Did you forget that tax payers spent 50 billion on a telescope called hubble and they still havnt pointed at earth or the moon. That's because Hubble Is as fake as the moon missions. I feel bad for the people who beleive the moon landing bullshit. They want to beleive so bad logic and critical thinking just goes out the window. And then when they can't prove a dam thing with first hand knowledge they get pissed and go on the offensive calling names and belittling anyone who has different ideas than the mainstream narrative. These people go into convulsions of this shit. Standing up for people at NASA they have never met vouching for their honesty and reliability like your insulting a family member. Its the brainwashing doing this. The unrelenting barage of info coming from the state run media ,the state run education system and goverment itself has broken down the ability to think on their own. They are constantly parroting talking points given to them by the so called expert class. They are constantly saying we have done this and we have done that when they havnt done a fucking thing other than repeat what they heard on the state run media. Sound bites and doctored pictures are responsible for molding their world view. They have no clue where reality starts and fantasy ends anymore. They want to beleive the Hollywood bullshit. If a person was raised without seeing the news propaganda and the movies and the science fiction and the bullshit theoretical physicists and was just taught to think critically for himself only believing what can be proven through his 5 senses and actual scientific experimentation. Repeatable observable results. He would recommend 90% of the population be put in psychiatric treatment. consensus doesn't make anything true the whole world can be wrong. sadly enough the people at the top are laughing their asses off at what they can make you people believe
Well in fact, Hubble has been pointed at the moon. And the reason it is not pointed at Earth is because you would not see anything beyond a blurry bit of blue. Apart from the fact that it can not rotate quick enough to track objects on Earth, it's optics simply wouldn't allow for a clear picture. Imagine using binoculars in the place of a microscope or the other way around. It is simply not designed to view Earth, there are plenty of other telescopes that do that.
@@sfojulius every picture of earth has been conclusively been debunked as composite. Not one real picture of the earth is genuine. That doesn't seem a bit odd to you?
No human will ever leave this planets environment. Just enjoy what the earth provides now and forget about travelling thousands of miles into space as they supposedly did 50 years ago. All we have is some mythical bullshit reflectors. Where's the photographs and images that could be easily shown with our new powerful telescopes so we can actually see the debris left by the moon walkers? human controlled robots may invade the moon but that's all.
@@atoaster6715 mind, even as close as the LRO is to the moon, the resolution of it's cameras is still several meters per pixel which makes it hard to spot anything other than the lower stage of the lander that stayed behind when they departed
You won’t be able to see them. A footprint is around a foot long (lol), and the Moon is 284k+ miles away. It’s like asking the Apollo 11 Astronauts to zoom in on a ruler you placed in a field
Not even the Hubble Space Telescope see the acual hardware left over. The resolution of the Hubble is around 300M. Anything less than that simply won't show up. It takes something much closer like an orbiting satellite. The Lunar Recon Satellite took photos and a few others have.
So this dudes scope can see millions of light years away but not the shit left on the moon.... to believe such it takes a true case of cognitive dissonance. That is absurd
The "shit" left on the moon is only a fraction of a meter wide. The objects millions of lights years away are lights years across. In other words, HUGE. Big difference.
Derek Smith, shows how little you know about telescopes. There are two types of power. Light gathering power and resolution. Light gathering power has to do with how large the telescope is called aperture. It allows you to see very dim objects. It can collect more light. The faint objects are the deep sky objects that are far away. These objects aren't small just dim. Most are not millions of light years away. They include galaxies, nebulas and star clusters. Galaxies can be millions of light years away. The others are near items a few hundred to few thousand light years away. Resolution is the ability to magnify and look close at things and see definition. It's what gives us the ability to see things closer up. This is what is required to see the lunar landing sites. They are just simply too small. As you see it isn't oburd or cognitive dissonace. Just your misunderstanding of telescopes. Don't try to make people angry about what you don't understand. It's very childish.
Very nice video. I've rarely seen a video of the landing sites zooming in from a distance like you did here. And NICE job of lunar photography with your scope too!
*+Delboy:* _"I didn't see one bit of proof of landing sites"_ J.W. Astronomy never claimed to prove the landings with his video. He was showing where on the moon the landings took place. It's (yup) another straw man attack where you say stupid stuff and then pretend someone else said it. Ridiculously inept deceptive technique there, bub.Don't give up the day job, if you have one. This is a video by an *amateur astronomer* who doesn't care about your delusions. And he should not be subjected to your foolishness. It's a great video.
The Delboy so ALLLLLLL the space agencies in the world (how many of them are there?? And how many people have EVER fucking worked for them??) All the airline companies...........all the GPS companies......all the freelance scientists.........all the freelance astronomers.......every person with a telescope............we are ALL lying???? Ok wait.....let me get this straight ......literally EVERYONE ON THE MUTHER FUCKING PLANET except a handful of flat earthers is lying and NO ONE runs their mouth. That is more ludicrous than you say the moon landing is!! To have a conspiracy THAT enormous, and to carry on for decades upon decades. And you say that I live in La-La land! 🙄
Jarrett Trezzo because you know a five year old when told they could be critical could tear this fake shit to pieces. Why would you talk about Flat Earth if the ball was bullet proof....... It's not
They are paid to post everywhere there may be a chance to damage faith. They've tied their idiocy to the book of Genesis so when science asserts itself against flat earth its the bible that gets the beating.
Serious question: why could we go before, but can’t go now? Think of anything in the 1960s that hasn’t been improved or advanced greatly to its current state. Please let me know one thing that hasn’t advanced since the 1960s.
we can go there now but there simply is no reason to. The reason we went in the first place is to beat Russia there to prove that NASA has better technology and to just prove Russia wrong. NASA is however planning a future apollo mission
What the hecks c11. You guys on another level. I got mine from Walmart. It's great for beggingers and that's what I am. Hey is it me or is there like a wave in front of moon. You know like heat on pavement. Peace
That's called atmospheric scintillation. When the ground is warmer than the air, it heats the air just above it. Warm air is lighter than cold air, but it sticks to the ground until it gathers enough warm air in a globule to break free. Then it rises as a bubble of warm air. Warm air has a different refractive index than colder air. So as these bubbles rise through the atmosphere, they act like lenses to slightly bend the light as it goes through them. Since, with the telescope, you are looking through a thick layer of air with thousands of bubbles rising through it, you see the image swim around, and this video is an excellent example. Dry air is less steady than moist air. That's why in Florida, I often get to see conditions where there is no scintillation at all.
Mmk, where exactly is your proof that the moon landing was a hoax? Also, why the heck would anybody fake this, they would literally gain nothing from doing so.
The telescope is an optical instrument that enlarge the angle we see the object, not enlarging the picture of object. Compare to the distance from Earth to the Moon, the angle that a person create with the flag is below the angle that human can see, telescope work like that too, in order to see the flag, you will need a telescope with at least 200m aperture. curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/45-our-solar-system/the-moon/the-moon-landings/122-are-there-telescopes-that-can-see-the-flag-and-lunar-rover-on-the-moon-beginner
The temperature on the moon can reach up to 250° Fahrenheit (120° Celsius) during the daytime at the equator, and drop to -208 degrees F (-130° C) at night. In certain spots near the moon's poles, temperatures can plummet even further, reaching -424 °F (-253°C).
Its too bad we havent been able to go back for 1, 2, 3, 4... 5 decades now while cloning, dna mapping, cern, organ transplants, nuclear power, computers, internet, cell phones and every single other tech field has exploded.
