@samwst56 what a disgraceful affront to all the things science has brought you. You should be ashamed my friend, and go find out all the technological wonders you now enjoy because of NASA and other research by public bodies.
@samwst56 Krisdevalle answered your question- the huge Virgin company has invested billions in its Galactic fleet, and still it isnt operational. I like to converse with scientific Men- my friend if it were up to you we would still be living in caves. You do know that the computer you use, the phone you use, the camera you use... they were all developed with public money? Sorry I hate your attitude to human progress so much... its like one of those mad muslims or crazy christians.
Ad Onor del Vero l'uomo non è ancora andato sulla Luna !
Troverete le prove schiaccianti digitando su GOOGLE " WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON "
Se invece preferite continuare a credere che dodici astronauti americani sono stati sulla Luna, fate pure così ! - CONTENTI VOI CONTENTI TUTTI !! ( ...soprattutto quelli che vi hanno sonoramente turlupinati ! - AH ! AH ! AH ! AH ! )
Ciao a tutti dall'Italia e, se potete, cercate almeno di starmi bene !
photographs have now been taken showing the actual locations of the moon buggys and even the tiny astronaught footprints. This video is now null and void. Please remove as we shouldnt corrupt our childrens minds.
@nameofthepen i watched it, fair play but it doesnt change my mind. I just dont like how people who are pro conspiracy (JFK, which I do believe was a conspiracy, 9/11, and many others involving the government, illuminati etc) have to believe that EVERYTHING incredible is a conspiracy. Now we have telescopes taking pics of the actual buggies used in the landings, to me thats irrefutable evidence really Brother, and grinds all your evidence into moon dust.
Allow me a question please. How come you have "telescopes taking pics of the actual buggies used in the landings" while the rest of the world have not?
@NASACrooks watch that dude watch?v=1bk8PWOpVes You know it was actually quite hard to find, I just knew Id seen it on our news in the UK. Just shows theres more money/interest in proving something is a conspiracy than proving that it isnt.
@Pentdad The LROC fiasco is used by our selves as evidence of the landing being fake.You cannot come here and bring evidence exactly what we think it's evidence against.If you can see "buggies" and "lander" from the LROC,then you need medical checks starting with your eyes.If Google can color photograph the face of a human on Earth from 600 miles away through the atmosphere,then surely NASA can photograph an object 30ft across from 25 miles away in an atmosphere-less environment.Period.
@NASACrooks The problem is scale. The GeoEye weighs a couple of tonnes and the sole instrument on it is the camera. It is dedicated to this task. The LRO is around 700kg and has 7 instruments, of which the camera is one of them; the entire unit massing some 20kg overall.
While it continues to gather useful scientific data about the lunar environment, it also was not put there to convince ignorant conspiracy theorists, because you make continual excuses to maintain your beliefs.
@NASACrooks I knew you'd say that my friend, and herein is the problem. Because now your not just saying a small group of scientists and filmmakers and actors 40 years ago were involved in a conspiracy, you're saying that it has continued, even to present day. Which means we are now looking at thousands of people involved. Sitting at a laptop saying you can see wires negates way too much, and it becomes impossible to think differently because your view is so blinkered. Sorry dude :(
The cover for the hoax is a national priority issue for the criminal regime who governs USA.I don't see why this should be a surprise to you.
The wires are the only explanation possible for what happens in @16 on this video.Ask somebody who knows elementary physics why the sand has greater speed ratio going down than the astro clown himself while the two objects should have exactly the same speed ratio when going down? And only then come back to me.
@NASACrooks No, because you didnt ask anyone that question, you got the answer from a video/book by someone who already totally believed the conspiracy to start with. I can go find someone who doesnt believe in Dinosaurs if I wanted, and bring you back a load of facts that appear to validate his claims. And Brother, now your connecting the hoax with the illuminati, the reptile men, 9/11, etc etc. Thats your problem, you seem to think you HAVE to believe ALL conspiracies. You shouldnt!
Looks like another case of a desert moth accidental taking his place in history as a moon goer.They are commonly known as "moonmoths" but the scientific name is colostomies sordae corollae krisdevales.
@CNN911Fakes So the buggies being on the Moon is less important than unproven wires shown on old footage... That makes no sense dude your confusing evidence with theory.
In any event, this video uses original NASA footage presumably filmed contemporaneously with the event they say it represents. So, in a criminal investigation, it is far more important than what we discover at the crime scene after it has been tainted by new planted evidence and people with big boots tramping through it.
The flashes and dangling are absolutely proven in this video. Only explanation that satisfies all the constraints is wires
@CNN911Fakes I just gotta ask it my friend.. why do you care? This was the USA's greatest achievment. No President died (JFK), no great leader died (MLK), no war was started (Iraq), no innocents died (9/11)... And plus its that crappy kind of conspiracy, like Hitler being alive, that could never be proven. Unless you see Hitlers bones/go to the Moon yourself, all evidence is tainted because its from 'them'. Therefore the debate is actually a complete waste of mine and your time isnt it?
@samwst56 lol Im very liberal dude, and I hate the gov, and I hate wall street. So why do I believe we went to the Moon? Surely everything in me would put me on your side? Alas, science is not about sides- you make the same mistake a religious Creationist makes. As a scientific gentleman, I judge based on facts. And I decree that in this case, NASA is correct, and you are misguided. You my friend, are not a scientific gentleman.
@Pentdad Gosh, I am talking about the wires in this video and you want to discuss material covered elsewhere in other videos.
Why don't you pursue your interests? If you are not interested in analysing this video that clearly shows the use of wires to further a lie of oppressive government, then go to a video that covers your interests.
I wish to support those who visit this video with honest inquiry, not fight government and NASA shills and infiltrators.
@CNN911Fakes no my friend, I am a liberal, young guy, who does believe the gov has been involved in some conspiracies! I am just like you, only I think I grasp science a little better. You see as scientists we look at the evidence and then make a decision. And if you really, seriously did that, you would see that on one side are theories on wires, shadows etc, and on the other is years and countless man hours of gov and non gov study. Peaceout x
@Pentdad All those noisy shilling comments and not one dealing with the subject of this video; flashes and dangling that the best, and only explanation that satisfies all the constraints, is wires and, thus, NASA video fakery and lies.
You are right that it is a theory that the actual flashes and actual dangling observed in this video are the result of the use of wires, but, after years of shilling, you shills have never offered an alternative that satisfies all of the constraints. Not one.
@Aeronauticalexplorer Anyone who wants to see that your suggestion is BS can look frame by frame. They will see that the person went up off the ground faster than the sand. The sand did not go as high as the person. I is just like one person jumped two feet in the air while another jumped 1 foot in the air. The video clearly shows that the gravity is equal for the sand and the person.
Others: Yes, I know the point is obvious but he seems not to be able to understand it
OMG! Here, on a humble YouTube forum, we have first public introduction of the breakthrough theory that the speed of light is not a fixed constant:
“The return [laser] pulse from the moons surface is much weaker and more spread out in time than the return pulse from the cornercubes.” - knowledgemangler
@nameofthepen Semantics aside, if the cornercubes aren't there, then why do the obsertatories aim at the spots where they are supposed to be and get a higher photon return?
What's your actual point here? Are all the astronomers who do this just dumb chumps?
The fact remains that this experiment is performed regularly. If there were no cornercubes the laser could be aimed at any old place on the moon and you'd get the same result. This is not happening.
So now you have decided to include a number of observatories, and astronomers, in on this 'conspiracy', by fabricating their results to pretend there is a mirror reflecting their laser pointed at the moon.
@krisdevalle I argue that there could not have been any launch other than the ones announced and thus the Apollo crew had to be how the cornercubes got there.
@knowledgemonger Agreed - but since Aeronauticaldenier is so violently opposed to agreeing with anything I say, he's now decided that there are no reflectors on the lunar surface whatsoever.
@krisdevalle Um no. If there are, it does not prove they are hand placed there is what you can not seem to grasp. You claim "that we all agree that they are there" The fact of the matter is that we do not. There is no actual proof that they are there and certainly no proof that they were hand placed there if so. Get it yet airhead? You are so slow, I have to rewrite comments more than once until you understand them.
@krisdevalle You mean if other observatories are using them. How do they know if they were hand placed there or if the information they are seeing on their computer monitors are generated from corner cubes? They are only told that but they don't really know. How can you not think of these things? Just playing dumb again?
