Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

VoidHawk

DJW001
Help me out: post a link to the last post you made that presented any evidence of any kind. I would be happy to debunk it for you.

And thats the problem, even TRUTH can be debunked!
If OP posted evidence that satified the entire human race, you would debunk it, because like I said, even the truth can be debunked.

This thread was started in November of 2012. Have you read one single post since then that you consider to be evidence that would satisfy the entire human race that the Apollo missions did not happen? If so, please repeat it here.

DJW001

VoidHawk

DJW001
Help me out: post a link to the last post you made that presented any evidence of any kind. I would be happy to debunk it for you.

And thats the problem, even TRUTH can be debunked!
If OP posted evidence that satified the entire human race, you would debunk it, because like I said, even the truth can be debunked.

This thread was started in November of 2012. Have you read one single post since then that you consider to be evidence that would satisfy the entire human race that the Apollo missions did not happen? If so, please repeat it here.

Tell me this. What would YOU accept as proof? Is there anything that could make you change your mind?

VoidHawk

DJW001

VoidHawk

DJW001
Help me out: post a link to the last post you made that presented any evidence of any kind. I would be happy to debunk it for you.

And thats the problem, even TRUTH can be debunked!
If OP posted evidence that satified the entire human race, you would debunk it, because like I said, even the truth can be debunked.

This thread was started in November of 2012. Have you read one single post since then that you consider to be evidence that would satisfy the entire human race that the Apollo missions did not happen? If so, please repeat it here.

Tell me this. What would YOU accept as proof? Is there anything that could make you change your mind?

Absolutely! Documentation, physical artifacts, personal testimony. You know, all the things that the historical record is made of. It just so happens all of that evidence supports the claims of NASA, and the detractors have never found any that supports their claims. But, by all means, try to find some.

DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Name the scientists then DJW. The rhetorical question you ask is totally useless. First, you back up your claims with sources.

Better than that, I'll just link to some of the papers. I know how lazy some researchers can be:

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

I doubt that you have more than 2 scientists that you could name. So get to work, pal. You made the claim. Or are you bluffing

Make up your mind: is this a card game or a court of law? If this were a court of law, you would be facing a heavy fine for filing a frivolous law suit.

This is a total useless post DJW001.

I don't think you tried your own links ?

Ссылка устарела. Вернитесь на предыдущую страницу. Обновите ее и попробуйте зайти сюда снова. Link is out of date. Go back. Refresh page and try to call this page again.

Or in fully English :

Reference is outdated. Return to the previous page. Update it and try to come here again. Link is out of date. Go back. Refresh page and try to call this page again.

VoidHawk

DJW001

VoidHawk

DJW001
Help me out: post a link to the last post you made that presented any evidence of any kind. I would be happy to debunk it for you.

And thats the problem, even TRUTH can be debunked!
If OP posted evidence that satified the entire human race, you would debunk it, because like I said, even the truth can be debunked.

This thread was started in November of 2012. Have you read one single post since then that you consider to be evidence that would satisfy the entire human race that the Apollo missions did not happen? If so, please repeat it here.

Tell me this. What would YOU accept as proof? Is there anything that could make you change your mind?

My guess would be something that shows they didnt go to the moon since thats the topic where discussing. What do you think qualifies accusations?

SayonaraJupiter
Nixon plays hard, dude. You have not shown a preponderance of evidence from non-governmental sources, no, you have shown exactly zilch nada nothing. The "Ham Radio operator" defense is not really worth it because it's like scraping the bottom of the barrell for evidence.

Here's a site that includes audio clips that were recorded by Larry Baysinger, W4EJA, during Apollo 11.

Enjoy.

legacy.jefferson.kctcs.edu...

webstra

DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Name the scientists then DJW. The rhetorical question you ask is totally useless. First, you back up your claims with sources.

Better than that, I'll just link to some of the papers. I know how lazy some researchers can be:

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

I doubt that you have more than 2 scientists that you could name. So get to work, pal. You made the claim. Or are you bluffing

Make up your mind: is this a card game or a court of law? If this were a court of law, you would be facing a heavy fine for filing a frivolous law suit.

