Proving the moon landing was a hoax - John Young is caught 'bare handed'.

Here are two stills from the Apollo 16 clip...





Look at Young's gloved hand, in the upper right corner of both stills.

His glove is clearly NOT pressurized. His fingers are CREASED, the exact same way rubber gloves will commonly be creased when you put them on - because rubber gloves that are larger than your fingers will crease at the joints, and along the entire side of the glove, at the pinky finger.

Note the ring finger, which is the finger next to his pinky, in both stills. There is a very obvious crease, at the finger joint. This creates a 'flap' down the finger, as shown in these close-ups...





It is impossible to create these creases and flaps in gloves that are pressurized to 3.75 psi.


These stills prove there is no pressurization in Young's gloves.

And just in case any of the videos above don't contain it, here is footage of the vacuum suit test that went wong.



Can't test the suit without testing the glove.

Suits were tested.

John Young wore his suit, complete with glove, on the surface of the moon.

a reply to: turbonium1

It is impossible to create these creases and flaps in gloves that are pressurized to 3.75 psi.

According to whom?
3.75 psi is far less pressure than it takes to inflate a toy balloon. It is a very small amount of pressure.

a reply to: turbonium1

sigh - the outer layer is NOT the pressure skin - one would have expected this to have sunk in by now - the topic has come up before

it looks like a bare hand with a wedding ring to me.

a reply to: MAC269

It's already been established (by including the OP) that there is no bare hand.
The OP is now claiming that the glove is not puffy enough, in his opinion.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: turbonium1

sigh - the outer layer is NOT the pressure skin - one would have expected this to have sunk in by now - the topic has come up before

It is as if they have no clue at all how the gloves are actually constructed!

originally posted by: turbonium1
It is impossible to create these creases and flaps in gloves that are pressurized to 3.75 psi.

So what expertise on Apollo gloves do you have to state that - remember, you do not even know how they are constructed!

a reply to: Phage

Dear Phage

just saying what it looks like to me, as with all these things the picture is poor but I can see a wedding band.

hey its what I can see.

a reply to: MAC269

Yeah. Well.
It is the weekend and all.

a reply to: Phage

had to laugh but I have not have alcohol since xmas day. got lovem

a reply to: MAC269

OK, so maybe it would help if you posted something showing the wedding ring.

Here are some representative screenshots from the link supplied in the OP clearly showing a gloved hand:

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: turbonium1

sigh - the outer layer is NOT the pressure skin - one would have expected this to have sunk in by now - the topic has come up before

So, now you are claiming the gloves are creased, and have flaps, even when they are pressurized?

Do you remember this earlier claim?....

originally posted by: Phage
The gloves could not be "skin tight", however, if anything, the pressurized glove displays a smoother surface than the unpressurized, which makes sense.

First, the pressurized gloves would look "smoother" than unpressurized gloves, "which makes sense".

Now, the pressurized gloves are NOT "smoother". They become creased at the joints when you curl your fingers inward, and it creates flaps of excess rubber along the outer edge. Exactly the way oversized rubber gloves appear when you curl your fingers inward!!

You have two opposing claims, which contradict each other. Of course, that's hardly a surprise, coming from those who dwell in 'Apollo-land'....

a reply to: turbonium1

They become creased at the joints when you curl your fingers inward, and it creates flaps of excess rubber along the outer edge. Exactly the way oversized rubber gloves appear when you curl your fingers inward!!

Actually, they don't.

originally posted by: turbonium1
You have two opposing claims, which contradict each other.

Wrong actually, we have a claim made by someone who does not even know how the gloves are constructed!

Here is a pressurized glove...



The image is from this site...

spaceref.com...$350000-to-winning-astronaut-glove-designers.html

The article

NASA's Centennial Challenges program awarded $350,000 this week to a pair of designers who developed concepts for more flexible space gloves that could make it easier for astronauts to perform tasks.

For the 2009 challenge, teams had to develop a complete glove, including the outer, thermal-micrometeoroid-protection layer and the inner, pressure-restraining layer.

Do you think these gloves would have creases and flaps of excess material when the fingers are curled inward? Not likely, right? They are complete space gloves, like the gloves you say Apollo wore, yet they would not crease at the finger joints when curled inward.

So I've proven my argument. I'm still waiting for you to prove yours.

Btw, proving a claim is not saying 'They ARE pressurized. The creases and flaps in Young's gloves are just from the outer, unpressurized gloves, which were worn over the pressurized gloves.'

You can say it over and over, but it's worthless babble. You need to show me the Apollo gloves before and after pressurization, in a continual process. NASA will not let anyone test the Apollo gloves, so your side is to blame for that, too.

Do you have any valid proof at all, or just a bunch of Apollo-ites spouting off that the gloves were pressurized?

a reply to: turbonium1

That's the palm of the glove. A more advanced glove than those used by Apollo.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1

That's the palm of the glove. A more advanced glove than those used by Apollo.

And clearly working just fine in space.

Saying I don't know how the gloves were constructed is yet another fine example of NOT supporting your claim.

And I'm sure it won't be the last one you try, either.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Saying I don't know how the gloves were constructed is yet another fine example of NOT supporting your claim.

And I'm sure it won't be the last one you try, either.

And how is your claim that he is not wearing gloves working out?

And your claim that there is no footage of testing?

Posting pictures of a pressurised glove working in space as an example of how pressurised gloves can't work in space also seems a risky strategy.