Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #80 on: June 15, 2022, 12:50:19 PM »
Okay, so you just showed us footage of the dust being pushed around... doesn't that have a bit of an impact on your claim that that doesn't happen in moon footage?

I suspect I'm confused by what you're actually trying to say here - could you rephrase for my benefit?
Sure.

Of course the dust moves around, as the astronauts walk through the dust or drive through it, the dust gets thrown around. But it's the way it moves I'm getting at. In a vacuum particles of any size will go in parabolas. I'm simplifying a bit, they will of course hit each other. But the point is in an atmosphere small particles will be affected by wind resistance or breezes and billow in a different way. That's what I'm getting at.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15179
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #81 on: June 15, 2022, 12:54:32 PM »
Right, yes, I see what you're saying now. Apologies.

But that assumes a very light dust (how do we assess this if the location of the shot is either entirely inaccessible to us or entirely unknown?) and the presence of a breeze (which is clearly absent in most moon shots, genuine or not - after all, flags never flutter in the wind).

So, to me, it seems like we can conclude that there was no wind in that location, and that the dust was maybe a little grittier than you'd normally expect. It doesn't come across as a smoking gun.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

شاحنات صعبة للغاية

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #82 on: June 15, 2022, 01:22:05 PM »
So, to me, it seems like we can conclude that there was no wind in that location, and that the dust was maybe a little grittier than you'd normally expect. It doesn't come across as a smoking gun.
I had a look at some dune buggy footage and the way the sand moved at times did look a bit different although I think I'm going to agree it's not that conclusive. Although it's funny you say about the flag not flapping - you're right, but some moon hoaxers claim it does and use that as a "smoking gun". The official line is because of the lack of atmosphere there is a rigid pole horizontally to keep the flag up, so it only "flaps" when they're screwing it in to the ground.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 1261
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #83 on: June 15, 2022, 01:45:51 PM »
So, to me, it seems like we can conclude that there was no wind in that location, and that the dust was maybe a little grittier than you'd normally expect. It doesn't come across as a smoking gun.
Are you suggesting that the soil was engineered to provide the desired effect?  Even very coarse soil usually has a sufficient component of dust so that when it is disturbed that dust will suspend in the air for a considerable time.  Wind or no wind.  I guess you could get all that dust out with some effort.
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15179
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #84 on: June 15, 2022, 02:09:14 PM »
Are you suggesting that the soil was engineered to provide the desired effect?
No, and it's utterly deranged of you to suggest that any engineering would be necessary.

I had a look at some dune buggy footage and the way the sand moved at times did look a bit different although I think I'm going to agree it's not that conclusive.
Fair. Sounds like we're on the same page. It's still worth noting, for sure, since it could be part of a bigger puzzle; but, in isolation, it's not conclusive.

Although it's funny you say about the flag not flapping - you're right, but some moon hoaxers claim it does and use that as a "smoking gun".
I'm not like other girls.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

شاحنات صعبة للغاية

*

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 1189
  • Nobody Important
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #85 on: June 15, 2022, 02:39:09 PM »

Come on. Even if he was correct that no technologies existed at the time which could make the film run in slow motion (which I have some doubts), even in the Moon Hoax scenario NASA clearly employed engineers and rocket scientists who are making things. Apparently according to this narrative Moon Hoax NASA would have sooner ended the project and admit that they couldn't get to the moon than to use their engineers to make a video run in slow motion.


This is fantastic.  You've just done precisely this:



Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 1261
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #86 on: June 15, 2022, 02:46:28 PM »
Are you suggesting that the soil was engineered to provide the desired effect?
No, and it's utterly deranged of you to suggest that any engineering would be necessary.
Nice Pete.  How ad hominem of you.

So, if they did not remove the dust we should see it suspended when the soil gets kicked up.  We don't.

BTW, they do remove dust from soil to make sets for movies about being on the moon or Mars or other airless objects more realistic.
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15179
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #87 on: June 15, 2022, 02:52:27 PM »
Nice Pete.  How ad hominem of you.
I'm trying to be nice to you. The next time you try putting words in other people's mouths, it's off to the gutter with you. For now - your suggestion was utterly deranged.

So, if they did not remove the dust we should see it suspended when the soil gets kicked up.
Hard disagree. Perhaps you've spent most of your life in very arid areas, but many of us haven't.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

شاحنات صعبة للغاية

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 1261
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #88 on: June 15, 2022, 03:17:13 PM »
Quote
I'm trying to be nice to you. The next time you try putting words in other people's mouths, it's off to the gutter with you. For now - your suggestion was utterly deranged.
I honestly was not trying to put words in your mouth.  Sorry for that.  Like I said in my follow-up post, soil is often engineered for just such an effect on movie sets.

Quote
So, if they did not remove the dust we should see it suspended when the soil gets kicked up.
Hard disagree. Perhaps you've spent most of your life in very arid areas, but many of us haven't.
The moon is a very arid place, and the videos presented show soil that is not clumping together like it is moist.  If you wanted to fake a shot of a buggy driving, or man walking, on the moon you would use desiccated and well screened (no clumps) soil.  If you did not want clouds of dust, you need to remove it.  Pete, this is actually done.

Strange thing is, my post was intended to be in support of your position.
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15179
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #89 on: June 15, 2022, 03:25:15 PM »
For the sake of transparency, BillO has reached out to reassure me he wasn't trolling. I take his point, admit that I judged him harshly, and apologise.

