|
Post by gillianren on Mar 3, 2008 20:05:22 GMT -4
I'm surprised how many people say the Moon landings must have been filmed in the Nevada desert, who have never been to Nevada. Pfft. You haven't been to everywhere in the Nevada desert, so you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 3, 2008 20:12:54 GMT -4
Also, to add to Jason Thompson's "HB argument flaw": as I've pointed out, the flag starts moving before the astronaut passes by. (Although, I must say that this is absolutely not conclusive proof. The photogrammetric analysis in this clip is very poor. I'm just pointing out what I see.) Gee BertL, you are very brave to venture into the Outer Limits of Youtube Moon Hoax Debunking. I was there for a few minutes once and high tailed it out after finding the lifeforms were wholly uncivilized, angry and hungry. Makes me shiver just thinkin' about it. I like it here. S-A-F-E. W-A-R-M, C-O-Z-Y. I want a smoke. Hmm. Cookies...
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Mar 3, 2008 20:26:16 GMT -4
The conspiracists never seem to want to mention the footage from the beginning of the clip, when they're carrying the flag broadside to the direction of travel, yet it does not flap in ressponse to the "air"; nor do they seem to notice the astronaut kicking dust as he sets-up the flag. As usual, the dust goes a long way and fails to billow.
|
|
|
Post by echard on Mar 8, 2008 2:22:28 GMT -4
If I remember correctly, wasn't the A15 flag planted at the very END of an EVA giving the astronauts plenty of time to build up an electrostatic charge while on the surface?
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Mar 17, 2008 16:43:27 GMT -4
Electrostatic forces would repel? or atract the flag?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Mar 17, 2008 17:19:12 GMT -4
Electrostatic forces would repel? or atract the flag? Depends on the charges, if the astronuat and the flag has opposite charges, then attract. If they had the same, then it'd repel.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Mar 17, 2008 18:00:58 GMT -4
I know. The question is in the context of this event. I'll reformulate: would an astronaut have the same charge signal of the flag? or the opposite?
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Mar 17, 2008 18:25:23 GMT -4
It's more accurate to think in terms of net charge. Repulsion occurs when there is an approximately equal charge. Where one object is less negatively charged than its neighbor, attraction will occur. As the astronauts move around the surface, they acquire a strong negative charge from interaction with loose surface material, which is strongly but loosely charged by incoming solar what-not. Their movements ensure that a considerable separation of charge occurs. The flag is simply planted in the surface and therefore does not generally acquire much of a negative charge.
It is practically guaranteed that a net difference in charge will occur between the astronaut and the flag. Or between the astronaut and just about every other object in his lunar environment. The flag simply has too little mass for inertia to resist the attraction.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Mar 17, 2008 18:29:31 GMT -4
Bertl posted a video showing that the tip of the flag starts moving away from the astronaut. Would this rule out electrostactics?
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Mar 17, 2008 18:33:45 GMT -4
It wouldn't rule out electrostatics, but a different proposition for charge accumulation would have to be devised and tested. There is considerable difference of opinion among debunkers whether the flag is attracted or repelled prior to the astronaut's transit. I'll leave you to interpret the video as you see fit; I won't attempt to impose an interpretation on you.
|
|
|
Post by brobertsumc on Aug 17, 2009 14:54:18 GMT -4
Can vibration from the astronaut bouncing up and down on the ground be ruled out? I know that it wouldn't amount to much in 1/6 g, but it wouldn't take much to move a nylon flag with practically no inertia and no air to hold it in place. I would say that the flag moves so slightly (compared to other footage of it swaying like a weighted pendulum in a vacuum) that it had to be a VERY minute force acting on it. The movement is so slight that I could almost be convinced that it is just some sort of illusion.
What if he kicked up some dust or a rock that struck the pole?
BTW, sorry to revive a dead post. I'm new here.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Aug 17, 2009 15:08:29 GMT -4
Can vibration from the astronaut bouncing up and down on the ground be ruled out? As long as the HBs don't disprove it, it is a valid hypothesis.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Aug 17, 2009 15:18:13 GMT -4
When reviewing the A15 sequence I noticed the dust being kicked up prior to the flag movement. It is VERY noticeable and would easily cause the flag to move had it flown in that direction. This part of the video is always cleverly and deceivingly avoided by those who want to claim it is due to air currents.
My question to them is, why would kicked dust be not feasible as an explanation?
|
|
|
Post by gonetoplaid on Aug 17, 2009 19:33:18 GMT -4
When reviewing the A15 sequence I noticed the dust being kicked up prior to the flag movement. It is VERY noticeable and would easily cause the flag to move had it flown in that direction. This part of the video is always cleverly and deceivingly avoided by those who want to claim it is due to air currents. My question to them is, why would kicked dust be not feasible as an explanation? I don't know if the kicked up dust idea is feasible or not, but that does make me think that the astronaut built up an electrostatic charge while kicking up a lot of dust.
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Aug 18, 2009 12:32:22 GMT -4
HBs don't seem to appreciate how windy the desert actually is. Wait. Now you are saying there is air in the desert? Just how high above the surface does this alleged air start? Sorry! ;D
|
|