Low pressure experiments

[bemdav]

Wow, that is just awesome, respect, man!

[teralabUK]

Superb demonstration. Thank you for posting this.

[ricardas83]

Nice video.

[h311raz0r]

If you are gullible enough to fall for this illuminati crap then they are really going to pull the wool over eyes with project bluebeam, pretending to find life on mars, fake signals found by SETI, and so called disclosure of "aliens" coming soon to bring in the New World Order.

Wake up before its too late.

ashes... lmaooooooooOOOOOO

[XmegaPresident]

You are an ignorant one aren't you??

wow

[st0rmforce]

or sarcastic.

hard to tell on the internet

[XmegaPresident]

lol. Good point!

Many people like user "h311raz0r" are very good at deluding themselves.

[h311raz0r]

sheep

[h311raz0r]

Stupid

[patargituloh]

elu di bumi,coba lakukan hal itu di bulan yang grafitasinya cuma 1/6 bumi,pasti sama dech

[brengun42]

Music from the original Sims!!

Great choice, great vid!

[lexscripta1]

No - this video was faked! Its a hoax!

Hahaha - Great work man, I learned something. Keep up the good work.

[Saurondor]

Fooling air would be trivial compared to fooling gravity. The real proof those videos are fake or not is testing against gravity not dust clouds. In the Moon the gravity is 1/6 that of Earth, but the astronauts are just as strong as here on Earth. So in theory they should project the same material a whole lot farther (just like they could jump a whole lot farther too).

If in a vacuum a similar type of dirt/ash lands sooner then yes the videos are real. Otherwise I'd believe them fake.

[timrocket2008]

The astronauts were pulled up by wires to make it look like it was in less gravity but the things like the surface material drops faster than they do so it was obviously faked.

[Urwumpe]

Obviously faked is the problem in your argumentation.

Obviously faked means, there is no other explanation for this. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

If there are wires attached, they need to be kept under tension, be attached to the astronauts in a way that they don't hinder their movement and you need to use optical tricks to make sure the wires and the ceiling on which you attached it are not visible.

[RoadRunnerLaser]

Great demo.

[grayhog86]

Nice.

Intelligent Humans 1

Conspiracy Hoax Dillweeds 0

[st0rmforce]

Seeing as there's been some new interest in this video and I recently bought a better camera (one with 100fps slo-mo) I'm thinking of remaking this with better quality video.

now I've just got to dig out that vacuum jar and get some dust...

[davewatcher]

Why bother? The point is proven.

[cawleym1]

At last, some intelligence on the subject. All the crappola arguments from the hoax halfwits settled, just like the Luna dust in a vacuum. Well done! I would put up with them but for the insult to the men who where brave enough to do it. I think deep down that's what drives them on. They know they would never have the guts to do it, so they debunk it. Saved as a favourite.

[davewatcher]

Very well done. Surely only an idiot could argue the case against. For me, the behaviour of the lunar dust is enough to prove the reality of Apollo.

[cawleym1]

It's like brownian motion in a medium. remove the medium and it stops.

[LindaStevensBZ]

PEOPLE: Instead of watching some Retard Hoax clip...go to the library or talk to a science teacher or go to the ALSJ site or Clavius. Being a Retard is not a desirable career path.

[LindaStevensBZ]

Nice clip Storm.

Science is a beautiful thing. The HoaxTards (Magoo) only answer is to watch some other idiotic Hoax clip that he saw on the internet. I've done the rough calculations on the materials required and cost of the Hoaxers Apollo CT Vacuum Chamber. It would have required 47 million tons of steel plate and 26 million tons of structural steel. Cost: The entire USA budget from 1961 to 1969. Would have required every welder in the USA/Canada/Europe and take 8 years to build. LOL!