There is no real reason to go back there. It is stupidly expensive, so repeated missions would be sparse, and we can't start mining anything because hauling the ore would be costly too. And politically, there is no "glory" in being second. (Name the Apollo 12 crew members without looking them up. My point exactly). Its not that we can't go back. Its just that there is not much to gain from doing so. Mars is more appealing because it is a new place no person has been, and it has potential for a sustainable colony, unlike the moon.
Good luck convincing our Neo-Con congress to ever actually send people back to the moon unless there's some military motive. Promise them we'll send the astronauts there to blow stuff up and they might fund it. Hell tell them there's oil on the moon. If they're dumb enough to think climate change is a lie then they're dumb enough to believe we found oil on the moon. They'd fund some missions in the name of oil or war. Otherwise it won't happen.
If they truly landed and since your scope can see nebulas and other solar systems I wanna see the tracks left from the rover. They should always be there considering there's no wind lol
We can't see other solar systems. Nebulas are huge and if you went out to a dark place without light pollution you could even see the orion nebula. The tracks and the rover are just too small to see all the way from here. Even hubble can't see them. LRO did see them however and you can find the photos online.
Flat Earth Extremists and Moon Hoax Lunatics have a right to expose their idiocy, deny themselves future job opportunities, future girl friends, future friends and acquaintances as future tools to expose lunatic and dangerous posts become better and better. Nobody believes them anyway. If they wish to hurt themselves, let them and laugh!
Just to tweak the Flatties. Very high resolution photography on the moon from 2013. www.360cities.net/image/lunar-panorama-change-3-lander#41.40,12.70,51.5 Challenge: find a single star, then explain why or why not it's visible. Numbers and logic, please.
*Darren* You're talking from utter ignorance and confidently in your ignorance proclaim _"There is no way to overcome the surface temperatures of the moon, batteries could not have been responsible for cooling the men under those condition's"_ Based on the utter fallacy of your declaration there, what evidence would you accept? There is no evidence you would accept, but I'll provide it anyway so honest normal people can laugh in your general direction. Watch this space. I have it all at home and will post after 6 pm.
Why do you think its true because you where told it.Telsa thought the moon was a magnetic light.I agree.The full moon is so bright how come armstrong isnt walking on glowing dirt?
Ah, no, you got the Apollo 14 site location wrong. That marker is only somewhat close to where Apollo 16 landed in the lunar highlands near the crater Deslandres but is still off by a little. Apollo 14 landed on just to the south of the eastern rim of the large ruined crater Fra Mauro. Your Apollo 16 landing site is also about 50 km west-southwest of where they actually landed, and your Apollo 17 marker is also placed about 60 km too far to the west of where the spacecraft actually landed in the Taurus-Littrow valley.
The Hubble Space Telescope is only 2.4 meters in diameter - much too small! Resolving the larger lunar rover (which has a length of 3.1 meters) would still require a telescope 75 meters (246 feet) in diameter. Currently, the largest, ground-based telescope is the Gran Telescopio CANARIAS (GTC) found in La Palma on the Canary Islands. The aperture of this reflecting telescope reaches a total 10.4 metres (34 feet) in diameter and is currently one of the most advanced in the world. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
@@sommarstuga1 nonsense no man has walked on moon and of course you have to say that cus you don't see it. Plasma PLASMA but what do i know besides Men lie and government lies even more ypu believe that nonsense and tell yourself whatever ypu have to to keep it true lol
@@OzzyOscy man, are you trying to say that while zoomed onto the moon, at 2:28 something within earths atmosphere flew past the lens? That small but fast object is earthly? Maybe the iss, but not something on earth. A small fly would have consumed the visual due to magnification. Or maybe my concept of zooming in is whack?
@@11designs25 You got it in the last sentence. We're infamously bad at judging size, especially the moon. It looks like a distant bat, it's even flapping its wings. 3:32 is a colony and evidently closer. What's more likely - that you misunderstand, or looking at the moon has caught several examples of aliens?
3:14 How is the picture of astronot, rover and ERATH IN HORIZONT possible if they landed in almost middle of the face of the moon which is always faced to the Erath? (Upper left corner vs. the added picture of the Astronot)
Just checked this stuff: the moon's orbit has an inclination of 5.16° to earth's ecliptic plane and has a tilt of 6.68°. The alnding site of Apollo 15 was 26° north of the lunar equator which sums up to the earth being 90°-5.16°-6.68°-26°=52° above the horizon. This is if the lunar southpole kinda points towards earth and if the moon is at the highest point of its orbit in respect to the ecliptic. 52 still seems much higher. But: The earth's shadow points downwards towards the horizon which suggests they'd have to be far west or east of 15's landing site (15 landed 3° east)
So it appears I am not able to find this picture for now (also the creator of this video didn´t put in a source for any of the images so duh). Also you can clearly see stars in the image, which shouldn´t be a thing, since the lunar surface is much to bright for cameras to pick up both the surface and the stars, which are far more pale. Though I could find this www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nasa.gov%2Fmultimedia%2Fimagegallery%2Fimage_feature_2020.html&psig=AOvVaw0mTHUq9Tqvg_-5w8Ih9eHw&ust=1592033395064000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCKj66qzj--kCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD which seems to be the exact same image with the exception that the right side is missing in which the earth can be seen on the picture from the video. Also the stars aren´t there. So you could argue, that the image from google is fake and that the US government is lying, or you could say that the image from the video is just an artistic impression. As it turns out I seem to just have found the picture from the video (my dumb ass didn´t see it the first time around): www.flickr.com/photos/futurilla/21903482502 So the dude (creator of the image) took the og 1:1 aspect ratio image (they apparently used Hasselband 500EL cameras) and added the lil slope and the earth and the stars just to make it look more interesting or whatever. He didn`t care about how realistic it looked he just wanted it to fit his artistic vision: You can see a small distortion in his edited version if you look closely right next to the rover wheel. (Probably he wanted an artifact to make it look like an older picture) (Also Follow the link to flicker on UA-cam it`s not visible that well). So he didn`t seem to care retouching this minor detail. Well, tHe mOre YoU KNoW. Sorry not sorry
They should send a rover to the Moon, so we can finally see if it really looks as funky and "cheap" on the surface as it honestly does in the Apollo photos. One single rover, instead of sending who knows how many rovers to Mars already.
wutup5566 No; their job is to research advanced aeronautical and astronautical concepts that could have a use in modern society and lead the Us Government’s civilian space programs.
you make that sound like a bad thing, you also forgot private space organizations and hobbyists armed with sounding rockets, you also forgot the observations made in by ancient figures like Pythagoras who used math to incredible accuracy to determine the size and shape of the earth. use logic, why would every other body in the universe appear spherical but not earth? study and observe a lunar eclipse that will give you all the data you need to unequivocally and without a doubt determine the shape of the earth. something to mention, people knew the shape of the earth long before space agencies based on astronomical measurements made on sea voyages dating back centuries. monuments were constructed to prove the math and track star positions of the circumpolar star and the position of Orion's belt. how is this even still an argument in 2018? the idea flat earth existence was proven wrong eons ago with the sundial! enough said.
www.apogeerockets.com/Rockets_by_Manufacturers, or get the parts however you can source them and get engineering. i'll admit i didn't give totally satisfactory answers in my previous comment but it's hard to tell who really gives a rats arse this day and age. your reply is commendable, thoughtful... I like that! for a change I feel refreshed. my one bit of advice? be careful, and join a model rocket club to get the best advice. lastly dont launch in an urban area, many cities have no fly zones. and don't forget to purchase a gps tag so you can recover your data if this is what you have your heart set on doing! good luck! warm regards!
Flat Earthers = irrelevant deniers. They can't agree on a model or any mechanisms They have no applications which work or result in any sensible, verifiable, or consistent observations. In short they are deluded, paranoid, or flat-out lying trolls.
