Take Your Best Shot: The Moon Landings Were A HOAX!

page: 7
21
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by JayDub113
 



Go outside in the sand. Go to a golf course and get in a sandtrap, I don't care, but make a video of you jumping that DUPLICATES (albeit at a much higher gravity) those effects and THEN you will have proven it.

Until then it's just what I say and what you say.


Why don't you go out and record yourself hopping in the sand. After all, you are the one claiming that the video looks fake. Provide a video showing what it should look like. I've explained the physics of it.




posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Haha I love it.



I've explained the physics of it.

And who the # are you? You aren't the only person on the internet that knows physics, you realize that yea?

No, you have not provided the physics of anything.

I provided the physics "of the video".. .and you can see and you can understand... if you understand physics.

You provided "your take" on the physics, which is the physics required to FIT YOUR WORLDVIEW.

That is not objective that's your "opinion."

Anyone who "understands" physics can see what I am talking about. If you cannot, then that is your own ignorance, think what you want.
edit on 29-11-2012 by JayDub113 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by JayDub113
 


so why can you not video the evidence that supports your claim ?



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   
And I was actually going to leave your little thread alone DJ because I know you like feeling all superior, but you walked right into it with the 'look at the how little effort and knee-bend is required.' LOL. Indeed.
edit on 29-11-2012 by JayDub113 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 










How about read the thread?



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Oh you mean actually MAKE the video?
I fully intend to when I get time.

Why can't you post a video that proves the supposition wrong?

Isn't this the "debunk all moon hoax evidence" thread?

Debunk by all means.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Perhaps one of these....





posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by JayDub113
 


Since when is running the same thing as hopping?



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


So you started a whole thread about "I can debunk anything pertaining to the moon landing to being a hoax" to "running is not hopping." Good one. I got some footage coming for YOU.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   
In the November 1967 issue of Science Digest, an article appeared by James R. Berry entitled, "How to Walk on the Moon."1 In it, Berry predicted that men would be able to make 14-foot slow-motionleaps, perform backflips and other gymnastics like professionals, and be able to easily move up ladders and poles with their arms. Another prediction was given in 1969 by the Writers of U.S. News & World Report in U.S. on the Moon: With gravity on the moon only one-sixth as strong as it is on earth, a home-run hitter in a lunar baseball game could drive a ball well over half a mile. A golfer's drive from the tee would sail clear over the horizon.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Elvis Hendrix
 



In the November 1967 issue of Science Digest, an article appeared by James R. Berry entitled, "How to Walk on the Moon."1 In it, Berry predicted that men would be able to make 14-foot slow-motionleaps, perform backflips and other gymnastics like professionals, and be able to easily move up ladders and poles with their arms. Another prediction was given in 1969 by the Writers of U.S. News & World Report in U.S. on the Moon: With gravity on the moon only one-sixth as strong as it is on earth, a home-run hitter in a lunar baseball game could drive a ball well over half a mile. A golfer's drive from the tee would sail clear over the horizon.


I guess he didn't take the space suits into account. Nothing was known about locomotion under reduced gravity back in 1967. Sure, they did experiments with inclined planes and counterweights, but that's not the same thing as having an infinite degree of freedom, restricting space suits and a powdery surface that doesn't provide much traction.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by JayDub113
 



So you started a whole thread about "I can debunk anything pertaining to the moon landing to being a hoax" to "running is not hopping." Good one. I got some footage coming for YOU.


Where did I say that in the OP? And I'm looking forward to your bunny hopping experiments at the beach.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   
A standing vertical jump of at least 18 inches on Earth can be accomplished by exerting an upward force of around 500 pounds by a 185-pound person. . Since a jump from a standing vertical position only requires the knees to bend slightly, the spacesuits would not have hampered the astronauts appreciably. The televised pictures of John Young on the Moon indicated that he was able to utilize his arms and legs for jumping in an essentially normal manner. . This means that even with the astronaut gear, Young should have been able to jump over six feet off the ground if the Moon had one-sixth of the Earth's gravity. In actuality, his efforts lifted him at most 18 inches off the ground.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Elvis Hendrix
 



