Edited and time compressed, but essentially "official".


Some believe, others know that it happened because we have studied the available information and have found nothing to suggest that it couldn't have happened the way history recorded it. Those that don't believe either chose to believe the fantasies spread by sheisters trying to make a buck off the ignorance of others, have misinterpreted photos and or facts, or just have not taken the time to educate themselves even a little bit on the science and technologies involved. Which category do you fit into?


And just how do you think it happened, and what proof do you offer for your conjecture?


Yes they were.


The probes on the bottoms of 3 of the landing pads were there to indicate when the LM was a certain distance above the lunar surface. When they contact the surface, a light on the LM control panel lit up, indicating to the astronauts that they were at the proper altitude above the surface and that they should shut off the Descent engine... manually. The probes served no other function that I am aware of, and were not tied into the guidance computer.

And what is it exactly you think the "flight control computer" had to do? If you actually read any of the widely available documentation, you'd see that the guidance computer was used to get the LM from lunar orbit into the proper attitude for landing, as well as providing the guidance and navigation for the abort systems if / when needed, and that the actual landing was handled manually on all 6 missions.


And of course you can provide proof of this claim... right?


Then you heard wrong.


See above.

And seeing as the probes projected down about 6 feet from the landing pads, just how would you expect them NOT to touch the lunar surface first?


I'm not really sure what you're saying here, but since it wasn't made in a studio, they had no other choice but to show actual footage.


Cz

Do tell!





Really...?
Do tell us about that experience!
Please: describe how the probes, which had a simple function (c'mon, you know what that was!), had anything to do with LM computer loads....or how it was too late for a sensing probe, designed to illuminate a light inside the LM cabin when it touched the surface, didn't have enough time to do it's designed function when it touched the surface...(?)







You allegedly worked for the company that MADE THEM...and you "heard" they were never used?




Uh...you "worked for the company that made them", right? That is what I'm reading here, right?

Perhaps you, therefore, can answer your own question, and tell us all why the probes, which were of course extending about 6 feet below the landing pads, so as to touch the lunar surface first...and trigger the blue CONTACT LIGHT inside the LM's cabin, would actually touch the suface first, prior to the landing pads...????


Maybe???





Maybe because actual 16mm footage taken from the LM's starboard window, was the only actual footage of the landing made????


While you're at it...you mnight want to connect the dots here, and tell us what this crazy idea has to do with some sort of Moon landing hoax conspiracy...

What company made the probes? I'm sure that some research will reveal this. Who did you work for?

I'm guessing it's another person who thinks that all they have to do is pick on an area which the layman probably doesn't know about, make up a premise, then everyone will believe them. Basically, IMO, it's attention-seeking behavior.

They forget that many people here are very familiar with the hardware, have studied the missions in great detail, etc... and some even worked in the various teams themselves.

A reasonable theorem, obviousman...I am beginning to suspect you're correct.



Mr. B...I bet he doesn't know who made the LM, or who the major sub-contractors were...


I can't wait for the answer....

Like I said I hardly recall the ad but might be true as one day I hear talk
out side the office door next to a picture that said 'Zero Defects'.


The two employees comment on it and recalled the probe ad and not even being used.

But not being a hush hush program where the boss say you don't know where this goes
I'd say it was a open info program.

So EDO would be the first America part made by a company to touch the Moon.
Its is now part of ITT, interestingly I googled ITT and Germany and found ties.
Back then the company was EDO.
Made parts for airplanes so it was in the aerospace industry.

Google EDO


Still on the net and on wiki.
On one forum I got a whole page on the probe with photos and all.
It ended up under the landing pad covered in gold colored foil.
Who gift wrapped the lander, that was unexpected.

Like I said, it was a strange twist of truth or fact ... it happens to people.
Perhaps they didn't know what they were talking about.

Now the company ad might might have had a video broadcast using a staged video
or actual footage if after the Moon landing. Yes, 1968 - 1969 was the time frame.
Seeing the actual landing makes me think of that so called dis info eavesdropping.
Too weird.

What's too wierd is this post.

