Lol. Reminds me of a rather humorous time travel novel I read about a viking movie being shot "on location" with real vikings and they still got criticised for the bad special effects and outfits.
I think the biggest one is the Soviet Union congratulated the US on it. If the Soviets had any reason to suspect it was fake don't you think they would have called the Americans out?
Underrated comment. They had every reason to deny we did it. We nearly eliminated the human race with them just a few years prior. There is no way they would have admitted we did it if it was fake.
You'd think. I only recently found a branch of the conspiracy: The U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., among other countries, are part of the New World Order. Always a side step. But this video is good for the basics lol
Germany's rocket scientists were split by USA and Soviet, and they talked to each other. Very easy to see why that happened: If you are in charge of a US agency, company or a Soviet branch, you want results, and the German experts say they can only give you the results if they can talk to their German experts on the other side. Why doesn't the enemies of the establishment call out that the Epstein client list isn't released? Elon Musk did, but why not Russia?
@@thepsychicspoon5984 Lol, if the USSR was part of it, that means all countries that do anything in space nowadays are part of it too... it's so ridiculous how the moon conspiracy logic goes, essentially you'd have to believe in a one world government that controls everything as that's the only way there would be all these government space programs AND private space companies supposedly trying to dupe everyone and working together. No wonder these guys don't listen to reason, if they believe in the whole Illuminati thing
@@thepsychicspoon5984 its astonishing anyone could think that two countries that nearly annihilated human life over their rivalry would magically be together on this... some folks are... simple.
Without watching yet, the biggest contemporary evidence I know of is that none of the mission transmissions were encrypted, everyone could hear everything, and anyone with a simple directional antenna could track them in the sky all the way there and back again. So, at the very least, something went to the Moon, stayed there for a couple days, and came back.
Yeah and the Russians would've been all over it calling the US out for lying, it'd would've been propaganda gold for them catching NASA, and the USA as whole lying about this
@@slyaspie4934 Ah, that just shows how far the conspiracy goes! But yes, anyone with an axe to grind could have just easily pointed out that the transmissions weren't coming from the Moon if they weren't coming from there.
And the time delay means that they couldn't route the signals back to Earth for responses, which means that transmissions where the astronauts *had* to respond in real time, *had* to oroginate on the craft without being able to rely on a pre-eecorded message. Meaning, there had to be something on the spacecraft that was capable of being able to simulate a normal human being in natural speech in real time. We can *barely* pull that off today with modern computers, and the amount of computing power required would have been several times larger and heavier than the entire spacecraft we sent to the Moon, if built with 1969 technology. And the software development - the very *basics* of the necessary algorithms were still being developed a mere 20 years ago.
I have a better one multiple universities with a radio telescope tracked the mission and Cambridge has a printout of it’s tracking that perfectly match’s the Eagle’s landing showing Armstrong and Aldrin looking for a clear landing zone. Then you have the laser reflectors left on the moon that you can still bounce a laser beam off the moon today.
@@BettyWhiteTheVibratorSlayer That *IS* a good one. (BTW, that's quite the handle, Little Lady. Or should I say "Gaping Lady. LOL) {and with a handle like that, I'm guessing you can deal with a bit of raunchy humor:-} Peace
@@Simboiss you need a stronger telescope, the one at our local planetarium can spot the reflectors just fine. You do realize they brought back over a thousand pounds of moon rocks and lunar dust riiggghhhht? 🤪👈
And at that same time, without even the technology to produce a Gameboy or a thumb drive, we somehow manage to fly back and forth to the Moon 6 times, right
@@Loralanthalas I was 6 when the first moon landing happened. It was so cool. I remember on the later Apollo missions, my teacher wheeling the tv into the classroom so we could watch it.
Best answer, before even watching: The Soviets, with their own ongoing moon program since 1959, had everything they needed in place to verify whether NASA was doing what they said. The USSR would have jumped at the opportunity to publicly humiliate the USA if everything wasn't exactly as it was being presented.
Actually , they didn't. The largest telescopes were not controlled by the USSR. Also, you assume that the USSR wanted to humiliate the US, which you can't prove, because it's an emotion in the head of an abtract group of people, living in different conditions and in a different culture. You also believe that their calling out would reach the US, without the media, government and military blocking it. You also assume that Americans themselves would believe the debunking.
@@Simboiss I was going to start listing off the assets the USSR had in place to verify what we were doing, but then i read "you assume that the USSR wanted to humiliate the US, which you can't prove", which shows me you're fulla shit and no amount of actual information is going to help. Kid, the USSR and USA were ALWAYS trying to embarrass the other, at all times. Read a history book or something, for goodness' sake. Or just look around right now, even. The USA and today's Russia are still on very unfriendly terms.
The survival of the Apollo 13 astronauts to me was more unbelievable than the moon landing. How those men were able to make it back despite the odds is just amazing.
The odds were not that bad in the first place. While the accident itself was not anticipated, they were prepared for a range of problems and the mission was set up accordingly.
You bought into the Hollywood version that only a miracle could save the crew, but NASA has so many scenarios/redundancies written into the planning of the space missions. It's one of the reasons that the costs were so astronomical for each moon landing.
Thats what gets me every time. Not that the Apollo 13 astronauts survived. But that the moon landing itself has so many virulent conspiracy theories around it, 1 more unbelievable and selfcontradictory than the next, but somehow, the conspiracy theorist has nothing, when it comes to Apollo 13. Never heard about a single conspiracy theory about Apollo 13. So apparently theyre just fine with Apollo 13 flying to the moon and overcoming their accident and making it back to Earth, but when it comes to the last part, landing on the moon, it suddenly not even possible to get there....
"Im not gonna believe nasa because I don't think there's enough hard evidence" ... "Anyway I'm gonna believe this one guy who has no hard evidence whatsoever"
NASA has been exposed many times for faking photos and lying to us. Yes, all the “technology” to get the moon was destroyed by NASA, but not only that, they have lied and conned many other things
My aunt was Wehner von Braun’s secretary and my dad was a junior engineer on Apollo. The stories they told about their work are more than sufficient for me (along with the mountain of actual evidence). My dad (rest his soul) would laugh about these people after a few beers. Crackpots gonna crackpot, no matter what.
Still dont know how I feel about the US selling its soul (using von Braun) to help us land on the moon. However, if we werent going to take him, the soviets would have.
Want to know exactly why the kubrick theory is actually their downfall he always scouted his own locations and refused to film on a set unless absolutely necessary so either he didn't film it or he did film it on the actual moon
There were something like 300,000 professional people who had some involvement in the Apollo missions, so it would be impossible to fool them all, or to keep them all from revealing secrets. My dad was one of them, an electrical engineer who specialized in microwave communications. He was part of the team at Collins Radio who built the spacesuits and the radio equipment built into them, and the communication equipment aboard the capsule. I remember being 8 years old, watching and listening when the landing occured and what a big deal it was when we heard those famous first words spoken from the Moon. I was older when I learned that my dad was involved in creating the equipment. He was a ham radio operator since he was a teenager which is why he wanted to work at Collins. That company started out making the best ham radio equipment. He listened to the communications just about the whole time, which I thought was boring as hell at eight years old because I didn't understand what it was.
The Soviets had teams of their best scientists, photographic experts, and so on, analyze every speck of information in an effort to debunk the Moon landings. If they had found even the tiniest discrepancy, they would have announced it to the four corners of the world.
Well that sound logic but what about this. How do you think the rest of the world would think of Soviet Union of they told it was fake while rest of the world was 100% certain it was real? Soviet Union would be the worlds joke. Also in the early 70s Soviet and USA cooperated a lot in space so all that would be ruined if they say it was fake. Im not saying the landing was real or fake but the Soviet Union point people make actually doesn't make any sense.
@@jasonking7736 the Soviets said lots of crazy crap that was aired all the time. There are more countries on the planet than just the US and Russia/USSR. Even if the US somehow successfully quashed any reports, other countries would've spoken up.
I did my own orignal research on this. I compared the original Apollo 17 16mm ascent camera film footage to the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) photos. Spoiler alert - they match up precisely. Video on this is on my EEVdiscover channel.
@EEVblog - Great research, Dave! The LRO photos are a great resource. It's so cool seeing the landing sites, especially the Lunar Rover tracks in the Apollo 15, 16 and 17 landing sites.
I'm interested in stereo photography. When you photograph a scene, move to the side, and photograph the scene again, you can use that to create a stereograph and see the depth in the scene. I often do this with two frames from a movie when the camera moves sideways, and when this is done in a studio or sound stage the flat painted backdrop becomes completely obvious, just like you were there in the room with it. I have also done this with the Apollo pictures that they took of the distant landscape while cruising around on the LRV, and those objects are NOT on a flat painted backdrop. They extend away miles into the distance. Good luck faking that one. Edit- My gosh, so many people saying "Deserts exist on Earth, haha gotcha!" What I'm doing here is saying that the photos cannot have been taken in a sound stage. But this whole operation was your idea- you all need the sound stage because lunar photos look bizarre and unlike Earth. On Earth, you have shrubs all over the place even in a desert, and even if you clear them all out for miles, you can't hide the wind and water erosion that's all over the place. The Moon doesn't have wind and water erosion, but what it does have are a lot of craters and micrometeorite impacts that are missing from any desert on Earth. I fully believe that some of you all can't tell the difference, but remember the goal here would be to fool a well-trained, intelligent Russian geologist, and to them the differences would be obvious. And before you keep trying to @ me with some "aha, gotcha!" ask yourself this... The goal of the Moon Landings was to show up the Russians, right? But that can't be done with a simple TV broadcast. The Russians had these things called telescopes and RADAR, and they were able to see and track the Apollo missions from the ground. It's that simple. If they hadn't seen it with their own eyes, they would have called BS and publicly mocked the US. So any contrived conspiracy theory you come up with has to include the cooperation of the Russians. Also, any amateur astronomer with a telescope in the 1960's would have been able to track the modules for at least some distance, much as how amateur astronomers track satellites today. They wouldn't have the resolution to watch them all the way to the Moon, but we would be able to see that they were leaving Earth on a Moon-bound trajectory. How do you fake that one? I get the value of being skeptical, but try to spend some time disproving your own ideas for a change.
@@freeearthcitizen7601 Even modern special effects would be HARD PRESSED to make a believable edit of film of the nevada desert that could pass for the moon.
I would love to see your research, nice research idea. Could your work be released as a ‘how I analysed’ and a 3D film? One claim is that the horizons are too low, so either the most distant part of a scene is quite close or with a lot of the moon buggy footage you have hills in the background. (The same hills in two different missions in two different locations) the star backdrop is completely lacking any artefacts apart from the famous ‘earth rise’ shot where differentiating between subtly different dark blacks show a rectangular box around the earth image. I don’t mind being convinced but your assertions don’t have much weight and are mostly debunking a straw man anyway.
@@jamesmaybury7452 Moon landing deniers seems to willingly forget that the Moon is much smaller than Earth, hence the horizon be much closer, also without atmospheric distortion, making it visually even closer.
We know because The Soviet Union did not publish any articles disproving the landing. Not even in Pravda. We also know because every capable country in the world followed the flight and every transmission. And as we all know, triangulating a radio signal is pretty easy.
There is a photograph on the Internet of Valentina Tereshkova pinning a decoration on Neil Armstrong, when he went on a goodwill trip to Russia in 1970. You can see the mutual respect between the two.
@@Simboissthe Russians managed to infiltrate the nuclear bomb program. They’d have had some inside person in NASA somewhere that would have revealed a hoax.
I had heard that Stanley Kubrick was hired to fake the moon landings. But he insisted on such realism that they ended up having to go to the moon to shoot the footage anyway 😀
@@paulkeenan2691 If by any remote chance Stanley Kubrick was indeed hired by NASA (though his daughter categorically denies it) it was probably to create the out of ship graphics, those we see of a space probe where nothing could film them, those views from distances as short as a few feet from the probe to as far as it could be seen and identified... and they show us such videos because it's what we like most, to watch air or spacecraft flying in their environment, but since there isn't any way they could make a camera fly along and film the craft, they have to draw the view instead. That may someday be possible when they develop inexpensive space drones that can fly along and film shots that replace what till now is done by computer. From what I've read, Stanley Kubrick was an honorable man, and he would have never got involved in such a farse. You probably won't understand this because it takes an honorable mentality to understand another and most conspiranoids are no such thing... if anything they are very dishonest but don't see themselves that way, and think it so easy for others to be like them, but they are very wrong!!!.
@@timpatrickhanna I responded to Paul Keenan because he wasn't being sarcastic, he truly believes that Stanley Kubrick killed himself... after "being discovered for having faked the Moon Landings", but he died of a heart attack during his sleep in 1999, 29 years after the Movie 2001 Space Odyssey.
I worked with Boeing engineers while I was in the army, I met a gentleman who, as a brand new engineer, worked on the camera and transmission equipment to get the pictures from the moon to earth. They had completed the work and were in the “tweaking” phase when in Dec 68 the president made the following statement: “I can’t wait to see the ‘Red, White and Blue’ flying over the moon!” At which point the project lead freaked out because suddenly the specifications changed from black & white to color with less than 6 months to complete the engineering changes!! His comment was “yea, we all just moved into our offices and we worked around the clock, smoked several thousand cigarettes, drank thousands of gallons of coffee and are pbj sandwiches or catered food. Wives and girlfriends collected dirty laundry and delivered clean clothes. He paused for a moment, smiled and capped the story with “it wasn’t all ‘nose to the grindstone’, my first daughter was born in Jan 70…do the math.” We all laughed with him.
Sarcasm... saying something they don't mean, leading on the interlocutor in a way that doesn't make them feel offended, or aware of the real meaning, sometimes it may be followed with a wink towards his acquaintances, coworkers, friends or family. So the meaning of the response is apparently agreeing with the interrogator but clearly not, for those with a brighter mentality.
@@JO-qn8gy not to mention they figured out how to make devices to breath, figured out transmission, made suits that could withstand leaving this atmospheric system and more within a few years of being an established part of the government? 😂
@@CulturalOasis 1958 was the year they named the agency with a formal name, but it was doing the same work since they captured the first Nazi V2 rocket... Radio _"Transmission"_ had been dependably working since 1900. Work on space suits obviously began as soon as they fired the first V2 rocket into space and knew they had to get started to have the suit on time... and it was a simple variant of all the other suits that were being used for orbital missions, which included doing "spacewalks". Just because you missed it all, doesn't mean it never happened... your mind is just one of 7 billion on this planet, and only you know what's in it... so your ideas change nothing. Reality is what most people can witness as such.
I hope flat earthers watch this too. I’ve realized being a flat earther doesn’t just mean that you believe the earth is flat, it pulls behind it a plethora of other dumb theories like that the moon landing was faked and that the dinosaurs never existed.
Fortunately the Soviet Union hadn't yet adopted the modern Russian tactic to just spit in the face of reality and deny it anyway. Wouldn't be surprised if many of these modern "conspiracy theorists" are just Russian troll farmers out to correct that old mistake of the Soviet Union.
About 2 day prior to the launch of Apollo 11 the USSR launched the Luna 15 mission. One of the mission goals was to monitor Apollo 11 flight, Moon orbit insertion and Moon landing. There is also a photo taken by Buzz Aldrin showing Luna 15 orbiting the Moon above Tranquility base. The Soviets knew that NASA landed on the Moon. Luna 15 was sending information about this back to Earth.
I love their Mitchel and Webb sketch were a shadowy government organization are trying to work out how to fake the moon landing. They decide the cheapest option is to fly to the moon and fake it there
"With a little planning, all of this was overcome. It's Almost as if NASA has a lot of people working there, who Know Exactly what they're doing." You are Awesome Simon
Well in a way that's exactly what conspiracy theorists could also say :D E.g. they can fake anything. (I don't believe in the theory, just pointing out a little bit of logic fault)
@@paulhogsten2613 and 400,000 people successfully kept it secret for decades. what's the purpose of lying about going to the moon? Especially after making several return trips, putting landers on Mars, telescopes like Hubble and JWST into space, launching probes like Juno or the Parker Solar Probe, etc? What would be the point of lying to begin with, let alone carrying on that lie? Let alone the impossibility of keeping the secret.
@@paulhogsten2613 Gonna need some reliable, verified sources that are backed with peer reviewed citations to back up that claim, buddy. You're claiming thousands of people faked the moon landing so YOU need to prove it. We already have evidence PROVING, yes I said proving and I did mean proving, you wrong.
They're not always one and the same, but there's certainly some significant overlap on that Venn diagram. Also, conspiracy theories are boring, and their adherents have short attention spans, so they need a lot of them to keep themselves fed.
Exactly my thoughts. I don't think they really believe the conspiracy or that the earth is flat. It's just a fun group to be a part of. Or as Forrest Gump said: You can't fix stupid.
my favourite bit of Lunar Trivia is that Command Module Pilot Michael Collins told Neil Armstrong "If you had any balls at all, you'd go out there and say 'We've touched down on the moon, and - OH MY GOD WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT-" then cut your mic." making him the funniest man to ever walk on the moon.