You first; Explain why there are two tropics of the same length Explain why 600 million people in the southern hemisphere all see the south celestial pole (which flat earthers deny exists) EVERY NIGHT, & all due south from their respective positions, all in the same patch of sky, but the field rotated by the differences in their degrees of longitude. Explain why the EAP (Flat earth map) results in East-west distances in Australia that are 250% of the measured & confirmed every day actual dimensions. Show me your working stellar Charts & ephemeris Show me your working surveying & Navigation applications, charts & maps. Until you do so you have nothing to discuss.
Also, people are mad that “conspiracy theorist” are commenting here. At least they are gathering all the information possible by researching. Maybe the main stream believers should visit hoax proof videos to get more info instead of just bashing. Better to get both sides information before having your own opinion
@aussie bloke We never went bro, sorry. Nothing gets harder to do with technology. Name one technology that hasn't gotten better in the last 50 years? I'll wait..... If we were able to go to the moon in the 1960s, in 2019 there'd be public transportation going there and back. So many trips to space, yet no clear WHOLE photo of the earth, every photo of earth is cgi created, said by NASA themselves. Blue marble biggest crock. If you believe the mainstream narrative, you're just scared of the truth
If you stick with the facts and not conspiracy theories, then everything makes sense. 12 Americans walked on the moon, supported by over 400,000 people on the ground. Kind of simple, really. I fear for the sanity of the doubters/hoaxers. When Space X explores one of the Apollo sites in the next year or two, their embarrassment will be epic.
Certainly in the next 10 years we'll have boots on the moon and I'd be very surprised if they don't actually return Apollo hardware for inspection. Then there will be no Moon Hoax Lunatics left. You won't even be able to find someone who will admit they *knew* a Moon Hoax Lunatic.
Will we even be allowed to send people to the old landing sites? Are they marked by the world as International Historical sites or something, I might be wrong.
Alan Patten, I've wondered about that myself. I understand the US government wants to protect the sites (footprints and all), but it would be neat if a crew or an unmanned lander could get right up to the edge. The video would be awesome.
I'd be very surprised if they didn't make a single exception to approach from a pristine direction and retrieve a piece of Apollo hardware to study the weathering effects of micrometeors over 50 years and the radiation exposure. They've done short-term studies on satellite pieces, but this would be ten times the duration they've accomplished before. Of course there are Surveyor spacecraft all over the moon, and they could just use an abundance of caution until we can preserve the Apollo landing sites for all to enjoy in the future. Once destroyed there would be no getting them back.
RED ALERT! NASA has provided detailed pictures of what Apollo left behind, the landing site, footprints, reflector, etc. but JW provided Google map pinpoint of locations of Apollo’s playgrounds but no toys. JW should have captured exactly what NASA captured but no toys, no playground. Busted! We never stepped foot on the moon!
I want to see what the rest of the world wants to see. Real actual telescopic pictures from earth of the equipment left behind from the Appolo missions. It would seem impossible as I can not find any. Surly it can be done in this day and age.
Nope, seeing stuff the side of a car 400.000 km away can't be done "in this day and age". Not with the telescopes we have today (even Hubble is not big enough to resolve such small stuff). But there are probes orbiting the Moon at a pretty low altitude, and they did take better pictures of the landing sites.
DJMModelWorks most people see the moon as this little dot in the sky and fail to realize just how far away and how big it really is. it's a bit smaller than the united states in diameter (3.500 km) and 384.000 km away. looking for the descent stages and hardware of apollo missions from earth would be like looking at a 35 m (~100 ft) sphere from 3,84 km away and trying to zoom in on a single dust particle.
They can see millions of light years into other galaxies but claim zooming in on the fucking moon is impossible... it takes a certain kind of idiot to believe such garbage
Derek smith Do you have any idea how large a galaxy is? They can be THOUSANDS OF LIGHT YEARS wide. That is why we can see them from so far away. The technology doesn't exist today to resolve an image like that. It isn't garbage because you can't understand it.
Derek smith it’s a matter of scale, not only distance. instead of closing your eyes and remaining incredibly ignorant, why don’t you think before you say something? it makes you sound so much less idiotic.
_"2020 we don't know how we did it, and aren't capable."_ - wrong on both counts smartass, it's all about one thing *$$ MONEY $$* during the cold war the idea of the Russians being ahead of us on any front especially in space was all the motivation the government needed to throw any insane amount of money at the problem, as long as it "put them pesky russians in their place" once that was over the government lost interest in the moon thus stopped the funding thus crippling NASA.
No Earth bound telescope is powerful enough to see a small object at such a distance. Even the Hubble telescope can't see anything smaller than a football stadium on the Moon. You'd need a 60 meters lense to (barely) see the stuff they left behind from 400000 km away. The LRO probes are orbiting the Moon at an altitude of 50km, though, and they did take pictures of the landing sites.
You are a brain dead idiot, period. How can people as stupid as you still exist? All the proof you need is laying in plain sight but you choose to believe conspiracy theorists like a fucking retard.
so we can observe the beautiful planets around us which we can clearly see are round, but for some strange reason we live on a flat plain .... Explain all you you-tube flat earth basement dwelling scientists and further more if you look at a global map laid flat out it should take like 6 hours to fly to Australia, but for some reason we fly 16 hours the wrong fucking direction and some how make to are destination without any problemo .... Explain ! I could go on and on and on...
globalmind43 - Since when did observing what is around us dictate what we are? If an African American baby is surrounded by 8 Caucasian babies does that mean it’s white?
They fixed the rover's fender using "duct tape"...on the moon...in 260 degree direct sunlight?! @4:53 (via universe today) "If you were standing on the surface of the Moon in sunlight, the temperature would be hot enough to boil water. And then the Sun would go down, and the temperature would drop 250 degrees in just a matter of moments"....Max temp duct tape can stand temperatures up to 200F, Whereas normal duct tape begins to melt at 130F. However, the 200F seems to be only a suggestion, the temp of the moon is only 30 to 50 degrees more than the melting point. Probably just got really sticky, its not like the tape would have melted instantly. Applying super sticky, melty duct tape with large gloves on seems super easy in this video "from the moon".....hhmmmm....doesn't seem super sticky/melty at all...why is that? ua-cam.com/video/ZzHEyUkyt9Y/v-deo.html
Ive somtimes wondered. How did they get there lunar rover buggies to the moon. Some of them look as long as a jeep. How did they transport the lunar rover from earth to the moon?
I still can't understand Hubble telescope can capture millions even billions light year distance galaxy's still it can't capture moon landings Apollo mission sites how?
Galaxies are enormous, a lot of them are bigger than 10 million light years, but footprints on the moon are extremely small and are impossible to capture through a telescope, there is however a satellite orbiting the moon which has been able to take some photos of the landing sites
Your telescope is just as good as NASA LRO camera, almost same quality, only difference is NASA drew some lines and dots on their pictures. Good and Objective video.
I have a question. I'm looking at some of these crater patterns, specifically the smaller ones. It looks as if the moon has an atmosphere. This should be impossible. It looks like bigger meteors were broken up in an atmosphere and when they hit the moon, it created multiple impact zones in lines. With no plants, the moons atmosphere would have to come from the earth, which suggests the moon itself is local. This would explain why the Astronauts didn't know they had to go through the van Allen belts. They didn't, so they were never briefed on the matter. Thoughts anyone?
Yeah, that is all bullshit. They DID pass through the radiation belts, and they WERE briefed on them. They specifically planned for them too. The impact crators on the moon you mention doesn't make any sense. The smaller debrid from larger impacts would still land back on the moon because of gravity. The moon does have gravity, you know?
