Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Fake Earth illusion - footage from Apollo 11, 1969

page: 54
105
<< 51  52  53    55  56  57 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Wow, you get an English woman on a video sounding all official and you guys will believe anything! Fortunately, as usual, Phage injected a bit of logic and reason into this thread and officially debunked this crap.





posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB

No, the Apollo footage is already slowed down...You need to speed it up to about twice the speed to see how it would have actually looked. We also know that the Astronauts were suspended from overhead cables to simulate being 1/6th as heavy as on Earth, and there is certainly firm video evidence for this.


Would you care to back any of this up with evidence? You claim there is firm video evidence yet you don't provide any. You make an outlandish claim without any evidence, prepare to be challenged on it. Just a reminder, this time, try not to post something that shows the exact opposite of what you're claiming.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by ProfessorAlfB
 



No, the Apollo footage is already slowed down...You need to speed it up to about twice the speed to see how it would have actually looked. We also know that the Astronauts were suspended from overhead cables to simulate being 1/6th as heavy as on Earth, and there is certainly firm video evidence for this.
Therefore you can easily fake 1/6th gravity, right here on Earth!


Did you actually watch the video? The pendulum on Earth lost 85% of its energy due to mechanical dissipation, including air resistance. The pendulum on the Moon lost only 40%, primarily due to the semi-chaotic state of the system itself. If you speed the footage up, the astronauts motion becomes jerky and unnatural.


Of course it looks unnatural...So would your movements if you were suspended by an overhead cable!



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainpudding

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB

No, the Apollo footage is already slowed down...You need to speed it up to about twice the speed to see how it would have actually looked. We also know that the Astronauts were suspended from overhead cables to simulate being 1/6th as heavy as on Earth, and there is certainly firm video evidence for this.


Would you care to back any of this up with evidence? You claim there is firm video evidence yet you don't provide any. You make an outlandish claim without any evidence, prepare to be challenged on it. Just a reminder, this time, try not to post something that shows the exact opposite of what you're claiming.


What, you expect me to do YOUR research for you? A bit of a cheek! But OK, Since you asked relatively nicely,
watch the following series of videos by Jarah White (dont skip any, watch them all):

www.youtube.com...


edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)


jra

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB
No, the Apollo footage is already slowed down...You need to speed it up to about twice the speed to see how it would have actually looked. We also know that the Astronauts were suspended from overhead cables to simulate being 1/6th as heavy as on Earth, and there is certainly firm video evidence for this.
Therefore you can easily fake 1/6th gravity, right here on Earth!


You obviously did not watch the video, since the guy does speed up the video for his pendulum. And guess what, it doesn't work, because it's sped up footage in a 1G environment. Slowing video down doesn't change the gravity of what you're filming. To think it does just shows how ignorant you really are on this subject.

How did they fake the 1/6th G for the dust kicked up by the astronauts feet, or by the rovers tires or any other object that was thrown by them?

There is also video of the astronauts on various missions walking over 100m away from the LM landing site. Show me a vacuum chamber big enough for doing that.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfessorAlfB
 



What, you expect me to do YOUR research for you? A bit of a cheek! But OK, Since you asked relatively nicely,
watch the following series of videos by Jarah White (dont skip any, watch them all):


Now I know you're joking. Read every single page of this thread. Don't skip any, read them all:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

(Talk about cheek!)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB
No, the Apollo footage is already slowed down...You need to speed it up to about twice the speed to see how it would have actually looked. We also know that the Astronauts were suspended from overhead cables to simulate being 1/6th as heavy as on Earth, and there is certainly firm video evidence for this.
Therefore you can easily fake 1/6th gravity, right here on Earth!



You obviously did not watch the video, since the guy does speed up the video for his pendulum. And guess what, it doesn't work, because it's sped up footage in a 1G environment. Slowing video down doesn't change the gravity of what you're filming. To think it does just shows how ignorant you really are on this subject.