A standing vertical jump of at least 18 inches on Earth can be accomplished by exerting an upward force of around 500 pounds by a 185-pound person. . Since a jump from a standing vertical position only requires the knees to bend slightly, the spacesuits would not have hampered the astronauts appreciably. The televised pictures of John Young on the Moon indicated that he was able to utilize his arms and legs for jumping in an essentially normal manner. . This means that even with the astronaut gear, Young should have been able to jump over six feet off the ground if the Moon had one-sixth of the Earth's gravity. In actuality, his efforts lifted him at most 18 inches off the ground.


The obvious way to test this would be to suit up and see how high you can jump on Earth. Do this, and jump 18 inches and you will have strong evidence that the footage was faked.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 09:28 AM
link   
A photo appeared in the December 12, 1969 issue Of Life magazine showing Apollo 12 astronaut Alan Bean carrying a barbell-shaped package of instruments which allegedly weighed 190 Earth pounds. The accompanying statement that it had a Moon weight of only 30 pounds does not seem consistent with the photo which shows a noticeable bow in the approximately 1-inch bar. The movie film of this event is even more revealing. As Bean carried the instrument package across the lunar surface, the bar bent up and down, strained by the heavy burden on each end.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Elvis Hendrix
 



A photo appeared in the December 12, 1969 issue Of Life magazine showing Apollo 12 astronaut Alan Bean carrying a barbell-shaped package of instruments which allegedly weighed 190 Earth pounds. The accompanying statement that it had a Moon weight of only 30 pounds does not seem consistent with the photo which shows a noticeable bow in the approximately 1-inch bar. The movie film of this event is even more revealing. As Bean carried the instrument package across the lunar surface, the bar bent up and down, strained by the heavy burden on each end.


The bar bent up and down because its mass was unaffected by lunar gravity. This means that inertia and momentum remained the same. It was easier to overcome the inertia when lifting it because less force was required due to lessened gravity, but once it was flying upward, the momentum was the same as on Earth. This is what caused the bar to bend, not the "weight" on either end, but the mass.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Elvis Hendrix
 



A photo appeared in the December 12, 1969 issue Of Life magazine showing Apollo 12 astronaut Alan Bean carrying a barbell-shaped package of instruments which allegedly weighed 190 Earth pounds. The accompanying statement that it had a Moon weight of only 30 pounds does not seem consistent with the photo which shows a noticeable bow in the approximately 1-inch bar. The movie film of this event is even more revealing. As Bean carried the instrument package across the lunar surface, the bar bent up and down, strained by the heavy burden on each end.


The bar bent up and down because its mass was unaffected by lunar gravity. This means that inertia and momentum remained the same. It was easier to overcome the inertia when lifting it because less force was required due to lessened gravity, but once it was flying upward, the momentum was the same as on Earth. This is what caused the bar to bend, not the "weight" on either end, but the mass.



Your quick and on the ball DJ il give you that. They must be paying you well mate.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
You noob! The moon is real!!!



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
It was only a Joke. The moon isn't real.
(Sorry but I have to get 20 posts
)



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayDub113
reply to post by DJW001
 


Why do you think I put "air" in quotes you moron??

...

I was talking about being pulled "on the moon."



I don't quite get what your point is here. Are you saying the astronaut was rigged up with a wire, on the actual moon? Isn't that ridiculously complicated?

The question of the dust in the 'air', just to make sure we all understand each other, is that if it was filmed on earth, dust would suspend in the atmosphere for a short time. If you look, it does not suspend at all, it just does its little parabolic arc straight back to the surface. Therefore, it was filmed in no air.
I'm still not clear if you understand that or not because you haven't expressed yourself well, just lashed out with insults. Calm down dude, this is not Call of Duty.

What do you mean by this...?


Originally posted by JayDub113
Perhaps one of these....





Wouldn't that require some pretty extensive special effects work to cover up, especially because of the fact that small clip is part of a much longer continuous shot?
edit on 29-11-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join