|
Post by frenat on Sept 30, 2005 17:43:31 GMT -4
One other thing about the clips. When sped up, the astronauts still spend more time airborne when hopping than they should in earth gravity. Yet another reason the sped up footage argument just doesn't work matix.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 30, 2005 17:41:03 GMT -4
You can even see in that footage when they speed it up that the arms move absurdly fast. The clips debunk themselves matix.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 30, 2005 17:38:49 GMT -4
This footage was filmed on Earth. Really? Then why does the dust behave as if in a vacuum? Are you trying to say they had a vacuum chamber that large? Give it up matix
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 29, 2005 14:38:32 GMT -4
That's an ad hominem attack if I ever saw one. Way to take the high road there Margamatix
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 29, 2005 14:21:12 GMT -4
[ Moving exactly as they would on Earth, if you halved the speed of the film, in fact. So if we did go to the moon, why did we shoot the footage on Earth? You only think that until you see other footage which has definitely not been halved (arms flailing wildly, etc.) This of course has been pointed out to you before and of course was ignored by you (of which we were not surprised. You've ignored any and all evidence that doesn't fit into your world view) You still haven't proved that the footage was shot on Earth. It couldn't have been when you look at the perfect ballistic trajectory of the dust thrown by the wheels of the lunar rover. That footage proves they were in a vacuum and therefore not on Earth.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 8, 2005 22:17:26 GMT -4
I think the point is there may be ice or water there now but there wasn't any when the rocks were formed.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 16, 2005 9:36:15 GMT -4
So you're starting that again? As has been explained to you multiple times already, he is bracing himself on the other astronaut and using the suits rigidity to help him get up. I believe this exact procedure is even spelled out in the ALSJ.
Why do you insist on using this very low res version of the video? It has also been pointed out that in the high res version this is much easier to see.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 1, 2005 21:04:09 GMT -4
He's got a small following that thinks anything he says is gospel. As far as I know he isn't getting anything monetary out of it. It may be similar to most on GLP where he is showing his severe distrust of the government.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 1, 2005 9:33:04 GMT -4
As has been pointed out before, contrary to Jack White's claims most of the shots were far from perfect. I always wonder with people like White, are they just willfully ignorant or do they knowingly lie either to sell books or to prop up "theories" they truly believe in? It hard to believe anyone could look at these images and say they are all perfectly composed. www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/Thanks to Craig Lamson who used to post here for the link Of they're perfectly composed! Didn't you know that most of the moon's landscape is naturally crooked, out of frame, and overexposed?
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Dec 15, 2006 17:22:24 GMT -4
No. My comments always come through in the future. Looks Like the Detla Really Ready Heavy will get the call for future flights. Really? Because we have yet to see that happen.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Dec 13, 2006 9:44:12 GMT -4
She does seem very happy. ;D
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Aug 14, 2005 14:29:17 GMT -4
Margamatix, It may not be Sibrel's calculations but it is Sibrel's misleading statement about what it means. Why am I not surprised that you believe it unquestioningly?
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Aug 14, 2005 12:46:50 GMT -4
That whole thing is misleading. The Saturn V did not go to the moon. Most of it was left in earth orbit and burned up in the atmosphere. Only a small portion of it went to the moon. I suspect those calculations may be correct if using a single stage rocket, but the Saturn V was a multi-stage rocket. Most of the mass of the rocket did not need to get out of low earth orbit. I'm sure others will be by later giving the calculations for the mass of the Apollo hardware to reach the moon. I am also sure that you won't really pay much attention to it. You have been given much more evidence that we have gone to the moon and shown where any evidence against that is wrong. It really looks like you don't want to really examine the evidence. You've made up your mind and have stopped listening.
The other misleading thing about that intro is the statement that man hasn't been farther than 400 miles from the earth. While true, man hasn't had a need to. The shuttle wasn't designed for it, it was designed to put things in orbit, nothing more. Public interest in space dropped greatly after Apollo and funding dropped as well. They try to draw the conclusion that because man hasn't been further than 400 miles since then that we couldn't go at all. That is total BS and bad logic.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 30, 2005 17:58:18 GMT -4
As hard as it may seem for you to believe, some people don't want fame, don't like fame, especially if it has been thrust upon them.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 30, 2005 15:37:23 GMT -4
If those are your reasons then you really haven't done any research.
So if the government lies about something it automatically means they are lying about everything else? The Russians and the Chinese believe the US went to the moon. Are they lying too?
|
|