Proof of a faked Apollo landing???

Discussion in 'Moon Landing' started by Bob0627, Nov 20, 2017.

  1. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Double the speed and watch the astronauts walking around in this video. Lunar gravity was faked on Apollo 11 simply by showing the footage at half speed.

    Historic Apollo 11 Moonwalk Footage



    To change the speed click on the six-pointed disk icon on the lower right of the video.
     
  2. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Numerous sections within that show absurd body movements. The actual natural factor to replicate vertical motion would be 2.45 times but it would have no effect on horizontal. Buzz is making absurdly long jumps for his attire.

    You see the crap you want as always.
     
  3. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    3,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The astronauts put up a laser reflector on the moon and you are free to try to buy some laser equipment to test that for yourself. Also, high resolution pictures of the moon shows the footprints and tracks they left. Again, you are free to purchase a telescope like this for yourself and test this. Also the picture in that guy's visor is really fuzzy and is really low resolution but seems to be someone in a space suit.
     
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,955
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The burden of proof is on the US government, not you or I.
     
  5. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Double speed still seems a little bit slow but if it's sped up just a little more, it will look one hundred percent like movements on Earth.

    Unmanned craft can have adjustable reflectors attached to their sides. If the Surveyor program was real, they had that technology. Reflectors on the moon are not proof that there were people on the moon.

    Start watching this video at the 6:00 time mark.


    The print we see being made are too far away to see the detail. The ones that have fine detail are not shown being made.
     
  6. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    48
    No it will not, there are absurd arm movements.

    You are a liar. You have had your ass handed to you on this and act as though you haven't.



    Unfeasible travel distances, clearly very fine dust being moved scattering across the surface and clear sharp prints.
     
    bigfella likes this.
  7. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    3,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US government put up a laser reflector for people to test, they took a ton of pictures, videos, brought back moon rock, displayed pictures of the sites we visited, etc. If you make a claim about their evidence or about the moon landing, you also have a burden of proof.
     
    kiwimac likes this.
  8. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    3,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That reflector has been there since the early 70s, long before unmanned craft. And if we could send an unmanned craft to the moon, why wouldn't we be able to send a person?

    The problem here is that they assume sand is on the moon. Its more like powdery stuff. Its pretty easy to make footprints in this stuff.

    Ok, but we can see the tracks at the landing site from space.
     
    kiwimac likes this.
  9. pitbull

    pitbull Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,451
    Likes Received:
    859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you mean the Russians were faster but nobody knows that?
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,955
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US government has made many claims and has also attempted to support their many claims using suspect or blatantly contrived evidence. The burden of proof always rests with the claimant, which is the US government in this case. I don't have any burden of proof about the moon landing, it's not my claim. My only claim is that based on the long history of the US government's many false claims and outright lies, nothing the US government claims can be taken as fact and all its claims are and always should be suspect.

    Is English your primary language? Use an English language dictionary if it isn't or you didn't understand what I posted. Please point out where in the sentence you quoted I mentioned anything about Russia or Russians or anything that might have any basis for you to ask such an idiotic question. Or better yet, don't bother, the prior sentence is rhetorical.
     
  11. pitbull

    pitbull Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,451
    Likes Received:
    859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Don't you think that the Russians who were then vying with the USA to conquer the moon, would have complained about, as the USA cheated?
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,955
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I could care less about the Russians, the burden of proof is on the US government, not the Russians or anyone else. To be sure, I don't know if the Moon landings were real or not nor do I really care, it's not my primary concern. The article I posted is "For those who don't believe the US sent humans to the Moon" as I pointed out.

    Having said that, why would anyone trust what the Russian government claims if one cannot trust what his/her own government claims? Putin claimed a couple of years ago that he had damaging information about 9/11, I'm still waiting to hear what that is (not that I trust what Putin has to say of course).
     
  13. pitbull

    pitbull Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,451
    Likes Received:
    859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The Russians were the one and only direct opponents to the US in the race to the moon. But they didn't ever complain.
    This is proof that the US won the race!
     
  14. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,955
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the proof for YOU is that the Russians didn't complain, then you're pretty easy. Perhaps the proof for you that the coronavirus affects hardly no one is that Donald Trump said so just recently.
     
  15. pitbull

    pitbull Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,451
    Likes Received:
    859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope, that's a general proof. The Russkies would never have accepted a faked moon landing since it showed them that the capitalist economy is much more powerful than their communist utopia.

    So moon landing took place, which was indirectly confirmed by the communist enemy. :)
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2020
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,955
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's ok, I don't really care what you buy as "proof", that's your issue not mine. I require incontrovertible/irrefutable proof. But to be sure there are millions just like you who accept hearsay, propaganda, indirect confirmation and anything claimed by authority as "proof", so you're in good company.
     
  17. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That's funny. When I look at it, the soil being flung looks just like sand on the beach would look if it were flung. Slow motion would explain the speed.
    I can't see any sharp footprints. Can you post a time mark?
     
  18. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Please show a time mark so that we an see the exact movement you're referring to.
     
  19. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Slow motion does not explain the speeds at all, because when the soil moves at Earth speed, the astronauts do the following:-



    Only a 245% speed increase will show the soil falling at earth speed.

    I think you are a disgraceful person the way you are raking up the same things that were discussed 4 years ago and in great detail. So much so that the gifs and pictures I created are now deleted online! The references however still exist -

    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-dust-free-sand-strawman-claim.443515/
    It has been claimed that it is possible to make an entire area the size of several baseball fields, completely dust free. Regardless of whether this is possible and it most certainly is not, it is just another in a long line of ridiculous strawman claims.