It didn't answer Mr. B's question, and it's almost unintelligible.




Who???



And what about the probes...designed for a single purpose?


I asked:




and...




No answers?


I smell a typical, rather non-thinking HB here, I think, who wishes to post nonsense just to be "heard"...




...is there something you actually wanted to say here, or are you going to bore us with non-descript ramblings?

let's get serious for at least 1 minute folks , who can believe these guys are jumping naturally in the surface of the moon ?

watch this video and don't miss the 'jump' at 14,5 seconds , isn't this pretty clear that this guy have been helped to get off the ground ? i mean how many more clues do you want to realise that these missions were faked ?

let me guess , you need an official documents by NASA with the signatures of the nauts claimed "we faked it , sorry" ?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BnULp974JqE

Think physically fit astronauts that "effectively" weighed about 50-60 pounds in lunar gravity ...yeah, they could jump. These shots (including Duke getting way silly and going into his back) were when they were just informally seeing what "high junps" were like.

High jumps were quite possible, though not entirely wise.

That would be one way to convince people that it was faked, but since it wasn't faked, there will never be that kind of evidence.

What is needed for us to be convinced that it was all a fake is for ANY ONE of the many hoax believers to bring forth ANY kind of irrefutable, scientifically provable and accurate evidence that proves beyond all doubt that it was faked.

And for the record, LLL, you are not going to be that person. Your ideas and opinions are only based on your immense lack of understanding of the subject matter.

So far, not one of the myriad theories proposed by any of the hoax believers stands up to any serious scrutiny or study, whereas the mountains of proof that the landings did happen as history recorded it has yet to be proven by anyone with any kind of credibility to be inaccurate.




Cz

you can't beserious here , do you think i'm only talking about the height ?
height is part of these jump but height alone is not the issue , it's the impulse of these jumps , and the key point is at 14,5 seconds on the video , look trough 10 to 20 seconds severals times and focus on the overall motion , the guy is lifted up by another force and he's even a bit surprised by the force of the lift at 14,5 seconds , i can't believe that you fail to see this.

Use your imagination...none of us have spent hours in 1/6 g. They did. They had spent many hours walking, loping, hopping in the low lunar gravity. They grew to understand ther center of gravity issues. They didn't do a lot of big jumps as it was completely unnecessary...and potentially hazardous. At the end of this spacewalk, they did "experiment" a bit. Young did some vertical jumps, then Charlie Duke did a rather overexuberant leap...thought he was going to die, falling on his PLSS and all. It's well documented.
I can jump straight up in 1g, why couldn't they in 1/6g? What is your specific problem with the video, other than "it looks wrong" to you?

It look wrong to me yes , if not why would i bother to post a link of the video , and ask if anyone can seriously believe this video depict a genuine scene filmed on the surface of the Moon .

using my imagination i can see the wires lifting up that naut , and not using my imagination i still know the wires lifted up that naut , and not only because i can imagine it , but because it's just plain obvious for anyone having a brain .

and even if i was wrong about wires , it wouldn't change that this guy didn't 'jumped' by only using the force of his body , something helped this naut to jump and at 14,5 seconds this something even managed to surprise the naut , and it become more obvious than in the others 'jumps' .

So one again LLL your evidence boils down to you thinking it looks wrong. No facts or figures to back up your opinion. No expert analysis. It just looks wrong to you. In your world your opinion may constitute evidence in the rest of the world it doesn't.

They only thing that is obvious is that you have no evidence on the subject and are grasping at straws. I would suggest that you go away and return when you have some real evidence but that would be a real long wait.

How do you know the astronaut was surprised? I didn't hear anything like "woah I'm surprised" in the audio. This is typical "I think so, so it must be true" stuff.

The video is backing up my opinion , so that's the figure you wanted , and i'm optimistic enough to think that anyone looking this video would notice the totally unnatural movements of these two nauts without the need of an 'expert' telling them what's wrong or not , but apparently i was wrong , and now you need an expert analysis ...
you want an expert in what by the way ? a circus expert ?