@Aeronauticalexplorer Aim a laser at another part of the moon : exceedingly minimal laser return.
Aim a laser at the cornercube site: Higher return.
It's that simple. It couldn't be much simpler. The cornercubes return a higher, more accurate laser reflection - allowing observatories to measure the distance to the moon down to the cm.
You can disbelieve this as much as you like; but it's accepted fact, and so far has not been debunked.
@krisdevalle How do you know there is a higher return? Just because they said so? So the monitor displays some numbers and that is proof than man actually walked on the Moon? I mean the ridiculousness of your argument makes me wonder if you are playing with a full deck.
@nameofthepen Some of the findings of this long-term experiment are:
- The Moon is spiraling away from Earth at a rate of 38 mm per year.
- The Moon probably has a liquid core of about 20% of the Moon's radius.
- The universal force of gravity is very stable. The experiments have put an upper limit on the change in Newton's gravitational constant G of less than 1 part in 1011 since 1969.
@nameofthepen As long as they can can get paid for it from honest taxpayers pockets. Astronomers, NASA and all manner of greedy contractors have been stealing money from taxpayers. As long as politicians are paid off, this will go on, go on, go on.
@Aeronauticalexplorer The important number is one that gets a lot smaller when you use the cornercubes. The error bar on the distance to the moon gets way smaller with that strong narrow return pulse. Since we know almost exactly the distance, we can have a great many pulses in flight towards and back from the moon. We can use extremely short pulses making finding the center of the return pulse very easy.
I honestly don't understand why a lot of people believe that the moon landing was fake... I guess we have to agree to disagree. The reason why i believe it "makes you feel superior" is because there's basically a war between the two sides and I just don't understand that people would stay with that accousation even though its extreamely hard to prove. And when people say it's real, I assume you would just say "Wow, too dumb to see it's fake" hense feeling superior... Do you believe 2012 is real?
@IcUClanMW3 You might want to do some of your own research into the subject. What you read about people wanting to "feel superior" is bull shit. Go look at all the evidence that proves they never walked on the moon yourself. It is all over the internet.
@Aeronauticalexplorer Yeah, i've researched this quite a bit. Sorry for accusing you of feeling superior but the only person I met that believed the moon landing was fake, did it just to feel like that they are better than society, and that everyone else was retarted for not believing it... The evidence is good but it is near impossible to prove your theory... Until the general public can see the moon's surface for themselves!
@IcUClanMW3 Actually basic Physics already proved they are on wire supports in their videos. So I don't believe anything they claim about walking on the Moon.
@Aeronauticalexplorer - Agreed! They may not publicly refute it, but that does NOT mean they *believe* it.
A military/industrial/gubmint job at $75,000/year, with full family medical and dental, gubmint-sponsored mortgage loans below prime, and annual 2-months paid vacation, etc. goes a long way to keeping eyes and mouths shut.
According to Berlet and Lyons, "Conspiracism is a particular narrative form of scapegoating that frames demonized enemies as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good, while it valorizes the scapegoater as a hero for sounding the alarm"
@krisdevalle Yes, I understand what you mean, but I honestly don't think that's the situation here, as it's a historical event which had little to no effect to basically anyone. Other than the legacy of mankind (I guess...).
@IcUClanMW3 Well yeah - but despite being unable to explain exactly WHY they could not make it to the moon, they announce that they have perceived anomalies in the footage that apparently make it clear to them it is a hoax. But if this were true, a vast portion of academia, science and engineering, or image experts would also see it. The 'hoax' would be busted. But it is not. Hence they deem themselves superior for working out something the rest of us have not, apparently.
@krisdevalle Its not the concept that they couldn't, it is the fact that they DIDN'T. Get your shit straight and stop trying to twist it around you fucking liar, piece of shit.
@IcUClanMW3 - You say you've "researched this quite a bit". Then, you say, "it's a historical event which had little to no effect to...anyone." These two statements conflict.
I'm curious. May I please ask you a Q?: Is MW3 a "brute force" type of game, with no real tactical finesse required?
@nameofthepen Yes, yes... Bring uo something that is completely irrelivant just to try to win an arguement that is about the moon landing! It's not mine, my brother's... He's a gamer. And at least I don't think something which is 100% true to be false. Oh no I can see a little ping, it MUST mean it's fake. Learn science, buy a powerful laser or hack into a satellite. It happened, accept it and don't believe in the 2012 doomsday, that's a lie too.
@nameofthepen LOL!!!!!!!!!!! What a crazy insane theory!!! People who think Sunlight reflects off the Moon just want to "Feel Superior" lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
en.wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories READ THE WHOLE PAGE, I don't understand why you refuse to accept the truth. I believe it's a seek for superiorness...
@nameofthepen Do you even know what a laser is? You can not reflect light off a surface like the moon's without a reflective material, try aiming a key ring laser to the wall in your house...
@nameofthepen The Laser will scatter off the moons surface. The return pulse from the moons surface is much weaker and more spread out in time than the return pulse from the cornercubes. It only takes fairly simple math to prove that the cornercubes are there. You just need to go look at the lunar ranging experiments and the results they get. Don't trust a US one, after all they my be among the millions in your imagined conspiracy. Try Crimea for example.
The American retard who salutes his flag at 0:16 ,is suspended on a wire.
The reason is: On a real situation,on the real Moon the sand would land at the same speed ratio as the falling "astronaut" because in a vacuum all unaided objects will fall at the same speed.Here we look at a situation on which the sand lands at a speed of about 3 meters a second and the retarded yankee lands at a speed of 0.90 meters a second.The wire effect of the puppeteers is more than evident.It's an absolute fact.
Troverete le prove schiaccianti digitando su GOOGLE " WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON "
Se invece preferite continuare a credere che dodici astronauti americani sono stati sulla Luna, fate pure così ! - CONTENTI VOI CONTENTI TUTTI !! ( ...soprattutto quelli che vi hanno sonoramente turlupinati ! - AH ! AH ! AH ! AH ! )
Ciao a tutti dall'Italia e, se potete, cercate almeno di starmi bene !
People who say the moonlanding is fake are addicted to chaos and conspiracy! The reason it SEEMS the astronauts are floating is that human muscles are "set" work and resist against the gravetational pull of Earth. These astronaut's muscles have worked against Earth's pull for 40 or so years! When the gravetational pull is much lighter, the muscles STILL work with the same resistance in mind but due to a lighter pull, the muscles work too hard which causes an exaggeration in movement. Accept it!
@Aeronauticalexplorer They are not actors, they are paid and trained for space exploration. Answer me one question? Why? Why would N.A.S.A spend billions faking something to gain globel power? There are so many more solutions then to "pretend" a moon landing. You and all the other conspiracists just want to create disruption and pretend that something that was so great, was fake just to feel superior to people who do believe it. My comment is a scientific fact, look it up.
@NASACrooks You guys have no motive and little to no FACTUAL evidence to support your theory, and yes it is a theory! What about the LRRR placed on the moon where many scientists have successfully rebound lasers to and from the moon in 2 - 3 seconds?
@IcUClanMW3 That doesn't mean they were hand placed there. The Russians even made an Unmanned Moon Landing claim along with NASA so you have no point whatsoever! lol!!
@IcUClanMW3 Since when is it a "scientific fact" that" NASA spent billions on faking the moonlandings"?
The whole thing is they never spent that much money and never went to the Moon at all. They collected billions to fill some pockets. It is not so that I "feel superior". lol!! That is a ridiculous theory. It is that there should not be all this evidence that they never walked on the moon if they really had. That is what you are not understanding.
@IcUClanMW3 I think that many who *say* that the moon landings are fake are in it for the money. You can sell movies and books to a market that is self selected for its gullibility. Because they have demonstrated that they will fall for such stuff, the makers don't have to check their "facts" or even be carefull not to include proofs that what they are saying is false. They can just get someone to pretend to be an expert and they are done.
@knowledgemonger You are WRONG again. I pointed out that 0:16 proves he is on a wire support. Which it does but I don't get paid for pointing that out LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I have no book for sale nor did I ever spend a dime on any book. Its all FREE!!!! Facts speak for themselves which prove the whole moonlandings claim was a lie. They never walked on the Moon. You can't argue with facts knucklehead.
