter resolution. Of course they couldn't see the equipment, but the LRO will be orbiting the moon next year and has a camera resolution of 18 inches. I'm looking forward to those photos.

  • Ravenflight104 I had been informed of the size of the LM decent stage and the LRV a few weeks ago by Apolloist (they even did the math as to why Hubble and Keck Telescopes does not have the resolution to see the equipment). I had been also informed of NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) in feb\mar 08.

    I to shall look forward to seeing the images\photo's. But thanks for the update :-)

  • May bad, I meant "LRO feb\mar 09" not '08 :-)

  • Google " L.R.O."

    You'll order will be filled this coming year!

    Happy 40th Anniversary.

  • "It's good to Question Authority. The problem lies in the fact that when Authority answers, will you pay attention? It's good to Question Authority "

    The problem here lies you don't question do you, just post a question on the youtube site hoping I will read it !

    What is also 'skeptic' and 'sheepish' stating " we DID go to the moon " ... DID being the operative word in capital letters.

  • Stillablaze sheepishly admits:"...I am now convinced we DID go to the moon. This series has given me a lot more information in the 2 last weeks than the last 40 years since man landed on the moon lol."

    You could have also come to the same conclusions by reading books in a library -- or watching the historical record on 16mm film and video.

    Of course, actually LIVING during the era when it happened in real time can't be beat either.

  • I was 7 years old when they landed and watched it on TV. If I said "I still don't believe afer watching the series. " What would you have said then ? jeese ! Just can't please some ppl eh.

    I also researched a lot of information from the internet, early Apollo research missions, Clavius, Wikipedia Apollo missions, Van Allen Radiation belt, Radiation effect on Humans, ISS Wikipedia, Moon Wikipedia, SAA radiation levels etc.

    Shame you can't ask a few more questions eh !

  • Hell i've been looking for the deployment of the LRV for some time now. Could never figure out how they folded\strapped it to the Apollo 15 LM now I know. All I could find is cartoon pictures ! Still ain't convinced we went to the moon though but i'm getting there.

  • Stillablaze sez:"Still ain't convinced we went to the moon though but i'm getting there."

    Watch this (One of Five-part series) and you'll be convinced:

    watch?v=fasMYnDW82U&feature=re­lated

  • I have just watched the whole series "Moon Machines" on Sky Discovery channel in the last 2 weeks. Having watched this series I am now convinced we DID go to the moon. This series has given me a lot more information in the 2 last weeks than the last 40 years since man landed on the moon lol. The series does go into a lot more detail regarding design and development of the Apollo LM, CM module, Saturn V rocket, LRV, Space Suits, Apollo 1 to 10 missions and numerous interviews.

  • "I have just watched the whole series "Moon Machines" on Sky Discovery channel in the last 2 weeks. Having watched this series I am now convinced we DID go to the moon."

    Wow, stillablaze, that's great! I applaud your honesty and willingness to look at real evidence. You Moon Hoax believers should take an example from this guy!! And check out that Moon Machines series. He's right, it's great!

  • "Stillablaze sez:"Still ain't convinced we went to the moon though but i'm getting there.""

    There's a mountain of evidence that says they faked it. There's a partial summary of it here.

    3W's (dot) rushlimbaughforum (dot) com/never-went-the-moon-t2782 (dot) html

    (check link for gaps)

  • "There's a mountain of evidence that says they faked it."

    All given by scientific illiterates, hoax newbies, and physics amateurs. There is no "HOAX!" movie or evangelist here or elsewhere that I would trust to even SPELL "Nasa," let alone pretend to have an education.

    But thats for everyone else. Cosmo, for continuous bluffing and quackery, you're still being ignored while unread. Enjoy. ;)

  • Hey SpreadingtheMuse

    strahd27sucks (dot) blogspot (dot) com/

    You say you're a physics professor so I have a question about physics for you.

    In the video below a piece of paper goes up, hits the side of the hatch, stops, and then continues moving. This is supposed to be the vacuum of space. What is the force that makes it start moving again? It looks like water current to me. You're the expert so please explain it to us.

    /watch?v=kG4Z_r38ZDE

    "About paper and bubbles of ShenzhouVII"

  • I think SpreadingtheMuse is a shill. He claims to be an expert in Physics, yet chooses to ignore the fact that the Van Allen radiation belt prevents our current crummy spacecraft from delivering a human to the moon alive.

    An astronaut shielded by 3 mm of aluminium in an elliptic orbit passing through the radiation belt will receive about 2,500 rem (25 Sv) per year. (2-5 Sv causes epilation or hair loss, hemorrhage and will cause death in many cases.)

  • "shill" is one of those cliches that wannabes hear and then repeat, pretending to sound clever without even knowing what it means.

    Do you? ;)

    For "radiation" is the same thing. Big scary word you hear on TV pretending to understand.

