The most consistently seen argument of moon hoax believers, is why, in a land with no air, the American flag stands up and waves, instead […]
Continue Reading Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Video Evidence
NASA has lied through their teeth constantly about the moon landings and still the sheeple swallow without question every thing they tell them. Ok just to prove them liars and that the landings are fake I will give you simple proof. They claim there is no stars in the photos because of sunlight then go on giving cheap excuses to prove this lie. So in all lunar photos yip no stars. Blatant lies sheeple. Here is an example from the Soviet Luna 13 photos, yip lots of stars. Oops NASA missed deleting them lol.have a look for your self here. http://www.mentallandscape.com/C_CatalogMoon.htm these are untampered photos from the Russian space museum.
Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – Video Evidence
if you take a scond and think of 2 different cams one taking a picture in 1/250 second and the other taking a picture over a few days, which picture do you think have more detailing. ask any photographer this question. or even better, try it under low light conditions yourself.
one of humans greatest achivements is the lunar landing, and i pity all the people that believes that it is a hoax
mor proof that the con game is the no moon landing hoax
go there to educate your self about the no moon landing hoax. Yes the conspiracy theory of no moon landing is a fabrication of media and social entrepreneurship targeting undereducated and gullible people to buy into their media driven hoax to sell books and eventually kill the civilian program to return to the moon.
Wake up children. Kubric composed the moon landing. He tells us all about in 2001 and in “The Shining”, if you wake up to the ART.
LA ILAHA ILLA LAHU MUHAMMAD RASULULAH. THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH. MUHAMMED IS HIS PROPHET
Here’s a handy experiment to try. Grab a digital camera with a manual exposure mode. On the next sunny day, go outside around noon, set your camera to ISO 100, shutter speed to 1/125, aperture to f/16, and take a picture of the landscape. You *should* get a decent exposure, at least within a half-stop or so. Now set the shutter speed to 30 seconds and take another picture. You should get a frame of solid, detail-free white.
On the next moonless night, go outside and take a picture of the stars using the same two sets of exposure settings. At Tv=1/125, you should have solid black where the stars should be. At Tv=30″, you should see at least the brightest stars (and possibly a lot of noise, depending on the camera).
Photographic film and digital sensors cannot capture the dynamic range between the sunlit lunar (or terrestrial) surface *and* the stars in the background. Our eyes have greater range, but even they have limits (tell me how many stars you can see on a moonless night vs. a night with a full moon).
Expose for the lunar surface, and the stars simply don’t register. Expose for the stars, and the surface will be a detail-free blob of solid white. Don’t take my word for it, grab your camera and see for yourself.
To get both in the same image, you either would have to use two separate exposures and combine them later, or somehow double expose the same frame, masking out the surface for one exposure and the stars for the other.
As for the Luna and Zond photos in the link you supplied: which frames are supposed to have stars in the background? As far as I can tell, *none* of the images show any background stars.
NO STARS IN RUSSIAN PICTURES
These are picture from the Russian sond going behind the moon. No stars whatsoever can be seen on these pictures. None. http://www.mentallandscape.com/C_CatalogMoon.htm
in response to hyundisonata…looked at the russian page…not one photo with stars in it! black just like ours!
Lol.lol. censored site. Yip when someone gives you real evidence of the lies you emit their post. Dickheads or what. Hope you enjoy living under the new world order.
Hey, Sonata – the fact you can’t even spell Hyundai is a bit of a clue to the rest of us. You poor undeveloped meat-puppet. Real evidence of lies? Good grief – try reading the text that belongs with your Russian photos. They are photos of the Dark Side of the moon. Do you understand the tricky scientific concept of Dark? It’s where you have to expose a film for seconds in order to see any detail at all – so of course the stars show up. Much like other NASA photos from missions that travelled around the back.
duuuh. if russia went all the way to the dark side of the moon dont you think nasa from the USA they will do the same to discover were the stars at
just once i’d like to meet a conspiracy theorist who presents plausible evidence.
Appolo moon landing is not true. Becouse of uncountable scientific reasons. I have many questions to ask NASA about space which NASA will not answer.
Apollo moon landing is just unbleivable joke of fake scientist i.e NASA. You better change your mind from making fable films to something important.
I have read the info and arguements on both sides looked over the photos and read opinions from freaking everyone. I have to say I don’t think the moon landing is a hoax. oh and by the way fuck you Sonata Im not a “sheeple”
point by point debunking of hoaxed no landing theroies
you might want to rain in the faulty research with real science
Apollo 16 "Jump Salute"
It seems that it is not possible for the footage covering this event to have been shot on the moon. When jumping for this historic snapshot, the astronaut stays in suspension far too long, accounting for the moon’s gravitational force and also the huge discrepancy between the soil’s falloff from the boots and the astronaut himself. It’s easier to ascertain this by bearing in mind that this should have been a lunar environment where there would be no air resistance and the moon’s gravitational force represents 1/6 of the earth’s gravitational force, the peak and descent of both soil and astronaut should have been pretty much the same. Oddly this doesn’t happen, the soil is pretty much settled when the astronaut begins it’s descent. Remember that a feather and a hammer fall at basically the same rate in the moon?
Here is more detail: http://speedge.free.fr/nasa/jumpflag2/jumpfalg.htm
Re: Apollo 16 "Jump Salute"
Um, isn’t buoyancy from air what keeps dust up on the Earth? Furthermore, if one watches the ground in the video closely, they will see a wave of dust spreading from the point where the astronaut jumped at. Some dust is still visible until the moment when the astronaut lands, perfectly consistent with the “hammer and feather” experiment.
If it is true that dust kept floating after the astronaut jumped will prove that they are not in the moon!
true, hammer and feather fall at the same speed in a vacuum…which they did…on the moon…and video taped it…and it worked…they must have been in a vacuum…in space…
RE: Jump Salute
You made the point that the maximum height of the dust is much smaller than the maximum height that the astronaut reached. You also said that the dust fell much quicker than him. Does this not make sense to you? Taking into account for the same gravity which applies to and is experienced both by the astronaut and the dirt, it would seem to make perfect sense that the majority of the dust will already be settled on the ground (because there is no air for the dirt to be supported by)? This is due to the fact that the dust is not attached to the astronauts boots and hence doesn’t possess the same vertical kinetic energy and is only momentarily disturbed as he applies downward force on the moon’s surface and jumps. Some of the dirt tracked into the base of his boots will come up with him, but as it is not directly attached, it will fall back to the surface according to Newton’s Laws while the astronaut who still possesses vertical kinetic energy will continue to rise. When his velocity is zero (due to the moon’s deceleration caused by its gravity (caused by mass)), he should (and does) fall back to the surface according to the same laws that caused the dirt to fall in a similar fashion. So basically, it is this “absence of air resistance” that causes the effect you described and that which is shown by footage taken on the Moon by NASA astronauts. “Science-ed” :P
+++ The Moon Landing Hoax +++
The moon landing was a cleverly designed plan to fool all people who thought it was a hoax. And guess what? NASA got away with it! NASA tricked all you basement dwellers into believing it was a hoax. All the astronauts pwnd you from the moon. In fact… when us smart people leave to live on mars, we will remember you hoax believers as our “village idiots”.
Let's shed a little light...
I know this will not convince everyone but, the moon hoax theorists can preserve the first part of the bell curve…
This IS crap