Oh I watched it, but your conclusion proves just how useless you are at photo and video analysis...The idiot who posted the video, and he must be an idiot, does his best to convince watchers that the hoax theory is wrong right up until the last 1/3 of the video then he goes and shoots himself in the foot by showing that when the Apollo footage is sped up it, the swing of both pendulums appears to be an exact match! Duh!
Don't believe me? Watch from 7:08 to 7:20. At that point he must have realised he was proving himself wrong and he cut the Earth footage on the left.


How did they fake the 1/6th G for the dust kicked up by the astronauts feet, or by the rovers tires or any other object that was thrown by them?


Again:
1) It could have been filmed in a large pressure chamber, evacuated to a partial vaccuum, right down here on Earth.
2) I gave you plenty of evidence that all of the the Apollo video footage was slowed down and speeding it up reveals it was a hoax.


There is also video of the astronauts on various missions walking over 100m away from the LM landing site. Show me a vacuum chamber big enough for doing that.


But how do you know for sure how far away they were? They may have used a simple camera trick to appear further away, such using a wider angle lens to make them look smaller in the frame and thus further away. NASA could have easily cropped the footage later so as not to reveal the wider framing.
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)


jra

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB
Again:
1) It could have been filmed in a large pressure chamber, evacuated to a partial vaccuum, right down here on Earth.


And what chamber would that be? Where is it located? How big is it?


2) I gave you plenty of evidence that all of the the Apollo video footage was slowed down and speeding it up reveals it was a hoax.


And when sped up to "normal" speeds, the astronauts move unrealistically fast. It just doesn't work. Slowing down the video does not magically make 1 G into 1/6th G no matter how hard you want to believe it does.


But how do you know for sure how far away they were?


Because you can see them walk for quite a ways in one long uncut clip. And looking at the documentation and satellite maps you can also measure it.


They may have used a simple camera trick to appear further away, such using a wider angle lens to make them look smaller in the frame and thus further away. NASA could have easily cropped the footage later so as not to reveal the wider framing.


Seeing as how they zoom in and out, no it would not be a wide angle lens. Cropping the video would also lower the quality and resolution, so that also would not work.

Watch some videos from Apollo 17. Specifically near the beginning of EVA 1 when Jack goes and carries the ALSEP equipment and looks for a site to deploy it. He walks a good distance away from the LM. Or watch some video from near the end of EVA 3 when they park the rover about 145m away from the LM and have to walk all the way back.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB

What, you expect me to do YOUR research for you? A bit of a cheek! But OK, Since you asked relatively nicely,
watch the following series of videos by Jarah White (dont skip any, watch them all):

www.youtube.com...


I'm sorry, but you're now trying to tell me it's MY job to prove YOUR claims? You really don't understand how this whole debate thing works do you? You're the one campaigning against established historical and scientific fact. It isn't my job to prove you wrong, it's your job to prove yourself right which you have failed so miserably at up to this point, that you've actually proved yourself wrong multiple times. Now you're using proven liar and fraud Jarrah White as your evidence? We're talking about a guy who thinks that his bedroom has similar conditions to the surface of the moon when doing his experiments on static with regards to the flag. The man isn't even qualified to teach a high school science class and you're using him as an authority on space flight? That's rich.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB
Again:
1) It could have been filmed in a large pressure chamber, evacuated to a partial vaccuum, right down here on Earth.



And what chamber would that be? Where is it located? How big is it?


That would be the Space Environment Simulation Lab. Its located in Plum Brook Station, part of the Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. It is 122 feet high and 100 feet in diameter.

gizmodo.com...

I admit I got this chambers location wrong but I am still convinced a second chamber of this kind has also been built at Groom lake. Also the existance of the SESL was unknown to me till DJW001 posted a link to it in a reply back on on page 53 of this discussion.
However, DJW001 made the mistake of saying that the SESL didn't come online until 1969, which would have conveniently ruled out its use before the time of the Apollo 11 mission.
However, as NASA freely admit, it was built back in 1965. It must have been ready for operation soon after its completion because its main pupose was as an essential tool for the testing of every Apollo Spacecraft.
As such it certainly must have been in operation before the ill fated Apollo 1 mission, which had a target launch date of February 21, 1967.
A quote from the NASA SESL website:
"It was built in 1965 to conduct thermal-vacuum testing for all US manned spacecraft of the Apollo Era. The large size of chamber a meant that full-scale flight hardware could be tested. In addition to Apollo modules, it has been used to test spacesuits".
Note the words: "for all US manned spacecraft of the Apollo Era"...Clearly implying that it came into operation long before 1969 and could therefore it certainly could have been used as the set for the fake Apollo footage!...

crgis.ndc.nasa.gov...