I know that , by looking at the video with my eyes , and by not missing any seconds of video , for example i don't put my hands in front of my eyes at 14 seconds trough 16 seconds , and since i have my eyes opened , and my eyes transmit a lot of informations to my brain , i see that the arm of the naut at 14 seconds is clearly showing a sign of that guy being lifted up and a bit backward on that badly synch 'jump'.

so you should try that BertL , open your eyes all along (some blinks allowed of course , but try to not blink at 14-16 sec)
.

Only obvious to someone who doesn't appreciate the difference between 1 g and 1/6 g.

What exactly about that jump is so different from the earlier ones? Check out how high he is standing compared with the start of the clip and you'll see that the only reason he goes straight up at that point is that he already has his legs bent ready to jump after coming down from the previous jump.

I think perhaps you should get serious for a minute. Most of us are, and have been serious here.
It would behoove you to learn something about what you see.

1/6g (an acceleration of gravity on the order of 5 ft/sec/sec, as opposed to ours, which is on the order of 32 ft/sec/sec), and a concurrent reduction in weight, with un-reduced energy applied to that weight...results in being able to jump pretty high.

It's funny, most HBs argue that they should have been able to jump 10 feet up or more, which is equally ridiculous. Here, you're attempting to argue that they were "helped" up for a jump of a couple-three feet!.

Go figure!

It's not a matter of belief, LLL. It's a matter of knowledge. The knowledge which would show you that this is a completely natural thing to see on the surface of the Moon is available to you. I for one, don't believe a thing about it. I know about it. You can too...



How much knowledge do you need to realize how silly such a statement is?
We can start from the very beginning of basic physics and the behavioral characteristics of objects in a gravity field if you like.



No.
We don't need anything. That would be rather futile, I venture, because it cannot be proven to be faked in any way, shape or form.
In fact, as I've said...if you understand what you're looking at, it substantiates the fact that these pictures were taken in the only place we know of where such pictures could've been taken: the Moon.

What the film does graphically illustrate is the potential danger in not keeping one's center of mass over his feet when attempting to jump with 195 pounds of mass strapped to his body...the majority of that on his back.

The film absolutely illustrates natural physical reactions on the Moon, which was of course where all that happened.

It can be explained in detail, for your benefit, should you so desire.

Such explanations are much better than looking at 45 seconds of youtube and drawing conclusions based upon nothing.

Your call!

So what does the arm do that makes you so sure the astronaut was surprised? I just see the arm moving around for a bit, as if the astronaut is keeping his balance in air: something you see in the other jumps as well (and even more clearly; the one on 0:11 shows the arm twisting). So, again: what makes you so sure the astronaut is surprised? His arm? What does his arm do that makes you so sure the astronaut is surprised?

"Not closing my eyes, like u lolzx!" is not an answer.

i appreciate the difference between these , i already mentioned that the height of the jumps wasn't the issue , in theory they surely could jump about 7 and a half feets high if they really were on the moon and if they feel it wouldn't pose any trouble , the heights are part of these jumps , but its not the height that i question , it's the sequence of jump , that looks more than odds , and in particular the one at 14,5 seconds , that you should watch in the sequence , severals times in a row is better than one , it's hard to explain what exactly is wrong with thaht 'jump' , because it's the whole attitude of the naut that is wrong , and the few miliseconds before .

just check by yourself , the naut jump 4 times , and after is fourth jump , he move about 20 centimeters forward and touch the rover with his right hand , then roughly as soon as he touched the rover , he is violently lifted up and backward , and when i say , he is lifted up , i don't mean he lift himself up , i mean he is lifted up by an external force , that even seems to surprise him a bit , again the whole sequence is important , and this 14,5 seconds moment being the key point .

That's all the "evidence" you ever present... "it looks wrong to me"... you never seem to understand that maybe it looks wrong to you because you don't understand how it SHOULD look and that you never take the time to actually learn the reasons why these things look the way they do.

You're no expert, that much is clear, so the fact that it looks wrong to you is in no way any kind of proof that it IS wrong, just that you don't understand it, and that you are either unwilling or unable to learn more about it before jumping to your ridiculous conclusions.