@@jeffashley5512 it does indeed sound like a Southernism, especially when you pronounce it as rasslin'. 😆 I'm from Georgia myself. So, I know not to be overly critical.
Camera film has a thing called "latitude". I was a photographer in highschool (68-70) and if you set your exposure for very bright items, you'd lose detail in the dark areas. At a basketball game, if you had black players and white players, you could not have detail in both faces without darkroom tricks. So we would "burn in" or "dodge out". For the black players, we would have a small cardboard disk on a wire and block the light to his face for part of the exposure making it look like he had a halo around his head. Burning in: e. g to show detail for a face with pale complexion with blond hair (dark on the negative) you take a piece of cardboard with a hole cutout and allow light to shine through for the face until you have detail making a halo of darkness around the face. Stars are so faint, you have to provide longer exposure at much larger apertures to get them to show up at all. If you expose to see detail on the bright surface of the moon, there's not way to get detail of the stars so the sky looks totally black!
If you look at the photo of Earth that was taken in 2015 from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter just 80 miles above the moons surface you can see the true scale of the Earth This was taken from the far side of the moon just imagine the view in the center of the moon . Don't you wonder why we don't have hundreds of photos from the moons surface with the view of the Earth like this ? Hello because we were never there or we would have . www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/earth_and_limb_m1199291564l_color_2stretch_mask_0.jpg
Slight correction... All in all, *nine* Apollo missions *visited* the moon. Three of them did not land - two because they didn't plan to, and one because of an in-flight emergency.
One thing about being on another planet if there's an emergency. you die, you have a flat tire on Earth you're good have a flat tire on another planet you die
@@healdiseasenow That depends greatly on the nature of the emergency, of course. Apollo 13 suffered a very, very serious failure and yet everyone survived. Had the same thing happened on Apollo 8, it likely would have ended very differently because there was no LM available.
@expattaffy1 Shadows facing two ways? Of course there's nothing even remotely reflective anywhere near them to perhaps cause those shadows. Wow - damning evidence there.
Three guys. Two landed, while the third stayed in orbit above the moon. Six astronauts had what must have been a VERY eerie experience, being _completely_ cut off from all other humans while they were in orbit on the lunar far side.
I kinda wish 4-5 year old you could have met the astronauts. the look of confusion and realization as the astronauts as they figured out that the eagle on the patch would be funny
As someone who has watched your channel for years, progress from thousands to millions of subscribers, knowing 75% of every story you tell....... I always love to watch your content because i always learn a few more tidbits of info about the subject that i didnt know. You may not hear it enough but we love you and what you do, keep doing it!
Regarding Spheres in Space 🌍and Comets: The on screen CGI showing spherical ball🌝🌍⚽objects floating in "Space" is pure nonsense. Our Sun and Moon are local ionizing gas plasma luminaries, travelling within the Tropics. Earth is a fixed level Plane of existence made of fossilized, mineralized biology of mainly ancient Titanic Dragons🐉 some thousands of miles long, turned to stone (Limestone, and Granite) 🗻mountains. The term is nucleophilic substitution, flesh to stone. The 38 Transition Metals we use today literally came from these titans veins, and arteries. The mega titanic fish 🐟🐠🐡give us most of the (SiO2) Silicon Dioxide, and (Si) Silica Dessert sands, exactly like the Sahara titan fish desert ! You still here ? 💫 lol. Space "rocks" ie. Asteroids, Meteors (meat🥩) and of course Comets, are the tough fossil remains of these titans (mostly dragons🐉🐲). The Void of space and level Earth was called the "Raqia" in ancient Hebrew (Latin-Firmament), and "the Expanse" is so massive we get Hyperbolic, and Interstellar (now) Comets. Due to Magnetic Force, when these massive transition metal (conductive) laden space fossils get near Earth's dipole, the Anode is discharging electrons into the "Comet" nucleus and taking protons from it. The Comet is now a hot cathode from a cold state (far away) and Sublimation-Phase Transition (from solid to a gaseous state) is causing it to discharge Carbonaceous Dust and microbes etc. by the hundreds of Tons an hour (example) as a Type2 Comet science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/19apr_isonids above Earth. The 3600 yrs. ago Thera Eruption marked last cycle of energetic Comets, and it was called the "Shar" in ancient Sumerian, the "Completion of the Circuit". The electrical Shar is likely an intentionally induced 👽Cosmic Cycle, which adds raw material (Proton Density, Radial Velocity etc.) to the outer magnetic field of the Toroidal Vortex EMF above the level Earth. The "Solar Wind" is the measured strength of the EMF Torus (AKA magneto/heliopause) without it the harmful ionizing UVC radiation from the Void would make life on Earth impossible. The last Passover 3600 years ago (Minoan eruption) was obviously much, much worse. I figured this out, at far less than NASA $26 Billion a Year budget. 😎 I want a raise, dammit. lol 💲
@@ValMartinIreland Nothing about apollo was "need to kniw" tgey told everyone exactly how they were going to do it. They had TV specials that showed how it worked and included interviews with the engineers that designed it giving guided tours of the equipment it's components and layout. The Glomar Explorer was need to know and nobody cared about it at all but still it was busted after only a year.
What changed my mind was watching the moon rover footage. The moon dust flies unnaturally high into the air compared to what you would see on earth. How could such an effect been achieved? Even more damning is that the dust flies into the air and falls back down without creating billowing dust clouds; this means the footage was filmed in a near complete vacuum. Filmed in what is apparently a large open environment. Such an effect could not be achieved by Kubrick or anyone else at the time.
In fact, a mathematical analysis of the ballistic trajectory of that lunar regolith kicked up by the Apollo 16 lunar rover, published in The American Journal of Physics, May 2012 by two professors from U. of Colorado (Hsiang-Wen Hsu and Mihaly Horanyi), indicated 1/6G gravity and a vacuum environment, a condition that cannot be duplicated on Earth.
Correct - there would be no way to fake the way the dust behaves unless you built a big set in a vacuum. That would be a pretty big vacuum chamber. The REALLY big kicker is that they recorded their journeys from site to site on the rover. There is footage right here on UA-cam of the rover traversing several hundred yards - even miles in some cases - with uncut footage. The lighting in these scenes is absolutely uniform, and objects on the surface are casting one and only one shadow. That means that there is only ONE light source, and that light source must be sufficiently far away. There is a concept in physics/lighting known as light falloff. It basically says that the intensity of light falls off inversely proportional to the distance you are from the light source. To put more simply, it means if you are twice as far away, the light is 1/4th as bright. If you are three times as far, the light is 1/9th as bright. If you are 10 times farther away, the light is 1/100th as bright....and so on. There is no single stage light in existence that could possibly uniformly light scenes as vast as the ones recorded on the rover. It's not physically possible. The only viable SINGLE light source that could possibly light these vast scenes uniformly - meaning it is bright enough - and sufficiently far away to avoid light falloff - - - - - is the sun. It is 93 million miles away, so moving a few miles farther doesn't change the intensity of the light. That's why there is no light falloff and the scenes are uniformly lit for miles and miles. It's the sun. If it were artificial stage lighting, then they'd be like 30 feet away from it at one point and 2 miles away at another. That single light could not possibly light the vast scenes that span miles uniformly. They are on the moon.
@@Doodlebird138 If you study basic physics, the truth reveals itself. The trouble is, the only thing deniers ever study is the motion of their hand movements when masturbating.
One more proof. Some friends and I, working on a college graduate project, built a receiver and dish antenna and listened to Apollo 17 all the way back from the moon. We had to adjust the frequency as it it moved closer because of the Doppler Effect. This can’t be faked because the object has to be far away and moving fast.
Go on next you will say you saw video of them inside the craft. Lol hell they hardly had the tech to get us decent pictures yet you had the tech to follow them. Ha
@@James-bw7rk if your IQ was half of mine your comment, might, mean something. But sorry for you you are prob one of the 86% of the population that has low IQs memory yes may be. But that's not good enough and you are to easy to fool.
This guy seems to not know,how easy it is for a radio expert with rather simple radio gear,amp.and antenna,to listen IN on any found or known radio transmission,around Earth.
It's me again; the dad with the 11 year old son who loves outer space. My son was debunking the conspiracy theory along with you. He's 11 and he gets it. He asked me, "dad, are people really that stupid?" I said, "yes, yes they are." Also, he really liked that someone got punched in the face by an 'old man'.
Think of it more like indoctrination. It's easier to understand that way, the intro and the continued acceptance; it's almost like Stockholm syndrome, where once they're part of it, believing they're right is easier than admitting they were wrong. We have a large portion of the modern population in needs of some real psychological help.
@@kindlin reminds me of my illuminati 9/11 loose change days... i mean there may be something going on there but it def aint people dancing naked around a fire lol
I followed the whole of the space race with bated breath. Kept a scrap book with newspaper clippings. Built the Gemini and Aoollo models. Listened to the touchdown live, courtesy of my science teacher. Apart from all that, the clincher for me is that if it had been fake, the Soviets would have known, and they would have shouted loud.
I started 1st grade in 1959. Watched every Mercury, Gemini and Apollo launch. I remember the B + W TVs the teachers would wheel into the classroom. Up on those big stands. I don't ever remember hearing a peep from the Russians about it being faked.
That's a very dumb justification, 'muricans never believed Russia and back then passed everything as propaganda as the brainwashing was still in full, this wouldn' t be any different.
@@RogueWraith909 You will never see Artemis going to the moon (they will keep pushing the launch date back until the day your gone)! Then on that day your soul will travel to the moon where you will eagerly await the little rocket to land (and there you will wait for eternity -because it will never happen in reality, just on earth in a Hollywood Studio)!
My Dad, RIP, worked for NASA and was a test engineer on the Lunar Rover. He told me that it had to be supported from its frame because it would have collapsed under its own weight on earth. With weight in space flight being a premium, it would make no sense to build a rover that could easily be used on earth as the extra weight in the frame construction would be useless on the moon! Remember, 60 lbs. on earth is 10 lbs. on the moon!
They have to test all equipment on EARTH. Although the Moons gravity is less, there is gravity on the moon and also the pressure G force of lift off. Plus they had to train on Earth with Earth Gravity. Just like the Flat Earthers. There are space photos proving earth is round but still refuse to believe it and the math. The ancient Greek's proved the earth was round with math and observing the stars. People just refuse to research and read.
Why didn’t the astronauts jump 15+ feet (5+ m) on the Moon. Think about it: they were wearing bulky spacesuits that monitored their breathing, heart rate, kidneys, etc. On Earth, such a suit would probably weigh 300-400 lbs. On the Moon, it would weigh 50-70 lbs. Not something you could easily jump up to 15 feet even in reduced gravity!
Lol i was going to type what u said.... but add in the movie THE SHINNING the same director put in the movie trying to tell the public it was fake .. the same guy that produced the fake landing
It's so ridiculous and has caused a lot of distress for buzz aldrin despite the fact he should basically have been able to chill on his laurels bc he basically did the most amazing thing anyone ever did
Another bit everyone misses about the footage of the Apollo landings: back in the day, whenever they started transmitting, the major networks would just start carrying it, sometimes over an hour at a stretch, and we'd sit there watching it, two guys in spacesuits bounding about on the lunar surface. It might have been theoretically possible to fake some shorts with late 60's - early 70's technology, there's no way they could've done it for an hour or more, without any edits, film scratches, etc., which would've given up the whole gig. The nutjobs today only deal with the snippets, not the big long stretches of really not a lot happening. Why fake that in the first place?
@@andersandersen6295 Because the astronauts movements had to be right, else the USSR would immediately call bullshit. Replicating lunar physics on earth would require lots of special effects and as such must be prepared ahead of time, and it all had to be just right, not only in and of itself, but the live performance had to be timed right. On the moon, the astronauts just had to do their thing.
I like the fact that the conspiracy relies on a massive number of people going to the trouble of inventing a whole lot of equipment and scientific data capable of fooling even experts, but also making a whole bunch of really obvious mistakes in their faked footage and thinking, "Eh, good enough."
@@TheCaj2012 there is a video on you tube... Its a video of Neil Armstrong and the others staging the earth view.. Its from the original mission... UPDATE at the advice of someone here I watched the original version of the video I mentioned here.. And the narrator says things that are not happening. So i retract this comment.
@@Jan_Strzelecki oh yeah, you keep believing what the nice lady says. That tuna can never sailed past the ceiling of the movie warehouse it was filmed in
The wildest claim Kaysing made has to be that the most famous people in the country went to Las Vegas and caused a big scene, and no one recognized them.
@@narajuna yes they were. The featured in life magazine and their every move followed for months before the launch. None of them were comfortable with the attention
@@paulinegallagher7821 ?????????????? Oho too much to drink? :) Who said they were comfortable with so much attention? ...WHO followed everymove on the NASA base? Hello? Featured... doing the Greatest Leap of Mankind, think so, NASA is a Civil Agency not a spy one! They all trained much with cameras and expected to be unseen🤔 Wives werent, or Mother(suicide), but these tuff Military Officers were used to uncomfortness. After a Month of Tourring Neil also volonteered to tour with Bob Hope in Vietnam, and numerous interviews after.
You are right. Photographing on earth during “the day” isn’t the same as photographing on the moon with no atmosphere to bounce light around. Yes, there could be a reduction of sensitivity with light from moon surface reflection and exposure settings, but to see nothing at all where it is similar to a bortle class 1 (or better) is strange.
@@normmcinnis4102 one of he most famous photographs is taken from the moon called “ Earth rising” . Still one can see this and still argue that does not prove anything because it is looking directly at a flat earth from the top. It will only work if they take a video from the space station. You can see the rotation of a round planet. Plus if you view the moon or any planet with a telescope. All the bodies are round .
Agreed. And my biggest takeaway from that was, if you listen to the other side and honestly consider their viewpoint/evidence, you might actually learn something new and fascinating.
The best part was when Adam couldn't replicate the movement of the astronauts no matter how much manipulation was applied. If they couldn't do it with more modern camera technology how could they fake it that well in 1969? Also, the Soviets would've pounced on any evidence that is was a sham and exposed NASA as a fraud.
A lot of people tend to forget that each Apollo mission was broadcast live for hours on end....uninterrupted with no cuts. Not just Apollo 11 either every mission up till 17.
It because these people have no idea about live broadcast vs film, special effects and editing, they just like to spread garbage and insult those that went there and even worse, those that died trying...
This is absolutely true: No one has ever been to the Moon. Yesterday, I was talking to Inspector Monk, who investigated the subject, and he said to me, as usual: "this is how it happened": NASA needed a sequence showing the astronauts walking on the moon, but they had to find a director capable of shooting this short film on Earth, in a credible way, and they asked Stanley Kubrick. He agreed, on the condition that the images be as realistic as possible. Some sequences were thus shot in the studio, and others outside. And, since he is a perfectionist, he asked that the outdoor shots be done on the Moon, so they discreetly took all the equipment, the cameras, the spotlights, and even the actors, to the Moon, in the middle of the night, so as not to be noticed, they shot the sequences they needed, and then came back down to Earth, with the recorded images. These were then broadcast on television news, without anyone noticing the deception.😂😅😂
This video should also have included the NASA film that shows a rock hammer, attached to the LEM, swinging on cable, after being released by an astronaut. Its period can be measured, and the pendulum equation can be used to calculate the force of gravity acting on the hammer as it swings. Spoiler: The answer is not 9.8 m/s/s.
They slowed down the video. Oh no, they've gotten to you....wake up....we've never left Ur....all of civilization is a deep fake and the world is a hockey puck.
@@Tallnerdyguy Nobody's denying gravity. But it's easy to manipulate the speed of the visuals to make the pendulum's period correspond to 1/6 Earth gravity. So Chris' comment in no way proves the footage was taken on the Moon.
The laser reflector is still there but I suppose that could have been placed by a very precise remote vehicle. But mostly, the fact that our enemies of the time weren't able to discredit it would be the deciding factor.
Your enemies at the time are the same enemies as the present... they are on the inside. And even if the world worked the way you seem to think it does... had Russia released anything then the media here would have called it lies, fake propaganda, etc... it might have been a talking point for a week but quickly buried. Russia also stuck w the Gulf of Tonkin lies, now officially a lie.... why was Russia/China/Japan/Vietnam not telling us the USA was lying to the world? even now most think Vietnam attacked a US Vessel leading to it... it was lies. If they can lie about a war and those you see as enemies stay silent, dont you think they can do the same for anything else? "Hey Russia... stay quiet... and then you can run your own money laundering operation from taxes w your own space agencies?" Money rules this world... and those that are ruled by it do not care what little act they gotta play as puppets. And I could list many other lies the so called "enemies" of the USA keep quiet about... "It is well enough that the people of this nation do not understand our banking and monetary system... for if they did, there would be a revolution tomorrow morning" - Henry Ford. Could a monetary system that is in essence a scam not be called out by our enemies? umm m not a peep.... isnt that interesting? So many on these comments just assume Russia is an enemy.... if they were an enemy they would educate us on what the above quote means ;) that way we would revolt. So would any enemy... they would tell us about Epstein Island and the world leaders that have gathered there.... but do you hear anything? nope... Behind the curtain, all your "enemies" chill w your leaders... just like the WWE just far more nefarious.
