The latest moon hoax documentary

[foghorn]

Any luck with the lighting issues...I don't see how we can get around them..you did see the expert evidence from those experts in the video...

Alex. I must admit I have not seen the video about lighting and studio, but found these to answers about lighting in the book mentioned earlier.

Why do the visors show reflections of studio lights?
IN A NUTSHELL: They’re not studio lights. They’re reflections of sunlight on the scratches and smudges of the visors. This is made clear by looking at the high-resolution scans of the photographs. Similar reflections are seen in Shuttle and International Space Station images.

[URL=https://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/2017/07/512-why-do-visors-show-reflections-of.html] From here [/URL]
++++

How come Aldrin looks like he’s standing in a spotlight?
IN A NUTSHELL: He’s not. He’s standing in a patch of the lunar surface where the lunar module’s rocket exhaust swept away the dust, making the surface brighter. Also, the spotlight-like effect is exaggerated in low-quality copies of the photos and is less pronounced in direct scans of the originals. Other natural optical phenomena, such as the way the dust reflects light, can also cause brighter areas in photographs.

[URL=https://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/2017/07/517-how-come-aldrin-looks-like-hes.html] From here [/URL]

and finally what he needs to realise is the only way to put the matter at rest is for him personally to inspect the landing sites and so short of that he is wasting his time... Alex

And when Freddy gets back to Earth ... How is he going to prove he did actually go to the moon to inspect the landing sites?

 

[FatFreddy]

@xelasnave,1947 You asked for proof, just one item - try this one video I found. If you don't understand the implication I can explain. This is IMPOSSIBLE to fake, physics cannot be rigged like this:

First of all that video was made by Betamax who is a known sophist. Here he looked silly trying to obfuscate the clear proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked*.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-faked-in-a-studio.190138/page-8#post-4587436


The first video is about this issue.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-2#post-3636832

Maybe the wire wasn't supporting him at that particular moment.

My math skills aren't good enough to check the math in the second video. Betamax can obfuscate with math and by manipulating the speed of his videos. Betamax does this a lot with issues that require high technical ability that most viewers don't have. When he has to obfuscate a simple clear anomaly, it becomes clear that he's a sophist.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...obviously-in-a-studio.362999/#post-1064030792


Another thing - look at the reflection of the sun in the visors of Betamax's videos and compare it with the reflection of the sun in this astronaut's visor.
https://www.scribd.com/article/370145510/Spacewalking-Astronauts-Give-New-Hand-To-Robot-Arm

Tell us why the reflection is bigger in the Apollo footage. I suspect this.
https://www.aulis.com/sunsize.htm


*
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...obviously-in-a-studio.362999/#post-1064028979

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Hey Alex, gonna address this?

No.

Or must we endure more gish gallup distraction.

What do you mean? If you want a serious reply you need to be specific and outlay clearly your concerns.

I find it interesting that you have another person who thinks the footage was faked but seems to lack the scientific rigour to understand how that it is actually provably impossible.

If you are referring to me I am not a scientist I hope you find that interesting but I will ask..when you say "it is actually provably impossible" to what do you refer...you need to be clearer...in fact I suggest you take a deep breath and gather your emotions as you seem to be so upset you are not being clear. If there is something that I have said that upsets you please take the time to point out what it is so I can clear up any misunderstanding.

@xelasnave,1947 You asked for proof, just one item

I think I asked for proof that we did not go to the Moon and the way you present this aspect it seems you think I asked for proof we did go to the Moon. Are you reading what I ha e written or as I suspect, erupted somewhat emotionally and read what you think I am saying rather than what I have said...you seem to be challenging me as if I think we did not go to the Moon ..is that your impression of me? If so please take the time to read my posts slowly and turn up your comprehension to full please.
You strike me as someone who has gone off lop without actually taking the time to bother to read my posts...what do you post those videos I have already seen them...what is your point?
Alex

 

[David C]

First of all that video was made by Betamax who is a known sophist.

That is called an ad hominem response. Firstly he is NOT a known anything since your jackass opinion doesn't count and secondly that doesn't give you the right to dismiss the content.