@Aeronauticalexplorer You pointed at 0:16 and barked nonsense. I pointed out that it is nonsense. I pointed out that your explanation of what is seen could not be true and that a different explanation fits the facts exactly. You made a false claim. Repeating it, stomping your foot, holding your breath until you turn blue won't help. Your claim is simply false. Get over it.
@Aeronauticalexplorer I said that your claims are nonsense. You are making claims that are not based in physics. I have pointed this out and have pointed out the physics that shows that your claims are nonsense.
0:16 the sand falls way way faster than the astronaut. Proves he is on a wire support. Just this alone proves the whole thing was faked. They never went to the Moon. End of story. Get over it NASA huggers.
Apollo 14...You really are stupid aren't you? Have you ever heard of transmission rod? God, this guy is an absolute retard. Burn in hell for causing so much bull
This guy has no idea of physics at all. If you reduce someones weight to 1/6 to let him jump higher, but he still is on earth he will still have the same g-forces pulling him down. Wich means he drops faster than our guys on the moon did.
Conspiracy theories make tons of money. You can make a conspiracy out of anything. The bigger the better. The smart ones know there are many people out there to be taken advantage of. Either too gullible or just plain stupid. Then they get TV shows, radio shows, websites and must keep the conspiracy alive so the cash keeps coming in.
Ad Onor del Vero l'uomo non è ancora andato sulla Luna !
Troverete le prove schiaccianti digitando su GOOGLE " WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON "
Se invece preferite continuare a credere che dodici astronauti americani sono stati sulla Luna, fate pure così ! - CONTENTI VOI CONTENTI TUTTI !! ( ...soprattutto quelli che vi hanno sonoramente turlupinati ! - AH ! AH ! AH ! AH ! )
Saluti a tutti voi dall' Italia e, se potete, cercate almeno di starmi bene !
@romanljc What does a mirror have to do with a drawn in sillhouette of baphomet?
This video is a fake; baphomet does not exist, except in the minds of our owners. They really think they need the power of the devil to cheat, lie, steal, maim and murder.
They think taking things and freedom from the ignorant is somehow noble. They think that keeping people big and stupid will somehow protect their interests.
The image of baphomet is conlcusive. Even if you can't see him.
@nameofthepen the moon is made of cheese there is no way we could have landed on it you would sink in the soft cheese surface that would melt from the rocket heat
@romanljc Based on the sillhouette of baphomet drawn in on this faked video of apollo 11, I have got to say I agree; goat of mendes cheese. Like everything NASA does; very stinky and only a few people can actually stomach it.
@snakehipsohoolihan You are pretty pathetic to change my user name on here and call me thecrappestdad.First of all you didn't even spell it right!Crappiest!Add an I you snakeshipohooligan! LOL!
I used to think we did go to the moon.But there is too much evidence that these so called scientists and space gurus messed up on and did not cover they fake tracks.So investagators and conspirists have all but proven without a shadow of a doubt that we did not go to the moon and every Apollo Project was a fake!But we will never get these so called idiots to admit that we never went to the moon.This is one that we will all probably go to the grave without seeing publicized admission to the fake!
@thecoolestdad - Except there isn't a single moon hoax claim that holds up to scrutiny, none, zero, zilch :). Instead the hoax claims are mostly based upon ignorance of science, engineering, physics, etc, even ignorance of photography. The idea that the world's leading scientists and research teams in several fields (physics, engineering, astronomy, chemistry, mathematics etc) who have confirmed/accepted the validity of the moon landings are somehow ALL lying, is just nonsense. :)
@MTMind2 On July 20,1969,I was in a motel room in Tn,with my grandparents and I was 10 yrs old.I stayed up til 1,2 or 3 in the morning to watch Neil Armstrong step out onto the moon.I believed it then and I want to still believe it now.But there is too much stuff out there on the internet that is doing its best to convince people otherwise and I am partly one of them.Based on what I have seen I am a strattler on the fence as to whether we went to the moon or not.Confused,yes I am.Want to believe
@thecoolestdad I watched it as a kid too here in the UK. You're American - you should be proud of it - not doubting it because of a load of internet "evidence", none of which stands up to a little bit of analysis.
@TheBaldmeister Well I am not as deep into believing the hoax as it may appear.This stuff has really become confusing for a lot of us.I say one thing in one direction but then later I'll say something different.Not because I want to but because some of these hoaxers really make it seem convincing that we never went to the moon.Who do we believe?I guess until there is proof in the pudding and it comes out to the public on national tv,I will always lean toward the side that we DID walk on the moon
Have you ever wondered why the so-called "astronauts" never came out on TV to debate and do whatever necessary to clean the situation?
If you or I were an astronauts who been to the Moon for real we would sue the "conspiracy theorists" if failed to convince them.Don't you see they behave guilty all the way?
@thecoolestdad Apart from none of the hoax "evidence" standing up, the whole thing defies logic.
Why do it 9 times and increase the chances of being found out?
Of all the hundreds of people involved, not one has admitted to a hoax - even on their death-bed.
Why "script" it with a spacecraft that leaves equipment and bits of itself behind, to be found (or not!) later? Like all good space sci-fi they would have had a craft that came home leaving no trace of itself.
@nameofthepen "...looking through a telescope..." No, of course not. Do you think there is a telescope powerful enough to see the landing sites from Earth?
@TheBaldmeister - So you are claiming that we left "equipment and bits behind", based upon the claims of NASA, not on your own eyes, or even independent, impartial, non-military-associated evidence?
Since NASA lies, why would you trust *anything* they say?
@nameofthepen You miss the point. I said if it was all made up, they would not have scripted it so that stuff was left behind to be verified (or not) later on. Even if it was not possible then, they would have expected at least that an un-manned probe might go there not long after to see that the lander, rover etc was not there. So they would have written the story so that nothing got left behind.
Logic dictates. If the landings were real,we would have fresh HD photographs of the lander etc. every two weeks.You know how much would cost for NASA a photographic probe able to do just that? About $10 000 all together,no more.
@TheBaldmeister Says we don't need even a little bit of analysis to see the NASA fakery. That is correct. The flash behind the antennna shown in this video proves there is something behind the antenna. The only explanation proffered so far is a wire. It explains the phenomenon completely and the shills who admit seeing it only offer explanations that don't satisfy all the constraints.
Why don't you give it a try? We have already proven it is not an antenna flash or a camera or film artifact.
@CNN911Fakes You see what you want to I guess. In the Apollo 17 shots especially, you can clearly see it's on the antennae, not on any wires.
How many people involved in this elaborate multi-million dollar hoax? No-one checked the film, to spot the flashes and get them to re-shoot it? No-one thought of using matt-black wires to avoid the problem?
@TheBaldmeister Sorry charlie, we take only the best tuna...
The lower flash at 1:29 ff lights the antenna from behind. A frame by frame analysis reveals it even more clearly than the running video. The object that flashes does not get lit by its own flash. Simple concept.
There is something behind the antenna that is flashing and lighting up the antenna in front of it. The only explanation so far that satisfies all the constraints is a wire.
@krisdevalle Thanks for the effort to find more wires, but I need only one set to prove they are there. You'll have to analyse that newly identified set your self. You could cover the front page with excrement conversing with yourself.
Regarding the lower flashes behind the antenna at 1:30 ff, perhaps you will eventually come up with an alternative to wires that meets all the constraints, but I doubt it.
ps, chap 3, verse 16 of John is probably the most peer reviewed sentence in history.
@CNN911Fakes Yep. It is a flash off the antenna. You can see the antenna flash and the point at the edge of the image where the bright light reflects off the inside surface of part of the Lens assembly. Anyone who has done much outdoor photography will have seen this same sort of thing happen here on earth. If it was a wire and was straight as you claim, the sun would not hit two places at the ends but not the middle. It looks like an antenna would and not like a wire would.
@knowledgemonger So you are confident that the flash that lights up the antenna in front of the flash is not a camera anomaly.
Why don't you find a non-NASA (and NASA shill) example of what you describe and present it to us. An amateur video where a flash lighting an object from behind is clearly from the objewct itself.
@CNN911Fakes You are just talking nonsense. The sun reflected off the antenna. That is the flash of the antenna. The light from it also hit the inside of the lens assembly. That is what is at the edge of the video. It is that simple. Anyone who knows anything about photography will agree. Only "we never went to the moon" nutter suggest anything different.