Laser ranging experiments were conducted almost a decade before the “retroreflector” was even claimed to have been placed on the moon. There’s no proof it exists.
Thank you Simon, I was 6 years old, standing outside a department store window in London watching it live with a lot of other people who didn't have televisions. I appreciate you bringing that memory back for me, and probably a lot of others!
There are a lot of folk who think if they can't do or understand something, no one can. Ironically spewing that incredulity on a smartphone to the whole world
Ironically we advanced to the point where idiots that used to just stand on the corner and yell about nonsense can now congregate on the internet and convince each other how smart they are.
I like how people say it was better back in the day. Almost no evidence presented, meanwhile technology is advancing on an exponential curve in some fields... Generally scientific, mathematic and general literacy has increased in the United States. Has it ever occurred to you there are more people, which means more idiots too? By the way if you want to challenge me on my claims I will produce links of you like. What I am saying it's fairly well documented.
@@notsam498 NASA did not lose the technology to go to the Moon in the sense that it was forgotten, mislaid or mysteriously disappeared. A lot of the blueprints still exist on file; but the individual knowledge of everyone involved and the “organisational know-how” of how to actually run such a huge, complex project has been lost. Most of the engineers and technicians are now retired or dead. And on top of that, much of the equipment is incredibly dated, and many things cannot be bought “off the shelf” but would have to be specially manufactured. Re-designing from scratch is cheaper and better. However, there is a price to pay; it takes years to build up that sort of expertise and NASA is going through the problems it had in the early to mid-60’s. The political imperative to accomplish it is also not there as it was during the Cold War. If it is delayed now no one really cares as much, as it’s just another government project that’s fallen behind.
13:00 - While the F1s performed flawlessly, the inboard J2 Engine of Apollo 13 did fail during launch. The spacecraft was still able to achieve orbit. As related in the movie, "well, I guess we've had our glitch for this flight"
It (the inboard J2 on the S2 stage) had an automatic shutdown because it was undergoing the "Pogo Effect". Fortunately the booster already exceeded Max Q at that point, so as the movie said, it was necessary for the remaining four engines to run longer than planned. Would have been a different story had it been one of the first stage engines: they may have been able to compensate for the loss at a critical time in the flight, but at such a low velocity it would have been dodgy. Once again, Lucky 13.
True story - my wife and I were on a tour of Princeton Univeristy - I asked the Princeton historian that was giving the tour if she could name the Princeton grad that walked on the moon (Pete Conrad - Apollo 12) - she could not and so I told her. She then looked at me and said "If we actually landed on the moon!?! - I walked away shaking my head in disbelief
This is wonderful! And it reminds me of that NBA player who said the Earth was flat.. and then when corrected, everyone in the group said that the round earthers had got to him😂 so I guess the moon landers got to you?😂
There's an old Tom Clancy quote that comes to mind when thinking about keeping all of the Apollo people quiet: The chance of a secret being leaked is equal to the square of the number of people who know it.
Same problem as always: the same people who will hit a pot hole and bitch that the gubberment! Can't even fix the roads, will easily assume that same government can keep the largest secret in history. It's just stupid, all the way down.
You're really not thinking it through! I'm not saying it was a hoax, but being ex military I know for a fact, that secrets are very easy to keep and to fake the moon landing less than ten people could have been involved, who when sworn to secrecy and had family threatened, would have remained quiet forever. Firstly like most people who don't think about the facts, if you watch the movie Capricorn one, you will realize that less than a handful of people needed to know it was fake. The astronauts get out of the rocket prior to launch, so only they know and all footage shown on TV after that is either staged in a mock-up, or playback. The entire NASA training missions were recorded as if they were actually happening even with fake telemetry readings. The best of those recordings could easily have been played back to everyone in launch control, as all they saw were monitors! Look at the astronauts in interview the day after they return to Earth, they look very odd, almost nervous, several times Armstrong is about to say something then he is either cut off or suddenly interrupted. They did not look as elated, excited or even as happy as three men who'd supposedly landed on the moon. Incidentally, Russia never landed on the moon and they also have a rover and a laser reflector on the lunar surface! Finally folks, when you're enlisted and told to keep a secret, you keep it, if it's serious and your life (and that of your dearest) are threatened, you keep a secret and then when someone you know who also knows the secret, dies in an unusual accident or out of character commits suicide in an odd way that's never questioned, you will be even more likely to keep your mouth shut. Watch the movie the Imitation Game. When the allies broke enigma enabling them to win ww2, many people knew at the time and yet it was kept total secret for 40 years! Wakey wakey...
Which is precisely why government intelligence organisations that employ 1000s, 10s of 1000s, or in the case of the CIA, over 100,000 people, don't work and can't keep secrets... Corporations that have trade secrets don't keep those secrets either because of the thousands of people working for them... Information compartmentalisation and non-disclosure agreements with criminal penalties don't exist... People are never motivated by self-interest like a big salary or prestige, and they never agree to exchange any amount of their freedom of expression for a great job with great benefits and salary... Nevers happens...
Mythbusters did a segment that took them to an Observatory, where Scientist running the Observatory said the were actually reflectors left on the Surface, and that she could actually fire a Laser at it, and she would get a return signal. Very interesting segment. We've been there.
I watched the moon landing on TV. I was nearly 4 years old at the time. In the USA, it was 20/07/1969. Here in Australia, it was on 21/07/1969. My older sister turned 12. Once I was old enough to learn about this, I had a very big interest in astronomy. Even now, there are times when I go outside at night, & look at the moon with either binoculars, or if I want a closer look, I then set up my high powered Celestron telescope. Looking into space with these is very interesting. One night, I was going to visit friends, & I saw a bright light moving across the sky. I was asked about it, & I said it was the ISS. I got in my car, switched on my Amateur transceiver, dialed up the frequency, & tried contacting them. I wasn't fast enough. As far as I know, Edwin Aldrin is still alive. In my opinion, the moon landings are a real feat of engineering. I hold those involved in awe.
Some years ago, in the 1990’s, I was working as a Director at Financial News Network, an American Cable TV Network. I was Directing a show called “The American Entrepreneur”, and on one episode, Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin was the sole guest. At about 20 minutes to air, I walked past the “green room” and noticed that Buzz was sitting in there ALONE! So I came in, introduced myself and told him that I’d always wanted to shake hands with a man who had walked on the moon! He was a fine fellow, and we were able to talk for about ten minutes before I had to get to the control room and get ready to go on-air. To this day, I have no idea what his business was, but I’ll always remember having spoken with Buzz (and what a small human he is!). All the astronauts were very small in size, because every ounce cost thousands to get into orbit.
@@jondrew55 What’s even better is that they wouldn’t even have had to take any cheese with them… Those highly respected scientists Wallace and Grommit had already proved that in fact the moon was made of cheese, though not as good as Wensleydale
What most people don't know is that it was grilled American cheese sandwiches on Wonder Bread with extra butter. Delicious. All kidding aside, it could have been code for getting the world to think that something fake (like American cheese) is real.
I’m sure the Americans would have tracked the ‘first man’ Gagarin spacecraft and be the first to shout out if he didn’t. Unless they both follow the same orders to fake the globe with fake space
@@Globeisahoaxx Treaty: Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only Art. I Freedom of scientific investigation in Antarctica and cooperation toward that end… shall continue Art. II Scientific observations and results from Antarctica shall be exchanged and made freely available Art. III
Thank you jrclad! Challenger broke my heart. I was a teenager playing hookie from school with my boyfriend. We watched it live and for decades I felt a twinge every time the subject came up over years. Until a couple years ago when I learned that several of the Challenger astronauts had some version of a twin still living and thriving, including Ronald McNair's identical twin brother. Which emoji is 'silly me'?
The dust is a really interesting tidbit that I’d never heard of before. In addition, the amount of inventions that were discovered and developed as a result of the Apollo missions just adds more credibility to the efforts put in by countless Americans to make this possible. The next time you need to use an emergency blanket, you can thank the Apollo program for keeping you warm
If you want more of an explanation of the dust from the lunar rover, then check out Vintage Space’s channel and video on the subject. I wouldn’t be surprised if her work contributed to this video.
@@brentgranger7856 I have commented and linked Vintage Space's video numerous times in comments on this channels other posts. I am sure they have seen it and are aware of it. Proof is in the dust.
Well done. Simon is at his best when he avoids the snarky sarcasm he employs in other videos, and sticks to facts and intelligent, well reasoned delivery. This video is about as good as it gets.
References to Stanley Kubrick's 2001 a Space Odyssey point out several inconsistencies in the assertion that this was all staged. Although the film was magnificent, I can point out many special effect issues. One of these is the billowing clouds of moon dust surrounding the arrival of the moon bus at Tycho crater. In a vacuum, the dust would simply have fallen back onto the moon, like it did whenever the lunar roving vehicle kicked up dust in Apollo 15 through 17. Also watching astronauts walking on the moon, like they would on Earth is another inconsistency. This is especially true when inside the Clavius moon base. Without the bulk of a spacesuit, a person would have a very hard time simply walking. Reducing someone's weight to 1/6th would make the floor 6 times more slippery. I don't expect either Stanley Kubrick or Donald Trumbull to have taken either of these into account in 1967. Likewise, NASA wouldn't have either.
@cosmic cat Exactly right. To fool some people you just pander to their craving for scandal and gossip. To get people to admit they are wrong often requires compelling evidence.
The corridor crew did a breakdown on the moon landing and they said with the technology back then, they could not recreate the dust fall. Even with today’s technology it wouldn’t be easy. They are CGI experts so do i believe them, or some random conspiracy theorists on the internet? It’s a tough call.
I used to work in a candy factory and the molds used for juju, gummies, and jellybean centers are trays of starch that is stamped with a negative mold. The way the starch holds the shape is what makes this possible. Furthermore, when you step in a pile of starch it leaves a better impression than moist soil and it's very dry so I've never doubted the authenticity of the foot prints
Just for sake of argument, starch isn't the same as other materials. Diatomaceous earth is also very, very dry, but doesn't behave the same as starch, which is a slippery feel.
@expattaffy1 I bet that you posted this comment immediately after the photo appeared on screen. I've seen how long conspiracy theory videos are, you should have capacity to stay seated until the section that addresses those "errors".
Another crazy simple thing that blows appart the multiple light sources claim. Multiple light sources cast multiple shadows, switch on two table lamps in a dark room and you'll see two shadows cast on the ceiling light.
Good point! I don't even see the shadows as strange at all because I grew up with walking in the woods on sunny days. Uneven ground + sunlight = the same kind of shadow distortion.
@@gmain1977 Proving the point being made. Believing a questionable claim in the face of mountains of evidence doesn't make you smart, quite the opposite.
@@tommasotiberi5666Their ship was shielded as much as possible to protect them from severe radiation exposure, allowing the Apollo astronauts to go through the Van Allen Belt without suffering from any major radiation exposure.
There are all the photographs available on the March to the Moon and NASA websites. Super large RAW files, uncompressed. Plus all of the footage from various cameras from each mission. Thousands of pics and films. Many showing the complete descent to the moon's surface from over 47,000ft high to touch down. From 47,000ft above any surface, one can see hundreds of miles! All shot on analogue film with no edits. No flying bugs of any kind in any of the media. You try shining even one small torch in a desert and see how many bugs fly by continuously. The Lunar Rover footage shows 360 degrees and some shows them traversing over a mile, until the film cannister runs out. All with no movement of deep, sharp shadows, caused by one magnificent light source - the sun. No light drop-off in any of the photographs, over any of the terrain. It would be impossible to shoot those photographs in a studio or some 100 mile wide outdoor stage (again with no flying insects) Nine missions around the moon, with six landings and thousands of media files for foreign agents to ponder over. We didn't have digital recordings back then, nor CGI Chromo-key (blue or green screens) and not even Hollywood today, could shoot such enormous scenes with one gigantic light source. (Even two lights would make multiple shadows, given you could suspend such massive, powerful lighting miles above a studio set up, to create such hard shadows) Plus, all the highly detailed moon surface footage would have had to be mapped out and created perfectly - every divet, just in case oh, 40, 50 years later, the moon was photographed/filmed by modern hi-res cameras, from various other countries, including the USA's greatest rival...far easier to just go there....six times.
Don't be so gullible McFly and stop being so arrogant and thinking you're too smart to get dupped well you're not the fact that you still believe it says it all I apologize if I'm being rude but for me that's being extremely nice in well-mannered so again I apologize if I offended you
Very concise explanation with absolutely zero holes for the ignorant to try and pick apart. Explains why it has so few responses as when someone knows what they are taking about they normally turn and run. Well done mate
In April 2021 the ISRO Chandrayaan-2 orbiter captured an image of the Apollo 11 Lunar Module Eagle descent stage. The orbiter's image of the Apollo landing site was released to the public in a presentation on September 3, 2021. Apollo missions were tracked by independent parties at the time, including a group at Kettering Grammar School who monitored radio transmissions of Apollo 17 in 1972. The question is a nonstarter for anyone with the will to think and research for themself.
A conspiracy theorist died and found himself at the Pearly Gate. Saint Peter greeted him and said, "All men go to their graves with unanswered questions. Because you were a God-fearing and pious man, you may ask one question and I will give you the true answer." With out hesitation, the man asked, were the moon landings faked?" Saint Peter, sighed loudly, and said, "God gave men the intelligence to explore and understand his creation. Apollo 11 landed on the Moon on July 20th, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the Moon and returned safely to Earth." The man shook his head in disgust and said, "The conspiracy goes much higher than I thought."
What St Peter actually said was "God gave men a brain, and expects them to use it -- think for yourself, and don't believe all the BS that is shoveled your way in life." We will make it to the Moon someday, when we have the technological ability to do so, without dying from cosmic radiation.
@@freeearthcitizen7601 There is not enough radiation in the Van Allen belts to kill anyone. James Van Allen, who discovered the belts in 1958, wrote an open letter saying that such claims were "nonsense". The radiation in the belts is composed of charges particles that cannot penetrate the aluminum skin of the spacecraft. Further, the trajectories they flew went around the thickest portions of the belts and they flew through the belts so fast they weren't in them for very long. This claim made by conspiracy theorists is false, just like all the others like the flag waving, no stars in the pictures, no crater under the LM, rockets won't work in space, etc. Its all a bunch of made up nonsense that's already been debunked many times over.
Ah, you see the thing you are missing is that Kubrick is such a perfectionist that he insisted on filming the entire thing on location with method actors. That’s how he made it so convincing.
My favorite thing is asking “well how come Astronauts haven’t come out and talked about this since it’s been so long, many are rather old?” and someone responds “well the government would kill them or silence them” and then I say “but they didn’t kill or silence Kaysing, now, did they? why would they let him shout this from the roof and gather a following, but wouldn’t let people actually involved in the landing talk? the people who can ACTUALLY dispel all these rumors?” And the best answer they have is “they’re all in on it” or “all the astronauts are in on it” LOL. you mean every single person who has ever been to space, the space station, and to the moon are ALL simultaneously in on it?
You dont need all of them to be on it. Just showing them the video footage as if it was real already fooled them. They're talking to someone on earth not the moon.
And they'll tell you yes. That's the problem with conspiracy theories. They provide value to the person (they're smarter for realizing the TRUTH!!) and they can just sweep all counterargument as they're in on it.
@@sH-ed5yf I was making a humorous reference to the "pitch meeting" UA-cam videos 👀 it's a famous quote that he always says. " Actually no barely an inconvenience" In fact, I am quite sure that if you were to just google the words " barely an inconvenience" stuff on the guy's channel will be right at the top of the list 🍻
@@Tim22222 Illiterate but so confident at the same time. The classical flat earther Jack swaggert was one of them died 10 years after his Mission. He was 51.
I was trying to figure out what they meant by non-parallel shadows. I think it looks flawless. Sure, lots of weird shadows around that *cough* shadowy terrain, but what do you expect? lol
There were multiple light sources: the Sun, the light reflecting from the Earth, and light reflecting from the Moon`s surface, spacecraft, spacesuits, etc.
This was very well done. I am impressed. I have two corrections, though. At 10:57 the narrator says that the average distance to the Moon is 237,000 kilometers. In fact, the average distance to the Moon is 383,000 kilometers (238,000 miles). Also, each astronaut wore a dosimeter, and the radiation exposure varied from one astronaut to another.
Here’s where the problem lies: it is 237,000 miles. How many kilometers is immaterial. The USA went to the moon, not Canada. Also notice that the astronauts did not repeat every sentence in French either.
