Pegasus Research Consortium

John Lear's Question and Answers => John Lear's Question and Answer Area => Apollo Reality - Did They go to the Moon? => Topic started by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 03:11:47 am

Title: Moontruth
Post by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 03:11:47 am
There's ONE STEP....take a look

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCXY3NS6G7Y
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 04:54:24 am

Take a look at 2:27....how an astronaut can fall to the ground...on the moon?

it's funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0OUaBRG2yY
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 23, 2015, 05:06:44 am
I can't find it right now, but the fact that the NASA Apollo astronauts were clearly suspended on wires in some of the footage is obvious at about 2m30 in the first video you posted here.

Zorgon started a thread with some of the footage with amusing soundtracks but the search button is not my friend today.  I'll try to find the footage.




[youtube]U0OUaBRG2yY[/youtube]

To embed a video you need to press the Youtube icon above the text box when you post.  That generates some code that looks like this (but with square brackets):

{youtube}{/youtube}

You then add the part of the youtube url after the equals sign like this:

{youtube}U0OUaBRG2yY{/youtube}
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 23, 2015, 05:14:50 am
Found it.

[youtube]Zcz0eL_bYsI[/youtube]

Certain debunkers on abovetopsecret.com lost credibility for me based on the reaction to that footage.  Anyone who thinks low gravity environments make your legs lift off the ground with no force applied is either completely ignorant about the laws of nature or are only sceptical when it suits them. An example is phage thinks there is nothing strange about the part I mentioned above at 2m30!!!  :o ::)

Sceptical but not about what NASA tell us.  I call it gullibility. Is gullibility a word?
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 05:19:06 am
Pimander, i found this...a long time ago...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ecBbSIdBKI[/youtube]
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 23, 2015, 05:38:34 am
Pimander, i found this...a long time ago...
Yet Apollo believers come up with all kinds of far fetched explanations about why they would have to create fake footage of the Moon landings.  Studios that look like the lunar surface. If you land there you don't need to fake it!

Join the club. ;)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 05:42:49 am
yep...or maybe...lost the original film....

what kind of excuses is that?

Oh sorry...we lost the ORIGINAL film...sorry...but here...watch live the iss...  :P
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 23, 2015, 05:47:04 am
Modern electronics can't get past the radiation outside low Earth orbiit.  Oh but we can still send probes to Mars all the time!

LIARS!
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 23, 2015, 05:49:15 am
Take a look at 2:27....how an astronaut can fall to the ground...on the moon?
I don't see what's the problem with that fall. ???
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Sgt.Rocknroll on June 23, 2015, 05:52:10 am
I don't see what's the problem with that fall. ???

Yeah falling down is not the problem, it's getting back up ::)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 23, 2015, 06:09:07 am
I don't see what's the problem with that fall. ???
No problem with the fall.

I see a problem with how the astronauts legs lift off the ground as he is helped to his feet.  Look again.

It is impossible for his legs to lift off the ground without an external force being applied.  That force is not the force applied to his arm as that would lift the head end of his body.  There must be a force applied unless there are new laws of physics involved. That force is a wire attached to the astronauts suit.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 06:14:25 am
also....the "sand" flying all over......
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: thorfourwinds on June 23, 2015, 07:46:57 am
[youtube]gsqGMsFNgMc[/youtube]

 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsqGMsFNgMcMoon Landing Hoax Revealed! - YouTube[/url)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 23, 2015, 01:45:44 pm
I see a problem with how the astronauts legs lift off the ground as he is helped to his feet.  Look again.
At what time, in which video? :)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 23, 2015, 01:46:19 pm
also....the "sand" flying all over......
And what's the problem with that? ???
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 01:57:42 pm
its been soo long when i study.let's see if i remember...thanks God...i found some videos with all evidences..


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8ZzFemBUJQ[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkYETGJ3OGE[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxZMjpMhwNE[/youtube]
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Sgt.Rocknroll on June 23, 2015, 03:35:31 pm
Check out Moonwalkers, 'How we really went to the Moon"!
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Ellirium113 on June 23, 2015, 03:42:58 pm
Take a look at 2:27....how an astronaut can fall to the ground...on the moon?

it's funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0OUaBRG2yY

Quite remarkable at 2:43 in that video look at the positioning of his feet and how his feet are dragged, one arm on the ground was holding something which meant he would not have had enough leverage to toss himself up. If that was the case they should be jumping around 10' at a time up there not those little bunny hops. Also unlikely his partner could straighten him up and drag him at the same time with one hand unless he was a body builder and the other guy was very thin.  :P
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 23, 2015, 05:01:18 pm
its been soo long when i study.let's see if i remember...thanks God...i found some videos with all evidences..