The first video is about this issue.
Maybe the wire wasn't supporting him at that particular moment.

Irrelevant what you think. You failed completely to address what is occurring, he cannot be on wires because the soil rises and falls at the same time. It is completely and 100% obvious we see a wave of soil that hits the ground at the same time. So he cannot be on wires, how the hell is he bouncing like that in a damn spacesuit! Since you claim it is speeded up YOU have the onus to explain how this is possible.

My math skills aren't good enough to check the math in the second video.

Your skills aren't good at anything pal! Mine are, his figures are 100% accurate.

Betamax can obfuscate with math and by manipulating the speed of his videos.

Stupidity is not a virtue. That is the original speed and the whole POINT is that NO speed makes the video look normal and only at the ridiculous 245% does the soil fall at Earth freefall.

Betamax does this a lot with issues that require high technical ability that most viewers don't have.

Bullshit. What he does is explain things to simpletons who have no education. You choose to ignore it because it kicks your ass.

When he has to obfuscate a simple clear anomaly, it becomes clear that he's a sophist.

Your jackass opinion does not count.

Another thing - look at the reflection of the sun in the visors of Betamax's videos and compare it with the reflection of the sun in this astronaut's visor.
https://www.scribd.com/article/370145510/Spacewalking-Astronauts-Give-New-Hand-To-Robot-Arm

Different camera you idiot.

Tell us why the reflection is bigger in the Apollo footage. I suspect this.
https://www.aulis.com/sunsize.htm

Here's more for you to run away from:

And this one completely owns Aulis and your stupid claim about the reflection:

 

[David C]

No.

What do you mean? If you want a serious reply you need to be specific and outlay clearly your concerns.

If you are referring to me I am not a scientist I hope you find that interesting but I will ask..when you say "it is actually provably impossible" to what do you refer...you need to be clearer...in fact I suggest you take a deep breath and gather your emotions as you seem to be so upset you are not being clear. If there is something that I have said that upsets you please take the time to point out what it is so I can clear up any misunderstanding.

I think I asked for proof that we did not go to the Moon and the way you present this aspect it seems you think I asked for proof we did go to the Moon. Are you reading what I ha e written or as I suspect, erupted somewhat emotionally and read what you think I am saying rather than what I have said...you seem to be challenging me as if I think we did not go to the Moon ..is that your impression of me? If so please take the time to read my posts slowly and turn up your comprehension to full please.
You strike me as someone who has gone off lop without actually taking the time to bother to read my posts...what do you post those videos I have already seen them...what is your point?
Alex

You claimed the footage was faked. I just showed you proof it wasn't. Hope that didn't confuse you. The fact that you aren't going to address this tells me a lot. My emotions are in check, you are a saint compared to fatfreddy - the worst internet troll in history.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Alex. I must admit I have not seen the video about lighting and studio, but found these to answers about lighting in the book mentioned

Well it could be very hard to make any judgement if you have not looked at what has been raised in respect to the lighting issue.

I was not referring to light reflections but as I said I was referring to the lighting issues referred to in the video that I watched.

Now if you watched the video we could discuss it but as I said early in the peace there is not point in discussing the matter ( I did say entering an arguement) if one has not seen the video and the exact comments on the lighting.

If you watch it you may have an explaination to refute the evidence ( I use the term lightly) of the experts that the only way you could observe the lighting effects in the photos they were asked to comment upon was by using studios lighting...and out of everything that I have seen this one thing seems reasonable, putting all jokes aside, the proposition strongly suggests set lighting...but you have not seen it so you can't offer input which is a pity.

I said nothing about anyone standing in a spot light I have been very specific and it is not fair to attribute me saying stuff that I did not say...

I already see a problem...you cant argue against something you have not looked at.