I think it's cool that you have decided that the phenomenon of lighting the antenna from behind is both a flash and a camera artifact. Place your bets on everything but the winner!
@knowledgemonger It is highly unlikely that you are right. It is more likely that it is the wire that has already been proven to be used in the John Young Jump Solute 0:16 sand falls way faster than he does confirming that the flash is the wire and the flash is directly where it should be.
@Aeronauticalexplorer No, the odds that the "wire" would reflect at two points one being where it is attached and the other being right at the edge of frame are exactly zero. A straight object simply can't do that. The fact that it looks exactly like what I described, makes the odds that I am correct practically 100% since there is no other explanation that matches.
@knowledgemonger LOL @ "no other explanation that matches" That is totally ridiculous. Its the wire support. Other evidence is conclusive that they are on a wire support. So the chances that the wire we see reflecting in "not" the wire is slim to None.
@Aeronauticalexplorer Yeah right. A light source reflecting off a wire at two end points but not in the middle. Pull the other one it has bells on it.
A new dwarf galaxy was found by MIT's Dr. Si. Vegetti. It is a satellite of an elliptical galaxy almost 10 billion light-years away from Earth.
There is a lot more interesting stuff than the made up stories of the "we never went to the moon" wingnuts. All of their claims have been debunked repeatedly at this point. It really is time for them to call it a day. It is over. Apollo was for real.
The so-called "astronaut" here after jumping he falls down at a speed of about 0:9 meters a second.But the sand of his feet has fallen at about 2.7 meters a second.
This is another absolute proof the moonlandings were faked.
On the real situation on the real Moon all objects would fall at the same speed rate.
how bout you unbelievers suck a dick and go up to the moon urselves
SUWBSWIBE 1 hour ago 2
The hoax is a hoax.
OneCentArms 2 hours ago
Summing up all of NASA's nasty hoaxes, here are some new lyrics to an old Lefty Frizzell song.
"If yew got the money, honey,
NASA's got the crime.
They'll go honky tonkin'
On the public's dime.
But if they run out of money,
NASA will sit and whine.
They got no more money, honey,
NASA will do no more crime.
samwst56 2 hours ago
@samwst56 what a disgraceful affront to all the things science has brought you. You should be ashamed my friend, and go find out all the technological wonders you now enjoy because of NASA and other research by public bodies.
Pentdad 2 hours ago
@Pentdad You are a phony, Pentagon Dad. If going into outer space was such a great idea, why didn't an entrepreneur do it? Humm?
We have to spend a zillion dollars from honest taxpayers for some two-bit Mickey Mouse "invention" that some lab on earth could do.
The trouble is you and your types have no conscience, no shame. You have continually robbed hard-working taxpayers. And will continue to do so.
"If taxpayers got the money,
NASA's got time to do the crime."
Cut/Print
samwst56 2 hours ago
@samwst56 Well, Virgin Galactic are doing it right now. So there you go.
krisdevalle 2 hours ago
@samwst56 Krisdevalle answered your question- the huge Virgin company has invested billions in its Galactic fleet, and still it isnt operational. I like to converse with scientific Men- my friend if it were up to you we would still be living in caves. You do know that the computer you use, the phone you use, the camera you use... they were all developed with public money? Sorry I hate your attitude to human progress so much... its like one of those mad muslims or crazy christians.
Pentdad 1 hour ago
@Pentdad
What "human progress" you see here retard? They feeding you CARTOONS! fucking goofball.
NASACrooks 1 hour ago
@Pentdad To be fair, I'm not sure VG are up to the 'billions' part yet, but they have certainly invested a lot.
krisdevalle 1 hour ago
@Pentdad - Computers, cameras and phones developed with public money?
"Galactic fleets", "mad muslims" and "crazy christians"?
You don't even need a hat to be hilarious!! :D
nameofthepen 44 minutes ago
@nameofthepen Congratulations! You are the most full-of-shit poster on YouTube today. Please do the world a favor and do not breed.
TheFACTSRUS 13 minutes ago
@Pentdad - "NASA...research"? "public bodies"? Wot???
Sounds like you're advocating drinking Tang whilst engaging in kinky sex!!
nameofthepen 51 minutes ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ad Onor del Vero l'uomo non è ancora andato sulla Luna !
Troverete le prove schiaccianti digitando su GOOGLE " WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON "
Se invece preferite continuare a credere che dodici astronauti americani sono stati sulla Luna, fate pure così ! - CONTENTI VOI CONTENTI TUTTI !! ( ...soprattutto quelli che vi hanno sonoramente turlupinati ! - AH ! AH ! AH ! AH ! )
Ciao a tutti dall'Italia e, se potete, cercate almeno di starmi bene !
Ettore
ettoremazza7 6 hours ago
photographs have now been taken showing the actual locations of the moon buggys and even the tiny astronaught footprints. This video is now null and void. Please remove as we shouldnt corrupt our childrens minds.
Pentdad 9 hours ago
@Pentdad - LOL. Love your sense of humor. ;-))
nameofthepen 8 hours ago
@Pentdad - I've found something for you: /watch?v=BBJUyYuzivo
Truth doesn't "corrupt our childrens minds". Television does. Please remove.
nameofthepen 7 hours ago
@nameofthepen i watched it, fair play but it doesnt change my mind. I just dont like how people who are pro conspiracy (JFK, which I do believe was a conspiracy, 9/11, and many others involving the government, illuminati etc) have to believe that EVERYTHING incredible is a conspiracy. Now we have telescopes taking pics of the actual buggies used in the landings, to me thats irrefutable evidence really Brother, and grinds all your evidence into moon dust.
Pentdad 5 hours ago
@Pentdad sez: "...people who are pro conspiracy...have to believe...."
Where did you get the idea that we "have to" believe anything?
nameofthepen 5 hours ago
@Pentdad
Allow me a question please. How come you have "telescopes taking pics of the actual buggies used in the landings" while the rest of the world have not?
NASACrooks 3 hours ago
@NASACrooks watch that dude watch?v=1bk8PWOpVes You know it was actually quite hard to find, I just knew Id seen it on our news in the UK. Just shows theres more money/interest in proving something is a conspiracy than proving that it isnt.
Pentdad 3 hours ago
@Pentdad The LROC fiasco is used by our selves as evidence of the landing being fake.You cannot come here and bring evidence exactly what we think it's evidence against.If you can see "buggies" and "lander" from the LROC,then you need medical checks starting with your eyes.If Google can color photograph the face of a human on Earth from 600 miles away through the atmosphere,then surely NASA can photograph an object 30ft across from 25 miles away in an atmosphere-less environment.Period.
NASACrooks 3 hours ago
@NASACrooks The problem is scale. The GeoEye weighs a couple of tonnes and the sole instrument on it is the camera. It is dedicated to this task. The LRO is around 700kg and has 7 instruments, of which the camera is one of them; the entire unit massing some 20kg overall.
While it continues to gather useful scientific data about the lunar environment, it also was not put there to convince ignorant conspiracy theorists, because you make continual excuses to maintain your beliefs.
krisdevalle 3 hours ago
@NASACrooks I knew you'd say that my friend, and herein is the problem. Because now your not just saying a small group of scientists and filmmakers and actors 40 years ago were involved in a conspiracy, you're saying that it has continued, even to present day. Which means we are now looking at thousands of people involved. Sitting at a laptop saying you can see wires negates way too much, and it becomes impossible to think differently because your view is so blinkered. Sorry dude :(
Pentdad 2 hours ago
@Pentdad
The cover for the hoax is a national priority issue for the criminal regime who governs USA.I don't see why this should be a surprise to you.
The wires are the only explanation possible for what happens in @16 on this video.Ask somebody who knows elementary physics why the sand has greater speed ratio going down than the astro clown himself while the two objects should have exactly the same speed ratio when going down? And only then come back to me.
NASACrooks 2 hours ago
@NASACrooks No, because you didnt ask anyone that question, you got the answer from a video/book by someone who already totally believed the conspiracy to start with. I can go find someone who doesnt believe in Dinosaurs if I wanted, and bring you back a load of facts that appear to validate his claims. And Brother, now your connecting the hoax with the illuminati, the reptile men, 9/11, etc etc. Thats your problem, you seem to think you HAVE to believe ALL conspiracies. You shouldnt!