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8ZzFemBUJQ[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkYETGJ3OGE[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxZMjpMhwNE[/youtube]

Did you notice that the last video shows evidence that gravity was what it was supposed to be on the Moon and that there wasn't any acceleration of the videos?
Title: Re: Moontruth - REAL NASA PIC
Post by: larishira on June 23, 2015, 08:20:34 pm
 Photo with shadows that should not exist on the moon.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5903.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5903.jpg)

no large holes in the ground under the Lunar Module.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5864.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5864.jpg)

Evidence of the Lunar Module had not landed on the moon.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5920.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5920.jpg)

And the most important proof...


Picture taken against the sun without burning the negative.
Floor without propellant use of evidence at the time of landing.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5863-69.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5863-69.jpg)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: zorgon on June 23, 2015, 11:54:04 pm
I can't find it right now, but the fact that the NASA Apollo astronauts were clearly suspended on wires in some of the footage is obvious at about 2m30 in the first video you posted here.
Zorgon started a thread with some of the footage with amusing soundtracks but the search button is not my friend today.  I'll try to find the footage.

PUPPET ON A STRING

Part One

[youtube]K1Zy2BkRv9Q[/youtube]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1Zy2BkRv9Q

Part Two

[youtube]Zcz0eL_bYsI[/youtube]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcz0eL_bYsI
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 24, 2015, 01:45:11 am
At what time, in which video? :)
Around 2m40 in the first one I embedded in this thread.  I'll make it easier for you. 40s in this one:

[youtube]Zcz0eL_bYsI[/youtube]

Not only do his legs lift off the ground when he is helped to his feet but the way his feet skim across the surface and lift just after that show that something is pulling him into the air.  That is not the effect of low gravity.  That is the effect of a force lifting his feet off the ground.

You can see that!
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: zorgon on June 24, 2015, 01:51:16 am
Check out Moonwalkers, 'How we really went to the Moon"!

I put that eaxact phrase into Google search and the 1st one on the list was...

Comedy Moonwalkers Wonders: What If We Faked The Moon Landing?
http://io9.com/comedy-moonwalkers-wonders-what-if-we-faked-the-moon-l-1691797409

I kid you not :D
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 24, 2015, 01:56:32 am
Quite remarkable at 2:43 in that video look at the positioning of his feet and how his feet are dragged, one arm on the ground was holding something which meant he would not have had enough leverage to toss himself up. If that was the case they should be jumping around 10' at a time up there not those little bunny hops. Also unlikely his partner could straighten him up and drag him at the same time with one hand unless he was a body builder and the other guy was very thin.  :P
Exactly the part I was referring to.  When Phage said he saw nothing unusual about that his credibility dropped to much lower for me.  So sceptical except when it comes to what NASA has to tell us.  Absolutely fascinating.   ::)

Scepticism (as opposed to disbelief) is an important tool. I find you can learn a lot about people when they are selective in their application of scepticism. ;)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 24, 2015, 02:38:53 am
[youtube]NxZMjpMhwNE[/youtube]

Sceptically speaking:  If there is an atmosphere and the bag is on earth then there is also air resistance acting on the open bag which functions like a parachute and slows the velocity of the bag as it falls.

The analysis is based on the idea that the films are in a vacuum and are flawed.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: zorgon on June 24, 2015, 02:45:12 am
The analysis is based on the idea that the films are in a vacuum and are flawed.

There is a video showing a hammer feather drop on earth. It is done is a room with no wind and the feather is dropped stem first (same as he did on the moon)  The feather dropped on Earth hit the ground at the same time as the hammer.  There was no flutter. An Eagle wing feather is stiff and relatively heavy... There is not enough distance dropped from 4-5 ft to show a difference in air resistance on such a heavy feather dropped end first

I will see if I can find that video tomorrow  I saved it somewhere  Wish I had a place to post older videos :D
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: larishira on June 24, 2015, 03:17:56 am
THIS one?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ciStUEZK-Y[/youtube]
Title: Re: Moontruth - REAL NASA PIC
Post by: ArMaP on June 24, 2015, 05:40:33 am
Photo with shadows that should not exist on the moon.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5903.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5903.jpg)
I don't understand that, why shouldn't any shadows exist? And exactly which shadows? ???

