Air caused the flag to move so it was obviously in a studio.

Discussion in 'Moon Landing' started by Scott, Jun 28, 2014.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The support rod that's attached to the pole shows what the rod is doing as it turns with the pole. If we look at the support rod, we can see that he does not twist the pole as you say he does. The rod movement is not what makes the flag stop. Air is what makes the flag stop. Anyone who actually watches the video can see that.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
    (00:50 and 1:50 time marks)
     
  2. Bleipriester

    Bleipriester Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Therefore, the Mythbusters are evidently dumb...
    The most easy way to get it is to watch the flag on the moon.
     
  3. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hogwash. He is holding the flagpole the whole time. The vertical support is bouncing the whole time. There is also rotation around the pole, which has a counter effect to the flapping.

    Hogwash. Nobody said it was the rod. It is the astronaut twisting the flag pole to start it and then stop it.

    Hogwash.

    I have yet to see anybody agree with you. More hogwash.

    Your spam continues unabated. I answered this 2 years ago in one of your spam triplicate threads:-

    Since you wish to include this as part of your wall of spam, I shall debunk it properly.

    Video 1:-

    Here is my first video showing the whole clip from the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. In this video, the astronauts crossover a few times, so the idea they are using "wires" that we never see, can be quickly debunked.

    [video=youtube;AQxQSzj3Khw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQxQSzj3Khw[/video]

    Video 2:-

    Now, we have discounted the use of wires, since it would be impossible to stop them tangling! Here is the next video with the film firstly sped up 150%. The dust and flag motion is excessive, and several movements by the astronauts look very odd. There are short glimpses of vertical motion showing that it still is too slow for Earth gravity. I then speed the film up 200%, and now it all looks patently absurd.

    [video=youtube;TPLoqxacpFI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPLoqxacpFI[/video]
    Video 3:-

    The final video is a debunk of the motion, showing also that the flagpole is rotating, causing a massive dampening effect to any pendulum swing.

    [video=youtube;sc6sqIe3Aio]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc6sqIe3Aio[/video]
     
  4. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One of these days, perhaps this serial forum spammer will answer responses given to him.
     
  5. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    18,909
    Likes Received:
    3,589
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it did not

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quite wrong the flag stops because it stops as it would in or out of an atmosphere.

    You lose again
     
  6. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're trying to muddy the waters and confuse the viewers who don't look at the footage in question.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
    (00:50 and 1:50 time marks)

    The rod shows how the pole is moving as it's connected to it. We know exactly how the astronaut is moving the pole as the rode moves with the pole. The pole is not moving the way you say it is. This is simply too clear to obfuscate and anybody who takes the time to look at the footage will see that. You might as well insist that a picture of a chicken is really a picture of a pig.

    When you pro-Apollo posters are cornered on a clear issue, you deny the obvious and try to divert the discussion with irrelevant questions until the issue blows over and then you try to bury that part of the debate to reduce the number of people who see it. Then you go on as if nothing had happened. If six sophists are jumping up and down screaming that two plus to equals five, it won't sway anybody. Go ahead and keep jumping up and down. Your success rate will be close to zero. This anomaly is simply too clear to obfuscate.


    Hey Bleipriester

    In post #70 I asked you if you believed the Chinese spacewalk was real and you didn't answer.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=362999&page=2&p=1064028979#post1064028979

    Yes. This is an objectivity test.
     
  7. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    God, even your responses on individual points are spam. Nobody is agreeing with you.

    Hogwash. It's like a five year old describing something with no scientific rigour, accuracy or anything meaningful. Nothing you say has any credence.

    How about this guy. He spends his entire life on the internet, spamming the same crap, same replies, same videos, same inept conclusions.

    My success rate is close to zero with conspiracy fruitcakes. With logical people, rationale people, or anybody who isn't completely blind to how their argument is useless, my success rate is 100%.
     
  8. Don Townsend

    Don Townsend New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm still on the fence. I was wondering (.it may have already been answered somewhere) how the lander could land witha 10,000 lb. thrust engine ,leave absolutely no disturbance of the soil beneath it and also have absolutely pristine golden landing pads without a spec of dust on them. They look like Neil gave the lander a nice polish job when he got out. Don't say the soil was hard because the Astronauts are leaving foot prints and kicking up soil with the slightest movements. There's one other photo that really bugs me . it's the Astronaut descending the ladder on the shady side of the lander and he is the only object lit up like daylight. So if we indeed go to the Moon would you make the this small concession,that some of those studio quality pictures supposedly taken on the Moon were really taken on the Mock up stage here on Earth for P.R. purposes because they knew they wouldn't get very good pictures up there , Is that possible?
     
