This one was a live television extravaganza and I watched every second. I can't imagine how people could turn away from the miracle of moon exploration.
@@dossenasantino3129 because the temperatures dont work how you think. There is no air to actually conduct heat, so its only conducted through the ground (which the cameras never touched) and direct heating from sunlight, which is slow and can be deflect with white coloring
HAPPY 50TH BIRTHDAY APOLLO-15 (DATES: 26/07/1971 - 07/08/1971)......SPECTACULAR MISSION, YOU PUT THE APOLLO PROGRAM BACK ON TRACK!! SADLY AL WORDEN & JIM IRWIN HAVE PASSED AWAY & DAVE SCOTT IS THE ONLY REMAINING ASTRONAUT FROM THAT MISSION.
FOR THE DENIERS this is one of the videos that convinced me this was filmed in a vacuum environment. no dust hangs in the air for more than 2 or maybe 3 seconds. look at all the dust that rover is kicking up and all of it ends up on the ground. if this was filmed in an atmosphere, dust would be hanging in the air that you would see above the horizon which you can see that the rover does kick dust up high enough to see above the horizon. no dust cloud, no atmosphere. how could you fake that? also, look how crisp that horizon is....no atmosphere
There's also the issue of 1/6th gravity. It would be "possible" to create a giant zero atmosphere environment on Earth, but such is not the case for 1/6th gravity. The only way to achieve that effect is by travelling to the Moon (or some other celestial body with 1/6th gravity of Earth) and filming there. That's it. There is no other way. Well unless you count parabolic manoeuvres in planes. But the limitation there is that the effect can only be achieved for 30 seconds at a time. So to get the Apollo rover footage you'd have to have a zero atmosphere "stage" setup in a plane with miniature rover models and then splice all the 30 second clips of film together, and… Yeah, that's ridiculous. The footage was filmed on the Moon. It's THE smoking gun that proves the Apollo missions were real. There's no other way to explain its existence. And even with today's CGI & video editing techniques, a convincing fake couldn't be made, much less circa early 1970s.
But what if the gigantic vacuum chamber was constructed in an enormous elevator shaft in a tower extending hundreds of miles up, and was allowed to drop with just enough braking to simulate lunar gravity? Just kidding. There's no reasoning people out of an idea they didn't reason themselves into. Oh, and the 16mm film of the landing shows the same thing. That's only possible in a vacuum.
Uma temperatura de 214 graus positivo e 180 graus negativo a noite segundo o Google eles não sobrveriam 214 temperatura que não existe no nosso planeta derreteria todo o painel de controle da espaçonave 😂a noite eles acenderam uma lareira pra se livrar dos 180 negativo 😂 ficavam jogando videogame, baralho, damino 😂😂aí fica um bando de imbecis acreditando nisso...
One thing that I have always found really fascinating about the moon landings is that it was almost a cheat code in nature that allowed us to get there; we aren't "supposed" to be able to make those kinds of journeys, since no other animal species in history has even come close to achieving something like that, but humans developed such an exceptionally high intelligence that they were like "we are gonna get to that moon, which has been out of reach for all other species in history", and then we started making all kinds of mathematically advanced plans that got us there. It is truly a testament to the human intellect.
@@softcolly8753 People like you are so sad. You do not believe in the moon landings not because of any reason that cant be disproved, but simply because you do not have the brainpower to understand the math and physics, which is really quite simple to myself. Good food can not be made, because I do not know how and failed to learn. You are like that.
@@my3dviews it will not ever happen not even 50 years humans cant be alive for the next 20 years because ww4 would start and technology will break and troops use swords and no any modern Weapons will exist so you can tell your ancestors on The last day that nobody got to mars
Excellent video. But NASA needs to do some restoration of the video footage transmitted by the television camera. It’s important historical work, and has degraded after fifty years.
How about the lack of visual data, research, & exploration of our moon makes you really wonder…especially with our technology advancement throughout the years. ;)
At9:37 Who is filming One astronaut on the left the other astronaut shadow on the right and it’s not moving but the cameras backing up the other cameras on the rover 9:37
At 9:37 you are looking at a panorama: a series of photos instead of a single photo. The panorama is stitched together in a way that distorts the image.
At 9:37 that is a panorama of several photos (not video) stitched together. The shadow is of the astronaut taking the set of photos to make the panorama. "The camera backing up" is just done by whoever made the video, zooming out on the photos.
@FilippoCipriano-v8z No. They did not bring external lights. It's just the sun lighting up the surface of the moon. This is a panorama so, the shadows are not all in the same direction. If you take several photos as you rotate around and stitch them together (as was done here) the shadows will not all go the same direction on the photos.
Yep. Guy named Ed Fendell in Mission Control operated the TV camera. In fact, it's official designation was the RCA Ground Command Color Television Assembly, because it could be controlled remotely from earth.
@@softcolly8753 So you know how long the delay was? Good! Now don't you think the folks in Houston who operated the camera _also_ knew about the delay?
This is seventeen minutes of really good footage from Apollo 15. A lot of large features from the Moon's landscape were revealed in the first part of the video including pictures of well defined craters (along with the name of the landing site), fault structures within the mare basin, laminated mountain ranges, and many looks at the rille (spelling?), Hadley. This video also dispelled the myth of having to place the moon rover at the landing site prior to arrival by the astronauts. That this landing wasn't by Apollo 17 mission really surprised. But, this video also went on to provide detailed images of collected rock samples, along with photos of thin sections made from the rocks.
the TV camera on the lunar rover had a remote control mount, which could be operated from Earth. So a guy in Mission Control was operating that camera most of the time.
so many folks that think the landing was faked are the same ones that have zero doubt in a magic fairy in the sky that knows their every thought and loves theme very very much
Believing that the moon landings were faked and believing that the sky fairy is real are both symptoms of the same mental defects. Low intelligence and a lack of critical thinking. Something that is as technically complex as Apollo requires intelligence and analytical skill to understand. The sky fairy is a simplistic explanation for things people don't understand. If you can't understand Apollo then you are the type that will default to the sky fairy.
is it silly to question? the moon landings happened when I was 2, still got the astronaut that was on my cake. i was exposed to the idea the landings were faked. and for about 6 months, i was on the fence about it, did it really happen? but after further research and checking out the physics in the videos, and all the information and people involved, it became clear that it did happen. im glad i doubted at 1st, i got an excellent experience of how to sort out the truth from facts (and fiction). i've a scientific mind and I would say that it 'would be' more possible to actually go the moon than it would be to try to fake it. its great they got all this film, shows the proof. hope i didnt come across to angular but hey, question everything
I don't believe they landed on the moon and I also don't believe in a god. I have doubts from this footage, 1) 9.44 the sun is in the top right hand corner producing shadows for everything from the centre of the screen to the right whereas everything on the left hand side of the screen has its shadows going in the complete opposite direction. 2)10.30 We see the same thing the shadows from the two Actornauts are roughly in the same direction yet the shadow of the rock is way off. This is not possible
Probably not. Besides the batteries there would be issues like the lubricants in the bearings turning to wax. Of course anything that worked once can work again if you put enough time, money and effort into restoring it. The rovers would probably need to be returned to earth to have enough restoration work done to make them useable again. And then they were not designed to operate on the earth so they couldn't be driven down here.
Под одним углом. Под разными не могут быть. Такая иллюзия возникает от того, что правый космонавт стоит не вертикально, а под углом, наклонившись вперед из-за веса тяжелого рюкзака жизнеобеспечения. К тому же поверхность Луны, на которую падают тени, не плоская, а вся в ямах.
@@thegreendragon843 Это так только кажется. Тень не может отбрасываться к Солнцу. Даже если подобную съемку делают для художественного фильма, то тень всегда будет отбрасываться от источника света, а не на него.
What Engine or Batteries Did they Use to POWER the Rover? They Travelled for 17.5 Miles. What did they use to Recharge the battery? How big was this Battery pack?
They had a charge capacity of 121 A·h each (a total of 242 A·h), yielding a range of 57 miles (92 km).These were used to power the drive and steering motors and also a 36-volt utility outlet mounted on the front of the LRV to power the communications relay unit or the TV camera. LRV batteries and electronics were passively cooled, using change-of-phase wax thermal capacitor packages and reflective, upward-facing radiating surfaces. While driving, radiators were covered with mylar blankets to minimize dust accumulation. When stopped, the astronauts would open the blankets, and manually remove excess dust from the cooling surfaces with hand brushes.
@@inlee99 No, we only say that when people ask questions then immediately assume it is fake despite the fact that there is not a single question about apollo that cant be answered
L'estrazione del Rover, tirando una fune,mi piace. Tra l'altro il filmato dell'estrazione rover è molto sfuocato, a confronto di altri filmati, fatti da bordo del Rover. molto nititi. Probabilmente il filmato da punto fisso, dell'estrazione del Rover e fatto con camera di bassa qualità, ottica scadente.
@@cardboard9124 dont think it was one of those fake military popups, Beetle they modified, no such folder ever sold on planet earth... and we got folding Bicycles for christ sake! Double steering and those super Space batteries, all fitted in tiny S-Band antenna bay.
هذا الفلم من انجح افلام هوليود الامريكية علي الاطلاق 😂😂😂 لقد تم خداع العالم كله بتقان وحرفية شديدة - كم هناك المليارات من الناس البسطاء الطيبون في هذا العالم المخادع القبيح الكاذب
Prolhané, ulhané ruSSácko...to má NULOVOU důvěryhodnost. Lhali o všem např. spojenectví s Německem, napadení Polska, Katyň, výbuch rakety N1, Nedelinova katastrova, Pleseck, Černobyl, sestřelení Korejských letadel-1978, 1983 a lžou pořád - ponorka Kursk, sestřel Malajsiského letadla, Ukrajina, atd.