Quote
no large holes in the ground under the Lunar Module.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5864.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5864.jpg)
Why should there be large holes in the ground? Because of the engine exhaust?

Quote
Evidence of the Lunar Module had not landed on the moon.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5920.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/5920.jpg)
Explain what you mean, please. :)

Quote
Picture taken against the sun without burning the negative.
Floor without propellant use of evidence at the time of landing.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5863-69.jpg (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5863-69.jpg)
You should get your facts straight before posting them, otherwise it looks like you are so worried about proving your point of view that you use any thing you can get your hands on, without even knowing what it is.

That's not a photo, that's a panorama made with several photos from more than one mission and with an artificial light added on the place where the Sun was supposed (by the person that made the panorama, Ed Hengeveld) to be. You can read more about it here (http://www.awe130.com/apollo-hoax-explained/297-the-truth-about-apollo-image-as11-40-5863-69-and-the-photoshopped-sun-of-ed-hengeveld).

As for the lack of marks on the ground made by the engine when landing, those marks exist in the photos that show the ground up close. I will look for some. :)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 24, 2015, 05:46:12 am
Around 2m40 in the first one I embedded in this thread.  I'll make it easier for you. 40s in this one:

[youtube]Zcz0eL_bYsI[/youtube]
Thanks. :)

Quote
Not only do his legs lift off the ground when he is helped to his feet but the way his feet skim across the surface and lift just after that show that something is pulling him into the air.
I don't understand it, are you saying that he wasn't touching the ground? The only occasion when I see both feet off the ground is when he gives an impulse with his legs, but when he gets up he has the right foot on the ground and (I think) the left hand is being held by the other astronaut to help him get up.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 24, 2015, 05:48:51 am
[youtube]NxZMjpMhwNE[/youtube]

Sceptically speaking:  If there is an atmosphere and the bag is on earth then there is also air resistance acting on the open bag which functions like a parachute and slows the velocity of the bag as it falls.
And as it goes up, right? I see no signs of any braking effect.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: RUSSO on June 24, 2015, 03:32:37 pm
Hey, can someone help me to caught a "rat"? I would love to know where to find the original footage they get this gif from.

(http://i.imgur.com/cMD8V.gif)

I see something moving in a different direction than the astronaut shadow.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 25, 2015, 05:23:43 am
Thanks. :)
I don't understand it, are you saying that he wasn't touching the ground?
No but he does lift completely off the ground shortly after being helped to his feet.

Quote
The only occasion when I see both feet off the ground is when he gives an impulse with his legs,
Look again. ::)

Quote
but when he gets up he has the right foot on the ground and (I think) the left hand is being held by the other astronaut to help him get up.

ArMaP, do you honestly not detect a third force acting on the astronaut in an upward direction?

At several points there the astronauts motion is not consistent with the forces that the film shows acting on him.  There is an additional force pulling him up, consistent - in my opinion - with a wire or elastic cable pulling the astronaut skywards to simulate low gravity.  The simulation is poor and amusing.

And as it goes up, right? I see no signs of any braking effect.
It is hard to tell because the object is moving away from us.


I'd also be interested to see which films show possible evidence of 1/6 gravity.  Do Apollo 11 and 12 videos?  It is in particular the Apollo 11 and 12 footage that I suspect is largely fake.

Don't forget the hills too.  How can the exact same background appear both with and without a lander in it  (I don't have the shot here right now but I can find it later).  That is impossible as there was nobody there to take a shot before the lander was present.

Do the hills look like the terrain around the landing sites?  How can the same hills appear in different missions that landed many miles apart?

The evidence screams of fake to me - even if they have landed a man on the Moon in later Apollo missions (or possibly via another means).

ETA: And astronauts who have been to the Moon and back but don't know whether you can see stars in space!  I'd like to see JimO explain that. :P
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 25, 2015, 08:24:02 am
That background (or front projection) I was talking about is discussed in the following video at 18m24s if you want to start exactly where the discussion takes polace.  I'd suggest listening from 16m30 for background.