The manhatton project was top secret,the apollo program was very public,every single mission was shown on live tv,not exactly something you would do if you were trying to keep something secret,as for the radiation belt,james van allen HIMSELF has said the amount of radiation for astronauts was less then 1% of a fatal dose
These type of conspiracy theories really gives the government way too much credit. Maybe South Park has a point and the moon landing conspiracy theories are a government conspiracy to make themselves feel more powerful.
Agreed. On the one hand, people are constantly amazed by how stupid and inept the government is and no one there can keep anything secret...but suddenly it is full of evil geniuses who all go to their graves without talking about wide-ranging conspiracies they were involved in...? You just have to ask which is more plausible.
Right. Remember when the Manhattan project was leaked. Also, remember when the stealth bomber project and U2 spy plane projects were leaked. The government is full of idiots that have all the money and power. If only they were as competent as the masses. 😂
I'm so glad that you, with your many channels, are covering so many interesting events in history, always great research and always fun to watch. Thank you!
Explain how nasa destroyed all the telemetry tapes? They destroyed manuals and equipment used to make the tapes as well That should of been saved for archives
As numerous individuals /Corporations Businesses he is keep busy with..... "thousands of times debunked nonsense" by Crazies with no basic Science (living in mom basement).
Flat earthers space deniers and moon landing deniers all do the exact same thing. They ask for pictures, you show them pictures. They say they’re fake, then ask again for pictures.
@@dansv1 yup, can show them anything and they'll just say it's fake, hell you can show them math and they'll just say "yeah what ever that doesn't work." or completely ignore it and say some other stupid claim.
Just for your information, there is no film or original images from the Moon landings, they were all some how destroyed so, the show an image is a false excuse, also Flat Earthers can't be thrown in with the Moon landings as there is a huge difference, one we still can't do today, the Earth we can see from LEO which is a pretty normal thing, we just can't get humans or animals past LEO, the only creatures that made it past LEO and back were two Tortoise, this is a fact you can Google it, the Tortoise have a very high radiation tolerance. Nice way to make your point of view very easy though ;) don't be so lazy next time and do a little research at least.
Round earthers all repeat what NASA has told them. Not one of them has been to the moon, proved curvature, or left earths orbit. They believe whatever NASA tells them.
@@leifburke5905 I have been high enough to see the curvature easily, I have also been in one of the tallest buildings in the world and seen the SUnset three times in the same afternoon, plenty of experiments that easily show a curved or round Earth, you can do it yourself, just go to a very tall building with a fast lift, watch the Sunset from ground floor then ride the elevator up to the top floor and Bingo, the Sun is ther ein all it's beauty to see and watch go below the horizon again, explain that on a flat earth lol.
4:02 Okay but if Kaysing believed NASA _could_ successfully launch an _empty_ rocket into space in '69... even though his incredulity was _specifically_ caused by the fact that the rockets were exploding on the launchpad two years prior... then his own conspiracy theory, by his own admission, _requires_ that NASA could successfully launch Apollo rockets? So...
Conspiracy nuts fail to see the irony that elaborate conspiracies that fooled billions of people also require them to make seemingly (to the nutjobs anyway) obvious mistakes so bad that the average Joe can see thru them just using "common sense" . Basically conspiracies all require the conspirators to be dumber than the person that sees thru them, even tho that defeats the whole point of a conspiracy in the first place.
But rockets weren't exploding on the pad 2 years prior. There was a test of the launch escape system on a Saturn 1-B where a rocket was intentionally broken up and exploded. Apollo 1 was not a Saturn V and was meant to be a test of the command and service modules. White, Grissom and Chaffee were performing a plug-out test where the command and service module would not be connected to any ground systems to test its life support and power. The Saturn V didn't launch and until Apollo 4, and it was uncrewed. As was the case for the second launch of the Saturn V with Apollo 6. The conspiracy theorists just make shit up.
@@krozareq Sure, but I was taking his own premises and placing them next to each other to show _even without needing to check anything_ his own reasoning is loony.
@@Zahaqiel Have you not seen Trumperism in the last 5+ years? The human race is on some kind of downward slope right now, and we have got to find some way out of it, unfortunately Idiocracy is starting to look more and more like a documentary and less like satire.
Look at all the astounding camera images, one in particular, the rocket detached segment. And of the Luna module landing it's self. How were these images obtained?
If you're talking about the footage of the LM ascent stage leaving the Moon, which was only captured on Apollo 17, it was filmed by the camera on the rover, the tilt mechanism operated remotely by Ed Fendell and NASA. As for the LM landing, the only footage of that is from the inside, from a camera mounted to the inside of one of the windows. If you're referring to anything else, please be more specific.
2:59 I think that says it all. “Allegedly” obtained a report approx 10 years before Apollo 11 and only 15 years after the first man made rocket reached space. Even if that report exists, which is dubious, it would not be a surprise if it cast doubt on the possibility of a successful moon mission. Kind of like that engineer who predicted it would take humanity a million years to develop a working flying machine… one year before the Wright brothers’ first successful test.
That would put the date around 1959, and it was too early to know anything about the difficulty of a Moon Landing. They were just starting to put small satellites in low orbit, and the Moon was impossible to reach at the time, before the 50s decade ended.
@@crazytrain7114 Around 2004 Intel said processors had reached a dead end in how fast they could be created (or something of the sort), that was when the single core Pentium 4 had reached a dead end... the next year dual-core processors came out.
And at the date that guy made that prediction, it was probably even less probable, they didn't know s*** about what was beyond the atmosphere and they didn't even know how high it was, they didn't even know about the jet stream till World War II
Werner Von Braun who is considered to be one of the godfathers of NASA and rocket technology a Nazi who was so important to the US that they forgave his war crimes and hired him to head Nasa said it would take 50 to 100 yrs to develop a rocket to the moon but after Kennedy bragged about it being done in 10yrs they had to do something to keep up with the USSR because they had launched Sputnik and a cold war. DO you people read history or do any research??? Connect the dots or you will be fooled again and again by our SHADOW Gov't!
My favorite is when people talk about the flag "flapping in the breeze". 1. It looks completely unnatural to the movement of real flag on Earth. 2. The top of the flag clearly has an internal support since it never moves and remains straight throughout it's handling. 3. How can there be a "breeze" if this was supposedly shot on a sound stage?
I like the old saying; "two can keep a secret if one of the two are dead." Just think about all the people involved who would have kept such a great secret. Impossible!
@@jflaplaylistchannelunoffic3951 Not entirely - Russian spies found out about it. Also, that was a military project during war time. Apollo was an open project involving dozens of companies. And, once that rocket took off, neither NASA nor the U.S. government could stop anyone with a telescope or a HAM radio antenna from tracking the craft. Even if "they" wanted to hide the hoax, "they" couldn't control those outside the program or organizations they had access to.
Some of us are old enough to have watched it live on black and white TVs. With the USSR no doubt primed to throw any possible doubt on the achievement.
You're right. Kubrick was a perfectionist. That's why, when NASA asked him to fake the Moon landings, he insisted that they do it on location.
Lol. Reminds me of a rather humorous time travel novel I read about a viking movie being shot "on location" with real vikings and they still got criticised for the bad special effects and outfits.
You comment that in other video. Pls be more original. You can describe the same facts with different words (synonyms).
@@michaelpettersson4919 Hey, Michael, what's the title of that book? Sounds really good and funny.
@@donlebo6824 I am also curious, a quick Google suggest "The Technicolour Time Machine"?
@@lukekingsland5851 That looks like the one. Thanks. I'll definitely have to read that. That one would make a great movie.
I think the biggest one is the Soviet Union congratulated the US on it. If the Soviets had any reason to suspect it was fake don't you think they would have called the Americans out?
Underrated comment. They had every reason to deny we did it. We nearly eliminated the human race with them just a few years prior. There is no way they would have admitted we did it if it was fake.
You'd think. I only recently found a branch of the conspiracy: The U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., among other countries, are part of the New World Order. Always a side step. But this video is good for the basics lol
Germany's rocket scientists were split by USA and Soviet, and they talked to each other.
Very easy to see why that happened: If you are in charge of a US agency, company or a Soviet branch, you want results, and the German experts say they can only give you the results if they can talk to their German experts on the other side.
Why doesn't the enemies of the establishment call out that the Epstein client list isn't released? Elon Musk did, but why not Russia?
@@thepsychicspoon5984 Lol, if the USSR was part of it, that means all countries that do anything in space nowadays are part of it too... it's so ridiculous how the moon conspiracy logic goes, essentially you'd have to believe in a one world government that controls everything as that's the only way there would be all these government space programs AND private space companies supposedly trying to dupe everyone and working together. No wonder these guys don't listen to reason, if they believe in the whole Illuminati thing
@@thepsychicspoon5984 its astonishing anyone could think that two countries that nearly annihilated human life over their rivalry would magically be together on this... some folks are... simple.
Without watching yet, the biggest contemporary evidence I know of is that none of the mission transmissions were encrypted, everyone could hear everything, and anyone with a simple directional antenna could track them in the sky all the way there and back again. So, at the very least, something went to the Moon, stayed there for a couple days, and came back.
Yeah and the Russians would've been all over it calling the US out for lying, it'd would've been propaganda gold for them catching NASA, and the USA as whole lying about this
@@slyaspie4934 Ah, that just shows how far the conspiracy goes!
But yes, anyone with an axe to grind could have just easily pointed out that the transmissions weren't coming from the Moon if they weren't coming from there.
And the time delay means that they couldn't route the signals back to Earth for responses, which means that transmissions where the astronauts *had* to respond in real time, *had* to oroginate on the craft without being able to rely on a pre-eecorded message. Meaning, there had to be something on the spacecraft that was capable of being able to simulate a normal human being in natural speech in real time. We can *barely* pull that off today with modern computers, and the amount of computing power required would have been several times larger and heavier than the entire spacecraft we sent to the Moon, if built with 1969 technology. And the software development - the very *basics* of the necessary algorithms were still being developed a mere 20 years ago.
@@ryandean3162 : Down the Rabbit Hole.
Go ask Alice ua-cam.com/video/ug2EcWkb26I/v-deo.html
I have a better one multiple universities with a radio telescope tracked the mission and Cambridge has a printout of it’s tracking that perfectly match’s the Eagle’s landing showing Armstrong and Aldrin looking for a clear landing zone. Then you have the laser reflectors left on the moon that you can still bounce a laser beam off the moon today.
About any conspiracy, Mark Twain said it best with: "Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead."
The reason people don't believe it is that united states is a liar. All western media lie. It's really about reputation.
My favorite from Longhorn was "Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."
@@BettyWhiteTheVibratorSlayer That *IS* a good one.
(BTW, that's quite the handle, Little Lady. Or should I say "Gaping Lady. LOL)
{and with a handle like that, I'm guessing you can deal with a bit of raunchy humor:-}
Peace
How many people would STILL believe in the Apollo landings if we'd show them 4K photos of the empty spot in Mare Tranquilitatis?
@@Simboiss you need a stronger telescope, the one at our local planetarium can spot the reflectors just fine. You do realize they brought back over a thousand pounds of moon rocks and lunar dust riiggghhhht?
🤪👈
Do you remember the time we thought the stupidity was caused by a lack of access to information?
Yeah, it wasn't that.
😂👍
you are right. the fact you comment here proves it
@@milo-qh7cv ditto
@@milo-qh7cv not really, get better insults
"a fetus is a living being", what sort of info can you derive from that? if you are illiterate you fall for it. and.or stupid.
In 1969, getting a clear picture on your tv set was a mission in itself.
Underrated comment. When I was a kid, playing with matches got you in serious trouble. Screwing with the antenna dial got you killed 😁😁😁
And at that same time, without even the technology to produce a Gameboy or a thumb drive, we somehow manage to fly back and forth to the Moon 6 times, right
@@jaqua7732 tech may help you life your life, but billions of us lived lives without, Hon.
This is the reason they "went there". Today the 4 k tv with full set of RGB colours makes it impossible. Thats all about it.
@@jaqua7732 😂😂😂😂
It's kind of weird that the moon landing didn't become a US annual holiday, considering the massive achievement it was.
Sure, 12 days after INDEPENDENCE DAY. That'd make a lot of sense.
@@ronjones-6977 horrid timing for holidays GREAT TIMING for 1969
the american people lost interest in the space program after apollo 11, except for a few days when apollo 13 was looking like a goner.
That would make it seem like we thought it was a big deal.
@@Loralanthalas I was 6 when the first moon landing happened. It was so cool. I remember on the later Apollo missions, my teacher wheeling the tv into the classroom so we could watch it.
Best answer, before even watching: The Soviets, with their own ongoing moon program since 1959, had everything they needed in place to verify whether NASA was doing what they said. The USSR would have jumped at the opportunity to publicly humiliate the USA if everything wasn't exactly as it was being presented.
Wow! Do you get a cracker for being a parrot?
That’s not true at all.
@@CH-so8tn😂😂ay yoh. Thats wild😂😂😂
Actually , they didn't. The largest telescopes were not controlled by the USSR. Also, you assume that the USSR wanted to humiliate the US, which you can't prove, because it's an emotion in the head of an abtract group of people, living in different conditions and in a different culture. You also believe that their calling out would reach the US, without the media, government and military blocking it. You also assume that Americans themselves would believe the debunking.
@@Simboiss I was going to start listing off the assets the USSR had in place to verify what we were doing, but then i read "you assume that the USSR wanted to humiliate the US, which you can't prove", which shows me you're fulla shit and no amount of actual information is going to help. Kid, the USSR and USA were ALWAYS trying to embarrass the other, at all times. Read a history book or something, for goodness' sake. Or just look around right now, even. The USA and today's Russia are still on very unfriendly terms.
The survival of the Apollo 13 astronauts to me was more unbelievable than the moon landing. How those men were able to make it back despite the odds is just amazing.
The odds were not that bad in the first place. While the accident itself was not anticipated, they were prepared for a range of problems and the mission was set up accordingly.
That was another drama enacted to give "legitimacy" to the so called "moon landings".
You bought into the Hollywood version that only a miracle could save the crew, but NASA has so many scenarios/redundancies written into the planning of the space missions. It's one of the reasons that the costs were so astronomical for each moon landing.
Thats what gets me every time. Not that the Apollo 13 astronauts survived. But that the moon landing itself has so many virulent conspiracy theories around it, 1 more unbelievable and selfcontradictory than the next, but somehow, the conspiracy theorist has nothing, when it comes to Apollo 13. Never heard about a single conspiracy theory about Apollo 13. So apparently theyre just fine with Apollo 13 flying to the moon and overcoming their accident and making it back to Earth, but when it comes to the last part, landing on the moon, it suddenly not even possible to get there....
Hollywood. Watch the edits when they supposedly returned from space
"Im not gonna believe nasa because I don't think there's enough hard evidence"
...
"Anyway I'm gonna believe this one guy who has no hard evidence whatsoever"
Absolutely
Makes sense to me. Remember what Q-anon says: Do your own research.😳😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏😏
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
NASA has been exposed many times for faking photos and lying to us. Yes, all the “technology” to get the moon was destroyed by NASA, but not only that, they have lied and conned many other things
Come on, be fair. At the very least, it's thousands of people with no hard evidence whatsoever.
@@andywest5773 I had some hard evidence, but I dropped it and it broke.
My aunt was Wehner von Braun’s secretary and my dad was a junior engineer on Apollo. The stories they told about their work are more than sufficient for me (along with the mountain of actual evidence). My dad (rest his soul) would laugh about these people after a few beers.
Crackpots gonna crackpot, no matter what.
Still dont know how I feel about the US selling its soul (using von Braun) to help us land on the moon. However, if we werent going to take him, the soviets would have.
@@YzerWings I also have deep misgivings. Not surprisingly, that part was never brought up much in family retellings.
Want to know exactly why the kubrick theory is actually their downfall he always scouted his own locations and refused to film on a set unless absolutely necessary so either he didn't film it or he did film it on the actual moon
There were something like 300,000 professional people who had some involvement in the Apollo missions, so it would be impossible to fool them all, or to keep them all from revealing secrets.
My dad was one of them, an electrical engineer who specialized in microwave communications. He was part of the team at Collins Radio who built the spacesuits and the radio equipment built into them, and the communication equipment aboard the capsule. I remember being 8 years old, watching and listening when the landing occured and what a big deal it was when we heard those famous first words spoken from the Moon. I was older when I learned that my dad was involved in creating the equipment.
He was a ham radio operator since he was a teenager which is why he wanted to work at Collins. That company started out making the best ham radio equipment. He listened to the communications just about the whole time, which I thought was boring as hell at eight years old because I didn't understand what it was.
Kudos, if only I could have heard half of the stories you have heard. Lucky you !
So many people believing that it never happened just shows how much people do not trust their governments, and or that I cannot blame them.
The Soviets had teams of their best scientists, photographic experts, and so on, analyze every speck of information in an effort to debunk the Moon landings.