This is a total useless post DJW001.

I don't think you tried your own links ?

Ссылка устарела. Вернитесь на предыдущую страницу. Обновите ее и попробуйте зайти сюда снова. Link is out of date. Go back. Refresh page and try to call this page again.

Or in fully English :

Reference is outdated. Return to the previous page. Update it and try to come here again. Link is out of date. Go back. Refresh page and try to call this page again.

They worked fine when I posted them. I'll try again later when I.am not on my mobile.

DJW001

webstra

DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Name the scientists then DJW. The rhetorical question you ask is totally useless. First, you back up your claims with sources.

Better than that, I'll just link to some of the papers. I know how lazy some researchers can be:

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

www.ngpedia.ru...

I doubt that you have more than 2 scientists that you could name. So get to work, pal. You made the claim. Or are you bluffing

Make up your mind: is this a card game or a court of law? If this were a court of law, you would be facing a heavy fine for filing a frivolous law suit.

This is a total useless post DJW001.

I don't think you tried your own links ?

Ссылка устарела. Вернитесь на предыдущую страницу. Обновите ее и попробуйте зайти сюда снова. Link is out of date. Go back. Refresh page and try to call this page again.

Or in fully English :

Reference is outdated. Return to the previous page. Update it and try to come here again. Link is out of date. Go back. Refresh page and try to call this page again.

They worked fine when I posted them. I'll try again later when I.am not on my mobile.

Ok, don't worry , i will remember you again on your links when you forget it.

Junkheap

SayonaraJupiter
Nixon plays hard, dude. You have not shown a preponderance of evidence from non-governmental sources, no, you have shown exactly zilch nada nothing. The "Ham Radio operator" defense is not really worth it because it's like scraping the bottom of the barrell for evidence.

Here's a site that includes audio clips that were recorded by Larry Baysinger, W4EJA, during Apollo 11.

Enjoy.

legacy.jefferson.kctcs.edu...

So one guy with a chicken wire antenna recorded 5mins of space noises and convinced himself that he was getting the real signal 5-10 seconds earlier than it came across the TV. Splendid. You only have this one guy for Apollo 11?

Author of your source article states "Had there been more Larry Baysingers eavesdropping on Apollo, or had there been more Glenn Rutherfords to record the work of the Baysingers who did eavesdrop, there would be no Apollo deniers."

As a matter of fact, Larry Baysinger, is all you have, he is just one guy.

SayonaraJupiter

Junkheap

SayonaraJupiter
Nixon plays hard, dude. You have not shown a preponderance of evidence from non-governmental sources, no, you have shown exactly zilch nada nothing. The "Ham Radio operator" defense is not really worth it because it's like scraping the bottom of the barrell for evidence.

Here's a site that includes audio clips that were recorded by Larry Baysinger, W4EJA, during Apollo 11.

Enjoy.

legacy.jefferson.kctcs.edu...

So one guy with a chicken wire antenna recorded 5mins of space noises and convinced himself that he was getting the real signal 5-10 seconds earlier than it came across the TV. Splendid. You only have this one guy for Apollo 11?

Author of your source article states "Had there been more Larry Baysingers eavesdropping on Apollo, or had there been more Glenn Rutherfords to record the work of the Baysingers who did eavesdrop, there would be no Apollo deniers."

As a matter of fact, Larry Baysinger, is all you have, he is just one guy.

He isnt the only one but once again you just make accusations and hope someone believes you people where tracking the astronauts from all over the world. Even some from there cars believe it or not people were fanatical about fm and shortwave radios at the time it was their version of the internet.But more important scientists from universities around the world tracked the mission. So your theory would mean all those scientists were just wrong and you're so much smarter than them and can show they're wrong.But here your welcome to look at telemetry and how it works since you apparently have no clue.

www.svengrahn.pp.se...

dragonridr

Ok at this point you're just embarrassing yourself. Look you dont measure a jump from when they start and when they finish you measure a jump from when they reach their apex to when they land.Even mythbusters knew this thats why in the show i suggest you watch they explain the rate of falling not how high they jumped.

choos hasn't replied to my last post, which was..

