Moon Hoax. Wire pulling (smoking gun?(doubtful)), page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 13 times

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 12:14 AM by DenyStupidity

I have said to people many times....

How do you know the moon exists? Normal answer is. ''Well I can see it, so it must be there'' or ''They have lots of pictures of the moon and even videos'' or ''there are so many books explaining space and how things work''.

Still the only way we would 'really' know something exists, is if we actually went there ourselves but no one has, apart from the people we are 'told' went to the moon.

So if everything we read, watch and listen to, only comes from the person before and the person before that. How do we really know if all this exists?

I am not saying there is no such thing as space and so on, I just say these things to make people think.

edit on 28-11-2010 by DenyStupidity because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 12:20 AM by Truth_B_Told

Originally posted by AnteBellum
It looks like he was holding the other astronauts hand and using his foot created a fulcrum point so all he had to do was turn his body a bit to straighten up (low gravity). The whole landing on the moon thing being a hoax just doesn't make sense to me.
I often wonder though from the perspective of Neil Armstrong which is better in a historical aspect. To be part of the greatest hoax known to man or being the first to land on the moon? I guess either way he's immortalized in the history books.
edit on 11/24/2010 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)

This is what it looks like to me too.

The standing guy held the downed guys hand and created the lift we see.

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 12:25 AM by DenyStupidity

Originally posted by Truth_B_Told

Originally posted by AnteBellum
It looks like he was holding the other astronauts hand and using his foot created a fulcrum point so all he had to do was turn his body a bit to straighten up (low gravity). The whole landing on the moon thing being a hoax just doesn't make sense to me.
I often wonder though from the perspective of Neil Armstrong which is better in a historical aspect. To be part of the greatest hoax known to man or being the first to land on the moon? I guess either way he's immortalized in the history books.
edit on 11/24/2010 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)

This is what it looks like to me too.

The standing guy held the downed guys hand and created the lift we see.

I'd agree with you guys there

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 12:34 AM by backinblack

At 2:31, what fell off the left astronaut?
It seemed to fall very quickly, not like at 1/6 th gravity..
Anyone know what it was??

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 03:53 AM by Devino

reply to post by backinblack

They are bags. If you listen to the astronauts talking at the moment you see these things fall you will hear them mention these bags.

ADD; Sorry, they talk about the bags falling starting at the 2:15 mark not at the 2:31 mark but it is the same thing. That object that fell from the left astronaut was a bag, actually if you look closely you will see two bags fall.

edit on 11/28/2010 by Devino because: added correction

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 03:55 AM by backinblack

Originally posted by Devino
reply to post by backinblack

They are bags. If you listen to the astronauts talking at the moment you see these things fall you will hear them mention these bags.

Thanks, but they fall very fast..
1/6 gravity should see them fall much slower that here on earth..
To me they seem to fall very fast..

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 04:12 AM by Devino

Originally posted by backinblack

Thanks, but they fall very fast..
1/6 gravity should see them fall much slower that here on earth..
To me they seem to fall very fast..

Objects on the Moon should fall at around 1.6 m/s. Keep in mind that there should not be any air resistance on the Moon so the bags will fall at the same rate as any other object no matter its size or density. It is hard to do gravitational acceleration calculations for such a small distance but it can be done to some degree of approximation. Take a closer look and see if you can discern the rate of free fall, is it faster, slower or close to the same as here on Earth?

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 04:16 AM by backinblack

reply to post by Devino

Objects on the Moon should fall at around 1.6 m/s. Keep in mind that there should not be any air resistance on the Moon so the bags will fall at the same rate as any other object no matter its size or density. It is hard to do gravitational acceleration calculations for such a small distance but it can be done to some degree of approximation. Take a closer look and see if you can discern the rate of free fall, is it faster, slower or close to the same as here on Earth?

Well to me they seemed to fall quite fast..Like a heavy object would on earth..
Certainly not 1/6 as fast as on earth..
Take a look yourself..2:31 into the vid...

Edit..BTW, if my physics is correct, they would not fall at 1.6ms, simply accelerate at that speed..
The starting velocity would be zero..

edit on 28-11-2010 by backinblack because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 08:06 AM by weedwhacker

reply to post by backinblack

The video itself answers your question:

Edit..BTW, if my physics is correct, they would not fall at 1.6ms, simply accelerate at that speed..
The starting velocity would be zero..

Watch again, very carefully (it is distracting, because of the stupid edit loop, the moron who narrates the film, trying to "expose" wires)...

Look carefully......there!! See it? The starting velocity of the bag was NOT zero.

It is dislodged, as Schmitt regains is footing, and he leans back, and imparts a force of acceleration on the bag, IN ADDITION to the natural 1.6 m/s Lunar gravity acceleration.

You can do this yourself, and time the results. Drop an object, from a certain height. Then, same object, same height, but throw it downwards.

Time the results. Better yet, film, then observe at your leisure.

edit on 28 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 04:50 PM by Devino

reply to post by backinblack

I looked at it several times @ the 2:31 mark. What I see is a bag fall out of his pack, hit his shoulder and then fall to the ground. I can accept, and work with, a starting velocity of zero but remember all of these measurements are approximations.

