Apollo 11 - Anyone else remember watching it?

[JoeChalupa]

July 16, 1969.
I was 8 yrs old and remember watching in on our Zenith Black & White TV. To this day Space exploration fascinates me.

http://www.longwood.edu/staff/dunningrb/teaching/phys495s07/lab/images/apollo_11_launch.jpg

What a summer that was.

[samikeyp]

I was -6 months. :)

[JoeChalupa]

I feel so old. :lol

[SpursStalker]

I feel so old. :lol

I was 5 ....

:lol

[Dark Gable]

You ARE old.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

i wasn't even a gleam in my dad's eye back then.

[JoeChalupa]

But I'm still young at heart. At least I witnessed history in the making.

[JoeChalupa]

i wasn't even a gleam in my dad's eye back then.

I was already in cub scouts scoping out the brownies.

[ManuTP9]

its eh UFO

[Borosai]

I was -11 years old. Good times. Wish I could go back.

[SpursWoman]

I was -871 days old. :spin

[DarkReign]

My father and mother were 18 years old that year.

[Sportcamper]

Cracks me up that people still think the moon landing was real…

[JoeChalupa]

Cracks me up that people still think the moon landing was real…

:lol Cracks me up that so many people still think the moon landing did not happen.

Mouse? I'm sure he has a documentary about how it was fake somewhere.

[Sportcamper]

I admit that I really enjoyed the movie...

http://files.coloribus.com/files/paedia/print/part_5/56582/preview_600_404.jpg

[Twisted_Dawg]

Add me to the list of watchers.

[mouse]

8QsgdXMUtdA

[sonic21]

my mother was 10

[JoeChalupa]

I knew mouse wouldn't let me down. :lmao

[JoeChalupa]

I was just here - http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

[mouse]

you notice how they never move the camera up or in a complete circle?


fTd9XjvWxCw

[Dutch13]

I watched it on a little zenith black and white tv as well. All of 6 years old.

[BlackSwordsMan]

I was 25

[Wild Cobra]

I watched it. It was great. I probably saw all the Apollo missions that had coverage.

[Taco]

Taco was 5 1/2 years old

[Wild Cobra]

you notice how they never move the camera up or in a complete circle?

Who cares?

All these concerns have been addressed. What I would like you conspiracy theorists explain is how do you simulate 1/6th gravity to do all the filming. I've heard the wire bit, but what did they do? Place spider web silk on all the dust that also was disturbed? Please. How did they simulate 1/6th gravity, and create a studio sized room with zero pressure. That would be technology well beyond what it takes to place a man on the moon.

The vacuum. Our atmosphere is 14.7 PSI at sea level. A studio wall only 25 ft high and 50 ft long would have 1323 tons of force pushing in on it. Yes, 2,646,000 pounds of force. Well over 2 million pounds. What is involved in making a wall that can survive that? I'm sure, such a feat in a studio, required larger than a 25' by 50' wall on each side. Did they have materials advanced enough to do that then? Do we now?

The shadows? Wide angle and telephoto lenses distort views. The eyes are in the neighborhood of a 80 mm focal length if I remember right. Longer or shorter lenses change a photographic perspective. There are also images that the angle looks wring because the surface isn't flat. Very hard to discern 3D on a 2D photo.

No dust under the lander. No shit Sherlock. It was all blown away from the landing, down to a solid surface.

The Van Allen belt is primarily plasma. No big deal. The aluminum Command Module was plenty of protection. Learn your radiation types before being duped by propaganda. Some of us play with it on a daily basis:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/Plasma-lamp_2.jpg/300px-Plasma-lamp_2.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

More on the radiation, the limited amount there is:

Wiki: Van Allen Belt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt)
A satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminum in an elliptic orbit passing through the radiation belt will receive about 2,500 rem (25 Sv) per year. Almost all radiation will be received while passing the inner belt.Wiki: Röntgen equivalent man (REM) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B6ntgen_equivalent_man)
A dose of under 100 rems is subclinical and will produce nothing other than blood changes. 100 to 200 rems will cause illness but will rarely be fatal. Doses of 200 to 1000 rems will likely cause serious illness with poor outlook at the upper end of the range. Doses of more than 1000 rems are almost invariably fatal

It was just a matter of hours they were traveling through that radiation. Lets assume 12 hours. that would be 1/730 of the 2,500 rems, or 3.42 rems. It would take almost 30 days to get 100 rems of radiation, and it was only a three day trip, one way. The Van Allen belt does not extend far from the Earth.