@@thediaz07 The radiation is only about 1 years worth of exposure. Nothing devastating. And we haven't gone back because it isnt politically important. The origional moon missions were good for the anti-russian talking points of the day. We can go back, we have the technology, but not the political support to do so.
@@HalcyonVoid yeah I could source the part about the radiation being deadly to humans...also the part that we destroyed the technology and Aren't capable of going back.
The three lunar roving vehicles from Apollo 15, 16, and 17 also sit on the surface of the moon. After striking plans for a 10,000-lb mobile lunar lab, NASA went with the 463-lb (77-lbs on the Moon) buggy.
I don’t understand why the comments here are so harsh. Can’t we have differing opinions and agree to disagree. Can’t we believe in the capacity of humankind or question what authority shows us and just agree to disagree. No one is stupid for believing or disbelieving. We have our opinions, we have our reasons, our arguments. Can’t we just share it without enforcing or belittling other people.
Human beings are cruel and evil. An unremarkable species. It's people's nature to be filled with hatred. My own opinion is that NASA is a big hustle. These faked missions not just to the moon, but the probes to the planets are like lap dancing money for the psychopaths who own us and run the world.
An otherwise excellent video is ruined with the rotation of the video. Why not just leave it in a “North Up” orientation? Each image is rotated about 90 to “East Up” as it is zoomed in.
What is the proof of moonlanding here ? If you can show us 1500 miles light years away nebula and galaxy why you don't show the flags and other manmade things in moon ?
It's impossible with any telescope on earth. Even hubble isn't big enough to see the landers. The nebulas are enormous. You could even see the orion Nebula from earth with a telescope. The problem is light pollution. So see the milky way properly you need to get away from all light. If you want to see the landers you can watch the photos from the LRO.
Through his telescope, it would be impossible to capture, there is a satellite orbiting the moon that has been able to take pictures of the landing sites
Wow. This is some good shots of the moon of your telescope frop earth. What type and kind is it? I want one like this. Or at lest use one like the one that you are using here for these shots.
How cool it would be to use this telescope from the Moon to view the Earth
We can't because we can't land on the moon
Did you forget that tax payers spent 50 billion on a telescope called hubble and they still havnt pointed at earth or the moon. That's because Hubble Is as fake as the moon missions. I feel bad for the people who beleive the moon landing bullshit. They want to beleive so bad logic and critical thinking just goes out the window. And then when they can't prove a dam thing with first hand knowledge they get pissed and go on the offensive calling names and belittling anyone who has different ideas than the mainstream narrative. These people go into convulsions of this shit. Standing up for people at NASA they have never met vouching for their honesty and reliability like your insulting a family member. Its the brainwashing doing this. The unrelenting barage of info coming from the state run media ,the state run education system and goverment itself has broken down the ability to think on their own. They are constantly parroting talking points given to them by the so called expert class. They are constantly saying we have done this and we have done that when they havnt done a fucking thing other than repeat what they heard on the state run media. Sound bites and doctored pictures are responsible for molding their world view. They have no clue where reality starts and fantasy ends anymore. They want to beleive the Hollywood bullshit. If a person was raised without seeing the news propaganda and the movies and the science fiction and the bullshit theoretical physicists and was just taught to think critically for himself only believing what can be proven through his 5 senses and actual scientific experimentation. Repeatable observable results. He would recommend 90% of the population be put in psychiatric treatment. consensus doesn't make anything true the whole world can be wrong. sadly enough the people at the top are laughing their asses off at what they can make you people believe
Well in fact, Hubble has been pointed at the moon. And the reason it is not pointed at Earth is because you would not see anything beyond a blurry bit of blue. Apart from the fact that it can not rotate quick enough to track objects on Earth, it's optics simply wouldn't allow for a clear picture. Imagine using binoculars in the place of a microscope or the other way around. It is simply not designed to view Earth, there are plenty of other telescopes that do that.
@@sfojulius every picture of earth has been conclusively been debunked as composite. Not one real picture of the earth is genuine. That doesn't seem a bit odd to you?
Go to the moon and spy on area 51
Didn't see anything you pointed out
@Eihoofd2 pretty stable reply, from someone that I'm sure could articulate his evidence.
Eihoofd2 I can even see their poops! It’s dark colour as they probably ate some junk food in the moon.
Eihoofd2 “We never went to moon” is a nice book for you.
Eihoofd2 Okay I trust you now. I believe that you have also been on the moon before.
Eihoofd2 kid, it’s time to wake up now, you were sleeping too long.
I just want to go there one day :(
LeoN ScoTT KeNNeDy sleep well and have a sweet dreams
LeoN ScoTT KeNNeDy Based on the rate of technological advancements, that might be possible within the next ten years.
I don't it terrorfies me.
Yes, i am excited and would love to go someday but my anxiety just bursts through the roof when i think of all the things that could happen
No human will ever leave this planets environment. Just enjoy what the earth provides now and forget about travelling thousands of miles into space as they supposedly did 50 years ago. All we have is some mythical bullshit reflectors. Where's the photographs and images that could be easily shown with our new powerful telescopes so we can actually see the debris left by the moon walkers? human controlled robots may invade the moon but that's all.
I'd like to see shots of the moon with the telescope zooming in on footprints or the Lunar module or something like that.
Search "Apollo landing sites lunar reconnaissance orbiter" into Google and click images. Easy.
@@atoaster6715 mind, even as close as the LRO is to the moon, the resolution of it's cameras is still several meters per pixel which makes it hard to spot anything other than the lower stage of the lander that stayed behind when they departed
You won’t be able to see them. A footprint is around a foot long (lol), and the Moon is 284k+ miles away. It’s like asking the Apollo 11 Astronauts to zoom in on a ruler you placed in a field
@toilet paper
your comment is almost as valuable as your name.
@@atoaster6715 .. Thanks a lot man, I have checked it and have seen all the clear and astonishing photos!.
Not even the Hubble Space Telescope see the acual hardware left over. The resolution of the Hubble is around 300M. Anything less than that simply won't show up. It takes something much closer like an orbiting satellite. The Lunar Recon Satellite took photos and a few others have.
Zoomer30
This guy know whats hes talking about. He should get more likes
So this dudes scope can see millions of light years away but not the shit left on the moon.... to believe such it takes a true case of cognitive dissonance. That is absurd
The "shit" left on the moon is only a fraction of a meter wide. The objects millions of lights years away are lights years across. In other words, HUGE. Big difference.
Derek Smith, shows how little you know about telescopes. There are two types of power. Light gathering power and resolution.
Light gathering power has to do with how large the telescope is called aperture. It allows you to see very dim objects. It can collect more light. The faint objects are the deep sky objects that are far away. These objects aren't small just dim. Most are not millions of light years away. They include galaxies, nebulas and star clusters. Galaxies can be millions of light years away. The others are near items a few hundred to few thousand light years away.
Resolution is the ability to magnify and look close at things and see definition. It's what gives us the ability to see things closer up. This is what is required to see the lunar landing sites. They are just simply too small. As you see it isn't oburd or cognitive dissonace. Just your misunderstanding of telescopes. Don't try to make people angry about what you don't understand. It's very childish.
Derek smith here is the answer to your question. ua-cam.com/video/QkaNqud_VxU/v-deo.html
Very nice video. I've rarely seen a video of the landing sites zooming in from a distance like you did here. And NICE job of lunar photography with your scope too!
Thanks man!
*+Delboy:* _"I didn't see one bit of proof of landing sites"_ J.W. Astronomy never claimed to prove the landings with his video. He was showing where on the moon the landings took place. It's (yup) another straw man attack where you say stupid stuff and then pretend someone else said it. Ridiculously inept deceptive technique there, bub.Don't give up the day job, if you have one.
