If they were in a low orbit, the clouds in the picture would move in the window shot, they are moving at a speed of 16.900 mph, but I don't see the clouds move by..........???
why the fuck would NASA use such shity film material with a bunch of mistakes in them instead of just retaking the shot and destroying the crapy movies?
Also if there really was no moonlanding? why the hell would the russians not have said that?
youre just dam ignorant folks who belive everything some damn conspiracy theorist puts inside your head?
...And theSoviet Union (aka Russia), at the height of the cold war, who were competeing in the space race to the moon, who had a VESTED interest in beating the much hated Americans, were also "in on it" right? They would have known there were no spacecraft in space, and would have tracked the space craft, and YET, they kept the secret too? Give your freakin head a shake. Learn some science.
They can bring men to the moon in 1969 in a tin can, with a computer as smart as today calculator.. and yet 43 years later Nasa has to use Russian orbital rocket to transport their men to the ISS. Not to mention they are having difficulty getting "back" to the Moon. I dont know about you guys but there is something seriously wrong there.
Oh christ the assholes that made this say on one hand that videos/audio are too fuzzy and poor quality and are faked, then they later claim that others are too good quality and are faked, bunch a stupid fuck shit claims that mean nothing.
Yea...They had a Director prompting them on what and how to say.
And I am sure their words were scripted too, down to the letter...
They were Astronautics, NOT actors... Big Deal...
So I guess the fact that astronomers are able to actually see the equipment, and tracks on the moon surface, that all those Apollo missions left behind, doesn't mean anything huh...? Hahaha.... My Senile 95 year old Grandmother Said the same thing, "Don't you believe that..." Hahaha...
I love the dumbing of america and these hoax believing wackjobs. As the world weens itself off your economic stupidity, you can start eating dogfood. Sometime back, you had Reagan, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash, now you have Obama, No Hope and No Cash. ROFLMAO
@notesleb If some of the footage is fishy, wouldn't it be wise to believe that all of it was fishy? If someone lies to you about shit, would you just believe some of the shit they say or think to yourself, "this motherfucker is I liar, I don't trust what he say..." Ok, I am more of a skeptic then the next person, but bullshit will at least force you to investigate before you totally believe that bullshit isn't there if you can clearly smell it...
What a lot of crap. If there wasn't someone droning on about what we are supposed to be seeing, would any of this prove falsity? Every objection raised has a reality-based rebuttal, but there isn't the space here to get into it.
@GUARDIANtrooper Huh? Wrong with what? The video or the landing? And no, your basic premise is wrong as it suggests that a multitude of flaws somehow lends credibility. Truth is usually more complicated than a convincing lie.
@Deep13Deep13Deep13 So if someone is a liar, you will believe what they say, because it is wrong to call someone a liar just because they lie? LMAO!! Give me a break, you know what I mean. Come on back to the real world... If you were buying a product and it is questionable to a magnitude of people, you wouldn't wonder why they were refusing to buying that product? You don't view just product parts, you view the entire company and explore their track record. Shop smart, good luck in life...
@GUARDIANtrooper What the hell are you talking about? I never said I believed liars. And considering the crap people by, I don't think commercial popularity is a good analogy for an effort to find the truth.
@Deep13Deep13Deep13 You believe NASA don't you? Do you actually believe that they tell us the truth about everything? The whole moon landing space program started out as a political thing, right or wrong? It was never about science, it was political. It was the USA versus the USSR, right? So if you agree it was political then you should know that politicians are liars, started with our president. In conclusion: The space program is a lie and you believe in it so you believe liars.
@GUARDIANtrooper Wow. The USSR agreed that the USA went to the moon, so what's your problem? Not everyone involved was a politician. 100s of 1000s of technicians and scientists were involved too. Rock samples & photos prove it. And politicians don't lie about everything. The space program is and was real. So why build a 300+ ft. rocket that actually works if it was fake?
@DeepDeepDeepLIES The USSR never agreed with anything, show me proof, anything, there is no proof of this whatsoever... I didn't say everyone involved was a politician, I said the whole operation was political, which generated from politicians, namely Kennedy. Rock samples were proven to be petrified wood and the pictures have so many fucking anomalies I can't stop laughing, LMAO!!! Not to mention those bozos look like they were dangling on wires. The rockets got them into space, that's it...
@GUARDIANtrooper Oh, and the photos of the landing sites recently released are dangling on wires too maybe? Crazy people can have a hard time stop laughing sometimes.
@GUARDIANtrooper And when China gets their men on the moon, as is their goal in near future, are you gonna call it a hoax when they bring photos of the landing sites back? You'll be my first to contact when that happens. Until then, have fun being skeptical.
@bridde If we made it to the moon with 1960's technology, what is taking one of the most richest countries so fucking long to achieve this simple goal if we made it 6 times clown? All they have to do is copy what we did in the 60s. Wouldn't you think it would be so easy to achieve that goal in 2011 with much greater technology you fucking fool? If China wants to fake a fucking moon landing, they first have to figure out how to get rid of the bubbles in their fish tank and use better fake models.
@GUARDIANtrooper Well, 1960's space technology was remarkably ahead of it's time, It took 10 yrs to get to the moon and China is going to prove you wrong, you stupid fucking idiot.
@bridde You must be asian, you seem mad, LMAO!! Ok lets say China make it to the moon, how do that prove we actually went to the moon in the 60s? Let me tell you something, in the 17 years I've lived on this earth, I got to see one of the greatest sights ever twice. I got to see the Space Shuttle go up. I wouldn't trade it for a blowjob with Rihanna or a night with Mizz Twerksum <---You probably would never get the Mizz Twerksum part unless you look up her videos. I just don't believe it dude...
@GUARDIANtrooper The moon landing was fake? lol Yeah, and nibiru is going to kill us and nasa is covering it up...LOL Elenin is going to kill us too!! Oh wait it past us and broke up... Ah conspiracies, what would lonely people do without them...:P
@Dmac11a666 Take your stupid ass somewhere else with your lame ass suggestions. You killed yourself just being ignorant to post stupid shit. A skeptic and a so-called conspiracy theorist is not the same. I'm not no follower and I will defend my right to live as a free man if I feel my freedom is threaten. You can live your life any way you want, but I choose to fight if it doesn't look or feels right to me. Be a fucking FOOL by your own terms and I will definitely change lanes to avoid it...
@GUARDIANtrooper What does defending your right to live have to do with the moon landing being faked? lol I am not a fool, I work off facts and reason...As you can see by getting pwned by the other guy, you moon skeptics have no leg to stand on...And when you can't prove anything and get beat in a debate all you do is claim people are sheep, fools and puppets...You can go ahead and waste your time on bullshit...I worry about "real" problems, not fake ones...:P
@Dmac11a666 You said conspiracies, did you not? The moon landings were one big conspiracy. The government was all part of the HOAX, it was politics, not science. Science was rewritten to orchestrate their bullshit HOAX. My free speech is eradicated when I challenge it or anything else in opposition versus the government. And what the hell is a pwned? Us moon skeptics don't have a leg to stand on, because we use it to stomp you ignorant ass fucker down. If your time is wasted then fuck off...
@GUARDIANtrooper stomp me down? Fine, lets have a civil debate...You state all the "facts" about why you think it was a hoax and I will crush them...Lets see what you got kid...This will be easy...:P
@Dmac11a666 No clown, I'm on offense, the liars that you are failing to support are on trial, your move if it is so fucking easy... Tell me one thing that proves we went to the moon in 1969 and I can give you too many reasons with tons of anomalies that would suggest otherwise, A HOAX...
@GUARDIANtrooper How about the fact that moon rocks we brought back compared to the ones from other later missions of other countries where the same and never disputed...Or the fact that you claim we did not have the tech yet had the sr-71 black bird at the time which had similar type of suites to survive and tech ahead of it's time...Or the fact that our major enemy of the time never refuted it AT ALL...Now lets hear some of yours....:P
@IamFullOfshit First of all there are no FACTS about a lie, so try to look at it from that perspective and maybe your ass would understand what a HOAX is all about... There is absolutely no proof that the moon rocks are real. Just because you and NASA said the rocks came from the fucking moon doesn't make it so. Tech ahead of its time is no guarantee trip to the moon by any means, stop speculating bullshit, this is Rayshun you are dealing with. Russia versus American propaganda is no contest...
@GUARDIANtrooper You are the one that claimed we didn't have the tech at the time...The rocks from the moon don't match terrestrial compositions.."Everything" you have ever brought up has been beaten down...If all you deniers think you have a case, why don't you gather your resources together and file a court claim for fraud and see how far it takes you...You all try to talk a great game on youtube...Lets see how it goes in a real courtroom with actually qualified people behind you... LOL
@NASAdevil666 No bitch, everything you and your god NASA has brought up got beat the fuck down, that is why your ignorant ass is here. I didn't bring this shit up, NASA brought it up those fucking lies and now they are on trial with the world, I don't have to do shit, but comment on it like your ass do. Now just twist the shit back the way you found it stupid mothafucker, LMAO!! And why would we file a court claim clown, new age tech will be their adversary, to tell the tail in the end fool...
@GUARDIANtrooper They are not on trial...None of you have the balls to file against them cause you know you'll lose...You should read about "Google Lunar X PRIZE"...What happens when they go by the landing sites and show the equipment? I'm sure you'll just say it was planted or the whole thing is fake again..Technology will be your adversary, cause non government groups are about to send unmanned probes up there...The reason i'm here is to make fun of you...:P
@Dmac11a666 Why in the fuck would I waste my time filing against them, they are filing against themselves. With new age technology it is call "Self Destruction." That is why they will not point the telescope to the moon to show the so-called moon landing sites, what fucking joke. That is why Armstrong refuse to put his hand on the bible, because he believes in God. And at some point he will be a whistleblower to this HOAX and you freaks already said you will still believe we went to the moon...
@GUARDIANtrooper And when the lunar x prize shows the equipment on the moon what are you going to say? I'm serious what will you claim? Why is the government allowing non government entities to shoot their own rovers on the moon to shoot hd video? What is "the telescope"? Hubble? They did take pics of the moon and landing sights, however it only has a 2 meter wide mirror that wont resolve much...You clearly never cared to look...lol
@iCLOWN666 Lets see the shit, fuck talking about it. What's the fucking holdup? At this point just about everything they do is fake shit, even the fake ass probes they claim take pictures of deep space, GIVE ME A FUCKNG BREAK, LMFAO!! Those FAKE ASS pictures, are you kidding me???!! And those stupid ass so-called pictures of the moon?? FUCK YOU CLOWN, LMAO!!!! Our US GOVERNMENT can go to the moon and back and see a fly on your head from space, but can't show clear pics of the moon? WTF, LMAO!!!
