[Split]Moon hoaxes - split from: Mars Voyage too Soon?

[ArmillarySphere]

I just remembered one interesting thing, which may or may not be important.

The 16mm DAC (Data Acquisition Camera) was mounted in the right observation window, pointing down towards the area in front of the porch. Before exiting the LM, Dr. Aldrin set it to take time-lapse shots at a rate of one photo per second. It captured the whole procedure while the astronauts were setting up the flag, posing for photos, walking around doing experimentation work, etc etc.

What's interesting about this footage is this:
1) Once the flag had been set up, it stays absolutely stock still, without even so much as a hint of movement. And that's a nylon flag, flimsy as anything you please.
2) If you watch the footage speeded up, the shadows are moving. I'm not sure if anyone has measured their motion and compared it with the moon's rotation wrt the Sun, but the whole EVA lasted two and a half hours, and the movement is only about a degree. Doesn't look like they're in Kansas...

 

[uruk]

Why can't woo ever see that they're been demolished ?

That is the stock and trade of the woo. Not being able to see what is really there.

 

[sts60]

Southwind17, does this mean that you are not going to defend your claims about ALSEP?

Oh, and could you answer the questions ("yes" or "no" for each will do fine) in post 524? It will only take a minute, and will really help clarify exactly which parts of the record you dispute.

I will sts, I promise, but I'm having way too much fun right now with this barrel o' fish!

You will... what? defend your ALSEP claims? Or answer the "yes" or "no" questions about which parts you believe and which parts you don't?

I ask about the former because I've been happy to give you time to deal with prior issues before ALSEP, but instead you've raised a host of other issues. I regret that prompts me to scale back how long I'm willing to wait before considering your ALSEP claims abandoned.

I ask about the latter because there is considerable uncertainty about exactly which positions you hold. The set of questions I posted should take anyone reasonably familiar with the Apollo program about a minute to answer. Just "yes" you believe item n, or "no" you don't. I'm sure you're anxious to clear up any confusion as to what you do and don't believe, so we can discuss the issues properly!

If you want to move on I'll PM you when I get onto it, if you like, to let you know?

Move on? Good heavens, no; I find this thread immensely entertaining. Rest assured I'm reading, and will continue to read, your posts with great care. In fact, I've been slowly cataloging your claims for my own amusement (and perhaps, eventually, for everyone's edification).

 

[uruk]

I just remembered one interesting thing, which may or may not be important.

The 16mm DAC (Data Acquisition Camera) was mounted in the right observation window, pointing down towards the area in front of the porch. Before exiting the LM, Dr. Aldrin set it to take time-lapse shots at a rate of one photo per second. It captured the whole procedure while the astronauts were setting up the flag, posing for photos, walking around doing experimentation work, etc etc.

It provides another perspective of the EVA. Which would rule out the cable rig set up the video was mentioning concerning simulating 1/6 G.

What's interesting about this footage is this:
1) Once the flag had been set up, it stays absolutely stock still, without even so much as a hint of movement. And that's a nylon flag, flimsy as anything you please.

That is also more proof that there is no air. You will notice Aldrin running past it a couple of times. If that were a stage with air in it, the wake of disturbed air as Aldrin went past the flag would have caused the flag to move. But I am sure Southwind will convieniently ignore this fact also.

2) If you watch the footage speeded up, the shadows are moving. I'm not sure if anyone has measured their motion and compared it with the moon's rotation wrt the Sun, but the whole EVA lasted two and a half hours, and the movement is only about a degree. Doesn't look like they're in Kansas...

Interesting.

 

[beachnut]

Given the apparent distance between the two astronauts that seems highly unusual to me. I also think that the characteristics of many of the photos, given the complete absence of artificial lighting available and lack of atmosphere, seems highly suspect. I think that's symptomatic of people who have very fixed views and erroneously believe that supplementing those views with weak and/or hypothetical arguments is sufficient to make a case.

I remain unconvinced that man has actually walked on the moon, ...

You need to study photography. Lack of experience on your part makes you question the moon landings? Get more knowledge and try again. …or…

Funny stuff, a tin foil hat idea implying man has not walked on the moon veiled in the unconvinced stand of a weak bet you know you will loose. You have weakly covered both sides of this argument.