Maybe if you'd actually start to learn about the things you're disputing by reading the available information and and asking intelligent questions about what you don't understand rather than automatically jumping to the "it has to be fake" conclusion, then hopefully you'd understand why you are wrong.

A 45 second video clip that shows astronauts moving in ways that are counter-intuitive to us - people that have never been in a situation requiring us to be moving in a 1/6 g, vacuum environment while wearing a cumbersome suit and life support system on our backs - is in no way proof of a hoax. What it proves is that the astronauts were in a very different environment that required them to move in unnatural, counter-intuitive ways.

The people who believe that this video - and the others like it that plague the internet - are somehow proof of a hoax are only showing proof of their own ignorance, their unwillingness to accept that something is happening that they don't understand and proof of their willful ignorance by deliberately not studying the available information which shows that what is being seen is exactly what should be seen.


Cz

Well , for me the reasons for the unnatural 'jumps' (in particular the one at 14,5 seconds) is the simulated lighter gravity that they used , wires come to mind , coupled with a slow-motion of course .



I don't need to be an expert to realize that this naut shouldn't have gone violently up and backward like that at 14,5 sec .

It looks wrong to me , and it will looks wrong to anyone not having any emotional trouble while watching apollo missions , or any NASA space missions videos i think.

and there is the link for that video again , for the ones eventually interested >> video



This scene is fake yes , not because i say so , but because it's not really filmed on the surface of the Moon while its supposed to be.



Wearing a cumbersome suit and life support system is one of the reason why he shouldn't be violently lifted up like that , without showing any sign of preparation of his jump , but apparently they messed the synchronization a bit for that one , this guy is a bit surprised by the force of the lift , no he don't say "Wow that one got me by surprize guy's watch out ..." or anything even more obvious , but the pictures are speaking that language.



But i don't believe this video , because i just said that i think this scene was faked on earth .

Maybe one day, LLL, you'll actually be able to provide something resembling real proof beyond "it looks wrong to me" and "they shouldn't be moving that way" and "they only way they could do it was with wires" for these conjectures of yours.

Until that day, all of your opinions on the legitimacy of the Moon landings will remain simply that... unfounded, uneducated and incorrect assumptions and opinions.

Interesting how hundreds of thousands, if not millions of credible and accredited scientists, technologists and engineers the world over, people who are actually knowledgeable on the subject, people with years of study, degrees, doctorates and real-world experience can find no problem whatsoever with the veracity of the Moon landings, yet a relative few uneducated, uninformed conspiracy theorists and hoax believers like yourself claim to have uncovered the "grand deception" in a 45-second YouTube video clip or a misinterpreted photograph...

Will wonders never cease...


Cz

That's were you are completly fooled Cz , there isn't in any way , hundreds of thousands even less millions of credible and accredited scientists over the worlds that can't find any problems with that moon landing , because the true story is , that there is hundreds of thousands and even millions of credible scientists that , don't give a damn about apollo moon landing , they don't give a damn because all the science doesn't revolve around apollo missions at all , i'm sorry if you just learned this , but 99% of the scientist in the world , are most certainly completly uninterested in apollo moon landing , because for 99% of the few percents of these scientist that have one day or another got some interest in these missions , well 99% of these are convinced that it was a fakery , but they are also convinced that they will be put on ban if they dared to 'take' on the issue , and scientist doesn't mean super-hero
.

That gives very few scientist , the scientist working in space related domain , that's already a very limited numbers of peoples around the world , and all these peoples have a common interest in remaining silent , because there isn't 30 billions way to achieve something in these domain , the only ways are to be in the very controlled company such as NASA , ESA , JAXA , and military ones , they all know that if they want to live their project to the end , they better 'shut up' on some sensitive subjects , in others words taboo subjects , like these apollo frauds are .

The difference is that unlike the first jump from a standing start, where he initially bobs down to bend his legs before going up by straightening them (as one does), that on the one you think suspicious he starts from a bent-leg position, so there is no initial bob down. He can do this because he bends his legs on landing from the previous jump and doesn't straighten them in the brief pause between the jumps. You can check that this is the case by looking for the height he is at relative to other objects in the picture. Before the "suspicious" jump he is decidedly lower than he is before the first jump.