I figure the distance this object fell to be around 1.3 meters, with his knees bent and at the angle he is in (normal shoulder height @ 1.5 m). Gravitational acceleration of 1.633 m/s will travel half that distance (0.8165 meters) in the first second with a staring velocity of zero (i.e. average the acceleration, 1/2, to get the speed and multiply this by the amount of time to get distance). This means that in the first second of free fall on the Moon an object will fall 81.65 centimeters compared with 490 centimeters hear on Earth.

My estimation of the distance this object fell was around 130 centimeter so it should take around 1.25 seconds to travel this distance (1.633 x 1.25=2.04125/2=1.020625 x 1.25=1.27578 or around 128 centimeters).

There does seem to be some discrepancy here with the observed time it takes this object to fall. At first it looks like a 1 second or less count but after reviewing this several times I think one could argue that it takes well over 1 second to fall this distance.

Now lets do this same thing will an object here on Earth falling at 9.8 m/s with a time of 1.25 sec.
9.8 x 1.25=12.25/2=6.125 x 1.25=7.656 meters
That's way over, almost a distance of 25 feet I think. We would have to adjust the time down to 0.5125 seconds (or around 1/2 a second) to get a distance fallen of around 130 cm (128.7 cm).

Clearly this object takes longer than half a second to fall to the surface. Actually I think it is over a second and could very well be the 1.25 seconds that we need to explain this but it is very difficult to get accurate measurements here.

Just to be thorough I need to point out the resistance of air in these figures. If this was staged here on Earth we would have this impedance and it would slow the free fall of objects down. This makes it much more difficult since we don't know the density to surface area of these bags and I don't know how to calculate this resistance over time anyway. Simply by doing experiments here in my room with what I would guess to be the same sized cloth/poly materials, i.e. bags, I came up with a time that is between 0.5 and 0.8 seconds.

The problem is that we are looking at bad footage of a small free fall distance using approximations of distance and resistance to compare with. You may come up with a different time for the free fall of a bag here on Earth but overall I think that this shows proof that this did happen in 1/6th gravity.

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 10:20 PM by backinblack

reply to post by Devino

Thanks for the detailed answer..
Personally it looks to me like it falls in well under a second..In frame by frame as best as I can do, it clearly shows that..
I think WW is wrong in saying there is any downward force impaired by the astronaut.
As you note, the object appears to bounce off him as he is rising..
Anyways, without the tools or knowledge to check for a beter timeframe it's still a little hard to estimate any better..

reply posted on 28-11-2010 @ 10:22 PM by backinblack

reply to post by weedwhacker

WW, do you have a link to the original footage??
I'll get a better idea from that I'm sure..

reply posted on 29-11-2010 @ 09:27 AM by weedwhacker

reply to post by backinblack

First of all, you should be aware of this resource:

The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal

It is accessible for free, online. Also, for serious fans and aficionados, can be purchased as a 3-DVD-ROM set: www.amazon.com...

Since that UTube clip is from an EVA conducted during the ~~Apollo 17 mission~~ (strike that, Apollo 16), here links directly to the ALSJ page for A17:

history.nasa.gov...

Now....comes the hard part. Sifting through ALL of the stills and videos that are compiled there. I will go off and see if the Webz can't help me narrow the search, by zeroing in on the MET (Mission Elapsed Time) of the event (Schmitt's stumble) and we will then find the relevant video clip, PLUS the communications transcripts....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OK, had to go watch that appalling clip, again from the OP (Appalling only because of the idiot David Percy and his comments..

What a buffoon....pimping his ridiculous claims, just to sell his crap book!!)

I remember "Jack" (Harrison) Schmitt falling a lot on A17, but now I see they used a clip from Apollo 16, so here's the direct ALSJ link to that mission....history.nasa.gov...

So, off again to hunt down the specific clip and time.......brb......

Found another clip, form Apollo 16...Charlie Duke, EVA at the Descartes Highlands (will look up specific EVA and Station location). You can see, he learned a technique for getting back up, after being down on his knees, using the inherent flexibility and rebound "springiness" nature of the suit, when inflated, combined with the lower gravity:

YouTube Link

OK, for the clip above, this is the description:

Charlie pushes the penetrometer into the ground. As it sinks all the way in he goes down with it, then stumbles forward and falls onto his hands. He does a press-up and springs back up to a standing position. Half-kneeling, he leans down to pull the penetrometer back out of the ground.

This at MET 144:35. It is EVA 2, at Station 4. Stone Mountain Cincos.

SAME CLIP from NASA archives: history.nasa.gov...

HERE'S the link to the transcript (should take you to the right time, otherwise scroll to 144:35:24):

history.nasa.gov...

edit on 29 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 29-11-2010 @ 10:25 AM by youdidntseeme

reply to post by weedwhacker

Thanks alot for posting a similar video. It really does help put some things into perspective.

I enjoy watching the EVA's, especially the moon landing material.

Thanks again

reply posted on 31-1-2012 @ 07:08 PM by mw