    The reason this claim is a strawman is because the circumstances of viewing much of the Apollo footage is in direct contrast to what such an environment would look like. Here it is summarized:-

    • Dry sand dust free will not take ANY print.
    • Wet sand will not allow un-clumped loose material to be kicked.
    • In numerous pieces of footage up to an hour long, we see prints being made.
    • In the same footage we see very fine particles flashing across the surface.
    • There are no circumstances where this is possible on Earth.

    The following 3 clips including the youtube video are part of an unbroken 35 minute sequence.

    Clip number 1
    [video=youtube;sk5GiF_mX5w]

    In that video above, literally the first 3 seconds and his sideways hop shows the really fine material as it glides across the surface, when his shadow moves away from that spot a nice clear print covered completely at 46 seconds,(just like when they work around the rover and the idiotic crap about tracks!). One minute 20 seconds right on the floor as the camera zooms in, clear as day and a nice detailed print.

    Clip number 2
    https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15v.1482604.mpg

    At the first 10 seconds we see the clearest of prints being made!

    Clip number 3
    https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15v.1482841.mpg

    Replete with fine dust being kicked, same continuous sequence(1:20 in particular for 5 seconds where it goes an un feasible Earth distance with the tiniest movement)
     
  20. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The kicked soil is moving faster than Earth speed in your video.

    Of course we do but they're too far away to see the detail. If we see one with this detail,...
    https://www.google.com/search?q=apo...WR2hQKHbFpBGEQ_AUoAXoECAwQAw&biw=1024&bih=677

    ...we never see it being made.

    I looked at both your clips and I don't see any movement of the lunar soil being kicked that couldn't be done on Earth with some manipulation of the speed. All the prints are too far away to show the kind of detail that's in the pictures in my link. You're seeing what you want to see.
     
  21. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    48
    How would we on a grainy video? Those are deliberate footprints taken for the purpose of a symbolic print on the Moon.

    You are an awful liar. You did this exact same thing the last time and I ended up making an animated gif. I then took a screenshot and you carried on denying the clear proof. You are cornered and know it. On the one hand we see clearly soil flashing across the surface way more than you would see on Earth, whilst clear prints are being made that are fine enough detail to satisfy any normal requirement.

    [​IMG]

    No you didn't. The one on the right above satisfies the requirement of clear boot tread and is made visibly during this piece of footage!!

    The worst irony. You are the one "seeing" what you want to see. To any physicist the motion of the speeded up version shows the astronauts moving like Charlie Chaplain - absurd. Meanwhile the soil falls at Earth freefall. There is no "manipulation of the speed" that makes the two work together! I would say - and you know this - but I'm not sure you are that smart to even understand anything like that.
     
  22. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Clear dust dispersal, fine grained with barely a flick of the boot and a ludicrous spread and distance.

    [​IMG]

    It bears zero comparison to Earth sand on the beach!
     
  23. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That looks suspiciously like what I see here at the 4:09 time mark at a slower speed.

    MoonFaker - Project Sandbox



    Start watching this at the 5:04 time mark.

    MoonFaker: Footprints On The Moon Set, Ralph René Was Correct! PART 2


    The picture you cite is too far away to see the detail that could show it to be similar to the picture on the right in the above clip. It may be like the picture on the left.

    That's not what I see. When I see the astronauts moving unnaturally fast, the dust they kick up looks like it's moving unnaturally fast too.

    Here's more on the dust issue in case there are some viewers who haven't come across it yet.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...landing-is-fake.553296/page-7#post-1072069453
     
  24. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Anything you can grasp straws at. He is running on a beach, kicking his feet deep into the sand. On the Moon, the astronaut barely moves his foot and the fine soil flashes a few metres across the ground. There is no comparison, look how low to the ground on the Moon.


    As always with you, you will do anything to avoid being wrong. Quite clearly the picture I supplied has definition like the one on the right. The undefined one on White's woeful histrionics has no visible definition at all - I have sharpened and adjusted contrast to match the comparison picture:-

    [​IMG]


    I totally agree with you. Right in that statement is where you just inadvertently admitted something you cannot take back.

    I didn't say the soil wasn't moving unnaturally, I said it was falling at Earth freefall. That is indisputable and I have proven many times in numerous videos where this is the case - of course these are videos where you are completely out of your depth of understanding.

    So what we have is the soil coming downwards at an appropriate speed but moving ridiculous distances and speeds horizontally. Since that is something that the absurd "wires" claim cannot support (pun intended) then there is only one explanation, it is not naturally the speed of the film.

    The "viewers" have seen enough. You just got your ass kicked again. Clear prints that match your own criteria that you deny - in your face - , clear soil dispersal along the ground with barely any movement, far exceeding a blundering Jarrah White on the beach kicking furiously as he walks. The two do not work together and never have.

    • Dry sand dust free will not take ANY print.
    • Wet sand will not allow un-clumped loose material to be kicked.
    • In numerous pieces of footage up to an hour long, we see prints being made.
    • In the same footage we see very fine particles flashing across the surface.
    • There are no circumstances where this is possible on Earth.
     
  25. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,976
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I put this video on full screen and 1.5 speed.

    Apollo 15 Digging a trench


    Everything looks consistent with large-grained dust-free sand being kicked and thrown in earth gravity. The distance the soil travels when he throws it with his hoe appears to be about the distance it would go on Earth judging by the speed at which he throws it. The astronauts' movements don't look unnaturally fast at that speed. This was filmed on Earth and shown in slow-motion. The use of support wires explains their bouncy movements (see 1:56:15 time mark).

    American Moon (English Version)
     

Share This Page