[mouse]

Who cares?

All these concerns have been addressed. What I would like you conspiracy theorists explain is how do you simulate 1/6th gravity to do all the filming. I've heard the wire bit, but what did they do? Place spider web silk on all the dust that also was disturbed? Please. How did they simulate 1/6th gravity, and create a studio sized room with zero pressure. That would be technology well beyond what it takes to place a man on the moon.

The vacuum. Our atmosphere is 14.7 PSI at sea level. A studio wall only 25 ft high and 50 ft long would have 1323 tons of force pushing in on it. Yes, 2,646,000 pounds of force. Well over 2 million pounds. What is involved in making a wall that can survive that? I'm sure, such a feat in a studio, required larger than a 25' by 50' wall on each side. Did they have materials advanced enough to do that then? Do we now?

The shadows? Wide angle and telephoto lenses distort views. The eyes are in the neighborhood of a 80 mm focal length if I remember right. Longer or shorter lenses change a photographic perspective. There are also images that the angle looks wring because the surface isn't flat. Very hard to discern 3D on a 2D photo.

No dust under the lander. No shit Sherlock. It was all blown away from the landing, down to a solid surface.

The Van Allen belt is primarily plasma. No big deal. The aluminum Command Module was plenty of protection. Learn your radiation types before being duped by propaganda. Some of us play with it on a daily basis:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/Plasma-lamp_2.jpg/300px-Plasma-lamp_2.jpg

Good ol wild cobra here to disagree with anything I say. I say the earth is round you say it's Oval. I say the sky is blue you say its an aqua, and so on...your just bitter since your Daddy Bush and his tree house gang are being investigated and all the bullshit you and your salad tossing friend yonnivore have been spewing in the political forum is now coming back to bite you on the ass.

First off in your post you say...
Who cares?

Why not sit back read more and post less and you might see who cares, you bring the same thick headed response about 9/11 as soon as someone finds out new information good ol Cobra is right there with his "who cares?"

Well apparently you must to leave your political romper room and abandon your only three Republican pals to respond so I think not only do you care but deep down inside you crave this shit.

Then you start talking like this...
No shit Sherlock.

And that is where I move on to intelligent posters who can somehow maintain there lame and very played out insults.

But just for the forum I will say this...if your so confident the The Van Allen belts are so safe then take your Bush loving ass up there next time Nasa has another 10 billion to blow on another useless satellite.

Fact: The Russians logged 100 hours to every 20 hours the united states logged in space and knew the dangers of the The Van Allen belts therefore limited their space journeys to not exceed the space it would take to reach the deadly radiation belts. Even Nasa own astronauts complained about seeing flashes of light with there eyes shut when they got to close to the belts and sure sign of radiation. And you have the nerve to say aluminum foil is all the protection you need when a dental Xray tech has to hide behind a two foot lead plated wall just to do dental xrays? Please tell me your smoking weed that I can excuse..And to think all this time the Russians and Nasa could have just came to SpursTalk and checked with Wild Cobra to ensure the danger was not a big deal?

I'm sorry bro you better stick to defending Dick and George in the politics forum the evidence is to overwhelming and you will be made a fool.

I must admit your comedy skills are improving...


The Van Allen belt is primarily plasma. No big deal. The aluminum Command Module was plenty of protection. Learn your radiation types before being duped by propaganda. Some of us play with it on a daily basis:

dyl1LsB7Xr8



I will not comment on this next quote since any 4th or 5th grader learns in school about light and shadows and never under any circumstances do the bend unless there are more than one source. I think you should have left this one out of your so called intelligent postings. It's really beneath you brah.


The shadows? Wide angle and telephoto lenses distort views. The eyes are in the neighborhood of a 80 mm focal length if I remember right. Longer or shorter lenses change a photographic perspective. There are also images that the angle looks wring because the surface isn't flat. Very hard to discern 3D on a 2D photo.

I would love you tell us all how the United states flag was flapping in a so called wind less environment?


8Vl0JJhVSVQ


And tell us oh great wise Cobra why the stars are never seen,photographed, or talked about. I'm am curious as I know you will be searching Google for all the debunking websites that never let you down.