@Dmac11a666 You have a choice to leave it alone, but you just continues to acknowledge this fucking lunatic that wasn't before, but for some reason with no changing lanes, I'm now a lunatic? You are so fucking stupid writing dumb shit, just give it up clown, your tired ass just makes me laugh when you write absolute senseless bullshit. You are just target practice...
@GUARDIANtrooper Considering you believed the hubble could resolve the apollo landing site and a fly on your head and also thought that the government or nasa have never pointed it at the moon because of a conspiracy, i'll take this all as a complement...You clearly make things up without checking them first.You claim everything nasa brought up was beat down..If that were true there would be a court case for fraud, but NOT ONE person has tried cause all the deniers sell books not facts. :P
@Dmac11a666 Is that the best evidence you could conjure up? The only people that really challenged the government are whistleblowers today and in the yesteryears with much anomalies to point out. You completely forget why your ass is here protecting your so-called TRUTH. If it was the TRUTH, then there shouldn't be a debate about it like real scientific explorations and experiments. Is the space station confirmed? Why was the shuttle program eradicated? What's with the ISS? R-U Skeptic at all?
@GUARDIANtrooper No matter what, there will always people who will debate something.Nasa said that comet elenin wasn't going to hit us and nibiru doesn't exist and what do they get? The loons coming out and bringing their pseudo evidence and claiming they are lying and to please buy their book for support.How did that work out for elenin? There are answers to all of your questions you just don't look them up and read the conspiracy bs.These anomalies have all been explained over and over again.
@Dmac11a666 If the government wasn't so fucked up they wouldn't have so many adversaries to contest their bullshit to be in the dark about an annihilation. Do you trust the government? It is so fucking cliched that they hide and lie about every fucking thing. You will be one of the those clowns that will get your stupid head taken off because you didn't listen to the warning to duck. The world just got a lot smarter, one less idiot. The space program has anomalies to explain, for real? Wow...
@GUARDIANtrooper You could take all my vacation photos and claim they have tons of anomalies and claim half where photoshopped.The government is made up of hundreds of thousands of people..Not all of them are bad or good and I'm not going to sit here and judge group as a whole.I won't have my head taken off, I pay attention to politics and the world.I'm not going to make wild assumption over pseudo evidence and rumors.Facts and evidence not pointless accusations.Which moon deniers have neither.
@Dmac11a666 If you look at a picture and you see something funny, the first thing you will do is further examine the shit. If you claimed to have landed on the moon, I will want to see proof, because that is an extreme task to accomplish and will not be taken lightly. Pictures showing a man standing beside the Rover well away from the LM and it has NO FUCKNG TIRE TRACKS? But..., you can photograph footprints in dry sand, but you cant make them on earth? Fuck that, I'm not stupid at all..
Hmmm....no tire tracks..... are you suggesting that to fake it they lowered the Rover by a crane onto a movie set to take pictures? What a stupid fuckass suggestion.
The photo details just aren't showing up for a variety of reasons.
Try buying a camera and using it sometime, you might learn something.
@Blahblobify Wrong answer bitch... Now explain how in the fuck do you get clear pictures of a Rover in the middle of nowhere with no fucking tracks to be found anywhere? Explain that shit or shut the fuck up... I don't need a fucking camera to explain shit, I'm looking at their bullshit pictures and I know your ignorant ass saw them. Now lets see if you can explain that shit without adding me into your pathetic ass theory. I don't have shit to do with you believing in a HOAX. Your move bitch...
@Blahblobify Are you crazy? They didn't use a crane, they built the whole set around the Rover. Dude, come on... I asked you a simple question and you can't explain that. You can't have it both ways, with the boot prints, but WHERE ARE THE TRACKS? Anomalies like that makes it hard to believe in this stuff. And you people aren't that convincing. The world is not buying it and you are saying they do, but yet you are fighting for the truth. But the truth needs no explanation at such a magnitude...
@Dmac11a666 It's already been explained...They don't have traditional tires...They are wire tires act like a sieve...stuff goes in and comes out...If the area they where at in the pic was shallow tire marks would be hard to make...They also many times moved the rover by picking it up and setting it down....And they have photographed many of footprints....
@Dmac11a666 Of course they picked it up and set it down, that is how they do things on a movie set... A shallow gravel terrain will give you something, that ground is untouched and the rover is well away from the LEM. Plus they hardly had enough room for the rover or better yet, THE ASTRONAUTS, let alone an apparatus that could lift it and set it into other area. If so, where is the tracks for it in the middle of nowhere? You can't be serious believing in this stuff, it is too stupid...
@bridde Are you joking? Theres so many error in the footage its not even funny ... no stars on picture ... no sheild for radiation ... no camera that can survive 200 degress diff ... no live footage ... and all the others mistake or clue leaved that it was a scam ...
If they were in low earth orbit then they would be moving around the earth making the earth surface in the window change as they circled the earth. However, this video clearly shows the same surface meaning they are not orbiting and also meaning pinkel pants is another debunked fake.
@GUARDIANtrooper I can't make any sense out of your comment. Will someone explain to me why the surface of the earth isn't flying by in the window. To maintain low earth orbit, a craft must be travelling at a minimum speed of 17,500+ MPH. That would make the view of the earth in the window change. However, in this video it is not, telling me that they truly are far from earth. NEXT
@GUARDIANtrooper My choice of communicating with a dumb troll like you or jumping over the fence into my neighbor's yard and play with his three pit bulls, two rottweilers and a mentally challenged doberman. I'll take the dogs...............The bandages should be off in about a week. watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
@MoltenMozzarella Alllll...., he fall down... Fuck you getting mad for bitch? What...? You lost? Of course you fucking lost, you are a fucking idiot versus me bitch. Now go jump your stupid ass over in your neighbors yard. The dogs would only say, "Wait, that's the loser that wrote those lame, stupid ass comments on Youtube. I'm not trying to eat his ignorant ass and be dumb like that stupid fuck!" (THEN THEY ALL LAUGHED THEIR ASSES OFF) LMAO!!
@MoltenMozzarella You read that shit and you know it bitch, LMAO!! You said you didn't want to communicate with a troll like me and you rather jump a fence with a bunch of dogs on the other said, but yet your ignorant ass continues to communicate, which means your ignorant ass is reading my books. Nevertheless I answered your stupid ass question and you know it, NEXT...
@MoltenMozzarella You read that shit and you know it bitch, LMAO!! You said you didn't want to communicate with a troll like me and you rather jump a fence with a bunch of dogs on the other said, but yet your ignorant ass continues to communicate, which means your ignorant ass is reading my books. Nevertheless I answered your stupid ass question and you know it, NEXT!
@GUARDIANtrooper You read my comments but I don't read yours and you know it bitch, LMAO!! I said I don't want to communicate with a troll like you and I'd rather jump a fence with a bunch of dogs on the other side, but yet your ignorant ass continues to communicate, which means your ignorant ass is reading my comments. Nevertheless you didn't answer my question and you know it, NEXT!
This nonsense video from cabdriver Bart Sibrel keeps popping up, but has been discredited and debunked repeatedly.
Bart's assertion that this mis-labeled "smoking gun" footage was sent to him from NASA by mistake, and is available nowhere else, is just an outright lie.
The same exact sequence has been available (unedited I might add) on Spacecraft Films Apollo 11 home video boxset for years now.
@hibob418 You can't debunk the truth, that is why you and your likes keep fucking popping up with your bullshit antics. The mistake is called whistleblowers and NASA anomalies are slowly coming to life, look at you idiots sweating bullshit all over these videos. You don't find a lot of people defending the truth, but a fucking lie spawns a lot of bullshit to talk about, WHAT A FUCKING JOKE. I haven't seen one fucking thing you people debunked yet, but you conjure that dumb shit up all the time.
what people don't realise is, i really don't care. What fucking use is going to the moon anyway seriously? Of all that money spent, no wasted, it could of been channeled to third world countries to actually provide some good to the world.
@rockdude2702 What people don't care about is what you think. "Could of?" You mean "could have." Bet you're "educated," degreed and all, but self centered. Remember, people CARE what YOU think... hah!
o.k. here's my decryption "half the journey "indicates the knowledge that this mission was NEVER completed. "the protective layers" refers to governmental influence to blatantly lie. the description of completing the journey refers to his personal hope that in the future the restrictions on truth would be lifted. the parrot comments are directly referring to his contract with the gov. his limited press engagements are the DIRECT result of having a conscience, and his unwillingness to cooperate.
Got you crusaders on the run now. You know you can't get around the radiation argument so you try to portray the individual who would dare speak as if they know of the comlexities of space radiation as someone who just doesn't know what they are talking about. I always provide references to my points. I do not make bare assertions and try my best the get the information correct. The crusaders on the other hand offer no proof but plenty of ridicule.
The longer you morons keep this up, the more people will eventually end up watching this video and then your cooked. The general public will have to accept the fact that we never went to the moon and it was all a lie. Then the questions about where all the money went will start. That's when I believe the fun starts. Major corporations, defense contractors, will have to start answering questions as to what they did with the money they stole from the american people with their fake ass program.
Will no one try and debunk the claim that the astronauts were staging an event? You can clearly see the camera is in the back of the cabin when the lights are turned on. But they claimed that the camera lens was pressed against the window because they said that it was the only way to see the earth from that distance. Anybody? at 3 18 in the video, the deception starts. Anyone want to try and explain what the astronauts were saying and where the camera ends up after the lights are turned on?
@Daddyo930 Who claimed the camera lens was placed against the window?
Was the female narrator? Have you been seduced by some artful bullshit here?
Do you remember yesterday, or the day before, or last week perhaps, where we explained to you that the Earth should be moving underneath them? Are you being wilfully ignorant?
Why are you doing that? It is as if you have learned nothing.
@krisdevalle Allright you stupid fat fuck. One more time to get it right. At 7:00 in the video, Neil Armstrong says it. "We only have one window that has a view of the earth and it's filled up with the tv camera". Is that Neil Armstrong's voice starting at 7:00 in the video? Answer that question first and foremost.
@krisdevalle So when they turn the lights on and the camera is in the back of the cabin when it's supposed to be 'filling up the window' which would mean very close to the window. Explain that?
@krisdevalle Edited by whom to show what? What kind of deception is the video engaging in? Now your just in denial mode because I caught your fat ass. Once again, fuck off stupid fat fuck. I'm done with you because you seem to make up your own reality as you go along that fits with your thinking. Nothing else is considered therefore you are a waste of time because you won't even acknowledge any inconsistency in the video and what's happening and where the astronauts say they are supposed to be.