[greenmagoos]

watch?v=9S30XLds5gc

[spooked911]

Two points this video neglects:

1) there was 1/6th less gravity on the moon, so dust would fall slower than on the earth-- even in a vacuum

2) the lack of dust clouds could have been easily simulated with sand and some similar larger particle material

[Killersepp]

1): And it does. Just watch the footage.

2): No it couldn't. Even Sand does form clouds on an atmosphere (seriously, have you ever been to a beach?), and the lunar dust seen in the Apollo footage is *much* finer than sand. Also, the lunar dust "clumps", allowing the astronaut's footsteps to be preserved so well.

Plus, there are other, very obvious facts that the Apollo footage was taken in a vacuum. The flag movement, for instance.

[767Captain]

...continuing...The hypergolic engines would not displace the lighter dust particles as much as you'd expect, nor would they be diffuse, as would happen in an atmosphere.

Remember, it is a vacuum. The thrust from the engine interacts in a way that is counter-intuitive to what you're used to on Earth, were there IS an atmosphere.

[michaelstmark]

The ground on which the LEM(on) allegedly landed still had to continually support several thousand lbs over many seconds through highly frictional ground pressure.

The notion that several inches of charcoal- fine material would still closely surround the craft after landing is ludicrous and totally absurd nonsense.

You're trying to debunk common sense with disinfo' science you've read in that Clavius comic or somewhere.

[davewatcher]

If we relied on our common sense, the world would still be flat and the universe would be going round the earth.

[pipoxyz]

..or later released.

does anyone know perhaps when the following footage was released. Also note that nasa Lost all original footage of the moonlanding.

[pipoxyz]

genious,..fantastic experiment!!

however..ive been checking some footage after this, to verify your claims, and the original footage, was not clear enough to determine dustclouds. The clips you compare it to, are computer enhanced..

[laserfloyd]

The earth based vacuum chamber could not have been used. Why? Go find the video/film of the entire landing sequence, which will last all the way from several hundred (if not thousand) feet in the air, to engine cutoff where the dust settles in seconds. So a 20x20 meter chamber wouldn't cut it. It would have to be much larger. The Moon is about the right size. ;)

[BullyBiFF]

NASA has admitted in 2002 that it cannot adequately protect the astronauts working in the International Space Station from radiation, yet it was able to do so with our lunar adventurers in flimsy Apollo modules back in 1969? Ridiculous.

[st0rmforce]

I've been busy for a while and forgot to comment some of these comments.

first off: A few people have mentioned about the gravity.

I've looked through a few bits of film and I'm wondering if your really looking. at around 3:00 theres an Apollo clip. how far does the dust go? compare to around 1:10 where I'm shaking the jar. see how far it jumps?

another point is that a lot of things don't work as you may expect. The Apollo videos look odd to somebody who's never been to the moon.

[michaelstmark]

That's a clever experiment based on good science, st0rm'. The ash is certainly as fine and powdery as the moon dust was claimed to be by Armstrong.

Now all you need to do is science how there could possibly be three inches of that loose BBQ-like ash left standing only 8ft away from where the several thousand lb LM descent engine supposedly touched down.

cheers.

[st0rmforce]

I've never been to the moon, I don't know how. I'm sure somebody with some scientific expertise has explained it.

I'm a programmer, not an astrophysicist. I just tell things as I see them and don't let my hatred of the government cloud my vision.

[michaelstmark]

Well done for that at least then. cheers.

[767Captain]

BBQ ash is much finer than the Lunar soil. The Descent engine only needed to produce enough force to counter the 'weight' of the Lander for the final few feet. At 5ft altitude the contact probes activate a light, and the Astronauts throttle down and land. Remember, if the vehicle weighs 3000lbs on Earth, it'd 'weigh' about 500lbs on the Moon.

[767Captain]

AND, mike, when you calculate the area of the engine nozzle opening you will find that the force of the thrust comes down to a few lbs/sq. inch. AND, there is no air! The displacement of atmosphere is what actually would move the soil. See, you're thinking about Earth experience, you can't seem to understand the science.

