No you troll. It proves he cannot be on wires. It is beyond refutation. Soil clearly rises at the same time as he does. You are afraid to address this. You lose, you always lose. Twenty years of complete failure. The laws of physics don't change just because some internet joke refuses to understand them. The same is true with the Cernan jump, we can see this even more clearly. The wave of dust rises to apex at the same time as Cernan, we then see it come down and strike the surface at the same time as he lands. A useless troll can suggest the magic soil is bouncing, but once again the laws of physics kick your pathetic argument to pieces.
It isn't a shadow, the moronic superlight has been disproven by simple observations that you cowardly avoid. What light even now, evenly lights many square miles of terrain!? What idiotic world do cables pass in front of impossible disproven lights? You're like a cornered rodent scrambling for ideas because their world is caving in. Every single garbage idea you have chucked out has been debunked. Not one single irrefutable thing cited as proof back at you has been honestly addressed You are the biggest joke on the internet, twenty years of failure and you still don't know when to quit.
1/ The entire record of the lunar sample analyses. Proven and you have nothing in response but spam you don't understand and have never watched. 2/ Gene Cernan soil wave matches his jump. Proven and ignored. 3/ The Jump Salute the parabolic dust arc matches his ascension, stop and beginning of descent! Proven and ignored. 4/ The falling battery cover shows zero dust displacement in the direction of the fall where it would be most acute. Proven and denied. 5/ The LRV traverse - perfect lunar footage. Absolutely faultless. No idea how it was done and no integrity to work out its significance! This serial forum spammer is simply too afraid to post any honest replies. The game is over, we are witnessing his total denial. Twenty years of complete failure, that is the saddest indictment of anyone's life. They spend their spare time posting crap on every subject (predominantly this one) and know absolutely zero about any aspect of anything they post about. How screwed up is that! Here we are, yet again, no honest replies and the serial forum spammer continues his ridiculous diversion with drivel about magic shadows on impossible lights. "Shadows" that for some reason mimic the color wheel on the damn video camera!
That is not proof regarding the presence or absence of wires. I am not talking about the movement of the moon dust which has been explained in terms of physics. Try to be a little more logical regarding 'proof'. I am specifically asking you to demonstrate that wires were actually used as conspiracy theorists claim. Again, using present day equipment, has anybody on the planet actually shown that the astronauts had wires and harnesses attached to them? And, what kind of technology was employed to hide the wires and harnesses back when the footage was taken? Can you also explain in detail the images taken by Nasa's LRO -- Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. The LRO has taken high resolution pictures of the lunar surface from a low orbit. There are pictures of the landing sites, abandoned rovers and abandoned descent modules from Apollo missions. The resolution is so massively good it has picked up the dark squiggly paths from the footprints of the astronauts. For independent verification, so you can't claim NASA is faking these, spacecraft from China, India, and Japan have independently confirmed the presence of the landing sites. There is also the lunar laser ranging retroreflector array that was placed on the surface of the moon. It is still operation today and allows us to reflect lasers off of it and to measure the distance to the Moon down to a centimetre. Are you going to deny it's up there or was it beamed up there magically. Explain it please. When the 600 million TV viewers were watching the moon landing in 1969, why didn't anybody notice anything wrong? Have you ever actually seen 2001: A Space Odyssey filmed in 1968? It is an excellent example of what Hollywood special effects could do at the time -- take a look. Now, take a look at a clip of the movie 'First Man' filmed in 2018. With all the capacity for digital enhancement, they could not replicate gravity, nor the movement of the moon dust. They would have had all sorts of CGI software at their fingertips. Go and look up any movie about the moon. None of them can replicate the on-location footage of the moon because they are filmed on Earth. As I have already mentioned, even with all the advanced technology, software would be able to show any fakery involved to make it look like it was on the moon. It's as simple as that. If NASA decided to 'fake', as you keep claiming, another moon landing right now, any footage taken would be revealed as fake immediately. So, explain how back in 1969, they managed to hoax the whole world on some soundstage using the technology they possessed at the time? I am not interested in any of your debunked links, I want to hear an explanation using your own words related to the questions that I have asked and you keep ignoring.
He's going to spam his stock responses, debunked to death and all concise responses ignored by him. For reflectors, it is "unmanned" crap with not one single iota of hard evidence to support it, he thinks his pathetic uninformed opinion suffices as "proof"! For LROC, he posts his stock 3 video spam then ignores extensive rebuttal, basically they are all supposedly faked, but he never quantifies how or by whom and ignores the sheer size of the image transmissions, or the ongoing number of them. For the countries who have also corroborated LROC, his moronic claim that they are all in on the scam together!. Seriously, there is no getting through to this clown, he is a serial forum spammer who is incapable of assessing evidence. He has no objectivity, no integrity and doesn't give a hoot about truth. @Scott don't even think about spamming your multiply used off topic garbage - I shall report it yet again. It isn't censorship to stop trolls from trolling.
