It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Cauliflower
a reply to: onebigmonkey
Lots of possible scenarios.
If you were going to organize a hoax so that all observers would support the hoax story you would need a covert channel.
Perhaps the Jodrell bank dish was the only listening tool available to receive the "true" data stream?
originally posted by: choos
apparently you didnt know and continue to feign stupidity as you still try to say that humans can only move at one constant speed.
so therefore dancing fast and then dancing slow is impossible in your mind.
originally posted by: choos
so apparently nasa slowed all the footage of the astronauts down to 50% for the apollo 11 mission to make it realistic, but as soon as they are in the LM and about to leave they immediately switch the slow down to 33% because it looks more realistic??
what reason would they have to change the slowdown speed mid mission??
originally posted by: turbonium1
That's how I meant we move in a constant speed, within the same environment, whether faster or slower in doing so...
originally posted by: turbonium1
Humans cannot move at two different speeds in the same environment,
It is not relevant to the issue, as I said..
The astronaut speed of movement is the issue, so don't think you can avoid it ...
originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1
Calculations.
Any time you like.
I'll make it simple for you:
How long does it take to fall the roughly 3 metres in the film?
How far would an object fall in Earth gravity in the same time?
In your own time.
originally posted by: choos
maybe not related to your issue but my issue with it is your reasoning/logic..
apparently it is perfectly fine for NASA to film Apollo 11 at both 50% and 66%.. you see absolutely nothing wrong with NASA filming at both those speeds for the one mission at all.
originally posted by: choos
so what was your reasoning that they filmed at 66% for the apollo 12-17 again?
originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1
Saturday already, doesn't time fly.
They aren't unknown. It is quite easy to find out the distance of the fall and to measure how long it takes in the film.
You can do this for Apollo 11 and for Apollo 17.
Yet you haven't.
You could quite easily prove your point, but you choose not to. Seems like you don't have enough faith in the theory you've copied to back it up with hard facts.
If you ever do the calculations, don't forget to work out how far the PLSS would fall in Earth gravity over whatever amount of time you manipulate the video to end up with. Make sure you publish those figures so that we can see that they make sense.
When you've done that, prove the TV cameras were not on the moon, because I'll repeat it again: all you are doing is proving you can mess around with video speeds. You are not proving they were not on the moon. The calculations you are afraid of doing will prove that actually they were, and your claim of sped up live TV is just nonsense.
When you've done that, you can identify the photo I posted of the ground some pages ago, because like everything else you ducked out of that argument.
So that's why they changed the speed - to 66.66%. - it allowed them to shoot hours of continuous footage.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: turbonium1
So that's why they changed the speed - to 66.66%. - it allowed them to shoot hours of continuous footage.
The "hours of continuous footage" were shot on video, not film. Please explain the techniques they used to do this.
The footage was shot at 24 fps. It then was put in a projector running at 16 fps. It resulted in a film shown at 66.66% speed.
To return it to normal speed, we simply speed it up 1.5x.
Do you think it is just an amazing coincidence that speeding up Apollo footage (after Apollo 11) by the same 1.5x rate results in the very same, normal speed?!?
originally posted by: DJW001
That technique is for film; most of what you see is video. It doesn't have frames. How do you do it? Having done it, how do you sync it to the dialog. Be specific, please.
originally posted by: DJW001
Here's an idea: speed up some Apollo footage to what you think is normal speed, then hop from foot to foot as fast as the astronauts do. Then try to keep up with them as they move around.
originally posted by: turbonium1
Apollo 11 was at 50% speed for all scenes with astronauts in them, and that's the only thing which mattered, anyway.
Why do you think the speed changes from 50% to 66%, in the same Apollo 11 mission? You must have a reason(s), and you can also explain it, right?....
I'll wait for your answer, before going any further..
Technology - a lack of it, would be the main reason.
The first mission - Apollo 11 - was slowed to 50%. We know this because at 2x speed, it becomes normal, Earth speed. You say the speed changes at the end, but not when astronauts move, as I said...
At the time, we had the technology to slow films down to exactly half-speed, as we all know. But they couldn't shoot hours of continuous footage with half-speed.
So that's why they changed the speed - to 66.66%. - it allowed them to shoot hours of continuous footage.
Do you really think that we would move around at exactly half-speed, or at exactly 2/3 speed, or magically change the speed after a mission???
Why would the lunar environment slow down all of their movements, for that matter?
Pure nonsense, all of it.
originally posted by: choos
this is the weird explaination i mentioned above, they didnt have the technology to slow footage down 66.66% but had the tech to slow it down to 50%..
originally posted by: choos
its nonsense to you because your understanding of what you are seeing is inaccurate.
their movements isnt slowed down, only gravity is less making rising and falling seem like it is slowed.