[michaelstmark]

It's actually you who doesn't understand the practicalities of the real science.

Your neat lbs per inch sq equation conveniently omits that was blast pressure involving constant friction with the surface over many seconds.

Your notion that would not displace a few inches of charcoal within 8ft of an engine bell indicates your scientific insanity.

[767Captain]

Umm, again Mike. 'constant friction with the surface over many seconds'?? That makes NO sense! Anyway, back to the point - there were a few cms of fine 'dust' on top of a firmer regolith, this is what made up the surfaces of the Apollo landing sites.

Below the regolith, who knows how deep, would be compacted basalt, the 'crust' of the Moon. Again, I DO understand the real science.

[bethpage89]

What an Honor, for the Americans to hear they did the impossible.

[JephN]

im willing to bet that you not only think we didnt land on the moon, but you believe that the Earth really is flat, Bush is doing a fine job, and god really did make humans. oh yeah, i forgot to mention...pagans are devil worshippers too, right?

[JephN]

i think i would rather talk to a road cone that reply to you with a comment from this point on.

[JephN]

earth's gravity is 32.17 ft/sec^2

moons gravity is 5.31 ft sec^2

this means something on earth will fall 32 feet in the first second, and 5 ft in a second on the moon (not counting wind resistance). its very likely that it will quickly settle in the vacuum of space. google this photo title-> AS17-139-21203 ...its kind of hard to fake something of that scale.

[JephN]

you're uneducated. moon dust is small and jagged. at the very least, the friction alone would stop it from scattering too far from the force causing the disruption. not to mention that it is, as you stated moon dust. it settles fairly quicky in a vacuum, as has been proven here on earth in a chamber.

[discouniverse]

Schemefighter , u r the same shit as that idiot...if the dust settles down on earth in 1 sec, then on moon in 6 sec...i have tiered of you stupids...on earth we can simulate all that landing perfectly, but NASA have not been able to do even so

[Yandros42]

Well done, but NASA beat you to it.

When it was constructed in 1969, the Space Power Facility (SPF) was the world's largest vacuum chamber. It stands more than 122 feet high, 100 feet in diameter and provides a vacuum environment for the study of space propulsion.

[Schemefighter]

Interesting. Hardly big enough to be used in these films. (Preempting the conspiracy nuts.) lol

Great film St0rm.

[Yandros42]

Big enough to the 20x20 meter area scenes however. Anything where the camera is close enough for the dust to be noticable could have been filmed in it.

[Schemefighter]

Not big enough for some of the rover, golf, running or rock hound or panning scenes. Most of witch is not on this clip but never the less on NASA films and much publicly witnessed more or less live.

[Datan0de]

Nicely done, St0rm. Your video is straightforward, reproducable, and proves its point well. Also, kudos on having a 0 in your username. It's a sign of rational thought. ;-)

[miciahdodge]

Nice vid, storm, thanks! if the conspiracy theorists can't believe in the scientific method then there's no point in arguing with them. Thanks again

[discouniverse]

:)))i like to tease the idiot whose name is ATFSCrash :)))))))))))))clear all these comments stormforce. because what ive said that idiot will not understand anyway:))))and for clever humans its obvious that NASA facked landing (its clearly seen even in ur movie, and only one thing u need is brains)

[st0rmforce]

good god! do you know how much you guys are blocking up my inbox?

[ATFSCrash]

Sorry, I will stop. It's not going anywhere anyway.

[discouniverse]

u should notice that land's surface remains the same after dust blowing:)))as before blowing:))))where all that dust disappeared????:)))))maybe aliens r guilty:)))))this movie once again proved - we never went on the moon

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "where all that dust disappeared?"

No dust disappeared. You're clearly delusional and hallucinating. Get some mental help kid.

[discouniverse]

u should take a look at the height of that soil is rising after that pseudoastronaut giving up digging, but at first u should feel difference between 6 and 1 (not between 1 and 1.6)

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "u should take a look at the height of that soil is rising after that pseudoastronaut giving up digging, but at first u should feel difference between 6 and 1 (not between 1 and 1.6)"

You should learn how to communicate intelligently. Washoe the chimpanzee could communicate better than you. You're like a brook, as usual you are babbling.

[discouniverse]

just like i said u r compleated idiot:))) i dont care what in ur stupid language means differencies between plazma and plasma...u idiot thats why u do not understand what im talking about...u can think that im talking about ur mommy:))))idiot:)))))its ur choice:)))to an idiot:) or just simple a gift from nature:))))btw science and is science because it tries to catch that true...if we knew the true there would be no need for scientists and experiments, idiot...its clearer now?

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse You got the words wrong. You got the definitions wrong. You got the science wrong. Yet you want to lecture me about science.

You are so insane you think I am wrong, science is wrong. You think everybody is wrong but a few conspiracy nuts like you. You are delusional. Get mental help.

[discouniverse]

u idiot should know that neptune, uran saturn and jupiter r gas giants without atmosphere (or completely consist of atmosphere:)))but u r an idiot and u do not understand that:))))

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "uran saturn and jupiter r gas giants without atmosphere (or completely consist of atmosphere"

Just like a hilarious little nutty kid, you want your cake, but you cry because you can't have it.

They all have atmospheres; a simple Internet search will prove that. Of course you don't take the word of real scientists or believe hard facts, because you're an insane idiot.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "do u know what is brown's motion"

I am familiar with Brownian motion but not brown's motion. Judging by your posts I would say brown's motion is a metaphor for when you post.

[discouniverse]

OK I quit...I have no time 4 idiots:))))))))

[discouniverse]

and if sun shine upon moon all water evaporates and no rain or snow exist...4 billion years is enough to evaporate all remains of vapor...ice can exist only near poles where temp is never rising above 0

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "billion years is enough to evaporate all remains of vapor"

False. You are just showing how ignorant, stubborn and nuts you are. I already told you top scientists agree that there is an extremely thin atmosphere and possibly even ice on the moon. Since the Moon is so cool, the evaporation rate is very slow. Much like the ice cubes in your freezer that evaporate, but evaporate very slowly.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "billion years is enough to evaporate all remains of vapor"

Also some of the ice is renewed by impacting comets. There's also other sources of gas such as radon produced by radioactive decay.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "and if sun shine upon moon all water evaporates and no rain or snow exist...4 billion years is enough to evaporate all remains of vapor...ice can exist only near poles where temp is never rising above 0" Once again you show your ignorance, the freezing point of ice in a vacuum is not 0. Using your logic those comets would've entirely evaporated by now. The Moon never had rain or snow because it doesn't have enough atmosphere, however it does possibly contain ice.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "evaporate all remains of vapor"

You're hilarious. Do you think you can melt steam? Just how do you evaporate vapor? You're like a brook, you're babbling.

[discouniverse]

encore:) if moon has atmosphere and water why NASA nuts is explaining footprints as they wouldnt caused by it. they explain clear footprints as being caused due to some special properties of the very soil (smart silicates)...of cause moon has all kinds of atoms and some simplest molecules as water, but not in gas state...u stupid should buy PC and start to simulate all u r talking here because now u can say that an elephant is the same as horse an give lots of arguments to prove it

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "but not in gas state"

As I already explained there is some atmosphere/gas on the moon. If you're such a conspiracy nut that you refuse to believe real science and scientists, then that just shows what an idiot and a nut you are. If you're gullible and ignorant enough to believe the pseudoscience lunatic conspiracy, that's your own fault

[discouniverse]

what an idiot...:))))))))omg:)))))u r native english speaker but incredibly stupid...do u understand ur own language??? do u feel any difference between molecules and atoms??? do u know what is brown's motion??? sublimation always exist but not atmosphere with stable constituents...following ur stupidity our sun has atmosphere...u should know idiotic nut that the emptyness do not exist at all. thats the last answer to u pure idiot:)))no more knowledge to u from me. rest in peace ill-minded kid:)

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "following ur stupidity our sun has atmosphere"

Our sun like any sun has an atmosphere.

Your one hardheaded idiot kid, you keep on hanging yourself and coming back for more. You're a hilarious foolish nut.

Do a Google search for "The Sun's Atmosphere"

There is a measurable atmosphere on the moon and the sun. Of course you don't care about facts and real science. Which is just more entertainment for us.

[discouniverse]

sun as the whole is an atmosphere:))))do google search the idiot:)))))

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "sun as the whole is an atmosphere)do google search the idiot)

Apparently you have multiple personality disorder or schizophrenia.

Make up your mind doesn't have an atmosphere or not?

Of course I know it is entirely made of gas.

You are the idiot that thought it didn't have an atmosphere. You can keep on trying but you cannot unring a bell, you only make more of a fool of yourself.

[discouniverse]

what an idiot:))))))))))))))))))))))))­)))))))))u r...but that is not so important...much worse that u r trying behaving as u was the most clever idiot on this planet:)))). u should stop believe in nonsences and start to use ur own brain. Think about very hard mentally ill kid:))))of cause sun does not have an atmosphere, because sun consist completely of plasma and radiation. and we know that atmosphere = gas (not only ions and atoms, but molecules as well)...so dont call an elephant the horse.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "because sun consist completely of plasma and radiation"

Just because it has plasma and radiation doesn't mean it's not an atmosphere. There is plasma and radiation in Earth's atmosphere also.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "of cause sun does not have an atmosphere,

So I should ignore all the well-trained scientists that say the Sun has an atmosphere and instead take the word of a stupid nutty kid like you?

You can even make up your mind whether it has an atmosphere or not, you've changed your argument three times so far today. You need mental help bad.

[discouniverse]

stupid calm down science is not true but the strive to reveal this true...if some scientist say sun has atmosphere it means that this atmosphere and wind has nothing to do with planets atmospheres, and only idiots believe in everything they say:))))tomorrow the very same scientists can change this notion:))))what u stupid will do then????:))))))) the most important is that sun do not have planets' atmosphere because it hasnt solid (non-plasmic) core.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "stupid calm down science is not true"

Science is always true. However people often get it wrong; take someone like you that virtually always gets it wrong because you are a stupid nutty kid.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "because sun consist completely of plasma"

Not all of the Sun is plasma.

[discouniverse]

when what does mean plazma:))) sun do not have molecules cause sun's surface temp is 6000C...sun's wind is completely of electrons and photons...we know 5 states of mater (solids, liquid crystals, liquids, gases, plazmas(neutron-proton or other elemetary particles as well)) and nothing more:)))now try to understand what u r talking here

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "when what does mean plazma"

Plazma is a component of blood.

Plasma is a gas that is ionized.

Maybe someday if you sober up and get mental help you will be able to comprehend.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "5 states of mater (solids, liquid crystals, liquids, gases, plazmas"

Crystals is not one of the five states of matter. Idiot

[discouniverse]

idiot, kick ur stupid scull once again:)))) crystals and liquid crystals r not the same...but of course u r stupid idiots and u dont know that

[ATFSCrash]

Discouniverse "crystals and liquid crystals r not the same"

Crystals is not one of the five states of matter. Idiot

[discouniverse]

Idiot, in this case i completly agree with u but do google search on this issue:)))stupid:)))and ull find hundred scientist which say that LC is the 5th state of mater:)))its now getting better to u stupid?:))))

[ATFSCrash]

Discouniverse "LC is the 5th state of mater"

Idiot. Liquid crystal is a PHASE of matter, not one of the five STATEs of matter. stupid

[discouniverse]

u r realy an idiot:))))do google search stupid scientist:))))have u ever heard about LC phases? Im working in this field at the moment:)))and i clearly see that u r an idiot:))))

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "Im working in this field at the moment"

What you do clean the toilets, are you a test subject for extreme density? It's clear you work is not in any scientific capacity. You clearly have no grasp of science or the jargon. You cannot even communicate on an elementary school level.

It is entertaining to see you make a fool of yourself, however it is depressing that someone in this day and age can be so uneducated and delusional.

[discouniverse]

yes i clean such idiots like u from toilets...u r the big, brown and stinking and of cause an idiot:)))))

[Schemefighter]

That smell is you Discouniverse, and that is your reflection you see. ;) I suspect you're a good example of conspiracy nuts. So little education you can't spell let alone grasp science.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "do google search stupid"

Search Wikipedia for "Phase (matter)"

Like I said you are confusing states of matter for phases of matter. If you were really working in the field as you claimed, you would know the difference. Considering what you have posted here I would doubt you even had high school physics or earth Science once again you have made a fool of yourself, idiot.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "mater"

Mater is your mommy, as expressed by boys like you. Idiot

Matter is the state of substances.

[discouniverse]

1 more question for a smart idiot...do u know why we have winds on eath? did u heard about convections and so on? when explain to urself what causes winds on the moon?

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "when explain to urself what causes winds on the moon"

The atmosphere is really too thin for what we would normally perceive as wind. However with stubborn continued ignorance you have chose to ignore the solar wind. You can't even handle basic spelling or grammar let alone science.

[discouniverse]

as i said u r an idiot...dont call (mental distorted kid) few atoms an atmosphere...idiots always remains idiots...u should even if u r an idiot that up to means not more and nothing says about minus:))))what a stupid u r:)))unbelievable...u should know that ice isnt gas, dont u? dark side of the moon is always dark for us but not for our sun idiot:)))...solar wind i guess consists of water and greenhouse gas:))))

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "dark side of the moon is always dark for us but not for our sun idiot"

The darkness is relative, it is not completely dark. The temperature does change so there are opportunities for ice to gasify. Apparently you don't know much about science because even at extreme cold temperatures ice can directly gasify/evaporate. Even in your refrigerator ice can evaporate below freezing temperatures. You just can't get enough of proving what a nut and idiot you are

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "dark side of the moon is always dark for us but not for our sun idiot"

If you weren't such an idiot and knew anything about science, you would know that the Sun's light reflects off of planets and lights the dark side of the moon. The dark side of the moon is also lit by starlight and comets. Just because it is called the dark side of the moon does not mean it is completely dark, it is relatively dark.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "idiots always remains idiots"

I suspect you will continue to remain an idiot kid, regardless of your age.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "u should know that ice isnt gas, dont u"

I obviously I do know that ice is not a gas, only someone a shallow minded idiot like you would think that is what I was saying. Obviously what I was saying if there is ice on the moon there would be slow evaporation, therefore there is an atmosphere. I even told you what to search for to find scientists that say the same. However you are such a stubborn simpleton you refuse to see that.

[discouniverse]

OK I dont want to pursuit this worthless discussion unless u answer my question about obvious event:)(of course for u retarded its not obvious)...why astronauts manage to hold on their feet:)))...and before answer this u stupid do some calculations and modeling if u know what PC does mean:))))) (im sure u even could prove that this was not Moon landing but Mars landing because u r idiot and u believe...u simple try to know stupid believer)

[ATFSCrash]

Instead of using pseudoscience from lunatic conspiracy web sites, you should learn to use real sane science. Since you're a nut I suspect you will continue to use pseudoscience from conspiracy nuts.

Once again you have proven how stupid you are.

[discouniverse]

ATFSCrash u r stupid idiot:))u answer my questions and not try to abuse me:))or your mental illness is so brilliant and splendid:))))No wind and no atmosphere on the Moon stupid because Moon's gravitation is 1/6 of Earth and temp. rises up to 150 C (enough energy to remove any gas) but for u stupid everything is possible:)

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "No wind and no atmosphere on the Moon stupid because Moon's gravitation is 1/6 of Earth and temp. rises up to 150 C (enough energy to remove any gas)"

There is an extremely thin atmosphere, so thin that some people say there isn't, however scientifically there is. They even think the Moon has ice, as the ice melts it produces gas. Radioactive decay reduces radon, which is a gas. The dark side of the Moon can be as cold as -280 F. "stupid" "kid"

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "u answer my questions and not try to abuse me:))or your mental illness is so brilliant and splendid"

Hypocrisy, you started throwing insults first because your arguments were scientifically week, so like a child instead of arguing the facts you resorted to propping up your arguments with attacks and insults. I only responded in kind. So you only have yourself to blame. Get a mental help

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "No wind and no atmosphere on the Moon stupid because Moon's gravitation is 1/6 of Earth and temp. rises up to 150 C (enough energy to remove any gas)"

Search Google for "Lunar ice" "solar wind" "Lunar atmosphere"

Instead of using pseudoscience from lunatic conspiracy web sites, you should learn to use real sane science. Since you're a nut I suspect you will continue to use pseudoscience from conspiracy nuts.

[discouniverse]

could u show me any traces of these small impacts on that dust??????????or that cant be seen due to the contrast??:)))))))or do u still believe that there exist winds on our Moon????? why after 'landing' the surface near that place remained the same as few hundred metres away???? u r simply mentally ill:))))))

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "could u show me any traces of these small impacts on that dust? or do u still believe that there exist winds on our Moon."

I didn't say anything about small impacts. You can see the evidence of larger impacts with naked eye from Earth, apparently you're on some other planet. There is wind on the moon, you ever hear of solar wind? There is some atmosphere on the moon, however it is extremely thin. Like I said it's not enough to cause any significant erosion.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "why after 'landing' the surface near that place remained the same as few hundred metres away????."

It should be pretty obvious that the reason the surface of the moon was not disturbed by the landing a few hundred meters away is because the atmosphere on the moon is so thin that it cannot set up a significant breeze at a distance or float dust as far. Suggest you get mental help

[discouniverse]

about dust origin...:)))))))))u r so stupid i even dont know how to start to explain to u...no wind or water at all on Moon...if all this dust is from impacts then in some places should be much more dust than in others...but i saw on these footages the same thickness everywhere they went:)))) moreover the dust is not from big impacts but from other small impacts as welll...

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "about dust origin.. u r so stupid i even dont know how to start to explain to u."

I did explain, you're just too stupid and too much of a conspiracy nut to understand and accept it. Face it your delusional and need mental help and an education.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "but i saw on these footages the same thickness everywhere they went:)"

Apparently you didn't watch the astronaut walk through the dust or the moon Rover drive through the dust, or notice rocks on the surface. There clearly is different thickness of dust. NASA even surveyed the moon and chose landing sites that had less dust to prevent the capsule, rover and astronauts from sinking so that exporting and finding rocks would be easier

[discouniverse]

once again about contrast...do u know what does it mean??????? or do u think that contrast is different for dust and for stars at the same moment and in the same footage??????????????? u should go back to your school...but i dont think that will help u

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "once again about contrast...do u know what does it mean??????? or do u think that contrast is different for dust and for stars at the same moment and in the same footage?"

I obviously know what contrast means, you obviously don't. So from where you stand you can see the same number of stars in the daytime as nighttime? Or are you not on earth? lol You need mental help and an education

[st0rmforce]

Thanks for all the comments

as for the music... its a piece of background music from a game

[ATFSCrash]

Sorry st0rmforce I put your name in front of a couple quotes by accident meant for discouniverse

Not only do I like how you did the experiment/demonstration. You seem to know that the moon landings were real, however you still seem objective enough to consider and investigate the other theories scientifically and fairly. In other words you seem to have a reasonably open scientific mind.

[whitescarfsyndrome]

Got here through svector's video's.  Great demo. Just got back from watching the 3D Imax Beautiful Desolation movie at KSC. Seeing those guys kick this fine stuff right in your face at nearly 20 feet tall, in 3D...really drives this point home. Thanks!

Also, what is that piano piece? It's beautiful!

[angelointhevideo]

GREAT work!!!

Well done!!

[st0rmforce]

I don't think this is actually proof. but it does show a few things...

the main problems with this is that I couldn't get a complete vacuum (I wonder how NASA managed to get ALL the air out of thier large film set) and also barbeque ash is not really that much like moon dust, but it was the best I could find

I may try this again with cement some time as I have been told that it is closer.

[ATFSCrash]

One would think the walls and roof would collapse in on such a large stage from the outside air pressing pushing in if was staged.

Have you ever seen how thick the walls and roof are on a smaller altitude chamber?

The real set must have been the moon. ;)

Good demo, science and video.

[svector]

GJ storm. Video response approved.

[discouniverse]

If u cannot see stars in the sky...how u could see any dust who settle down??? No dust on these footages because u see the soil not the dust:). Moreover this soil behave as it feels 1G and not 1/6G:). Its so simple to understand that:)

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "If u cannot see stars in the sky...how u could see any dust who settle down?"

Then how come you can see the dust on landing and the dust they kicked? You can see it then just a few seconds later it settles. Think. ;)

It is impressive how fast it settles with even such low gravity.

[discouniverse]

if u can see the dust...how could u see no stars in the sky??? This dust must fall down with perfect trajectories and 6 times slower than in this experiment...try to compare what u see on these NASA footages...only kids can still believe that these pictures and movies have been made on the Moon...moreover what thickness of that dust layer on the Moon (and what the age of Moon???)? Is it possible to have erodated rock on the Moon?

[ATFSCrash]

st0rmforce "if u can see the dust...how could u see no stars in the sky?"

Haven't you ever heard of contrast? In daylight go outside, you obviously can see dust; lookup in the sky how many stars do you see? They're still there you just can't see them as well because of the contrast.

[ATFSCrash]

st0rmforce "This dust must fall down with perfect trajectories and 6 times slower than in this experiment."

The trajectory in the speed looked correct for the Moon on the NASA tapes. Notice how the astronaut is so light that he can bounce on his toes with virtually no effort. Notice how when the astronaut digs his spade that his weight is not enough to counteract the digging so he loses balance.

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "only kids can still believe that these pictures and movies have been made on the Moon..."

Many would think only the uneducated, or mentally challenged would believe the moon conspiracy theories. The vast majority of the kids I know younger than you are not daft enough to believe the conspiracy theories.

[discouniverse]

i believe in facts but not in the stories for dafted and mentally challenged persons...u should calculate the mass center of astronauts and try to learn physics and such notions as impulse, momentum and energy...however, no medicaments for stupids...so u would believe in fairlytales in any case...u should feel a shame against these kids that seems r older than u

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "u should calculate the mass center of astronauts and try to learn physics and such notions as impulse, momentum and energy"

As I have pointed out your post clearly show you don't know about physics, whereas I do.

discouniverse "however, no medicaments for stupids"

That would explain your continued mental illness and ignorance. Get help, grow up

[ATFSCrash]

discouniverse "moreover what thickness of that dust layer on the Moon (and what the age of Moon???)? Is it possible to have erodated rock on the Moon?"

Who said anything about erosion, you're pretty daft to think it is from erosion? There's not enough wind or water on the moon to cause substantial erosion. I don't see any signs of erosion on the rocks. The dust is clearly from impact events. You seem to be in an altered state of perception.

[BamptonLol]

Proof indeed, well done!!!