@krisdevalle Running scared now aren't you? No more insults. I'm actually sorry that I said those things and apologize. I don't hate you. We don't even have a difference of opinion. There is the truth and then there's everything else. The truth is that 5 joules/gram = 500000 rads. 5 joules/kilogram = 500 rads. Death in either case if your in space at 100,000 miles.
@krisdevalle Radiation - Absorbed Dose Conversion Table, run by some webmaster is based off of Einsteins E=mc2 theory. Checkmate. In order to disprove that 5 joules/gram = 500,000 rads, you would have to disprove Einstein's theory. Does Einstein qualify as an expert? Has his work been peer reviewed? Do you now wish to take issue with the theory of E=mc2?
@krisdevalle What is wrong with my calculations? The theory of converting mass into energy is well established. That theory is represented by E=mc2. The unit conversion table I provide links to is based on this theory of E=mc2. Is there something you need verified? Wikipedia should be able to help you with E=mc2.
@krisdevalle Running scared now? Can't face reality? Answer me this question. Can astronauts fly through solar flares? According to you, radiation is really not a problem so astronauts should be able to fly through solar flares with no real problem right?
@Daddyo930 What a dodge! Unwilling to have anyone check your work, you simply raise more questions.
Get your work checked you amateur. You know as soon as you get someone who knows physics to look at it they will tell you that you are nuts. Which is why you are cowardly dodging the issue. Pussy.
@krisdevalle Catalogue of LDE flares (January 1969 - March 1986) differential rotation of the Sun during the period 1921-1971. page 82 to understand the chart. page 87 for the apollo 12 mission. I count 13 hours of M3 and X5 class solar flares. This is from NASA and Harvard. What else do you want? At this point, you should just knock your king over and capitulate. The game is over. Checkmate. Thank you for playing. Sorry about the namecalling on my part. I apologize for that.
@Daddyo930 You are the only one making these claims. As soon as you have them checked by an expert I will treat them as likely. Until then it's just you.
You haven't ever wondered why a physics or astronomy major from any college or university in the world has not made the same claims?
Surely you must understand that your expertise in this field is amateur at best, ignorant at worst.
I tend to trust people who are educated in the field and can demonstrate it.
@krisdevalle Who made the catalogue of LDE flares (january 1969 - march 1986)? NASA astrophysics data system did. Are they reputable enough? Can you believe them or do you think this document is somehow faked? Are you becoming a conspiracy nutbag?
@krisdevalle This is not my work. The data was provided by satellites and ground monitoring stations and the references are provided. Shielding Design This means when added thicknesses are used, the shielding multiplies. For example, a practical shield in a fallout shelter is ten halving-thicknesses of packed dirt, which is 90 cm (3 ft) of dirt. This reduces gamma rays to 1/1,024 of their original intensity (1/2 multiplied by itself ten times). From Wikipedia Radiation protection.
@krisdevalle You can visit the NASA website if you wish. Every trained scientist has to acknowledge the dangers of radiation or energy exposure. To insist that massive amounts of radiation exposure would not lead to death would be insanity and you will find no scientist that would advocate such a position. To the contrary NASA's motto when it comes to radiation is ALAR As Low As Reasonably achievable. Go tell them to get their work reviewed. That's where I get my information from.
@Daddyo930 I assume your reticence to answer the question means you will not have anyone reviewing your work and will continue to spew shit on youtube as if you are some trained expert.
You are simply an untrained amateur with just enough knowledge to be dangerous only to yourself.
You squawk like an angry seagull about deadly radiation while no-one, not even a first year physics student, supports your idiot claims.
@krisdevalle So then I will make a statement and lets see if it is true or false. If you are exposed to 10,000 joules of energy in any form, you are gonna die. Is this true of false?
@Daddyo930 10,000 joules in calorie form is the average daily intake for a male. So yeah, I could eat 10,000 joules in the form of a couple of hamburgers and I should be ok.
@krisdevalle I said energy. I know I should have been more specific. Light energy. Radiation energy. Sound energy. 10000 joules of that type of energy will destroy you. Why you gotta make it so hard? You already lost. You have nothing left to argue except that my sources are not peer reviewed when I only use science references and NASA themselves as references. You have lost totally. When you knock your king over is your choice. Checkmate. Thanks for playing.
@Daddyo930 You said energy in any form, bro. Food is energy. So you fucked that one.
Nobody else supports your claims. Manned space travel is a reality. You are either too lazy, or too afraid to even visit an online forum to have someone look over your claims because you know, clearly, that you are full of shit.
@krisdevalle In the past, you reduced me to namecalling. I realize now how it contributed nothing to the conversation. Do you wish to refute the claim I made about 10000 joules of light energy? Do you think that will kill you? Or is my understanding of the matter not clear? Am I to believe now that high levels of radiation are safe? If that was the case, why did they evacuate Fukishima? You know that your stuck and there's no getting around the fact that you can't fly through solar flares.
@Daddyo930 10,000 joules of energy will raise a few litres of water by one or two degrees.
It's not a lot, as we can tell also by equating it with calories; only the average daily dietary intake. So behind the hull of the Command module, not much is going to get through.
Energy really is only half the equation when dealing with radiation, and to consistently focus only on the energy part is misleading.
I am not saying radiation is safe; only that you overstate the risks.
@krisdevalle Catalogue of LDE flares (January 1969 - March 1986) differential rotation of the Sun during the period 1921-1971. page 82 for explanation of chart. page 87 for November 17, 18, 19. According to the heliocentric and heliographic data in the report, apollo 12 is flying through M3 and X5 class solar flares. Is the heliocentric and heliographic longitude data correct?
@Daddyo930 The data maybe correct but your interpretation is emotionally biased.
By repeating ad nauseam you've come to believe your conclusion is definitive.
SPE's & flares are NOT omni-directional.
Apollo 12's external sensors detected a minor flare,the hull being attenuated with 7-8g/cm² al, which is equal to 20g/cm² of water would've been enough shielding for a dissipated SPE in question.
.
You realize it takes 620,000,000,000,000 million electron volts/sec. to light up a 100-watt bulb.
@Tweekerhead The data maybe correct but your interpretation is emotionally biased. What's that supposed to mean? Data does not have a political affiliation nor does it care what you think or believe. Numbers are what they are and are only open to interpretation in statistical analysis. Is the data regarding the heliocentric and heliographic longitude of the solar flares correct or not?
@Daddyo930 Data doesn't have a"political"affiliation? Are you projecting this inane comment on me?LOL
It is your interpretation that is in question, not the data, even tho' it's from Czechoslovakia.
.
You've think you've found the most prohibitive event that would render Apollo impossible but you haven't found anything that hasn't been addressed before.
There were 14 flares in Nov.69' some soft Xrays, mostly αlpha events, what's the big deal?
@Tweekerhead You've gone from saying that there were no solar flares during apollo 12 to saying that the hours spent in solar flares wouldn't kill the astronauts. No one can fly through a solar flare. Even NASA says you can't. NASA has gone out of their way to stress the importance of radiation in space and how dangerous it is. Am I wrong? Does NASA say that radiation in space is no big deal? Flying through a solar flare is a very big deal because your gonna die and NASA knows it.
@Tweekerhead So they did fly through a solar flare! I say that's impossible. Scientists classify solar flares according to their x-ray brightness in the wavelength range 1 to 8 Angstroms. There are 3 categories: X-class flares are big; they are major events that can trigger planet-wide radio blackouts and long-lasting radiation storms. If this information is correct then there is no way any 1969 astronaut could fly through an X class solar flare. Impossible.
@Daddyo930 As you assumed the ionosphere blocked gamma rays & X-rays, now you are to assume I'd said there were no solar flares in 69' in previous posts, you're starting to seem to have an argument with yourself.
.
That's fine if you believe what you want, Again,solar flare events are NOT omni-directional!
They're dissipated through the void of space much like α rad' is attenuated by air.
Yes A12 went thru' flares,but not an appreciable amount of protons were detected,at least in the inner hull
@Tweekerhead Can you show a number that would indicate how much energy is in an X5 class solar flare? I get 60 to the 25th power joules. That kind of energy will fry you quick. The aluminum on your spacecraft would only insure that you were turned into beef jerky. The manned missions to the moon are totally busted and fake. The data from NASA itself proves it. You can't fly through a solar flare and NASA would say the same thing.
@Daddyo930 Flares are NOT omni-directional,they are UNI-DIRECTIONAL,you should study a little more & give yourself time to extrapolate the data before you make outlandish claims.
One day you may look at your posts & say to yourself. WTF??
.
One thing you haven't considered is the fortitude of the astronauts.
When did a test pilot ever back out of a mission/ test run because of danger?
GL wrestling with the integrity of those bad-asses, I like Lovell's statement to Borman in a resent interview.
@Tweekerhead You have no idea what your talking about do you? Your paid to do this. I get it now. Either your unemployed looking for work online and you do this on the side or you are doing this at work or this is your job. Do you know what counter intelligence operations are?
@Daddyo930 I read your comment on Fukishima from below,it seems you may have your radiation confused,that's not surprising since you claimed the ionosphere blocks gamma radiation from GCR's.
I think you're a little fuzzy when it comes to differentiating between wave & particle radiation and what the eV values really mean.
.
Again by repeating or pasting in your case this ad nauseam doesn't make your interpretation of the data definitive.
There were a least 14 solar flares in Nov. of 69'.
@Tweekerhead How many solar flares occured during apollo 12? I count 8 solar flares, some of them in the X5 class totalling around 15.42 hours. What's your count? for the entire year of 1969 there were 103 solar flares. That's almost one every week.
@krisdevalle I only asked you if the heliocentric and heliographic data in the report was correct. We will deal with shielding later. Is the heliocentric and heliographic data correct in the report?
@krisdevalle Then why do you even bother? You obviously have been fed talking points by bad astronomy and have run out of those. Tell your buddies at bad astronomy that a day of reckoning is coming. The day will come when they will have to explain their willful ignorance and deception.
@krisdevalle I take it you count yourself among the rabble. I'm done with you . Thank you for making me study astrophysics. If there is any blame to be placed, some of it can be placed squarely on your shoulders. You really screwed up. I was never meant to study astrophysics.
@Daddyo930 You didn't, and you haven't, studied astrophysics.
For fuck's sake. Really. What a ridiculous affront to say you have 'studied' it. You have barely skimmed the absolute basics.
You front up your utter bullshit on an actual physics forum and see how far you get there, you amateur. You coward. You fraud. You lack a single ball to even try this.
@krisdevalle This guy is worse than deadray'but his style is very eerily similar!?
I asked him last week if there was so much gamma radiation out there in space (hoaxers always retreat to when the Van Allen belts issue is addressed)... then why do the UV rays make it to Earth's surface,after all they're from the same end as the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation.
He said the ionosphere blocks the gamma rays from GCR's, I corrected him, it's the ozone layer.