That said, I'm completely unconvinced that any serious amount of engineering would need to go into this low-res footage. Sure, that's how you'd produce a high quality movie today, but even slightly moist conditions would be enough to match the footage we're actually looking at.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

شاحنات صعبة للغاية

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3289
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #90 on: June 15, 2022, 05:11:44 PM »
The video with the slow mo soccer players are generally not good examples because it has people falling backwards or on their side doing side saults. But on some of them you will notice that their arms appear to move pretty fast towards the ground, even in slow mo.

When you fall you have incredibly quick reaction time with your arms. They move much faster than under normal conscious conditions.

What's weird about that, is that the limbs moving about to brace on the moon look at normal speed. So you're saying that the astronauts moved their limbs at more than normal speed in order to create the effect in the slo-mo frames that they were moving at normal speeds?

As well, there were technical limitations to slo-mo. As referenced in the video Jimster posted a couple of pages ago:

At the time of the broadcast, magnetic disk recorders capable of storing slow motion footage could only capture 30 seconds in total, for a playback of 90 seconds of slow motion video. To capture 143 minutes in slow motion, you’d need to record and store 47 minutes of live action, which simply wasn’t possible.

This in reference to the state-of-the-art Ampex HS-200, the largest storage capacity tele-production machine with slo-mo capability on the planet at the time.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10081
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #91 on: June 16, 2022, 05:21:06 PM »
What's weird about that, is that the limbs moving about to brace on the moon look at normal speed. So you're saying that the astronauts moved their limbs at more than normal speed in order to create the effect in the slo-mo frames that they were moving at normal speeds?

When you fall your arms move and react faster than when under conscious conditions, yes. It is an unconscious involuntary reaction to brace yourself when falling.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2022, 05:30:28 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3289
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #92 on: June 16, 2022, 05:45:40 PM »
The limbs when bracing appear at normal speed in the Apollo footage.

In actual slo-mo. all aspects of the frame, including limbs, are in slo-mo, not appearing at normal speed.



Additionally, storage capabilities at the time couldn't come close to handling the length of footage all in slo-mo.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10081
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #93 on: June 16, 2022, 05:52:48 PM »
They wouldn't move at "normal speeds" under any slow motion condition. The scene you posted goes into super slow motion and the man is almost suspended in mid air, barely moving downwards. This is not the rate of slow motion that would have occurred in the Apollo scenes.

Even so, in your scene we can clearly see that the man is moving his arms down much faster to brace himself than the rate at which he is falling.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2022, 05:55:21 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 6669
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #94 on: June 16, 2022, 08:33:36 PM »
Not that they're the most reliable authorities, but the MythBusters have tested the slo-mo and 1/6 gravity rigs to see if they match the "real" moon videos.  Turns out that neither look right.  It's not until they tried it in a vomit comet flying 1/6 g parabolas that they finally got the right look.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

#firePete

*

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 1189
  • Nobody Important
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #95 on: June 16, 2022, 08:47:05 PM »
If Adam and Jamie say it's busted, you really need nothing more.
Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3289
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #96 on: June 17, 2022, 12:44:57 AM »
Just check out the 1/6 G chair at space camp. Notice how their limbs move at normal speed. Maybe this is how they faked it...



Not the moon, but from skylab. Slo-mo doesn't cover off on this:





Additionally, storage capabilities at the time couldn't come close to handling the length of footage all in slo-mo.


*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 6669
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #97 on: June 17, 2022, 01:05:31 AM »
Just check out the 1/6 G chair at space camp. Notice how their limbs move at normal speed. Maybe this is how they faked it...
If you watch the MythBusters vid that I posted, you'll notice that the loose stuff on his suit bounces around at normal speed in the rig too, which doesn't happen in real 1/6 g.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2022, 01:08:25 AM by markjo »
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

#firePete

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10081
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #98 on: June 23, 2022, 08:40:32 AM »
The basis of the MythBusters argument is that a wire rig only simulated the 1/6th gravity in a vertical direction. On a horizontal direction it does not simulate 1/6th gravity. This is a curious argument, because why should horizontal movements be slowed on the Moon? If you throw a punch why should it be slower on the Moon's surface?

I do think it's possible to slow movement on a horizontal plane, such as with a wire rig that moves with the actor (as opposed to the actor pulling the rig) or with slow motion, but the premise of why the Moon should act to slow horizontal movement needs some explaining.

If Myth Busters was able to use a wire rig to slow vertical movement to 1/6th gravity and found that it was incompatible with the Moon Landing footage because the astronauts also moved slow in their horizontal movements then they clearly negated the validity of the Moon Landing, as opposed to their declaration that the Moon mission must have been real because of the incompatibility.

The fact that this was filmed on a US Naval base and there are American flags everywhere also works against their credibility. One will notice that they tried the wire rig and the slow motion tests separately, declaring that they don't look right, but didn't combine the methods. This was an obvious slip up, and it is clear that they didn't combine the methods for the obvious reasons that slow motion would successfully simulate slow horizontal motion and the wire rig would successfully simulate vertical low gravity.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2022, 09:22:42 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tron

  • *
  • Posts: 393
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #99 on: June 23, 2022, 04:43:50 PM »
I suppose they could have held these tests underwater as well... That's frequently used by NASA to simulate low or no gravity conditions anyway. 

« Last Edit: June 23, 2022, 05:18:37 PM by MetaTron »
What if the Earth is flat but looks round?