|
|
Post by BertL on Aug 6, 2008 18:05:33 GMT -4
I just had a debate with an HB on YouTube, who said the following:
I laughed out loud for about a minute.
That made me think, are there any (moon hoax related) quotes you came across on YouTube that just made you laugh out loud because of the sillyness?
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Aug 6, 2008 21:48:34 GMT -4
Blessedly, I have avoided YouTube debate altogether.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Aug 6, 2008 21:57:51 GMT -4
Also the buggies were ordinary buggies how was it the fuel did not freeze?
What NASA need to answer is this,why when the astronauts claimed they could hardly make a fist in the space suit they managed to start and drive a buggy,these buggies must have been stored with protective casing of some sort as they have sat equipment on them how was the casing removed when they could hardly move their hands,and each buggy must have taken up masssive amount of space where did they fit in the lander?.
No footage as ever been released of the buggies in storage or exiting craft.
NASA has so many high powered telescopes in space they could easily take pictures of the FLAG, MOON BUGGY, APOLLO 11 launch pad all must be still on the moon. There must have been a CAMERA left on the moon that took the film of Apollo 11 taking off back to earth! Or was it filmed in a studio? OF COURSE IT WAS !
Get a huge telescope and look for the flag on the moon, and if it is not there then we will know it was staged!
today every one can see that it was a hoax by the poorly done videos with a lot of mistakes.
when me and my dad said at space camp to a supervisor about the moon landing and they gave us a seorious look and said thats classified
I didn't know that! do you know where I can find some info on that? now I'm really interested! they actually landed?
Von Braun also said that the shelter of a cave would be necessary to protect lunar astronauts from micro-meteorites traveling at 60,000 m.p.h.
It was a huge hoax and this cracked me up. Look at the facts.
de from 1950s technology implemented in the 60s.. yet it travelled 5 times farther than the current space shuttle... National pride built on lies
The magnetosphere cannot be traversed.
There will be no manned moon flights till the spatial radiation problem is resolved.
those rocks which were analyzed were 99% similar in composition to the earths rocks, they couldnt find any differences so they gave a 1% margin of error
. it was staged. radiation would have killed them
This is just from the first two videos I looked at.. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Aug 6, 2008 23:32:49 GMT -4
Back when In The Shadow Of The Moon was on YouTube, there was someone who posted Bart Sibrel's Top Fifteen arguments, including the one about how Michael Collins refuses to be interviewed. I guess they didn't read the names of the astronauts in the film.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cavorite on Aug 7, 2008 1:44:06 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Aug 7, 2008 9:39:26 GMT -4
It kind of reminded me of a classic xkcd. I first thought he was kidding, but he really wasn't. |
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 7, 2008 10:55:31 GMT -4
A must admit that youtube has a certain entertainment value, though I have never signed up. I think people who think they are invisible and have the power of Grey Skullgoogle and probably a few raging hormones come out with classics. What used to amaze me was the out right "oh my god, never seen that before. must be true". Now I wish I was a second hand car salesman near where they live. All cars one old lady owner.
Members of the over 90's demolition derby club.
Will keep an eye out though.
|
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Aug 7, 2008 20:57:06 GMT -4
YouTube does have a certain entertainment value, yes. But at the same time I get the idea that the dumb comments are posted by actual people. And that scares me, in a way. From the same guy: A response to me asking why the stars would be so bright on the Moon that they'd show up on the photos. I still have to figure out how he came by the idea that I'm "married". I suspect it was a poor attempt at an "I have personal information about you" scare tactic. Made me laugh, nonetheless. It's just so random. |
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Aug 7, 2008 21:30:46 GMT -4
That's like me saying that the Walgreens that's about 2 miles away from my house is far nearer to Detroit.
Of all the ignorant claims HBs make, their funiest are about astronomy.
It's like watching arguements from a Young Earth Creationist trying to counter real science.
Incidently, I found once that after posting just two comments, I had to enter that random group of characters to allow me to post again. I guess the powers that be at YouTube didn't like my bashing of the HBs relience on their character limit and lack of URL posting, not to mention how limited a conversation can be in the comments section.
|
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Aug 7, 2008 23:27:50 GMT -4
Not YouTube, but I like the spelling: Okay, how do you explain this? The cross hairs should always be in front of all objestc but in this picture it is clearly behind that piece of equipment. The only way this could have happened is if the pictures had been tampered with.Also I was kind of gloating about this because the person thought they'd asked me a really hard question, but I've seen the cross hair explanation on countless debunking sites. |
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Aug 8, 2008 9:24:09 GMT -4
Yes, a lot of people on YouTube are very ignorant. Yet somehow, a lot of these ignorant people still think they know more than you. That's what anonymity does to people, I guess. It makes them overly confident of skills they don't really have.
EDIT: Of course, this isn't true for every YouTube user. I've seen this with many people discussing the hoax theories on YouTube, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 8, 2008 17:53:12 GMT -4
OK, I assume there is a typo in here and wonder where your satellite TV comes from.
"satelites have never been all the through the Van Allen Radiation belts and brought back film. You are way off base here. Furthermore the moon is bombarded with radiation every day. And radiation hits the moon and breaks up into even smaller particals and stays there on the moon. You know that the moon is 260,000 miles away from earth? Satelites stay within 1,000 miles from earth. You know that no other manned space flight ever has gone further than 400 miles away from earth, ever."
Its on the one about the up coming mythbusters.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 8, 2008 18:28:44 GMT -4
Straw man. If the argument is that film would be rendered useless by the radiation (which I assume is the point being made) then the film need not be brought back to Earth to demonstrate the argument false. Satellites have taken film through the Van Allen Radiation belts, taken photos with it, developed it, scanned the transparencies, and transmitted the images back to Earth. This has adequately shown that film can survive passage through the radiation belts.
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 8, 2008 18:44:47 GMT -4
I was a tad wondering of the gist and assuming radiation but also the distance from Earth for sats. Geostationary and all that. Must have been referring to radiation in its many forms.
|
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Aug 8, 2008 19:09:05 GMT -4
I'd suspect that the like of Zond 5 and 6 both took film beyond the VA Belts.
In fact (for Zond 6)
"Zond 6 flew around the moon on November 14, 1968, at a minimum distance of 2420 km. Photographs of the lunar near side and far side were obtained with panchromatic film. Each photo was 5 in by 7 in (127.0 by 177.8 mm). Some of the views allowed for stereo pictures. The photos were taken from distances of approximately 11,000 km and 3300 km."
|
|
