The fraudulent claim of air and the Apollo 15 flag.

Discussion in 'Moon Landing' started by Betamax101, Dec 31, 2015.

  1. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Mother Nature has aeons to do this at the coast. The deserts of the world don't have dust free environments. It isn't impossible to do this for small areas which I suspect the geologists were postulating on. Clearly from the way the video camera pans and zooms around, the Apollo areas are very large and open with no extra lighting, rigging, doors or windows. Nothing but the two astronauts from numerous visor reflections. You keep making this claim as though they are in a little room or some unknown arena when this is disproven with one camera sweep!
     
  2. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I think you may have hit on something here. The reason why sand on the beach is dust free as opposed to desert sand is because of WATER! All you would have to do is hose down the sand and the dust would wash down deep into the substrate - let it dry and VOILA! DUST FREE SAND! :roll:
     
  3. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I physically had to stop myself from putting my head into both hands and shaking it. You seem to have some sort of blinkered cognition going on here or are just playing the troll.

    What substrate? Are you saying this is now outdoors? This was, according to the mindless spammer, in a studio of indescribable size, so how exactly does that work? Then we have the alternative of it being outside perfectly lit massive open terrain with dark skies. If you used a considerable amount of water(as required for the huge area), where exactly does it go indoors? The ground becomes flat and congealed. Outdoors you could let it rain for a month but then it still stays a strawman because then we have the even more obvious case of this dry sand taking definite prints whilst we can see really fine particles being kicked excessive distances. That is impossible. If the sand is wet, it takes prints but is flat congealed and doesn't allow fine dust to clearly be kicked.

    I would say you haven't thought this one through, but clearly you don't think an awful lot through anyway!
     
  4. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I must admit - I have not spent a lot of time thinking about this - because I consider this to be a phony argument anyway! Like Scott has pointed out, beaches are covered with dust free sand! It is not a rare thing! :roll:
     
  5. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yes, you haven't thought about it. Answer directly:-

    Dry sand on the beach does it take a print? No is the answer.
    Wet sand on the beach does it take a print? Yes is the answer.
    Now, which one of those prohibits the kicking of fine grains, is clumped together and is predominantly flat and congealed?
    Neither of those two options allow for prints and fine soil to be kicked easily and "dust free"!


    I suggest that instead of playing the fool, you start thinking about this a bit more! Cosmored will never admit any of that, it's another of his "moot points". Every time one of his moronic claims gets trounced he falls back to his 2 observationally incompetent pieces of "trump" evidence.
     
  6. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You are misrepresenting the situation. You may confuse a few people who don't watch this video...

    MoonFaker - Project Sandbox
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc


    ...but you won't confuse anybody who watches it.
     
  7. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Get away with your spammed obfuscation!

    Dry sand on the beach does it take a print? No is the answer.
    Wet sand on the beach does it take a print? Yes is the answer.
    Now, which one of those prohibits the kicking of fine grains, is clumped together and is predominantly flat and congealed?
    Neither of those two options allow for prints and fine soil to be kicked easily and "dust free"!
     
  8. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    32,782
    Likes Received:
    6,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yahooo!!!

    I just think you found evidence that the moon isn't quite your average beach on Earth!!
     
  9. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18


    Scott is absolutely correct here! And the reason is simple:

    1. Still photos are the ONLY source of the detailed boot prints
    2. Videos showing them kicking the sand DO NOT show detailed boot prints being made!

    comparing plums and pears! :roll:
     
  10. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    We see them being made on many different hours of footage that you have no idea exist. The digging a trench video and the Apollo 15 flag video. They also occur during the Apollo 17 video. You are the comedy interlude who has no clue what they are talking about.
     
  11. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I didn't see any detailed footprints in the footage you mentioned. If you know of some footage which shows some detailed bootprints being made, please link to it.
     
  12. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Please explain how dry sand takes any firm of print. It simply does not and you cannot be dumb enough to think this. You keep attempting to dismiss clear evidence you are wrong by raising expectation to beyond that which is needed. The prints we see being made are clearly not being made in dry sand regardless of whether they are the same definition as those photographed.
     
  13. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    ???????? What the heck are you talking about ??????

    I think your response is known as a "Non Sequitur":

    Non Sequitur – a response which does not follow the logic of a contention made, which furtively seeks to position the contention maker falsely into a prescribed camp of irrationality or non sequitur relationship to the subject being considered. This will usually be delivered in the form of a one liner, memorized talking point or weapon word.

    In everyday speech, a non sequitur is a statement in which the final part is totally unrelated to the first part, for example:

    Life is life and fun is fun, but it's all so quiet when the goldfish die.
    :roll:
     
  14. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Are you an idiot?

    We are talking about visible prints being made in video footage!

    Dry sand does not allow it. Wet sand does not allow fine sand to be kicked.

    If you don't understand that and where I have elaborated on it above, no need to answer my first question.
     