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I see you've had time to reply to other posts since then, so why don't you address mine now?

I'll make it easy for you. Here are the most important two frames to address..






In frame 30 (2nd image above) Young lands before, or at least the very same time, as the Mythbusters guy lands. But Young was much higher than Mythbusters in frame 28 (1st image above), which proves Young is descending at a faster rate than the Mythbusters guy.

So have at it...

OP is on to something. I no longer believe airplanes exist, EXPLAIN FLIGHT SIMULATORS. Flying is clearly a hoax.

Thanks OP, you opened my eyes.

My last post is open to all the other Apollo-ites, as well.

So how about it?

turbonium1
My last post is open to all the other Apollo-ites, as well.

So how about it?

Im not sure what you were trying to prove but the mythbusters toes are on the ground even before you start hes not in the air making your argument kind of silly because are astronaut is still clearly in the air. But apparently you didnt notice that and you are watching when there heals hit. Looks like the mythbusters guy jumps using his toes because hes on earth and we learn not to jump flat footed but use our toes to cushion the fall. Doesnt appear the astronaut was concerned with the shock do to being on the moon and didnt care if he hit flat footed.

Ps dont think im going to get into an argument with math ive seen you two going at it and you have no understanding of math. So if thats what you want to argue about count me out.

turbonium1

His toes are not touching the ground in frame 28 and 29. A shadow of his entire right foot can be seen on the floor below the foot. If his toes were touching the ground, it wouldn't be possible to have a shadow going past the toes. The shadow isn't seen in frame 30, when he lands.

Yes my point was to point out that john young was lagging behind the myth busters

It doesn't matter when they "absorb" the landing, it only matters when they actually land. Young lands before, or at least the very same time, as Mythbusters lands. That's in frame 30. But Young was much higher than Mythbusters in frame 28 and 29, which proves Young is descending at a faster rate than Mythbusters.

That's what you can't get around.

It actually does matter, since the jumps are so close together they can appear to be touching the ground at the same time but in different phases of the jump.

Energy dissipation.. It is shown in frame 31 and 32 that the myth busters are absorbing their jump before john young. Which indicates also that john young was still lagging behind the myth busters

If what you say is correct and john young was faster than 1g then john young should have absorbed his jump at or before frame 31, which he clearly does not do.

Because - as I've told you many times - Young is using wires to assist his jump, like Mythbusters is. Young has clearly landed in frame 30, as well as frame 31. He "absorbs" the landing in frame 32, to make it appear to be a real jump, just like the Mythbusters guy does. This is why you're puzzled.

Perhaps you are not aware of the time difference between the frames??

If the clip was at around 73.7fps that means each frame is about 0.014 seconds long...

You are suggesting that john young has the ability to consciously absorb his jump to within +-0.01 of a seconds

I do deny it.

It's official you are deluded...

NASA are able to control a jump to within 0.015 seconds but with a jump that occurs with a flight time of 1.5 seconds they screw up but not one single scientist in the world is able to notice this huge mistake.

And yes it is a huge mistake as this is. Very well studied and circulated clip demonstrating lunar gravity..

And nasa just made a mistake..

What a joke you are..

The jump doesn't demonstrate lunar gravity, period. Just because NASA is doing it, that doesn't mean it's going to be done right. It's hardly the only thing NASA screwed up in making their hoax.

You are misunderstanding me..

It was nasa attempt, if they faked it, to prove to the world they were on the lunar surface by displaying the moons gravity..

But apparently they got it wrong?? Only one of their most credible sources is displaying lunar gravity to the world and they got it wrong??

Not only wrong but no one noticed for 40+ years. Only one random person on a conspiracy based website..

Why don't you get one respectable scientists to back up your claim that john young is not falling at 1.62m/s^2?? With calculations and proof of the claim. You could make yourself rich from the find you have no reason not to!!