I don't believe they landed on the moon and I also don't believe in a god. I have doubts from this footage, 1) 9.44 the sun is in the top right hand corner producing shadows for everything from the centre of the screen to the right whereas everything on the left hand side of the screen has its shadows going in the complete opposite direction. 2)10.30 We see the same thing the shadows from the two Actornauts are roughly in the same direction yet the shadow of the rock is way off. This is not possible
Hey, scientists of Artemis 2 programm desiging new space suits and the space shield I wonder why they couldn't use very good and tried Apollo technology😂
@@secular13 okay, would you rather use the latest iphone or some crappy phone from 2009? Keep in mind they both achieve the same stuff, but the latest iphone is more expensive. And yet i dont see anyone buying phones from 2009 anymore.
@@FilippoCipriano-v8z U cant recognize sarcasm ,can you,the suits from the 60ties allegedly worked perfectly but the suits designed now can't and u r aware that going back to the moon were announced quite a few times in the past similar to Jehovah's Witnesses declarations about the end of the world.Seems Don Pettit was right " we lost the technology and it's a very hard to rebuild it'"😅
Astronauts who walked on the moon Date Location Apollo 11 Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin, 7/16/1969 Sea of Tranquillity Apollo 12 Charles Conrad, Alan Bean, 11/13/1969 Oceans of Storms (Surveyor 3) Apollo 14 Alan Shepard, Edgar Mitchell, 1/31/1971 Littrow Crater Apollo 15 David Scott, James Irwin, 7/30/1971 Censorinus Crater Apollo 16 John Young, Charles Duke, 4/16/1972 Descartes Highlands Apollo 17 Gene Cernan, Harrison Schmitt. 12/7/1972 Marius Hill Astronauts who orbited the moon Apollo 8 Frank Borman, Bill Anders, Jim Lovell Apollo 10 Tom Stafford, Apollo 11 Michael Collins Apollo 12 Dick Gordon, Apollo 13 Jack Swigert, Fred Haise, (Jim Lovell) 4/11/1970 Apollo 14 Stuart Roosa Apollo 15 Al Worden Apollo 16 Thomas Mattingley Apollo 17 Ron Evans
Yep AND 50 yrs later, the lack of visual data, research, & exploration of our moon makes you really wonder…especially with our technology advancement throughout the years. ;)
@@kimlazimishim Rocket technology has not progressed much at all and although modern computers are far more sophisticated, they are far more vulnerable to particle radiation than those that used low density integrated circuits and magnetic core memory, both of which are extremely radiation hard, so a new solution has to be found to a different problem. Once Apollo 11 had returned from the Moon and President Kennedy's goal had been achieved, cutbacks began under Richard Nixon during a widescale retreat from technology projects due to competing demands e.g. Vietnam War, 70’s recession, public apathy and of course, Nixon never liked Kennedy and didn’t want to prolong his legacy. It was extremely expensive; each mission cost $1 billion to put two men on the Moon for a maximum of 3 days, a sum which was not financially sustainable. There was/is no political imperative to go back to the Moon as there was to get there in the 1960’s Cold War, which was a completely different time. Even Apollo 8 commander Frank Borman said. 'Any idea that the Apollo programme was a great voyage of exploration or scientific endeavour is nuts. People just aren't that excited about exploration. They were sure excited about beating the Russians.’
It looks like gravity, because it _is_ gravity. Approximately 1/6th of Earth's. Which is part of the reason the "dirt" behaves differently on the Moon than it does on Earth.
@@Ruda-n4hthe old expression, “no bucks, no Buck Rogers”, very much applied to the 70’s. Inflation, oil shortages, and having to pay off the Vietnam war were factors in cutting back on the space program.
"Man Must Explore", , but we quit exploring. We might have sealed our fate because we didn't. The last few flights of Apollo were paid for already. Could have gone to the Moon on those last missions on $30,000 it's estimated. We squandered over Politics and built a Uber cheap space station, that failed. Politics might have sealed our fate as well. If we would have, we probably could have been on mars by 1985. Definitely would have a base on the moon by then or close to it. Apollo 15, the first true science mission. Those before were test flights, even the first landing.
We didn't quit exploring, unmanned missions like Voyager, New Horizons, and Juno have taken us to amazing depths of discovery within the solar system (and now interstellar space!) If anything, it was the moon landings that were politically motivated, as it essentially was nothing more than a cold war dick measuring contest (not that they werent valuable and great of course, but it was literally politics) lol
17.5.2024 Irene Cara - Fame (my cover version 🥳) *_Baby look at me_* 👨🏫 *_And tell me what is the sea_* ❔ *_You ain't seen the curve of it yet_* 🌅 *_Give me time I'll make you forget the mess_* 🌐🟰💩 *_I got truth in me_* 🫶 *_And you can get it free_* 🤗 *_They can't catch the moon in their hands_* 🙅♂ *_Don't you know it's a game?_* 🎬 *_Remember their shame_* 👆 Chorus *_Fake_* ‼ *_Nasa won't live forever_* 😛 *_Nasa will learn how to die (yay)_* 🥳 *_I feel it coming and closer_* 😁 *_People will see it and sigh_* 😌 *_Fake_* ‼ *_I'm gonna make it to happen_* 👍 *_Fight up the lie like a man_* 👊 *_Fake_* ‼ *_Nasa won't live forever_* 😛 *_Baby remember their shame_* 👆 *_(Remember, remember, remember, remember_* ☝ *_Remember, remember, remember, remember)_* ☝ *_Baby gold is fight_* 🥇 *_'Cause we can make it right_* 😎 *_We can show the sky is the top_* 🟦 *_God above we break them and relive_* 🙏 *_Baby they won't laugh_* 😨 *_To touch is not enough no_* 🤓 *_We can ruin their parts till it breaks_* 🤛🤜 *_Ooh we got what it takes_* 🔨⛏🪓🪚✂🏹🔪🗡⚔🧨💣🔫🔥 Repeat chorus to fade
What is the upside down umbrella antenna doing exactly? Bouncing around like that the whole time, what is it actually transmitting / receving to or from? No doubt I will get insults instead of answers from the faithful.
While driving, that antenna is not in use. When they parked the rover, they manually pointed the antenna at Earth, and from then on, the TV camera on the LRV could be used to transmit its video directly to a receiving station on Earth. This is how they did the live coverage of the EVAs.
@@softcolly8753 This is how the LRV was used: 1. at the start of the day, drive to the first science location. 2. get out, do experiments, gather rock samples. 3. Drive to the next site. 4. Repeat this for ~6 sites over an 8-hour period. 5. Go back to the lunar module, end the EVA, go to sleep. So they’d spend most of the time away from the LM, but near the LRV. The camera helped mission control monitor the astronauts, it gave context to the experiments and sample collection etc. And it meant most of the EVA could be recorded. If they’d left the camera at the LM, they would not have been able to show most of the EVA. The astronauts carried a film camera. This was used during the drives, running at a low framerate to create a visual record of the drive. This footage would not be available until the astronauts returned to Earth. It also wasn’t possible to pack enough film to record for 8 hours straight.
COME FAI A PUNTARE LA PARABOLA SE IL ROVER SI MUOVE E IMPOSSIBILE ESSENDO A 485 MILA KM DALLA TERRA SE LA PARABOLA E MONTATA SUL ROVER???.SPIEGATEMI GRAZIE.
They did not transmit while moving. The TV camera was only used when they were stopped. The video while moving was on 16mm film, and was not seen until it was developed when they returned to Earth. You can see the TV camera assembly in the middle of the picture when they are moving.
Ma soprattutto portare u. Rover enorme sull Luna senza un reale motivo .....ma dive volevano andare ?MA COME SI FA A DAR BERE TUTTA QUESTA FALSITA ALL'INTERO MONDO
@@GiuseppeVitie The rover wasn’t brought “for no reason”. On Apollo 14, the astronauts spent 4 hours walking to a primary science target, and they couldn’t find it. They ended up having to turn back to the LRV because they were out of time for the day (limited oxygen in the backpack). With the LRV, they would have been able to drive to the target in 20 minutes, and with the navigation system on the LRV they wouldn’t have missed the target. The LRV allowed the astronauts to cover a much larger area, taking rock samples from more sites and do far more science in the time they had available.
If you look at the shadows around 9:40-9:44 they doesn't add up. The crater on the left has a shadow on its left side but the moon and the other shadows are on the right side. Also the austronauts shadow is on the same side as the sun.
@@thegreendragon843 "this is not a panorama... no reason to chop up pictures" What you see at 9:46 is the result of the astro taking a photo of the horizon at 0 degrees, pivoting to 30 deg and taking another photo, then pivoting another 30 deg, and so on until he had photographed all 360 degrees and was back to where he started. Notice that the rising slope on the right edge of the photo is the same slope on the left edge where it continues to rise. You printed this photo into paper, you could bend it into a circle and tape the left edge to the right edge and it would show the entire 360 degree horizon. I will assume that you understand why the shadows cast by a fixed light (the sun) in a panorama could not possibly all align in to the same direction.
@@thegreendragon843 " I don't buy that." You don't buy what? You can't see that it's a panorama? Or you don't understand why shadows point in different directions in a panorama?