Betamax, you never addressed these two questions. (from post #119) http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-5#post-1073845639 (see video in post #115) http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-5#post-1073840012 (from post #124) http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-5#post-1073846636
Troll. Already addressed - your obfuscation and strawman diversion is pathetic! As noted - a sequence where the reflection from the Sun is blocked out completely by a very narrow rod. This 100% refutes the stupid claim that it was some sort of massive light. How can anybody deny that the visor reflection is diffused sunlight, when a narrow rod makes it disappear!? 1/ The entire record of the lunar sample analyses. Proven and you have nothing in response but spam you don't understand and have never watched. 2/ Gene Cernan soil wave matches his jump. Proven and ignored. 3/ The Jump Salute the parabolic dust arc matches his ascension, stop and beginning of descent! Proven and ignored. 4/ The falling battery cover shows zero dust displacement in the direction of the fall where it would be most acute. Proven and denied. 5/ The LRV traverse - perfect lunar footage. Absolutely faultless. No idea how it was done and no integrity to work out its significance! This serial forum spammer is simply too afraid to post any honest replies. The game is over, we are witnessing his total denial. Twenty years of complete failure, that is the saddest indictment of anyone's life. They spend their spare time posting crap on every subject (predominantly this one) and know absolutely zero about any aspect of anything they post about. How screwed up is that! Here we are, yet again, no honest replies and the serial forum spammer continues his ridiculous diversion with drivel about magic shadows on impossible lights. "Shadows" that for some reason mimic the color wheel on the damn video camera! The corrupt nature of Apollo hoax claimants!
I suppose the most annoying thing about this troll, is his moronic insistence that every single idiotic claim and question he puts forward must be addressed, whilst he cowardly avoids responding to the real meat of the situation, things he must know prove he is wrong. I cannot imagine anyone looking at all those rebuttals and direct evidence and being too stupid to see it. A thin cable crossing in front of a wide angled lens would never block it, that is just stupid. It's maybe 5% max of the field of view - it takes profound ignorance not to understand this. What would it look like? I just did a very quick video on my smartphone: Very slow across the lens and you can see the cable. Anything else and it is more or less identical to what we see on the surface footage - no definition to the cable, just a moving shaded section. Video for a clueless troll - YouTube
I stopped your video before the cable started going fast and it blocked what was behind it. That doesn't happen in the video in post #115 and the alleged shadows are going at about the same speed. When the cable starts going faster in your video, what's behind the cable can be seen because the movement is too fast for the frames-per-minute of the camera. Start watching this video at the 00:40 time mark. This is Hummingbird Heaven | United States of Animals There's a point at which things move too fast for the shutter speed or the frames per minute to get sharp images. That's not what's happening in the video in post #115. Also, at about the 2:05 time mark of the video the narrator talks about color banding and shows how it can happen when objects and shadows are filmed. Stop the video at the 3:19 time mark. The color banding can be seen. Can that happen to hummingbird wings when they are moving too fast for the camera to get sharp images? Do a freeze frame of the hummingbird hovering. Everything behind the wings can be seen. That only happens at high speeds. The images in the video in post #115 are shadows as their speed is too slow for the images to be the same phenomenon as the hummingbird wings.
And that would tell a reasonably intelligent person all they needed to know. The cable visible was a tiny camera and me moving it across very slowly. It is totally obvious that on the Apollo footage whatever is passing across the lens is doing so extremely rapidly! And of course you believe the idiot narrator trying to sell a hoax video to gullible fools. The color banding is a result of absolutely anything moving. A moronic comparison with a high-speed movie camera and a low speed VHS vidicon camera! The artefacts are not shadows, that is the kind of conclusion a biased and very ignorant person would make. The superlight is debunked and you are too cowardly to address it. In this sequence (part of long unbroken footage), the camera does a large sweep of terrain and the lit area is absolutely massive. No light(s) on Earth could do that at night even now! Certainly not one small enough that a narrow rod blocks it completely!
The rod DOES NOT block it completely. discussed here: http://www.politicalforum.com/index...anding-is-fake.553296/page-10#post-1072172451
No it isn't. They're in a studio. Go down about half way on this page to where it says, "The Hills Are Alive". http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm https://www.aulis.com/exposing_apollo1.htm http://www.politicalforum.com/index...roof-that-the-moon-missions-were-real.603866/ http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-they-are-on-the-moon.580330/#post-1072162665 http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-3#post-1072504892 http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-2#post-1072491946 http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-apollo-landing.519410/page-9#post-1072078676 http://www.politicalforum.com/index...he-authenticity.603023/page-4#post-1073762189 It's not very sporting not to show both sides of an argument. Thanks for backing me up Descartes.
@Scott Please address what I asked you -- http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-6#post-1073847619 -- in your own words, no links to other threads here, no links to conspiracy based websites -- just you, in your own words -- answer my queries directly.
Yes it does. The actual Sun can be seen on the rod. There is the tiniest bit of residual light burnt in to the tube, but the full circle claimed by fools, to be a superlight, clearly disappears.
