Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouse
Man you are some piece of crap:bang:bang:bang
This is for the Mouse. It is footage of the transmission deliberately not shown by Sibrel. @ 6 mins 50 seconds. The camera zooms back from the window, the Earth gets smaller. It cannot be a transparancy, it is the Earth. There is no other explanation.
This one seems to be working.Quote:
none of the videos you post actually show that clip anymore
http://www.livevideo.com/video/7720A...e-gem-par.aspx
(4:10 time mark)
This is a debate and I'm asking you pro-Apollo people to give your analyses of an anomaly that I say proves they faked being halfway to the moon in Apollo 11.
Here's a link to the issue (post #1626).
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...postcount=1626
You pro-Apollo people are acting like cornered shills. I suppose it's because you are cornered shills.
Stop ducking this issue and address it.
Summat wrong with you fuckwad. Seriously. You had your answer on loose change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
And here......
Tap dancing is avoiding it, your explanation is moronic in the extreme. It is impossible for a plane in a zero gravity dive to 'flutter' as your idiotic spamming brain thinks.Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmotwat
For the 1000th time, internet wide, this wanker peddles his crap about this. Repetition doesn't make it correct, endless explanations never sink in.
Again for the foooooooool................
Listen muppet. The idea of comparing to horizontal motion is exactly the same as a weightless motion. There is no gravity pulling it backwards and forwards in a horizontal direction.
It moves the same in horizontal as it does in gravity and without gravity. Therefore gravity is not an issue. it is inertia, his arm is connected to his fucking sleeve:rolleyes
You keep trying to obfuscate this debate with sophistry and tap dancing. You would be laughed out of the debating hall:lmao:lmao
OK, once again here is my full explanation......
You are so dense. A horizontal movement needs no gravity!
The movement in zero gravity or gravity is the same. Inertial. It changes direction because the sleeve is attached to his fucking arm you dipshit.:bang:bang:bang:bang:bang:bang
You are not interested in an explanation. You are just interested in spamming your links.
On Earth on the Moon or in zero g, the jacket will do the same.
If you move your arm up and down quickly, no matter where you are it will do that.
I guarantee you will not do this, but it will prove once and for all that you have no clue........
Long sleeved loose top.
Holding your arm horizontally, move it forwards and backwards swiftly.
It will do exactly what that video shows.
There is no gravitational energy imparted on horizontal motion, it is only downwards. All the movement is inertial.
You have had your explanation, you don't seem to get reality.
Your explanation of it being done on a plane dive is moronic and contradicts your LEO film from Jarrah, David Percy and Bart Sibrel.
I believe you had this perfectly explained to you over 2 years ago.:bang:bang
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChange...opic/51606/22/
I truly believe you need to see a shrink about your obsession :wakeup :lmao
We did Phil Collins genesis jacket:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
Scenario of Cosmouse stupidity:-
Cosmouse question... What is 2 + 2:bang
Apollo people... Answer 4
Cosmouse question... What is 2 + 2:bang
Apollo people... Already answered it, it's 4.
Cosmouse question... What is 2 + 2 you people seem to be cornered here.:bang
Apollo people... Look you tosser we have already answered it, it's 4.
Cosmouse question... What is 2 + 2 you people seem to be cornered here - these shills just can't answer my difficult question.:bang
Apollo people... Shitheads. This was answered by five year olds it is 4.
Summary:-
These two wankers are not interested in answers. They have no concept at all of the depth of their stupidity.:lmao:lmao Repeat posts, debunked years ago.:rolleyes
Mouse and his mystery film:rolleyes, ignored the site detailing where it was manipulated. He has made no response to the video that shows it could not possibly be a transparancy.:nope
Cosmored and his jacket. He has no scientific background. He does not understand inertial movement or gravity. He ignores every answer ever given and then has the audacity to say that it hasn't been answered.:bang:lmao
Are you serious this thread's been going on for a year?