@Tweekerhead Flying the in face of all trained physicists, or radiologists, of course.
He doesn't seem to even consider the fact that he's the only person making this claim, while many more trained people, even first year students, never yell about it.
Then there is the obvious reticence to move his claims upwards and outwards to peers, panels, forums or specialists, who might be able to give him some credence or properly evaluate the claims.
@Tweekerhead Do you have a problem with NASA putting it's name on Czek work? As far as Stonyhurst or Carrington's the discernable difference is the longitude. Both use the same solar rotational axis. That still puts apollo 12 in the middle of solar flares which given the apollo 12 shielding makes that scenario impossible.
@Daddyo930 Your interpretation of the coordinates makes Apollo12 impossible to you & you only.
Apollo12 did not fly through the middle of a solar flare.Flares originated 92,956,000M away from Apollo12.
Show how you came up with the intersection of the flare & the trajectory of A12,that will stifle the argument.
I don't believe you could discern the difference between Sonyhurst or Carrington heliographic, NOR do I believe you even knew what Stonyhurst or Carrington was until I mentioned it.
@Daddyo930 Again, sorry to belabor the question, but which coordinate system Stonyhurst or Carrington, did you use to calculate your amazing discovery that will surely turn the science world upside down?
@Tweekerhead You can use them both. Both use the same solar rotational axis, and differ only in the definition of longitude. There is no hard and fast rule about which system you use. Both systems of coordinate calculation put the apollo 12 in the middle of a solar flare. That answer the question? No? Fine. I would use the carrington. Have you even bothered to do the calculation of where the solar flares were? Your just playing semantical word games now. Grow up.
@Tweekerhead This is from NASA's "What is a Solar Flare". The amount of energy released is the equivalent of millions of 100-megaton hydrogen bombs exploding at the same time. Do you really think you can build a spacecraft capable of flying through that in 1969? 27 ergs per second for four hours and you are going to need some lotion because your gonna be all ash. Do you know what 27 ergs per second is in joules and then rads? Ugly numbers. Real ugly numbers. Your totally busted.
@Daddyo930 The amount of energy is equivalent 100mega-ton bomb but only when you're on the surface of the Sun,the flux rate decreases the father away from the sun it is,it's not rocket science.
Solar events are uni-directional & don't fan out from the sun in concentric rings like you think.
Remember it takes about a 620,000,000,000,000MeV per second to light up a 100-watt bulb. those numbers aren't so scary when you put in a unitary, which space basically is.
@Daddyo930 That Aug72' flare in between A16-17,if my memory serves.
Just because a detectable flare happened during A12 doesn't mean a thing,we have dozens per month.
I really wanted to see your work ;-)
.
How then do they keep those images coming uninterrupted day by day from the GOES satellites,which are just under 36,000km in orbit,outside LEO & in outer VA's,if the Xrays & α rad' is so abundant?
There's a difference between a major & a detectable flare.
@Daddyo930 Every element in the solar flares?..... I don't really know, I think so. I know of gamma burst, but they're not that intense lucky for us,otherwise the ozone,which attenuates the gamma & Xrays by the way;-) would melt.
@Tweekerhead Then let me ask you another question. Is it true that every element in the periodic table can be found in the sun? This is basic science.
@Daddyo930 Let's talk about this sophomoric video above,when this originally aired did you really fall for these straw-man arguments? I mean the statement "the window is completely filled-up with the camera" doesn't mean it was up against the window, nobody ever considered this bull until this video aired.
It's all"red herrings"&straw-man fallacies,I saw through tabloid piece when it first aired,how could people be so dumbed-down& gullible?
@Tweekerhead Are you gonna answer the question or just try and change the subject? You can google that fact easily enough. Is it true that all elements on the periodic table can be found in the sun? We'll talk about the video later.
@Daddyo930 But those heavy elements are charged & accelerated like the GCR's are.
It's like this ... gamma from GCR's are like the VA belts, the more energetic they are the less their flux ratios are, the less energetic they are , the more their flux ratios grow per unitary.
I'm tellin' you my man, you're beatin' a dead horse.
I checked your channel out, and I actually like you as a person, I lived in Boston in 84'-85', I worked at Inter.Bike Center in Brighton, I raced on a bike team there..
I see you're a vet, and I assume you're a brother from a video i watched, which i find intriguing since most hoax believers are disenfranchised white boys who grew up listening to Rush ;-)
I wish you could come to Ohio & I could introduce you to someone that could convince you those 12 bad-ass gigantic balled SOB's went.
Have you ever seen the 16mm film the 6 missions brought back and compared it to the LRO images?
@Tweekerhead Wrong. Dorchester. Glad you enjoyed my music. I wrote it myself and played everything. Lets just get back to the question. Is it true that every element on the periodic table can be found in the sun and solar flares? That's very basic science. A no brainer. Would you like to take a shot at answering it?
@Daddyo930 To guess I would say not every element, just iron and the elements under it's atomic weight.
Are we talking about MAJOR solar flares or just detectable flares.
Only a major(not detectable) flare would've rendered any Apollo mission fatal or impossible.
The most prohibitive aspect of Apollo would've been passing thru' a proton field in the Va Allens' of 400MeV at 5x10³cm²/sec. in which Apollo 11's trajectory shows for instance, not your scared flare on Nov.14 69'.
@Tweekerhead From NASA's website on galactic cosmic rays. All of the natural elements in the periodic table are present in cosmic rays, in roughly the same proportion as they occur in the solar system. I would say that an X5 class solar flare is a MAJOR solar flare which means that apollo 12 never went to the moon. The solar flare was on November 17, 18 and 19th 1969 for a total of 12+ hours of M3 and X5 class solar flares.
@Daddyo930 You said earlier that there was a flare on the day of the lunch of Apollo 12 that was in direct course for Earth, now which flare did you calculate hit earth & Apollo12, 17,18,or 19th?
Please get this thru...Flares are NOT omnidirectional, they don't make concentric rings around the Sun and disperse.
@Tweekerhead Yeah, I made a mistake and looked at the wrong page in the catalogue. It's page 87 for November 17, 18, and 19th 1969. True. Solar flares are not omnidirectional. They are also not concentrated into a narrow beam. That would be galactic cosmic rays. Solar flares interact with the solar winds generated by the sun and increase the amount of energy directed towards the planet. This may last for seconds or hours. Anything caught in the solar winds would be subject to 27 ergs per second.
@Tweekerhead I'm not running away from solar flares. As a matter of fact with the amount of solar flares, I find it impossible for anyone to goto the moon without electromagnetic shielding. I did make a mistake that I would rectify right now. I was wrong on the amount of ergs per second in a solar flare. It's not 27 ergs per second which I thought was a huge number of rads, it's actually 10 to the 27th power ergs per second. See there, I admitted a mistake and corrected it.
@Daddyo930 There's allota' things I don't know and do not have the intellectual capacity to learn.
But I know they Apollo was shielded enough to block 400MeV particle rad'.
GCR's were the least prohibitive issue facing Apollo and Neil Armstrong was literally a boy-scout and does not lie. His integrity far exceeds anyone's on this planet, that I will defend vociferously along with any science related to astronomy, which I dearly love.
I still think you've put the cart before the horse here.
If they were in a low orbit, the clouds in the picture would move in the window shot, they are moving at a speed of 16.900 mph, but I don't see the clouds move by..........???
Larspr1 1 week ago
Ey you guys
just stop beeing such idiots and think about it:
if the moonlanding would have been faked
why the fuck would NASA use such shity film material with a bunch of mistakes in them instead of just retaking the shot and destroying the crapy movies?
Also if there really was no moonlanding? why the hell would the russians not have said that?
youre just dam ignorant folks who belive everything some damn conspiracy theorist puts inside your head?
just grow up and stop acting like babys...
TheHomerGang 2 weeks ago
...And theSoviet Union (aka Russia), at the height of the cold war, who were competeing in the space race to the moon, who had a VESTED interest in beating the much hated Americans, were also "in on it" right? They would have known there were no spacecraft in space, and would have tracked the space craft, and YET, they kept the secret too? Give your freakin head a shake. Learn some science.
eyahoo2 3 weeks ago
They can bring men to the moon in 1969 in a tin can, with a computer as smart as today calculator.. and yet 43 years later Nasa has to use Russian orbital rocket to transport their men to the ISS. Not to mention they are having difficulty getting "back" to the Moon. I dont know about you guys but there is something seriously wrong there.
zero00tolerance 3 weeks ago
Okay it was fake. He just said it all. Neil subliminally admitted it was fake.
sreinvention 1 month ago
they faked the landing so they could spend all your money on hookers
SuperEarther 2 months ago
Oh christ the assholes that made this say on one hand that videos/audio are too fuzzy and poor quality and are faked, then they later claim that others are too good quality and are faked, bunch a stupid fuck shit claims that mean nothing.
Blahblobify 3 months ago
@Blahblobify Wow, you are an idiot, to totally misconstrued the whole thing, LMAO!!
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
Yea...They had a Director prompting them on what and how to say.
And I am sure their words were scripted too, down to the letter...
They were Astronautics, NOT actors... Big Deal...
So I guess the fact that astronomers are able to actually see the equipment, and tracks on the moon surface, that all those Apollo missions left behind, doesn't mean anything huh...? Hahaha.... My Senile 95 year old Grandmother Said the same thing, "Don't you believe that..." Hahaha...
RunningSwimmingMan 4 months ago
I love the dumbing of america and these hoax believing wackjobs. As the world weens itself off your economic stupidity, you can start eating dogfood. Sometime back, you had Reagan, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash, now you have Obama, No Hope and No Cash. ROFLMAO
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
Sibrel's conclusions are way off but there is definitely something fishy going on in that "half-way-to-the-moon" footage
notesleb 5 months ago
@notesleb If some of the footage is fishy, wouldn't it be wise to believe that all of it was fishy? If someone lies to you about shit, would you just believe some of the shit they say or think to yourself, "this motherfucker is I liar, I don't trust what he say..." Ok, I am more of a skeptic then the next person, but bullshit will at least force you to investigate before you totally believe that bullshit isn't there if you can clearly smell it...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
What a lot of crap. If there wasn't someone droning on about what we are supposed to be seeing, would any of this prove falsity? Every objection raised has a reality-based rebuttal, but there isn't the space here to get into it.
Deep13Deep13Deep13 5 months ago
@Deep13Deep13Deep13 If you have to question it at such great magnitude chances are, there is something wrong with it...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Huh? Wrong with what? The video or the landing? And no, your basic premise is wrong as it suggests that a multitude of flaws somehow lends credibility. Truth is usually more complicated than a convincing lie.