This is a video by an *amateur astronomer* who doesn't care about your delusions. And he should not be subjected to your foolishness. It's a great video.
The Delboy here's another question......what the fuck are these amateur astronomers gaining from "lying" to the world?
The Delboy no honey that's your land! I'll stay on sane side of the world! But thanks!
The Delboy so ALLLLLLL the space agencies in the world (how many of them are there?? And how many people have EVER fucking worked for them??) All the airline companies...........all the GPS companies......all the freelance scientists.........all the freelance astronomers.......every person with a telescope............we are ALL lying???? Ok wait.....let me get this straight ......literally EVERYONE ON THE MUTHER FUCKING PLANET except a handful of flat earthers is lying and NO ONE runs their mouth. That is more ludicrous than you say the moon landing is!! To have a conspiracy THAT enormous, and to carry on for decades upon decades. And you say that I live in La-La land! 🙄
I dont see anything to prove the landings?!?!?
🤦♂️
Apollo landings? More like Who’s Joe
2:27 a black dot leaving the moon.
Klickavelli Your brain?
Good spot, but it's not leaving the moon. If it was, it would be a huge object. Possibly a satellite passing by?
Vape Dude ha ha ha, you must be so proud of yourself. Come up with that one all on your own? Lmao!
Afloat Fob possible, just saying what I saw that's all.
NP. I'm open to the idea of Ufos/aliens, but that's what I think it is.
I knew there would be flat earthers commenting here... LOL
So, for dislike the fake title...
flat earthers are from NASA, they and ufo's are its strongest argument
Jarrett Trezzo because you know a five year old when told they could be critical could tear this fake shit to pieces. Why would you talk about Flat Earth if the ball was bullet proof....... It's not
They are paid to post everywhere there may be a chance to damage faith. They've tied their idiocy to the book of Genesis so when science asserts itself against flat earth its the bible that gets the beating.
Where are the flag & camera that the astro-nuts left.?😕
Serious question: why could we go before, but can’t go now? Think of anything in the 1960s that hasn’t been improved or advanced greatly to its current state. Please let me know one thing that hasn’t advanced since the 1960s.
we can go there now but there simply is no reason to. The reason we went in the first place is to beat Russia there to prove that NASA has better technology and to just prove Russia wrong. NASA is however planning a future apollo mission
Cost losts of money, it was done once so we can show that we can. Right now we are busy sending rovers to other planets.
Background music 😍
Nice scope, that mount is a beast! Makes my C11 look small.
Thanks! I think the C11 is big too and a great scope.
What the hecks c11. You guys on another level. I got mine from Walmart. It's great for beggingers and that's what I am. Hey is it me or is there like a wave in front of moon. You know like heat on pavement. Peace
The wave is caused by atmospheric distortion from Earths atmosphere.
That's called atmospheric scintillation. When the ground is warmer than the air, it heats the air just above it. Warm air is lighter than cold air, but it sticks to the ground until it gathers enough warm air in a globule to break free. Then it rises as a bubble of warm air.
Warm air has a different refractive index than colder air. So as these bubbles rise through the atmosphere, they act like lenses to slightly bend the light as it goes through them. Since, with the telescope, you are looking through a thick layer of air with thousands of bubbles rising through it, you see the image swim around, and this video is an excellent example.
Dry air is less steady than moist air. That's why in Florida, I often get to see conditions where there is no scintillation at all.
Can you find indian chandrayan2 vikram lander? You know it lost in moon?
It was on the dark side I believe which means he cant
Its disturbing that ppl still believe they made it to the moon...
Mmk, where exactly is your proof that the moon landing was a hoax?
Also, why the heck would anybody fake this, they would literally gain nothing from doing so.
@Brynautic NASA has raked in countless trillions over the years. It's like "lap dancing money" to the powerful elite who own you and run the world.
@@PouchMaster what...? I mean, if governments don't get money, then they will collapse, so are you saying that everybody should commit tax fraud?
@@PouchMaster also, if the US government's budget was only one dollar, then nasa would get about half of a penny...
@Brynautic That's a lot of pennies. As I said, it's like a fun money bonus to them. Fake all of this for dirt cheap, then rake in the cash.
We can see light years away I don’t see why we can’t see a flag clearly from the moon.
The telescope is an optical instrument that enlarge the angle we see the object, not enlarging the picture of object. Compare to the distance from Earth to the Moon, the angle that a person create with the flag is below the angle that human can see, telescope work like that too, in order to see the flag, you will need a telescope with at least 200m aperture.
curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/45-our-solar-system/the-moon/the-moon-landings/122-are-there-telescopes-that-can-see-the-flag-and-lunar-rover-on-the-moon-beginner
you're the personification of ignorance.
The temperature on the moon can reach up to 250° Fahrenheit (120° Celsius) during the daytime at the equator, and drop to -208 degrees F (-130° C) at night. In certain spots near the moon's poles, temperatures can plummet even further, reaching -424 °F (-253°C).
Thank you, J. W.. Very good views of the lunar surface.
Can you zoom in so we can see the module?
Nope even hubble can't see that far. You can see the lander on the LRO photos though
I think the zoom is at maximum
Bro if u can pls find chandrayann 2 from india on south pole.. Help if u can
just wow.
What landing site? Didn’t see jack…
You can zoom in on sun spots but can't see anything on the moon?
Michelle R Sun spots are thousands of miles in diameter. The lunar lander was 31 ft wide
Awesome..info About Apollo Landing Site..the Moon is Definitely a Vast Place !! 🔭👍
Its too bad we havent been able to go back for 1, 2, 3, 4... 5 decades now while cloning, dna mapping, cern, organ transplants, nuclear power, computers, internet, cell phones and every single other tech field has exploded.
There is no real reason to go back there. It is stupidly expensive, so repeated missions would be sparse, and we can't start mining anything because hauling the ore would be costly too. And politically, there is no "glory" in being second. (Name the Apollo 12 crew members without looking them up. My point exactly).
Its not that we can't go back. Its just that there is not much to gain from doing so. Mars is more appealing because it is a new place no person has been, and it has potential for a sustainable colony, unlike the moon.
Good luck convincing our Neo-Con congress to ever actually send people back to the moon unless there's some military motive. Promise them we'll send the astronauts there to blow stuff up and they might fund it. Hell tell them there's oil on the moon. If they're dumb enough to think climate change is a lie then they're dumb enough to believe we found oil on the moon. They'd fund some missions in the name of oil or war. Otherwise it won't happen.
Not with my taxes 😂
Mike Mower Why would the U.S spend millions of dollars to get to the moon when there isn’t shit there.
Lamster66 I’m talking about right now, we already know everything about the moon.
If they truly landed and since your scope can see nebulas and other solar systems I wanna see the tracks left from the rover. They should always be there considering there's no wind lol
We can't see other solar systems. Nebulas are huge and if you went out to a dark place without light pollution you could even see the orion nebula.
The tracks and the rover are just too small to see all the way from here. Even hubble can't see them.
LRO did see them however and you can find the photos online.
🙄😫 how can someone be so dumb
I don't understand how people say all space photos are fake Humanity man. Some search in wonder and some of us wonder in fear
there's nothing to fear, reach out and let GOD find you. then you will know the truth. be humble brother not prideful
valentino galaviz Theres no god you stupid fuck
All your hard work and efforts are greatly appreciated but please disable the comments section.