Now I consider myself reasonable and able to look at things from both sides, in law that's what you do, what I observe here is no one is ,looking at both sides..the whole reason I looked at at least one video of Fat Freddy was to be able to say I have seen what I am discussing..now clearly no one here has done similar..their minds are made up so there is not need to look right...take that video I put up for Paddo..no one will look at that and I say this..if that has not been edited to make them look like they are on wires then they are certainly doing a fantastic job of looking like they are on wires..there is one shot where the guy is floating off the ground for god sake...if you can look at that and say it's ok I would be astounded.

I played then at varying speeds and no matter what speed you get him floating...now if no one has seen it they can't comment..I had expected someone to say the footage has been doctored but no...

How is he going to prove he did actually go to the moon to inspect the landing sites?

It is about him satisfying himself , my point is if one holds a belief the only way to change it is to see whatever with your own eyes.

Alex

 

[David C]

what I observe here is no one is ,looking at both sides..the whole reason I looked at at least one video of Fat Freddy was to be able to say I have seen what I am discussing..now clearly no one here has done similar.

You have to be kidding! This is a guy who has had his arse handed to him about a thousand times by people who have seen every single piece of excrement he has blundered upon. Just because you aren't seeing it in this - probably his thousandth duplicate thread - doesn't mean it hasn't been done.

Specifically what timestamp on what video do you see him floating?

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

. I just showed you proof it wasn't

So you claim but you have not proven zip..proof via a video..you are Joking right...you tbe person who calls into review the scientific approach of others coming forward exclaiming proof via a video ..just mail your video into nature and see how that goes.

No I did not want to argue with you but tell me this from a purely scientific assessment...

If we had a man on a string raising him up and down and kicking up dust do you think it would be at all possible to have him and the dust hit the ground at the same time or at different times or do any damn thing you decided to do to produce whatever result you wanted? And put my question in a context of making a movie not for a moment forgetting seeing King Kong hanging off buildings in New York.

Would it be impossible?

My emotions are in check

That good I just sensed that you went off without all the details..This is supposed to be fun isn't it ..as I said I am not inclined to take it seriously and I thought such would be entirely apparent and that moreover that I was going to great lengths to explain to Freddy that even if what the public saw was a movie that in no way proves we did not go to the Moon.


And so here I am as I always find myself arguing with both sides...and there is a reason for that..folk hear and see what they wish and happily rush past details that may change that position.

Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

You have to be kidding!

Well I wasn't but I admit I have not had any experience with Fat Freddy.

This is a guy who has had his arse handed to him about a thousand times by people who have seen every single piece of excrement he has blundered upon

That's what I was trying to do... simplified...agree with opponent that all their points could be valid, there is no need to argue any point on this approach by the way, and having reached agreement then point out that even if all their points are valid such proof does not establish their case ..so sure all this could be made in a studio and there could be good practical reasons, do science on the Moon not movies, but establishing a movie does not prove in anyway that we did not go to the Moon to prove that you need entirely different evidence so tell me , what you mistakenly took the wrong way, what single piece of evidence do you have that we did not go to the Moon...now add to that approach my determination it should be fun and you must now get where I am coming from.

Personally I do think the lighting thing is interesting..it may be an effect due to no atmosphere but no one is interested.
How they stopped the film being ruined would be nice to know about as even here on Earth cosmic rays can stuff an image.

Anyways to Freddy.
Let's say that you have proved that the Moon landing movie was made on Earth...do you have one single piece of evidence that proves we did not go to the Moon..not you and me..but ..you know what I mean...just one thing is all I want a d in your words and for goodness sake please don't offer a video as evidence.
Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Specifically what timestamp on what video do you see him floating?

I don't know...look I invested time and I am not investing more..you watch it..it's short..put it on fast and if you don't notice anything forget it.
It boils down to this..it must be edited to look bad..if it's not edited they are on wires for sure..my point was to Paddo really that one must suspect editing and by implication if hoaxers have edited that one could ask what else..my suspicion is negative edits probably take place, that guy is selling a book by the way, and because reasonable folk don't watch these things they get away with it...I looked at we did not go stuff years ago but the one this week surprised me..more professional and above all convincing..see what I am driving at?
Anyways I have spent too much time on this..Freddy will not reply because he knows what I am up to.
Alex

 

[David C]

So you claim but you have not proven zip..proof via a video..you are Joking right...you tbe person who calls into review the scientific approach of others coming forward exclaiming proof via a video ..just mail your video into nature and see how that goes.