Deep13Deep13Deep13 5 months ago
@Deep13Deep13Deep13 So if someone is a liar, you will believe what they say, because it is wrong to call someone a liar just because they lie? LMAO!! Give me a break, you know what I mean. Come on back to the real world... If you were buying a product and it is questionable to a magnitude of people, you wouldn't wonder why they were refusing to buying that product? You don't view just product parts, you view the entire company and explore their track record. Shop smart, good luck in life...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper What the hell are you talking about? I never said I believed liars. And considering the crap people by, I don't think commercial popularity is a good analogy for an effort to find the truth.
Deep13Deep13Deep13 5 months ago
@Deep13Deep13Deep13 You believe NASA don't you? Do you actually believe that they tell us the truth about everything? The whole moon landing space program started out as a political thing, right or wrong? It was never about science, it was political. It was the USA versus the USSR, right? So if you agree it was political then you should know that politicians are liars, started with our president. In conclusion: The space program is a lie and you believe in it so you believe liars.
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Wow. The USSR agreed that the USA went to the moon, so what's your problem? Not everyone involved was a politician. 100s of 1000s of technicians and scientists were involved too. Rock samples & photos prove it. And politicians don't lie about everything. The space program is and was real. So why build a 300+ ft. rocket that actually works if it was fake?
Deep13Deep13Deep13 5 months ago
@DeepDeepDeepLIES The USSR never agreed with anything, show me proof, anything, there is no proof of this whatsoever... I didn't say everyone involved was a politician, I said the whole operation was political, which generated from politicians, namely Kennedy. Rock samples were proven to be petrified wood and the pictures have so many fucking anomalies I can't stop laughing, LMAO!!! Not to mention those bozos look like they were dangling on wires. The rockets got them into space, that's it...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Oh, and the photos of the landing sites recently released are dangling on wires too maybe? Crazy people can have a hard time stop laughing sometimes.
bridde 4 months ago
@bridde A planet full of fools dangling on NASA wires. Be a puppet in your own respect, but don't hang yourself clown...
GUARDIANtrooper 4 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper And when China gets their men on the moon, as is their goal in near future, are you gonna call it a hoax when they bring photos of the landing sites back? You'll be my first to contact when that happens. Until then, have fun being skeptical.
bridde 4 months ago
@bridde If we made it to the moon with 1960's technology, what is taking one of the most richest countries so fucking long to achieve this simple goal if we made it 6 times clown? All they have to do is copy what we did in the 60s. Wouldn't you think it would be so easy to achieve that goal in 2011 with much greater technology you fucking fool? If China wants to fake a fucking moon landing, they first have to figure out how to get rid of the bubbles in their fish tank and use better fake models.
GUARDIANtrooper 4 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Well, 1960's space technology was remarkably ahead of it's time, It took 10 yrs to get to the moon and China is going to prove you wrong, you stupid fucking idiot.
Until then, shoot yourself.
bridde 4 months ago
@bridde You must be asian, you seem mad, LMAO!! Ok lets say China make it to the moon, how do that prove we actually went to the moon in the 60s? Let me tell you something, in the 17 years I've lived on this earth, I got to see one of the greatest sights ever twice. I got to see the Space Shuttle go up. I wouldn't trade it for a blowjob with Rihanna or a night with Mizz Twerksum <---You probably would never get the Mizz Twerksum part unless you look up her videos. I just don't believe it dude...
GUARDIANtrooper 4 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper The moon landing was fake? lol Yeah, and nibiru is going to kill us and nasa is covering it up...LOL Elenin is going to kill us too!! Oh wait it past us and broke up... Ah conspiracies, what would lonely people do without them...:P
Dmac11a666 4 months ago
@Dmac11a666 Take your stupid ass somewhere else with your lame ass suggestions. You killed yourself just being ignorant to post stupid shit. A skeptic and a so-called conspiracy theorist is not the same. I'm not no follower and I will defend my right to live as a free man if I feel my freedom is threaten. You can live your life any way you want, but I choose to fight if it doesn't look or feels right to me. Be a fucking FOOL by your own terms and I will definitely change lanes to avoid it...
GUARDIANtrooper 4 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper What does defending your right to live have to do with the moon landing being faked? lol I am not a fool, I work off facts and reason...As you can see by getting pwned by the other guy, you moon skeptics have no leg to stand on...And when you can't prove anything and get beat in a debate all you do is claim people are sheep, fools and puppets...You can go ahead and waste your time on bullshit...I worry about "real" problems, not fake ones...:P
Dmac11a666 4 months ago
@Dmac11a666 You said conspiracies, did you not? The moon landings were one big conspiracy. The government was all part of the HOAX, it was politics, not science. Science was rewritten to orchestrate their bullshit HOAX. My free speech is eradicated when I challenge it or anything else in opposition versus the government. And what the hell is a pwned? Us moon skeptics don't have a leg to stand on, because we use it to stomp you ignorant ass fucker down. If your time is wasted then fuck off...
GUARDIANtrooper 4 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper stomp me down? Fine, lets have a civil debate...You state all the "facts" about why you think it was a hoax and I will crush them...Lets see what you got kid...This will be easy...:P
Dmac11a666 4 months ago
@Dmac11a666 No clown, I'm on offense, the liars that you are failing to support are on trial, your move if it is so fucking easy... Tell me one thing that proves we went to the moon in 1969 and I can give you too many reasons with tons of anomalies that would suggest otherwise, A HOAX...
GUARDIANtrooper 4 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper How about the fact that moon rocks we brought back compared to the ones from other later missions of other countries where the same and never disputed...Or the fact that you claim we did not have the tech yet had the sr-71 black bird at the time which had similar type of suites to survive and tech ahead of it's time...Or the fact that our major enemy of the time never refuted it AT ALL...Now lets hear some of yours....:P
Dmac11a666 4 months ago
@IamFullOfshit First of all there are no FACTS about a lie, so try to look at it from that perspective and maybe your ass would understand what a HOAX is all about... There is absolutely no proof that the moon rocks are real. Just because you and NASA said the rocks came from the fucking moon doesn't make it so. Tech ahead of its time is no guarantee trip to the moon by any means, stop speculating bullshit, this is Rayshun you are dealing with. Russia versus American propaganda is no contest...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper You are the one that claimed we didn't have the tech at the time...The rocks from the moon don't match terrestrial compositions.."Everything" you have ever brought up has been beaten down...If all you deniers think you have a case, why don't you gather your resources together and file a court claim for fraud and see how far it takes you...You all try to talk a great game on youtube...Lets see how it goes in a real courtroom with actually qualified people behind you... LOL
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@NASAdevil666 No bitch, everything you and your god NASA has brought up got beat the fuck down, that is why your ignorant ass is here. I didn't bring this shit up, NASA brought it up those fucking lies and now they are on trial with the world, I don't have to do shit, but comment on it like your ass do. Now just twist the shit back the way you found it stupid mothafucker, LMAO!! And why would we file a court claim clown, new age tech will be their adversary, to tell the tail in the end fool...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper They are not on trial...None of you have the balls to file against them cause you know you'll lose...You should read about "Google Lunar X PRIZE"...What happens when they go by the landing sites and show the equipment? I'm sure you'll just say it was planted or the whole thing is fake again..Technology will be your adversary, cause non government groups are about to send unmanned probes up there...The reason i'm here is to make fun of you...:P
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@Dmac11a666 Why in the fuck would I waste my time filing against them, they are filing against themselves. With new age technology it is call "Self Destruction." That is why they will not point the telescope to the moon to show the so-called moon landing sites, what fucking joke. That is why Armstrong refuse to put his hand on the bible, because he believes in God. And at some point he will be a whistleblower to this HOAX and you freaks already said you will still believe we went to the moon...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper And when the lunar x prize shows the equipment on the moon what are you going to say? I'm serious what will you claim? Why is the government allowing non government entities to shoot their own rovers on the moon to shoot hd video? What is "the telescope"? Hubble? They did take pics of the moon and landing sights, however it only has a 2 meter wide mirror that wont resolve much...You clearly never cared to look...lol
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@iCLOWN666 Lets see the shit, fuck talking about it. What's the fucking holdup? At this point just about everything they do is fake shit, even the fake ass probes they claim take pictures of deep space, GIVE ME A FUCKNG BREAK, LMFAO!! Those FAKE ASS pictures, are you kidding me???!! And those stupid ass so-called pictures of the moon?? FUCK YOU CLOWN, LMAO!!!! Our US GOVERNMENT can go to the moon and back and see a fly on your head from space, but can't show clear pics of the moon? WTF, LMAO!!!
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper You literally sound like a raving lunatic now...With nothing to back it up..LMFAO!!
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@Dmac11a666 You have a choice to leave it alone, but you just continues to acknowledge this fucking lunatic that wasn't before, but for some reason with no changing lanes, I'm now a lunatic? You are so fucking stupid writing dumb shit, just give it up clown, your tired ass just makes me laugh when you write absolute senseless bullshit. You are just target practice...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Considering you believed the hubble could resolve the apollo landing site and a fly on your head and also thought that the government or nasa have never pointed it at the moon because of a conspiracy, i'll take this all as a complement...You clearly make things up without checking them first.You claim everything nasa brought up was beat down..If that were true there would be a court case for fraud, but NOT ONE person has tried cause all the deniers sell books not facts. :P
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@Dmac11a666 Is that the best evidence you could conjure up? The only people that really challenged the government are whistleblowers today and in the yesteryears with much anomalies to point out. You completely forget why your ass is here protecting your so-called TRUTH. If it was the TRUTH, then there shouldn't be a debate about it like real scientific explorations and experiments. Is the space station confirmed? Why was the shuttle program eradicated? What's with the ISS? R-U Skeptic at all?
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper No matter what, there will always people who will debate something.Nasa said that comet elenin wasn't going to hit us and nibiru doesn't exist and what do they get? The loons coming out and bringing their pseudo evidence and claiming they are lying and to please buy their book for support.How did that work out for elenin? There are answers to all of your questions you just don't look them up and read the conspiracy bs.These anomalies have all been explained over and over again.
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@Dmac11a666 If the government wasn't so fucked up they wouldn't have so many adversaries to contest their bullshit to be in the dark about an annihilation. Do you trust the government? It is so fucking cliched that they hide and lie about every fucking thing. You will be one of the those clowns that will get your stupid head taken off because you didn't listen to the warning to duck. The world just got a lot smarter, one less idiot. The space program has anomalies to explain, for real? Wow...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper You could take all my vacation photos and claim they have tons of anomalies and claim half where photoshopped.The government is made up of hundreds of thousands of people..Not all of them are bad or good and I'm not going to sit here and judge group as a whole.I won't have my head taken off, I pay attention to politics and the world.I'm not going to make wild assumption over pseudo evidence and rumors.Facts and evidence not pointless accusations.Which moon deniers have neither.
