• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

More Lies by NASA

Scott said:
If we can see that his elbow hasn't arrrived to the end of the flag yet when it starts to move, why does knowing the precise distance matter?
Click to expand...

Avoided the whole list yet again. What's wrong, are you afraid to answer with your "too clear to obfuscate" claim?

Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW9qcL4LiUg
Click to expand...

Clearly and unequivocally states the movement occurs 2 feet to the left of the flag pole.

The flag that moved
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0
Click to expand...

States it starts when he is level with the flag pole.

As I said they contradict each other. But since the first claim is more accurate, I will take this as your final answer.

His elbow was too far away from the flag to touch it when it started to move. That's all that matters.
Click to expand...

Bollocks. There's a couple of other things that matter too. How far is his body from the flag edge that moves. How much air is pushed in front of a moving object at slow speed.

He is well over a metre away AT LEAST and I've seen footage stills that show it to be closer to double that. For argument's sake I'll stick to 1 metre.

Here is a picture of a vehicle in a wind tunnel -

mb-test-tunnel-500-mercedes-benz-e-class-coupe-wind-tunnel-1-lgwtmk.jpg


A very simple question, how does your "atmosphere explanation" equate the flag moving when we can see that air does not behave that way? The viewers are demanding you answer this!
 
Antitroll said:
Avoided the whole list yet again. What's wrong, are you afraid to answer with your "too clear to obfuscate" claim?



Clearly and unequivocally states the movement occurs 2 feet to the left of the flag pole.



States it starts when he is level with the flag pole.

As I said they contradict each other. But since the first claim is more accurate, I will take this as your final answer.



Bollocks. There's a couple of other things that matter too. How far is his body from the flag edge that moves. How much air is pushed in front of a moving object at slow speed.

He is well over a metre away AT LEAST and I've seen footage stills that show it to be closer to double that. For argument's sake I'll stick to 1 metre.

Here is a picture of a vehicle in a wind tunnel -

mb-test-tunnel-500-mercedes-benz-e-class-coupe-wind-tunnel-1-lgwtmk.jpg


A very simple question, how does your "atmosphere explanation" equate the flag moving when we can see that air does not behave that way? The viewers are demanding you answer this!
Click to expand...

Bump! Bolded. Please give full details with a citation on your "atmosphere explanation".

It does get very frustrating when this person spams this and repeatedly ignores major problems with his "never debunked" claim. His claim is a physical impossibility. Further to that, he also repeatedly claims that anyone can trot by a flag to duplicate it, yet in 10 years of forum repeats, even with simple video phones now easy to use, he has never performed this for all to see.
 
A very simple question, how does your "atmosphere explanation" equate the flag moving when we can see that air does not behave that way? The viewers are demanding you answer this!
Click to expand...
Anyone can duplicate the movement of the flag by hanging a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trotting by it at a forty five degree angle. The cloth first moves away from you, and then back toward you the way the Apollo 15 flag does.

This shows that the air does move that way.
 
Scott said:
Anyone can duplicate the movement of the flag by hanging a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trotting by it at a forty five degree angle. The cloth first moves away from you, and then back toward you the way the Apollo 15 flag does.

This shows that the air does move that way.
Click to expand...

Did you even read my post, because you certainly didn't address it. I showed you how air is pushed in a wind tunnel. It is a matter of a few inches. Your claim of the "atmosphere explanation" is total vague crap. You know it, which is why you keep running away from this. Did you not just read where I typed this -

"Further to that, he also repeatedly claims that anyone can trot by a flag to duplicate it, yet in 10 years of forum repeats, even with simple video phones now easy to use, he has never performed this for all to see. If it is that easy to do, video it and upload it. We both know why you can't do that."