@@gives_bad_advice there should only be one light soures the sun!! still! and no diffrent shadows regardless of when the pics were taken! your in space the light blankets the whole at once or its complet darkness! there is no atmosphere to govern the light! your not on earth were the sun sets and rise, your on the moon total darkness or total light!
The Lunar Rovers could travel 57 miles, but we never get to see video footage of them traveling more than half a mile or so. The camera is always very restricted, we never see them arrive at any location after a long drive, we never see them exist a rover after a long drive, we never see them turn. This is so fake it's driving me insane.
Much of the rover recording is 16mm film, not video. If you think i the whole thing was a fabrication I don't know what tell you. Lewis & Clark never left Virginia I betcha
@@tedpeterson1156 There is actually an insane amount of evidence that suggest that the Moon landings were filmed on sets. Many books and documentaries have been made compiling this evidence. Keep in mind you cannot easily find this evidence with simple Google/UA-cam searches, because content that support conspiracy theories have their SEOs demoted. (And yes, they have admitted to demoting SEOs at congressional hearings, and even specifically cited Moon landing conspiracy theory content as something that would be suppressed) If you are curious, 'American Moon (English)' was the documentary that started making me question the whole thing.
What do you expect, a parade and 4k video? Theyre on the moon. Any mistake and they all get oofed. They used caution, not overusing the battery. Besides, im sure Mission Control and NASA didnt consider idiots in the future discrediting their hard work. Prove the moon landing a hoax.
@@johnbarkl1700 There is ample evidence that the Moon landings were a hoax. But I can tell by your attitude that you will likely dismiss any evidence I present. If I am incorrect and you are genuinely interested though, I can start off with the moving flags. The Moon has no atmosphere, meaning the American flags cannot move in the wind, yet there are multiple instances of the flag moving due to a breeze. In other words, the Moon landings were actually filmed on a set on Earth. This is not as farfetched as you may think, because NASA literally had entire simulation studios that they used for training. They had big studios, sets, wires, balloons, cranes, cameras, advanced camera rigs, giant models of the Moon, explosives used to create Moon-accurate craters in the desert, etc. Plus the head of the Lunar program Werner von Braun was a film maker who used to work with Walt Disney.
wow 14:30 they found a primordial stone, without any instruments, only by a look. How do they know, how primordial rocks look like ? Did they know, how the moon is made of ? Fantastic ! If you believe...
Arguably, all the rocks on the moon are old. Like on Earth. What stood out about this one against the gray regolith is that it had different colored minerals in it which caught their attention. They were trained as geologists. They spent a ton of time learning geology, in fact. Apollo 17 actually sent a bonafide geologist to the moon.
@@erac5855 And it "lies" on the surface for 4,5 Billion Years, but you can pick it up like a fresh mushroom ? No asteroids and meteoroids in the meantime? The whole surface of the moon is bombarded and layers of dust are covering the moon, but this tiny piece looks out of it, just for the astronauts and their diagnosis is in this minute exact.
@@darts-multiverse ha ha indeed, dont think the meteorite showers have stopped, these guys know the difference of Made on Moon and fallen rocks! Do they lift their Sunvisors looking down on reflective surface ? I read Soviet rovers had hard time because the rocks would turn to dust! It is way worst then our *sandy* Sahara.....
@@лесоруб-я7у You asked where Earth is. You don't see it because it's high in the sky overhead. I think it would be difficult to bend the neck and look high overhead while wearing an astronaut's helmet. They had many photos of Earth taken in transit so there was not much motivation to do the gymnastics required to look high overhead. Although there ARE some photos of the Earth taken from the lunar surface, but they are not particularly impressive, so they have not emerged into popular circulation. As far as the diameter--The amount of space taken in a photo frame of Earth or anything else that is photographed depends on the camera lens being used. If i zoom in, it appears larger. If i zoom out it appears smaller. Add to that the zoom function of your laptop's image viewer and you can make the Earth look as big as you like--just zoom in.
@@лесоруб-я7у The moon's angular diameter is about 0.5°. The Earth when viewed from the moon is about 2°. Since they are using a wide angle lens, a 2 degree Earth does not appear that large. Try taking a photo of the moon with a 35mm SLR or equivalent with a 50mm lens. See how small it is, then the Earth would appear 4x that, which it does in the photos that have the Earth in them.
The photo at 9:46 is a 360 degree panorama. Try using your own camera to take a panoramic view on a sunny day and you will see that the shadows in your photo behave in the same "impossible" fashion.
@@健三夜半 You don't need any technology other than a camera to take a panorama. You just take a photo, pivot 30 degrees, take another, and do that for 360 degrees. Then you align the series of photos edge to edge to edge.
How have you been deceived? The moon landings happened. Forget about all that conspiracy theory nonsense. If you do your research, you’ll discover the truth: the moon landings happened. Don’t lose any sleep over it.
@@tubecated_development Googles very on A.I. was given copies of the recent Chinese photos of their mission to the moon as well as NASA’s Apollo mission photos. Which set of photos did the unbiased computer detect as fraudulent? Vladimir Putin’s reply may interest you. Listen I understand that being deceived is a hard thing to handle so if you want to think we have went to the moon and now can’t for some reason return because of lost blueprints, plans and trajectory maps that’s ok but NASA will eventually have to own up to why they did this. It’s going to happen friend, what their excuse will be I guess we will have to wait and see. As far as evidence goes this isn’t something hidden, there are hundreds of researchers with thousands of hours of evidence if you really want to know the truth. The question is do you really want to know the truth because the ridiculous video and photo evidence NASA offers doesn’t cut it for me and thousands of others. It’s absolutely so fake looking it is beyond me how anyone can’t see it. Good luck bro.
"so far not one person has shown NASA to be lying on anything." -remember that? Ignoring all their tales found to be false, like the bacterial life had been discovered that could thrive on arsenic. - nasas-new-form-of-life-untrue-scientists-say-20120709-21 [ Science published Sunday the much-hyped initial study in December 2010, with lead researcher Felisa Wolfe-Simon, then a fellow in NASA's astrobiology program, announcing that a new form of life had been scooped from a California lake. The original study needed to be confirmed in order to be considered a true discovery, and two separate teams found that indeed, the bacterium needed some phosphate to survive, and could not fully substitute arsenic to live. "I don't know whether the authors are just *bad scientists or whether they're unscrupulously pushing NASA's 'There's life in outer space!' agenda," wrote Redfield in a blog that ignited the web furor shortly after the paper was first published. The journal did not retract the original study but said it was "pleased to publish additional information on GFAJ-1." Wolfe-Simon said....]
When you on the moon during the day on earth, do you think you cant see the stars on the other planets like mars, i heard so much stars in space aahh i see that was fake landing 😂😂 wake up people😂😂😂😌😌😌
Simply i say Theres nothing difference between the black on earth and in space! The stars spotted easily twinkling on earth either in space, on the moon, if we Iooking on venus or mars theyre even clearer , yesterday i saw stars during the day by plane!
@@someguy-g4r lol, If you say theres a difference, youre mistaken. The darkness of night on earth n in space is the same, you even able to see the stars on the moon clearer dum dum
Wires? LOL. You mean the antenna that sticks up about 12" from the top of their packs? Please show us the other length of the "wires". Another hoaxer fail. Chris
These recordings were shown on live television all over the world during the early 70s. You did NOT have access to advanced CGI effects or super-long video tapes that could fit several hours of perfectly edited slow-motion back then. Hell, even RUSSIA have admitted that the moon landings were real, and they would have been the first guys to blow the whistle if it actually was faked - the nuclear physicists in Russia know what authentic moon landing footage is supposed to look like, and they haven't called fake on a damn thing.
@@tubecated_development I claim NASA pulled most of the video and pictures off of their web page, some of the video was recorded over, the telemetry was lost entirely, and they seem to have removed more than they show now. Go look at their government web page and tell me I'm wrong. There was more available a decade ago, but then people started questioning it more and more. In 2014 UA-cam pulled every challenging video questioning the veracity of the "man went to the moon and back in 1969 but we don't have the money now and we forgot how we did it" B.S.!!!!! 🤓
They did take still pictures of the earth from the moon, which you can easily locate online. But why would they take video of it? You would have to take at least a few hours of video to see the effects of the earth's rotation. During all that time they could take video of the astronauts instead, showing them exploring the moon and allowing scientists on the ground to participate in the exploration. I really think that would be more important.
On ne voit jamais l'horizon lointain dernière les astronautes .que quelques mètres .probablement la largeur du studio. Dans toutes les vidéos et photos prises soi-disant sur la lune on distingue clairement un trait qui sépare l'image .en avant c'est réel mais en arrière c'est clairement une image,et jamais il ne tourne la caméra à gauche ou à droite ou en arrière,on ne montre que ce qu'il y'a devant .
Watch any video with communication and there is in fact a delay between when they ask a question on Earth and get a reply. There isn't one when the astronauts ask a question and they reply from Earth, since they can reply as soon as they hear the astronauts.
People are so gullible, they can watch a fake scyfy space movie like (Gravity, Martian, or Apollo with Tom Hanks that looks realistic but they know it's just a movie, yet can't conceive that space could be easily faked especially in the 60's. I'm embarrassed for anyone who truly believes in space travel.
@@Ruda-n4h You cannot fake these kinds of videos with 60s-70s technology, back when CGI barely existed, and when slow-motion videos could only be made like a couple minutes long.
@@Hobbes746 There's also a mountion of unanswered questions....I just wish they had have gone but we will never know but then again maybe years down the road it might all come out.
