Being patronised by an internet troll is most satisfying, it means your idiotic photoshopping exercise kept you quiet. I figured it out immediately, I don't respond to barked orders from fools. You are a coward. How am I doing? As for you "answering questions". I have dozens tabled well before your trick photography question:- Tell me more about the "terrace" on the Moon, is it dead flat for the many miles it spans? You have nothing to say. Try again, assume they aren't on wires and doing gravity defying crap, since they cross over numerous times, there is no jerkiness associated with movement by wires and they fall over hundreds of times! Show why it's baloney/nonsense. Ignoring the backpack(assuming it is empty), what angle makes the astronaut stable. It's a very simple question and one you cannot answer because it shows you are full of crap. "Just for curiosity, at 56:34 assume his backpack is empty. Now tilt your screen and tell me what angle it makes to stop him falling over period! Then at 56:56 watch the astronaut exit right and tell me what angle you think the terrain is based on his forward stance." Just to iterate the total cowardice you are exuding and the diversion, obfuscation and irrelevant hogwash you keep posting - this post detailing numerous posts of mine that have been ignored, was itself ignored:- http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=441083&page=10&p=1065896915#post1065896915 As for your latest barrage of pictures how does this one fit in with your "empirical observation"?
Of course not! I am not sure how you determined that to be true - it would not be hard to assemble an anti-gravity rig. All you would need is some cable, some springs, and a hydraulic damper. Heck, I have something similar on my garage door. I don't have to answer it because you already did - I think you said "20-30 degrees to the left" Why do I have to answer questions when you have already stated the answer? You ask lots and lots of questions that require a lot of time and work to answer correctly - and you act like you are an authority on the subject and that you already know the answer - but yet I ask one simple little question that requires no time and no work to answer - and I have to wait 3 weeks for a response. It fits in quite nicely, actually!
Then your argument is crap! Heck? What we are asking is thin invisible wires operational over hectares and cross overable! That's bull for starters. Them we have a constant suspension of weight. If you use springs(my god the ignorance!) you will definitely produce jerkiness as the springs contract and compress! As the astronaut moves direction the cable angles, it cannot stay perfectly aligned with every single action taken. As it resets this angle back to vertical, there comes the inevitable jerkiness. You do have to answer it coward, because you said it was baloney. Now answer it. Right out the gate, cowardice again. You can't answer the questions that were tabled well before your diversionary crap! Then explain it.
Here is a perfect example showing how every side motion and every forward motion causes a reset in the COG(from just at 30 minutes 30 seconds):- http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2m7k1z What's the betting the spam artist comes in with his "discredited" bull and ignores the evidence accordingly! We shall take it as read that the hogwash claim is wires and slowmo, yada, yada, yada! But it doesn't work, the motion is jerky with supports unless there is counter balance and multiple pivot points.
I dunno... This anti-gravity device seems to work smoothly - and they even mention "counter balance" How Anti-Gravity Devices Work https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yFhsl3s_4A
Yet again you ran away from the questions. You post some vertical track-hoist system with runners that has no bearing whatsoever on a mobile suspension rig. You made no comment on the video example I posted and the reasons why wire systems cannot fail to exhibit imbalanced motion from COG changes. All gravity simulation systems must have a counter balance otherwise there will be nothing to offset the weight of the subject. Yes, they can use a system of springs(should say "decompress" in my post above) or elastic(as opposed to partial weight/pulley system) but they must have stabilizers otherwise you get what we saw in that video you ignored above - obvious and unavoidable jerkiness. Multiple pivot points in a full gravity rig act as stabilizers and move mainly independently of the subject - they still aren't perfect though. The best way to simulate gravity is to do a close to horizontal setup and have vertical wires that are constantly supporting the subject hence no jerkiness because the weight decrease is taken up by the non vertical layout:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1CUhz0U-Gc
I see yet again you cowardly avoid responding to the requests and focus on side issues that you know nothing about. I typed the term "counter balance" instead of "stabilization". Simple error. Springs can act as a counter balance but the problem is that they need to be set properly otherwise when decompressing the counter balance goes completely - they always produce jerkiness. Now, how many months before you start responding to the important stuff or any of the items in the other threads showing how Apollo was not faked?.