Now, instead of being a coward, answer my post above properly and/or upload your trotting video. When cornered, you obfuscate like the Black Knight. People would laugh you out of the debating hall. Apologies for using all your spam catch phrases:roll:
 
Antitroll said:
Did you even read my post, because you certainly didn't address it. I showed you how air is pushed in a wind tunnel. It is a matter of a few inches. Your claim of the "atmosphere explanation" is total vague crap. You know it, which is why you keep running away from this. Did you not just read where I typed this -

"Further to that, he also repeatedly claims that anyone can trot by a flag to duplicate it, yet in 10 years of forum repeats, even with simple video phones now easy to use, he has never performed this for all to see. If it is that easy to do, video it and upload it. We both know why you can't do that."

Now, instead of being a coward, answer my post above properly and/or upload your trotting video. When cornered, you obfuscate like the Black Knight. People would laugh you out of the debating hall. Apologies for using all your spam catch phrases:roll:
Click to expand...
You left out "sophist" and "disinfo agent".
 
L
Antitroll said:
Did you even read my post, because you certainly didn't address it. I showed you how air is pushed in a wind tunnel. It is a matter of a few inches. Your claim of the "atmosphere explanation" is total vague crap. You know it, which is why you keep running away from this. Did you not just read where I typed this -

"Further to that, he also repeatedly claims that anyone can trot by a flag to duplicate it, yet in 10 years of forum repeats, even with simple video phones now easy to use, he has never performed this for all to see. If it is that easy to do, video it and upload it. We both know why you can't do that."

Now, instead of being a coward, answer my post above properly and/or upload your trotting video. When cornered, you obfuscate like the Black Knight. People would laugh you out of the debating hall. Apologies for using all your spam catch phrases:roll:
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but I got lost somewhere along the line. Could you make a brief summary of the atmosphere issue?
 
zyzygy said:
Click to expand...


I don't know how many times I've posted this as a rebuttal to that video.

windyz.wmv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

MythBusters has no credibility.
MoonFaker: Phil Plait, Mythbusters & Dirty Tricks. PART 1 - YouTube
Prepare to be Busted - Mythbusters Debunked addendum - YouTube
AULIS Online – Different Thinking


Did you even read my post, because you certainly didn't address it. I showed you how air is pushed in a wind tunnel.
Click to expand...
If any viewers actually have doubts about this, hang a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at about a forty five degree angle. It will behave exactly like the flag in the video did.
 
Last edited:
Is there any conspiracy so ridiculous the CT crowd wont beleive it?
 
Quag said:
Is there any conspiracy so ridiculous the CT crowd wont beleive it?
Click to expand...

The thing about CT's is they very rarely believe in just one. The same critical thinking deficiency that makes them susceptible to one makes them susceptible to most.
 
Mark F said:
The thing about CT's is they very rarely believe in just one. The same critical thinking deficiency that makes them susceptible to one makes them susceptible to most.
Click to expand...

Hence my question
 
Scott said:
I don't know how many times I've posted this as a rebuttal to that video.

windyz.wmv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

MythBusters has no credibility.
MoonFaker: Phil Plait, Mythbusters & Dirty Tricks. PART 1 - YouTube
Prepare to be Busted - Mythbusters Debunked addendum - YouTube
AULIS Online – Different Thinking



If any viewers actually have doubts about this, hang a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at about a forty five degree angle. It will behave exactly like the flag in the video did.
Click to expand...

Relatively Interesting The Moon Landing Hoax Debunked (again)
 
Scott said:
I don't know how many times I've posted this as a rebuttal to that video.

windyz.wmv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
Click to expand...

Spam. Thousands of times. I don't knowhow many times you have avoided the responses.

Debunking The Apollo Moon Hoax: The Apollo 17 Flag

"Since you wish to include this as part of your wall of spam, I shall debunk it properly.

Video 1:-

Here is my first video showing the whole clip from the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. In this video, the astronauts crossover a few times, so the idea they are using "wires" that we never see, can be quickly debunked.
Apollo 17 flag deployment - YouTube


Video 2:-

Now, we have discounted the use of wires, since it would be impossible to stop them tangling! Here is the next video with the film firstly sped up 150%. The dust and flag motion is excessive, and several movements by the astronauts look very odd. There are short glimpses of vertical motion showing that it still is too slow for Earth gravity. I then speed the film up 200%, and now it all looks patently absurd.
Apollo 17 flag deployment - at 150% and 200% speeds - YouTube


Video 3:-

The final video is a debunk of the motion, showing also that the flagpole is rotating, causing a massive dampening effect to any pendulum swing.
Apollo 17 flag rebuttal - YouTube "

MythBusters has no credibility.
Click to expand...