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@Dmac11a666 If you look at a picture and you see something funny, the first thing you will do is further examine the shit. If you claimed to have landed on the moon, I will want to see proof, because that is an extreme task to accomplish and will not be taken lightly. Pictures showing a man standing beside the Rover well away from the LM and it has NO FUCKNG TIRE TRACKS? But..., you can photograph footprints in dry sand, but you cant make them on earth? Fuck that, I'm not stupid at all..
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper
Hmmm....no tire tracks..... are you suggesting that to fake it they lowered the Rover by a crane onto a movie set to take pictures? What a stupid fuckass suggestion.
The photo details just aren't showing up for a variety of reasons.
Try buying a camera and using it sometime, you might learn something.
Blahblobify 3 months ago
@Blahblobify Wrong answer bitch... Now explain how in the fuck do you get clear pictures of a Rover in the middle of nowhere with no fucking tracks to be found anywhere? Explain that shit or shut the fuck up... I don't need a fucking camera to explain shit, I'm looking at their bullshit pictures and I know your ignorant ass saw them. Now lets see if you can explain that shit without adding me into your pathetic ass theory. I don't have shit to do with you believing in a HOAX. Your move bitch...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper
so you're claiminmg that they used a crane to lower it on a movie set?
Why?
Wow you are teh genius
Blahblobify 3 months ago
@Blahblobify Are you crazy? They didn't use a crane, they built the whole set around the Rover. Dude, come on... I asked you a simple question and you can't explain that. You can't have it both ways, with the boot prints, but WHERE ARE THE TRACKS? Anomalies like that makes it hard to believe in this stuff. And you people aren't that convincing. The world is not buying it and you are saying they do, but yet you are fighting for the truth. But the truth needs no explanation at such a magnitude...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@Dmac11a666 It's already been explained...They don't have traditional tires...They are wire tires act like a sieve...stuff goes in and comes out...If the area they where at in the pic was shallow tire marks would be hard to make...They also many times moved the rover by picking it up and setting it down....And they have photographed many of footprints....
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@Dmac11a666 Of course they picked it up and set it down, that is how they do things on a movie set... A shallow gravel terrain will give you something, that ground is untouched and the rover is well away from the LEM. Plus they hardly had enough room for the rover or better yet, THE ASTRONAUTS, let alone an apparatus that could lift it and set it into other area. If so, where is the tracks for it in the middle of nowhere? You can't be serious believing in this stuff, it is too stupid...
GUARDIANtrooper 3 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Here is a video explaining most of the common things you and others bring up on the subject.../watch?v=oUPtiYiMCbQ
Dmac11a666 3 months ago
@bridde Are you joking? Theres so many error in the footage its not even funny ... no stars on picture ... no sheild for radiation ... no camera that can survive 200 degress diff ... no live footage ... and all the others mistake or clue leaved that it was a scam ...
nouvellepatate 4 months ago
NASA Fail Moon Scam!
DoyleMediaGroup 5 months ago
@DoyleMediaGroup I seconded that, lmao!
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
If they were in low earth orbit then they would be moving around the earth making the earth surface in the window change as they circled the earth. However, this video clearly shows the same surface meaning they are not orbiting and also meaning pinkel pants is another debunked fake.
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
@MoltenMozzarella Good point. Also, isn't that a right-sized Africa on that Earth?
Deep13Deep13Deep13 5 months ago
@MoltenMozzarella At some point the vessel can and will change positions, that does not exclude the window, lmao!
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper I can't make any sense out of your comment. Will someone explain to me why the surface of the earth isn't flying by in the window. To maintain low earth orbit, a craft must be travelling at a minimum speed of 17,500+ MPH. That would make the view of the earth in the window change. However, in this video it is not, telling me that they truly are far from earth. NEXT
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
@MoltenMozzarella watch?v=8n7LJSDmJ5k&feature=related
YOU ARE AN IDIOT...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper Whats your point? My IP Tracker say that you live in downtown Stupidville. Your next stop, Moronville. ROFLMAO
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper My choice of communicating with a dumb troll like you or jumping over the fence into my neighbor's yard and play with his three pit bulls, two rottweilers and a mentally challenged doberman. I'll take the dogs...............The bandages should be off in about a week. watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
YOU ARE THE IDIOT...
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
@MoltenMozzarella Alllll...., he fall down... Fuck you getting mad for bitch? What...? You lost? Of course you fucking lost, you are a fucking idiot versus me bitch. Now go jump your stupid ass over in your neighbors yard. The dogs would only say, "Wait, that's the loser that wrote those lame, stupid ass comments on Youtube. I'm not trying to eat his ignorant ass and be dumb like that stupid fuck!" (THEN THEY ALL LAUGHED THEIR ASSES OFF) LMAO!!
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@GUARDIANtrooper I'd count to infinity TWICE before I read your "books" your writing to me. ROFLMAO
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
@MoltenMozzarella You read that shit and you know it bitch, LMAO!! You said you didn't want to communicate with a troll like me and you rather jump a fence with a bunch of dogs on the other said, but yet your ignorant ass continues to communicate, which means your ignorant ass is reading my books. Nevertheless I answered your stupid ass question and you know it, NEXT...
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
@MoltenMozzarella You read that shit and you know it bitch, LMAO!! You said you didn't want to communicate with a troll like me and you rather jump a fence with a bunch of dogs on the other said, but yet your ignorant ass continues to communicate, which means your ignorant ass is reading my books. Nevertheless I answered your stupid ass question and you know it, NEXT!
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GUARDIANtrooper You read my comments but I don't read yours and you know it bitch, LMAO!! I said I don't want to communicate with a troll like you and I'd rather jump a fence with a bunch of dogs on the other side, but yet your ignorant ass continues to communicate, which means your ignorant ass is reading my comments. Nevertheless you didn't answer my question and you know it, NEXT!
MoltenMozzarella 5 months ago
This nonsense video from cabdriver Bart Sibrel keeps popping up, but has been discredited and debunked repeatedly.
Bart's assertion that this mis-labeled "smoking gun" footage was sent to him from NASA by mistake, and is available nowhere else, is just an outright lie.
The same exact sequence has been available (unedited I might add) on Spacecraft Films Apollo 11 home video boxset for years now.
hibob418 5 months ago
@hibob418 You can't debunk the truth, that is why you and your likes keep fucking popping up with your bullshit antics. The mistake is called whistleblowers and NASA anomalies are slowly coming to life, look at you idiots sweating bullshit all over these videos. You don't find a lot of people defending the truth, but a fucking lie spawns a lot of bullshit to talk about, WHAT A FUCKING JOKE. I haven't seen one fucking thing you people debunked yet, but you conjure that dumb shit up all the time.
GUARDIANtrooper 5 months ago
what people don't realise is, i really don't care. What fucking use is going to the moon anyway seriously? Of all that money spent, no wasted, it could of been channeled to third world countries to actually provide some good to the world.
Fuck the government annoys me.
rockdude2702 5 months ago
@rockdude2702 What people don't care about is what you think. "Could of?" You mean "could have." Bet you're "educated," degreed and all, but self centered. Remember, people CARE what YOU think... hah!
soco13466 5 months ago
o.k. here's my decryption "half the journey "indicates the knowledge that this mission was NEVER completed. "the protective layers" refers to governmental influence to blatantly lie. the description of completing the journey refers to his personal hope that in the future the restrictions on truth would be lifted. the parrot comments are directly referring to his contract with the gov. his limited press engagements are the DIRECT result of having a conscience, and his unwillingness to cooperate.
jimmytherose68 6 months ago
Wow this is amazing stuff init? lol
FPVdrone 6 months ago
Got you crusaders on the run now. You know you can't get around the radiation argument so you try to portray the individual who would dare speak as if they know of the comlexities of space radiation as someone who just doesn't know what they are talking about. I always provide references to my points. I do not make bare assertions and try my best the get the information correct. The crusaders on the other hand offer no proof but plenty of ridicule.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
The longer you morons keep this up, the more people will eventually end up watching this video and then your cooked. The general public will have to accept the fact that we never went to the moon and it was all a lie. Then the questions about where all the money went will start. That's when I believe the fun starts. Major corporations, defense contractors, will have to start answering questions as to what they did with the money they stole from the american people with their fake ass program.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
Will no one try and debunk the claim that the astronauts were staging an event? You can clearly see the camera is in the back of the cabin when the lights are turned on. But they claimed that the camera lens was pressed against the window because they said that it was the only way to see the earth from that distance. Anybody? at 3 18 in the video, the deception starts. Anyone want to try and explain what the astronauts were saying and where the camera ends up after the lights are turned on?
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 Who claimed the camera lens was placed against the window?
Was the female narrator? Have you been seduced by some artful bullshit here?
Do you remember yesterday, or the day before, or last week perhaps, where we explained to you that the Earth should be moving underneath them? Are you being wilfully ignorant?
Why are you doing that? It is as if you have learned nothing.
krisdevalle 7 months ago
@krisdevalle Allright you stupid fat fuck. One more time to get it right. At 7:00 in the video, Neil Armstrong says it. "We only have one window that has a view of the earth and it's filled up with the tv camera". Is that Neil Armstrong's voice starting at 7:00 in the video? Answer that question first and foremost.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 'Filled up' is not 'pressed against the window'.
Get it right.
Also, you call me fat. Why is that? Obviously if I was, this insult might be cutting. To me however, it is merely amusing.
krisdevalle 7 months ago
@krisdevalle So when they turn the lights on and the camera is in the back of the cabin when it's supposed to be 'filling up the window' which would mean very close to the window. Explain that?
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 The video has been edited. I am reviewing the mission transcripts:
ww w. hq. nasa. gov/alsj/a11/AS11_PAO. PDF
Page 126. The actual unedited activities make sense.
This video is engaging in blatant deception and you seem to be ready to believe it, hook line and sinker.
krisdevalle 7 months ago
@krisdevalle Edited by whom to show what? What kind of deception is the video engaging in? Now your just in denial mode because I caught your fat ass. Once again, fuck off stupid fat fuck. I'm done with you because you seem to make up your own reality as you go along that fits with your thinking. Nothing else is considered therefore you are a waste of time because you won't even acknowledge any inconsistency in the video and what's happening and where the astronauts say they are supposed to be.
Daddyo930 7 months ago
@Daddyo930 No matter what location the camera is in, if the capsule was in LEO, the Earth would be in motion in these images.
This has been explained to you. You had no plausible answer for it. This fat fuck is asking you why you keep ignoring that fact.
krisdevalle 7 months ago
@krisdevalle Running scared now aren't you? No more insults. I'm actually sorry that I said those things and apologize. I don't hate you. We don't even have a difference of opinion. There is the truth and then there's everything else. The truth is that 5 joules/gram = 500000 rads. 5 joules/kilogram = 500 rads. Death in either case if your in space at 100,000 miles.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Please stop acting like you are an expert in absorbed radiation dose and get some actual experts to verify your claims.