Don't worry ArMaP the part you need to see is not too long but there is your smoking gun.  The footage is faked!

(https://therionorteline.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/bigstock_smoking_gun_4399171.jpg?w=300&h=218)

[youtube]yNI61LbYHzI[/youtube]

Zorgon, there is plenty for you in that video.  John Lear is mentioned at 53m20s. ;)

Andrew Johnson lives down the road from me.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Elvis Hendrix on June 25, 2015, 09:57:54 am
Good video Pim. Around 23.15 is new to me. the operating temperature parameters of the luna rover batteries, are way out to what they should be... The batteries would simply have fried on the moons surface!!!.
I did not know that, and its there in black and white in the rover operating manual!
the AVERAGE temp on the moons surface is 107 degrees c.
the luna rover batteries where designed to operate between 52 and 60 c.

well bugger me!!
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 25, 2015, 11:14:21 am
I used to believe Apollo was real.  Then I questioned it.  Any sceptic worth their salt must have doubts.  Lets not confuse scepticism with contradicting conspiracy theories.  I'm sceptical of what NASA says.

I had a guy from human intelligence (UK RAF) look at thew astronauts body language.  He said 100% certain they were concealing something at that press conference.  It is his job to know that!

Technically, the facts don't add up.

In human terms, one of the astronauts "couldn't remember seeing any {stars}" then wrote in his book he saw them perfectly well on Gemini flights.

The footage.  Faked!

Apollo 11 landed on the Moon with two men in it and returned safely?  My arse!
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: thorfourwinds on June 25, 2015, 12:42:15 pm
[youtube]oAwiXqCMVcU[/youtube]

Apollo hoaX: Flagging The Gems. - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAwiXqCMVcU)

Published on Oct 26, 2012

Originally uploaded in July 2007.

This series was produced from public domain NASA inflight footage from Apollo 10. It proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the views of earth from that mission had been pre-filmed and then edited together, as was obvious from camera cutting repeatedly despite running perfectly synchronized to uncut audio communications.

This series also showed that pieces of existing Apollo 10 footage, which the transcript confirms to exist, was absent on the Spacecraft Films DVD set despite sold as "complete".

Just days after this series was originally posted, Mark Gray of Spacecraft Films filed fraudulent DMCA copyright infringement claims against my videos. This not only resulted in the removal of these films, but the termination of my old account. Legally Spacecraft Films has no claim, because NASA's footage is public domain.

Now that it has become clear to Youtube that Gray's DMCA claims were fraudulent, we at JW Studios are proud to say that Flagging The Gems is restored to Youtube.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 25, 2015, 04:45:40 pm
No but he does lift completely off the ground shortly after being helped to his feet.
Sorry, I still don't understand what you mean. :(

Quote
ArMaP, do you honestly not detect a third force acting on the astronaut in an upward direction?
No, but to be clear, if you call that a "third force", what are the other two?

Quote
At several points there the astronauts motion is not consistent with the forces that the film shows acting on him.  There is an additional force pulling him up, consistent - in my opinion - with a wire or elastic cable pulling the astronaut skywards to simulate low gravity.
I don't see what's inconsistent with the forces supposed to be acting on the astronaut.

Quote
I'd also be interested to see which films show possible evidence of 1/6 gravity.  Do Apollo 11 and 12 videos?  It is in particular the Apollo 11 and 12 footage that I suspect is largely fake.
True, but most videos we have were made with the camera on the rovers, and the first missions didn't have a rover, so they only had a (low quality) fixed camera.

Quote
Don't forget the hills too.  How can the exact same background appear both with and without a lander in it  (I don't have the shot here right now but I can find it later).  That is impossible as there was nobody there to take a shot before the lander was present.
All the cases some people say that they hills are the same in different occasions that I have looked into the hills do not appear as being exactly the same, we see differences in perspective.

Quote
Do the hills look like the terrain around the landing sites?  How can the same hills appear in different missions that landed many miles apart?
Please give specific images, without that I cannot comment.

Quote
The evidence screams of fake to me - even if they have landed a man on the Moon in later Apollo missions (or possibly via another means).
All that I have seen is that most people are so worried about proving that the images/landing were fake that they ignore things like perspective, and most videos/photos presented as "evidence" are not identified, I remember one case of a video that said that two images (or footage, I don't remember) are from different missions when they were from the same.