...

Not because you say so, huh?
and then you add, in the same sentence:



Which means, BECAUSE YOU SAY SO.

Do you actually think about what you write before you write it?

Of course, again, because you say so...




LLL:

I note you ignore my requests, and my challenges to you to ask questions and to do a little work on your own.
You prefer to argue from the basis of a complete lack of subject-matter knowledge, rather than challenge yourself to learn something.

Very boring, and time wasting.




How 'bout a question for you:


If, as you "say so", the astronauts are being lifted by wires, one would think that those wires would be attached along the center of mass axis, so as to suspend the astronauts in a balanced and upright position while they do things like jump, right?

Do you even understand what I'm saying here?


Given that there were wires suspending them, how would you explain the fact that Charlie jumps up, and falls on his rear, completely off balance, with wires attached to him...someplace...which should've supported him in an upright position and not allowed him to pitch back at all?


Again: wanna learn about these things, or just argue blindly?

LLL

Do you agree that the astronaut has his knees bent much more before the last jump than the first jump? If so, can you explain why he can't jump up just by straightening his legs and pushing himself off the lunar surface?

Thanks

Wow, LLL. Is this your proof? "It looks wrong to me, and everyone who isn't SUTUUPPIDIDDD will agree with me." Well, to me, it looks fine, and I'm sure that everyone who doesn't have serious eye damage will agree with me. So did I just prove you wrong with that? No, of course not; anyone who has a sense of logic will agree with that. I just said the exact same as you, however, just from another point of view. Do you know why it's wrong? Because this is not how evidence and debate works. You also haven't answered the question as to how the arm movement makes you so sure the astronaut was surprised at the jump. Now, are you actually looking for debate, or just trolling?

Uhm... yeah... ok...

So now your conspiracy has expanded to include NASA using its vast resources and military connections to control the world's scientists so that they can keep their "dirty secret" under wraps, but still, a determined little group of uneducated YouTube "videographers" and some nutjobs trying to make a buck off people's ignorance (Sibrel, Rene et al) have managed to penetrate the "wall of silence" that NASA has miraculously kept in place for some 40 years and are exposing the truth...

And you can't see the fundamental flaws in your theory...?

Oh right... I forgot... believability for you only depends on how something looks, not on anything as silly or inconvenient as facts or proof... my mistake...

So... what about all the aerospace scientists and engineers who don't work for NASA or any of the other of the world's space agencies or military institutions? Is NASA somehow keeping them in check, too? What about engineering and physics educators at universities, colleges and schools around the planet? Let me guess... NASA has them under their thumb too, I suppose...

And if there are, by your obviously biased estimation, so many engineers and scientists out there who are "convinced it was a fakery", why haven't they come forward with anything resembling factual, verifiable proof? If what you say has any credence, that NASA is controlling the small group of scientists who work in space-related fields, then there are bound to be lots that aren't under NASA's oppressive thumb. Where are they in all of this?

Face it... you have no proof... you will never have any proof... you only look at things and say "Hmm... I don't get it... it looks weird... it has to have been faked" and that's enough for you. You're not here to actually learn anything, or to have intelligent debates. You're only here to tell people how things look to you and that we are all stupid for not seeing things your way and that the people who have the education, understanding and experience to tell you why you're wrong, and who know that it wasn't faked, are all wrong, and you are right.



Cz

Ho, hum...up pops "Evil NASA" again...

Did we land on the moon????????

As soon as I have the proof we did not land on the moon, I will post it in here.
And that will shut you all up before this topic gets to 400pages.