At least you will have fun trying to explain your own inability to believe the moon landings took place to yourself while teasing others with your lack of knowledge to understand the moon program, from walking, to pictures and more. Reminds me of the faint of the phony fake moon landing faint.

 

[CurtC]

That is also more proof that there is no air. You will notice Aldrin running past it a couple of times. If that were a stage with air in it, the wake of disturbed air as Aldrin went past the flag would have caused the flag to move.

Then explain this video:


At the 2:36 mark, an astronaut comes walking by and the flag seems to blow a little bit.

 

[PetersCreek]

As the flag support is momentarily released at/about -2:52, it can be seen to vibrate before being obscured. The flag was being handled pretty vigorously as late as -2:47-46. Subsequent motion appears to dampen through the -2:36 mark. I don't see any motion that I could reasonably characterize as being caused by nearby movement of an astronaut, without physical contact.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Then explain this video:


At the 2:36 mark, an astronaut comes walking by and the flag seems to blow a little bit.

Jay Windley figured this one out. As the astronauts moved around the lunar surface, they built up static electric charges. Occasionally when they'd pass close to the flag those charges would attract it. Notice also how the flag continues moving like a pendulum for many seconds after the astronaut has passed. These phenomena would not occur in an atmosphere; this is actually more proof that the film was taken in a vacuum.

 

[sts60]

If this is the Apollo 15 example, it was discussed at some length over on Bad Astronomy.

 

[PetersCreek]

I'm not so sure this is the same video. It doesn't look like what I remember from that discussion.

Correction: It is the same video. The posted example shows up on my screen with a negative time index, so I was looking at the wrong portion.

 

[CurtC]

As the flag support is momentarily released at/about -2:52, it can be seen to vibrate before being obscured. The flag was being handled pretty vigorously as late as -2:47-46. Subsequent motion appears to dampen through the -2:36 mark. I don't see any motion that I could reasonably characterize as being caused by nearby movement of an astronaut, without physical contact.

Interesting, when I posted the link as an embedded video, I didn't realize the time counter would be missing. Try this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UE...lskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3216848

Now go to the +2:36 mark and watch the flag when he passes.

 

[Brainache]

So just how many sqare miles of Arizona desert had to be totally re-landscaped to look like the surface of the moon Southwind? Was it the same patch for each mission, or did the two guys with bulldozers have to clear another swathe every time?

I'd also like to see the single point lighting rig that could light up those square miles so evenly, as the captions in the rover clip above point out.

 

[uruk]

Then explain this video:


At the 2:36 mark, an astronaut comes walking by and the flag seems to blow a little bit.

If you look closely you will notice that the flag was still oscillating from all the movement from inserting into the lower post. The oscillations last longer because there is not air to dampen the oscillations of the flag.

edited Sorry, the timer settings on the youtube windows threw me off. I was looking at -2:36.

It looks to me like the astronaut lightly brushed against the flag as he passed by. Although static electricity would also be a good explination.

I was refering to the Apollo 11 footage. Aldrin and Neil pass by the flag a couple of times and the flag does not move.

 

[PetersCreek]

You look like a patient type to me. Hell, it's been 40 years. What's another few days between friends?!

Yes, I am reasonbly patient, with reasonable people, when circumstances reasonably call for patience. Several days ago, you explained the delay for answering questions with, "I'm trying to respond in an orderly fashion. Please continue to bear with me with any future responses; you're kind of in a queueing system!"

Have you abandoned your system in favor of picking questions on whim while introducing new arguments as previous questions and points languish? I may show some patience for that where friends are concerned...but then, you and I are not friends. This is the second time you've put off my questions with little more than a handwave. Please understand, I have precious little patience for being jerked around. Is that what you're doing here?

 

[PhantomWolf]

SVector has a nice sped up version of the DAC footage of the Apollo 11 flag. The two things to watch are the flag itself, which never moves, and the flag's shadow which does (it appears to get shorter of the 37 minutes.) Without a very impresive lighting rig that was able to be moved in relation to how the sun would over time on the moon, there is no way to get this shadow movement other than by filming it on the moon. Filming it outdoors on earth would result in a larger shadow movement and breezes affecting the flag causing it to ripple. Having air in the area would cause the flag to move as the Astronauts passed it.

 

[Southwind17]

Why has no man gone beyond LEO since? Short answer: money.

longer answer: ... We beat the Russians, that's all the public cared about.