Quote
ETA: And astronauts who have been to the Moon and back but don't know whether you can see stars in space!  I'd like to see JimO explain that. :P
Yes, that's strange, specially because if the story was a lie they just had to get a lie for the stars.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 25, 2015, 04:54:07 pm
That background (or front projection) I was talking about is discussed in the following video at 18m24s if you want to start exactly where the discussion takes polace.  I'd suggest listening from 16m30 for background.
Thanks for pointing the exact time, otherwise I would have ignored the video. :)

What they talk about on that part of the video is something that was already posted somewhere here on Pegasus, and one thing that people do not say about it is the distance to the hill in the background. When you have the Lunar Module at 10 metres or 100 metres and a hill at 5010 metres or 5100 metres, there will not be a clear difference between the hill on both photos, as the hill is too far away for any change in perspective. Also, the slow animation on the video helps to hide any small difference in perspective that may have existed, I would like to know what photos are those (I don't remember, I have to see if I can find the other thread) to see the photos in full size and not converted to Flash video.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 25, 2015, 05:01:20 pm
Good video Pim. Around 23.15 is new to me. the operating temperature parameters of the luna rover batteries, are way out to what they should be... The batteries would simply have fried on the moons surface!!!.
The batteries were not on the Moon's surface, they were on the rover, inside their compartment.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 25, 2015, 05:04:07 pm
Just days after this series was originally posted, Mark Gray of Spacecraft Films filed fraudulent DMCA copyright infringement claims against my videos. This not only resulted in the removal of these films, but the termination of my old account. Legally Spacecraft Films has no claim, because NASA's footage is public domain.??
I also had a problem like that with a video from the tether breaking, some company said that I had used the footage from their DVD about the tether mission, but I sent them and YouTube the link to the NASA page from where I got the video and the video is still on YouTube.

PS: I still have the messages, so I can look to see the company's name. :)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Elvis Hendrix on June 26, 2015, 01:12:38 am
The batteries were not on the Moon's surface, they were on the rover, inside their compartment.

Yea on the rover, ON the moon. ok maybe not touching the surface but just inches away.
so obviously still way outside official operating parameters.
its pedantic to suggest otherwise.
the official story is full of holes and damn dirty lies I tells ya  ;)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 26, 2015, 06:21:27 am
Yea on the rover, ON the moon. ok maybe not touching the surface but just inches away. so obviously still way outside official operating parameters.
Not that obviously, how is the heat of the surface supposed to enter the battery compartment?
The astronauts were (as supposedly as the rover) on the Moon's surface, did they got boiled?

Quote
the official story is full of holes and damn dirty lies I tells ya  ;)
You may tell all you want, it doesn't make it the truth. :)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 26, 2015, 07:39:38 am
Not that obviously, how is the heat of the surface supposed to enter the battery compartment?
The same way it reaches the Lunar surface from the Sun - by radiation.

So how the did the keep the lander cool enough?  Battery powered refrigeration units?  Sounds like it would weigh a lot. (Yes I'm speculating. ;D)

Quote
The astronauts were (as supposedly as the rover) on the Moon's surface, did they got boiled?
No because they were in a TV studio on Earth! :P


Thanks for pointing the exact time, otherwise I would have ignored the video. :)
No problems.


Quote
When you have the Lunar Module at 10 metres or 100 metres and a hill at 5010 metres or 5100 metres, there will not be a clear difference between the hill on both photos, as the hill is too far away for any change in perspective. Also, the slow animation on the video helps to hide any small difference in perspective that may have existed, I would like to know what photos are those (I don't remember, I have to see if I can find the other thread) to see the photos in full size and not converted to Flash video.
I've emailed Andrew Johnson for a copy of the slide where he overlays the two pictures.  I'll link him to this chat too. ;)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: RUSSO on June 26, 2015, 09:52:22 am
Yes, that's strange, specially because if the story was a lie they just had to get a lie for the stars.

Well at least they try give and answer everytime, even if the answers are "weird" or simple lies  ::)

(http://i.imgur.com/iRv5Q.gif)

It does not fit the same ascent stage seen on the moon's surface , at the same side.