Pentdad 2 hours ago
@Pentdad
I don't know what you talking about and I'm not interested to know either.
NASACrooks 2 hours ago
@Pentdad - I can't *believe* you would post this link as "proof". :LMAO!!
All I can say is to paraphrase the old meme: "Dad, I am disappoint."
nameofthepen 58 minutes ago
@NASACrooks - Get your "buggies" right here ;-) : /watch?v=Yb3xrKvUVTo#t=1m12s
nameofthepen 2 hours ago
@nameofthepen
Looks like another case of a desert moth accidental taking his place in history as a moon goer.They are commonly known as "moonmoths" but the scientific name is colostomies sordae corollae krisdevales.
NASACrooks 2 hours ago
@Pentdad This video shows wires (so far the only explanation that satisfies all the constraints) via flashes and dangling.
Why would images of the moon change what this video shows conclusively?
CNN911Fakes 3 hours ago
@CNN911Fakes So the buggies being on the Moon is less important than unproven wires shown on old footage... That makes no sense dude your confusing evidence with theory.
Pentdad 3 hours ago
@Pentdad You are forgetting the adjective "dune"
In any event, this video uses original NASA footage presumably filmed contemporaneously with the event they say it represents. So, in a criminal investigation, it is far more important than what we discover at the crime scene after it has been tainted by new planted evidence and people with big boots tramping through it.
The flashes and dangling are absolutely proven in this video. Only explanation that satisfies all the constraints is wires
CNN911Fakes 2 hours ago
@CNN911Fakes I just gotta ask it my friend.. why do you care? This was the USA's greatest achievment. No President died (JFK), no great leader died (MLK), no war was started (Iraq), no innocents died (9/11)... And plus its that crappy kind of conspiracy, like Hitler being alive, that could never be proven. Unless you see Hitlers bones/go to the Moon yourself, all evidence is tainted because its from 'them'. Therefore the debate is actually a complete waste of mine and your time isnt it?
Pentdad 2 hours ago
@Pentdad Sounds like that impassioned fairy tale came from a Pentagon Dad. You'll got your wings clipped, too.
No guns. No ammo. Gotta find a war quick.
samwst56 2 hours ago
@samwst56 lol Im very liberal dude, and I hate the gov, and I hate wall street. So why do I believe we went to the Moon? Surely everything in me would put me on your side? Alas, science is not about sides- you make the same mistake a religious Creationist makes. As a scientific gentleman, I judge based on facts. And I decree that in this case, NASA is correct, and you are misguided. You my friend, are not a scientific gentleman.
Pentdad 2 hours ago
@Pentdad Gosh, I am talking about the wires in this video and you want to discuss material covered elsewhere in other videos.
Why don't you pursue your interests? If you are not interested in analysing this video that clearly shows the use of wires to further a lie of oppressive government, then go to a video that covers your interests.
I wish to support those who visit this video with honest inquiry, not fight government and NASA shills and infiltrators.
Like you.
CNN911Fakes 2 hours ago
@CNN911Fakes no my friend, I am a liberal, young guy, who does believe the gov has been involved in some conspiracies! I am just like you, only I think I grasp science a little better. You see as scientists we look at the evidence and then make a decision. And if you really, seriously did that, you would see that on one side are theories on wires, shadows etc, and on the other is years and countless man hours of gov and non gov study. Peaceout x
Pentdad 2 hours ago
@Pentdad All those noisy shilling comments and not one dealing with the subject of this video; flashes and dangling that the best, and only explanation that satisfies all the constraints, is wires and, thus, NASA video fakery and lies.
You are right that it is a theory that the actual flashes and actual dangling observed in this video are the result of the use of wires, but, after years of shilling, you shills have never offered an alternative that satisfies all of the constraints. Not one.
CNN911Fakes 59 minutes ago
Moon-based cornercubes are on the wish list of the NASA fraudsters.
nameofthepen 9 hours ago
Wires 2.18 yank that monkey actor upwards !
NASAvsPETE1 17 hours ago
Our legendary Apollo heroes are wire-@ssed frauds. C'est le bummer. ٩๏̯͡๏)۶
nameofthepen 20 hours ago
Proof they are on wire supports @ 0:16. AstroNot falls at a slower rate than the sand. Basic Physics people. Wake up.
Aeronauticalexplorer 21 hours ago
Proof they are on wire support is @ 0:16 The AstroNot falls at a much slower speed than the sand.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer Anyone who wants to see that your suggestion is BS can look frame by frame. They will see that the person went up off the ground faster than the sand. The sand did not go as high as the person. I is just like one person jumped two feet in the air while another jumped 1 foot in the air. The video clearly shows that the gravity is equal for the sand and the person.
Others: Yes, I know the point is obvious but he seems not to be able to understand it
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
OMG! Here, on a humble YouTube forum, we have first public introduction of the breakthrough theory that the speed of light is not a fixed constant:
“The return [laser] pulse from the moons surface is much weaker and more spread out in time than the return pulse from the cornercubes.” - knowledgemangler
nameofthepen 1 day ago
@nameofthepen Semantics aside, if the cornercubes aren't there, then why do the obsertatories aim at the spots where they are supposed to be and get a higher photon return?
What's your actual point here? Are all the astronomers who do this just dumb chumps?
The fact remains that this experiment is performed regularly. If there were no cornercubes the laser could be aimed at any old place on the moon and you'd get the same result. This is not happening.
Is it worth arguing?
krisdevalle 1 day ago
@krisdevalle lol@ "high photon return" more like a higher dollar return if enough idiots like you believe it. lol!!!!!!!!
Besides that, how would that prove it was hand placed there if they even made claims of unmanned moonlandings?
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer This is why the point is moot, and not worth arguing.
We can confirm and guarantee that cornercube reflectors are in place.
I believe they were placed by astronauts.
You believe they were placed by robots that have we no proof of.
However, this does confirm that NASA had the capacity to get equipment to the moon.
An important first step.
krisdevalle 1 day ago
@krisdevalle There is no proof that its even there let alone it proving it was hand placed there dreamer.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer Goodness me you are just the most amazingly ignorant person.
So now you have decided to include a number of observatories, and astronomers, in on this 'conspiracy', by fabricating their results to pretend there is a mirror reflecting their laser pointed at the moon.
With utterly no proof whatsoever. Impressive.
krisdevalle 1 day ago
@krisdevalle I argue that there could not have been any launch other than the ones announced and thus the Apollo crew had to be how the cornercubes got there.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
@knowledgemonger Agreed - but since Aeronauticaldenier is so violently opposed to agreeing with anything I say, he's now decided that there are no reflectors on the lunar surface whatsoever.
I love this guy. Just so aggressively stupid.
krisdevalle 23 hours ago
@krisdevalle Um no. If there are, it does not prove they are hand placed there is what you can not seem to grasp. You claim "that we all agree that they are there" The fact of the matter is that we do not. There is no actual proof that they are there and certainly no proof that they were hand placed there if so. Get it yet airhead? You are so slow, I have to rewrite comments more than once until you understand them.
Aeronauticalexplorer 22 hours ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer But a number of observatories around the world perform ranging using them.
Are you claiming they are also lying, and do you have any proof of that?
krisdevalle 22 hours ago
@krisdevalle You mean if other observatories are using them. How do they know if they were hand placed there or if the information they are seeing on their computer monitors are generated from corner cubes? They are only told that but they don't really know. How can you not think of these things? Just playing dumb again?
Aeronauticalexplorer 21 hours ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer Aim a laser at another part of the moon : exceedingly minimal laser return.
Aim a laser at the cornercube site: Higher return.
It's that simple. It couldn't be much simpler. The cornercubes return a higher, more accurate laser reflection - allowing observatories to measure the distance to the moon down to the cm.
You can disbelieve this as much as you like; but it's accepted fact, and so far has not been debunked.
krisdevalle 21 hours ago
@krisdevalle How do you know there is a higher return? Just because they said so? So the monitor displays some numbers and that is proof than man actually walked on the Moon? I mean the ridiculousness of your argument makes me wonder if you are playing with a full deck.
Aeronauticalexplorer 21 hours ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer What proof do you have that these experiments are faked?
krisdevalle 21 hours ago
@krisdevalle Have some intelligent person with common sense show this to you.
samwst56 9 hours ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer - How many times do "astronomers" have to measure the distance to the moon?
nameofthepen 21 hours ago
@nameofthepen Some of the findings of this long-term experiment are:
- The Moon is spiraling away from Earth at a rate of 38 mm per year.