Dan Dare

Not exactly that , it would be , everyone that doesn't agree that these jumps aren't looking natural (regardless of the supposed gravity difference) are imbeciles , and i just happen to think that these jumps aren't looking naturall at all , so if you only focus on me saying this it's not correct. because that's not because i say this that anyone with a brain wouldn't say the same thing , i nother words , i just said what any honest person looking at these jump without having any emotional link to these video would say , the ones denying that these jumps aren't real are imbeciles , and certainly not logical peoples.

and i was talking about his arme because you can note that he doesn't bend down before jumping , and since he just made the highest jump of the sequence , and even if he have already some bending before doing the jump , you will still bend a little before jumping , it's a natural reflex , eveyrone on earth can understand that , while you prepare to jump from a standstill , you don't only push on your toes , you bend a bit then you push on your legs and eventually on your toes aswell , but here he just directly go up as he only pushed on his legs (very strongly) without making that natural little bend down before (again this is not related to having or not his legs bend already , its related to a natural reflex making that you bend a little before jumping , because you have better control of your jumps this way , its a reflex carved in our primitive brain , you can't fight this)

the wires are attached about at belly level , the balance wasn't perfect , they didn't used direct simulation of 1/6g , the wires they use are jump here to simulate a lighter gravity , then they adjust the video speed to match 1/6g , that's why this naut can lose is balance on some big 'jumps' .

yes he probably have some bending on his leg already , but also notice that he's close of the rover , so the rover 'cut' a bit higher also because of his position relative to the camera , but yes i don't deny that he have some bending on his legs before making the most suspicious on the jump.

i said that he couldn't do that , because there is a natural reflex that make that you will bend a little just before jumping , this gives you a better control of your jump because during that little bending you estimate your weight and the force need to jump at the desired height , its natural , you don't even question why you should make this , you just make this , unless you are completly bended of course , in this case you can't bend anymore , but that wasn't the case here , and in this situation were you couldn't just jump like a crazy , there is no doubt that you will not bypass this reflex just to look completly stupid and fall on your backpack , so he should have bended before , and he didn't do it , because he was surprised by the badly synchrozined 'pull' on the wire .

note how they simulated the flag salute jump in comparison >> video link (download) or YTvideo

do you see how he bend before his jump ? the bending is part of the jump control , not only because you need to bend to push after , but also while you're bending you estimate the force needed , and note he only jump 43 cm high here , in comparison in the other jump he jump more than 70cm high.

-edited to add a comparison video -

Those suits were restricting and cumbersome, which - with the addition of 1/6th gravity - led to an "unnatural" appearance. Furthermore, the bulk of the weight of the suits were centered on the astronaut's back, in their PLSS, which required them to lean forward whenever they jumped to counterbalance it. I suggest you watch this debunking video, if you haven't already: Link

Our minds are hardwired to function in 1G situations, in a 1/6th G environment it would be completely understandable to miscalculate a jump and fall on your back, especially with a life-support system half your total weight strapped to your back. There is no proof that the astronaut did not bend before his jump, since he was hidden behind the rover and the suit itself masks most subtle movements.

EDIT: Just watched it again, he's surprised because he jumped straight up and rotated backwards due to the weight of his backpack, not because of any "unseen wires"

You're suggesting they adjusted the speed real time in live tv? You did know that most fo the footage was live right? That the astronauts were reacting to live input from mission control, including at times conversations with the president and reactions to sports scores.

LLL name-calling is not acceptable behaviour on this forum and is a clear violation of forum rules. This is your first and last warning, lets keep this discussion civil and constructive.

He doesn't have to bend before his final jump because his legs are already bent from his landing from the previous jump. You've admitted this.
If your legs are already bent then you do not need to bend them further to jump again. There's no reflex preventing anyone from doing this, it's easy.

Sooo, basically, everyone who disagrees with you is an imbecile? Everyone who thinks in another way is a dishonest imbecile with no brain? Wow, LLL, I didn't think you would sink that low.


So your complete "This video is faked and you are all dishonest brainless imbeciles" ad hominem is based on the presumption that the arm should go down when the astronaut jumps? Besides, there are other factors that cause less arm movements, like the astronaut being in a suit, making his movements a bit less smooth, and small arm movements like the natural reflex will not move the suit's arm. Being in 1/6 of the gravity (the gravitational force is only 1/6 of that of Earth's; approximately 1.6ms^-2) also means you need a lot less force to jump higher. The legs are already bent; something which can be easily shown through two simple screenshots. The red line is at the same height in both pictures (142 pixels from the top, if I'm not mistaken).