Sigh! For crying out loud, YOU present stuff that calls into question something you don't understand, via a video. They are on the Moon in low gravity, same inertia but with different friction and motion - I would be staggered if it didn't look odd. The whole point is that every single instance where we see jumps, objects or anything falling it can be shown within a very reasonable scientific rigour to be at Lunar freefall. When we adjust the speed for Earth freefall it looks absurd. EVERY piece of video.

Now the mad troll fatfreddy argues over and over and over again about "wires" and different speeds. Yet, absurdly ignores the way the regolith gets kicked huge distances at normal speeds (horizontal motion is unaffected by gravity). BUT........

That is why I presented two videos that show soil landing at the same time. Clearly we can see the wave of regolith, clearly seen at the same height and the last part of the wave hitting exactly as he lands.
That is impossible to do with special effects from 1972.

If we had a man on a string raising him up and down and kicking up dust do you think it would be at all possible to have him and the dust hit the ground at the same time or at different times or do any damn thing you decided to do to produce whatever result you wanted?

Of course not!! He is being suspended the dust is not. Bloody obvious. The wires alter the rate of fall.

And put my question in a context of making a movie not for a moment forgetting seeing King Kong hanging off buildings in New York.

Would it be impossible?

In 1972 yes. Nowadays, CGI can do anything.

That good I just sensed that you went off without all the details..

I have the details. I had them two decades ago and well before blundering fatfreddy saw some "stuff on youtube".

... there is a reason for that..folk hear and see what they wish and happily rush past details that may change that position.

Seen it all before, not one single thing I have seen stands up to any scrutiny. My position is the same because of that.

 

[David C]

Here is one that the publisher thinks proves the opposite...I ran it first at normal speed and then at slow speed then at fast speed and must admit a couple of these look as if there are wires holding them up...are hoaxers editing these or are they real shots?

Dude, watch it again and look at the soil being kicked. The astronauts appear to be moving slower, the soil is getting kicked massive distances and fast.

"quite often they appear to be pulled backwards" - that would be the 100lb PLSS on their backs.
"and we quite often see some odd jumping as the wire pulls tight" - the example shows him losing his balance from unfamiliarity with low gravity traction.
"you see the astronauts pulled up unexpectedly" - No! You see them using the heavy backpack as a backwards lever. They weigh much less on the Moon but still have the same inertia.
"and balancing can be quite difficult" - but they are on wires! Did the wireman let it go suddenly? Low traction, in a cumbersome suit, unfamiliar gravity.
"swaying on the wire in harmony" - nothing to address just a bullshit observation.
"There is no question the astronauts are on wires. How else can you explain this circus" - Ignorance of the film maker to motion in a low gravity environment in a spacesuit with a large weight on their back. The appeal to incredulity and the natural requirement that everyone should be as ignorant as he is.

nb. many examples from the video are from a camera that is on the Lunar Rover and not parked horizontally - eg. 1 min 23 seconds.

Your floaty bit has to be the sequence at 4.59 - he weighs 6olb in total he is using his left arm to hold himself and then his PLSS and forward motion to right himself.

 

[foghorn]

I said nothing about anyone standing in a spot light I have been very specific and it is not fair to attribute me saying stuff that I did not say...

Alex, I picked those quotes about ''sunlight on the scratches and smudges of the visors'' and ''Aldrin looking like standing in a spotlight'' because they were at hand in the ''free book''.
You didn't give a link to anything you were saying about lighting??

 

[FatFreddy]

Let's talk about Betamax

Here's the proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked that you people are afraid to touch.
https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?169361-The-Chinese-spacewalk-was-faked-in-a-water-tank

Betamax tried to obfuscate it and destroyed his credibility.

