david
Venus
Account Disabled
Posts: 67
|
Post by david on Oct 22, 2006 8:06:37 GMT -4
In the documentary "What Happened on the Moon" the "Dangling effect is explained at the 2 hr. 1 min. 45 sec. mark. video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1913474363747128107The astronaut makes a jump and then seems to just hang there. At the 2 min 46 sec. mark of this clip the astronaut makes a similar jump but falls straight back to the ground. www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a16/a16v.1234609.rmThere seems to be a difference in the way gravity affects the astronauts in these two segments. That's an impossibility so this is glaring proof the wire supports were used. Who has some ideas on this?
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Oct 22, 2006 11:14:35 GMT -4
For those who don't want to have two discussions going on at once, this is already being discussed at BAUT (scroll down to post #1721 for the start).
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Oct 22, 2006 14:49:08 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Oct 22, 2006 15:11:41 GMT -4
Heh, Heh. I just wanted everyone to know that David C has been plowing this row for a looooooooong time. And to get everyone up to speed on what he has been arguing.
|
|
|
Post by spongebob on Oct 22, 2006 16:11:00 GMT -4
I am only on this forum, but is it considered to be "bad form" to say the same thing on more than one forum?
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Oct 22, 2006 20:22:00 GMT -4
Pity all he come come up with is a RealMedia file ripped from a Bart Sibrel movie. Over at BAUT I asked him to find the actual missions, so one wasn't restricted to arguing based on this kind of evidence.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 22, 2006 20:52:50 GMT -4
Mission number and time would certainly help, if anyone had them. I'd rather check out the DVD version on my 28" screen that peer through the haze of a downloaded one that takes 3 hours to see.
|
|
david
Venus
Account Disabled
Posts: 67
|
Post by david on Oct 23, 2006 14:18:29 GMT -4
Pity all he come come up with is a RealMedia file ripped from a Bart Sibrel movie. Over at BAUT I asked him to find the actual missions, so one wasn't restricted to arguing based on this kind of evidence. There's one on the "Loose Change" forum somewhere. I'll hve to look for it. I did see it though and the one I posted is not doctored in any way. It has the same movements. I am only on this forum, but is it considered to be "bad form" to say the same thing on more than one forum? We have to think of the viewers. Some of them only look at one forum. I want to post this where as many people as possible can see it. www.ufos-aliens.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/apollofilm.rm 35 sec. mark www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a16/a16v.1234609.rm2 min 46 sec. mark The gravity affects the astronauts differently in the two segments so wires must have been used. But that's the whole point Peter. It's pointless directing me to video footage, because I've seen a video of David Copperfield making the Statue of Liberty disappear.
In the footage I referred to, you can quite clearly see that the astronaut is hoisted up on a wire. Would it not be better simply to deny that it is genuine Apollo footage? Can anybody tell me why the guy who said this got banned?
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Oct 23, 2006 15:09:22 GMT -4
You can check this thread for the poster's name. People generally only get banned from here for being extremely rude or for behavior which might make ProBoards shut down the forum. Fred
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Oct 23, 2006 15:29:15 GMT -4
Since I don't have access to the visuals, I'll have to try some meta-analysis instead.
The claim is that wires are used in one clip and not another. The argument for their presence in the one, in fact, seems to be that the movement appears different in the other -- a sort of argument by absence. So we have two clips that require different methods and different explanations. On the smaller scale, can a wire adequately explain the movement in one? And can the movement in the other clip be explained without a wire? What additional techniques might need to be invoked to re-create the motion observed, if no wire was used?
On the larger scale, why have two techniques? If the wires worked, why aren't they in all clips? And -- given that the "clips" are up to hours in duration in the actual record -- if the wire is not consistently used, how exactly is it attached and removed while the astronaut is on camera?
Is additional meta-analysis possible? When a randomized sampling is sorted for only clips that appear to contain wires, do these clips have other characteristics in common? Do they tend to be smaller, tighter shots where it would be easier to hide the hardware? Or do they tend to be exactly those shots (the large panoramas, the extensive movement distant from the camera) that would be most difficult to hide a wire track/crane/whatever on?
It does appear that the simplest explanation is that the method and the movement are both consistent, and the perceptions of the viewers is what arbitrarily sorts certain sequences into "wire used" and "not wire used."
(I should add that I have yet to see a sequence in which A) a wire needed to be invoked to explain the movement, and B) any attempt to actually lock down where the "wire" would be attached and how used fails to be consistent with the movement observed.)
((Oh...for those that haven't noticed, David has revived the old Moon Man thread over at BAUT and is using that to tout these clips of his))
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Oct 23, 2006 17:10:02 GMT -4
Can anybody tell me why the guy who said this got banned?
Can you tell anybody why you can't tell us who the poster in question is, or do we have to do all your legwork for you?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 23, 2006 17:34:57 GMT -4
The gravity affects the astronauts differently in the two segments so wires must have been used.
huh? even watching them (I have RM and a faster connection here at work) I don't see what you're getting at. The Apollo 16 footage (second link) the guy is stepping backwards, up a hill, how is that going to even look remotely like the other footage were they are walking fowards taking large strides?
By the way, these sets of footage are about 30-40 mins in length involving 360° shots and in some cases looking up at the sky. Why then aren't any crew, lighting, equipment, ot wires actually seen in any of the film? Just because you claim there are wires, doesn't make it so, where is your evidence?
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Oct 24, 2006 7:50:52 GMT -4
Since both segments are from Apollo 16, below is a side-by-side comparison of footage from Spacecraft Films Apollo 16 DVD. The segments are synchronized to the marks you've listed above, indicated by the timer at the top of the video (seconds:frames), including the 10 seconds preceding and following those marks. Click here to view the video in-browser, or here to download the video directly. (AVI, 1.5MB, XVid codec) I see no significant difference in the gravitational effect on the astronauts in the two segments. Perhaps you could elaborate?
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Oct 24, 2006 14:51:12 GMT -4
Can anybody tell me why the guy who said this got banned? The user who said that was margamatix, who was banned for posting offensive pictures to the forum. You can read about it in the Banned Users thread. Fred
|
|