Memo to Cobra: There are debunking sites about everything form no God. The earth is 45 Billion years old, and WTC came down due to fire that doesn't make them fact. Then again you already know about facts that's why your Wild Cobra.

[Wild Cobra]

But just for the forum I will say this...if your so confident the The Van Allen belts are so safe then take your Bush loving ass up there next time Nasa has another 10 billion to blow on another useless satellite.

If I could only be invited on a space mission, I would go in a heartbeat. The Van Aleen belt is safe for short periods of time, when shielded by aluminum. Please remember that the link I quoted gave specific numbers for a 3 mm thickness. 3 mm is very close to 1/8 inch.


Fact: The Russians logged 100 hours to every 20 hours the united states logged in space and knew the dangers of the The Van Allen belts therefore limited their space journeys to not exceed the space it would take to reach the deadly radiation belts. Even Nasa own astronauts complained about seeing flashes of light with there eyes shut when they got to close to the belts and sure sign of radiation. And you have the nerve to say aluminum foil is all the protection you need when a dental Xray tech has to hide behind a two foot lead plated wall just to do dental xrays? Please tell me your smoking weed that I can excuse..And to think all this time the Russians and Nasa could have just came to SpursTalk and checked with Wild Cobra to ensure the danger was not a big deal?

Fact because a British woman said so?

Link please, that describes the dangers inside a capsule. Also, how strong are any X-Ray types of radiation? There's far more alpha radiation, which is relatively harmless.

Besides, notice she specifically says "for space walking astronauts."

Wow... Who would go into the Van Allen belt in just a space suit. That would be idiotic. Probably be as safe as going down a sledding course on crumbly hard snow naked, instead on on the sled.


I will not comment on this next quote since any 4th or 5th grader learns in school about light and shadows and never under any circumstances do the bend unless there are more than one source. I think you should have left this one out of your so called intelligent postings. It's really beneath you brah.

Idiot. I did not say bend. The angle of the landscape changes how shadows lay.


I would love you tell us all how the United states flag was flapping in a so called wind less environment?

Static electricity and solar wind.

Any idea how the quickly the static charge forms in a vacuum from just the solar radiation?

Lean the sciences please.


And tell us oh great wise Cobra why the stars are never seen,photographed, or talked about. I'm am curious as I know you will be searching Google for all the debunking websites that never let you down.

Has to do with the ratio of light. The lumens from the sun are so much more intense from the stars that they get washed out.


Memo to Cobra: There are debunking sites about everything form no God. The earth is 45 Billion years old, and WTC came down due to fire that doesn't make them fact. Then again you already know about facts that's why your Wild Cobra.

I didn't use a debunking site. I understand the sciences.

[Jacob1983]

I wonder how much the budget was for the moon landing movie, I mean landing. :lol
The moon looked more realistic in the movie Moon that it did in those old videos of the moon landing.

[mouse]

Wild Cobra I am doing a data recovery I have my reply saved on note pad I just need a few links and spell check and after a few boot ups I will post my reply.

will you be around?

wdMvQTNLaUE

[mouse]

while I am working can you debunk the astronaut's arm that got in the way of the camera?


3HT3_X9Suec

[Alex Jones]

22pk2polNeA

[Insomniac]

:lol I wasn't born yet but I'm old enough not to fall for the hoax theory.

[Wild Cobra]

:lol I wasn't born yet but I'm old enough not to fall for the hoax theory.
No shit. The wire theory doesn't work, especially with the dust flying the way it does. The frame they repeat, on helping the other guy up, if you watch carefully, you can see he pushes himself up with his left hand, either from the other guys right hand, or maybe knee.

I cannot explain all, but I can think of possibilities, including, those saying it's a hoax, doctoring the pictures themselves.

Too much was spot on with physics. They didn't have the ability to fake that in the 60's.

Mouse, believe as you want. None of the footage you linked looks at all fake to me.

[SpursStalker]

:lol

This is just too funny!

[mouse]

Mouse, believe as you want. None of the footage you linked looks at all fake to me.

Ok Cobra I will try and respond this mans laptop has more infections than GIG's penis. I like how he wants me to flush out all his Trojans but doesn't want to lose any of his gay porn.