The rover was equipped with a high-gain antenna (the metallic umbrella seen on the left) for communications between the astronauts and Mission Control in Houston, a television camera (the box in front of the high-gain antenna), and a low-gain antenna (the aerial antenna located between the seats).
@@Ruda-n4h Sur une antenne parabolique à gain très élevé, le lobe de rayonnement est extrèmement étroit. Pour attraper le faiseau d'un satellite de géostationnaire et le garder, c'est déjà très compliqué sur un bâti hyper stable. Quelques dizaines de minutes d'angle font perdre le signal. J'aimerais que l'on m'explique comment l'on rester dans le faisceau hertzien d'un objectif situé dix fois plus loin et une parabole qui se balance sur une jeep qui fait du rodéo ? Et sans la moindre coupure d'émission !
@@martindoche7151 L’antenne à gain élevé offre un moyen plus précis de cibler les signaux radio et est donc très essentielle aux réseaux sans fil à longue portée. Ils avaient également une ligne de mire, c’est-à-dire qu’il n’y avait pas d’obstacle entre la Terre et la Lune.
And if they had been back a few times😂😂😂😂.then they would of made it so idk maybe leave a flag somewhere that a telescope can see it..because china is the only lander to land on the dark side🤔how is that explained...or no footprints to be seen or excess parts from rockets and landers and shit...far out come on
Huh? Trying to make sense of most of this comment. Anyway, they haven’t landed people on the far side of the moon, due in no small part to there being no line of site, which means no communications with Earth. You would need an incredibly powerful telescope to see a very small flag on the moon. However, if you really are interested in educating yourself, check out the lunar reconnaissance orbiter, which has taken photographs from altitude of all of the Apollo landing sites. You can see rover tracks, the descent stages of the LM, and paths of astronaut foot prints. You can even see equipment they set up in the ALSEP. Again, if you want to be educated…
Those supposed pictures of the Apollo landing sites are so fake! It’s laughable. You telling me that NASA can’t get clear and convincing pictures? What a joke! The LRO took those supposed pictures from an altitude of 60? Miles and that’s the best quality they could get? 😢😢😢😂😂😂
Too bad its another fake😂😂😂re watch from 5.05 to about 5.20 and you can clearly see just before the speed goes wierd hes floating been pulled up and then it goes fast for some reason😂😂😂..wow
Ohhhh you’re referring to the VHF radio antennas on the PLSS that they used to communicate with each other and Earth catching a glint of sunlight! Thanks for pointing out a cool detail! Back in the day when TVs had antennas, I would often tie a string around it and try to lift my TV up. Quickly discovered it was not designed for that and designed to receive signals. Just like their antennas. Foiled again. It literally also says time lapse 450x at that part.
@@whoeverunknown8199 So you have the "real" rockets and Americns lies? You mean that your Moon rocket N1 which failed 4x (1969-72), killed hundreads of people, of course you lied about it for decades? Or Luna 25 (2023) which crashed to the Moon making 10 meters crater? A ruZZian writes something about "lying" ... one of the most ironical things what could happen.
This one was a live television extravaganza and I watched every second. I can't imagine how people could turn away from the miracle of moon exploration.
Surely, especially when it was a live broadcast 😉
Watching all three EVAs on their entirety was the best moment of my childhood.
Dalle balle Americane ne siamo pieni le scatole .DIMMI COME HANNO FATTO A FARE LE FOTOGRAFIE CON TEMPERATURE COSI OSTILI?????
@@dossenasantino3129 because the temperatures dont work how you think. There is no air to actually conduct heat, so its only conducted through the ground (which the cameras never touched) and direct heating from sunlight, which is slow and can be deflect with white coloring
@@clearheaded5696 live broadcast from Hollywood studio
HAPPY 50TH BIRTHDAY APOLLO-15 (DATES: 26/07/1971 - 07/08/1971)......SPECTACULAR MISSION, YOU PUT THE APOLLO PROGRAM BACK ON TRACK!! SADLY AL WORDEN & JIM IRWIN HAVE PASSED AWAY & DAVE SCOTT IS THE ONLY REMAINING ASTRONAUT FROM THAT MISSION.
That's the first time I've seen such footage. Thank you!
Fun Fact.The total run time oc this Video is 17:01,The Registry cor the Starship Enterprise is...1701.....
Man, wouldn't it be something to be there?
Moon has been beautiful the past few nights in the scope, too.
Lol u sound like my grandfather
Great video! Thank you!
FOR THE DENIERS this is one of the videos that convinced me this was filmed in a vacuum environment. no dust hangs in the air for more than 2 or maybe 3 seconds. look at all the dust that rover is kicking up and all of it ends up on the ground. if this was filmed in an atmosphere, dust would be hanging in the air that you would see above the horizon which you can see that the rover does kick dust up high enough to see above the horizon. no dust cloud, no atmosphere. how could you fake that? also, look how crisp that horizon is....no atmosphere
There's also the issue of 1/6th gravity. It would be "possible" to create a giant zero atmosphere environment on Earth, but such is not the case for 1/6th gravity. The only way to achieve that effect is by travelling to the Moon (or some other celestial body with 1/6th gravity of Earth) and filming there. That's it. There is no other way. Well unless you count parabolic manoeuvres in planes. But the limitation there is that the effect can only be achieved for 30 seconds at a time. So to get the Apollo rover footage you'd have to have a zero atmosphere "stage" setup in a plane with miniature rover models and then splice all the 30 second clips of film together, and…
Yeah, that's ridiculous.
The footage was filmed on the Moon. It's THE smoking gun that proves the Apollo missions were real. There's no other way to explain its existence. And even with today's CGI & video editing techniques, a convincing fake couldn't be made, much less circa early 1970s.
But what if the gigantic vacuum chamber was constructed in an enormous elevator shaft in a tower extending hundreds of miles up, and was allowed to drop with just enough braking to simulate lunar gravity?
Just kidding. There's no reasoning people out of an idea they didn't reason themselves into.
Oh, and the 16mm film of the landing shows the same thing. That's only possible in a vacuum.
TO THE FAITHFUL shouldn't the dust go in more of an arc? It appears to hit resistance.
@@softcolly8753 the dust does exactly what would be expected in the Moon's 1/6 gravity, (near) zero atmosphere environment.
Uma temperatura de 214 graus positivo e 180 graus negativo a noite segundo o Google eles não sobrveriam 214 temperatura que não existe no nosso planeta derreteria todo o painel de controle da espaçonave 😂a noite eles acenderam uma lareira pra se livrar dos 180 negativo 😂 ficavam jogando videogame, baralho, damino 😂😂aí fica um bando de imbecis acreditando nisso...
A wonderful summary of an outstanding mission.
The moon rover is like my childhood fantasy, so cool!
That must have been the coolest buggy ride ever! And to be the first... Happy 50th!
I was so proud and 13 when I was watching this live.
There is a terrific book all about the Apollo lunar rovers. It's called Across the Airless Wilds.
From 14 failed test missions to putting man on the moon. Lol 😂
such a cute video! love you nasa! God is with you no matter where you are!
Apollo 15 was truly mind boggling. They all were amazing. It just seems like Apollo 15 had something special about it.
One thing that I have always found really fascinating about the moon landings is that it was almost a cheat code in nature that allowed us to get there;
we aren't "supposed" to be able to make those kinds of journeys, since no other animal species in history has even come close to achieving something like that, but humans developed such an exceptionally high intelligence that they were like "we are gonna get to that moon, which has been out of reach for all other species in history", and then we started making all kinds of mathematically advanced plans that got us there.
It is truly a testament to the human intellect.
One might say that is was unbelievable.
@@softcolly8753 People like you are so sad. You do not believe in the moon landings not because of any reason that cant be disproved, but simply because you do not have the brainpower to understand the math and physics, which is really quite simple to myself. Good food can not be made, because I do not know how and failed to learn. You are like that.
This is our beautiful moon -- a satellite. We NEED to land on a planet and that is MARS.
Wont happen !!!
@@Bectria-nagibator Won't happen soon. That I agree, but eventually it will. But it may take 50 years or more.
@@my3dviews it will not ever happen not even 50 years humans cant be alive for the next 20 years because ww4 would start and technology will break and troops use swords and no any modern Weapons will exist so you can tell your ancestors on The last day that nobody got to mars
Priceless footage 😊❤
Excellent video. But NASA needs to do some restoration of the video footage transmitted by the television camera. It’s important historical work, and has degraded after fifty years.
I know seeing this as a kid brings back some awestruck moments in time I'm 57 years old in the news pieces here and there back then.
How about the lack of visual data, research, & exploration of our moon makes you really wonder…especially with our technology advancement
throughout the years. ;)
@@kimlazimishim there’s all kinds of visual data, research, etc. what are you talking about?
The footage that came into Australia is the real video, everything else was copied from that and is not as good. But the Aussie footage still exists.
@@briandenleyG'day,so there there.The signal came to Parks Radio Telescope in NSW Australia
At9:37 Who is filming One astronaut on the left the other astronaut shadow on the right and it’s not moving but the cameras backing up the other cameras on the rover 9:37
the one eyed alien...
The shadow dont match because they brought external lights, but the shadow on the bottom is clearly from the person recording
At 9:37 you are looking at a panorama: a series of photos instead of a single photo. The panorama is stitched together in a way that distorts the image.
At 9:37 that is a panorama of several photos (not video) stitched together. The shadow is of the astronaut taking the set of photos to make the panorama. "The camera backing up" is just done by whoever made the video, zooming out on the photos.