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com/2011/07/chinese-spacewalks-part-1.html
http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com/2011/07/chinese-spacewalks-part-2.html


I had a thread on the Chinese spacewalk over at Political Forum. Betamax tried to obfuscate this on that thread and just ended up looking silly so the moderator rode to his rescue and deleted the whole thread.

The clearest proof that I've seen is the flag fluttering the way it would in a gaseous or liquid medium at the thirty second time mark in this video.

Chinese Space Walk - 2008

In his first video (Apollo 17 - analysis of another jump sequence) the astronaut is so far away from the camera that it's not that easy to see what the sand is doing. Go back and look at this.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-2#post-3636832

The astronaut is close to the camera and the behavior of the soil can be seen. The astronaut is obviously on a wire because the soil falls as he keeps rising. This closes the case on that issue.


The proof the footage was filmed in air renders all of your stuff moon anyway.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-6#post-3645387


I'll start looking at your other stuff. Give me some time to catch up.

I'm still waiting for you people to respond to this...
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-4#post-3645211

...and the issues I asked you to address at the bottom of post #35.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-2#post-3636828

You're going to look silly in the eyes of the viewers if you keep ignoring this.

 

[paddoboy]

I'm still waiting for you people to respond to this...

People are aware of what you are and the nonsense you push...sometimes its best to ignore nonsense such as yours.

You're going to look silly in the eyes of the viewers if you keep ignoring this.

Not half as silly as craig2 at cosmoquest who was banned as a sock, or anywhere near as silly as you certainly appear by pushing such nonsense.
Again, we went to the Moon and 12 men walked on its surface....that is an historical fact.
What type of conspiracy are you and/or other gullible fools going to fabricate when we return to the Moon, as a stepping stone for a Mars landing.
Do you like my suggestion of putting you and the criminal Sibrel and the sock craig2 in an area with all the Apollo astronauts that did go to the Moon...all in their eighties now by the way!
I'll try and get Buzz not to lose his cool, promise!!

 

[FatFreddy]

I'm going to make this a little clearer than I did in my last post.

Start watching this at the 00:30 time mark.

Chinese Space Walk - 2008

He moves the flag from right to left. It flutters because it's in water. Betamax maintained that it was normal for the flag to flutter like that in the vacuum of space. That totally showed he was a paid sophist who didn't even believe his own arguments. The pro-Apollo moderator deleted the whole thread.

Tell us whether you agree with him. Give your opinions on what made the flag flutter at the 00:30 time mark.

 

[paddoboy]

Tell us whether you agree with him. Give your opinions on what made the flag flutter at the 00:30 time mark.

I'll tell you what I have told you continually...you are a gullible fraud, pushing nonsense.
Mercury program was fact: The Gemini program was fact: The Apollo program was fact and a culmination of mankind's greatest ever achievement. An irrefutable scientific fact.

Now while you keep on avoiding the issue and facts at hand....again, What type of conspiracy are you and/or other gullible fools going to fabricate when we return to the Moon, as a stepping stone for a Mars landing.
Do you like my suggestion of putting you and the criminal Sibrel and the sock craig2 in an area with all the Apollo astronauts that did go to the Moon...all in their eighties now by the way!
I'll try and get Buzz not to lose his cool, promise!!

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

You didn't give a link to anything you were saying about lighting??

Sorry about that I think it is this one.

Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

You're going to look silly in the eyes of the viewers if you keep ignoring this.

I am assuming you are still trying to catch up and out of concern for you looking silly in the eyes of viewers I remind you of the only relevant question that you need address.
What is your single proof, in your own words, that the Moon missions never took place. Remember what you need to show is not related to any issue as to the movie footage possibly being made in a studio....what I want is evidence that simply establishes that we did not go...so far everything you put up seems to deal with establishing the footage was created on Earth which goes no where to establish that we did not go...so don't risk being silly in the eyes of everyone address the main issue...what is your proof..no videos..your words... imagine you are summing up before a judge and it is your credibility that is on the line...hang on no need to pretend.
Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

For crying out loud

I will have to get back to you ...something has come up but I will reply when I am in a position to do so.
Alex