Lets review...

Fact: The USSR was light years ahead of the Americans and knew traveling to the moon was impossible at the time.

Fact: The USA has never invited any of the Russians to join them on their so called many trips to the moon.

Fact Neil Armstrong has never given a live on TV interview, what is he hiding?

Fact: The Apollo Lunar Module was impossible to control and they crashed it trying to learn how to operate it.

And yet they was able to land on the moon on the first try perfectly?

who writes this comedy?

Fact: The 10,000 per square inch thruster rockets that allowed the so called lunar model to land would have been extremely loud and yet you don't hear a sound and the astronauts voices are clear?

Come on Cobra even you have to find that hard to digest!



MrXxZmTHIcc

R1CpNoI4WGc


mr_yNefhINw

[JoeChalupa]

:lol

This is just too funny!

Yeah it is. :lol

[Sportcamper]

Wild Cobra- I have seen the magic of motion pictures…Close Encounters, Jaws, Harry Potter, Godfather…Did James Caan really get machined gun to pieces? It sure looked real….Did that guy really get cut in half with a chain saw in Scarface? The Moon Landing was another well made film that lifted the spirits of Americans during the cold war…I plan on ordering the new enhanced version on DVD…

[SpursStalker]

Yeah it is. :lol

Is someone getting ready to tell me there is no such thing as Santa?

:lol

[Bender]

July 16, 1969.
I was 8 yrs old and remember watching in on our Zenith Black & White TV. To this day Space exploration fascinates me
I also watched it on a B&W TV. I was 9.

[JoeChalupa]

We are all not really here.....this is the Matrix.

[Sportcamper]

Is Alien Autopsy real just because we watched it on TV?

[mouse]

Wild Cobra- I have seen the magic of motion pictures…Close Encounters, Jaws, Harry Potter, Godfather…Did James Caan really get machined gun to pieces? It sure looked real….Did that guy really get cut in half with a chain saw in Scarface? The Moon Landing was another well made film that lifted the spirits of Americans during the cold war…I plan on ordering the new enhanced version on DVD…


I was shocked Wild Cobra would say the technology to do it was not there also. it was kinda non wild cobra like to make such a cheesy statement.

remember the President himself before he was shot said America will land on the moon before the decade was over it was important to keep the USSR from using there nukes on us if that ain't reason enough to lie to the public what is?

If you want to lie to Americans go for it! i have no problem if it saves lives just don't expect me to buy into it, like WTC7 just happened to fall at free fall speed due to a small fire.

A-c-6qkbxd0

[JoeChalupa]

Is Alien Autopsy real just because we watched it on TV?

Are you for real just because you post here?

You guys crack me up. :lmao

[Dr. Gonzo]

This proves that big lizards do exist. It was on TV!

Poor Japanese people. :depressed

8trsDPpAI5E

[Wild Cobra]

Lets review...

Fact: The USSR was light years ahead of the Americans and knew traveling to the moon was impossible at the time.

Not true. They had some advances over us, we had some over them. They were in space before us, but not because they were better. I will assume they didn't care as much for safety.


Fact: The USA has never invited any of the Russians to join them on their so called many trips to the moon.

Why would you expect that in the middle of the Cold War? In the middle of the space race? That's right... Let's show the competition our secrets.


Fact Neil Armstrong has never given a live on TV interview, what is he hiding?

He's a very private and shy man. You should listen to interviews of the people who know him.


Fact: The Apollo Lunar Module was impossible to control and they crashed it trying to learn how to operate it.

And yet they was able to land on the moon on the first try perfectly?

And how is that important? How do you test a vehicle that uses a 51/49 fuel ratio in an atmosphere that requires at least a 75/25 fuel mix, and is operating at a full gravity instead of 1/6th? Then of coarse, testing such a vehicle for the first time is done to work out such problems too.


[b]Fact: The 10,000 per square inch thruster rockets that allowed the so called lunar model to land would have been extremely loud and yet you don't hear a sound and the astronauts voices are clear?

The rocket had 10,125 pounds of thrust. Not per square inch, idiot. I don't think you have got any facts right yet.

Since when does sound travel in space? Did you know that all you hear is the "popping" sound of when the control valves turn on and off in the shuttle craft? The Lunar lander and Command module, being smaller, you can probably hear the fuel traveling in the piping, but it would sound like water running through a garden hose.


