Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 9, 2010 13:12:22 GMT -4
So we agree Apollo footage of astronaut jumping height v time must be parabola? Not necessarily. It depends specifically on what you are attempting to analyze.
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Aug 9, 2010 13:15:49 GMT -4
Very well. I will prove that at least one was faked, and if one was all are suspect. Using the OP you tube link I calibrated the rise and fall both of the astronaut and control. here is an analysis of the time taken to jump to max height i664.photobucket.com/albums/vv9/ContrarianThinker/ApolloJump.png?t=1281359603The you tube author - who is attempting to defend NASA - says the jumps start at 72 time clicks and peak at 90 time clicks. I would allow a 2 click cumulative error but I basically agree with him. The red arrows show max elevation of feet from ground. (arrows are identical per set) Do we agree with this analysis? Take your time... edit I tried to upload the image @ that link but no show. I guess you have a size limit?
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Aug 9, 2010 13:18:37 GMT -4
Very well. I will prove that at least one was faked, and if one was all are suspect. So . . . if you find one counterfeit bill, all are suspect? What a difficult life you must lead.
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Aug 9, 2010 13:20:50 GMT -4
Very well. I will prove that at least one was faked, and if one was all are suspect. So . . . if you find one counterfeit bill, all are suspect? What a difficult life you must lead. You are being disingenuous and you know it. A Mod should pull you up for that.
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Aug 9, 2010 13:22:25 GMT -4
So we agree Apollo footage of astronaut jumping height v time must be parabola? Not necessarily. It depends specifically on what you are attempting to analyze. You are correct. As pointed out @ BAUT strictly speaking it is the C of G that moves parabolic
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Aug 9, 2010 13:25:01 GMT -4
So . . . if you find one counterfeit bill, all are suspect? What a difficult life you must lead. You are being disingenuous and you know it. A Mod should pull you up for that. I'm the one and only mod here, and I'll tell you that I think Gillianren's point is completely valid. Let's pretend Apollo 11's TV footage was faked. How does that in any way invalidate the footage from the other missions?
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Aug 9, 2010 13:35:19 GMT -4
You are being disingenuous and you know it. A Mod should pull you up for that. I'm the one and only mod here, and I'll tell you that I think Gillianren's point is completely valid. Let's pretend Apollo 11's TV footage was faked. How does that in any way invalidate the footage from the other missions? Because If they faked film footage it proves 1) Fakery was used to create Apollo illusion by NASA & co 2) This fakery has been covered up by all and sundry - including your forum - diligently. The logical implications of that are staggering if you are all proven liars. You will be asked to produce IRREFUTIBLE EVIDENCE you actually went to the Moon. Now, what about MY proof? So far do you disgaree or agree with my analysis of the footage?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Aug 9, 2010 13:47:09 GMT -4
If they faked film footage it proves 1) Fakery was used to create Apollo illusion by NASA & co Does fakery in one instance prove fakery in all instances? Lying is intentional deception. If the forum honsetly believes that Apollo went to the moon then they are not lying when they state this belief, regardless of whether the belief is factually true.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Aug 9, 2010 13:48:00 GMT -4
Sorry but all I see at the link is a composite of images with numbers and arrows. No analysis is present.
|
|
|
Post by fiveonit on Aug 9, 2010 13:50:38 GMT -4
Because If they faked film footage it proves 1) Fakery was used to create Apollo illusion by NASA & co 2) This fakery has been covered up by all and sundry - including your forum - diligently. The logical implications of that are staggering if you are all proven liars. You will be asked to produce IRREFUTIBLE EVIDENCE you actually went to the Moon. Now, what about MY proof? So far do you disgaree or agree with my analysis of the footage? I'm having trouble understanding your reasoning. If you are stating that if one is Fake then all come into question, the why wouldn't the opposite be true as well?? In other words, are you also suggesting, "If one is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, the rest are validated" ??
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Aug 9, 2010 13:52:13 GMT -4
Sorry but all I see at the link is a composite of images with numbers and arrows. No analysis is present. Did I miss something......what is the hoax proof?
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Aug 9, 2010 13:56:59 GMT -4
Sorry but all I see at the link is a composite of images with numbers and arrows. No analysis is present. Did I miss something......what is the hoax proof? Twenty seven eight-by-ten color glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was to be used as evidence against us.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Aug 9, 2010 13:57:37 GMT -4
Let's pretend Apollo 11's TV footage was faked. How does that in any way invalidate the footage from the other missions? Because If they faked film footage it proves 1) Fakery was used to create Apollo illusion by NASA & co No, if (and that's a big IF) proof of fakery was found in the Apollo 11 footage it only proves fakery was used for the Apollo 11 footage. It does not prove that all footage from the other missions was also faked. If a husband gets caught telling a lie to his wife, should she believe that everything he has ever said to her was also a lie? Since there was no fakery there is nothing to cover up. Well, until that day comes, I think it's more likely that hoax believers simply don't know what they are talking about. I believe irrefutable evidence was provided by NASA over 40 years ago. You just choose to ignore it. You assume that any discrepancy between the Apollo images and the Mythbusters experiments prove that the Apollo images were faked. But you fail to consider that maybe the problem lies on the Mythbuster's side. Perhaps their experiment was flawed and didn't properly reproduce the 1/6th gravity of the Moon. Or maybe the Apollo astronauts were being more cautious than Adam Savage was and didn't jump as high as they could have. Or maybe your measurements are inaccurate... in other words, maybe your whole entire analysis is flawed. Did you consider that possibility? So, no, I don't agree with your analysis.
|
|
|
Post by fiveonit on Aug 9, 2010 14:00:31 GMT -4
Twenty seven eight-by-ten color glossy photographs with circles ... LOL!!! At Alice's Restaurant???
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Aug 9, 2010 14:04:24 GMT -4
1) Fakery was used to create Apollo illusion by NASA & co If they faked film footage, it proves footage was fake? Breathtaking logic. What would you accept as irrefutable? Frankly, I don't think there's irrefutable evidence of anything, unless you want actual logical refutation. Of course, if you limit it to that, the evidence of Apollo is irrefutable. Incidentally, why is it that Hoax Believers always assume the only options are truth and lies? Why are mistakes never possible? Disagree.
|
|