Jason, the guy who started it, has made about 50 duplicates on 50 different forums on the internet for 5 years. Whenever one of them dies, he comes along and re-asks questions already answered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason R
He needs a lobotomy.:lmao
That is not working properly, the timer isn't cycling.:rolleyesQuote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
The GET 30:28 telecast is in the video you and Mousefart keep avoiding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
The first minute has Collins on the treadmill, so detail exactly to the second, where your "problem" is, and show your case completely (then watch 6mins 50 seconds onwards and tell me why you still think it is a transparancy!:bang:bang)
I just checked it and it works fine. Wait until the number that comes up is 4:10 and watch the corner of Collins' jacket.Quote:
That is not working properly, the timer isn't cycling
Here's the issue in question. Please stop playing games and address it.
post #1626
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...postcount=1626
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look very carefully at the way the corner of this shuttle astronaut's jacket floats when she's still.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4
Now look at the corner of Collins' jacket when he's not jogging in place.
http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/ca...299829n75qtFtS
(17:40 time mark)
http://www.livevideo.com/video/7720A...e-gem-par.aspx
(4:10 time mark)
(one of these links should be working)
It falls to a hanging position. It behaves exactly the way it would in gravity.
In this video at the 00:14 time mark a man starts to run on a treadmill on earth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
Look at the corners of his jacket. This is gravity and Collins is in gravity.
Go into some detail and explain why the corner of Collins' jacket is in zero-G if you're so sure. Don't just say it's zero-G without giving any explanation. They wouldn't just laugh you out of the debating hall for that response of yours. They'd throw you out.
Please explain why you think material attached to his arm, an arm moving down relative to his head would not itself move down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Please explain why, when one astronaut is sitting at right angles to him, you even know which way would be down.
If the footage was filmed in a plane, please explain why you adhere to Bart Sibrel filmed in LEO assessment.
Now read this reply, one of many and tell me why it is incorrect
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...postcount=1678
Answer the questions shitbag, you think you are debating here? You are just spamming.:bang:bang:bang
You selectively quote and avoid questions back at you....
Repeated for the Liar....
That is not working properly, the timer isn't cycling.:rolleyes
The GET 30:28 telecast is in the video you and Mousefart keep avoiding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
The first minute has Collins on the treadmill, so detail exactly to the second, where your "problem" is, and show your case completely (then watch 6mins 50 seconds onwards and tell me why you still think it is a transparancy!:bang:bang)
The issue is the corner of his jacket–not his arm. Now please stop ducking the issue I raised in post #1626. I say this proves the hoax by itself and you keep tap dancing around it instead of addressing it. Is it because you know I'm right and can't deal with it?Quote:
Please explain why you think material attached to his arm, an arm moving down relative to his head would not itself move down.
At 52 seconds the same passage of film. Only better quality.:toast
What is the problem? He is running up and down with his jacket unfastened. As he goes up and down, the fabric follows him.
It is called inertia. The body goes up pulls the jacket up, the body goes down pulls the jacket down. As can clearly be seen, there is a very loose feel to the direction changes of the fabric. This is because gravity is not in effect.
Can you see the apparatus in front of him? That has mass too. When it moves backwards and forwards it has inertia, when it changes direction it has inertia. It is connected to his jacket. It seems to be pulling it all over the place.:downspin::downspin::downspin:
You have already admitted you are not scientific, do you understand what inertia is?:lol
This is one of the dumbest arguments for gravity I ever saw. Who first postulated this as a sign of gravity? It couldn't have been you, as nothing you do is original!
Answer how the 6mins 50 seconds camera pan does not discount a transparancy.
You keep avoiding this.
You seem to be confusing the issue of the way the jacket corner bounces around when he's jogging with the issue of why the corner falls to a hanging position when he stops jogging. Here's the question again. Please answer this question.
Here's post #1626
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...postcount=1626
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look very carefully at the way the corner of this shuttle astronaut's jacket floats when she's still.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4
Now look at the corner of Collins' jacket when he's not jogging in place.
http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/ca...299829n75qtFtS
(17:40 time mark)
http://www.livevideo.com/video/7720A...e-gem-par.aspx
(4:10 time mark)
(one of these links should be working)
It falls to a hanging position. It behaves exactly the way it would in gravity.
In this video at the 00:14 time mark a man starts to run on a treadmill on earth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
Look at the corners of his jacket. This is gravity and Collins is in gravity.
Go into some detail and explain why the corner of Collins' jacket is in zero-G if you're so sure. Don't just say it's zero-G without giving any explanation. They wouldn't just laugh you out of the debating hall for that response of yours. They'd throw you out.