@FilippoCipriano-v8z No. They did not bring external lights. It's just the sun lighting up the surface of the moon. This is a panorama so, the shadows are not all in the same direction. If you take several photos as you rotate around and stitch them together (as was done here) the shadows will not all go the same direction on the photos.
This is excellent. Thanks for sharing. I saw these images as a child on TV, but I don't remember it being that long. It is a wonder!
It's a combination of the television broadcast, still photos and the 16mm film taken on the Lunar Rover.
He is a first person to drive on outer space
incroyable les risques qu'ils ont pris mais ils avaient confiance dans leur matériel robuste et ont enchaîné étape après étape 👍
Wow who would've thought!
Kenapa di depan nampak gelap? Bumi juga bulat. Jika tempat kita berada cerah, di depan juga nampak cerah.
There is no atmosphere, so the sky appears black and shadows appear much darker than on Earth, since they still get lit by our atmosphere.
Excellent video! 🦅🦅🦅 🌑🌒🌓🌔🌕🌖🌗🌘🌑
Who controls the camera Houston
The operator in Houston!
Yep. Guy named Ed Fendell in Mission Control operated the TV camera. In fact, it's official designation was the RCA Ground Command Color Television Assembly, because it could be controlled remotely from earth.
@@Tim22222 with a 2-3 second delay? Sure.
@@softcolly8753 So you know how long the delay was? Good! Now don't you think the folks in Houston who operated the camera _also_ knew about the delay?
@@Tim22222 isn't it strange that the skeptics seem to know more details than the true faithful, who question nothing?
This is seventeen minutes of really good footage from Apollo 15. A lot of large features from the Moon's landscape were revealed in the first part of the video including pictures of well defined craters (along with the name of the landing site), fault structures within the mare basin, laminated mountain ranges, and many looks at the rille (spelling?), Hadley. This video also dispelled the myth of having to place the moon rover at the landing site prior to arrival by the astronauts. That this landing wasn't by Apollo 17 mission really surprised. But, this video also went on to provide detailed images of collected rock samples, along with photos of thin sections made from the rocks.
Who's controlling the video camera?
Camera man obviously..😉😊
the TV camera on the lunar rover had a remote control mount, which could be operated from Earth. So a guy in Mission Control was operating that camera most of the time.
@@Hobbes746 🤣
@@zhengling2668 Why laugh. That was exactly what was done. The camera mounted on the rover could be panned left and right, and up and down from Earth.
Amazing stuff and this shows how clever humans are💯💯💯💯🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸❤️
so many folks that think the landing was faked are the same ones that have zero doubt in a magic fairy in the sky that knows their every thought and loves theme very very much
Believing that the moon landings were faked and believing that the sky fairy is real are both symptoms of the same mental defects. Low intelligence and a lack of critical thinking. Something that is as technically complex as Apollo requires intelligence and analytical skill to understand. The sky fairy is a simplistic explanation for things people don't understand. If you can't understand Apollo then you are the type that will default to the sky fairy.
Theme🤣🤣🤣🤣
is it silly to question? the moon landings happened when I was 2, still got the astronaut that was on my cake. i was exposed to the idea the landings were faked. and for about 6 months, i was on the fence about it, did it really happen? but after further research and checking out the physics in the videos, and all the information and people involved, it became clear that it did happen. im glad i doubted at 1st, i got an excellent experience of how to sort out the truth from facts (and fiction). i've a scientific mind and I would say that it 'would be' more possible to actually go the moon than it would be to try to fake it. its great they got all this film, shows the proof. hope i didnt come across to angular but hey, question everything
Lol only gullible sheep believe everything what tv box says 😂 photo film cant even survive vaccum not to mention radiation and extreme temps
I don't believe they landed on the moon and I also don't believe in a god.
I have doubts from this footage,
1) 9.44 the sun is in the top right hand corner producing shadows for everything from the centre of the screen to the right whereas everything on the left hand side of the screen has its shadows going in the complete opposite direction.
2)10.30 We see the same thing the shadows from the two Actornauts are roughly in the same direction yet the shadow of the rock is way off.
This is not possible
I wonder if it would still work if they tinkered with it and popped in a new battery?
Probably not. Besides the batteries there would be issues like the lubricants in the bearings turning to wax. Of course anything that worked once can work again if you put enough time, money and effort into restoring it. The rovers would probably need to be returned to earth to have enough restoration work done to make them useable again. And then they were not designed to operate on the earth so they couldn't be driven down here.
@joevignolor4u949 It'd be nice if someone dropped a probe to revisit the old Apollo landing sites.
@@PortmanRd They did photograph all of the landing sites from lunar orbit. You can see the rover tracks as well as the descent stages and rovers.
@@my3dviews I thinking more along the lines of an automated moon rover, but thanks for info.
@@PortmanRd Yes, it would be nice if they eventually send a lander near the Apollo sites to get a closeup of how well the equipment survived.
Favorite images: 0:51, 09:37-09:48, 15:28.
👍Отлично!
согласен, только жаль что враньё
10:30 почему тени двух космонавтов под разными углами?? 🤔🧐
Под одним углом. Под разными не могут быть. Такая иллюзия возникает от того, что правый космонавт стоит не вертикально, а под углом, наклонившись вперед из-за веса тяжелого рюкзака жизнеобеспечения. К тому же поверхность Луны, на которую падают тени, не плоская, а вся в ямах.
Отраженный свет глупый....
@@thegreendragon843That photo is a panorama. I'll let you do the math on why shadows in a panorama will be at varying angles.
@@thegreendragon843 Это так только кажется. Тень не может отбрасываться к Солнцу. Даже если подобную съемку делают для художественного фильма, то тень всегда будет отбрасываться от источника света, а не на него.
@@MsAviator69.
Previous flights before Apollo 15 were considered test flights? That is called hyperbole, lol
Not even close ….
Only up to Apollo 10, were they test flights.
Well, I was convinced of that, but he also convinced me of how he returned to Earth again because he went with a space rocket and the momentum.
He was havin some fun with that hammer 😏
What Engine or Batteries Did they Use to POWER the Rover?
They Travelled for 17.5 Miles. What did they use to Recharge the battery?
How big was this Battery pack?
The Lunar Roving Vehicle used two 36-volt silver-zinc potassium hydroxide non-rechargeable batteries developed by the Eagle-Piche company. Take care
They had a charge capacity of 121 A·h each (a total of 242 A·h), yielding a range of 57 miles (92 km).These were used to power the drive and steering motors and also a 36-volt utility outlet mounted on the front of the LRV to power the communications relay unit or the TV camera. LRV batteries and electronics were passively cooled, using change-of-phase wax thermal capacitor packages and reflective, upward-facing radiating surfaces. While driving, radiators were covered with mylar blankets to minimize dust accumulation. When stopped, the astronauts would open the blankets, and manually remove excess dust from the cooling surfaces with hand brushes.
@@viktorm3840 They weren't driving on Earth.
Don't ask too many questions because they will start calling you a "conspiracy idiot"..😉😊🙃
@@inlee99 No, we only say that when people ask questions then immediately assume it is fake despite the fact that there is not a single question about apollo that cant be answered
L'estrazione del Rover, tirando una fune,mi piace. Tra l'altro il filmato dell'estrazione rover è molto sfuocato, a confronto di altri filmati, fatti da bordo del Rover. molto nititi. Probabilmente il filmato da punto fisso, dell'estrazione del Rover e fatto con camera di bassa qualità, ottica scadente.
"Capcon,can I have a toilet break?"
Lame....
7:21
Ratter weird rover extraction, balloon like, guess they had to add equipment like batteries and dish.
They had to unfold the seats and attach the TV camera and stowage for the tools and samples, and unfold and attach the high gain antenna.
@@FosterZygote Ah some little effort, not just a pop-up contraption :)
@@wildboar7473 the actual rover was just a popup essentially, the folding of it is very interesting
@@cardboard9124 dont think it was one of those fake military popups, Beetle they modified, no such folder ever sold on planet earth... and we got folding Bicycles for christ sake! Double steering and those super Space batteries, all fitted in tiny S-Band antenna bay.
@@wildboar7473 huh?
"Theres no doubt about those mountains being there" - Huh? Who or why does someone say something like that?
A humourous remark about landing in the right place.
هذا الفلم من انجح افلام هوليود الامريكية علي الاطلاق 😂😂😂 لقد تم خداع العالم كله بتقان وحرفية شديدة - كم هناك المليارات من الناس البسطاء الطيبون في هذا العالم المخادع القبيح الكاذب
يتعلمون الشر من القرآن
That's in my YT channel I have my Zeus Meteorite. @ Limahong's Time.👍😊 Philippines.
We just got the Lego LRV
Až místo přistání na Měsíci nafotí Rusko, nebo Čína, tak nám pošlete fotku. Proč to vždycky jezdí proti kopci? Abychom neviděli co je dál?
Prolhané, ulhané ruSSácko...to má NULOVOU důvěryhodnost.
Lhali o všem např. spojenectví s Německem, napadení Polska, Katyň, výbuch rakety N1, Nedelinova katastrova, Pleseck, Černobyl, sestřelení Korejských letadel-1978, 1983 a lžou pořád - ponorka Kursk, sestřel Malajsiského letadla, Ukrajina, atd.
The moon is balloon 🎈. David Nivan
Madonna, appesi a saltellare come burattini senza coerenza nell’inerzia dei movimenti e con luci da sceneggiato anni 70.
I don't believe they landed on the moon and I also don't believe in a god.