Jack Torrance
touche 👏👏👏
Real men dont give a fcuk No, disabling comments is annoying. Allow people to speak. If you don't want to see the comments, then don't look at them
Flat Earth Extremists and Moon Hoax Lunatics have a right to expose their idiocy, deny themselves future job opportunities, future girl friends, future friends and acquaintances as future tools to expose lunatic and dangerous posts become better and better. Nobody believes them anyway. If they wish to hurt themselves, let them and laugh!
Just to tweak the Flatties. Very high resolution photography on the moon from 2013. www.360cities.net/image/lunar-panorama-change-3-lander#41.40,12.70,51.5 Challenge: find a single star, then explain why or why not it's visible. Numbers and logic, please.
*Darren* You're talking from utter ignorance and confidently in your ignorance proclaim _"There is no way to overcome the surface temperatures of the moon, batteries could not have been responsible for cooling the men under those condition's"_ Based on the utter fallacy of your declaration there, what evidence would you accept? There is no evidence you would accept, but I'll provide it anyway so honest normal people can laugh in your general direction.
Watch this space. I have it all at home and will post after 6 pm.
Why do you think its true because you where told it.Telsa thought the moon was a magnetic light.I agree.The full moon is so bright how come armstrong isnt walking on glowing dirt?
Ah, no, you got the Apollo 14 site location wrong. That marker is only somewhat close to where Apollo 16 landed in the lunar highlands near the crater Deslandres but is still off by a little. Apollo 14 landed on just to the south of the eastern rim of the large ruined crater Fra Mauro. Your Apollo 16 landing site is also about 50 km west-southwest of where they actually landed, and your Apollo 17 marker is also placed about 60 km too far to the west of where the spacecraft actually landed in the Taurus-Littrow valley.
did not read the comments but expect....
ahh flat earth BS and fake moonlanding crap
@@ottokarvonschnallenburg2572 lol you believe in flat earth ?
could you see the flag or laser reflector or any debris left behind?
The Hubble Space Telescope is only 2.4 meters in diameter - much too small! Resolving the larger lunar rover (which has a length of 3.1 meters) would still require a telescope 75 meters (246 feet) in diameter.
Currently, the largest, ground-based telescope is the Gran Telescopio CANARIAS (GTC) found in La Palma on the Canary Islands. The aperture of this reflecting telescope reaches a total 10.4 metres (34 feet) in diameter and is currently one of the most advanced in the world.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
Moon Landing was total fake
i wish the person writing this comment was fake
Have you ever seen anything creepy on when looking at the moon? Like a small moving dot??
Can you see remnants, of a landing site. Naw, of course not!
well that is because we are looking at the SITES a zoomed out AREA of where the astronauts landed
@@sommarstuga1 nonsense no man has walked on moon and of course you have to say that cus you don't see it. Plasma PLASMA but what do i know besides Men lie and government lies even more ypu believe that nonsense and tell yourself whatever ypu have to to keep it true lol
Actually you can with the most powerful telescopes we have
@@zipper978 you are fucking high
Thank you... I saw Buzz Aldrin speak for an hour here in NZ in 2010 about his experience ON the Moon and in space.. thanks from NZ 👍🇳🇿
2:26 dude look at the moon and you will see something transition in front of the moon
3:32 bruh more things bottom of the screen wtf
@@ashishkoge9325 'dude', 'bruh', you're aware this telescope is on Earth. Where do you think those 'things' are based?...
@@OzzyOscy man, are you trying to say that while zoomed onto the moon, at 2:28 something within earths atmosphere flew past the lens? That small but fast object is earthly? Maybe the iss, but not something on earth. A small fly would have consumed the visual due to magnification. Or maybe my concept of zooming in is whack?
@@11designs25 You got it in the last sentence. We're infamously bad at judging size, especially the moon. It looks like a distant bat, it's even flapping its wings. 3:32 is a colony and evidently closer.
What's more likely - that you misunderstand, or looking at the moon has caught several examples of aliens?
Someone is doing an amazing job cleaning the moon ...
you can see the flags waving
pepe no you can't. God you people are so brainwashed. Lol
pepe there’s no atmosphere on the moon so no wind, fuck off.
good one dawg LOL
How would you see flags waving if there is no atmosphere (no wind)
After about 2.50 min. I see something flying over the moon. Could that be a satelite?
Yes yes I also seen
2:26 ovni? Xd
3:14 How is the picture of astronot, rover and ERATH IN HORIZONT possible if they landed in almost middle of the face of the moon which is always faced to the Erath? (Upper left corner vs. the added picture of the Astronot)
Most likely it's more northern than it appears on the image
Just checked this stuff: the moon's orbit has an inclination of 5.16° to earth's ecliptic plane and has a tilt of 6.68°. The alnding site of Apollo 15 was 26° north of the lunar equator which sums up to the earth being 90°-5.16°-6.68°-26°=52° above the horizon. This is if the lunar southpole kinda points towards earth and if the moon is at the highest point of its orbit in respect to the ecliptic. 52 still seems much higher.
But: The earth's shadow points downwards towards the horizon which suggests they'd have to be far west or east of 15's landing site (15 landed 3° east)
So it appears I am not able to find this picture for now (also the creator of this video didn´t put in a source for any of the images so duh). Also you can clearly see stars in the image, which shouldn´t be a thing, since the lunar surface is much to bright for cameras to pick up both the surface and the stars, which are far more pale. Though I could find this
www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nasa.gov%2Fmultimedia%2Fimagegallery%2Fimage_feature_2020.html&psig=AOvVaw0mTHUq9Tqvg_-5w8Ih9eHw&ust=1592033395064000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCKj66qzj--kCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD
which seems to be the exact same image with the exception that the right side is missing in which the earth can be seen on the picture from the video. Also the stars aren´t there. So you could argue, that the image from google is fake and that the US government is lying, or you could say that the image from the video is just an artistic impression. As it turns out I seem to just have found the picture from the video (my dumb ass didn´t see it the first time around):
www.flickr.com/photos/futurilla/21903482502
So the dude (creator of the image) took the og 1:1 aspect ratio image (they apparently used Hasselband 500EL cameras) and added the lil slope and the earth and the stars just to make it look more interesting or whatever. He didn`t care about how realistic it looked he just wanted it to fit his artistic vision: You can see a small distortion in his edited version if you look closely right next to the rover wheel. (Probably he wanted an artifact to make it look like an older picture)
(Also Follow the link to flicker on UA-cam it`s not visible that well). So he didn`t seem to care retouching this minor detail.
Well,
tHe mOre YoU KNoW.
Sorry not sorry
@@pianoraves Very nice!
@@hypatch8014 lol almost forgot about this 🤣🤣
They should send a rover to the Moon, so we can finally see if it really looks as funky and "cheap" on the surface as it honestly does in the Apollo photos. One single rover, instead of sending who knows how many rovers to Mars already.
tumarfa It isn’t NASA’s job to spend billions on a project to validate their own accomplishments in the eyes of Conspiracy nuts.
wutup5566 No; their job is to research advanced aeronautical and astronautical concepts that could have a use in modern society and lead the Us Government’s civilian space programs.
Musk is going to get a ship up there soon, hopefully he lands near one of the Apollo sites so we can have tourists taking photos of it!
@@Quickened1 You mean earth's richest one permille
www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/06/11/science/moon-robot-rover-viper-nasa.amp.html
where is stars?
He’s looking at a piece of rock do u expect there to be stars there?
EXPOSURE
I'm here to look for the flat earth comments, lol!
