We never went to the moon.

Either you are acting dumb or are dumb. The fact that he struck it with his elbow after passing it, does not preclude another cause for the tiny movement before. Quite how you are consistently unable to grasp this is proof of your fixation.

It wasn't "missed", the camera zooms in to get a better view! It is ridiculous to suggest that it was not seen during playback and nobody noticed.

The vertical pole most definitely is moving. Frame grabs placed side to side quite clearly show this. Anyone can verify this quite easily.

I can't see the vertical rod moving either, but to suggest it is wind is plain stupid. Not once during this footage is there the slightest hint of any other disturbance from body drafts or wind. It's way more plausible by a thousand times that it is in vacuum on the Moon.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There is no other footage where he runs close enough to the flag. The clue was in the words "build up". It happens when the charge reaches a critical discharge point.

After he hits it with his elbow yes, before it's perfectly feasible that the tiny movement is a camera bloom.

Explain why the lens flares move.

I am not concerned with what you said before a million times. The vertical rod moves and can easily be verified.

The regolith simply strikes the lower part of the pole. Not the flag!

It doesn't need to be more than a few millimetres on the Moon. You would not notice it on that camera and quality. It is perfectly feasible.

What info?

It does not close any case and your conclusion is ludicrous. The footage in most cases encompasses vast evenly lit terrain, that would need a hangar the size of a few miles!!

Spare us your pathetic ad hominem and address the arguments given. I would remind you that giving your bare asserted opinion as a means to dismiss other opinion is kind of moronic. Especially when the replies from those people tear your backside out!

Only morons think the Chinese faked their spacewalk.

Only morons think the Apollo missions were hoaxed. Neither of those two people give
any reason to suggest they believe that idiotic claim.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The info that's in post #21 on this page.

http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=993.15

I forgot to link to it.
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1118.15

Sorry.

Please look at it and tell us whether you agree with Jay Windley*.


*
http://www.clavius.org/about.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You seem to know how to use the quote function. Therefore I suspect you're too lazy or complete discombobulated.

 

No, it started moving once his hand was occluding the pole.

Congratulations, you just proved that he hit the flag as he walked by.

 

That or the Titanic rammed the bloody thing.

 

Basically the same spam as here and on the political forum where you got your sorry ass handed to you.

I said spare us your ad hominem crap! You just ignored my entire post. Go and answer it.

 

Freddy.
What else has you concerned?
Alex

 

I don't think anyone who takes the time to read it would agree with you.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-ever-happened.512081/page-29#post-1068254989

I'd like to hear everybody's opinion on Jay Windley's* analysis of he dust-free sand issue which is explained in the above link.


*
http://clavius.org/about.html

 

Here's some stuff.
http://well-temperedforum.groupee.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9130004433/m/6371082656/p/1

 

I am not going to look.
If you have an opinion place it here.
Alex

 

At least tell us what you think of Jay Windley's analysis of the dust-free sand issue.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-ever-happened.512081/page-29#post-1068254989

 

Again I say present your opinion.
I raised issues in my words not those of others I think that is best for us and anyone reading this.
You have the stage so why pass the mic to someone else, I want to hear your concern in your words.
Distil it and present it.
Think of me as a possible convert and present your argument to convert me.
Heck I would love to be convinced everyone has been conned so I must be an easy mark.
However I won't just roll over if the evidence you talk about is not convincing.
Your words please.
Alex

 

Those are my words. My username over there is Scott.

 

Well cut and paste and put what you want here failure to do so sees your opportunity to discuss your concerns die for want of effort on your part.
Alex

 

I am going off now and won't be in a position to input for a while.
Alex

 

It must be very confusing for you. Everywhere you go, people ask you tough questions that you avoid, you get banned for ridiculous spamming and you generally get your whole case systematically torn to pieces.

You were asked what concerned you and I would venture to suggest he meant on topic concerns not total garbage about holocaust denial and a whole host of other batshit crazy conspiracies!

The reason for this is so that you can use it as your biased and dishonest so called credibility test Those who disagree with your clearly inept opinion get labelled as non credible and you refuse then to answer any of their points.

I would like you to respond to the long carefully written post above that you completely ignored, instead of asking for an opinion on a totally irrelevant issue that is clearly not what the evidence shows. SEE MY AVATAR!!

 

Dude that forum link, WTF?

"The Well-Tempered Forum is a community devoted to pianos, piano music and piano players. Visit "The Soundboard" for discussion of pianos, music, teachers and performance. Have something to say on any other subject? Pop over to "Off Key" and speak your mind!"

 

I should point out that he's done that on pretty much the whole internet. Totaĺly mental.

 

I figured you people would tap dance around this issue instead of addressing it.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-ever-happened.512081/page-29#post-1068254989

You're between a rock and a hard place; if you agree with Jay Windley*, you'll all look silly but you can't disagree with him. Any objective truth-seeker would simply say that Jay Windley was wrong when he said that just transporting and placing large-grained dust-free sand would cause enough erosion to create enough dust to cause a dust cloud when the sand is driven over. This is such a basic issue that he wasn't simply mistaken. He was lying. That means he's most likely a paid sophist** working for a public-relations agency that was contracted by the government to engage in damage-control.

Please say whether you think he was right, or wrong.


*
http://www.clavius.org/about.html

**
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
https://openheartedrebel.com/2012/0...-confessions-of-a-paid-disinformation-poster/