I have doubts from this footage,
1) 9.44 the sun is in the top right hand corner producing shadows for everything from the centre of the screen to the right whereas everything on the left hand side of the screen has its shadows going in the complete opposite direction.
2)10.30 We see the same thing the shadows from the two Actornauts are roughly in the same direction yet the shadow of the rock is way off.
This is not possible
Concordo contigo.
It's a panorama: apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap081130.html
11:15 😸
~😂£€§¥£€😮~AVE~
Hey, scientists of Artemis 2 programm desiging new space suits and the space shield I wonder why they couldn't use very good and tried Apollo technology😂
Because they are 50 years old, why use 50 year old technology when we have significantly improved in space travel in these past 50 years
Bc old is tested and worked 😂 and new one ,well,is crap😂 well,they lost the technology and it's hard to re- build it- Don Petitt ,astronot
@@secular13 okay, would you rather use the latest iphone or some crappy phone from 2009? Keep in mind they both achieve the same stuff, but the latest iphone is more expensive. And yet i dont see anyone buying phones from 2009 anymore.
@@FilippoCipriano-v8z U cant recognize sarcasm ,can you,the suits from the 60ties allegedly worked perfectly but the suits designed now can't and u r aware that going back to the moon were announced quite a few times in the past similar to Jehovah's Witnesses declarations about the end of the world.Seems Don Pettit was right " we lost the technology and it's a very hard to rebuild it'"😅
Astronauts who walked on the moon Date Location
Apollo 11 Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin, 7/16/1969 Sea of Tranquillity
Apollo 12 Charles Conrad, Alan Bean, 11/13/1969 Oceans of Storms (Surveyor 3)
Apollo 14 Alan Shepard, Edgar Mitchell, 1/31/1971 Littrow Crater
Apollo 15 David Scott, James Irwin, 7/30/1971 Censorinus Crater
Apollo 16 John Young, Charles Duke, 4/16/1972 Descartes Highlands
Apollo 17 Gene Cernan, Harrison Schmitt. 12/7/1972 Marius Hill
Astronauts who orbited the moon
Apollo 8 Frank Borman, Bill Anders, Jim Lovell
Apollo 10 Tom Stafford,
Apollo 11 Michael Collins
Apollo 12 Dick Gordon,
Apollo 13 Jack Swigert, Fred Haise, (Jim Lovell) 4/11/1970
Apollo 14 Stuart Roosa
Apollo 15 Al Worden
Apollo 16 Thomas Mattingley
Apollo 17 Ron Evans
Like a boat or maybe a forklift :)
Uah!🐻👍👍👍🌟💥🌟💥🌟
Moon dirt gets kicked up, then goes straight down,hmmmmmm. Looks like gravity boys
Looks like a vacuum, no dust hanging in the air.
The moon does have gravity.
Yep AND 50 yrs later, the lack of visual data, research, & exploration of our moon makes you really wonder…especially with our technology advancement
throughout the years. ;)
@@kimlazimishim Rocket technology has not progressed much at all and although modern computers are far more sophisticated, they are far more vulnerable to particle radiation than those that used low density integrated circuits and magnetic core memory, both of which are extremely radiation hard, so a new solution has to be found to a different problem.
Once Apollo 11 had returned from the Moon and President Kennedy's goal had been achieved, cutbacks began under Richard Nixon during a widescale retreat from technology projects due to competing demands e.g. Vietnam War, 70’s recession, public apathy and of course, Nixon never liked Kennedy and didn’t want to prolong his legacy.
It was extremely expensive; each mission cost $1 billion to put two men on the Moon for a maximum of 3 days, a sum which was not financially sustainable. There was/is no political imperative to go back to the Moon as there was to get there in the 1960’s Cold War, which was a completely different time. Even Apollo 8 commander Frank Borman said. 'Any idea that the Apollo programme was a great voyage of exploration or scientific endeavour is nuts. People just aren't that excited about exploration. They were sure excited about beating the Russians.’
It looks like gravity, because it _is_ gravity. Approximately 1/6th of Earth's. Which is part of the reason the "dirt" behaves differently on the Moon than it does on Earth.
@@Ruda-n4hthe old expression, “no bucks, no Buck Rogers”, very much applied to the 70’s. Inflation, oil shortages, and having to pay off the Vietnam war were factors in cutting back on the space program.
Sjene su jasan dokaz da je film lažiran. Čovjek ipak nije hodao po mjesecu.
"Man Must Explore", , but we quit exploring. We might have sealed our fate because we didn't. The last few flights of Apollo were paid for already. Could have gone to the Moon on those last missions on $30,000 it's estimated. We squandered over Politics and built a Uber cheap space station, that failed. Politics might have sealed our fate as well. If we would have, we probably could have been on mars by 1985. Definitely would have a base on the moon by then or close to it. Apollo 15, the first true science mission. Those before were test flights, even the first landing.
We didn't quit exploring, unmanned missions like Voyager, New Horizons, and Juno have taken us to amazing depths of discovery within the solar system (and now interstellar space!)
If anything, it was the moon landings that were politically motivated, as it essentially was nothing more than a cold war dick measuring contest (not that they werent valuable and great of course, but it was literally politics) lol
17.5.2024
Irene Cara - Fame (my cover version 🥳)
*_Baby look at me_* 👨🏫
*_And tell me what is the sea_* ❔
*_You ain't seen the curve of it yet_* 🌅
*_Give me time I'll make you forget the mess_* 🌐🟰💩
*_I got truth in me_* 🫶
*_And you can get it free_* 🤗
*_They can't catch the moon in their hands_* 🙅♂
*_Don't you know it's a game?_* 🎬
*_Remember their shame_* 👆
Chorus
*_Fake_* ‼
*_Nasa won't live forever_* 😛
*_Nasa will learn how to die (yay)_* 🥳
*_I feel it coming and closer_* 😁
*_People will see it and sigh_* 😌
*_Fake_* ‼
*_I'm gonna make it to happen_* 👍
*_Fight up the lie like a man_* 👊
*_Fake_* ‼
*_Nasa won't live forever_* 😛
*_Baby remember their shame_* 👆
*_(Remember, remember, remember, remember_* ☝
*_Remember, remember, remember, remember)_* ☝
*_Baby gold is fight_* 🥇
*_'Cause we can make it right_* 😎
*_We can show the sky is the top_* 🟦
*_God above we break them and relive_* 🙏
*_Baby they won't laugh_* 😨
*_To touch is not enough no_* 🤓
*_We can ruin their parts till it breaks_* 🤛🤜
*_Ooh we got what it takes_* 🔨⛏🪓🪚✂🏹🔪🗡⚔🧨💣🔫🔥
Repeat chorus to fade
What is the upside down umbrella antenna doing exactly? Bouncing around like that the whole time, what is it actually transmitting / receving to or from? No doubt I will get insults instead of answers from the faithful.
because gravity on the moon acts in reverse the rain falls upwards.. so they mounted the umbrella upside down.... obvious even to a 5 year old child..
While driving, that antenna is not in use. When they parked the rover, they manually pointed the antenna at Earth, and from then on, the TV camera on the LRV could be used to transmit its video directly to a receiving station on Earth. This is how they did the live coverage of the EVAs.
Exactly ! you will be labeled a "conspiracy idiot" for asking too many questions.
@@Hobbes746 why attach it to the buggy at all then?
@@softcolly8753 This is how the LRV was used:
1. at the start of the day, drive to the first science location.
2. get out, do experiments, gather rock samples.
3. Drive to the next site.
4. Repeat this for ~6 sites over an 8-hour period.
5. Go back to the lunar module, end the EVA, go to sleep.
So they’d spend most of the time away from the LM, but near the LRV. The camera helped mission control monitor the astronauts, it gave context to the experiments and sample collection etc. And it meant most of the EVA could be recorded. If they’d left the camera at the LM, they would not have been able to show most of the EVA.
The astronauts carried a film camera. This was used during the drives, running at a low framerate to create a visual record of the drive.
This footage would not be available until the astronauts returned to Earth. It also wasn’t possible to pack enough film to record for 8 hours straight.
COME FAI A PUNTARE LA PARABOLA SE IL ROVER SI MUOVE E IMPOSSIBILE ESSENDO A 485 MILA KM DALLA TERRA SE LA PARABOLA E MONTATA SUL ROVER???.SPIEGATEMI GRAZIE.
They did not transmit while moving. The TV camera was only used when they were stopped. The video while moving was on 16mm film, and was not seen until it was developed when they returned to Earth. You can see the TV camera assembly in the middle of the picture when they are moving.
Ma soprattutto portare u. Rover enorme sull Luna senza un reale motivo .....ma dive volevano andare ?MA COME SI FA A DAR BERE TUTTA QUESTA FALSITA ALL'INTERO MONDO
@@GiuseppeVitie The rover wasn’t brought “for no reason”. On Apollo 14, the astronauts spent 4 hours walking to a primary science target, and they couldn’t find it. They ended up having to turn back to the LRV because they were out of time for the day (limited oxygen in the backpack).
With the LRV, they would have been able to drive to the target in 20 minutes, and with the navigation system on the LRV they wouldn’t have missed the target.
The LRV allowed the astronauts to cover a much larger area, taking rock samples from more sites and do far more science in the time they had available.
If you look at the shadows around 9:40-9:44 they doesn't add up.
The crater on the left has a shadow on its left side but the moon and the other shadows are on the right side. Also the austronauts shadow is on the same side as the sun.
This is not 1 picture. This is a panorama made out of several pictures.
Joel discovers panorama pictures and perspective. Next step: spelling the colors correctly.