No, but have I have seen other planets through a telescope with my own eyes.
you make that sound like a bad thing, you also forgot private space organizations and hobbyists armed with sounding rockets, you also forgot the observations made in by ancient figures like Pythagoras who used math to incredible accuracy to determine the size and shape of the earth. use logic, why would every other body in the universe appear spherical but not earth? study and observe a lunar eclipse that will give you all the data you need to unequivocally and without a doubt determine the shape of the earth. something to mention, people knew the shape of the earth long before space agencies based on astronomical measurements made on sea voyages dating back centuries. monuments were constructed to prove the math and track star positions of the circumpolar star and the position of Orion's belt. how is this even still an argument in 2018? the idea flat earth existence was proven wrong eons ago with the sundial!
enough said.
www.apogeerockets.com/Rockets_by_Manufacturers, or get the parts however you can source them and get engineering. i'll admit i didn't give totally satisfactory answers in my previous comment but it's hard to tell who really gives a rats arse this day and age. your reply is commendable, thoughtful... I like that! for a change I feel refreshed. my one bit of advice? be careful, and join a model rocket club to get the best advice. lastly dont launch in an urban area, many cities have no fly zones. and don't forget to purchase a gps tag so you can recover your data if this is what you have your heart set on doing! good luck! warm regards!
Flat Earthers = irrelevant deniers.
They can't agree on a model or any mechanisms
They have no applications which work or result in any sensible, verifiable, or consistent observations.
In short they are deluded, paranoid, or flat-out lying trolls.
You first;
Explain why there are two tropics of the same length
Explain why 600 million people in the southern hemisphere all see the south celestial pole (which flat earthers deny exists) EVERY NIGHT, & all due south from their respective positions, all in the same patch of sky, but the field rotated by the differences in their degrees of longitude.
Explain why the EAP (Flat earth map) results in East-west distances in Australia that are 250% of the measured & confirmed every day actual dimensions.
Show me your working stellar Charts & ephemeris
Show me your working surveying & Navigation applications, charts & maps.
Until you do so you have nothing to discuss.
Also, people are mad that “conspiracy theorist” are commenting here. At least they are gathering all the information possible by researching. Maybe the main stream believers should visit hoax proof videos to get more info instead of just bashing. Better to get both sides information before having your own opinion
@aussie bloke
We never went bro, sorry. Nothing gets harder to do with technology. Name one technology that hasn't gotten better in the last 50 years? I'll wait..... If we were able to go to the moon in the 1960s, in 2019 there'd be public transportation going there and back. So many trips to space, yet no clear WHOLE photo of the earth, every photo of earth is cgi created, said by NASA themselves. Blue marble biggest crock. If you believe the mainstream narrative, you're just scared of the truth
If you stick with the facts and not conspiracy theories, then everything makes sense. 12 Americans walked on the moon, supported by over 400,000 people on the ground. Kind of simple, really. I fear for the sanity of the doubters/hoaxers. When Space X explores one of the Apollo sites in the next year or two, their embarrassment will be epic.
Certainly in the next 10 years we'll have boots on the moon and I'd be very surprised if they don't actually return Apollo hardware for inspection. Then there will be no Moon Hoax Lunatics left. You won't even be able to find someone who will admit they *knew* a Moon Hoax Lunatic.
Will we even be allowed to send people to the old landing sites? Are they marked by the world as International Historical sites or something, I might be wrong.
Alan Patten, I've wondered about that myself. I understand the US government wants to protect the sites (footprints and all), but it would be neat if a crew or an unmanned lander could get right up to the edge. The video would be awesome.
Ken Fredrick yea, they might let them get close enough to see it but far enough so it remains untouched
I'd be very surprised if they didn't make a single exception to approach from a pristine direction and retrieve a piece of Apollo hardware to study the weathering effects of micrometeors over 50 years and the radiation exposure. They've done short-term studies on satellite pieces, but this would be ten times the duration they've accomplished before.
Of course there are Surveyor spacecraft all over the moon, and they could just use an abundance of caution until we can preserve the Apollo landing sites for all to enjoy in the future. Once destroyed there would be no getting them back.
J. W. beautiful footage. Can you discuss the telemetry data as compared to your footage?
RED ALERT! NASA has provided detailed pictures of what Apollo left behind, the landing site, footprints, reflector, etc. but JW provided Google map pinpoint of locations of Apollo’s playgrounds but no toys. JW should have captured exactly what NASA captured but no toys, no playground. Busted! We never stepped foot on the moon!
imagine wat hing it while appolo was landing there :OO
I didn't see any traces of landing sites at all.
Robert Thayer exactly my thoughts as well.
He can't zoom in far enough to show traces left over...
No telescope on earth can see that small details on the moon.. not even the Hubble.
De Wae....No wind, no dust!
Robert Thayer leave.
Genial saludos cordiales desde Patagonia Chile
Jesus so many moon-landing deniers lmao.
They also deny North and South America exists...
it was a scam
Spedz
Jesus is a fake .. don't bring his name in with the moon landings please
repent
SiMs
yes sir
Hare Krishna I have one question why there are no stars in the sky, of Neil Armstrong photos of landing at moon?
I want to see what the rest of the world wants to see. Real actual telescopic pictures from earth of the equipment left behind from the Appolo missions. It would seem impossible as I can not find any. Surly it can be done in this day and age.
Nope, seeing stuff the side of a car 400.000 km away can't be done "in this day and age". Not with the telescopes we have today (even Hubble is not big enough to resolve such small stuff).
But there are probes orbiting the Moon at a pretty low altitude, and they did take better pictures of the landing sites.
DJMModelWorks most people see the moon as this little dot in the sky and fail to realize just how far away and how big it really is. it's a bit smaller than the united states in diameter (3.500 km) and 384.000 km away. looking for the descent stages and hardware of apollo missions from earth would be like looking at a 35 m (~100 ft) sphere from 3,84 km away and trying to zoom in on a single dust particle.
They can see millions of light years into other galaxies but claim zooming in on the fucking moon is impossible... it takes a certain kind of idiot to believe such garbage
Derek smith Do you have any idea how large a galaxy is? They can be THOUSANDS OF LIGHT YEARS wide. That is why we can see them from so far away. The technology doesn't exist today to resolve an image like that. It isn't garbage because you can't understand it.
Derek smith it’s a matter of scale, not only distance. instead of closing your eyes and remaining incredibly ignorant, why don’t you think before you say something? it makes you sound so much less idiotic.
I don't see anything...how are you showing me something?
he isnt trying to show the stuff they left there. He is just showing you where they landed
We landed on the moon!
mdr that may was a private party
I feel bad for people who actually believe man walked on the moon. 1969 man walks on moon. 2020 we don't know how we did it, and aren't capable.
_"2020 we don't know how we did it, and aren't capable."_ - wrong on both counts smartass, it's all about one thing *$$ MONEY $$* during the cold war the idea of the Russians being ahead of us on any front especially in space was all the motivation the government needed to throw any insane amount of money at the problem, as long as it "put them pesky russians in their place" once that was over the government lost interest in the moon thus stopped the funding thus crippling NASA.
@@wildmanfujiami5870 you are so ignorant.
Yip, don't see anything. Thanks for the location but your telescope is not strong enough. I want a space telescope to show us the landings.
No Earth bound telescope is powerful enough to see a small object at such a distance. Even the Hubble telescope can't see anything smaller than a football stadium on the Moon. You'd need a 60 meters lense to (barely) see the stuff they left behind from 400000 km away.
The LRO probes are orbiting the Moon at an altitude of 50km, though, and they did take pictures of the landing sites.
J vdSpuy
The lunar orbiters took photos. Can even see the rover tracks.
With a Nikon p900Camera we can see that stars are not balls of fire.
Aurora One Raven
Stars are not balls of fire. They are stars.
Larry Scott
😒Nikon p900Camera shows otherwise.
Somebody went golfing on the moon? AWESOME!