A few hours work and a google calculator do not make you an authority in space radiation.
Surely you must understand this. Scientific theories live and die through peer review. Have your work reviewed by someone competent.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Radiation - Absorbed Dose Conversion Table, run by some webmaster is based off of Einsteins E=mc2 theory. Checkmate. In order to disprove that 5 joules/gram = 500,000 rads, you would have to disprove Einstein's theory. Does Einstein qualify as an expert? Has his work been peer reviewed? Do you now wish to take issue with the theory of E=mc2?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 No, I want you to have your work checked. It is clearly wrong, as no other scientist or expert is making the same claims as you.
What is more likely - a hundred thousand trained experts are wrong, or you are?
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle What is wrong with my calculations? The theory of converting mass into energy is well established. That theory is represented by E=mc2. The unit conversion table I provide links to is based on this theory of E=mc2. Is there something you need verified? Wikipedia should be able to help you with E=mc2.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Running scared now? Can't face reality? Answer me this question. Can astronauts fly through solar flares? According to you, radiation is really not a problem so astronauts should be able to fly through solar flares with no real problem right?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 What a dodge! Unwilling to have anyone check your work, you simply raise more questions.
Get your work checked you amateur. You know as soon as you get someone who knows physics to look at it they will tell you that you are nuts. Which is why you are cowardly dodging the issue. Pussy.
Get your reviewed. Your claims are bullshit.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Catalogue of LDE flares (January 1969 - March 1986) differential rotation of the Sun during the period 1921-1971. page 82 to understand the chart. page 87 for the apollo 12 mission. I count 13 hours of M3 and X5 class solar flares. This is from NASA and Harvard. What else do you want? At this point, you should just knock your king over and capitulate. The game is over. Checkmate. Thank you for playing. Sorry about the namecalling on my part. I apologize for that.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 You are the only one making these claims. As soon as you have them checked by an expert I will treat them as likely. Until then it's just you.
You haven't ever wondered why a physics or astronomy major from any college or university in the world has not made the same claims?
Surely you must understand that your expertise in this field is amateur at best, ignorant at worst.
I tend to trust people who are educated in the field and can demonstrate it.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Who made the catalogue of LDE flares (january 1969 - march 1986)? NASA astrophysics data system did. Are they reputable enough? Can you believe them or do you think this document is somehow faked? Are you becoming a conspiracy nutbag?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 No, I just want you to have your work reviewed. You seem reluctant to do so.
Have you factored in the shielding levels of the Apollo command module in your calculations? Are you aware that solar flares are directional?
Why will you not have your work checked? Lazy... or afraid?
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle This is not my work. The data was provided by satellites and ground monitoring stations and the references are provided. Shielding Design This means when added thicknesses are used, the shielding multiplies. For example, a practical shield in a fallout shelter is ten halving-thicknesses of packed dirt, which is 90 cm (3 ft) of dirt. This reduces gamma rays to 1/1,024 of their original intensity (1/2 multiplied by itself ten times). From Wikipedia Radiation protection.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 wikipedia huh.
Make contact the physics faculty of your local college, or make inquiries here:
ww w . physicsforums. com/
When you have some independent verification that your claims about instant death are correct, I may give you some credibility.
As your claims are currently unsupported by any other REAL scientist, you must understand that I find them highly dubious.
You see this, don't you? You are making a claim that no trained student, educator or scientist is making.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle You can visit the NASA website if you wish. Every trained scientist has to acknowledge the dangers of radiation or energy exposure. To insist that massive amounts of radiation exposure would not lead to death would be insanity and you will find no scientist that would advocate such a position. To the contrary NASA's motto when it comes to radiation is ALAR As Low As Reasonably achievable. Go tell them to get their work reviewed. That's where I get my information from.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 I assume your reticence to answer the question means you will not have anyone reviewing your work and will continue to spew shit on youtube as if you are some trained expert.
You are simply an untrained amateur with just enough knowledge to be dangerous only to yourself.
You squawk like an angry seagull about deadly radiation while no-one, not even a first year physics student, supports your idiot claims.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle So then I will make a statement and lets see if it is true or false. If you are exposed to 10,000 joules of energy in any form, you are gonna die. Is this true of false?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 10,000 joules in calorie form is the average daily intake for a male. So yeah, I could eat 10,000 joules in the form of a couple of hamburgers and I should be ok.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle I said energy. I know I should have been more specific. Light energy. Radiation energy. Sound energy. 10000 joules of that type of energy will destroy you. Why you gotta make it so hard? You already lost. You have nothing left to argue except that my sources are not peer reviewed when I only use science references and NASA themselves as references. You have lost totally. When you knock your king over is your choice. Checkmate. Thanks for playing.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 You said energy in any form, bro. Food is energy. So you fucked that one.
Nobody else supports your claims. Manned space travel is a reality. You are either too lazy, or too afraid to even visit an online forum to have someone look over your claims because you know, clearly, that you are full of shit.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle In the past, you reduced me to namecalling. I realize now how it contributed nothing to the conversation. Do you wish to refute the claim I made about 10000 joules of light energy? Do you think that will kill you? Or is my understanding of the matter not clear? Am I to believe now that high levels of radiation are safe? If that was the case, why did they evacuate Fukishima? You know that your stuck and there's no getting around the fact that you can't fly through solar flares.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 10,000 joules of energy will raise a few litres of water by one or two degrees.
It's not a lot, as we can tell also by equating it with calories; only the average daily dietary intake. So behind the hull of the Command module, not much is going to get through.
Energy really is only half the equation when dealing with radiation, and to consistently focus only on the energy part is misleading.
I am not saying radiation is safe; only that you overstate the risks.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Catalogue of LDE flares (January 1969 - March 1986) differential rotation of the Sun during the period 1921-1971. page 82 for explanation of chart. page 87 for November 17, 18, 19. According to the heliocentric and heliographic data in the report, apollo 12 is flying through M3 and X5 class solar flares. Is the heliocentric and heliographic longitude data correct?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 The data maybe correct but your interpretation is emotionally biased.
By repeating ad nauseam you've come to believe your conclusion is definitive.
SPE's & flares are NOT omni-directional.
Apollo 12's external sensors detected a minor flare,the hull being attenuated with 7-8g/cm² al, which is equal to 20g/cm² of water would've been enough shielding for a dissipated SPE in question.
.
You realize it takes 620,000,000,000,000 million electron volts/sec. to light up a 100-watt bulb.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead The data maybe correct but your interpretation is emotionally biased. What's that supposed to mean? Data does not have a political affiliation nor does it care what you think or believe. Numbers are what they are and are only open to interpretation in statistical analysis. Is the data regarding the heliocentric and heliographic longitude of the solar flares correct or not?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Data doesn't have a"political"affiliation? Are you projecting this inane comment on me?LOL
It is your interpretation that is in question, not the data, even tho' it's from Czechoslovakia.
.
You've think you've found the most prohibitive event that would render Apollo impossible but you haven't found anything that hasn't been addressed before.
There were 14 flares in Nov.69' some soft Xrays, mostly αlpha events, what's the big deal?
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead You've gone from saying that there were no solar flares during apollo 12 to saying that the hours spent in solar flares wouldn't kill the astronauts. No one can fly through a solar flare. Even NASA says you can't. NASA has gone out of their way to stress the importance of radiation in space and how dangerous it is. Am I wrong? Does NASA say that radiation in space is no big deal? Flying through a solar flare is a very big deal because your gonna die and NASA knows it.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 No I haven't,you are projecting again.
14 flares during Nov.69'. That's about the 5th time I've said that.
You're not so obtuse that you have to project ridiculous statements that misrepresent my position?
.
You're WRONG, Apollo did fly thru' a solar flare event, and that event was detectable but not a major SPE as your revisionism has implied.
Space environment is NOT black & white,just as radiation isn't either.
I think you need to have a rad' primer.
.
Checkmate,thx 4 playing.lol
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead So they did fly through a solar flare! I say that's impossible. Scientists classify solar flares according to their x-ray brightness in the wavelength range 1 to 8 Angstroms. There are 3 categories: X-class flares are big; they are major events that can trigger planet-wide radio blackouts and long-lasting radiation storms. If this information is correct then there is no way any 1969 astronaut could fly through an X class solar flare. Impossible.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 As you assumed the ionosphere blocked gamma rays & X-rays, now you are to assume I'd said there were no solar flares in 69' in previous posts, you're starting to seem to have an argument with yourself.
.
That's fine if you believe what you want, Again,solar flare events are NOT omni-directional!
They're dissipated through the void of space much like α rad' is attenuated by air.
Yes A12 went thru' flares,but not an appreciable amount of protons were detected,at least in the inner hull
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead What type of solar flares did they fly through and for how long?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Try Apollo 14 if you want an issue with radiation, their average dosage was 1.14Rads.
Odd that Shepard & Roosa died of leukemia & pancreatitis.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Can you show a number that would indicate how much energy is in an X5 class solar flare? I get 60 to the 25th power joules. That kind of energy will fry you quick. The aluminum on your spacecraft would only insure that you were turned into beef jerky. The manned missions to the moon are totally busted and fake. The data from NASA itself proves it. You can't fly through a solar flare and NASA would say the same thing.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Flares are NOT omni-directional,they are UNI-DIRECTIONAL,you should study a little more & give yourself time to extrapolate the data before you make outlandish claims.
One day you may look at your posts & say to yourself. WTF??
.
One thing you haven't considered is the fortitude of the astronauts.
When did a test pilot ever back out of a mission/ test run because of danger?
GL wrestling with the integrity of those bad-asses, I like Lovell's statement to Borman in a resent interview.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead You have no idea what your talking about do you? Your paid to do this. I get it now. Either your unemployed looking for work online and you do this on the side or you are doing this at work or this is your job. Do you know what counter intelligence operations are?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Are you a shill trying to sell DVD's for moonmovies * com?
I'ma'51 yr. old musician,I was friends with one of the astronaut's sons that walked on the Moon.
I was a fan of Apollo & Gemini,tried never to miss a launch on TV.
I've been studying astronomy related subjects since I was a kid, because I love it.
You however have put the cart before the horse, you've studied a little bit of astro'science & think eureka!
You loyalty is not to science but to the confirmation of your beliefs.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead 'You loyalty is not to science but to the confirmation of your beliefs. '
Brilliant comment.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 BTW...Your last post is typical of the way you make outlandish assumptions and go running off believing whole hardily it is the truth!!!