2) I gave you plenty of evidence that all of the the Apollo video footage was slowed down and speeding it up reveals it was a hoax.



And when sped up to "normal" speeds, the astronauts move unrealistically fast. It just doesn't work. Slowing down the video does not magically make 1 G into 1/6th G no matter how hard you want to believe it does.


You obviously haven't bothered watching Jarrah Whites video series proving the NASA video footage was definitely slowed down, and without a shadow of dought (remember to watch all of the videos in the series):

www.youtube.com...
...


But how do you know for sure how far away they were?



Because you can see them walk for quite a ways in one long uncut clip. And looking at the documentation and satellite maps you can also measure it.


Surely you don't think I am going to trust NASA's documentation of the Apollo missions?




They may have used a simple camera trick to appear further away, such using a wider angle lens to make them look smaller in the frame and thus further away. NASA could have easily cropped the footage later so as not to reveal the wider framing.



Seeing as how they zoom in and out, no it would not be a wide angle lens. Cropping the video would also lower the quality and resolution, so that also would not work.


OK, so they used a zoom lens, it could still be wide angle at one end of the zoom range.


Watch some videos from Apollo 17. Specifically near the beginning of EVA 1 when Jack goes and carries the ALSEP equipment and looks for a site to deploy it. He walks a good distance away from the LM. Or watch some video from near the end of EVA 3 when they park the rover about 145m away from the LM and have to walk all the way back.


I will.
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfessorAlfB
 



That would be the Space Environment Simulation Lab. Its located in Plum Brook Station, part of the Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. It is 122 feet high and 100 feet in diameter.

gizmodo.com...

I admit I got this chambers location wrong but I am still convinced a second chamber of this kind has also been built at Groom lake. Also the existance of the SESL was unknown to me till DJW001 posted a link to it in a reply back on on page 53 of this discussion.


I love it! You took a random leap of fantasy about there being a hundred foot large vacuum chamber at Groom Lake. You made no effort to research the question when I baited you with an argument from incredulity, and when I showed you that such a chamber actually existed elsewhere, you still claim to be right about there being one at Groom Lake! Priceless!



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainpudding

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB

What, you expect me to do YOUR research for you? A bit of a cheek! But OK, Since you asked relatively nicely,
watch the following series of videos by Jarah White (dont skip any, watch them all):

www.youtube.com...



I'm sorry, but you're now trying to tell me it's MY job to prove YOUR claims? You really don't understand how this whole debate thing works do you? You're the one campaigning against established historical and scientific fact. It isn't my job to prove you wrong, it's your job to prove yourself right which you have failed so miserably at up to this point, that you've actually proved yourself wrong multiple times. Now you're using proven liar and fraud Jarrah White as your evidence? We're talking about a guy who thinks that his bedroom has similar conditions to the surface of the moon when doing his experiments on static with regards to the flag. The man isn't even qualified to teach a high school science class and you're using him as an authority on space flight? That's rich.


Jarrah White a fraud? He's no fraud, but I have to admit he seems to spend most of his time getting back at certain "NASA propagandists" that have personally attacked his sometimes odd research methodology, which can get a little tedious to watch. However it is these same exchanges that seems to bring out his excellent deductive reasoning.
You were not alone when you wondered what the heck he was doing with a flag on his bed, jumping up and down on an obviously solid floor and looking for movement! Yes he doesn't get it right every time, but who does?
While his deductions are often quite brilliant I am amazed to find that he sometimes misses very obvious and even more damning evidence to back up the hoax theory in his own videos...Take a look at the 2nd video in his series ("MoonFaker: Flagging The Dead Horses. PART 2"), explaining how the Apollo 15 flag movement proves that it was a hoax...He spends most of the video arguing the possible reasons why the flag moved when Scott ran in front of it but he completely missed the second and even clearer evidence of flag movement that occured when Irwin ran behind it! I spotted it in this video between 1:28 to 01:45.
www.youtube.com...
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by ProfessorAlfB
 



That would be the Space Environment Simulation Lab. Its located in Plum Brook Station, part of the Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. It is 122 feet high and 100 feet in diameter.

gizmodo.com...

