Raw Video: Restored Video of Apollo 11 Moonwalk

NASA released Thursday newly restored video from the July 20, 1969, live television broadcast of the Apollo 11 moonwalk. The release commemorates the 40th anniversary of the first mission to land astronauts on the moon. (July 16)

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• apollo
• 11_video
• raw
• video
• restored
• 11
• moonwalk

[amor987654321]

im actually so tired of all these fags who are going on about how the apollo 11 moon landing was faked. it clearly happened. there are pictures of the landing site, explanations about the flag waving, and all that crap about the bent shadows. more evidence supporting that it happened than all these lame conspiracy theories

[devinseven11]

@ReallyDisturbing It can be faked now adays easy, especialy with a billion dollar budget that nasa had, but realy lets not contest what they say until we go to the moon and its there or not there. The Lazer thing isnt proof at all, we need to see the lunar landers there. Im just so surprised that we havent gone back and thats what leaves me questioning!

[Jop3lius]

@iKingMeow yes and where is your brain

[amor987654321]

@iKingMeow there are reasonable explanations for both of those things.

1. if the cameras were designed to pick up the faint glow of the stars they would clearly over-expose the bright/reflective surface of the moon, and all u would see would be a glow

2. When the "shuttle" lifted off there were no burn marks, that is correct. to answer why that was the case u gotta learn about why burn marks are made and why they wouldnt be made in that environment. utube doesnt give me enough sapce to explain.

[iKingMeow]

@amor987654321 where are the stars and the engine noise while landing and burnmarks when shuttle lifted off

[GGE47]

@michaelpilot1000 It was attached to the lunar module.Afterward they moved it away from the LM and mounted it on a tripod.

[eFFect0073]

@jerichomutant For the stars, same with your eyes or photography, you need long and high exposure (long stills) to see them, and since the moon doesn't have atmosphere the sun hits x times stronger on its surface, making it even harder to see them, the exposure of the cameras were designed so we could see the astronaut and details of the lunar surface, not the stars (since we can see them back home anyway).

[eFFect0073]

@michaelpilot1000 There was a cam on the Eagle (a shitty but steady one)

[jerichomutant]

@reallydisturbing ...... watch the opening credits of Star Trek which aired BEFORE Apollo -- Rodenberry did a superior job. He could actually put the stars in the back ground.... and music and credits. Kubrick did a suprior job. NASA couldn't even make the moon ball look better than a science fair project by a 3rd grader who rides the short bus. NASA NAZI = FAKE =FAIL

[ProductSignSupplies]

bdc3427 - if yer gonna troll, you really need to learn to do it better than that...

[smato68]

Arguing this is pointless. If you were to take these conspiracy tards to the moon, drag them up to the landing sites and shove their faces in the bootprints, they would STILL say it was all faked. Funny how the conspiracy kooks always think that THEY are REALLY the smart ones that cannot be fooled. I've not met one yet that has more than a rudimentary education, poor dental hygiene, and a chronic lack of female companionship.