Also, I took the courtesy to download the clip you are talking about, and isolating the jump. You can find the .gif file here (it's a bit big, so I decided to link it instead of showing it here). It's played at 10FPS for more playback comfort, which means it's slowed down back to 40% of the original speed it was in the video I downloaded it from. (YouTube converts uploaded films to 25FPS.) It starts with part of the jump from before that (the one at 12-ish seconds), then a pause, then the jump itself (13/14 seconds).

I think it might take you alot longer than the time it will take this thread to get to 400 pages to get such "proof", since there is none.
Further, whatever you find, and post here, will very probably be explained so that you understand what it is you posted, and that it is not proof that we didn't land on the Moon.


As with most HB materials, most of what is promoted as "proof" of a hoax is actually substantiation that we did in fact go there...

But whenever, feel free to post you findings right here.

...nice try, but it doesn't make much sense...


Belly level?
Front, rear, on the sides ( ).

Where would one attach such lines? And, where are they?

Frankly, if they wanted to do this, they'd have only one place to attach them: not at the belly (?) which would be forward and below the center of mass, resulting in a most certain pitch back every time they left their feet, but rather, above the center of mass, and on the vertical centerline of that mass...which would be at the forward end of the PLSS, or between the PLSS and the shoulders, up at the top of the astronaut.

Of course, there aren't any there, as you can plainly see...



This is really a matter of very basic physics...what you see in these jumps.
One tends...given a constrant force applied, and a constant mass, to ascend higher on the Moon than one would with the same energy and mass on the Earth. A factor of 6 comes to mind as a probable factor you might consider in estimating these dimensions.

Additionally, one takes more time to get to peak height, and more time to descend again on the Moon after reaching that peak height. You'd probably be amazed at the factor involved in that time as well!

With lower gravity, you go up, and you slow down slower getting up to where you are headed. When you come back down, you're accelerating slower as well...meaning you speed up slower coming down.

All that slower stuff means it actually looks slower on film (it does when you're standing there watching it too!). This is because it IS slower...all the way around.

It's perfectly natural 1/6 g behavior.

Thus, when you say:



You paint yourself in a very bad light, the light of ignorance.

The jumps do look natural, and that is precisely because some of us understand what I tried to explain to you above.

I think perhaps you're attempting to say that these jumps don't look like you'd expect the jumps to look on Earth. They're unusual looking, based upon your only experience, which is seeing what a jump looks like here on this planet.

You'd be correct, if you stated your position clearly like that. However, even being polite and expressing things accurately would not be any proof that these jumps were in fact un-natural, or imply somehow that they were faked...


You see, if you understand that these jumps don't look like Earth jumps rather naturally, because they were executed on the Moon, and you understand, as many of us do, that the Moon is an alien world, where things behave in un-Earthly fashion, due to some specific physical laws which apply in both places (we can somewhat easily calculate this behavior), then you'll realize that these jumps, while un-Eartly, are decidedly, and in fact precisely: Lunar.

Dunno if this has been posted already but if we landed on the moon then why have we not gone back up there, surely we have better technology and more money than we had in the past.

Yes it has been discussed several times in this and the other Moon hoax thread, but here are the short, simple answers:

No one wanted to.

Yes we do, sort of.

Yes and no.


Now for the not quite as sort but still simple answers:

Why have we not gone back?
Political / public will, and the lack there of. In the 60's it was a race and a contest between the US and Soviets. The US won that race quite convincingly. These days, there's not that kind of pressing need to show the world that it can be done, since the US already did it. The US - and its people - had more important things to spend their money on, like make up and cigarettes and drugs and Vietnam and the Cold War and now Iraq and the so-called "War on Drugs" and the so-called "War on Terror". NASA gets relegated to the sidelines with an ever dwindling budget (even at the height of the Space Race, NASA's budget at it highest was only ever 4% of the US National Budget in 1966) and refocused itself on less expensive deep space and planetary probes and the Space Shuttle & ISS in low earth orbit.