Come on Cobra even you have to find that hard to digest!

Not at all. I understand the facts. You obviously don't.

You are now clearly a waste of time. Maybe if you tried to dispute the quotes from the wiki links about the rads per a satellite bets with 3 mm shielding, and tried to show me wrong. All you do is come up with more bullshit without disputing any points I make. I see you are far too ignorant of any scientific facts to have a reasonable debate.

Goodbye.

[Strike]

Is someone getting ready to tell me there is no such thing as Santa?

:lol

Careful. You don't want to instigate a holy war.

[Wild Cobra]

We are all not really here.....this is the Matrix.
No, The Thirteenth Floor (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0139809/) fits the situation better.

[Biernutz]

I watched the landing laying on the floor with my Mom and Dad. It gave me chills to watch it. It was just such a amazing feat. I will never forget it.

[Wild Cobra]

Something I didn’t cover yet, and 9/11 truthers had similar claims about lack of photography knowledge. The claims of doctored photos because of covered crosshairs… Anyone who is an experienced photographer, knows about a phenomena called washout. Here’s a clear example of what happens with the NASA cameras:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Misc/as15-88-11863-flag.jpg

Notice that the crosshairs are visible over the red, but washed out in the white.

[Laker Lanny]

The rocket had 10,125 pounds of thrust. Not per square inch, idiott.

There went your credibility as an adult debating a subject you couldn't resist could you?


I see you are far too ignorant of any scientific facts to have a reasonable debate.
Goodbye.

Real mature bail out because someone didn't win the science fair back in 1989 like you did. Not every debate has to have experts that's why people debate to find out more and maybe learn something.

Both which are to much for your small mind to grasp. Maybe you mistake debates as smack offs? In either case your intelligence far exceeds your character.

Good Job! :tu

[Wild Cobra]

There went your credibility as an adult debating a subject you couldn't resist could you?



Real mature bail out because someone didn't win the science fair back in 1989 like you did. Not every debate has to have experts that's why people debate to find out more and maybe learn something.

Both which are to much for your small mind to grasp. Maybe you mistake debates as smack offs? In either case your intelligence far exceeds your character.

Good Job! :tu
Mouse and I have exchanged words before. There are only a few people I attack like that. I try to maintain civility with most. He simply does not deserve it.

It really gets me that people will take a position without understanding what they are talking about. A wise person either acknowledges they don't know, or doesn't speak so certain of things they don't understand. I have a hard time being nice to most conspiracy theorists. To believe as they do is simply unbelievable to me.

[DizzG.]

Mouse and I have exchanged words before. There are only a few people I attack like that. I try to maintain civility with most. He simply does not deserve it.

So you pick and choose who and when your going to be civil and intelligent with depending on their screen names?
That is not only bias but borderline split personality persona syndrome.

And no I am not a psychiatrists so save your "you idiot" lectures I don't claim to be as smart as you!



It really gets me that people will take a position without understanding what they are talking about.

Then maybe ST is not the place for you, try the MENSA forums they would love you over there.


A wise person either acknowledges they don't know, or doesn't speak so certain of things they don't understand.

You must be new to the www......



I have a hard time being nice to most conspiracy theorists. To believe as they do is simply unbelievable to me.

Sounds like you have behavior issues maybe you should seek help. And where did mouse post he was this wise person?

Sounds to me like you have no real comebacks for the youtube videos he posted so you choose to insult your opponents to make others feel you may be right, that's very Bill O'Ryly of you!
Your FOX news material! :tu

[mouse]

I have a hard time being nice to most conspiracy theorists.

Why is it anyone who questions anything is a conspiracy theorists? I supposed if you asked the folks at red Lobster if the Crap meat cakes are made with real crab meat then your a conspiracy theorists, or work for PETA?

Don't bother with a reply, I have to many others I can converse with that don't pull out the "Idiot" card every time they are in a corner........


sorry folks back on topic.............

3TWiJQhaajA

[Alex Jones]

Mouse is a Golden God!

[mouse]

kEJrtw4kHQQ

[Wild Cobra]

So you pick and choose who and when your going to be civil and intelligent with depending on their screen names?
That is not only bias but borderline split personality persona syndrome.

Certain users here have infuriated me over the last couple years. Mouse is one of the.