I say it doesn't. I say you know nothing about inertial forces in outer space, and the lack of gravity on astronauts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Nowhere in any of the 1000's of times you have asked this, do you ever detail your case. You say the jacket "comes down" because of gravity.:bang:bang:lmao
You never detail an explanation for how the objects in the cabin seem to have a floaty effect to them. Or don't they count in your delusion?:rolleyes
It doesn't "fall" you stupid schmuck. To get to his resting condition, involves a final change of direction from him. The final change of direction from him causes the final change of direction of his fucking jacket.:bang:bang:bangQuote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Now, please explain why you are ok with direction changes ("bounces around") when he's jogging, but not the direction change when he stops???:bang
Now at 1 minute 18 seconds a clear sign of weightlessness from his toilet bag, floating around. Explain it please. It is floating.
You avoid answering the 6minutes 50 seconds pan.:nope
Anybody would think you are avoiding it. Next time you avoid it, I will just revert to cut and paste reply mode and stop this one to one exchange.
Please provide proof that the new photographs were faked.Quote:
Originally Posted by mouse
This will either be in the form of technical analysis, or testimony of someone involved in faking them.
Once again, you have added to the number of people with knowledge of the conspiracy, yet still have no accounts of conspirators.
Ad hominem starts getting a bit threadbare after a while. For as long as this theory has been around, and as feverently as some believe in it, you would think that someone would come up with a confession, "media suppression" or no.
The conspiracy is so competant as to keep that out of "the media", but not competant enough to produce credible photographs and videos.
Funny how this conspiracy is competant when you want it to be, and not competant when you want it to not be competant.
Almost as if you were making this shit up as you go along.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/pict...pictureid=1459Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy, who asked
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy, who asked for the first time
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy, who asked for the second time
...and yet, you keep ignoring my question. Quid pro quo. The full explanation has been given to you in multiple places by multiple people over the course of years. I feel little compulsion to re-hash or copy and paste other people's responses, although if you want, I can do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Bottom line: I answered yours, mine is even simpler. Yes or no. It takes all of a second to type the answer. In a real debating hall, you have to answer the questions posed to you.
Is it possible there is no testimony from hoax conspirators because there is *no hoax*?
Off and on. Check the time stamp of the OP. 1-10-10Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason R
As FF has pointed out, the OP has been pushing this in multiple forums in multiple places for years.
The anomalies in the video and still pictures show it was a hoax. That is the bottom line.Quote:
Is it possible there is no testimony from hoax conspirators because there is *no hoax*?
Those were just lame attempts to obfuscate the anomaly that proves that they were faking being halfway to the moon. Anyway, we basically just discussed why the jacket bounces. We didn't specifically discuss why it went back to a hanging position.Quote:
...and yet, you keep ignoring my question. Quid pro quo. The full explanation has been given to you in multiple places by multiple people over the course of years. I feel little compulsion to re-hash or copy and paste other people's responses, although if you want, I can do so.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
(00:52 time mark)
This is real zero-G.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4
The corners of the astronaut's jacket have no tendency to go down to a hanging position.
There's no identifiable force making go back to that position except for gravity. The material is too loose to push it down that much. If it were stiff enough to do that, it wouldn't be able to go up the way it does.Quote:
It doesn't "fall" you stupid schmuck. To get to his resting condition, involves a final change of direction from him. The final change of direction from him causes the final change of direction of his fucking jacket.
I was able to exactly duplicate the movement of Collins' jacket corner with a loose coat on a coat hanger. I just bounced it up and down. Anyone can try this at home.
Please explain how it's possible to duplicate zero-G movement on earth.
Do you mean the bag that's on his knee? It looks to me like it's just resting on his knee. If that were zero-G and the bag weren't strapped to his knee, it would have been forced up into view when he was jogging in place by his leg.Quote:
Now at 1 minute 18 seconds a clear sign of weightlessness from his toilet bag, floating around. Explain it please. It is floating.
Are you saying the pictures aren't fakable? Just the fact that it's possible to fake pictures means those pictures can't be used as proof because they might be fake. Proving they were faked isn't necessary to prove they faked Apollo. The video anomalies have already done that anyway.Quote:
Please provide proof that the new photographs were faked.