@@thegreendragon843 "this is not a panorama... no reason to chop up pictures"
What you see at 9:46 is the result of the astro taking a photo of the horizon at 0 degrees, pivoting to 30 deg and taking another photo, then pivoting another 30 deg, and so on until he had photographed all 360 degrees and was back to where he started. Notice that the rising slope on the right edge of the photo is the same slope on the left edge where it continues to rise. You printed this photo into paper, you could bend it into a circle and tape the left edge to the right edge and it would show the entire 360 degree horizon. I will assume that you understand why the shadows cast by a fixed light (the sun) in a panorama could not possibly all align in to the same direction.
@@thegreendragon843 " I don't buy that." You don't buy what? You can't see that it's a panorama? Or you don't understand why shadows point in different directions in a panorama?
@@gives_bad_advice there should only be one light soures the sun!! still! and no diffrent shadows regardless of when the pics were taken! your in space the light blankets the whole at once or its complet darkness! there is no atmosphere to govern the light! your not on earth were the sun sets and rise, your on the moon total darkness or total light!
It almost looks real!
It is Real because it looks so fake.
Not really. 😂
🚀💖
83
Director : hey boy, don't drive too far, you'll probably bump into painted background, time to return.
This is real. They are actually on the moon.
The Lunar Rovers could travel 57 miles, but we never get to see video footage of them traveling more than half a mile or so.
The camera is always very restricted, we never see them arrive at any location after a long drive, we never see them exist a rover after a long drive, we never see them turn.
This is so fake it's driving me insane.
Much of the rover recording is 16mm film, not video. If you think i
the whole thing was a fabrication I don't know what tell you. Lewis & Clark never left Virginia I betcha
@@tedpeterson1156 There is actually an insane amount of evidence that suggest that the Moon landings were filmed on sets. Many books and documentaries have been made compiling this evidence.
Keep in mind you cannot easily find this evidence with simple Google/UA-cam searches, because content that support conspiracy theories have their SEOs demoted. (And yes, they have admitted to demoting SEOs at congressional hearings, and even specifically cited Moon landing conspiracy theory content as something that would be suppressed)
If you are curious, 'American Moon (English)' was the documentary that started making me question the whole thing.
What do you expect, a parade and 4k video?
Theyre on the moon. Any mistake and they all get oofed. They used caution, not overusing the battery.
Besides, im sure Mission Control and NASA didnt consider idiots in the future discrediting their hard work.
Prove the moon landing a hoax.
@@johnbarkl1700 There is ample evidence that the Moon landings were a hoax. But I can tell by your attitude that you will likely dismiss any evidence I present.
If I am incorrect and you are genuinely interested though, I can start off with the moving flags. The Moon has no atmosphere, meaning the American flags cannot move in the wind, yet there are multiple instances of the flag moving due to a breeze.
In other words, the Moon landings were actually filmed on a set on Earth. This is not as farfetched as you may think, because NASA literally had entire simulation studios that they used for training. They had big studios, sets, wires, balloons, cranes, cameras, advanced camera rigs, giant models of the Moon, explosives used to create Moon-accurate craters in the desert, etc. Plus the head of the Lunar program Werner von Braun was a film maker who used to work with Walt Disney.
@@justinmadrid8712 when you twist a flag, the flag moves, genius. That doesn't change on the moon.
what a movie, Kubrick was just a genius!
He insisted filming be on location on the Moon
화성의 사진은 밝고 멀리 보이고 시야가 넓은데 어찌 달 사진은 항상 어둡고. 시야도 좁고 가까이만 보일까 ? 스튜디오라서?
Mars - atmosphere
Moon - no atmosphere
All fake
We still don't have technology to send a man to the moon
We still don't have technology to send a man to 1% of the distance to the moon and come back alive.
@@inlee99 we do?
we do?
@@cardboard9124 really what happened to bringing back sunita Williams from space station?
@@ForestKingdoms she is coming back on crew-9
wow 14:30 they found a primordial stone, without any instruments, only by a look. How do they know, how primordial rocks look like ? Did they know, how the moon is made of ? Fantastic ! If you believe...
Arguably, all the rocks on the moon are old. Like on Earth. What stood out about this one against the gray regolith is that it had different colored minerals in it which caught their attention. They were trained as geologists. They spent a ton of time learning geology, in fact. Apollo 17 actually sent a bonafide geologist to the moon.
@@erac5855 As I said: Perhaps a geologist. Quote: geo- meaning, definition, what is geo-: relating to the Earth or its surface: Learn more.
@@erac5855 And it "lies" on the surface for 4,5 Billion Years, but you can pick it up like a fresh mushroom ? No asteroids and meteoroids in the meantime? The whole surface of the moon is bombarded and layers of dust are covering the moon, but this tiny piece looks out of it, just for the astronauts and their diagnosis is in this minute exact.
@@darts-multiverse ha ha indeed, dont think the meteorite showers have stopped, these guys know the difference of Made on Moon and fallen rocks! Do they lift their Sunvisors looking down on reflective surface ?
I read Soviet rovers had hard time because the rocks would turn to dust!
It is way worst then our *sandy* Sahara.....
@@wildboar7473 Exactly what I mean. About the soviets, this is new to me, but it fits in my convictions too.
Где наша земля которая в 6-7 раз больше луны и должна смотреться с луны как арбуз на метр от глаз?
In Apollo 11 Earth was at about 60 degrees.
@@gives_bad_adviceЯ не про угол солце а ее диаметр!
@@лесоруб-я7у You asked where Earth is. You don't see it because it's high in the sky overhead. I think it would be difficult to bend the neck and look high overhead while wearing an astronaut's helmet. They had many photos of Earth taken in transit so there was not much motivation to do the gymnastics required to look high overhead. Although there ARE some photos of the Earth taken from the lunar surface, but they are not particularly impressive, so they have not emerged into popular circulation.
As far as the diameter--The amount of space taken in a photo frame of Earth or anything else that is photographed depends on the camera lens being used. If i zoom in, it appears larger. If i zoom out it appears smaller. Add to that the zoom function of your laptop's image viewer and you can make the Earth look as big as you like--just zoom in.
@@лесоруб-я7у The moon's angular diameter is about 0.5°. The Earth when viewed from the moon is about 2°. Since they are using a wide angle lens, a 2 degree Earth does not appear that large.
Try taking a photo of the moon with a 35mm SLR or equivalent with a 50mm lens. See how small it is, then the Earth would appear 4x that, which it does in the photos that have the Earth in them.
9:44の画像はどう考えてもおかしいでしょ、前に太陽光が見えてるのに
人影はその太陽の方向に伸びてる、こんなことはあり得ない！
The photo at 9:46 is a 360 degree panorama. Try using your own camera to take a panoramic view on a sunny day and you will see that the shadows in your photo behave in the same "impossible" fashion.
@@gives_bad_advice 1970年代にはパノラマビューで撮影する技術なんか無いよ
既存の画像をパノラマに加工したんだとすると何の目的で加工したの？
@@健三夜半 You don't need any technology other than a camera to take a panorama. You just take a photo, pivot 30 degrees, take another, and do that for 360 degrees. Then you align the series of photos edge to edge to edge.
@@gives_bad_advice うん、だから何のためにそんなことをする必要があるの？
@@gives_bad_advice 早く返信しろよ、この画像について議論したいんじゃないの？
それともパノラマ画像の説明がしたかっただけ？
lie
Lie where? On a hospital bed while they search for your intellect?
The more videos I watch the more obvious it becomes, we have been deceived.
How have you been deceived? The moon landings happened. Forget about all that conspiracy theory nonsense. If you do your research, you’ll discover the truth: the moon landings happened. Don’t lose any sleep over it.
Then offer evidence to support your hypothesis. One single piece of falsifiable evidence. Can you?
@@tubecated_development Googles very on A.I. was given copies of the recent Chinese photos of their mission to the moon as well as NASA’s Apollo mission photos. Which set of photos did the unbiased computer detect as fraudulent? Vladimir Putin’s reply may interest you. Listen I understand that being deceived is a hard thing to handle so if you want to think we have went to the moon and now can’t for some reason return because of lost blueprints, plans and trajectory maps that’s ok but NASA will eventually have to own up to why they did this. It’s going to happen friend, what their excuse will be I guess we will have to wait and see. As far as evidence goes this isn’t something hidden, there are hundreds of researchers with thousands of hours of evidence if you really want to know the truth. The question is do you really want to know the truth because the ridiculous video and photo evidence NASA offers doesn’t cut it for me and thousands of others. It’s absolutely so fake looking it is beyond me how anyone can’t see it. Good luck bro.
@@chriscurtis1578Lost blueprints? Blueprints of what?
да
Holloywood 😂studio
Proof?
Ok buddy.
Don't talk crap!
@@mrmods7912 we still don't have the technology to send a man to the moon and bring him back
@user-du4oy7 completely deluded
Do people know anything about actual physics and not NASA's magic physics?
ty
In NASA they trust
Yes, just not here. And neither do you. Astrophysicists and physicists worldwide know. You just won a Dunning-Kruger award
"so far not one person has shown NASA to be lying on anything." -remember that?
Ignoring all their tales found to be false, like the bacterial life had been discovered that could thrive on arsenic.
- nasas-new-form-of-life-untrue-scientists-say-20120709-21
[ Science published Sunday the much-hyped initial study in December 2010, with lead researcher Felisa Wolfe-Simon, then a fellow in NASA's astrobiology program, announcing that a new form of life had been scooped from a California lake.