And no I am not a psychiatrists so save your "you idiot" lectures I don't claim to be as smart as you!

So?


You must be new to the www......

Hardly. Been surfing since the early 90's.


Sounds like you have behavior issues maybe you should seek help. And where did mouse post he was this wise person?

No, this is the help I need. I let my mood swings loose in here rather than in real life. Well, not entirely true. I let loose on a solicitor last week.


Sounds to me like you have no real comebacks for the youtube videos he posted so you choose to insult your opponents to make others feel you may be right, that's very Bill O'Ryly of you!
Your FOX news material! :tu

If you followed the thread, you see I did explain the earlier Youtube videos. His answer was to post more nonsense without any discussion of my showing how they were wrong.

Besides. You are one of Mouse's many names. Aren't you.

[mouse]

Mouse is a Golden God!

I am not sure I agree with this post! Buts it's close!


rG8QHQB2cTk

[Wild Cobra]

OK, I'll try this one more time.

The the "fake moon" video, it starts by saying Donna Tietze saw certain things. Only what I read, is normal to put multiple photos together to create a larger one. She saw an apparent terrestrial scene." Apparent isn't good enough, and it could have just been a photographic anomaly.

Marcus Allen's claims...

He shows a picture from the book "Full Moon" and shows errors in the combining of multiple photos. I see no problem, just a mistake.

No lander in the panoramic picture doesn't mean squat. The moon is full of hills, they took the Rover, and it could be hidden by a natural feature.

Jesus. I'm already tired of showing the stupidity of these claims.

The shadow issue is a false assumption. Silica reflects light at all angles. There is enough to back light an astronaut, but not enough behind a terrain shadow to back light it at the same exposure level. Notice when we see the moon in space, we see the whole spherical area that the sun shines on, and it appears rather equally bright.

"If light was reflected from the surface, it will obviously illuminate things closer to the surface more than farther away from the surface."

Well, except fort the height of the astronaut, this is a trick of a statement. He is as close to the lunar surface as the rocks. The rocks are's mane of a light reflecting material to shed heat either.

That was really a poor example, saying the astronaut appeared about 30 to 65 cm tall. He didn't show any proof of the known height.

Wow... two more videos, fifteen more minutes. Sorry, it's a waste of time.

[Wild Cobra]

Apollo Mission Tapes (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-video.html)

Apollo 11 Mission Tapes (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/video11.html)

[Wild Cobra]

The shadows? Wide angle and telephoto lenses distort views. The eyes are in the neighborhood of a 80 mm focal length if I remember right. Longer or shorter lenses change a photographic perspective. There are also images that the angle looks wring because the surface isn't flat. Very hard to discern 3D on a 2D photo.

For those who don't understand the shadow bit, watch this:

Wym04J_3Ls0

[Wild Cobra]

More from Myth Busters:

9JbaM1xNIis


5taIxlNA_Lw


yhab86KoVjU


uE4w2MIYhC4


XAcXBT-GZCo


VmVxSFnjYCA

[Dario]

Many of these conspiracy theorist are crazy people seeking aknowledge, so i laugh at them for a while and move on.
But on the other hand, some stuff that happened in the past are downright stupid and if you think of it for just a while you realize something ain't right.
As for the moon landing i don't believe it for 1 reason - in 30+ years after apolo noone went back to the moon.

[Wild Cobra]

As for the moon landing i don't believe it for 1 reason - in 30+ years after apolo noone went back to the moon.
I'll bet NASA would love to if you'll foot the bill.

[Sportcamper]

Joe-The noise level of a NASA rocket engine is 140 to 150 decibels, yet we can clearly hear the astronauts at normal dialogue levels…Why does area 51 have an exact replica of the moon craters that Buzz walked around? No blast crater under the Lem? How is that possible? It was lowered by a movie set cable, that is why! Where is the exhaust blast? If there is no air on the moon why is the flag waving? Why are the images so grainy? We have used the same video technology since the 50’s yet TV images are clear…

[Alex Jones]

So anyone who doesn't believe in something 100% is a conspiracy theorist? Real good there son! It's just a matter of time when Neil Armstrong has a death bed confession about the fake landing and Wild Cobra will change his screen name out of shame and embarrassment.