surely we have better technology ... than we had in the past
Yes we do, sort of. Apollo utilized highly specialized, hand made, one-of-a-kind hardware. Once the Apollo Program was finally canceled, there was no further need to continue developing that hardware. The ships (CM's, SM's and LM's) that were left over were either converted to be used with Apollo Soyuz, Skylab or as museum pieces. NASA then shifted into high gear on getting the Shuttle ready to fly and getting the ISS up and running. After a few years, the people who had worked on Apollo had been essentially strewn to the four corners and the processes involved in building the ships were either forgotten or long since mothballed. The technology behind Apollo was the best of its day for the mission profiles, which is why the current Orion / Constellation program underway has used Apollo as its starting point and reference material and is improving on those designs to take advantage of technological advances since the 60's, while still maintaining a bit more than just a superficial resemblance to the Apollo systems.

surely we have ... more money than we had in the past
Again, yes and no. As I said previously, at Apollo's developmental high-point in 1966, NASA's overall budget accounted for only 4% of the US national budget of the day. Apollo was a bargain for the US, coming in at under $30 billion over the 10 year course of the project. Compare that to today where, the actual dollar figure may be higher, but the comparative spending power is far lower and the overall percentage alloted to NASA to design, build and fly Orion / Constellation is roughly just under 2% of the US national budget. Even at that low level, people think of a Lunar program as "needlessly expensive". But compare that to other spending figures: the US people spend roughly $500 billion dollars on cosmetics per year. Cosmetics... Think of how much is spent on alcohol or cigarettes. The war in Iraq is costing somewhere around what? $700billion per year? (I could be off on that figure a bit, its just an estimate).

With sufficient political and public will to go back to the Moon, then the money necessary to recreate and redesign the technology would come. But since that will is not there, and there is no really "important" reason to go there (like showing the rest of the planet that it can be done) politicians and the public alike don't think its important enough to dedicate even double the pittance they currently have ear-marked for NASA to ensure the program's success.



Cz

EDITED: for typos...

i don't think youtube converted this clip , it was just at 25 fps already (and i assume it's a cutout of a 29,97 or 30 fps supposed live broadcast ) , i already saw 29,97 fps clip on youtube .

YouTube automatically converts uploaded videos from whatever format they were in when they were uploaded into a flash video format so that it can be viewed by the widest number of browsers / users.



Cz

I can plainly see that i don't know how i would be supposed to see thin transparent wires with that video quality.




I know this , i don't dispute the height , i just include the height to compare with another jump they did on the flag salute apollo 16 with completly different preparation (a more natural preparation , even if the jump is also fake at the end) , but the way the jumps occured , the way they occured are unnatural , this naut is not making a bending to estimate is weight and balance and the force needed , while he is supposed to be on another world , while even a child would do this , because it's a natural reflex , to find your balance , and here with a strange balance you consider he wouldn't even think to check is balance by doing such a simple thing ?.




Not perfectly but close yes , that's why they used wires with the addition of slow-motion , and not slow-motion only , because slow motion only would have given perfectly valid 1/6g fallrates , but toally unnatural scene given the obvious slow motion detected on the naut movements except vertical axis freefalling.



I'm saying , that these jumps don't look natural anywhere on earth or on the moon , since you will not be insane enough to not take the time to check your balance by bending the leg before jumping (i'm not saying that he don't have some bend on his leg here , i'm talking about the bend that he should exhibit before jumping , and not just the +-2 centimeters seen here , but a clear one like in the apollo 16 flag salute scene for example).

So, again... your entire argument essentially is this:

"It doesn't look right to me, therefore it must have been faked with wires. Anyone who doesn't agree with me is either an imbecile or helping cover-up NASA's big secret. I have no proof of this, but I don't need proof because I know when things look wrong."





And now you are telling us that you know how it should look when an astronaut is jumping on the Moon...

So, LLL... when was the last time (or first time, even) that you went jumping on the Moon, or anywhere with in 1/6g, vacuum environment in a cumbersome, unnaturally balanced spacesuit?


Cz