- The Moon probably has a liquid core of about 20% of the Moon's radius.
- The universal force of gravity is very stable. The experiments have put an upper limit on the change in Newton's gravitational constant G of less than 1 part in 1011 since 1969.
krisdevalle 21 hours ago
@krisdevalle Make that 1011 a 10^11 I think
Did you know that the LHC sends protons around the ring at speeds in excess of 35 MPH?
knowledgemonger 10 hours ago
@nameofthepen As long as they can can get paid for it from honest taxpayers pockets. Astronomers, NASA and all manner of greedy contractors have been stealing money from taxpayers. As long as politicians are paid off, this will go on, go on, go on.
samwst56 9 hours ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer The important number is one that gets a lot smaller when you use the cornercubes. The error bar on the distance to the moon gets way smaller with that strong narrow return pulse. Since we know almost exactly the distance, we can have a great many pulses in flight towards and back from the moon. We can use extremely short pulses making finding the center of the return pulse very easy.
knowledgemonger 10 hours ago
I honestly don't understand why a lot of people believe that the moon landing was fake... I guess we have to agree to disagree. The reason why i believe it "makes you feel superior" is because there's basically a war between the two sides and I just don't understand that people would stay with that accousation even though its extreamely hard to prove. And when people say it's real, I assume you would just say "Wow, too dumb to see it's fake" hense feeling superior... Do you believe 2012 is real?
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 You might want to do some of your own research into the subject. What you read about people wanting to "feel superior" is bull shit. Go look at all the evidence that proves they never walked on the moon yourself. It is all over the internet.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer Yeah, i've researched this quite a bit. Sorry for accusing you of feeling superior but the only person I met that believed the moon landing was fake, did it just to feel like that they are better than society, and that everyone else was retarted for not believing it... The evidence is good but it is near impossible to prove your theory... Until the general public can see the moon's surface for themselves!
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 Actually basic Physics already proved they are on wire supports in their videos. So I don't believe anything they claim about walking on the Moon.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 There probably isn't a scientist in the entire world that really believes the NASA claim.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer - Agreed! They may not publicly refute it, but that does NOT mean they *believe* it.
A military/industrial/gubmint job at $75,000/year, with full family medical and dental, gubmint-sponsored mortgage loans below prime, and annual 2-months paid vacation, etc. goes a long way to keeping eyes and mouths shut.
nameofthepen 23 hours ago
@nameofthepen What if they get fired, or change careers, or retire, or drop out or whatever?
WOW! So none of them speak up either?
Not a single one?
How interesting.
Your theory is pathetic, buster.
krisdevalle 22 hours ago
@krisdevalle I wouldn't say shit. You wouldn't live very long at your low level of intelligence in such a predicament..
Aeronauticalexplorer 21 hours ago
@IcUClanMW3 Correct:
According to Berlet and Lyons, "Conspiracism is a particular narrative form of scapegoating that frames demonized enemies as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good, while it valorizes the scapegoater as a hero for sounding the alarm"
krisdevalle 1 day ago
@krisdevalle Yes, I understand what you mean, but I honestly don't think that's the situation here, as it's a historical event which had little to no effect to basically anyone. Other than the legacy of mankind (I guess...).
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 Well yeah - but despite being unable to explain exactly WHY they could not make it to the moon, they announce that they have perceived anomalies in the footage that apparently make it clear to them it is a hoax. But if this were true, a vast portion of academia, science and engineering, or image experts would also see it. The 'hoax' would be busted. But it is not. Hence they deem themselves superior for working out something the rest of us have not, apparently.
krisdevalle 1 day ago
@krisdevalle Its not the concept that they couldn't, it is the fact that they DIDN'T. Get your shit straight and stop trying to twist it around you fucking liar, piece of shit.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 - You say you've "researched this quite a bit". Then, you say, "it's a historical event which had little to no effect to...anyone." These two statements conflict.
I'm curious. May I please ask you a Q?: Is MW3 a "brute force" type of game, with no real tactical finesse required?
nameofthepen 1 day ago
@nameofthepen Yes, yes... Bring uo something that is completely irrelivant just to try to win an arguement that is about the moon landing! It's not mine, my brother's... He's a gamer. And at least I don't think something which is 100% true to be false. Oh no I can see a little ping, it MUST mean it's fake. Learn science, buy a powerful laser or hack into a satellite. It happened, accept it and don't believe in the 2012 doomsday, that's a lie too.
IcUClanMW3 17 hours ago
@IcUClanMW3 - Looking carefully for an answer to a simple question.
No see-um anywhere in this reply.
nameofthepen 11 hours ago
Gosh! Silly me. All this time, I thought sunlight was reflecting off the moon!
nameofthepen 1 day ago
@nameofthepen LOL!!!!!!!!!!! What a crazy insane theory!!! People who think Sunlight reflects off the Moon just want to "Feel Superior" lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
en.wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories READ THE WHOLE PAGE, I don't understand why you refuse to accept the truth. I believe it's a seek for superiorness...
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3
The water here is too deep for you.
NASACrooks 1 day ago
A laser will bounce off the moon itself. Why pretend there's a mirror there?
nameofthepen 1 day ago
@nameofthepen Do you even know what a laser is? You can not reflect light off a surface like the moon's without a reflective material, try aiming a key ring laser to the wall in your house...
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@nameofthepen The Laser will scatter off the moons surface. The return pulse from the moons surface is much weaker and more spread out in time than the return pulse from the cornercubes. It only takes fairly simple math to prove that the cornercubes are there. You just need to go look at the lunar ranging experiments and the results they get. Don't trust a US one, after all they my be among the millions in your imagined conspiracy. Try Crimea for example.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
2:15 is said to be the suit recouping into it's original form
TheFireboy699 1 day ago
The American retard who salutes his flag at 0:16 ,is suspended on a wire.
The reason is: On a real situation,on the real Moon the sand would land at the same speed ratio as the falling "astronaut" because in a vacuum all unaided objects will fall at the same speed.Here we look at a situation on which the sand lands at a speed of about 3 meters a second and the retarded yankee lands at a speed of 0.90 meters a second.The wire effect of the puppeteers is more than evident.It's an absolute fact.
NASACrooks 1 day ago
Proof he is on a wire support 0:16 the sand falls much faster than the astroNot. Simple. The whole thing was faked. Already proven. No way around it.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Aeronauticalexplorer Ad Onor del Vero l'uomo non è ancora andato sulla Luna !
Troverete le prove schiaccianti digitando su GOOGLE " WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON "
Se invece preferite continuare a credere che dodici astronauti americani sono stati sulla Luna, fate pure così ! - CONTENTI VOI CONTENTI TUTTI !! ( ...soprattutto quelli che vi hanno sonoramente turlupinati ! - AH ! AH ! AH ! AH ! )
Ciao a tutti dall'Italia e, se potete, cercate almeno di starmi bene !
Ettore
ettoremazza7 1 day ago
People who say the moonlanding is fake are addicted to chaos and conspiracy! The reason it SEEMS the astronauts are floating is that human muscles are "set" work and resist against the gravetational pull of Earth. These astronaut's muscles have worked against Earth's pull for 40 or so years! When the gravetational pull is much lighter, the muscles STILL work with the same resistance in mind but due to a lighter pull, the muscles work too hard which causes an exaggeration in movement. Accept it!
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 You are stupid.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer They are not actors, they are paid and trained for space exploration. Answer me one question? Why? Why would N.A.S.A spend billions faking something to gain globel power? There are so many more solutions then to "pretend" a moon landing. You and all the other conspiracists just want to create disruption and pretend that something that was so great, was fake just to feel superior to people who do believe it. My comment is a scientific fact, look it up.
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3
You should ask nasa.They know why.
NASACrooks 1 day ago
@NASACrooks You guys have no motive and little to no FACTUAL evidence to support your theory, and yes it is a theory! What about the LRRR placed on the moon where many scientists have successfully rebound lasers to and from the moon in 2 - 3 seconds?
IcUClanMW3 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 That doesn't mean they were hand placed there. The Russians even made an Unmanned Moon Landing claim along with NASA so you have no point whatsoever! lol!!