CDeoBcVQSp4

[Wild Cobra]

The noise level of a NASA rocket engine is 140 to 150 decibels, yet we can clearly hear the astronauts at normal dialogue levels…The burning propellant is traveling too fast to have any notable effect of transferring the noise through the physical structure of the capsule. With no atmosphere in space, there is no way to hear it. It takes matter, to carry the sound. No atmosphere, no sound. Period. Just that simple.

Why does area 51 have an exact replica of the moon craters that Buzz walked around? Do they? What evidence is there of that? Then even if true, there could be other explanations for it. Was it built before or after the Apollo missions? If it was built before the missions, could it be a training and or resting ground?

No blast crater under the Lem? How is that possible? It was lowered by a movie set cable, that is why! Where is the exhaust blast? Nope. The moon's service is essentially one very hard clump, except for about a 2" layer of moon dust. This dust was completely blown away from the exhaust, and the rock based surfaces doesn't melt easy. Without oxygen, there is no scorching from the rocket fuel mix either.

If there is no air on the moon why is the flag waving? It was primarily the pendulum effect. With no atmosphere to slow it down, it just kept moving. It appears to my "static cling" is also in play. Look at the Youtube I linked titled Mythybusters Moon Hoax Flag Flapping.

Why are the images so grainy? We have used the same video technology since the 50’s yet TV images are clear…
No, technology has changed dramatically. In the 60's and 70, TV cameras were vacuum tubes that the light charged an internal surface of, and was scanned by an electron beam. I can assure you that electronic noise from the sun, with no protective atmosphere on the moon, would make such an electronic signal noisy. There are more reasons for the distortion than I remember, but I can also tell you that the video camera technology for broadcast quality NTSC was very large. Living the 60's, I remember. Here are two pictures from a web site called THE COLLECTION OF BOBBY ELLERBEE (http://www.pharis-video.com/p5320.htm)

http://www.pharis-video.com/bobby-13.jpg

http://www.pharis-video.com/bobby-16.jpg

A camera small enough and light enough for use on a 60's space mission would be of much lower quality.

From LabGuy's World: Extinct Westel Corp. Video Equipment (http://www.labguysworld.com/Cat_WestelCo.htm):

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Misc/firstportableTVcamera.jpg


So anyone who doesn't believe in something 100% is a conspiracy theorist? Real good there son!
No, just people who are ignorant, then stupid enough to claim something is fake, just because they lack the ability to understand. They're just talking out their ass. The earth used to be flat, partially because people didn't understand the truth. Even when others explained the truth.

It's just a matter of time when Neil Armstrong has a death bed confession about the fake landing and Wild Cobra will change his screen name out of shame and embarrassment.

I would really be surprised if that would happen. I would say it never will, because I am fully confident we actually went to the moon. It was within our technological grasp, and all the claims otherwise are well disputed.

Look at the Mythbuster Videos.

[nacho]

Looks to me if it wasn't for Mythbusters you would be up shit creek! And I disagree about the quality of cameras back then, how was it the camera the astronauts had on board was color, and also clear? Why wouldn't NASA get rid of their black and white fuzzy 1950 piece of shit and borrow the camera the astronauts had inside?


A19o1Cs4WKw

[Sportcamper]

Wild Cobra- Same moon set from several Apollo Missions…The images are exact copies over one another from Appolo 1 on…Another example of poor continuity & bad editing…

[Sportcamper]

I can post images of old microphones & claim that audio technology has greatly advanced…But the audio from the moon landing film is remarkable clear…

[Sportcamper]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Apollo_11_Crew_During_Training_Exercise_-_GPN-2002-000032.jpg/250px-Apollo_11_Crew_During_Training_Exercise_-_GPN-2002-000032.jpg

So I guess these movie set photos are fake?

[Wild Cobra]

Looks to me if it wasn't for Mythbusters you would be up shit creek!
No. I was able to dispute the conspiracy theorists without the Mythbusters show. If you go back to my first two or three posts disputing them, it is rather clear.

And I disagree about the quality of cameras back then, how was it the camera the astronauts had on board was color, and also clear?
The color was taken with a 16 mm film movie camera, and processed once they came back to Earth. The live images were done with a portable BW TV camera.

Why wouldn't NASA get rid of their black and white fuzzy 1950 piece of shit and borrow the camera the astronauts had inside?