(http://stellar-views.com/images/AS16-113-18332.jpg)
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_aJeegFsC3nY/S8r1yZOKAOI/AAAAAAAABao/rSvEw5la9yQ/s1600/AS16-113-18329HR.jpg (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_aJeegFsC3nY/S8r1yZOKAOI/AAAAAAAABao/rSvEw5la9yQ/s1600/AS16-113-18329HR.jpg)

So, WHO messed up with the Apollo 16's ascent stage?

(http://i.imgur.com/euyoj.gif)

NASA says:

Quote
After a third night's sleep on the surface, the two astronauts started their third and last EVA. Their first stop was four-and-a-half kilometres north, at a point on the rim of North ray crater, a large formation nearly one kilometre across. This journey took them thirty five minutes. On the edge of North crater they found the largest boulder the Apollo astronauts had been able to investigate so far. This was a size of a house, and it soon became known as "House Rock". Further driving and exploration eventually brought to crew back to the vicinity of Orion, where they parked the Rover, and re-entered the Lunar Module with those experiments which would be returned to the Earth. Although their time on a lunar surface had been less than planned, John Young and Charlie Duke had broken records for the time spent there, and for the weight of the samples that they were bringing back. The crew then prepared to return to orbit. The ascent stage engine fired as planned and Young and Duke rode the Ascent Stage to orbit. Orion's radar locked onto Casper at a range exceeding 150 miles, and a near perfect rendezvous was achieved. At this point both spacecraft again passed out of sight from Houston around the Moon. When they next rounded the Moon, the two spacecraft were less than six kilometres apart, but a planned TV broadcast of the docking operation proved impossible because of the faulty high gain antenna on the Lunar Module. Young and Duke then inspected Casper's SIM Bay to see if they could determine why some of the experiment were not functioning as planned. Ken Mattingly carried out a similar examination of Orion, noticing that the outer thermal blankets on the rear of the Lunar Module were badly damaged, and hanging off the spacecraft. These had been torn loose at engine ignition on the surface the Moon,  but the thermal blankets underneath appeared to be intact.
http://history.nasa.gov/ap16fj/a16summary.htm (http://history.nasa.gov/ap16fj/a16summary.htm)

They had troubles with the "thermal blankets", but the thermal blankets underneath appeared to be intact. ;D
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 26, 2015, 10:14:20 am
Oh, my use of the term third force is nonsense as I did not qualify it.  Sorry.  I meant that gravity and the astronauts movements were the first two forces which is not very scientific to be honest.

I mean there is a force acting on the astronaut in the opposite direction to gravity.  My contention is that it is a wire or something elastic which the astronauts are suspended from to simulate low gravity.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 26, 2015, 01:07:15 pm
No because they were in a TV studio on Earth! :P
So no problems for the rover either. :)

Quote
I've emailed Andrew Johnson for a copy of the slide where he overlays the two pictures.  I'll link him to this chat too. ;)
That would be great. :)

I will try to find the other thread anyway. :)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 26, 2015, 01:10:06 pm
I mean there is a force acting on the astronaut in the opposite direction to gravity.  My contention is that it is a wire or something elastic which the astronauts are suspended from to simulate low gravity.
To me it looks like that force comes from the astronaut's right foot and his left hand, supported by the other astronaut.

One thing I think makes a difference and makes people see their movements as unreal is that the astronaut's centre of gravity wasn't on the same place as if they didn't have their life support systems on their backs, as those weighed some tens of kg.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: zorgon on June 26, 2015, 01:31:17 pm
The astronauts were (as supposedly as the rover) on the Moon's surface, did they got boiled?

Well IF there were Astronauts on the moon   yes they would have boiled... but they have a spacesuit that has air conditioning  and thermal layers...

Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: zorgon on June 26, 2015, 01:38:59 pm
One thing I think makes a difference and makes people see their movements as unreal is that the astronaut's centre of gravity wasn't on the same place as if they didn't have their life support systems on their backs, as those weighed some tens of kg.

One other thing...

Back in the 60's BEFORE the missions  they showed us fancy rigs on Earth that simulated 1/6th gravity. They had on the suits and the full back packs

When they showed us how high they could easily jump it was very high... they could do flips with ease... long distance jumps...