If they had found even the tiniest discrepancy, they would have announced it to the four corners of the world.
Well that sound logic but what about this. How do you think the rest of the world would think of Soviet Union of they told it was fake while rest of the world was 100% certain it was real? Soviet Union would be the worlds joke. Also in the early 70s Soviet and USA cooperated a lot in space so all that would be ruined if they say it was fake. Im not saying the landing was real or fake but the Soviet Union point people make actually doesn't make any sense.
There is always the thing, that Casey might have been a paid Soviet agent too besides a charlatan
Putin would've been more than happy to have released any Apollo Hoax material by now. And he's been there for 20+ years.
you think any corner of the world would of aired anything Soviet lol? really? ..
@@jasonking7736 the Soviets said lots of crazy crap that was aired all the time. There are more countries on the planet than just the US and Russia/USSR. Even if the US somehow successfully quashed any reports, other countries would've spoken up.
I did my own orignal research on this. I compared the original Apollo 17 16mm ascent camera film footage to the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) photos. Spoiler alert - they match up precisely. Video on this is on my EEVdiscover channel.
Indeed and a very good video it is too.
@EEVblog - Great research, Dave! The LRO photos are a great resource. It's so cool seeing the landing sites, especially the Lunar Rover tracks in the Apollo 15, 16 and 17 landing sites.
@@stevenemert837 Dont worry.
The deniers will claim its all fake...
What's the video called?
@@jocec3283 Yeah, that's the sad part. Conspiracy theorists' beliefs can't be changed even with a preponderance of evidence.
I'm interested in stereo photography. When you photograph a scene, move to the side, and photograph the scene again, you can use that to create a stereograph and see the depth in the scene. I often do this with two frames from a movie when the camera moves sideways, and when this is done in a studio or sound stage the flat painted backdrop becomes completely obvious, just like you were there in the room with it.
I have also done this with the Apollo pictures that they took of the distant landscape while cruising around on the LRV, and those objects are NOT on a flat painted backdrop. They extend away miles into the distance. Good luck faking that one.
Edit- My gosh, so many people saying "Deserts exist on Earth, haha gotcha!"
What I'm doing here is saying that the photos cannot have been taken in a sound stage. But this whole operation was your idea- you all need the sound stage because lunar photos look bizarre and unlike Earth. On Earth, you have shrubs all over the place even in a desert, and even if you clear them all out for miles, you can't hide the wind and water erosion that's all over the place. The Moon doesn't have wind and water erosion, but what it does have are a lot of craters and micrometeorite impacts that are missing from any desert on Earth. I fully believe that some of you all can't tell the difference, but remember the goal here would be to fool a well-trained, intelligent Russian geologist, and to them the differences would be obvious.
And before you keep trying to @ me with some "aha, gotcha!" ask yourself this... The goal of the Moon Landings was to show up the Russians, right? But that can't be done with a simple TV broadcast. The Russians had these things called telescopes and RADAR, and they were able to see and track the Apollo missions from the ground. It's that simple. If they hadn't seen it with their own eyes, they would have called BS and publicly mocked the US. So any contrived conspiracy theory you come up with has to include the cooperation of the Russians. Also, any amateur astronomer with a telescope in the 1960's would have been able to track the modules for at least some distance, much as how amateur astronomers track satellites today. They wouldn't have the resolution to watch them all the way to the Moon, but we would be able to see that they were leaving Earth on a Moon-bound trajectory. How do you fake that one?
I get the value of being skeptical, but try to spend some time disproving your own ideas for a change.
Last I checked, Nevada extended for miles. Who says everything was filmed on a stage?
@@freeearthcitizen7601
Even modern special effects would be HARD PRESSED to make a believable edit of film of the nevada desert that could pass for the moon.
@Christa Simon
They just make up crap and hope someone as gullible as they are fall for it.
I would love to see your research, nice research idea. Could your work be released as a ‘how I analysed’ and a 3D film?
One claim is that the horizons are too low, so either the most distant part of a scene is quite close or with a lot of the moon buggy footage you have hills in the background. (The same hills in two different missions in two different locations) the star backdrop is completely lacking any artefacts apart from the famous ‘earth rise’ shot where differentiating between subtly different dark blacks show a rectangular box around the earth image. I don’t mind being convinced but your assertions don’t have much weight and are mostly debunking a straw man anyway.
@@jamesmaybury7452 Moon landing deniers seems to willingly forget that the Moon is much smaller than Earth, hence the horizon be much closer, also without atmospheric distortion, making it visually even closer.
We know because The Soviet Union did not publish any articles disproving the landing. Not even in Pravda.
We also know because every capable country in the world followed the flight and every transmission.
And as we all know, triangulating a radio signal is pretty easy.
There is a photograph on the Internet of Valentina Tereshkova pinning a decoration on Neil Armstrong, when he went on a goodwill trip to Russia in 1970. You can see the mutual respect between the two.
How about the possibility of the lie being good enough to convince the Soviets?
@@Simboiss Nothing has convinced thousands of scientists from countries all over the world for decades and we can include Russia in that.
@@Simboissthe Russians managed to infiltrate the nuclear bomb program. They’d have had some inside person in NASA somewhere that would have revealed a hoax.
@@Simboisshow about the possibility that conspiracy theorists lack the ability to rationally process information? Occam’s razor and all that…
I had heard that Stanley Kubrick was hired to fake the moon landings. But he insisted on such realism that they ended up having to go to the moon to shoot the footage anyway 😀
😂🤣😆😁
And he killed himself at such frustration that they would not believe his movie in how he faked landings.
@@paulkeenan2691 If by any remote chance Stanley Kubrick was indeed hired by NASA (though his daughter categorically denies it) it was probably to create the out of ship graphics, those we see of a space probe where nothing could film them, those views from distances as short as a few feet from the probe to as far as it could be seen and identified... and they show us such videos because it's what we like most, to watch air or spacecraft flying in their environment, but since there isn't any way they could make a camera fly along and film the craft, they have to draw the view instead. That may someday be possible when they develop inexpensive space drones that can fly along and film shots that replace what till now is done by computer.
From what I've read, Stanley Kubrick was an honorable man, and he would have never got involved in such a farse. You probably won't understand this because it takes an honorable mentality to understand another and most conspiranoids are no such thing... if anything they are very dishonest but don't see themselves that way, and think it so easy for others to be like them, but they are very wrong!!!.
@@Lowonfuel You need to learn to recognize sarcasm.
@@timpatrickhanna I responded to Paul Keenan because he wasn't being sarcastic, he truly believes that Stanley Kubrick killed himself... after "being discovered for having faked the Moon Landings", but he died of a heart attack during his sleep in 1999, 29 years after the Movie 2001 Space Odyssey.
I worked with Boeing engineers while I was in the army, I met a gentleman who, as a brand new engineer, worked on the camera and transmission equipment to get the pictures from the moon to earth. They had completed the work and were in the “tweaking” phase when in Dec 68 the president made the following statement: “I can’t wait to see the ‘Red, White and Blue’ flying over the moon!” At which point the project lead freaked out because suddenly the specifications changed from black & white to color with less than 6 months to complete the engineering changes!! His comment was “yea, we all just moved into our offices and we worked around the clock, smoked several thousand cigarettes, drank thousands of gallons of coffee and are pbj sandwiches or catered food. Wives and girlfriends collected dirty laundry and delivered clean clothes. He paused for a moment, smiled and capped the story with “it wasn’t all ‘nose to the grindstone’, my first daughter was born in Jan 70…do the math.” We all laughed with him.
Shame when history was being made it was filmed in black and white.
😆 😂 Tell us who filmed the spaceship leaving and how the film made it back to earth to be televised.
@@badassmother1426 never heard of an automatic or remote control camera?
@@badassmother1426 Or radio?
@@badassmother1426 goofy
I was at a meeting with the Apollo 11 Mission Commander. Someone asked him "so was it hoax"? He replied "well, they sure fooled me".
Gene Kranz?
Sarcasm... saying something they don't mean, leading on the interlocutor in a way that doesn't make them feel offended, or aware of the real meaning, sometimes it may be followed with a wink towards his acquaintances, coworkers, friends or family. So the meaning of the response is apparently agreeing with the interrogator but clearly not, for those with a brighter mentality.
In other words, Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
@@JO-qn8gy not to mention they figured out how to make devices to breath, figured out transmission, made suits that could withstand leaving this atmospheric system and more within a few years of being an established part of the government? 😂
@@CulturalOasis 1958 was the year they named the agency with a formal name, but it was doing the same work since they captured the first Nazi V2 rocket...
Radio _"Transmission"_ had been dependably working since 1900. Work on space suits obviously began as soon as they fired the first V2 rocket into space and knew they had to get started to have the suit on time... and it was a simple variant of all the other suits that were being used for orbital missions, which included doing "spacewalks". Just because you missed it all, doesn't mean it never happened... your mind is just one of 7 billion on this planet, and only you know what's in it... so your ideas change nothing. Reality is what most people can witness as such.
So happy to see very essential content like this getting millions of views! So much misinformation on the internet! Thanks for doing it!
I hope flat earthers watch this too. I’ve realized being a flat earther doesn’t just mean that you believe the earth is flat, it pulls behind it a plethora of other dumb theories like that the moon landing was faked and that the dinosaurs never existed.
it's funny that you think this is information.
@papai-y3i I do, yes. Very well presented information too
@@unrecognizedtalent3432 very well presented propaganda indeed
@@papai-y3i Well, I'll respect your opinion. Thanks for watching the video
I still say the best evidence for us having landed on the moon is that the Soviet union didn't dispute it.
Fortunately the Soviet Union hadn't yet adopted the modern Russian tactic to just spit in the face of reality and deny it anyway. Wouldn't be surprised if many of these modern "conspiracy theorists" are just Russian troll farmers out to correct that old mistake of the Soviet Union.
I'm sure they did. Remember, you just got told they didn't. And of course, they magically did later too.
couldn't agree more.
@JefferyTurpin-cm1tk
I guess that's why Soviet newspapers and media reported the moon landings, tho they didn't make a big deal of it of course.
About 2 day prior to the launch of Apollo 11 the USSR launched the Luna 15 mission. One of the mission goals was to monitor Apollo 11 flight, Moon orbit insertion and Moon landing. There is also a photo taken by Buzz Aldrin showing Luna 15 orbiting the Moon above Tranquility base.
The Soviets knew that NASA landed on the Moon. Luna 15 was sending information about this back to Earth.
I love their Mitchel and Webb sketch were a shadowy government organization are trying to work out how to fake the moon landing. They decide the cheapest option is to fly to the moon and fake it there
Might it not be cheaper to just pop to the moon and fake the footage there? ua-cam.com/video/P6MOnehCOUw/v-deo.html
Indeed.
Another favourite of mine is their Homeopathy A&E.
ua-cam.com/video/HMGIbOGu8q0/v-deo.html
That same episode shows how much harder it is to fake several common conspiracy theoretical stories.
Just watched Mitchel and Webb , very funny
Precisely. "So we will be saving on....catering?"
"With a little planning, all of this was overcome. It's Almost as if NASA has a lot of people working there, who Know Exactly what they're doing." You are Awesome Simon
I laughed at that also 🤣
Solid point.
Well in a way that's exactly what conspiracy theorists could also say :D E.g. they can fake anything. (I don't believe in the theory, just pointing out a little bit of logic fault)
Sorry buddy it's NASA (Not A Space Agency)! NO ONE ever went to the MOON!
@@paulhogsten2613 and 400,000 people successfully kept it secret for decades. what's the purpose of lying about going to the moon? Especially after making several return trips, putting landers on Mars, telescopes like Hubble and JWST into space, launching probes like Juno or the Parker Solar Probe, etc? What would be the point of lying to begin with, let alone carrying on that lie? Let alone the impossibility of keeping the secret.
@@paulhogsten2613 Gonna need some reliable, verified sources that are backed with peer reviewed citations to back up that claim, buddy. You're claiming thousands of people faked the moon landing so YOU need to prove it. We already have evidence PROVING, yes I said proving and I did mean proving, you wrong.
Well, I'm afraid that as long as we have flat earthers, we'll have moon landing conspiracy theorists.
They're not always one and the same, but there's certainly some significant overlap on that Venn diagram. Also, conspiracy theories are boring, and their adherents have short attention spans, so they need a lot of them to keep themselves fed.
Exactly my thoughts. I don't think they really believe the conspiracy or that the earth is flat. It's just a fun group to be a part of. Or as Forrest Gump said: You can't fix stupid.
Wait until you hear about the Flat Moon conspiracy theory 😜
As long as we have flat earthers, we will have people that believe we walked on the moon.
not mutually inclusive. Two very different Communities, of Theories. This does not mean that you can't be a Flat-earther and yet not a Never-wenter.
my favourite bit of Lunar Trivia is that Command Module Pilot Michael Collins told Neil Armstrong "If you had any balls at all, you'd go out there and say 'We've touched down on the moon, and - OH MY GOD WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT-" then cut your mic." making him the funniest man to ever walk on the moon.
Unfortunately that is just a myth.
That would have been GOLD.
That would have been the best dad joke ever!
I hope they joked around like this- at least the thoughts shared for laughs.
Astro-Types can be sadly uncomical
@@suavexxi not nearly as much miserable tossers who push conspiracy nonsense, they really have no sense of humour, or any sense at all.
Reminds me of joke I heard comedian say years ago about his grandmother.
'My grandma believes wrestling is real but the moon landing is fake.' Lol
Foxworthy
@@jeffduncan9140 I thought it was he but couldn't remember for sure. Sounds like Southernism. Lol
I'm from Tennessee so I know them well.
@@jeffashley5512 it does indeed sound like a Southernism, especially when you pronounce it as rasslin'. 😆 I'm from Georgia myself. So, I know not to be overly critical.
Ha ha ha
Wrestling is real, it is just heavily scripted. There is a reason why wrestlers sustain horrible injuries all the time.
The moon landings WERE faked, but Kubrick (being such a perfectionist) insisted that they film on location.
This is perfect.
😆
You copied & pasted this comment from someone else
@@macysondheim Probably not. That joke is like the fourth most common comment on videos like these. I kind of hate it.
🙄
"A man sees what he wants to see, And disregards the rest."
Paul Simon - The Boxer
Camera film has a thing called "latitude". I was a photographer in highschool (68-70) and if you set your exposure for very bright items, you'd lose detail in the dark areas. At a basketball game, if you had black players and white players, you could not have detail in both faces without darkroom tricks. So we would "burn in" or "dodge out". For the black players, we would have a small cardboard disk on a wire and block the light to his face for part of the exposure making it look like he had a halo around his head. Burning in: e. g to show detail for a face with pale complexion with blond hair (dark on the negative) you take a piece of cardboard with a hole cutout and allow light to shine through for the face until you have detail making a halo of darkness around the face. Stars are so faint, you have to provide longer exposure at much larger apertures to get them to show up at all. If you expose to see detail on the bright surface of the moon, there's not way to get detail of the stars so the sky looks totally black!
Exactly.
That's why there are no stars visible on Moon shots!
If you look at the photo of Earth that was taken in 2015 from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter just 80 miles above the moons surface you can see the true scale of the Earth This was taken from the far side of the moon just imagine the view in the center of the moon . Don't you wonder why we don't have hundreds of photos from the moons surface with the view of the Earth like this ? Hello because we were never there or we would have . www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/earth_and_limb_m1199291564l_color_2stretch_mask_0.jpg
That's really interesting. Thanks for sharing
if that was the case why didn't they take a huge piece of cardboard to cover sun and the moon so we could see the stars ????
Slight correction... All in all, *nine* Apollo missions *visited* the moon. Three of them did not land - two because they didn't plan to, and one because of an in-flight emergency.
They landed on the moon because an emergency? wow....
One thing about being on another planet if there's an emergency. you die, you have a flat tire on Earth you're good have a flat tire on another planet you die
@@healdiseasenow You have greatly misunderstood my comment. Go back and read it again.
@@healdiseasenow That depends greatly on the nature of the emergency, of course. Apollo 13 suffered a very, very serious failure and yet everyone survived. Had the same thing happened on Apollo 8, it likely would have ended very differently because there was no LM available.
@expattaffy1 Shadows facing two ways? Of course there's nothing even remotely reflective anywhere near them to perhaps cause those shadows. Wow - damning evidence there.
I was given a mission patch when I was 4 years old in 1969 and couldn't understand how two guys could fly to the moon on an American Bald Eagle.
Three guys. Two landed, while the third stayed in orbit above the moon. Six astronauts had what must have been a VERY eerie experience, being _completely_ cut off from all other humans while they were in orbit on the lunar far side.
They used freedom
I kinda wish 4-5 year old you could have met the astronauts. the look of confusion and realization as the astronauts as they figured out that the eagle on the patch would be funny
They were just THAT American.
still more believable than some of these conspiracy theories.
How to know that you did something: 1) Do it. 2) Know that you did it.