How many more wacky paranoid assumptions are you gonna make to try and confirm your beliefs?
You sound a little desperate.
.
Thank you for the complement in assuming I'm paid for this incidentally.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 I read your comment on Fukishima from below,it seems you may have your radiation confused,that's not surprising since you claimed the ionosphere blocks gamma radiation from GCR's.
I think you're a little fuzzy when it comes to differentiating between wave & particle radiation and what the eV values really mean.
.
Again by repeating or pasting in your case this ad nauseam doesn't make your interpretation of the data definitive.
There were a least 14 solar flares in Nov. of 69'.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead How many solar flares occured during apollo 12? I count 8 solar flares, some of them in the X5 class totalling around 15.42 hours. What's your count? for the entire year of 1969 there were 103 solar flares. That's almost one every week.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Depends on the shielding, which you haven't factored in. Maybe you could ask for help on a physics forum.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle I only asked you if the heliocentric and heliographic data in the report was correct. We will deal with shielding later. Is the heliocentric and heliographic data correct in the report?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 I'd have to ask an astrophycisist. Unlike you I do not pretend to be an expert on the topic after a few google searches.
Get your work reviewed.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Then why do you even bother? You obviously have been fed talking points by bad astronomy and have run out of those. Tell your buddies at bad astronomy that a day of reckoning is coming. The day will come when they will have to explain their willful ignorance and deception.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 I don't frequent bad astronomy, but I dare say there are astronomers there.
You tried your theories on with those dudes, or are you safely sticking to the unmoderated rabble here on youtube?
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle I take it you count yourself among the rabble. I'm done with you . Thank you for making me study astrophysics. If there is any blame to be placed, some of it can be placed squarely on your shoulders. You really screwed up. I was never meant to study astrophysics.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 You didn't, and you haven't, studied astrophysics.
For fuck's sake. Really. What a ridiculous affront to say you have 'studied' it. You have barely skimmed the absolute basics.
You front up your utter bullshit on an actual physics forum and see how far you get there, you amateur. You coward. You fraud. You lack a single ball to even try this.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle This guy is worse than deadray'but his style is very eerily similar!?
I asked him last week if there was so much gamma radiation out there in space (hoaxers always retreat to when the Van Allen belts issue is addressed)... then why do the UV rays make it to Earth's surface,after all they're from the same end as the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation.
He said the ionosphere blocks the gamma rays from GCR's, I corrected him, it's the ozone layer.
Now to the solar flares.
Desperate?
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Flying the in face of all trained physicists, or radiologists, of course.
He doesn't seem to even consider the fact that he's the only person making this claim, while many more trained people, even first year students, never yell about it.
Then there is the obvious reticence to move his claims upwards and outwards to peers, panels, forums or specialists, who might be able to give him some credence or properly evaluate the claims.
He's dicking about trying to score points.
krisdevalle 6 months ago
@krisdevalle Are you thinking what I'm thinking?
Dunning-Kruger?
.
LOL
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 1st. you're employing E=mc² wrong, that has to do primarily with the strong atomic force & the electromagnetic force.
2nd. RAD is unit of measure for dosage.
3rd. this Catalog LDE is from the Czechoslovakia 1986, provided by NASA
As far as your heliographic coordinates, are you using Stonyhurst or Carrington's heliographic of αo=286°.13.
I'd like to see what you had for right ascension & declination if you have it handy for this flare you claim makes Apollo12 impossible ;-)
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Do you have a problem with NASA putting it's name on Czek work? As far as Stonyhurst or Carrington's the discernable difference is the longitude. Both use the same solar rotational axis. That still puts apollo 12 in the middle of solar flares which given the apollo 12 shielding makes that scenario impossible.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Your interpretation of the coordinates makes Apollo12 impossible to you & you only.
Apollo12 did not fly through the middle of a solar flare.Flares originated 92,956,000M away from Apollo12.
Show how you came up with the intersection of the flare & the trajectory of A12,that will stifle the argument.
I don't believe you could discern the difference between Sonyhurst or Carrington heliographic, NOR do I believe you even knew what Stonyhurst or Carrington was until I mentioned it.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Again, sorry to belabor the question, but which coordinate system Stonyhurst or Carrington, did you use to calculate your amazing discovery that will surely turn the science world upside down?
Stonyhurst or Carrington?
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead You can use them both. Both use the same solar rotational axis, and differ only in the definition of longitude. There is no hard and fast rule about which system you use. Both systems of coordinate calculation put the apollo 12 in the middle of a solar flare. That answer the question? No? Fine. I would use the carrington. Have you even bothered to do the calculation of where the solar flares were? Your just playing semantical word games now. Grow up.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead This is from NASA's "What is a Solar Flare". The amount of energy released is the equivalent of millions of 100-megaton hydrogen bombs exploding at the same time. Do you really think you can build a spacecraft capable of flying through that in 1969? 27 ergs per second for four hours and you are going to need some lotion because your gonna be all ash. Do you know what 27 ergs per second is in joules and then rads? Ugly numbers. Real ugly numbers. Your totally busted.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 The amount of energy is equivalent 100mega-ton bomb but only when you're on the surface of the Sun,the flux rate decreases the father away from the sun it is,it's not rocket science.
Solar events are uni-directional & don't fan out from the sun in concentric rings like you think.
Remember it takes about a 620,000,000,000,000MeV per second to light up a 100-watt bulb. those numbers aren't so scary when you put in a unitary, which space basically is.
There was one major flare in Aug 72'
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 That Aug72' flare in between A16-17,if my memory serves.
Just because a detectable flare happened during A12 doesn't mean a thing,we have dozens per month.
I really wanted to see your work ;-)
.
How then do they keep those images coming uninterrupted day by day from the GOES satellites,which are just under 36,000km in orbit,outside LEO & in outer VA's,if the Xrays & α rad' is so abundant?
There's a difference between a major & a detectable flare.
I think it's you that's busted my man.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Then answer me this question. Is it true that every element in the periodic table can be found in solar flares?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Every element in the solar flares?..... I don't really know, I think so. I know of gamma burst, but they're not that intense lucky for us,otherwise the ozone,which attenuates the gamma & Xrays by the way;-) would melt.
How about those GOES satellites??
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Then let me ask you another question. Is it true that every element in the periodic table can be found in the sun? This is basic science.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Let's talk about this sophomoric video above,when this originally aired did you really fall for these straw-man arguments? I mean the statement "the window is completely filled-up with the camera" doesn't mean it was up against the window, nobody ever considered this bull until this video aired.
It's all"red herrings"&straw-man fallacies,I saw through tabloid piece when it first aired,how could people be so dumbed-down& gullible?
JFK,Nam,Nixon,9/11 made us cynics
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Are you gonna answer the question or just try and change the subject? You can google that fact easily enough. Is it true that all elements on the periodic table can be found in the sun? We'll talk about the video later.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 But those heavy elements are charged & accelerated like the GCR's are.
It's like this ... gamma from GCR's are like the VA belts, the more energetic they are the less their flux ratios are, the less energetic they are , the more their flux ratios grow per unitary.
I'm tellin' you my man, you're beatin' a dead horse.
I checked your channel out, and I actually like you as a person, I lived in Boston in 84'-85', I worked at Inter.Bike Center in Brighton, I raced on a bike team there..
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Lived in Jamaica Plain...Miss it !
I see you're a vet, and I assume you're a brother from a video i watched, which i find intriguing since most hoax believers are disenfranchised white boys who grew up listening to Rush ;-)
I wish you could come to Ohio & I could introduce you to someone that could convince you those 12 bad-ass gigantic balled SOB's went.
Have you ever seen the 16mm film the 6 missions brought back and compared it to the LRO images?
Those bastards went dude...sorry.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Wrong. Dorchester. Glad you enjoyed my music. I wrote it myself and played everything. Lets just get back to the question. Is it true that every element on the periodic table can be found in the sun and solar flares? That's very basic science. A no brainer. Would you like to take a shot at answering it?
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 To guess I would say not every element, just iron and the elements under it's atomic weight.
Are we talking about MAJOR solar flares or just detectable flares.
Only a major(not detectable) flare would've rendered any Apollo mission fatal or impossible.
The most prohibitive aspect of Apollo would've been passing thru' a proton field in the Va Allens' of 400MeV at 5x10³cm²/sec. in which Apollo 11's trajectory shows for instance, not your scared flare on Nov.14 69'.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead From NASA's website on galactic cosmic rays. All of the natural elements in the periodic table are present in cosmic rays, in roughly the same proportion as they occur in the solar system. I would say that an X5 class solar flare is a MAJOR solar flare which means that apollo 12 never went to the moon. The solar flare was on November 17, 18 and 19th 1969 for a total of 12+ hours of M3 and X5 class solar flares.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 You said earlier that there was a flare on the day of the lunch of Apollo 12 that was in direct course for Earth, now which flare did you calculate hit earth & Apollo12, 17,18,or 19th?
Please get this thru...Flares are NOT omnidirectional, they don't make concentric rings around the Sun and disperse.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead Yeah, I made a mistake and looked at the wrong page in the catalogue. It's page 87 for November 17, 18, and 19th 1969. True. Solar flares are not omnidirectional. They are also not concentrated into a narrow beam. That would be galactic cosmic rays. Solar flares interact with the solar winds generated by the sun and increase the amount of energy directed towards the planet. This may last for seconds or hours. Anything caught in the solar winds would be subject to 27 ergs per second.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 Your doing the same thing every hoax-believer does when the truth is revealed about solar flares & Van Allen rad',they move to GCR's.
Anyone who's studied astronomy knows GCR's flow rate is less than 1% of the rad' out there.
I defend Apollo but I also defend the science.
I've seen to many hoaxers twist science to confirm their beliefs,.
I believe we all should be beholding to the science & not our emotions.
Once you see the facts on GCR's you'll pull that dog outta' the hunt.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago
@Tweekerhead I'm not running away from solar flares. As a matter of fact with the amount of solar flares, I find it impossible for anyone to goto the moon without electromagnetic shielding. I did make a mistake that I would rectify right now. I was wrong on the amount of ergs per second in a solar flare. It's not 27 ergs per second which I thought was a huge number of rads, it's actually 10 to the 27th power ergs per second. See there, I admitted a mistake and corrected it.
Daddyo930 6 months ago
@Daddyo930 There's allota' things I don't know and do not have the intellectual capacity to learn.
But I know they Apollo was shielded enough to block 400MeV particle rad'.
GCR's were the least prohibitive issue facing Apollo and Neil Armstrong was literally a boy-scout and does not lie. His integrity far exceeds anyone's on this planet, that I will defend vociferously along with any science related to astronomy, which I dearly love.
I still think you've put the cart before the horse here.
Tweekerhead 6 months ago