The original study needed to be confirmed in order to be considered a true discovery, and two separate teams found that indeed, the bacterium needed some phosphate to survive, and could not fully substitute arsenic to live.
"I don't know whether the authors are just *bad scientists or whether they're unscrupulously pushing NASA's 'There's life in outer space!' agenda," wrote Redfield in a blog that ignited the web furor shortly after the paper was first published.
The journal did not retract the original study but said it was "pleased to publish additional information on GFAJ-1." Wolfe-Simon said....]
Not you apparently
hoax
When you on the moon during the day on earth, do you think you cant see the stars on the other planets like mars, i heard so much stars in space aahh i see that was fake landing 😂😂 wake up people😂😂😂😌😌😌
One question, sport. How long is the lunar day? Hint: it's not 12 hours. Consider learning something before you spout off and look like a bafoon
Simply i say Theres nothing difference between the black on earth and in space! The stars spotted easily twinkling on earth either in space, on the moon, if we Iooking on venus or mars theyre even clearer , yesterday i saw stars during the day by plane!
How is your parents Someguy? Someone told me they were famous p stars and they love orgi like animal!😂
@cadstol123 you say simply, then don't answer the question. The lunar day is 14 earth days. Try filming stars in the day. Good luck, doofus
@@someguy-g4r lol, If you say theres a difference, youre mistaken. The darkness of night on earth n in space is the same, you even able to see the stars on the moon clearer dum dum
Love the convenient edit.
The astronots take a ridiculous tumble and are obviously supported by wires...
Always a cartoon character in the comments.
Wires? LOL. You mean the antenna that sticks up about 12" from the top of their packs? Please show us the other length of the "wires".
Another hoaxer fail.
Chris
"astronots", wow, how clever and original! SMH
These recordings were shown on live television all over the world during the early 70s.
You did NOT have access to advanced CGI effects or super-long video tapes that could fit several hours of perfectly edited slow-motion back then.
Hell, even RUSSIA have admitted that the moon landings were real, and they would have been the first guys to blow the whistle if it actually was faked - the nuclear physicists in Russia know what authentic moon landing footage is supposed to look like, and they haven't called fake on a damn thing.
A shame they forgot to record the Earth 😂
They didn’t. Wait, you think this is all the footage from all of Project Apollo? How can you be so ignorant yet still claim to know anything about it?
@@tubecated_development I claim NASA pulled most of the video and pictures off of their web page, some of the video was recorded over, the telemetry was lost entirely, and they seem to have removed more than they show now. Go look at their government web page and tell me I'm wrong. There was more available a decade ago, but then people started questioning it more and more. In 2014 UA-cam pulled every challenging video questioning the veracity of the "man went to the moon and back in 1969 but we don't have the money now and we forgot how we did it" B.S.!!!!! 🤓
@@Valkron11that was a Gish Gallop of BS from you and you know it.
They did take still pictures of the earth from the moon, which you can easily locate online. But why would they take video of it? You would have to take at least a few hours of video to see the effects of the earth's rotation. During all that time they could take video of the astronauts instead, showing them exploring the moon and allowing scientists on the ground to participate in the exploration. I really think that would be more important.
@@joevignolor4u949 Why did Steve Austin run slower when he was running faster?
Why does less gravity make people slower?
When it shows him riding the lunar rover. There are no tiny holes in the moon. There are no markings from meteorites.
they show depressions, but on those hills never any craters.... no rocks about.
I guess they were on a different movie set that day 🤷♂️
So you know how big those ‘tiny holes’ are when actually up close?
@@greekokie yup
The moon
On ne voit jamais l'horizon lointain dernière les astronautes .que quelques mètres .probablement la largeur du studio.
Dans toutes les vidéos et photos prises soi-disant sur la lune on distingue clairement un trait qui sépare l'image .en avant c'est réel mais en arrière c'est clairement une image,et jamais il ne tourne la caméra à gauche ou à droite ou en arrière,on ne montre que ce qu'il y'a devant .
voice communication with no delay. Bullshit
Where is there comm with no delay? Timestamp, please.
Watch any video with communication and there is in fact a delay between when they ask a question on Earth and get a reply. There isn't one when the astronauts ask a question and they reply from Earth, since they can reply as soon as they hear the astronauts.
People are so gullible, they can watch a fake scyfy space movie like (Gravity, Martian, or Apollo with Tom Hanks that looks realistic but they know it's just a movie, yet can't conceive that space could be easily faked especially in the 60's. I'm embarrassed for anyone who truly believes in space travel.
Hi mark, hope that you are well. We all see your incredulity but you seem to be lacking in proof and evidence....Take care.
It couldn't have easily been faked and I'm embarrassed for anyone who doesn't believe in it.
@@Ruda-n4h You cannot fake these kinds of videos with 60s-70s technology, back when CGI barely existed, and when slow-motion videos could only be made like a couple minutes long.
Don’t worry bud, we’re equally, if not more, embarrassed for you, too.
Otra mentira, busquen los robots en desiertos de África y en Asia, allí están, gracias por la película
Fantasy.
But they didnt really go.
Burro do jeito que você é muito me admira que consiga ganhar dinheiro pro pão
They did, as proven by a mountain of evidence.
@@Hobbes746 There's also a mountion of unanswered questions....I just wish they had have gone but we will never know but then again maybe years down the road it might all come out.
@@piano4014 Nope. Every question ever asked about the Apollo missions has an answer.
@@piano4014 Name a question that has gone unanswered. Just one.
was n schwachsinn...
A good summary of how to use scale models to make a set look real.
watch the VFX Corridor crew react to the moon landing, they debunk this exact argument
LMAO, at 6.58 is just the alleged front of the rover with a movie in the background
Fake bs
between your ears
What was broken umbrella used for on the moon buggy! Probably trying to send a,message to Uranus and see if the aliens are gay!
The rover was equipped with a high-gain antenna (the metallic umbrella seen on the left) for communications between the astronauts and Mission Control in Houston, a television camera (the box in front of the high-gain antenna), and a low-gain antenna (the aerial antenna located between the seats).
@@Ruda-n4h Sur une antenne parabolique à gain très élevé, le lobe de rayonnement est extrèmement étroit. Pour attraper le faiseau d'un satellite de géostationnaire et le garder, c'est déjà très compliqué sur un bâti hyper stable. Quelques dizaines de minutes d'angle font perdre le signal. J'aimerais que l'on m'explique comment l'on rester dans le faisceau hertzien d'un objectif situé dix fois plus loin et une parabole qui se balance sur une jeep qui fait du rodéo ? Et sans la moindre coupure d'émission !
@@martindoche7151 L’antenne à gain élevé offre un moyen plus précis de cibler les signaux radio et est donc très essentielle aux réseaux sans fil à longue portée. Ils avaient également une ligne de mire, c’est-à-dire qu’il n’y avait pas d’obstacle entre la Terre et la Lune.
Never happened.
Мультики Дисней ))
😂😂😂😂😅 IT'S ALL FAKE 🤡😂😄😂😄😅😅🤣🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️
And if they had been back a few times😂😂😂😂.then they would of made it so idk maybe leave a flag somewhere that a telescope can see it..because china is the only lander to land on the dark side🤔how is that explained...or no footprints to be seen or excess parts from rockets and landers and shit...far out come on
ty
Huh? Trying to make sense of most of this comment. Anyway, they haven’t landed people on the far side of the moon, due in no small part to there being no line of site, which means no communications with Earth.
You would need an incredibly powerful telescope to see a very small flag on the moon.
However, if you really are interested in educating yourself, check out the lunar reconnaissance orbiter, which has taken photographs from altitude of all of the Apollo landing sites. You can see rover tracks, the descent stages of the LM, and paths of astronaut foot prints. You can even see equipment they set up in the ALSEP.
Again, if you want to be educated…
Those supposed pictures of the Apollo landing sites are so fake! It’s laughable. You telling me that NASA can’t get clear and convincing pictures? What a joke! The LRO took those supposed pictures from an altitude of 60? Miles and that’s the best quality they could get? 😢😢😢😂😂😂
@@erac5855why waste your time trying to educate these morons.... the dumbest ones think they are smarter than any one else
@@mikeivey7167chang e and indian probes confirmed Apollo sites🫢🫢🫢
Keep crying
Too bad its another fake😂😂😂re watch from 5.05 to about 5.20 and you can clearly see just before the speed goes wierd hes floating been pulled up and then it goes fast for some reason😂😂😂..wow
thx
Ohhhh you’re referring to the VHF radio antennas on the PLSS that they used to communicate with each other and Earth catching a glint of sunlight! Thanks for pointing out a cool detail!
Back in the day when TVs had antennas, I would often tie a string around it and try to lift my TV up. Quickly discovered it was not designed for that and designed to receive signals. Just like their antennas. Foiled again.
It literally also says time lapse 450x at that part.
you have a hard time believing this happened.... hard to believe you made it through school
@@rancher12121 "believe" is the correct word
@@rancher12121 What is it with Deniers and excessive emoji use?
америкосы навалили постановочных видосиков, как детки малые
Russian Moon landing rockets blow up on the launchpad
@@thegreatdivide825 У русских хотя бы настоящие ракеты, а не киношная имитация брехливых американцев
@@whoeverunknown8199 So you have the "real" rockets and Americns lies?
You mean that your Moon rocket N1 which failed 4x (1969-72), killed hundreads of people, of course you lied about it for decades? Or Luna 25 (2023) which crashed to the Moon making 10 meters crater?
A ruZZian writes something about "lying" ... one of the most ironical things what could happen.