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 Since when is it a "scientific fact" that" NASA spent billions on faking the moonlandings"?
The whole thing is they never spent that much money and never went to the Moon at all. They collected billions to fill some pockets. It is not so that I "feel superior". lol!! That is a ridiculous theory. It is that there should not be all this evidence that they never walked on the moon if they really had. That is what you are not understanding.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@IcUClanMW3 I think that many who *say* that the moon landings are fake are in it for the money. You can sell movies and books to a market that is self selected for its gullibility. Because they have demonstrated that they will fall for such stuff, the makers don't have to check their "facts" or even be carefull not to include proofs that what they are saying is false. They can just get someone to pretend to be an expert and they are done.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
@knowledgemonger You are WRONG again. I pointed out that 0:16 proves he is on a wire support. Which it does but I don't get paid for pointing that out LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I have no book for sale nor did I ever spend a dime on any book. Its all FREE!!!! Facts speak for themselves which prove the whole moonlandings claim was a lie. They never walked on the Moon. You can't argue with facts knucklehead.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer You pointed at 0:16 and barked nonsense. I pointed out that it is nonsense. I pointed out that your explanation of what is seen could not be true and that a different explanation fits the facts exactly. You made a false claim. Repeating it, stomping your foot, holding your breath until you turn blue won't help. Your claim is simply false. Get over it.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
@knowledgemonger Since when is the Laws of Physics "nonsense". LOL!!!!!!!!!
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer I said that your claims are nonsense. You are making claims that are not based in physics. I have pointed this out and have pointed out the physics that shows that your claims are nonsense.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
the world was lied to
NiallVincentBrady 1 day ago
At 0.49, that looks so real! Not.
snakehipsohoolihan 1 day ago
0:16 the sand falls way way faster than the astronaut. Proves he is on a wire support. Just this alone proves the whole thing was faked. They never went to the Moon. End of story. Get over it NASA huggers.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
Apollo 14...You really are stupid aren't you? Have you ever heard of transmission rod? God, this guy is an absolute retard. Burn in hell for causing so much bull
avpkid345 2 days ago
This guy has no idea of physics at all. If you reduce someones weight to 1/6 to let him jump higher, but he still is on earth he will still have the same g-forces pulling him down. Wich means he drops faster than our guys on the moon did.
Eckendenker 2 days ago
@Eckendenker
Which moon?
NASACrooks 1 day ago
@NASACrooks - Which moon? Bad Moon! ;-) /watch?v=ZeZm7KQJT1o
nameofthepen 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Conspiracy theories make tons of money. You can make a conspiracy out of anything. The bigger the better. The smart ones know there are many people out there to be taken advantage of. Either too gullible or just plain stupid. Then they get TV shows, radio shows, websites and must keep the conspiracy alive so the cash keeps coming in.
JDQuantum 2 days ago
LMAO @ this: /watch?v=Ml6PA5-uDdo
nameofthepen 2 days ago
POVERA GENTE...!! Povera gente....!!!
Ma come si fa a credere ancora che dodici astronauti americani sono andati a spasso sulla Luna ???
....E Biancaneve e i sette nani come stanno....??
Ma non vi rendete conto cari americani creduloni e turlupinati senza pietà che fate veramente pena a tutti ......?!?
P.S.
MA SI PUO' .............?!?!?
ettoremazza7 2 days ago
@nameofthepen I was joking about the cheese with these crazy fucks that make no sense
romanljc 2 days ago
@CNN911Fakes the mirror is,proof we went there your delusional
romanljc 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ad Onor del Vero l'uomo non è ancora andato sulla Luna !
Troverete le prove schiaccianti digitando su GOOGLE " WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON "
Se invece preferite continuare a credere che dodici astronauti americani sono stati sulla Luna, fate pure così ! - CONTENTI VOI CONTENTI TUTTI !! ( ...soprattutto quelli che vi hanno sonoramente turlupinati ! - AH ! AH ! AH ! AH ! )
Saluti a tutti voi dall' Italia e, se potete, cercate almeno di starmi bene !
Ettore
ettoremazza7 2 days ago
@CNN911Fakes they left a mirror up there that they still use to do experiments off of you are delusional
romanljc 2 days ago
@romanljc - first it's cheese, now it's mirrors? Dude...lol!!
nameofthepen 2 days ago
@romanljc What does a mirror have to do with a drawn in sillhouette of baphomet?
This video is a fake; baphomet does not exist, except in the minds of our owners. They really think they need the power of the devil to cheat, lie, steal, maim and murder.
They think taking things and freedom from the ignorant is somehow noble. They think that keeping people big and stupid will somehow protect their interests.
The image of baphomet is conlcusive. Even if you can't see him.
CNN911Fakes 2 days ago
Bill Maher, lol. So glad I've been TV-free for over 6 years now.
nameofthepen 2 days ago
@nameofthepen Six years! Nice! I'm at about 4,there are others!! :)
cj900rr 2 days ago
Bill Maher to 9/11 conspiracy theorists:
"Stop asking me to raise this ridiculous topic on the show and start asking your doctor if Paxil is right for you." - September 14, 2007
It 100% applies to Moon hoax believers as well!
BlisterHiker 2 days ago
@nameofthepen the moon is made of cheese there is no way we could have landed on it you would sink in the soft cheese surface that would melt from the rocket heat
romanljc 2 days ago
@romanljc Based on the sillhouette of baphomet drawn in on this faked video of apollo 11, I have got to say I agree; goat of mendes cheese. Like everything NASA does; very stinky and only a few people can actually stomach it.
Caesar ordered this salad, NASA tossed it.
CNN911Fakes 2 days ago
That "wire" an antenna. This limey is such a sore loser that his country was too stupid to go to the moon let alone know how to use a toothbrush.
Alman556 3 days ago
@thecrappestdad : "so called scientists" . Hilarious. Not like you proper ones eh?
snakehipsohoolihan 3 days ago
@snakehipsohoolihan You are pretty pathetic to change my user name on here and call me thecrappestdad.First of all you didn't even spell it right!Crappiest!Add an I you snakeshipohooligan! LOL!
thecoolestdad 3 days ago
I used to think we did go to the moon.But there is too much evidence that these so called scientists and space gurus messed up on and did not cover they fake tracks.So investagators and conspirists have all but proven without a shadow of a doubt that we did not go to the moon and every Apollo Project was a fake!But we will never get these so called idiots to admit that we never went to the moon.This is one that we will all probably go to the grave without seeing publicized admission to the fake!
thecoolestdad 3 days ago
@thecoolestdad - Except there isn't a single moon hoax claim that holds up to scrutiny, none, zero, zilch :). Instead the hoax claims are mostly based upon ignorance of science, engineering, physics, etc, even ignorance of photography. The idea that the world's leading scientists and research teams in several fields (physics, engineering, astronomy, chemistry, mathematics etc) who have confirmed/accepted the validity of the moon landings are somehow ALL lying, is just nonsense. :)
MTMind2 3 days ago
@MTMind2 On July 20,1969,I was in a motel room in Tn,with my grandparents and I was 10 yrs old.I stayed up til 1,2 or 3 in the morning to watch Neil Armstrong step out onto the moon.I believed it then and I want to still believe it now.But there is too much stuff out there on the internet that is doing its best to convince people otherwise and I am partly one of them.Based on what I have seen I am a strattler on the fence as to whether we went to the moon or not.Confused,yes I am.Want to believe
thecoolestdad 3 days ago
@thecoolestdad I watched it as a kid too here in the UK. You're American - you should be proud of it - not doubting it because of a load of internet "evidence", none of which stands up to a little bit of analysis.
TheBaldmeister 3 days ago
@TheBaldmeister Well I am not as deep into believing the hoax as it may appear.This stuff has really become confusing for a lot of us.I say one thing in one direction but then later I'll say something different.Not because I want to but because some of these hoaxers really make it seem convincing that we never went to the moon.Who do we believe?I guess until there is proof in the pudding and it comes out to the public on national tv,I will always lean toward the side that we DID walk on the moon
thecoolestdad 3 days ago
@thecoolestdad
Have you ever wondered why the so-called "astronauts" never came out on TV to debate and do whatever necessary to clean the situation?
If you or I were an astronauts who been to the Moon for real we would sue the "conspiracy theorists" if failed to convince them.Don't you see they behave guilty all the way?