As someone who has watched your channel for years, progress from thousands to millions of subscribers, knowing 75% of every story you tell....... I always love to watch your content because i always learn a few more tidbits of info about the subject that i didnt know. You may not hear it enough but we love you and what you do, keep doing it!
E
Wierd
Regarding Spheres in Space 🌍and Comets: The on screen CGI showing spherical ball🌝🌍⚽objects floating in "Space" is pure nonsense. Our Sun and Moon are local ionizing gas plasma luminaries, travelling within the Tropics. Earth is a fixed level Plane of existence made of fossilized, mineralized biology of mainly ancient Titanic Dragons🐉 some thousands of miles long, turned to stone (Limestone, and Granite) 🗻mountains. The term is nucleophilic substitution, flesh to stone. The 38 Transition Metals we use today literally came from these titans veins, and arteries. The mega titanic fish 🐟🐠🐡give us most of the (SiO2) Silicon Dioxide, and (Si) Silica Dessert sands, exactly like the Sahara titan fish desert ! You still here ? 💫 lol. Space "rocks" ie. Asteroids, Meteors (meat🥩) and of course Comets, are the tough fossil remains of these titans (mostly dragons🐉🐲). The Void of space and level Earth was called the "Raqia" in ancient Hebrew (Latin-Firmament), and "the Expanse" is so massive we get Hyperbolic, and Interstellar (now) Comets. Due to Magnetic Force, when these massive transition metal (conductive) laden space fossils get near Earth's dipole, the Anode is discharging electrons into the "Comet" nucleus and taking protons from it. The Comet is now a hot cathode from a cold state (far away) and Sublimation-Phase Transition (from solid to a gaseous state) is causing it to discharge Carbonaceous Dust and microbes etc. by the hundreds of Tons an hour (example) as a Type2 Comet science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/19apr_isonids above Earth. The 3600 yrs. ago Thera Eruption marked last cycle of energetic Comets, and it was called the "Shar" in ancient Sumerian, the "Completion of the Circuit". The electrical Shar is likely an intentionally induced 👽Cosmic Cycle, which adds raw material (Proton Density, Radial Velocity etc.) to the outer magnetic field of the Toroidal Vortex EMF above the level Earth. The "Solar Wind" is the measured strength of the EMF Torus (AKA magneto/heliopause) without it the harmful ionizing UVC radiation from the Void would make life on Earth impossible. The last Passover 3600 years ago (Minoan eruption) was obviously much, much worse. I figured this out, at far less than NASA $26 Billion a Year budget. 😎 I want a raise, dammit. lol 💲
Don’t encourage the fact boy. He’ll make another channel!
All of this.
“Almost as if NASA has a lot of people working there who know exactly what they’re doing”
I love smug sarcasm 😂
I find it sad and pathetic
@@daveeol1987 Is that because it's directed at some unfounded beliefs you wish were true?
It was a need to know basis only.
@@ValMartinIreland Nothing about apollo was "need to kniw" tgey told everyone exactly how they were going to do it.
They had TV specials that showed how it worked and included interviews with the engineers that designed it giving guided tours of the equipment it's components and layout.
The Glomar Explorer was need to know and nobody cared about it at all but still it was busted after only a year.
It's funny how no other nation has been able to reach there even after decades
As I was born on the day Armstrong stepped onto the moon, I've always quipped: "That's one small step for man....but one giant push from my Mum!!" 🤣👍
😳
You’re British. Hello fellow Brit. 🇬🇧🌹
Good on ya, Mate!
Did you ruin her?
@@MemoirsofaBasketcase I take it you're speaking for yourself - and from experience!
What changed my mind was watching the moon rover footage. The moon dust flies unnaturally high into the air compared to what you would see on earth. How could such an effect been achieved? Even more damning is that the dust flies into the air and falls back down without creating billowing dust clouds; this means the footage was filmed in a near complete vacuum. Filmed in what is apparently a large open environment. Such an effect could not be achieved by Kubrick or anyone else at the time.
In krubick's movie 2001 you see dust clouds when the craft lands on the moon.
In fact, a mathematical analysis of the ballistic trajectory of that lunar regolith kicked up by the Apollo 16 lunar rover, published in The American Journal of Physics, May 2012 by two professors from U. of Colorado (Hsiang-Wen Hsu and Mihaly Horanyi), indicated 1/6G gravity and a vacuum environment, a condition that cannot be duplicated on Earth.
Correct - there would be no way to fake the way the dust behaves unless you built a big set in a vacuum. That would be a pretty big vacuum chamber.
The REALLY big kicker is that they recorded their journeys from site to site on the rover. There is footage right here on UA-cam of the rover traversing several hundred yards - even miles in some cases - with uncut footage. The lighting in these scenes is absolutely uniform, and objects on the surface are casting one and only one shadow. That means that there is only ONE light source, and that light source must be sufficiently far away. There is a concept in physics/lighting known as light falloff. It basically says that the intensity of light falls off inversely proportional to the distance you are from the light source. To put more simply, it means if you are twice as far away, the light is 1/4th as bright. If you are three times as far, the light is 1/9th as bright. If you are 10 times farther away, the light is 1/100th as bright....and so on. There is no single stage light in existence that could possibly uniformly light scenes as vast as the ones recorded on the rover. It's not physically possible. The only viable SINGLE light source that could possibly light these vast scenes uniformly - meaning it is bright enough - and sufficiently far away to avoid light falloff - - - - - is the sun. It is 93 million miles away, so moving a few miles farther doesn't change the intensity of the light. That's why there is no light falloff and the scenes are uniformly lit for miles and miles. It's the sun. If it were artificial stage lighting, then they'd be like 30 feet away from it at one point and 2 miles away at another. That single light could not possibly light the vast scenes that span miles uniformly. They are on the moon.
@@Doodlebird138 If you study basic physics, the truth reveals itself. The trouble is, the only thing deniers ever study is the motion of their hand movements when masturbating.
Into the air lol. Or into the lack of air
One more proof. Some friends and I, working on a college graduate project, built a receiver and dish antenna and listened to Apollo 17 all the way back from the moon. We had to adjust the frequency as it it moved closer because of the Doppler Effect. This can’t be faked because the object has to be far away and moving fast.
Go on next you will say you saw video of them inside the craft. Lol hell they hardly had the tech to get us decent pictures yet you had the tech to follow them. Ha
@@petethewrist Not too bright, are you?
@@James-bw7rk if your IQ was half of mine your comment, might, mean something. But sorry for you you are prob one of the 86% of the population that has low IQs memory yes may be. But that's not good enough and you are to easy to fool.
This guy seems to not know,how easy it is for a radio expert with rather simple radio gear,amp.and antenna,to listen IN on any found or known radio transmission,around Earth.
@@petethewrist I feel bad for you
It's me again; the dad with the 11 year old son who loves outer space. My son was debunking the conspiracy theory along with you. He's 11 and he gets it. He asked me, "dad, are people really that stupid?" I said, "yes, yes they are." Also, he really liked that someone got punched in the face by an 'old man'.
Think of it more like indoctrination. It's easier to understand that way, the intro and the continued acceptance; it's almost like Stockholm syndrome, where once they're part of it, believing they're right is easier than admitting they were wrong. We have a large portion of the modern population in needs of some real psychological help.
And by all accounts it was solid contact. The actual footage brings me to tears. The mixture of pride & hilarity is overwhelming.
@@kindlin reminds me of my illuminati 9/11 loose change days... i mean there may be something going on there but it def aint people dancing naked around a fire lol
I watched that footage - it was a good punch, I wouldn't like to have been on the business end of it.
Buzz Aldrin, my hero....
I followed the whole of the space race with bated breath. Kept a scrap book with newspaper clippings. Built the Gemini and Aoollo models. Listened to the touchdown live, courtesy of my science teacher.
Apart from all that, the clincher for me is that if it had been fake, the Soviets would have known, and they would have shouted loud.
I started 1st grade in 1959. Watched every Mercury, Gemini and Apollo launch. I remember the B + W TVs the teachers would wheel into the classroom. Up on those big stands. I don't ever remember hearing a peep from the Russians about it being faked.
That's a very dumb justification, 'muricans never believed Russia and back then passed everything as propaganda as the brainwashing was still in full, this wouldn' t be any different.
And if you still believe it, you're still indoctrinated to the nonsensical propaganda!
I would've loved to be around back then! Excited to see what happens with Artemis and Starship flights in the near future!!
@@RogueWraith909 You will never see Artemis going to the moon (they will keep pushing the launch date back until the day your gone)! Then on that day your soul will travel to the moon where you will eagerly await the little rocket to land (and there you will wait for eternity -because it will never happen in reality, just on earth in a Hollywood Studio)!
My Dad, RIP, worked for NASA and was a test engineer on the Lunar Rover. He told me that it had to be supported from its frame because it would have collapsed under its own weight on earth. With weight in space flight being a premium, it would make no sense to build a rover that could easily be used on earth as the extra weight in the frame construction would be useless on the moon!
Remember, 60 lbs. on earth is 10 lbs. on the moon!
USA is the master of spin. No one has landed on the moon.
They have to test all equipment on EARTH. Although the Moons gravity is less, there is gravity on the moon and also the pressure G force of lift off. Plus they had to train on Earth with Earth Gravity. Just like the Flat Earthers. There are space photos proving earth is round but still refuse to believe it and the math. The ancient Greek's proved the earth was round with math and observing the stars. People just refuse to research and read.
Can your dad explain why men skipping around on the moon weren't able to jump 15 feet high with such low gravity ?
Why didn’t the astronauts jump 15+ feet (5+ m) on the Moon. Think about it: they were wearing bulky spacesuits that monitored their breathing, heart rate, kidneys, etc. On Earth, such a suit would probably weigh 300-400 lbs. On the Moon, it would weigh 50-70 lbs. Not something you could easily jump up to 15 feet even in reduced gravity!
He’s dead, so no.
Buzz Aldrin punching that guy is one of the things that lives in my memories rent-free.
He represented all sane humans in history giving a punch to the nutty conspiracy theorists out there.
Until one day he couldn't lie to a little girl. Buzz has been hinting that it was all a crock of crap his whole life.
Lol i was going to type what u said.... but add in the movie THE SHINNING the same director put in the movie trying to tell the public it was fake .. the same guy that produced the fake landing
Oh snap he mentioned the shinning Wow.. this guys knows his truth
And guess what
. When the cia uses the term conspiracy theory you know your over the target
It's so ridiculous and has caused a lot of distress for buzz aldrin despite the fact he should basically have been able to chill on his laurels bc he basically did the most amazing thing anyone ever did
Buzz puts more stress on himself then all the debunkers put together. Don't get me wrong, I love the cat, but c'mon.
Well, to be fair, he did the second most amazing thing anyone ever did ;-)
He also told a 10 year old, on camera, we never went there.. who knows??? Van Allen belts still puzzle me
@@zoeyshoots Bull
annoying buzz aldrin may be the only good thing that came out of these conspiracies
Another bit everyone misses about the footage of the Apollo landings: back in the day, whenever they started transmitting, the major networks would just start carrying it, sometimes over an hour at a stretch, and we'd sit there watching it, two guys in spacesuits bounding about on the lunar surface. It might have been theoretically possible to fake some shorts with late 60's - early 70's technology, there's no way they could've done it for an hour or more, without any edits, film scratches, etc., which would've given up the whole gig.
The nutjobs today only deal with the snippets, not the big long stretches of really not a lot happening. Why fake that in the first place?
@James Henry Smith radio and microwaves are also bounsed of the " Firmament " not just across the plane ....
If they could bounce around on the moon for a hour without editing, why would it be impossible on earth?
@@andersandersen6295 Because the astronauts movements had to be right, else the USSR would immediately call bullshit. Replicating lunar physics on earth would require lots of special effects and as such must be prepared ahead of time, and it all had to be just right, not only in and of itself, but the live performance had to be timed right.
On the moon, the astronauts just had to do their thing.
@@wyrmofvt Not taking into account that the russians were in on the hoax.
@@andersandersen6295 And why would they be in on the hoax?
living in Australia I remember watching the whole thing on a little black-and-white TV put in the public bar of the hotel where I work.
I like the fact that the conspiracy relies on a massive number of people going to the trouble of inventing a whole lot of equipment and scientific data capable of fooling even experts, but also making a whole bunch of really obvious mistakes in their faked footage and thinking, "Eh, good enough."
Like the missing data and footage from the original mission...they lost it.
There really only needs to be a hand full of people involved...
@@TheCaj2012 there is a video on you tube... Its a video of Neil Armstrong and the others staging the earth view.. Its from the original mission... UPDATE at the advice of someone here I watched the original version of the video I mentioned here.. And the narrator says things that are not happening. So i retract this comment.
@@americanwoman6246 No, it's not. The nice narrator lady says it _is,_ but she's lying to you, counting on your ignorance to deceive you.
@@Jan_Strzelecki oh yeah, you keep believing what the nice lady says. That tuna can never sailed past the ceiling of the movie warehouse it was filmed in
The wildest claim Kaysing made has to be that the most famous people in the country went to Las Vegas and caused a big scene, and no one recognized them.
Precisely... at that time they were like rockstars in that everyone in the country knew their faces.
You say, that is in his book? Not sure they were before their return.
@@narajuna yes they were. The featured in life magazine and their every move followed for months before the launch. None of them were comfortable with the attention
@@paulinegallagher7821 ?????????????? Oho too much to drink? :) Who said they were comfortable with so much attention? ...WHO followed everymove on the NASA base? Hello? Featured... doing the Greatest Leap of Mankind, think so, NASA is a Civil Agency not a spy one! They all trained much with cameras and expected to be unseen🤔 Wives werent, or Mother(suicide), but these tuff Military Officers were used to uncomfortness.
After a Month of Tourring Neil also volonteered to tour with Bob Hope in Vietnam, and numerous interviews after.
Also they were constantly in radio contact when not with NASA , with Parks in NSW Australia.
“But where are the stars?” Tell me you don’t know anything about photography without telling me.
They were only filming during the day, so no stars. 😎
You are right. Photographing on earth during “the day” isn’t the same as photographing on the moon with no atmosphere to bounce light around. Yes, there could be a reduction of sensitivity with light from moon surface reflection and exposure settings, but to see nothing at all where it is similar to a bortle class 1 (or better) is strange.
@@zalllonyou need to learn what bright light bouncing off a bright surface does to a camera. Especially with the cameras that were available in 1969.
Why is there no actual photo of the earth. This would knock out any "flat earth" theory.
@@normmcinnis4102 one of he most famous photographs is taken from the moon called “ Earth rising” . Still one can see this and still argue that does not prove anything because it is looking directly at a flat earth from the top. It will only work if they take a video from the space station. You can see the rotation of a round planet. Plus if you view the moon or any planet with a telescope. All the bodies are round .
Even the soviet union who will call out the us on absolutely anything confirmed and even congratulated the US.
He was 39 and walked on the moon?! I’m 39 sitting here playing video games and eating Cheetos 😭
I hear you, and there-in lies the difference between those guys & the rest of us.
Crunchy or puffed?
@@kissthesky40Hot or regular? We need answers Jabroni!
I'm 65, sitting here playing video games and eating peanuts. I am the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come, so to speak. :P
Sucks to be you....😂😂😂😂😂
I loved that episode of mythbusters as a kid, they busted many of these claims. The footprints, flag, how easy the astronauts moved and shadows
I have pointed this out a number of times. They were great shows
Agreed. And my biggest takeaway from that was, if you listen to the other side and honestly consider their viewpoint/evidence, you might actually learn something new and fascinating.
And yet millions of people still think it's all fake...
I remember the episode. They could prove absolutely no claim that the landings were hoaxes.
The best part was when Adam couldn't replicate the movement of the astronauts no matter how much manipulation was applied. If they couldn't do it with more modern camera technology how could they fake it that well in 1969?
Also, the Soviets would've pounced on any evidence that is was a sham and exposed NASA as a fraud.
A lot of people tend to forget that each Apollo mission was broadcast live for hours on end....uninterrupted with no cuts. Not just Apollo 11 either every mission up till 17.
So if its on tv, it must be real. lol
@Last Chance
What, live TV didn't exist in the 60s and 70s? That's news to me.
@Last Chance You think live broadcasts didn't exist in the 70'? Really? In the late 30's and 40's, all TV was live.
Are you sure?
It because these people have no idea about live broadcast vs film, special effects and editing, they just like to spread garbage and insult those that went there and even worse, those that died trying...