Troll. What motivates somebody to post when they are getting mercilessly beaten on every single point? You are a joke posting links to where you evade the very things highlighted. Quite obvious to anyone is that this cannot be anywhere but the lunar surface: In your own words, here, explain how dust can rise at the same time as the astronaut on the jump salute and Cernan jumping, yet according to your bullshit obfuscation falls at a different speed. You are busted and know it. It would be if you were making an honest argument. You aren't. You are evading it with sheer ignorance. Well that is hardly impressive, a serial forum spammer and a troll agreeing with each other. As noted - a sequence where the reflection from the Sun is blocked out completely by a very narrow rod. This 100% refutes the stupid claim that it was some sort of massive light. You can CLEARLY see the big circle blob disappear, people who say otherwise are deluded. How can anybody deny that the visor reflection is diffused sunlight, when a narrow rod makes it disappear!? 1/ The entire record of the lunar sample analyses. Proven and you have nothing in response but spam you don't understand and have never watched. 2/ Gene Cernan soil wave matches his jump. Proven and ignored. 3/ The Jump Salute the parabolic dust arc matches his ascension, stop and beginning of descent! Proven and ignored. 4/ The falling battery cover shows zero dust displacement in the direction of the fall where it would be most acute. Proven and denied. 5/ The LRV traverse - perfect lunar footage. Absolutely faultless. No idea how it was done and no integrity to work out its significance! This serial forum spammer is simply too afraid to post any honest replies. The game is over, we are witnessing his total denial. Twenty years of complete failure, that is the saddest indictment of anyone's life. They spend their spare time posting crap on every subject (predominantly this one) and know absolutely zero about any aspect of anything they post about. How screwed up is that! Here we are, yet again, no honest replies and the serial forum spammer continues his ridiculous diversion with drivel about magic shadows on impossible lights. "Shadows" that for some reason mimic the color wheel on the damn video camera!
I already did. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-3#post-1072504892 http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nd-absurd-hoax-coffin.604367/#post-1073766164 Here's some more evidence that they were in a studio.. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...set-mod-warning.403884/page-5#post-1073717063 The anomalies that show they were in atmosphere close the whole case by themselves... http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ers-are-corrupt.441261/page-2#post-1072215068 ...so all the other discussions on other anomalies aren't about whether the missions were faked. They're about how the missions were faked.
That is a lie. you never did. There is no evidence they were in a studio Once again anomolies prove nothing. You have yet to make a csse that they were faked and you have been systematically ruined
No. That is stupid evasion. You ignore the irrefutable proof as you always do. No. That is evidence that you are completely clueless. You are a pathetic serial forum spammer with zero integrity. No amount of evidence can get through your wall of complete ignorance. Nothing you have ever posted has stood up to scrutiny. Logoff and get a productive hobby, because you totally suck at this one.
(from post #116) (from post #136) http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nlight-addendum.584604/page-5#post-1073840012 So you maintain that those are not shadows, but a cable and the reason that it doesn't block what's behind it is the same phenomenon that let's us see what's behind beating hummingbird wings, Is that right?
I maintain that you are the worst forum spammer in history, incapable of honest debate. You have something profoundly wrong with your basic perception. That TV lens is 30 odd degrees. We can see the camera panning span at least 180 degrees, all perfectly lit. For your ignorant and bafflingly stupid claim to hold water, whatever ridiculously unfeasible object passing in front of the impossible and disproven "superlight" it would need to be massive and very fast. There is not a light in existence that could illuminate that massive area. Anyone who claims it is possible has no idea about how light travels. To illuminate such a wide area would need something so wide that light from one side of the beam would wash out any shadow from the opposite side. Kindly shut up about your stupid humming bird observation.
Listen up troll. We can see the lunar rover travelling miles. On any number of shots we see huge zooms and 360 pans. So take your pathetic, clueless, trolling comment and get a clue. As noted - a sequence where the reflection from the Sun is blocked out completely by a very narrow rod. This 100% refutes the stupid claim that it was some sort of massive light. You can CLEARLY see the big circle blob disappear, people who say otherwise are deluded. How can anybody deny that the visor reflection is diffused sunlight, when a narrow rod makes it disappear!? 1/ The entire record of the lunar sample analyses. Proven and you have nothing in response but spam you don't understand and have never watched. 2/ Gene Cernan soil wave matches his jump. Proven and ignored. 3/ The Jump Salute the parabolic dust arc matches his ascension, stop and beginning of descent! Proven and ignored. 4/ The falling battery cover shows zero dust displacement in the direction of the fall where it would be most acute. Proven and denied. 5/ The LRV traverse - perfect lunar footage. Absolutely faultless. No idea how it was done and no integrity to work out its significance! This serial forum spammer is simply too afraid to post any honest replies. The game is over, we are witnessing his total denial. Twenty years of complete failure, that is the saddest indictment of anyone's life. They spend their spare time posting crap on every subject (predominantly this one) and know absolutely zero about any aspect of anything they post about. How screwed up is that! Here we are, yet again, no honest replies and the serial forum spammer continues his ridiculous diversion with drivel about magic shadows on impossible lights. "Shadows" that for some reason mimic the color wheel on the damn video camera!
Here's a 360 pan that seems to be consistent with the studio scenario*. https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/a17pan1174743.jpg * https://www.aulis.com/exposing_apollo1.htm
