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.
AthlonSavage
Does anyone have the ability to take this film and speed up 6 times. I would expect at 6 times speed it will look like a buggy travelling over a desert surface. Doesn't prove anything however.
shinto
reply to post by smurfy
IF the moon did not have 65% of the earth's gravity, those wheels would not be kicking dust up and so quickly back down AND if the atmosphere is so thin, where are all the stars? NASA blacked out the entire background sky.
jlafleur02
what was the reason to bring the buggy to the moon in the first place. Seems like a lot of weight to tow around just to joy ride.
ArchAngel_X
jlafleur02
what was the reason to bring the buggy to the moon in the first place. Seems like a lot of weight to tow around just to joy ride.
Why do you take a car anywhere? Sure beats walking. The buggy enabled the astronauts to spend more time taking measurements and samples at farther locations from their landing point than they would have just walking there and back.
brace22
reply to post by wmd_2008
Now on to the OP. I believe we went the moon. I also believe we have been lied to about what exactly happened up there. But we were there for sure.
The video is awesome. Yes, the buggy does seem to move Earthly, but none of us have ever been to the moon, so we don't know jack about the handling of a car in space. So there.
phantomlord
reply to post by wmd_2008
I'm sure the cameras on the rover craft are very different from your typical DSLR. We don't know anything about the tech they used to capture this film. So yeah, exposure and other technical settings like that are hard to form a legitimate argument around.
That said, I've taken nighttime landscape photos and telephoto pictures of the moon (with my DSLR.) Yes, zoomed telephoto images of the moon typically don't show other stars, but nighttime landscape photos usually do, even with smaller apertures.
I'm suspicious of OP's video. But hell, looks like a lot of fun cruising around on the moon!
smurfy
brace22
reply to post by wmd_2008
Now on to the OP. I believe we went the moon. I also believe we have been lied to about what exactly happened up there. But we were there for sure.
The video is awesome. Yes, the buggy does seem to move Earthly, but none of us have ever been to the moon, so we don't know jack about the handling of a car in space. So there.
I don't even think the event has the need for a belief system, this picture says volumes to me,
phantomlord
reply to post by wmd_2008
I'm sure the cameras on the rover craft are very different from your typical DSLR. We don't know anything about the tech they used to capture this film. So yeah, exposure and other technical settings like that are hard to form a legitimate argument around.
jlafleur02
what was the reason to bring the buggy to the moon in the first place. Seems like a lot of weight to tow around just to joy ride.
onebigmonkey
smurfy
I don't even think the event has the need for a belief system, this picture says volumes to me,
Off the Pacific coast of central America are the remains of Hurricane Bernice, which (verified by weather satellites) existed in that particular shape only on the day that the photograph was taken. The photograph was taken at the same time as a TV broadcast that also featured the Apollo 11 crew, and images of that broadcast were on the front page of the newspapers the following day.
Because you can't get this photograph in low Earth orbit, this means that the only time and place it could have been taken was exactly where it was claimed: in space, on the way to the moon.
wildespace
Cameras used by the Apollo astronauts are well-documented. Still images come from Hasselblad cameras that were adapted to space and simplified for astronauts' use. Film footage comes from 16mm cameras.
www.hq.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
www.myspacemuseum.com...