It wasn't a 50's piece of shit. The first portable wasn't available until the later 60's. Again, we are talking about two different media. Live video and magnetic tape vs. 16mm film.


A19o1Cs4WKw

LOL at the cat in zero gravity linked to this one. It borders on animal abuse though. The cat had to be scared shitless.

fUIokQ36rbA


Wild Cobra- Same moon set from several Apollo Missions…The images are exact copies over one another from Appolo 1 on…Another example of poor continuity & bad editing…
Show me the evidence. I would especially like to see a lunar landing site with Apollo 1.

[Wild Cobra]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Apollo_11_Crew_During_Training_Exercise_-_GPN-2002-000032.jpg/250px-Apollo_11_Crew_During_Training_Exercise_-_GPN-2002-000032.jpg

So I guess these movie set photos are fake?
Didn't you know, there was simulation training before the missions.

[ididnotnothat]

WC, why even bother with these idiots?

[Jimcs50]

I was a baby. :)

[Wild Cobra]

WC, why even bother with these idiots?
Good question. I think I'm losing IQ points just being around them.

[Sportcamper]

Q: Why would somebody as inteligent as Senator Hillary Clinton claim to evade sniper fire when she was visiting Bosnia in 1996 as first lady?

Quote: “I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.”

A: Because the film was already made showing her under sniper fire in Bosnia…John McCain’s camp put the royal kybosh on the film before Senator Clintons camp could release the sniper film…

Some of you should stop being so naïve, perhaps rent “Wag the Dog” & see how things are really done…

[Wild Cobra]

Some of you should stop being so naïve, perhaps rent “Wag the Dog” & see how things are really done…
I think the series "The West Wing" was probably a good view of how politics is done. What is shows is rather disturbing at limes.

[BlackSwordsMan]

today on the history channel they're supposedly gonna show apollo 11 encountering aliens

[Alex Jones]

WC, why even bother with these idiots?

Is that what you call people who don't agree with everything they hear or read? I wonder what you call a person who's only skill is to enter a debate topic to insult someone? I think You proved to us all here at ST who the real idiot is and gutless at that.

kzz9CO-6PXk

[JudynTX]

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3

[ididnotnothat]

Is that what you call people who don't agree with everything they hear or read? I wonder what you call a person who's only skill is to enter a debate topic to insult someone? I think You proved to us all here at ST who the real idiot is and gutless at that.

kzz9CO-6PXk

Your believing in the hoax theory is why I call you an idiot. Your youtube links don't prove anything at all but you go on and think they do. :lol

[ididnotnothat]

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3

That's fake.

[Alex Jones]

Your youtube links don't prove anything :lol


Did you tell Wild Cobra that also?

[DarkReign]

WC....holdin' it down.

Man went to the moon. Man has also sent robots to Mars. It happened.

Sorry.

[911]

You got that right he loves to hold the truth down. You salad tossers have the easy part, we have to do all the hard work, we are the ones that have to prove it didn't happen. You all are just lazy sheep that will be looking for a bail out when the shit hits the fan. I bet you think Iraq had WMDs?


crqbdjybYeE

BdXtRpCsjp0

[JoeChalupa]

Space Exploration rocks!!!

[Sportcamper]

If I had to pick one…I would pick Apollo 13 with Tom Hanks, Bill Paxton & Kevin Bacon as my favorite space adventure film over Apollo 11 with Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Buzz Aldrin...

[hater]

a chinaman will be the first human on the moon. Book it

[Sportcamper]

Letterman...

Top Ten Surprises On The NASA Moon Landing Tapes

10. Neil Armstrong demanded to be addressed as "Spock"
9. Buzz Aldrin won $20 bet by eating a pound of moon dust
8. Sea of Tranquility had a place where you could rent kayaks
7. Audible meowing indicates someone brought a kitty
6. Were supposed to go to Mars, but the men refused to stop and ask for directions
5. Dumb scientist yelled, "They put a man on the moon? What? How'd they get him back?"
4. Someone at NASA taped over the first half with "Gunsmoke"
3. Due to time, NASA had to edit out the big dance number
2. Aliens... Run!
1. Aldrin admitted taking one giant leap onto Armstrong's wife

[JoeChalupa]

:lol I'd like to go up in the Space Shuttle.