Your deluded ad hominem does not discount their conclusions.

If any viewers actually have doubts about this, hang a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at about a forty five degree angle. It will behave exactly like the flag in the video did.
Click to expand...

Bollocks. Film it and put it on youtube! Everybody knows why you cannot. The viewers never agree with you.

I see you cowardly avoided responding to my post yet again.


Explain how air moves feet in front of an object in that Apollo 15 video, when it breaks the laws of physics! Elaborate on your "atmosphere explanation".
 
Scott said:
This page doesn't deal with the clearest proof.
Relatively Interesting The Moon Landing Hoax Debunked (again)
Click to expand...

It deals with most of it completely and totally. But very dishonestly, you ignore it and repeat your wall of spam on multiple forums, that includes nearly every point debunked to death.

That's because they don't want people to even see it as it's too clear to obfuscate.
Air caused the flag to move so it was obviously in a studio.
Click to expand...

It doesn't need obfuscating. You can't even answer the most basic of basic questions about it. How does your wall of air work from several feet away when the laws of wave dynamics show that air moves a few inches at most!

AULIS Online – Different Thinking
Click to expand...

Different thinking? Do you mean idiotic thinking, dishonest conclusions, badly manipulated poor copies, hopeless understanding of photogrammetry and a page designed to suck money from the deluded? The fact you use that page leads me to believe that you may be involved in its money making crap.

All of it addressed, and all of it ignored by the dead person who put it together -
Jack White's Aulis "Apollo Hoax" Investigation - A Rebuttal - The Apollo Moon Landings - The Education Forum
 
AULIS Online – Different Thinking
Click to expand...
Different thinking? Do you mean idiotic thinking, dishonest conclusions, badly manipulated poor copies, hopeless understanding of photogrammetry and a page designed to suck money from the deluded? The fact you use that page leads me to believe that you may be involved in its money making crap.

All of it addressed, and all of it ignored by the dead person who put it together -
Jack White's Aulis "Apollo Hoax" Investigation - A Rebuttal - The Apollo Moon Landings - The Education Forum
Click to expand...

I just did a page search on the word "parallax" on all sixteen pages of that thread. Nothing came up.

The guy who did that study is a PH.D.

Why don't you explain it to us?
 
Scott said:
I just did a page search on the word "parallax" on all sixteen pages of that thread. Nothing came up.

The guy who did that study is a PH.D.

Why don't you explain it to us?
Click to expand...

We know what parallax is. We don't need an explanation. We know how a flag would behave in a vacuum and one sixth of Earth's gravity.
 
We know what parallax is. We don't need an explanation.
Click to expand...
You seem to be trying to muddy the waters. I mean his explanation of why he thinks the study is wrong. You knew that when you made your post.
 
Scott said:
You seem to be trying to muddy the waters. I mean his explanation of why he thinks the study is wrong. You knew that when you made your post.
Click to expand...

The study is wrong because we landed on the Moon. It's as simple as that.
 
zyzygy said:
The study is wrong because we landed on the Moon. It's as simple as that.
Click to expand...
This post is hardly worth a response but I'll respond anyway. What you just said would get you laughed out of the debating hall.
 
Scott said:
This post is hardly worth a response but I'll respond anyway. What you just said would get you laughed out of the debating hall.
Click to expand...

They wouldn't even let you in.
 
The issue I have with many of the vids/ytubes Scott posts is they say a lot, but do not provide any sources to back up their statements. If they do mention a source it is generally a CT site.

The issue comes down to do you believe real science or do you believe a unnamed author of a ytube ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom