Mythbusters Moon Hoax Footprint

I am still not convinced by this "proof". The regolith used in this "experiment" was already exposed to the water vapor of Earth atmosphere, so it already is "sticky". Second, this footprint is MUCH shallower and smoothier than the footprint on the photos of the moon landings. The "myth" is still not busted!!!

I met a guy (dorm neighbor) who believed that almost every conspiracy theory was true. No matter how much evidence some of us showed him, or no matter how many times he contradicted himself, he wouldn't budge on the matters. All I learned from him is that some people live in their own realities and even direct proof won't change this (so arguing with conspiracy theory nuts can be funny for awhile but eventually leads to a head ache)

shnopsnub, your point is well-taken. Personally, I look at a discussion with a conspiracy theorist as an exercise in epistemology or the basic application of the rules of logic. It also serves the purpose of exposing those who don't know about Apollo to some of the science associated with what happen. I'm perfectly willing to let others hold on to their opinions, however misguided they may be.

LT,

Sand's used are less than that of the PAN's area. Some sands could be easily displaced. Another, they did not leave a deep impression on the sand, unlike that of the photo.

It's hard to believe the boy who cried wolf. Much more if an agency has been the subject of cover-ups..?

watch?v=V3Gf4liJjMA

Faith, the point of this demo is to show that material can hold together despite not having any moisture in a vacuum. Personally, I wish they had used more material, then I'm sure the impression would have been deeper. Nonetheless, it holds together without moisture.

LT,

Does Kari Byron think the sand on earth is the same as that in the moon? That's not being smart. Prove that the sand in the moon have the same composition (moisture, thickness, etc, etc) as that of earth.

Faith, if you listened carefully, you would note that the sand used in the demonstration was chosen because it was a reconstruction of the regolith found on the moon. Geologists are quite capable of reproducing material that matches what is found on the moon. We know that the lunar regolith has NO moisture and lacks any evidence of typical erosion as found on earth, so such material was duplicated for this demo.

On U tube just watch the video 'Dark side of the moon' where Nixon's aids CIA Director General walters, donald rumsfeld, henry kissenger and chief of staff alexander haig all admit that the apollo 11 man on the moon was filmed in London MGM studio's by Stanley Kubric. Nixon ordered the killing of all the crew, Rogers, Dow, Brown and Stein along with many others. So if the top brass say they never went to the moon they never went to the moon, NASA you must be joking, moon landings

mincepaw, as I mentioned on my other page...

mincepaw, "Dark Side of the Moon" is a "MOCKUMENTARY!" It was a joke! A prank! Director, William Karel was kidding! He, Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Haig, Kubric's wife...they were all in on this comedic documentary. Dow, Brown and Stein aren't real astronauts! You need to watch them at the end during the credits when they show the bloopers. Karel was making a comment about how easily gullible people are sucked in if they don't do their homework!

Folks, I've blocked un4g1v3n1. I hate doing this, but my channel clearly explains: "if you are verbally abusive, threatening or if you "hijack" the comments section, you will disappear." I also warned him, yet he has responded by calling me "thick" and accusing me of ignorance, laziness and lying.

I can endure a lot, but when it's combined with "hijacking" a page, I see no reason to endure it. If un4g1v3n1 wants to apologize, I'm happy to let him comment, because I think it could be useful.