    Do you know what kinds of radiation are in the belt?

    Do you know how to block them all? (Hint, you dont need metal).

    Do you know the official Radiation Penetration Formula? Which tells you EXACTLY how much dose per unit shielding? Of course you dont.

  • Touched a nerve, did I? Your private message to me screams "I NEED VALIDATION." I'm still laughing.

  • Yes, hoaxaholics who deliberately go out of their way to post immaturity on peoples personal profiles certainly radiate "I'm begging for attention!" dont they? ;)

  • Are you claiming to be an expert in physics fnord?

    "3 mm of aluminium"

    If you were you would know that metal is the worst type of shielding against the type of radiation found in the van allen belts. (note the s)

    Polyethylene is the preferred shielding against high energy charged particles.

    You might also know that the VABs also only stretch about 20 degrees above and bellow the magnetic equator and are therefore easily avoidable.

  • Please also say that the NASA report with the 2500 rem value also uses a 200x20,000 miles orbit as reference. Such a satellite does about 1513 orbits in one year, spending approximately 30 minutes of each orbit in the belt (of about 6 hours time for each orbit)

    Each Apollo passed the altitude of the belts in 25 minutes during a mission. That means, being hoax-friendly: 25 Sv/1513 = 0.0165249 Sv.

    That calculated number is still higher as the measured value during the missions.

  • Strange. I have yet to see them.

    I only have seen mountains of technical documentation and scientific reports about the Apollo program.

    Also, does somebody know how much 28 hours of life transmissions from the moon weight if transported to the surface of the moon in the form of 1969 video tapes? ;-)

    (I know there are more hours of transmissions, but German TV was transmitting live for 28 hours when Apollo 11 landed, with millions of Germans seeing it.)

  • The TV transmissions were broadcast live using (you better sit down for this as it involves magical technology) radio waves! Yes indeed, man had discovered radio by the 1960's.

  • Yes, indeed. And they used radio signals which indeed came from the moon. Or sometimes from lunar orbit, with strong differences in the Doppler shift of the signal.

    The radio observatory of Bochum still has the recordings of the signals on magnetic tape, including antenna pointing.

    So, by observation, something must have been emitting such signals from lunar orbit or lunar surface - can this be done unmanned?

  • Exactly. Unfortunately the conspiracy theorists just claim that the data from Bochum is fake too. :-)

  • Yeah, but fortunately, such kind of denial chains soon lead to the conclusion, that the moon hoaxer himself must be fake. ;-)

  • @stevel666

    i heard that a town in germany

    had a massive satelite Dish and aimed at the landing area to get live transmission

  • Yeah dude - no tapes. They transmitted the live vid, and had some 16mm film cameras too. So there's lots of video, and a much smaller amount of good-quality 16mm film.

  • Dude, Wikipedia is NOT a verified source of FACTS. Anyone can write articles on anything they want. It's FULL of mistakes.

    And as far as this clip goes... they had a remote control powerful enough to operate a camera on the Moon from Earth with NO time delay??? And I asked my mom about the baby carriage thing like you suggested and she says it took between one and two minutes, sometimes three if she was driving the car at the same time...

  • "they had a remote control powerful enough to operate a camera on the Moon from Earth with NO time delay???"

    Of course -- it's called a radio. I mean, this TV signal was broadcast directly from the Moon, that's way harder.

    And the time delay is only 1.5 seconds.

    "Wikipedia is NOT a verified source of FACTS"

    On Wikipedia, as everywhere else, you should check the references. Wiki "Apollo TV camera", you'll find links to detailed specs. Argue the information, not the source.

  • Yeah fair enough. I am now a moon-goer believer. Re: Wiki- so many people take everything on there as verified and definitive, when obviously it's not. I find someone pointing to any old Wiki entry as 'evidence' disturbing. But yeah the Apollo TV entry has sources listed. Groovy...

  • so why didnt they both get on this wonderful machine i'm sure after waiting such a long time they must have been itching to have a go both of them, i'm surprised we dont see them both fighting over who goes first.

  • The rover was not built on the moonThe GTCA is remotely controlled from earth. For further information please read wiki or astronautix or other sources.

    Ask your mom how long she needed to mount your baby carriage.

  • Now I am curious what the whole baby carriage thing is about? but to glambush2..we did go to the moon and yes they had a rover on it ..with just a little research all the details,weight ,power source, batteries,speed even the distance traveled by each rover, etc can easily be found.

  • We had even three rovers on the moon :-þ Maybe mount is not the best word, perhaps unfold? Didn't you ever seen a mother taking out the carriage out of the trunk, unfold it, put the baby in?

  • Ok ,now I see what you were talking about.I have seen the actual footage release/unfolding of the rover on the moon and in the tarining at the Apollo lunar surface journal and on YT.There are a few videos of it on YouTube if you search for " Lunar Rover deployment.

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