Apollo authentication - the final nail in the untenable and absurd "hoax" coffin

You seem to be obsessed with a guy jumping down a hill for some reason.

 

I'll post this one more time. Notice that the motion of your astronaut is exactly the same as those kids jumping down a sand dune.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-they-are-on-the-moon.580330/#post-1072165944

 

Put this video on full screen and set the speed at .25.

John Young's Lunar Salute on Apollo 16



The ark can be seen at the .08 time mark. It only shows dust falling. That dust is what was on top of the toe of his boot. When he jumped, it fell off. It never rose with the other dust that falls before his boots even stop rising. That footage is one hundred percent consistent with the astronaut's being on a wire.

The Apollo Moon Jump Salute Refute
https://www.brighteon.com/612d782a-9223-4698-99ac-3eb337ceedf5

 

We continued talking about that and I said I'd taken a closer look at it and modified my opinion.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nd-absurd-hoax-coffin.604367/#post-1073768270

Why didn't you show that too?

 

You seem to be the one doing all the cluster copying and pasting. Out of the 22 posts on this page, 14 our yours along with most of the text. You seem to want to cover up an honest discussion with cluster word bombing of the thread with the same stuff over and over. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bs, right? And you always want to get the last copy and pasted word in.

 

I doubt he's succeeding in baffling anybody. He's amusing a lot of people though.

 

This is the FOURTH TIME you have cluster pasted this garbage on THE PREVIOUS PAGE ALONE !!! AND MULTIPLE TIMES HERE AND ON OTHER THREADS !!!

 

It*s there but it doesn't rise to get there.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...urd-hoax-coffin.604367/page-3#post-1074074552

It falls off the toe of his boot. It can only be seen going down. It can't be seen going up.

 

That's already been disproven.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-they-are-on-the-moon.580330/#post-1072162665

If you can't debunk it, bury it.

 

Ok, so this duo of fail refuse to concede in your face and totally obvious evidence. Let's look at the clearest final part of the jump sequence. In this short excerpt, Cernan rises in perfect sync with a dust wave kicked in front of him. As can be seen, the wave rises level with his boots and at the same time.

 

You're still forgetting to put hyphens in your compound adjectives.

• Young's jump, a clear and IMPOSSIBLE-to-fake arc of dust in perfect sync with his ascent.

• Miles of LRV footage in IMPOSSIBLE-to-fake perfection in 1971.

• 842lbs of IMPOSSIBLE-to-fake lunar samples.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...anding-is-fake.553296/page-29#post-1074075946

 

Explain why that is.

 

It's like arguing whether it but the moon is made of cheese

 

What is? What point are you making here?

 

It's not complicated I stated it you responded to it. I'm sorry you're struggling.

Think about it. What in earth could I possibly be referring to. Start with post #89

Start with post number 89 and follow it really is not complicated.

I can't make it anymore clear what I'm talking about when I say this argument I'm talking about this argument.

That's why I typed those words.

So quit asking me to explain that I'm talking about this argument when I said it clearly, you shouldn't be having trouble with this.

 

This argument it hasn't changed it isn't nuanced.

I was direct.

Then wth is the problem

It was started in post 89.

It's simple. You're over thinking it

It's not vague you are struggling with something very simple.

what do you need clearing up?

I'm saying this because it's what I think.

Because everybody already knows it's false. It's like arguing with someone about the Earth being flat. Nobody believes it is.

 

There you go, clarity. I post to stop this dishonest poster from influencing others who are equally incapable of checking the crap he posts.

 

The hoax*believers' analyses of all of that has been discussed on this forum. There's no sense in reiterating it continuously. The viewers can look at both sides and come to their own conclusions.

Here is a link to some summaries of the hoax proof in case there are any newcomers who haven't seen it yet.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...anding-is-fake.553296/page-22#post-1073703706

 

Why don't you link to what you claim to be refuting? How are the viewers supposed to know what you're dealing with if you don't give the complete picture?

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-apollo-landing.519410/page-9#post-1072078676

The Apollo Moon Jump Salute Refute hd
https://www.brighteon.com/a515dc75-83bb-4e02-aad9-b1cdfe0de150

Galileo and the Apollo Moon Jump hd
https://www.brighteon.com/8d21e915-09a2-4e28-83c1-f6f33c9a4199


The viewers can look at the videos and your analyses of them and come to their own conclusions.

 

Neither of those mega-spammed-previously-addressed videos address the points being raised.

• Cernan's jump clear as could possibly be, a dust wave rising and falling with his jump. IMPOSSIBLE to fake.
• Young's jump, a clear arc of dust in perfect sync with his ascent - and IMPOSSIBLE to fake .
• Miles of LRV footage in 1971 in total perfection - IMPOSSIBLE to fake.
• 842lbs of lunar samples - IMPOSSIBLE to fake.
• A falling battery lid with ZERO dust disturbance where it is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

Tens of thousands of reports from scientific data transmitted by ALSEPs. Thousands of reports of lunar samples. A thousand plus hours of audio dialog perfectly in line with all the missions. Impossible to fake lunar motion that idiots think is slowed down but only works in the vertical vector - horizontal motion not affected by gravity. Thousands of images showing exact positioning of the Earth and Moon including phase angles exactly as they should. Images taken in places 100% consistent in place, vector and time. Images on the lunar surface perfectly matching orbital images.

The entire record of the lunar landings, the photographic consistency, the video and film consistency, the total narrative internally and externally, the third party evidence the truly vast amount of data. There is not an event in the entire history of the human race so meticulously and perfectly documented.