This is absolutely true: No one has ever been to the Moon. Yesterday, I was talking to Inspector Monk, who investigated the subject, and he said to me, as usual: "this is how it happened":
NASA needed a sequence showing the astronauts walking on the moon, but they had to find a director capable of shooting this short film on Earth, in a credible way, and they asked Stanley Kubrick. He agreed, on the condition that the images be as realistic as possible. Some sequences were thus shot in the studio, and others outside. And, since he is a perfectionist, he asked that the outdoor shots be done on the Moon, so they discreetly took all the equipment, the cameras, the spotlights, and even the actors, to the Moon, in the middle of the night, so as not to be noticed, they shot the sequences they needed, and then came back down to Earth, with the recorded images. These were then broadcast on television news, without anyone noticing the deception.😂😅😂
This video should also have included the NASA film that shows a rock hammer, attached to the LEM, swinging on cable, after being released by an astronaut. Its period can be measured, and the pendulum equation can be used to calculate the force of gravity acting on the hammer as it swings. Spoiler: The answer is not 9.8 m/s/s.
They slowed down the video. Oh no, they've gotten to you....wake up....we've never left Ur....all of civilization is a deep fake and the world is a hockey puck.
🤣🤣🤣🤣, u really got me
That proves nothing.
@@jonsmith3945 except gravity.
@@Tallnerdyguy Nobody's denying gravity. But it's easy to manipulate the speed of the visuals to make the pendulum's period correspond to 1/6 Earth gravity. So Chris' comment in no way proves the footage was taken on the Moon.
The laser reflector is still there but I suppose that could have been placed by a very precise remote vehicle. But mostly, the fact that our enemies of the time weren't able to discredit it would be the deciding factor.
People shot lasers at the moon before "we went there"... The moons reflective sand already works as a mirror. Go read some books and dont be fooled.
Your enemies at the time are the same enemies as the present... they are on the inside.
And even if the world worked the way you seem to think it does... had Russia released anything then the media here would have called it lies, fake propaganda, etc... it might have been a talking point for a week but quickly buried.
Russia also stuck w the Gulf of Tonkin lies, now officially a lie.... why was Russia/China/Japan/Vietnam not telling us the USA was lying to the world? even now most think Vietnam attacked a US Vessel leading to it... it was lies.
If they can lie about a war and those you see as enemies stay silent, dont you think they can do the same for anything else?
"Hey Russia... stay quiet... and then you can run your own money laundering operation from taxes w your own space agencies?"
Money rules this world... and those that are ruled by it do not care what little act they gotta play as puppets.
And I could list many other lies the so called "enemies" of the USA keep quiet about...
"It is well enough that the people of this nation do not understand our banking and monetary system... for if they did, there would be a revolution tomorrow morning" - Henry Ford.
Could a monetary system that is in essence a scam not be called out by our enemies? umm m not a peep.... isnt that interesting?
So many on these comments just assume Russia is an enemy.... if they were an enemy they would educate us on what the above quote means ;) that way we would revolt. So would any enemy... they would tell us about Epstein Island and the world leaders that have gathered there.... but do you hear anything? nope...
Behind the curtain, all your "enemies" chill w your leaders... just like the WWE just far more nefarious.
Laser ranging experiments were conducted almost a decade before the “retroreflector” was even claimed to have been placed on the moon. There’s no proof it exists.
Good point. If the Soviets could have possibly spotted a flaw in the event they would have brought a 5 minute ad on the Johnny Carson Show to tell it.
The enemy thing is a sham. Independent nations don't exist. They want you to believe they do so you are easier to control.
Thank you Simon, I was 6 years old, standing outside a department store window in London watching it live with a lot of other people who didn't have televisions. I appreciate you bringing that memory back for me, and probably a lot of others!
Your age sir?
@@SUREETBHATTACHARYA 59 since he said he was 6
@@SUREETBHATTACHARYA Hi Supreet, I am 59 years old and honestly didn't expect to make it this far.
Does not mean that it actually happened.
@@CulturalOasis And you have no solid proof it didnt happen, either.
There are a lot of folk who think if they can't do or understand something, no one can. Ironically spewing that incredulity on a smartphone to the whole world
As Winston Churchill once said ‘never in the field of human intelligence have so few displayed so much ignorance to so many’
I used to live in a literate and scientifically advanced country. I remember it fondly...
Ironically we advanced to the point where idiots that used to just stand on the corner and yell about nonsense can now congregate on the internet and convince each other how smart they are.
@@adion24 or get elected to Congress (in both parties)
I like how people say it was better back in the day. Almost no evidence presented, meanwhile technology is advancing on an exponential curve in some fields... Generally scientific, mathematic and general literacy has increased in the United States. Has it ever occurred to you there are more people, which means more idiots too?
By the way if you want to challenge me on my claims I will produce links of you like. What I am saying it's fairly well documented.
@@notsam498 you could just say the quantity of d*ckheads increased instead of outing yourself as one
@@notsam498 NASA did not lose the technology to go to the Moon in the sense that it was forgotten, mislaid or mysteriously disappeared. A lot of the blueprints still exist on file; but the individual knowledge of everyone involved and the “organisational know-how” of how to actually run such a huge, complex project has been lost. Most of the engineers and technicians are now retired or dead. And on top of that, much of the equipment is incredibly dated, and many things cannot be bought “off the shelf” but would have to be specially manufactured. Re-designing from scratch is cheaper and better. However, there is a price to pay; it takes years to build up that sort of expertise and NASA is going through the problems it had in the early to mid-60’s. The political imperative to accomplish it is also not there as it was during the Cold War. If it is delayed now no one really cares as much, as it’s just another government project that’s fallen behind.
I wonder if there are any Europeans left who still believe their sail ships never landed on North American shores.
I can make that flight myself.
Oh there are plenty.
Fact is columbus never set foot in north america.
There was never a 50 year gap between the first European sail ships landing on North American shores and thousands more following
@@madamnoire7464he landed in present day Dominican Republic. The DR is located in North America. He did in fact land on North American shores.
13:00 - While the F1s performed flawlessly, the inboard J2 Engine of Apollo 13 did fail during launch. The spacecraft was still able to achieve orbit. As related in the movie, "well, I guess we've had our glitch for this flight"
It (the inboard J2 on the S2 stage) had an automatic shutdown because it was undergoing the "Pogo Effect". Fortunately the booster already exceeded Max Q at that point, so as the movie said, it was necessary for the remaining four engines to run longer than planned. Would have been a different story had it been one of the first stage engines: they may have been able to compensate for the loss at a critical time in the flight, but at such a low velocity it would have been dodgy. Once again, Lucky 13.
@@jondrew55 Yep. Love the F1 development history. Was touch and go for a while with the combustion instability issues.
True story - my wife and I were on a tour of Princeton Univeristy - I asked the Princeton historian that was giving the tour if she could name the Princeton grad that walked on the moon (Pete Conrad - Apollo 12) - she could not and so I told her. She then looked at me and said "If we actually landed on the moon!?! - I walked away shaking my head in disbelief
This is wonderful! And it reminds me of that NBA player who said the Earth was flat.. and then when corrected, everyone in the group said that the round earthers had got to him😂 so I guess the moon landers got to you?😂
Of all the proofs i have heard, the behavior of the dust is new to me. Good stuff.
There's an old Tom Clancy quote that comes to mind when thinking about keeping all of the Apollo people quiet: The chance of a secret being leaked is equal to the square of the number of people who know it.
Same problem as always: the same people who will hit a pot hole and bitch that the gubberment! Can't even fix the roads, will easily assume that same government can keep the largest secret in history. It's just stupid, all the way down.
There ARE secrets that have been and will be taken to the grave! Does anybody REALLY believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK?
You're really not thinking it through! I'm not saying it was a hoax, but being ex military I know for a fact, that secrets are very easy to keep and to fake the moon landing less than ten people could have been involved, who when sworn to secrecy and had family threatened, would have remained quiet forever.
Firstly like most people who don't think about the facts, if you watch the movie Capricorn one, you will realize that less than a handful of people needed to know it was fake.
The astronauts get out of the rocket prior to launch, so only they know and all footage shown on TV after that is either staged in a mock-up, or playback.
The entire NASA training missions were recorded as if they were actually happening even with fake telemetry readings. The best of those recordings could easily have been played back to everyone in launch control, as all they saw were monitors!
Look at the astronauts in interview the day after they return to Earth, they look very odd, almost nervous, several times Armstrong is about to say something then he is either cut off or suddenly interrupted. They did not look as elated, excited or even as happy as three men who'd supposedly landed on the moon.
Incidentally, Russia never landed on the moon and they also have a rover and a laser reflector on the lunar surface!
Finally folks, when you're enlisted and told to keep a secret, you keep it, if it's serious and your life (and that of your dearest) are threatened, you keep a secret and then when someone you know who also knows the secret, dies in an unusual accident or out of character commits suicide in an odd way that's never questioned, you will be even more likely to keep your mouth shut.
Watch the movie the Imitation Game.
When the allies broke enigma enabling them to win ww2, many people knew at the time and yet it was kept total secret for 40 years!
Wakey wakey...
Less than 12, all financially motivated.
Which is precisely why government intelligence organisations that employ 1000s, 10s of 1000s, or in the case of the CIA, over 100,000 people, don't work and can't keep secrets... Corporations that have trade secrets don't keep those secrets either because of the thousands of people working for them...
Information compartmentalisation and non-disclosure agreements with criminal penalties don't exist... People are never motivated by self-interest like a big salary or prestige, and they never agree to exchange any amount of their freedom of expression for a great job with great benefits and salary... Nevers happens...
Mythbusters did a segment that took them to an Observatory, where Scientist running the Observatory said the were actually reflectors left on the Surface, and that she could actually fire a Laser at it, and she would get a return signal. Very interesting segment. We've been there.
And? The Soviets have reflectors on the moon. They never landed there
@@Ambush6578 say it with me; Apples. and Oranges. You are correct. The Soviets never landed there. But, they never once said the Americans didn't.
I watched the moon landing on TV. I was nearly 4 years old at the time. In the USA, it was 20/07/1969. Here in Australia, it was on 21/07/1969. My older sister turned 12. Once I was old enough to learn about this, I had a very big interest in astronomy. Even now, there are times when I go outside at night, & look at the moon with either binoculars, or if I want a closer look, I then set up my high powered Celestron telescope. Looking into space with these is very interesting. One night, I was going to visit friends, & I saw a bright light moving across the sky. I was asked about it, & I said it was the ISS. I got in my car, switched on my Amateur transceiver, dialed up the frequency, & tried contacting them. I wasn't fast enough. As far as I know, Edwin Aldrin is still alive. In my opinion, the moon landings are a real feat of engineering. I hold those involved in awe.
Some years ago, in the 1990’s, I was working as a Director at Financial News Network, an American Cable TV Network. I was Directing a show called “The American Entrepreneur”, and on one episode, Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin was the sole guest. At about 20 minutes to air, I walked past the “green room” and noticed that Buzz was sitting in there ALONE! So I came in, introduced myself and told him that I’d always wanted to shake hands with a man who had walked on the moon! He was a fine fellow, and we were able to talk for about ten minutes before I had to get to the control room and get ready to go on-air. To this day, I have no idea what his business was, but I’ll always remember having spoken with Buzz (and what a small human he is!). All the astronauts were very small in size, because every ounce cost thousands to get into orbit.
As of today 28-06-2023, Edwin Aldrin is still alive.
@@frederickd.provoncha8671 thank you for the updated info on Buzz Aldrin. This is awesome to know. I hope he lives for a lot more years to come.
@@edryba4867 wow, I am a bit jealous. you are lucky to meet buzz in person.
You watched the transmission from Earth.
Hearing Simon say "cheese sandwiches..." in an amused, yet conspiratorial tone is epic.
Who doesn't like a cheese sandwich? That would be enough to get me to Area 51.
commenting about it is equally epic lol
Also, in addition to Armstrong's famous "One small step.." quote, his other famous line to Buzz was "Should I grate the cheese or cut the cheese?"
@@jondrew55 What’s even better is that they wouldn’t even have had to take any cheese with them… Those highly respected scientists Wallace and Grommit had already proved that in fact the moon was made of cheese, though not as good as Wensleydale
What most people don't know is that it was grilled American cheese sandwiches on Wonder Bread with extra butter. Delicious.
All kidding aside, it could have been code for getting the world to think that something fake (like American cheese) is real.
I'm sure the Russians would have tracked the spacecraft and be the first to shout out if they didn't get there.
I’m sure the Americans would have tracked the ‘first man’ Gagarin spacecraft and be the first to shout out if he didn’t.
Unless they both follow the same orders to fake the globe with fake space
Like from Antarctic Treaty Pact, for which they are founding members
@@Globeisahoaxx Have you read it?.
@@Globeisahoaxx Treaty:
Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only
Art. I
Freedom of scientific investigation in Antarctica and cooperation toward that end… shall continue
Art. II
Scientific observations and results from Antarctica shall be exchanged and made freely available
Art. III
@@Globeisahoaxx Radio amateurs also heard Sputnik with it's Beep, Beep, Beep identification and would lose it on the other side of Earth.
If landing on the moon was fake, NASA would have an ongoing soap opera with them re-landing every week.
They did until the Challenger served to put an end because of people having better and better technology to record and study these flights.
Thank you jrclad!
Challenger broke my heart. I was a teenager playing hookie from school with my boyfriend. We watched it live and for decades I felt a twinge every time the subject came up over years.
Until a couple years ago when I learned that several of the Challenger astronauts had some version of a twin still living and thriving, including Ronald McNair's identical twin brother.
Which emoji is 'silly me'?
The dust is a really interesting tidbit that I’d never heard of before. In addition, the amount of inventions that were discovered and developed as a result of the Apollo missions just adds more credibility to the efforts put in by countless Americans to make this possible. The next time you need to use an emergency blanket, you can thank the Apollo program for keeping you warm
And Velcro! Can't forget THAT amazing invention, and it only cost taxpayers 92 million!
If you want more of an explanation of the dust from the lunar rover, then check out Vintage Space’s channel and video on the subject. I wouldn’t be surprised if her work contributed to this video.
@@brentgranger7856 I have commented and linked Vintage Space's video numerous times in comments on this channels other posts. I am sure they have seen it and are aware of it. Proof is in the dust.
@@tymesho : Sorry, that Velcro thing is a myth. Way older than NASA.
@@tymesho Velcro was patented in 1955 - NASA wasn't born until 1958
Well done. Simon is at his best when he avoids the snarky sarcasm he employs in other videos, and sticks to facts and intelligent, well reasoned delivery. This video is about as good as it gets.
100% agree about the snark!
He just comes across as very arrogant. It's not a good look for him.
References to Stanley Kubrick's 2001 a Space Odyssey point out several inconsistencies in the assertion that this was all staged. Although the film was magnificent, I can point out many special effect issues. One of these is the billowing clouds of moon dust surrounding the arrival of the moon bus at Tycho crater. In a vacuum, the dust would simply have fallen back onto the moon, like it did whenever the lunar roving vehicle kicked up dust in Apollo 15 through 17. Also watching astronauts walking on the moon, like they would on Earth is another inconsistency. This is especially true when inside the Clavius moon base. Without the bulk of a spacesuit, a person would have a very hard time simply walking. Reducing someone's weight to 1/6th would make the floor 6 times more slippery. I don't expect either Stanley Kubrick or Donald Trumbull to have taken either of these into account in 1967. Likewise, NASA wouldn't have either.
😚
The real problem is Kubrick is such a perfectionist he would have insisted on filming it on location :)
@cosmic cat Exactly right. To fool some people you just pander to their craving for scandal and gossip. To get people to admit they are wrong often requires compelling evidence.
@cosmic cat yes we'll said brother.. your comment is the only comment that represents the truth.
The corridor crew did a breakdown on the moon landing and they said with the technology back then, they could not recreate the dust fall. Even with today’s technology it wouldn’t be easy.
They are CGI experts so do i believe them, or some random conspiracy theorists on the internet?
It’s a tough call.
FINALLY. COMMON SENSE PREVAILS. THANK YOU.
I used to work in a candy factory and the molds used for juju, gummies, and jellybean centers are trays of starch that is stamped with a negative mold. The way the starch holds the shape is what makes this possible. Furthermore, when you step in a pile of starch it leaves a better impression than moist soil and it's very dry so I've never doubted the authenticity of the foot prints
So they used starch on the set?
@@Grggeorge no it shows the possibility of making foot prints with no moisture
Just for sake of argument, starch isn't the same as other materials. Diatomaceous earth is also very, very dry, but doesn't behave the same as starch, which is a slippery feel.
@expattaffy1 why don’t you just tell us, it’s easier and quicker
@expattaffy1
I bet that you posted this comment immediately after the photo appeared on screen. I've seen how long conspiracy theory videos are, you should have capacity to stay seated until the section that addresses those "errors".
I love the video of watching Buzz Aldrin punching that jackalope that ambushed him with that accusation. Epic own.
If he only could remember if he saw the stars or not on his "voyage" to the Moon . Hahaha
I would love it better if he took the oath. Once a rascal is cornered he resorts to violence. No one makes a fool of me. They fooled me long enough
I'm guessing the crossover between fake moon landing people and flat earth people is a pretty healthy slice of the ol' Venn Diagram...