Gee, you're actually acknowledging that that's ALL that mattered. You'll be defecting over to my side soon! What better scenario for the US Govt. to try pulling off a fake EVA stunt. And all that's needed to do it is a pile of photos, mostly of a baron landscape, and a couple hours video footage, also mostly of a baron landscape with a couple guys tripping around on it! Jeez - if ever there was a makings of a scenario whereby the political downside of losing is simply NOT an option and the upside was inversely proportional to the 'difficulties' posed by the technical and logistical practicalities, plus the risk of failure, THIS would be that scenario!!!

The Vietnam war also helped to turn interest away.

Oh, that's right, I forgot about that. It wasn't only interest that was turned away, though, was it. Cash was also needed. BIG CASH! How could the US Govt. possibly justify pumping money into the Apollo program when the Vietnam War was in full flow. No, the space race had to be won, and quickly!

NASA is a government agency. It's budget is determined by politicians. The space race was a big thing and so was NASA's blank check at the time. Public interest goes away so does the money. No bucks, no Buck Rodgers .

Again, time was of the essence!

Could have just said "no". Sarcasm does not translate well on text.

I'm sorry. I'll deploy another then next time so it's clear what I mean and what I don't mean! I am, however, desperately trying to limit the use of but the trash that 90% of respondents are posting here virtually demands them!

 

[332nd]

Gee, you're actually acknowledging that that's ALL that mattered. You'll be defecting over to my side soon! What better scenario for the US Govt. to try pulling off a fake EVA stunt. And all that's needed to do it is a pile of photos, mostly of a baron landscape, and a couple hours video footage, also mostly of a baron landscape with a couple guys tripping around on it! Jeez - if ever there was a makings of a scenario whereby the political downside of losing is simply NOT an option and the upside was inversely proportional to the 'difficulties' posed by the technical and logistical practicalities, plus the risk of failure, THIS would be that scenario!!!

About 10,000 photos (No royalty though.) Also they needed the moon rocks, telemetry tapes, and a way to trick the Russians into believing the transmissions were coming from the moon/on the way to the moon.

Now if they faked going to the moon and the Russians had figured it out what was the "political downside" of that?

 

[Southwind17]

I would stop if I were you. Your head may ache. I lost it right after the bad science, the UFO stuff, the hiding of Mars structures that match those on earth, astrology, Horus' eye...

It was too much even leaving out the parts google wouldn't let you see.

To hold this guy up as a serious researcher is a joke.

Yea, I saw the part about the face on Mars and I threw up a little bit in my mouth.

Unfortunatly most of Groves calculations in the index are with held. I'll have to go and see if i can find it at the library.

Yeah, I felt that the book lost it's way somewhat after Chapter 4, if not Chapter 3, but Chapters 1 and 2 alone (114 pages) wouldn't be enough material for a book, I suppose.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Gee, you're actually acknowledging that that's ALL that mattered.

Read what he wrote again. He didn't say that beating the Soviets was all that mattered, he said that it was all the PUBLIC cared about. To NASA, Apollo was about the science and about expanding man's influence beyond the Earth. They believed that Apollo was a stepping stone to Mars and beyond and they wanted to go further. Unfortunately to the average man in the street Apollo was billed as a race against the Soviets so once it was done they lost interest in it. The public didn't care about the science or moon bases or getting to Mars, and without the public support, the politicians were able to pune NASA budget to nearly nothing regardless of what NASA wanted.

Again you don't seem to understand what was happening in the 60's. NASA wanted to get to the moon, they started planning how to get there in 1958. In 1960 they convinced Esienhower to let them fly there, though he wasn't entirely behind the idea believing that dominance in Earth Orbit was more important. Finally they managed to convince Kennedy to let them do what they wanted to do, go to the moon. Why would people who had been planning and wanting to get people to the moon for a decade and then on out to Mars and beyond suddenly give up and fake it? It makes no sense.

 

[Southwind17]

About 10,000 photos (No royalty though.) Also they needed the moon rocks, telemetry tapes, and a way to trick the Russians into believing the transmissions were coming from the moon/on the way to the moon.

Now if they faked going to the moon and the Russians had figured it out what was the "political downside" of that?

I see you're resorting to 'IF' questions too, now!