NASACrooks 3 days ago
@NASACrooks - the Astro-NOTs hide in their houses and get drunk.
NASA sends shills to flood the internet with endless hoaxstory repeats.
nameofthepen 3 days ago
@thecoolestdad Apart from none of the hoax "evidence" standing up, the whole thing defies logic.
Why do it 9 times and increase the chances of being found out?
Of all the hundreds of people involved, not one has admitted to a hoax - even on their death-bed.
Why "script" it with a spacecraft that leaves equipment and bits of itself behind, to be found (or not!) later? Like all good space sci-fi they would have had a craft that came home leaving no trace of itself.
TheBaldmeister 3 days ago
@TheBaldmeister - I've never seen any "spacecraft and equipment" there.
Have you? And I'm not talking about NASA or MSM-provided pictures.
I'm talking about YOU, looking through a telescope. No? Thought so.
nameofthepen 2 days ago
@nameofthepen "...looking through a telescope..." No, of course not. Do you think there is a telescope powerful enough to see the landing sites from Earth?
TheBaldmeister 2 days ago
@TheBaldmeister - So you are claiming that we left "equipment and bits behind", based upon the claims of NASA, not on your own eyes, or even independent, impartial, non-military-associated evidence?
Since NASA lies, why would you trust *anything* they say?
nameofthepen 2 days ago
@nameofthepen You miss the point. I said if it was all made up, they would not have scripted it so that stuff was left behind to be verified (or not) later on. Even if it was not possible then, they would have expected at least that an un-manned probe might go there not long after to see that the lander, rover etc was not there. So they would have written the story so that nothing got left behind.
TheBaldmeister 2 days ago
@TheBaldmeister - No, *you* miss the point. Same logic still applies.
The original NASA story is phony, and the sequels will be just as fake.
nameofthepen 2 days ago
@nameofthepen
Logic dictates. If the landings were real,we would have fresh HD photographs of the lander etc. every two weeks.You know how much would cost for NASA a photographic probe able to do just that? About $10 000 all together,no more.
NASACrooks 2 days ago
@NASACrooks - For our trillions, all we got from NASA was an anal probe.
nameofthepen 2 days ago
@nameofthepen lol!!!
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@TheBaldmeister Says we don't need even a little bit of analysis to see the NASA fakery. That is correct. The flash behind the antennna shown in this video proves there is something behind the antenna. The only explanation proffered so far is a wire. It explains the phenomenon completely and the shills who admit seeing it only offer explanations that don't satisfy all the constraints.
Why don't you give it a try? We have already proven it is not an antenna flash or a camera or film artifact.
CNN911Fakes 3 days ago
@CNN911Fakes You see what you want to I guess. In the Apollo 17 shots especially, you can clearly see it's on the antennae, not on any wires.
How many people involved in this elaborate multi-million dollar hoax? No-one checked the film, to spot the flashes and get them to re-shoot it? No-one thought of using matt-black wires to avoid the problem?
TheBaldmeister 3 days ago
@TheBaldmeister matt-black wires would avoid that problem if it was rehearse so many times and not to mention pre-recorded. great point!
TheOuskie 3 days ago
@TheBaldmeister Sorry charlie, we take only the best tuna...
The lower flash at 1:29 ff lights the antenna from behind. A frame by frame analysis reveals it even more clearly than the running video. The object that flashes does not get lit by its own flash. Simple concept.
There is something behind the antenna that is flashing and lighting up the antenna in front of it. The only explanation so far that satisfies all the constraints is a wire.
If you don't see it, don;t try to explain it
CNN911Fakes 2 days ago
@CNN911Fakes There's a flash underneath the backpack too. Is that a wire?
krisdevalle 2 days ago
@krisdevalle Thanks for the effort to find more wires, but I need only one set to prove they are there. You'll have to analyse that newly identified set your self. You could cover the front page with excrement conversing with yourself.
Regarding the lower flashes behind the antenna at 1:30 ff, perhaps you will eventually come up with an alternative to wires that meets all the constraints, but I doubt it.
ps, chap 3, verse 16 of John is probably the most peer reviewed sentence in history.
CNN911Fakes 2 days ago
@CNN911Fakes Hmm. Looks like a camera anomaly.
krisdevalle 2 days ago
@krisdevalle suggests, again, that the lower flash at 1:31 ff that ligfhts up the antenna from behind is a camera anomaly.
Nope, doesn't satisfy any of the constraints.
Try again.
CNN911Fakes 2 days ago
@CNN911Fakes What constraints?
krisdevalle 2 days ago
@CNN911Fakes Yep. It is a flash off the antenna. You can see the antenna flash and the point at the edge of the image where the bright light reflects off the inside surface of part of the Lens assembly. Anyone who has done much outdoor photography will have seen this same sort of thing happen here on earth. If it was a wire and was straight as you claim, the sun would not hit two places at the ends but not the middle. It looks like an antenna would and not like a wire would.
knowledgemonger 2 days ago
@knowledgemonger So you are confident that the flash that lights up the antenna in front of the flash is not a camera anomaly.
Why don't you find a non-NASA (and NASA shill) example of what you describe and present it to us. An amateur video where a flash lighting an object from behind is clearly from the objewct itself.
CNN911Fakes 2 days ago
@CNN911Fakes You are just talking nonsense. The sun reflected off the antenna. That is the flash of the antenna. The light from it also hit the inside of the lens assembly. That is what is at the edge of the video. It is that simple. Anyone who knows anything about photography will agree. Only "we never went to the moon" nutter suggest anything different.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
@knowledgemonger So bring an example. No censroship here.
I think it's cool that you have decided that the phenomenon of lighting the antenna from behind is both a flash and a camera artifact. Place your bets on everything but the winner!
CNN911Fakes 1 day ago
@CNN911Fakes It is highly unlikely that he is right.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@knowledgemonger It is highly unlikely that you are right. It is more likely that it is the wire that has already been proven to be used in the John Young Jump Solute 0:16 sand falls way faster than he does confirming that the flash is the wire and the flash is directly where it should be.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer No, the odds that the "wire" would reflect at two points one being where it is attached and the other being right at the edge of frame are exactly zero. A straight object simply can't do that. The fact that it looks exactly like what I described, makes the odds that I am correct practically 100% since there is no other explanation that matches.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
@knowledgemonger LOL @ "no other explanation that matches" That is totally ridiculous. Its the wire support. Other evidence is conclusive that they are on a wire support. So the chances that the wire we see reflecting in "not" the wire is slim to None.
Aeronauticalexplorer 1 day ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer Yeah right. A light source reflecting off a wire at two end points but not in the middle. Pull the other one it has bells on it.
knowledgemonger 1 day ago
Meanwhile back in the real world....."and then there were the 3 bears...."
41mikmac 3 days ago
Arrest the Apollo gang and hang 'em high!
nameofthepen 3 days ago
Arrest the Apollo "program" criminals.
NASACrooks 3 days ago
Meanwhile back in the real world:
A new dwarf galaxy was found by MIT's Dr. Si. Vegetti. It is a satellite of an elliptical galaxy almost 10 billion light-years away from Earth.
There is a lot more interesting stuff than the made up stories of the "we never went to the moon" wingnuts. All of their claims have been debunked repeatedly at this point. It really is time for them to call it a day. It is over. Apollo was for real.
knowledgemonger 3 days ago
Have a look at 0:16 in this video.
The so-called "astronaut" here after jumping he falls down at a speed of about 0:9 meters a second.But the sand of his feet has fallen at about 2.7 meters a second.
This is another absolute proof the moonlandings were faked.
On the real situation on the real Moon all objects would fall at the same speed rate.
NASACrooks 3 days ago
krisdeval reminds me of an over paid Defense Lawyer defending his client while he knows his client is guilty. But not as smart. LOL
Aeronauticalexplorer 3 days ago
@Aeronauticalexplorer - and certainly not as well-dressed. ;-)
nameofthepen 3 days ago
@nameofthepen
If you want to see devalle singing.
watch?v=Xu1eSCmV0G8
NASACrooks 3 days ago
@NASACrooks - LOL. And here is GeneralSweetie's rocket-science teacher: /watch?v=V1Ar79f8aN8
nameofthepen 3 days ago
Dr.Raman ராமன் BSc,MSc,Phd in Physics.
Aeronauticalexplorer 3 days ago