I've seen mistakes made by hoax-belivers but I've never seen a case in which the correction of that mistake proved the missions were real. I've never seen anything that could be called proof that the missions were not faked but I've seen a mountain of proof that they were faked. http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/347662-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-...ins-were-backdrops-movie-set-mod-warning.html http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=362999&page=2&p=1064028979#post1064028979 http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=403884&page=2&p=1064900819#post1064900819
Your opinion is as worthless now as it has always been. You have no integrity, no credibility and cowardly avoid threads providing proof and showing your film makers to be every bit as dishonest as you are. All you have is spam. At least Descartes made an effort at debate, inept as it was, he inevitably stooped into the pit of cowardice you reside in. Keep running away, at least one gets a break from your single minded, blinkered hogwash.
From you I will consider that a compliment! At least "Beta the Bridge Troll" didn't get me thrown into the Gorge of Eternal Peril! STOP! He who would cross the Bridge of Apollo Must answer me These questions three Ere the other side he see. Bridge Troll: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPOyOM7wxlE
Stevethechemist's videos are all gone which I find strange. He proved the hoax by himself. He had a video in which he showed that the guy making the jump in this video was on a wire. John Young's Lunar Salute on Apollo 16 He compared the falling soil with the falling sand in volleyball games on the beach. You can put YouTube videos in slow-motion by clicking on the six-sided star that's on the lower right-hand corner of the videos. Start watching this video in slow-motion at the 5:44 time mark. TOP 40 Crazy Actions Beach Volleyball | FIVB Beach Volleyball World Champs 2017 When the guy on the right in the foreground jumps, the sand goes up as high as his foot does. When the Apollo astronaut jumps, the soil he kicks up starts falling before the astronaut starts coming back down. That can be explained by the astronaut's being helped by a support wire. Can anyone else offer another explanation?
Oh no he did not! This is the fool who did a pendulum analysis of the flag and failed to incorporate the multiple pivot points within a fabric! No it doesn't. It's just harder to see, poor video quality and grey on grey. First video shows the dust hitting the ground at the same time. You just have to look more carefully:- Second one, shows the dust cloud within the pictures taken:-
In the upper video the arrow shows the wind blowing in the opposite direction to that of the blowing flag, but in the lower one the wind's blowing the same direction. I rest my case.
The quality of your posts is sub kindergarten. Wind strong enough to move surface material would move the flag, you have no case.
I put this on full-screen and .25 speed. (This video is in post #162) John Young's Lunar Salute on Apollo 16 I don't see any dusts hitting the ground at the same time. If it's there, I can't make it out. I don't see its shadow either. I might change my mind later. Point something out to me that I missed.
You pretend to see what you want to see. The dust is kicked forwards as his legs move that way. On the Moon, it travels further, its splashes in front of him, the slightly darkened area. On a poor quality nth generation copy, with grey against grey, what would you expect! Here is the best footage I could find, it looks like a TV video of the original transmission. I have unloaded the frames and boosted the contrast 30% - I have added a small red line on frame 1 just above where the wave ends up on the ground. The astronaut clearly kicks his feet forwards:- Only the blind or dishonest can deny that the dust falls in front and at the same time! Which of those are you?
I can see some sand that goes up pretty high but it comes down faster than the astronaut. The sand and the astronaut should come down at the same speed.
Dishonest. The regolith splashes in front of him clearly at the same time. I am debating with somebody who knows they are wrong. You've been beaten so many times now it must be second nature for you to lie and weasel away clear proof. You got your answer and you got irrefutable proof. It's not my fault you lack the integrity to concede your errors.
I'm still skeptical, and watching that bloke bouncing up and down does nothing to assuage it; I could be wrong obviously, but it looks as if there's a trampoline just under all that dust? The reason for my belief is because the 'bounces' are too regular: for instance, if they were gravity-related then his (sorry to use the word again) bounces would be more randomized, viz. distally as well as vertically. Additionally, I've often wondered why there has never been a convincing video recording of the lunar blast-off.
I put it on full screen and .25 slow-motion. I can't see any regolith splashing down in front of him.
You are lying or need spectacles. And what the hell are you talking about! I posted an animated gif above that cannot be slowed down, it shows quite clearly the wave of the regolith just below the red line. https://s3.gifyu.com/images/jump.gif