  9. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The thrust is variable. That is the maximum, which once nearly all the fuel is depleted is no longer necessary. This webpage gives a good explanation:-

    http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm

    As regards a blast crater, during the EVA, the astronauts took photographs under the lunar module and Armstrong himself remarked on the lack of a blast crater, though there were striations from the engine exhaust. Now ask yourself, if this was a hoax, why couldn't they just dig one out? Are they that stupid, that they photograph and talk about it, yet forget to put one in?

    Aldrin is lit from the surface reflection and from the brightly reflecting suit of Armstrong. His suit shows illumination consistent with light coming from an area below his elevation, shadows cast in an upwards direction:

    [​IMG]

    Look at this direct scan of the un-color balanced snap of Aldrin on the Moon:-
    http://www.mem-tek.com/apollo/ISD_highres_AS11/roll_40/5903_cropped_medium-res.jpg

    Notice the right side is lit by bright sunshine, the left is not, yet we can still see it clearly. It is the same thing, illuminated by the vast area of surface in daylight.
     
  10. Karma Mechanic

    Karma Mechanic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    8,054
    Likes Received:
    83
    Trophy Points:
    48
    explanations are ignored. People want to believe they have special knowledge and that if you don't think as they do then you are a stupid sheep. It makes them feel important.
     
  11. Colonel K

    Colonel K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mythbusters deconstructed this conspiracy years ago, but the energiser bunnies keep on going!
     
  12. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Indeed, with one particularly persistent and gullible joker claiming that the mythbusters team are actually disinfo agents. He'll be along any time soon to spam his stock response.
     
  13. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First of all, BetaMax destroyed his credibility a long time ago when he tried to obfuscate the anomalies that prove the Chinese spacewalk was faked.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=362999&page=2&p=1064028979#post1064028979

    MythBusters was shown to be disinfo a long time ago.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5ajIVmGiQE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23BIb_PMJ4M
    http://aulis.com/mythbusters.htm

    Here's a study of the crater issue.
    http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker:+No+Crater

    Here's an analysis of the shadow issue by a guy with a PH. D.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6MvcIs4OcQ
     
  14. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As predictable as a daily motion.

    There are no anomalies only stupid observations. My credibility is fine. When the judge of it is somebody with no idea what they are talking about, who exhibits severe reading / comprehension issues and who cowardly avoids debate, I can rest easy.

    I should explain here, that this person thinks that his opinion is a fact. He lacks any capacity at all to assess contrary evidence and worse, goes out of his way to avoid it. The idea that an entertainment TV program has been coerced into giving out false information about the moon landings is simply pathetic.

    Here is one example where the spammer avoids evidence:-

    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/apollo-17-flag.html

    That is an uneducated youtube user talking out of his backside. Here is an educated response:-

    [video=youtube;K66YpKaimdI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K66YpKaimdI[/video]

    Who told you he had a doctorate? Here is his totally useless analysis disassembled - Heading LINK 2 on this page:-

    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/some-cosmored-hoax-links.html

    Nobody hold your breath waiting for cogent rebuttal, the spammer will ignore that last link.
     
  15. Don Townsend

    Don Townsend New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Myth busters ,I'll have to start quoting them as experts in my posts .PAALEEZEE. Who with just a modicum of intelligence would believe the B.S. about the dust just settling down right where it came from NASA has been proven by ex NASA EMPLOYEES to lie about,alter, and manipulate images and any agency that call the following picture just a ROCK has ZERO CREDIBILITY with me and millions more.

    [video=youtube_share;xDef4Bwgod4]http://youtu.be/xDef4Bwgod4[/video]
     
  16. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess you qualify in that bracket/ Those with more than a modicum are able to conclude dust blasted by a rocket engine will travel a considerable distance beyond the lander.

    No it has not. This is where you name the employees.

    You really claim to speak for millions? It's a rock deceptively colored in by a photo-shopping package. Google "pareidolia" maybe it will enable you to see how you have been hoodwinked. I somehow doubt it.