That would be really really funny, if a fly 🪰 did appear on the lens of one of the cameras of the moon landing footage 😅 🤣
Another crazy simple thing that blows appart the multiple light sources claim. Multiple light sources cast multiple shadows, switch on two table lamps in a dark room and you'll see two shadows cast on the ceiling light.
Good point! I don't even see the shadows as strange at all because I grew up with walking in the woods on sunny days. Uneven ground + sunlight = the same kind of shadow distortion.
"I don't trust what they tell me, but I'll believe this random guy who made a video on Facebook."
We did not go Americans are FOS
@@gmain1977 Proving the point being made. Believing a questionable claim in the face of mountains of evidence doesn't make you smart, quite the opposite.
@@gmain1977 Nasa landed on the moon so yes they did go that is a fact.
Evidence for how they could survive radiation then, please...
@@tommasotiberi5666Their ship was shielded as much as possible to protect them from severe radiation exposure, allowing the Apollo astronauts to go through the Van Allen Belt without suffering from any major radiation exposure.
There are all the photographs available on the March to the Moon and NASA websites. Super large RAW files, uncompressed. Plus all of the footage from various cameras from each mission. Thousands of pics and films. Many showing the complete descent to the moon's surface from over 47,000ft high to touch down. From 47,000ft above any surface, one can see hundreds of miles! All shot on analogue film with no edits. No flying bugs of any kind in any of the media. You try shining even one small torch in a desert and see how many bugs fly by continuously.
The Lunar Rover footage shows 360 degrees and some shows them traversing over a mile, until the film cannister runs out. All with no movement of deep, sharp shadows, caused by one magnificent light source - the sun. No light drop-off in any of the photographs, over any of the terrain. It would be impossible to shoot those photographs in a studio or some 100 mile wide outdoor stage (again with no flying insects) Nine missions around the moon, with six landings and thousands of media files for foreign agents to ponder over. We didn't have digital recordings back then, nor CGI Chromo-key (blue or green screens) and not even Hollywood today, could shoot such enormous scenes with one gigantic light source. (Even two lights would make multiple shadows, given you could suspend such massive, powerful lighting miles above a studio set up, to create such hard shadows)
Plus, all the highly detailed moon surface footage would have had to be mapped out and created perfectly - every divet, just in case oh, 40, 50 years later, the moon was photographed/filmed by modern hi-res cameras, from various other countries, including the USA's greatest rival...far easier to just go there....six times.
This comment takes the cake, if no one believes the moon landings were real then they could be considered delusional
Don't be so gullible McFly and stop being so arrogant and thinking you're too smart to get dupped well you're not the fact that you still believe it says it all I apologize if I'm being rude but for me that's being extremely nice in well-mannered so again I apologize if I offended you
That pretty much sums it up.
Very concise explanation with absolutely zero holes for the ignorant to try and pick apart. Explains why it has so few responses as when someone knows what they are taking about they normally turn and run. Well done mate
You're darn tight Luke!
18:50 : there are no "negatives" of Apollo pictures. The film used was a positive.
In April 2021 the ISRO Chandrayaan-2 orbiter captured an image of the Apollo 11 Lunar Module Eagle descent stage. The orbiter's image of the Apollo landing site was released to the public in a presentation on September 3, 2021. Apollo missions were tracked by independent parties at the time, including a group at Kettering Grammar School who monitored radio transmissions of Apollo 17 in 1972.
The question is a nonstarter for anyone with the will to think and research for themself.
A conspiracy theorist died and found himself at the Pearly Gate. Saint Peter greeted him and said, "All men go to their graves with unanswered questions. Because you were a God-fearing and pious man, you may ask one question and I will give you the true answer." With out hesitation, the man asked, were the moon landings faked?" Saint Peter, sighed loudly, and said, "God gave men the intelligence to explore and understand his creation. Apollo 11 landed on the Moon on July 20th, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the Moon and returned safely to Earth." The man shook his head in disgust and said, "The conspiracy goes much higher than I thought."
Can't you just see it? That's a good one.
What St Peter actually said was "God gave men a brain, and expects them to use it -- think for yourself, and don't believe all the BS that is shoveled your way in life." We will make it to the Moon someday, when we have the technological ability to do so, without dying from cosmic radiation.
@@freeearthcitizen7601 There is not enough radiation in the Van Allen belts to kill anyone. James Van Allen, who discovered the belts in 1958, wrote an open letter saying that such claims were "nonsense". The radiation in the belts is composed of charges particles that cannot penetrate the aluminum skin of the spacecraft. Further, the trajectories they flew went around the thickest portions of the belts and they flew through the belts so fast they weren't in them for very long. This claim made by conspiracy theorists is false, just like all the others like the flag waving, no stars in the pictures, no crater under the LM, rockets won't work in space, etc. Its all a bunch of made up nonsense that's already been debunked many times over.
Ah, you see the thing you are missing is that Kubrick is such a perfectionist that he insisted on filming the entire thing on location with method actors. That’s how he made it so convincing.
Shelley Duvall approves this message
allegedly
... by me
now it all makes sense
@Dino Sauro it does make us think! that stupidity has vastly increased.
There was no cgi back then and our adversaries were watching with a keen eye.
As well as the world's Scientific and Engineering Communities.
My favorite thing is asking “well how come Astronauts haven’t come out and talked about this since it’s been so long, many are rather old?” and someone responds “well the government would kill them or silence them” and then I say “but they didn’t kill or silence Kaysing, now, did they? why would they let him shout this from the roof and gather a following, but wouldn’t let people actually involved in the landing talk? the people who can ACTUALLY dispel all these rumors?” And the best answer they have is “they’re all in on it” or “all the astronauts are in on it” LOL. you mean every single person who has ever been to space, the space station, and to the moon are ALL simultaneously in on it?
Didn't you know? _Everyone_ is on it, _except_ for a small group of UA-camrs 😁
Kaysing had nothing to do with the apollo missions, what an absurd line of logic. Put the straws down bucko
You dont need all of them to be on it. Just showing them the video footage as if it was real already fooled them. They're talking to someone on earth not the moon.
And they'll tell you yes. That's the problem with conspiracy theories. They provide value to the person (they're smarter for realizing the TRUTH!!) and they can just sweep all counterargument as they're in on it.
Sweetie these same idiots think millions of doctors all around the world all secretly got together and started blaming covid on deaths.
" oh so there's radiation. I'm sure that was difficult to get through"
" Actually no it was quite easy. Barely an inconvenience"
Well it was not. Two astronauts died of cancer shortly after their return.
@@sH-ed5yf I was making a humorous reference to the "pitch meeting" UA-cam videos 👀 it's a famous quote that he always says. " Actually no barely an inconvenience"
In fact, I am quite sure that if you were to just google the words " barely an inconvenience" stuff on the guy's channel will be right at the top of the list 🍻
@@sH-ed5yf Which ones? You are flat wrong!
@@Tim22222 Illiterate but so confident at the same time. The classical flat earther
Jack swaggert was one of them died 10 years after his Mission. He was 51.
@@sH-ed5yf It was Jack Swigert, not Swaggert, and 10 years after, is not "shortly after their return."
It should be pointed out that if there were multiple light sources, objects would have multiple shadows.
I was trying to figure out what they meant by non-parallel shadows. I think it looks flawless. Sure, lots of weird shadows around that *cough* shadowy terrain, but what do you expect? lol
There were multiple light sources: the Sun, the light reflecting from the Earth, and light reflecting from the Moon`s surface, spacecraft, spacesuits, etc.
I saw a documentary on this and one of the big alternate light sources was coming off the LEM.
Just said this myself, of course if you watch sone early films you'll see the actors casting multiple shadows in the sound stages.
@@baneverything5580 The Sun was the only light source. reflections are just Sunlight from the Sun.
Thanks for some great understanding of what we truly did ! Thank you
the ultimate trump card is that the soviet union didn't dispute that we went there....
There's always SOMEBODY who has to bring politics into things... 😏
/sarc. 🤣🤣
This was very well done. I am impressed. I have two corrections, though. At 10:57 the narrator says that the average distance to the Moon is 237,000 kilometers. In fact, the average distance to the Moon is 383,000 kilometers (238,000 miles). Also, each astronaut wore a dosimeter, and the radiation exposure varied from one astronaut to another.
Here’s where the problem lies: it is 237,000 miles. How many kilometers is immaterial. The USA went to the moon, not Canada. Also notice that the astronauts did not repeat every sentence in French either.
@@ericephemetherson3964 b.s. bro....stop trying to take our accomplishments away from us. Neil or buzz would whoop your ass in person, even today
Obviously, he meant miles not km, give him a break. Great video.
The manhatton project was top secret,the apollo program was very public,every single mission was shown on live tv,not exactly something you would do if you were trying to keep something secret,as for the radiation belt,james van allen HIMSELF has said the amount of radiation for astronauts was less then 1% of a fatal dose
"The narrator"? That's Simon Whistler you're talking about!
The narrator..... of all the nerve....
:P
These type of conspiracy theories really gives the government way too much credit. Maybe South Park has a point and the moon landing conspiracy theories are a government conspiracy to make themselves feel more powerful.
Considering the same percentage of people believed that 9/11 was faked…
Agreed. On the one hand, people are constantly amazed by how stupid and inept the government is and no one there can keep anything secret...but suddenly it is full of evil geniuses who all go to their graves without talking about wide-ranging conspiracies they were involved in...? You just have to ask which is more plausible.
Right. Remember when the Manhattan project was leaked. Also, remember when the stealth bomber project and U2 spy plane projects were leaked. The government is full of idiots that have all the money and power. If only they were as competent as the masses. 😂
This video even destroyed the Hollow Moon theory. That's another conspiracy theory I'd love to hear you shred into miniscule pieces. :)
I'm so glad that you, with your many channels, are covering so many interesting events in history, always great research and always fun to watch. Thank you!
Explain how nasa destroyed all the telemetry tapes? They destroyed manuals and equipment used to make the tapes as well
That should of been saved for archives
It's easier to fool a man's than to convince a man he's been fooled. And that's you pal. A fool. Lmao. Sad....
A bullshitter for everyone's taste.
Ive heard a Narrations , using his voice... Im also guessing an AI Text to Speech Algo...
As numerous individuals /Corporations Businesses he is keep busy with..... "thousands of times debunked nonsense" by Crazies with no basic Science (living in mom basement).
Flat earthers space deniers and moon landing deniers all do the exact same thing. They ask for pictures, you show them pictures. They say they’re fake, then ask again for pictures.
Yes, like photos of the earth from the moon, or video of the ISS being built.
@@dansv1 yup, can show them anything and they'll just say it's fake, hell you can show them math and they'll just say "yeah what ever that doesn't work." or completely ignore it and say some other stupid claim.
Just for your information, there is no film or original images from the Moon landings, they were all some how destroyed so, the show an image is a false excuse, also Flat Earthers can't be thrown in with the Moon landings as there is a huge difference, one we still can't do today, the Earth we can see from LEO which is a pretty normal thing, we just can't get humans or animals past LEO, the only creatures that made it past LEO and back were two Tortoise, this is a fact you can Google it, the Tortoise have a very high radiation tolerance.
Nice way to make your point of view very easy though ;) don't be so lazy next time and do a little research at least.
Round earthers all repeat what NASA has told them. Not one of them has been to the moon, proved curvature, or left earths orbit. They believe whatever NASA tells them.
@@leifburke5905 I have been high enough to see the curvature easily, I have also been in one of the tallest buildings in the world and seen the SUnset three times in the same afternoon, plenty of experiments that easily show a curved or round Earth, you can do it yourself, just go to a very tall building with a fast lift, watch the Sunset from ground floor then ride the elevator up to the top floor and Bingo, the Sun is ther ein all it's beauty to see and watch go below the horizon again, explain that on a flat earth lol.
4:02 Okay but if Kaysing believed NASA _could_ successfully launch an _empty_ rocket into space in '69... even though his incredulity was _specifically_ caused by the fact that the rockets were exploding on the launchpad two years prior... then his own conspiracy theory, by his own admission, _requires_ that NASA could successfully launch Apollo rockets? So...
It's a perfect example of the old saying "A wise man knows he doesn't know everything. A fool thinks he knows everything."
Conspiracy nuts fail to see the irony that elaborate conspiracies that fooled billions of people also require them to make seemingly (to the nutjobs anyway) obvious mistakes so bad that the average Joe can see thru them just using "common sense" . Basically conspiracies all require the conspirators to be dumber than the person that sees thru them, even tho that defeats the whole point of a conspiracy in the first place.
But rockets weren't exploding on the pad 2 years prior. There was a test of the launch escape system on a Saturn 1-B where a rocket was intentionally broken up and exploded. Apollo 1 was not a Saturn V and was meant to be a test of the command and service modules. White, Grissom and Chaffee were performing a plug-out test where the command and service module would not be connected to any ground systems to test its life support and power. The Saturn V didn't launch and until Apollo 4, and it was uncrewed. As was the case for the second launch of the Saturn V with Apollo 6. The conspiracy theorists just make shit up.
@@krozareq Sure, but I was taking his own premises and placing them next to each other to show _even without needing to check anything_ his own reasoning is loony.
@@Zahaqiel
Have you not seen Trumperism in the last 5+ years? The human race is on some kind of downward slope right now, and we have got to find some way out of it, unfortunately Idiocracy is starting to look more and more like a documentary and less like satire.
Look at all the astounding camera images, one in particular, the rocket detached segment. And of the Luna module landing it's self. How were these images obtained?
If you're talking about the footage of the LM ascent stage leaving the Moon, which was only captured on Apollo 17, it was filmed by the camera on the rover, the tilt mechanism operated remotely by Ed Fendell and NASA. As for the LM landing, the only footage of that is from the inside, from a camera mounted to the inside of one of the windows.
If you're referring to anything else, please be more specific.
@@critthought2866there was what passed for animation/visualization of some of the landing sequence too, right? At least for Apollo 11?
@@ArKritz84 Good point. Definitely for 11. I'm not quite sure about the rest to be honest.
2:59 I think that says it all. “Allegedly” obtained a report approx 10 years before Apollo 11 and only 15 years after the first man made rocket reached space. Even if that report exists, which is dubious, it would not be a surprise if it cast doubt on the possibility of a successful moon mission. Kind of like that engineer who predicted it would take humanity a million years to develop a working flying machine… one year before the Wright brothers’ first successful test.
They were going to shut the Patent office in 1893 (?) Because everything had aready been invented
That would put the date around 1959, and it was too early to know anything about the difficulty of a Moon Landing. They were just starting to put small satellites in low orbit, and the Moon was impossible to reach at the time, before the 50s decade ended.
@@crazytrain7114 Around 2004 Intel said processors had reached a dead end in how fast they could be created (or something of the sort), that was when the single core Pentium 4 had reached a dead end... the next year dual-core processors came out.
And at the date that guy made that prediction, it was probably even less probable, they didn't know s*** about what was beyond the atmosphere and they didn't even know how high it was, they didn't even know about the jet stream till World War II
Werner Von Braun who is considered to be one of the godfathers of NASA and rocket technology a Nazi who was so important to the US that they forgave his war crimes and hired him to head Nasa said it would take 50 to 100 yrs to develop a rocket to the moon but after Kennedy bragged about it being done in 10yrs they had to do something to keep up with the USSR because they had launched Sputnik and a cold war. DO you people read history or do any research??? Connect the dots or you will be fooled again and again by our SHADOW Gov't!
My favorite is when people talk about the flag "flapping in the breeze".
1. It looks completely unnatural to the movement of real flag on Earth.
2. The top of the flag clearly has an internal support since it never moves and remains straight throughout it's handling.
3. How can there be a "breeze" if this was supposedly shot on a sound stage?
Not only that but the flag stays still for the next 2 hours of the broadcast once they stop touching it.
@@msidc1238 there is plenty of footage of the flag moving without anyone touching it, clear evidence that the wind is manipulating it
@@reviewflicks wind on the moon? 🥲
@@chaosclg it demonstrates that they can not possible be on the moon 😒
@@reviewflicks Only shortly after thet stopped touching it.
I like the old saying; "two can keep a secret if one of the two are dead." Just think about all the people involved who would have kept such a great secret. Impossible!
Manhattan project was kept a secret successfully. It cannot be ruled out that way, since it is possible.
@@jflaplaylistchannelunoffic3951 Clearly not very well, since you seem to know about it.
@@jflaplaylistchannelunoffic3951 Not entirely - Russian spies found out about it. Also, that was a military project during war time. Apollo was an open project involving dozens of companies. And, once that rocket took off, neither NASA nor the U.S. government could stop anyone with a telescope or a HAM radio antenna from tracking the craft. Even if "they" wanted to hide the hoax, "they" couldn't control those outside the program or organizations they had access to.
I once told a friend that, he mysteriously died a few days later.
@@jflaplaylistchannelunoffic3951 a better reply would have been "the (redacted) project" has been kept a secret
Some of us are old enough to have watched it live on black and white TVs.
With the USSR no doubt primed to throw any possible doubt on the achievement.