 

There's a link in post #34 to where Cernan's jump is addressed. As far as I'm concerned, post #9 blows you out of the water. The viewers can decide for themselves.

Post #44 has analyses of Young's jump. The viewers can look Steve the Chemist's and your analyses and come to their own conclusions.


As far as I'm concerned, this video blows your statement about LRV footage out of the water.

Apollo 15 Rover Traverse Issue


The viewers can come to their own conclusions.


The viewers can look at the alternative analyses and your analysis of the lunar samples and come to their own conclusions.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...roof-that-the-moon-missions-were-real.603866/
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ocks-irrefutable-proof-that-we-landed.604239/


The first link in post #44 goes to where you tried and failed to obfuscate the issue of air blowing the dust when the battery lid fell.

 

You have never addressed trhe facts of evidence,

Your every claim has been disproven asnd crushed.

The viewers have spoken

 

Your reply does not address the laws of physics you are ignoring,

Your concern is meaningless, you have no honest objectivity and are making claims that are disproven simply by visual evidence.

Once again a completely dishonest reply. Nowhere does that post address the issue of the clear parabolic arc of dust, You said you saw it then "changed your mind"\ when you realized what that meant!

3 out of 3 dishonest responses. Nowhere does that video explain how the filming was done and makes one of the most inane claims about "hovering dust flaps". Meh!

And a full house of failure. Just one simple observation proves they are on the Moon and your own useless video brought it to light.

 

@Scott - All this poster can do is post links to where he has previously failed to answer points raised in this thread and others. Nowhere is the following answered:

CERNAN



In your face, a wave of dust clearly rising in front of him at the same speed as his jump and you have run away from this slam dunk point every time.

• This forms part of a long continuous 30 minute EVA sequence.
• Beyond any doubt we can prove this jump is 100% consistent with it being lunar gravity.
  
• There is no jerkiness in his motion that would indicate any center of gravity changes from wires.
• As he rises he kicks soil ahead which clearly reaches the same height and without any doubt at the same time.
• Physics 101, an object takes the same time to rise to zenith as it takes to fall (absent of air resistance).
  
• The soil clearly strikes the surface at the same time as he lands - proving physics 101(previous jump).
• Unless the soil is on wires, neither can he be!.

YOUNG

Right there(emphasis mine) is the only part of your statement that we need. The soil does go up as high as his boot, quite correct. We see it. Unfortunately for you THAT, and just THAT is the nail in your coffin of ignorance. Absent of an atmosphere and over short distances on Earth, an object will rise to its zenith at the same time as it falls from the zenith to the surface. I suggest you read and digest that. See if you can use your best English comprehension skills to fully understand it. Because I know what you must do now. You must obfuscate, divert, distract and try and make this go away. But it won't because you have inadvertently closed your own case. Your argument about the soil falling immediately is disproven by physics and it does not do this anyway - it disperses and tracks forwards - see moving dust shadows on the ground!

LRV
Faultless. Dark shadows, dark skies, fully lit for miles, impossible to be a backdrop screen, impossible to be a static model, impossible to be fabricated to that complexity on some bullshit, fully lit 10,000 acre set with dark skies and mountains that never get any nearer. Thread found here.

• An honest person would look and start to think it is clear evidence of a lunar landing.
• A logical person would look at the quality, the date, the scenery, the dark sky etc. and conclude that it cannot have been filmed on Earth.
• An objective person would look at this as irrefutable proof of a lunar landing.
• The scientific method shows this was filmed on the surface of the Moon. There is no workable counter explanation.
• A person with none of the above would arm wave away evidence that is impossible to explain or refute.

BATTERY LID

There is such a thing as deductive reasoning and he seems to have a complete absence of this basic and easily acquired skill. From the video we can see a number of things:-Now from the responses being received from this serial forum spammer we can also see a number of things:-

• There is a plethora of dust. It is clearly and obviously covering most of the visible area. This is not up for debate, the film maker actually insists on it.

• The lid for the battery is pushed shut. Again not up for debate, clearly visible.

• It impacts the box and there is a small disturbance in the near corner. Again not up for debate, clearly visible.

• A descending flat surface displaces air as it falls. Mainly in the direction of fall, but also to the sides. Similar to the draft from a closing door. Irrefutable and obvious.

• There is not the slightest movement or displacement of any of the dust opposite to the direction the lid is falling. Nothing whatsoever!

• In a vacuum, there would be no displaced air and subsequently no displaced dust. This is what is observed.

• In a vacuum and low gravity, any impact vibrations would exaggerate the movements observed.

• It is completely and irrefutably irrelevant which part of the lid impacts the box. We know it does impact because it stops!Any lid falling onto a box must cause an impact force and it must be from the underside.

CLICK HERE to watch the clip. Pause the video at 17 seconds to see how this youtube video maker shoots himself in both feet. The whole area is covered in dust, I agree,
yet the pushed falling lid only puffs in one tiny corner and look at how ridiculously high the dust goes up from the impact of the corner - low gravity! NOTHING is disturbed in front, none of that mass of dust is disturbed!

The footage presented has now 100% irrefutably shown that the small segment highlighted must be in a vacuum. It almost certainly must also be in low gravity from the absurdly unnatural way the dust moves. Further, since we now have proven that this sequence is in a vacuum, so must be the footage before and after this section. It's on the Moon.

 

Still waiting for some honest answers that perfectly explain the content in post 49 above.