    [​IMG]

    There's a fish in the bottom left corner
     
  17. Don Townsend

    Don Townsend New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You just made my point the dust would be blasted a considerable distance,wouldn't one assume just a spec or two might end up on the foot pads.

    There are many ,but the ones I've been quoting are Richard Hoover and Donna Hare, I'll let you look up their credentials and stories.

    That image was published by every major newspaper in the world and it took several days for NASA TO say NAW ti's just a rock shaped by wind and water TO LOOK EXACTLY LIKE A BONE PAALEEZEE! For crying out loud in the better photos you can see the bone marrow passage in the end of it ,a pretty good trick for a ROCK ! What do you think people BONE OR ROCK !

    [video=youtube_share;xDef4Bwgod4]http://youtu.be/xDef4Bwgod4[/video]
     
  18. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BetaMax linked to the Clavius site in his obfuscation attempt here.
    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/some-cosmored-hoax-links.html
    http://www.clavius.org/envradfilm.html

    The webmaster of the Clavius site (Jay Windley) is a known sophist.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=347184&page=11&p=1064226662#post1064226662

    BetaMax destroyed his credibility a second time when he agreed with Jay Windley's lame analysis of the dust-free sand issue (see above link).

    There's more on Jay Windley and the Clavius site in posts #5 and #8 here.
    http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=125628
     
  19. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First off you present Ad Hominem spam,then you claim betamax has no credibility and link to one of your OWN posts on another forum to illustrate this.

    Try again Scott/cosmored/fatfreddy88/david c....
     
  20. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I really had to think hard here, as for a moment you completely lost me. You seem to be suggesting that the picture taken by the Curiosity rover, literally miles away from the actual lander shouldn't have any dust lying around! I suggest you revise your opinion, because it is completely wrong.

    http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/pia18391_sol663map-small.jpg

    Donna Hare is making it up. There is no way a contractor would be allowed to "wander" into a secure area. I suspect that one of the technicians was winding her up, knowing that she was a UFO fanatic. She makes so many daft claims. particularly about aliens helping Apollo 13 back from the Moon.

    Hoover simply believes that NASA is covering up life on Mars:blankstare: I can see why you think he's not talking total hogwash. All his fellow workers think he is.

    Doctored photograph of a rock that vaguely looks like a bone. The person who did this has completely imagined what lies beneath the lower part underneath the dust. Spare us your histrionics. As for the marrow passage, the lower part of the rock is completely covered in dust!
     
  21. Gorn Captain

    Gorn Captain Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    35,580
    Likes Received:
    237
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why would a television studio.....have an open window?

    - - - Updated - - -

    It wasn't aliens....it was Forrest Gump and Lieutenant Dan....I have video proving it.
    :)
     
  22. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You use that word so often it is quite painful. You don't seem to understand the difference between obfuscation and explanations. I think there lies your problem. You are so set in your spam that you cannot under any circumstances admit you are wrong - you are, you always are.

    Again you seem under the delusion that your simple opinion means it is a fact. Jay Windley is one of the foremost experts on Apollo and has extensive experience in numerous associated fields. You have none. You are not even remotely qualified to judge him in any way shape or form. Your knowledge on any of these subjects is pitiful and laughable.

    The spam opinion yet again. My credibility and that of Mr Windley are fine. You are one of the largest jokes on the internet. Informed people laugh at your antics and shake their collective heads at your stunning ignorant repetition. The first link in your spam doesn't work, and the geologists in question to a man think that hoax believers are morons for claiming the rocks are somehow faked.

    Now, everybody following this thread can see you cowardly avoiding the responses whilst supplying ad hominem spam.
     
  23. Don Townsend

    Don Townsend New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,357
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do you believe the recent revelations by SNOWDEN against then NSA there all calling him a Conspiracy Nut. If you do believe Snowden then you can't have it both ways . Calling your witnesses WHISTLE BLOWERS and mine CONSPIRACY NUTS and that;s 100% a bone and I 'm pretty sure you really think so too. AW,C'MON ADMIT IT, nobody's looking.
     
  24. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Have it both ways is not even a valid statement. One is talking hogwash about covering up aliens, the other is talking about mass surveillance programs.

    He's colored in the part covered by dust. He's basically just made it up because he wants it to resemble a bone. On the ground, as it is in the original photograph, it's a rock.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...f-the-human-mind-emerges-in-computers/260760/

    I take it you concede your dust claim as being wrong.
     
  25. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113

Share This Page