They never landed. Period
You are a brain dead idiot, period. How can people as stupid as you still exist? All the proof you need is laying in plain sight but you choose to believe conspiracy theorists like a fucking retard.
I can't use my telescope right now since I have to wait til tomorrow night :c
(Due to storms)
so we can observe the beautiful planets around us which we can clearly see are round, but for some strange reason we live on a flat plain .... Explain all you you-tube flat earth basement dwelling scientists
and further more if you look at a global map laid flat out it should take like 6 hours to fly to Australia, but for some reason we fly 16 hours the wrong fucking direction and some how make to are destination without any problemo .... Explain ! I could go on and on and on...
globalmind43 - Since when did observing what is around us dictate what we are?
If an African American baby is surrounded by 8 Caucasian babies does that mean it’s white?
Is it me or does the Apollo 11 landing sight has a devils face
Entertaining fakery.
It's much more easier to fool people than trying to convince them they have been fooled.
Go back to elementary school; you seem to have forgotten common sense.
Fred Cink lol.
JEBEDIAH KERMAN yea.
They fixed the rover's fender using "duct tape"...on the moon...in 260 degree direct sunlight?! @4:53 (via universe today) "If you were standing on the surface of the Moon in sunlight, the temperature would be hot enough to boil water. And then the Sun would go down, and the temperature would drop 250 degrees in just a matter of moments"....Max temp duct tape can stand temperatures up to 200F, Whereas normal duct tape begins to melt at 130F. However, the 200F seems to be only a suggestion, the temp of the moon is only 30 to 50 degrees more than the melting point. Probably just got really sticky, its not like the tape would have melted instantly. Applying super sticky, melty duct tape with large gloves on seems super easy in this video "from the moon".....hhmmmm....doesn't seem super sticky/melty at all...why is that? ua-cam.com/video/ZzHEyUkyt9Y/v-deo.html
Whats your smallest mm eyepiece you used in this video?
Another awesone upload. Subbed...
Maybe one day they might show some real evidence!!
LMFAO 😂. Where's all the trash 😂
Not the smartest tool in the shed, are you?
@@sonzofhardcore
My tools, all of them, are clean, in order and well taken care of. None are useless or dull. Have a good day.
Ive somtimes wondered. How did they get there lunar rover buggies to the moon. Some of them look as long as a jeep. How did they transport the lunar rover from earth to the moon?
Pity you can't actually see the sites, tracks, flags etc!!!
appolo not landing sites *
rip john young 1930-2018
Please tell what part showing us flag
I remember seeing a film of the first moon landing. Who was that dude just hanging out waiting for someone to land, hilarity.
Can you send me the link to that video?
@@plushiez_show8827 that's from the 80s I would not know how to locate it.
@@patrickmartin7316 Okay
Brilliant! well done .
I could not see Flags or anything!
how do you expect to see a a 2 foot long flag 250,000 miles away? there are no optics capable of that magnification. dude, use your brain
I still can't understand Hubble telescope can capture millions even billions light year distance galaxy's still it can't capture moon landings Apollo mission sites how?
Galaxies are enormous, a lot of them are bigger than 10 million light years, but footprints on the moon are extremely small and are impossible to capture through a telescope, there is however a satellite orbiting the moon which has been able to take some photos of the landing sites
Where????
I can clearly see some stools they left in the moon. Thanks for the video!
they really should have taken up some coloured dust or made marks that would be visible from earth. I wonder did NASA ever consider this
Unfortunately, if the photos are excluded the telescope shows nothing!
Very nice video! Thanks.
Thank you!
Can anyone else see the cute and rather surprised look on the moon's face? or is it just me being silly...😃🌚
LET ME TAKE A COUPLE A MORE SHOTS AND I'LL GET BACK TO YOU
Your telescope is just as good as NASA LRO camera, almost same quality, only difference is NASA drew some lines and dots on their pictures.
Good and Objective video.
Dr J悟 mine is better
I have a question. I'm looking at some of these crater patterns, specifically the smaller ones. It looks as if the moon has an atmosphere. This should be impossible. It looks like bigger meteors were broken up in an atmosphere and when they hit the moon, it created multiple impact zones in lines. With no plants, the moons atmosphere would have to come from the earth, which suggests the moon itself is local. This would explain why the Astronauts didn't know they had to go through the van Allen belts. They didn't, so they were never briefed on the matter. Thoughts anyone?
Yeah, that is all bullshit. They DID pass through the radiation belts, and they WERE briefed on them. They specifically planned for them too.
The impact crators on the moon you mention doesn't make any sense. The smaller debrid from larger impacts would still land back on the moon because of gravity. The moon does have gravity, you know?
@@HalcyonVoid how did the pass through the van Allen belt? Isn't the radition DEVASTING to humans? Also why don't we have the technology to go back?
@@thediaz07 The radiation is only about 1 years worth of exposure. Nothing devastating. And we haven't gone back because it isnt politically important. The origional moon missions were good for the anti-russian talking points of the day.
We can go back, we have the technology, but not the political support to do so.
@@HalcyonVoid yeah I could source the part about the radiation being deadly to humans...also the part that we destroyed the technology and Aren't capable of going back.
@@HalcyonVoid I'm not saying we never went to the moon, I'm just saying we didn't go the first time.
Then why can't you actually see the landing vehicle?
Because it is too small? Seriously are all commenting people here kids?
The three lunar roving vehicles from Apollo 15, 16, and 17 also sit on the surface of the moon. After striking plans for a 10,000-lb mobile lunar lab, NASA went with the 463-lb (77-lbs on the Moon) buggy.
fucking joke !
YOUR PICTURES ARE FAR BETTER THAN NASA PICS OF THE MOON SHOWING THE SITES. WHY IS THAT.LOL
George Margerum i have a better telescope
I don’t understand why the comments here are so harsh. Can’t we have differing opinions and agree to disagree. Can’t we believe in the capacity of humankind or question what authority shows us and just agree to disagree. No one is stupid for believing or disbelieving. We have our opinions, we have our reasons, our arguments. Can’t we just share it without enforcing or belittling other people.
Human beings are cruel and evil. An unremarkable species. It's people's nature to be filled with hatred. My own opinion is that NASA is a big hustle. These faked missions not just to the moon, but the probes to the planets are like lap dancing money for the psychopaths who own us and run the world.
An otherwise excellent video is ruined with the rotation of the video. Why not just leave it in a “North Up” orientation?
Each image is rotated about 90 to “East Up” as it is zoomed in.
Too bad we can't actually see the landing sites on the video.
What is the proof of moonlanding here ? If you can show us 1500 miles light years away nebula and galaxy why you don't show the flags and other manmade things in moon ?
It's impossible with any telescope on earth. Even hubble isn't big enough to see the landers. The nebulas are enormous. You could even see the orion Nebula from earth with a telescope. The problem is light pollution. So see the milky way properly you need to get away from all light. If you want to see the landers you can watch the photos from the LRO.
A question. What is the real color of the moon soil
Flat earthers wont like this video😂
why you dont zoom to the landing site...i want to see the remaings of apollo missions????
Through his telescope, it would be impossible to capture, there is a satellite orbiting the moon that has been able to take pictures of the landing sites
Why we can`t see the remaining gear and the american flag when we discover the moon by telescope ?
Wow. This is some good shots of the moon of your telescope frop earth. What type and kind is it? I want one like this. Or at lest use one like the one that you are using here for these shots.
J.W.Astronomy What background music did you use for this video??
All of them are right here: maps.google.com/maps?ll=37.235,-115.811111&q=37.235,-115.811111&hl=en&t=h&z=14
An American citizen, not US subject.