I admit I got this chambers location wrong but I am still convinced a second chamber of this kind has also been built at Groom lake. Also the existance of the SESL was unknown to me till DJW001 posted a link to it in a reply back on on page 53 of this discussion.



I love it! You took a random leap of fantasy about there being a hundred foot large vacuum chamber at Groom Lake. You made no effort to research the question when I baited you with an argument from incredulity, and when I showed you that such a chamber actually existed elsewhere, you still claim to be right about there being one at Groom Lake! Priceless!


No, I said I am convinced there is another such chamber at Groom lake, I didn't say that I am right about one being there...Try reading properly next time!
What is priceless though is your claiming the SESL didn't come into operation until 1969, when it was already up and running before Apollo 1 in 1967.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB

Watch some videos from Apollo 17. Specifically near the beginning of EVA 1 when Jack goes and carries the ALSEP equipment and looks for a site to deploy it. He walks a good distance away from the LM. Or watch some video from near the end of EVA 3 when they park the rover about 145m away from the LM and have to walk all the way back.



I will.
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)


Yes, your right, even the SESL wouldn't be big enough for that. I did notice a strange anomoly in the footage...despite the sunlight seemingly coming from above left of frame there was no smooth feathering of the ground into the bottom of the slopes of the hills/craters in the background as we would expect...Instead there is a distinct dark horizonal line where the ground meets the bottom of the hills/craters in the background...This leads me to the possibility that the dark line might actually be the boundry of the studio set and the hills/craters we see in the background are simply painted onto the backdrop.
So that brings me back to my assumption that they probably have an even bigger chamber than the SESL at Groom lake...Its much easier to hide a hoax on a highly departmentalised and secretive military base, where only a select few have access.
Of course while that makes it nigh on impossible to prove, it doesn't remove the possibility.
edit on 2/2/13 by ProfessorAlfB because: (no reason given)


jra

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB
despite the sunlight seemingly coming from above left of frame there was no smooth feathering of the ground into the bottom of the slopes of the hills/craters in the background as we would expect...Instead there is a distinct dark horizonal line where the ground meets the bottom of the hills/craters in the background...


A screenshot would help, but I think I know what you're trying to say.

Most of the time, due to the uneven terrain, you cannot see the base of far away mountains where they meet the ground. The Lunar surface is anything but flat.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ProfessorAlfB
 



Jarrah White a fraud?


He has been so thoroughly busted that every time you bring up his name, everyone else on this thread laughs out loud. If you refuse to read the entire thread out of laziness, at least read the six or seven posts starting here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
He has been so thoroughly busted that every time you bring up his name, everyone else on this thread laughs out loud. If you refuse to read the entire thread out of laziness, at least read the six or seven posts starting here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


If they were on the moon, how come they're not allowed to tell us, how it was on the moon ?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 05:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 



If they were on the moon, how come they're not allowed to tell us, how it was on the moon ?


It helps if you can read.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Ove38
 



If they were on the moon, how come they're not allowed to tell us, how it was on the moon ?


It helps if you can read.


We're not interested in autobiography (an account of the life of a person), DJW001

Please supply us with a video link, with an astronaut telling us, how it was on the moon.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB
despite the sunlight seemingly coming from above left of frame there was no smooth feathering of the ground into the bottom of the slopes of the hills/craters in the background as we would expect...Instead there is a distinct dark horizonal line where the ground meets the bottom of the hills/craters in the background...


A screenshot would help, but I think I know what you're trying to say.

Most of the time, due to the uneven terrain, you cannot see the base of far away mountains where they meet the ground. The Lunar surface is anything but flat.


But do you really think those mountains/craters in the background look far away? They don't to me but of course this is not a 3D video so we can't get a sense of how far away they actually are.






top topics



 
105
<< 51  52  53    55  56  57 >>

log in

join