  15. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    This is the kind of game that paid sophists* play when they're checkmated. When they're checkmated, they tap dance around and play games until the hoax-believer gets tired and stops posting. Then they try to bury the part of the thread in which they're checkmated to reduce the number of people who see it and then go on as if nothing had happened.


    *
    http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/articles/twenty_five_ways.html
    http://cultureofawareness.com/2012/...-confessions-of-a-paid-disinformation-poster/
     
  16. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Please explain which questions I am avoiding!! You post your truly pathetic log of censorship at your basketball forum where you are universally ridiculed, as though nobody here can see it.

    I have explained this scenario quite clearly. YOU are the one avoiding questions. YOU are the one cornered or checkmated. You do this in every single thread all the time. I shall further demonstrate.

    In the following video we see prints being made that are more than well defined for it to be IMPOSSIBLE on dry sand:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk5GiF_mX5w

    We also see dust kicked and digging that shows quite clearly very fine particles being sprayed along the ground IMPOSSIBLE on wet sand.

    You seem to think the entire record is little youtube snippets! This entire transmission is part of a continuous piece at Station 8 of 35 minutes.

    The same situation can be applied to the Apollo 15 flag setting. There are literally dozens of close quarters examples throughout the ALSJ.


    See the bolded bit, explain to the viewers where I am avoiding questions. Then if I get time I'll cut and paste in the hundred or so that you are avoiding, like whole thread subjects!

    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=441261&page=3&p=1065810769#post1065810769
     
  17. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Beta, you made the following comment refuting my comment that NO VIDEOS exist that show detailed boot prints being made - and you stated that you knew of specific videos that did show it:

    After you made the above comment, Scott politely asked that if you knew of some videos would you please link to them:

    At this point you went off on a Non Sequitur tangent that had nothing to do with the logical progression of the thread:

    Scott then accuses you of "tap dancing":

    and you respond with this:

    Why don't you just answer the question that Scott originally asked? - and link to the videos that you claim that you know exist? Either they do or they don't! :roll:

     
  18. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I have shown the digging a trench video and the Apollo 15 video. When a lying fool refutes that which can be clearly seen, there is no hope. When somebody arrives and sides with him I sense some sort of collusion.

    [video=youtube;sk5GiF_mX5w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk5GiF_mX5w[/video]

    As I stated, the definition of these prints can be seen to be more than adequate enough tro refute that it is dry sand. The act of kicking numerous examples clearly very fine grains is refutation that it is wet sand. Which part of that obvious and easily verifiable scenario confuses you.

    This dishonesty atributable to hoax film makers is clearly not exclusive to them.

    Btw: Your claim of a non-sequitur shows that you don't understand the term. Refuting his denial that the prints occurred in my examples is a logical argument!

    "The prints we see being made are clearly not being made in dry sand regardless of whether they are the same definition as those photographed."
     
  19. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Beta, thanks for putting up the video and I will admit that it is more than nothing and at least now there is something to examine. As I have said before, I do not consider the sand issues to be compelling evidence of anything either way. Whether the sand is dry or damp, dusty or clean, blowing or in a parabolic arc - I just think that the grainy videos lend themselves to endless speculation without much substance - but that is just my opinion. If someone can point out something of substance here, let us hear it. Maybe others can debate this to eternity but I see not much point.
     
  20. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I suppose you cannot be blamed for not being aware of this, but the serial forum spammer has had this whole situation PLUS those video links put before him literally dozens of times! All you did was naively turn up and expect them to be posted yet again.

    Your "opinion" carries no logic or thought. I asked two specific questions related to this that clearly demonstrate the major problem.

    In other words you have nothing more to post on the matter apart from disrupting this thread.

    Further back, you made this erroneous statement:

    "2. Videos showing them kicking the sand DO NOT show detailed boot prints being made!"

    "As I stated, the definition of these prints can be seen to be more than adequate enough tro refute that it is dry sand. The act of kicking numerous examples clearly very fine grains is refutation that it is wet sand. Which part of that obvious and easily verifiable scenario confuses you."


    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.

    https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15v.1482604.mpg
    At the first 10 seconds we see the clearest of prints being made!

    https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15v.1482841.mpg
    Replete with fine dust being kicked, same contnuous sequence(1:20 in particular for 5 seconds where it goes an un feasible Earth distance with the tiniest movement)
     
  21. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Oh, I will have something to say about it as soon as I have adequately examined it...
     
  22. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The last link in my post has clear prints being made and clearly fine dust being kicked:-

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I know you people go quiet, run away or lie and refuse to "see things" that are clearly there. How about some honesty for a change! Cosmored's moronic strawman taken apart in 2 easy gifs.
     
  23. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I agree with him. They do not show detailed bootprints being made. The viewers can decide for themselves.
     
  24. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    An extremely dishonest statement since directly above we see one being made with clear lines across it made by the boot prints and in the same video very fine particles being kicked. You are cornered so resort to blanket denial. No doubt your new team members will avoid it or concur, but no honest person reading this thread will agree with you.
     
  25. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Why cant it easily be explained by part of the sand is dry and part is damp? :roll:
     

Share This Page