I don't know if any of the old film that was airred on TV is still available or all got 'lost'  but I watched it LIVE....  and all the sci fi movies of the day showed awesome leaps like Superman

Now I realize doing dangerous stunts on an airless moon is silly and can be deadly, but the REAL Apollo videos show that at best they can manage an 18" high jump

(http://e.fastcompany.net/multisite_files/codesign/imagecache/slideshow_large/slideshow/2013/01/1671559-slide-nasa-05-714180.jpg)

So what happened to their project 1/6th weight and what we see in Apollo?
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: ArMaP on June 26, 2015, 03:41:30 pm
One other thing...

Back in the 60's BEFORE the missions  they showed us fancy rigs on Earth that simulated 1/6th gravity. They had on the suits and the full back packs

When they showed us how high they could easily jump it was very high... they could do flips with ease... long distance jumps...
Something like this?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auQwaeee89o[/youtube]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auQwaeee89o

Or this?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSfg3KfBZkc[/youtube]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSfg3KfBZkc
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Elvis Hendrix on June 27, 2015, 06:54:45 am
This thread has re piqued my interest somewhat in the moon hoax.
this video may be old hat, I don't know cos I aint been around here in a while.
But it certainly has some great new (to me) evidence!
If you havnt already seen it give it a look.
Elvis.

[youtube]5KsH2M4m4zM[/youtube]

It wasn't real.
They lied to us.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 27, 2015, 11:56:57 am
Well bang goes my idea that Apollo missions 14 and after were real.  ;D

Quote
Study Conclusion

Professor of University of California G. Schiller has noted: "To be successful, manipulation should remain invisible. The success of the manipulation is guaranteed when the manipulated believe that everything happens naturally and inevitably. In short, manipulation requires a false reality in which its presence will not be felt". Very often this false reality is amplified by the media.
 
In the convergence of these Apollo 15 pictures, more than a million equations (the number of pixels in the images) were calculated obeying the laws of optics. In order to obtain a zero stereoscopic effect for a remote landscape, typical distortion grids were generated around the photographic session sites.
 
Numerous Apollo 15 photo examples indicate an identical distortion grid – a projection screen at the distance of 100-120 metres from the front of the studio stage. A serious falsification of the true lunarscape, in particular, an artificial trench 30-60 metres in width given for the lunar Rima Hadley which is actually 1,200 metres in width; the image of this remote lunarscape being projected onto the curved background screen; and ‘astronaut’ photographers taking pictures in front of it in a studio set.
 
The Apollo 15 photographic record contradicts the stereoscopic parallax verification method. The apparent change in the relative positions of objects by moving the camera when the camera angles are separated by several tens of cms show that:

    the distance to distant objects such as mountains is not tens of kilometres but is no more
    than a few hundred metres;
    the landscape is not continuous, but with clear lines of separation;
    there is movement between nearby sections of the panorama relative to other sections.

Thus, based on the above examples, this study concludes that the Apollo 15 photographic record does NOT depict real lunarscapes with distant backgrounds located more than a kilometre away from the camera.

These pictures were, without doubt, taken in a studio set – up to 300 metres in size. A complex panorama mimicking the lunarscape shows degrees of movement, such as horizontal and vertical changes to give an impression of imaginary distance to the objects and perspective.
http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm

I have the animation from Andrew {EDIT:Not Collins} Johnson.  I will upload to Photobucket later and try to get permission to use it on the website.
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: zorgon on June 27, 2015, 03:47:09 pm
I have the animation from Andrew Collins.  I will upload to Photobucket later and try to get permission to use it on the website.

Tell him we will THUMP his books :D  They are on Amazon ;)
Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: zorgon on June 27, 2015, 03:53:52 pm
This just in...

China's space agency releases new pics of the Moon and says it's the last time they are made public.

WHY am I not surprised?


[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1gAvuGwweI[/youtube]

[youtube]I1gAvuGwweI[/youtube]



Title: Re: Moontruth
Post by: Pimander on June 28, 2015, 01:54:48 am
Tell him we will THUMP his books :D  They are on Amazon ;)
Sorry, its Andrew Johnson.  I was mixing up my researchers.  (I like Andy Collins too though.

He is distributing his booklets free because the believes the information is important and should be out there.

Check out his site Z, he is pretty much into the same stuff as us.  He has a Mars anomalies section, Twin Towers, Moon....

http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/