No, it is the correct factor on the genuine lunar surface. But it isn't the correct factor in Apollo footage, which is claimed to be on the lunar surface.

Haha but now you are forced to deny reality..

NASA are accurate enough to fake a jump to within 0.015 seconds but can't get a jump 1.5 seconds long accurate..

Delusional, is all I got to say to you

dragonridr

Im not sure what you were trying to prove but the mythbusters toes are on the ground even before you start hes not in the air making your argument kind of silly because are astronaut is still clearly in the air. But apparently you didnt notice that and you are watching when there heals hit. Looks like the mythbusters guy jumps using his toes because hes on earth and we learn not to jump flat footed but use our toes to cushion the fall. Doesnt appear the astronaut was concerned with the shock do to being on the moon and didnt care if he hit flat footed.

Let's say you're right, that his toes really are touching the ground.

This only makes it worse for you.

His entire foot is casting a shadow on the ground , at the very same time his toes are (supposedly) touching to the ground.

We know his toes are being pointed downward, at this time. so his toes are contacting the ground before he lands!

If his toes were not pointing downward, he wouldn't be touching the ground at all, right? The only reason he touches the ground - (if he really does) - is because his feet are pointing downward at the time!!

He has not landed yet. But he is very close to the ground, and just about to make his landing. Young is not as close to the ground at that point, however. He is clearly higher above the ground than the Mythbusters guy is.

But Young lands to the ground at the same time, or likely before, the Mythbusters guy lands.

It is not about who touched a body part to the ground first, it is about who LANDED first.

Just because he points his feet downward to make contact with his toes, means diddly squat

reply to post by turbonium1


Since you are so convinced of the accuracy of your videos and your recording techniques, hint hint,

Can you explain to everyone that since john young at 2.46 x speed up is moving quickly why frame 28 and frame 29 I believe it was (sorry still using my phone) why john young does not move?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


www.jb.man.ac.uk...

www.astr.ua.edu...

[url=http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?81998-two-absolute-definitive-answer-proving-man-on-the-moon-is-not-a-hoax/page4&p=1382134#post1382134 ]http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?81998-two-absolute-definitive-answer-proving-man-on-the-moon-is-not-a-hoax/page4&p=1382134#post1382134[/ur l]

It does't really matter how many. What matters is whether it's true or not. It's true.

choos

It actually does matter, since the jumps are so close together they can appear to be touching the ground at the same time but in different phases of the jump.

Energy dissipation.. It is shown in frame 31 and 32 that the myth busters are absorbing their jump before john young. Which indicates also that john young was still lagging behind the myth busters

If what you say is correct and john young was faster than 1g then john young should have absorbed his jump at or before frame 31, which he clearly does not do.

It has nothing to do with "energy dissipation", or "absorbing their jump"!! I've already explained this point to you!

You keep talking about what they do AFTER they landed. It doesn't matter who bends their knees first. They are using wires in the jumps. They probably don't even need to bend their knees, since they are basically being 'set down' to the floor with these wires! They only bend their knees to make it look like they're performing a genuine, unassisted jump. That's what you see them do here.

This is the real issue....

Young is higher above the ground than Mythbusters guy is in frames 28 and 29.

It's possible Mythbusters guy is touching his toes to the ground by this point. You think he does.

He had not landed though, By pointing his feet downward, his toes were able to touch the ground before he landed. But he was still in mid-air at the time.

The shadow proves he was still above the ground. His toes touched first, because his feet were pointing downward.



Young is higher than Mythbusters guy in frames 28 and 29. The Mythbusters guy has not landed yet, since his entire foot is casting a shadow onto the ground just below it. His toes could be touching at the time, since they were being pointed downward, but the full shadow of his foot means it was not the landing..


Fact one - We know Young is higher above ground then Myth guy is in frames 28 and 29.

Fact two We know Young lands at the same time, or probably before, Myth guy lands in frame 30.

These two facts prove that Young descends faster than Myth guy does.


You should be able to 'absorb' the most important facts.