NASA moon walker claims Alien cover-up

[KimB]

Well in the video the flag started moving from being still when one of the astronauts hops by.

Which would be the expected result if he'd brushed it slightly.

 

[RudeCurve]

Which would be the expected result if he'd brushed it slightly.

Of course but from the video it looked like he was quite a distance from being able to touch it with his body or arm.

 

[Citrous]

Seismic anomaly.

 

[KimB]

Of course but from the video it looked like he was quite a distance from being able to touch it with his body or arm.

Camera angles can be deceptive.

But regardless, how's this? Have you ever seen a TV or movie depiction of motion that looked anything like what you get in the Moon walking videos?

 

[RudeCurve]

But regardless, how's this? Have you ever seen a TV or movie depiction of motion that looked anything like what you get in the Moon walking videos?

I have, movies that are filmed at normal speed then played back at a slower speed.

 

[KimB]

I have, movies that are filmed at normal speed then played back at a slower speed.

Slow motion is not the only thing that one needs to do to look like those videos. Take the feather/hammer drop, for instance. Or their ability to push themselves up to a standing position after falling down.

 

[Johnny_Physics]

It's not that he was able to push himself up without help, it was the fact the motion looked like he swiveled from some invisible axis close to his back. If I was in a "push-up" position and pushed up really hard, I would rotate around where my feet are. That is where the fulcrum would be. Also in some of the clips you'll notice that the astronauts start to float up even before they push with their feet to hop.
__________________

Try to do that submerged in water and see if you will revolve around the insignificant weight of your feet as the center, or if the more substantial mass of your torso will have some say in the way you rotate...

 

[Humus]

So this thread is about the moon landing now? What about 'em alien?

 

[RudeCurve]

Try to do that submerged in water and see if you will revolve around the insignificant weight of your feet as the center, or if the more substantial mass of your torso will have some say in the way you rotate...

Well first of all you can't really do it under water because there is too much friction from the water. On the other hand if you do it in a completely weightless environment you will rotate around the fulcrum point by your feet especially if your feet end is block by a stationary object.

 

[KimB]

Well first of all you can't really do it under water because there is too much friction from the water. On the other hand if you do it in a completely weightless environment you will rotate around the fulcrum point by your feet especially if your feet end is block by a stationary object.

The ground on the Moon is rather dusty, and doesn't provide a good anchor point.

 

[Gerry]

The definitive article as to whether the moon landings were fake or not (may make more sense to British participants).

http://stuffucanuse.com/fake_moon_landings/moon_landings.htm

 

[Mendel]

Randi's response to this nonsense:

http://www.randi.org/joom/commentary/swift/swift-july-31-2008.html#i1

And Phil Plait's

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/b...ll-going-to-the-moon-doesnt-mean-youre-right/

I think it pretty much boils down to this:

It doesn’t matter who believes in aliens. What matters is — hello! — evidence.

 

[Jawed]

The definitive article as to whether the moon landings were fake or not (may make more sense to British participants).

http://stuffucanuse.com/fake_moon_landings/moon_landings.htm

Aw, the Clangers, I love that programme - recognised the moon-landing from just the first picture

Jawed

 

[fearsomepirate]

Well, my reasoning is thus:
1. What we know of life here on Earth seems to indicate that it's probably very, very likely to appear once the conditions are right.

A single data point is generally insufficient to establish a probability. Now if life had gone completely extinct and re-arisen on Earth 100 times or so, we'd be on to something.

 

[KimB]

A single data point is generally insufficient to establish a probability. Now if life had gone completely extinct and re-arisen on Earth 100 times or so, we'd be on to something.

I wasn't talking about the mere fact that life exists here, but rather about the work done in understanding abiogenesis.