This will either be in the form of technical analysis, or testimony of someone involved in faking them.
I dealt with why we'd never hear about it if someone came forward in post #1090 but you people keep playing dumb about it so I have to keep reposting it.Quote:
Once again, you have added to the number of people with knowledge of the conspiracy, yet still have no accounts of conspirators.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4731597&postcount=1090
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222
(excerpt)
---------------------------------------------------------------
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I haven't been concentrating on how they faked the earth out of the window. To tell the truth I'm not sure how they did it. It's possible that both Percy and Sibrel are wrong. The part where his jacket is bouncing up and down was obviously filmed in earth gravity. Maybe some footage from a scene in which they were faking zero-G in a diving plane and got careless and filmed some of it in obvious gravity was mixed in with the low earth orbit footage. Maybe the theory that they faked being halfway to the moon while in low earth orbit is wrong and it was all done in a diving plane or on earth and they faked the earth outside by some other means.Quote:
You avoid answering the 6minutes 50 seconds pan.
The main reason I bother to continue posting here is so that you shills don't just talk to each other and fill up the thread with your BS. There's nothing so lame that you won't say it so I know you'll always be here. I really I'm just wasting my time though; all the important evidence is in post #1 so you can't bury it. The only way you people are going to make anyone think they went to the moon is by keeping them from seeing the clear evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy, who asked
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy, who asked for the first time
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy, who asked for the second time
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy, who asked for the THIRD time
My question is simple, and is either a yes, or a no, not "look at my videos".Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
Is it possible there is no testimony from hoax conspirators because there is *no hoax*?
The blindman uses the video I gave him, not realising its significance:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
6 mins 50 seconds. Bart Sibrel says it was a transparancy. How come it gets smaller when the camera pans back, how come the edge of the window occludes it as the astronaut moves sideways?
You hoaxtards keep avoiding this, just as you avoided my gravity assessment in this post....
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...postcount=1650
The jacket "went back to a hanging position", because the inertia of the jacket changing direction prior to the astronaut coming "down" added to the inertia of the chest attachment also changing direction and pulling it.
So simple a simpleton would understand. But not cossytwat.
Inertia is the force. As the man changes direction so does his jacket, and so does the mass of the chest attachment.Quote:
There's no identifiable force making go back to that position except for gravity. The material is too loose to push it down that much. If it were stiff enough to do that, it would be able to go up the way it does.
Explain the floating waist bag 1 minute 18 seconds. It rises for no reason apart from gentle inertia in a weightless environment. It is attached to his waist and clearly visible moving during his jog.
Watch Cosmotard avoid all these questions.
Then the dipshit says...Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmored
:bang:lmao:bang:lmao:bang:lmaoQuote:
I haven't been concentrating on how they faked the earth out of the window. To tell the truth I'm not sure how they did it. It's possible that both Percy and Sibrel are wrong.
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/u...kass-award.jpg
Evidence? None. Speculation through informed opinion? Nope. Speculation on behalf of somebody who does have informed opinion? Nope. Speculation because cosmored thinks it is so? Yes.Quote:
The part where his jacket is bouncing up and down was obviously filmed in earth gravity.
Basically your "evidence" is that you think it looks odd. No matter who tells you otherwise, it matters not a fuck. You are the "playing dumb" King of the internet.:king:lmao:lmao
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
These two NASA photochopped
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...ollo11site.jpg
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...ollo14site.jpg
This one I photochopped
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p.../fake-moon.jpg
whats not to understand? Your whole bag of evidence Apollo 11 landed on the moon is some old black and white photoshopped picture?
come back when you and you pal FraudFreddy88 have some real evidence.
like this.....
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p...MoonCD2of2.jpg
But then he has posted this?Quote:
Originally Posted by mouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouse
Oh, the hypocrisy. The sheer stupidity of this person:lmao:lmao:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by mouse
For the lying mouse once again....
This is for the Mouse. It is footage of the transmission deliberately not shown by Sibrel. @ 6 mins 50 seconds. The camera zooms back from the window, the Earth gets smaller. It cannot be a transparancy, it is the Earth. There is no other explanation.