Thats one small step for man.....

[Donnervogel 0]

because it doesn't wave. The film clips where it "waves" have to do with astronauts fiddling with the flag pole. No athmospehere doesn't mean there is no vis inertiae.

If you compare pics of the flag it always looks like that. and as R. Gerschwarzenge already said, the flag is also attached on a horizontap pole so the key is to watch the lower outer edge of the flag when it's moving. If it would be moving because of a wind the edge would move first and then the rest of the flag would "wave" but in the movie clips it's always the edge that follows the movement of the horizontal bar which means that the movement is caused by the movement of the horizontal bar. ;) So much for winds on moon.

EDIT: two pics that have been made in a time interval of 18 secounds. the flag obviously didn't move ;)

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

There's no wind in a sound stage either, genius

[Kaliyuga 0]

another interesting fact:

In 1994 a joint project between the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization and NASA called project Clementine was launched, part of this project was to to make scientific observations of the Moon

The observations included imaging at various wavelengths including ultraviolet and infrared, laser ranging altimetry, and charged particle measurements. These observations were originally for the purposes of assessing the surface mineralogy of the Moon

The Moon's surface was covered completely during the two month lunar mapping phase of the mission.

And yet there isn't a single image of the lunar landing site anywhere in these images

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/clementine.html

[Donnervogel 0]

another interesting fact:

In 1994 a joint project between the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization and NASA called project Clementine was launched, part of this project was to to make scientific observations of the Moon

The observations included imaging at various wavelengths including ultraviolet and infrared, laser ranging altimetry, and charged particle measurements. These observations were originally for the purposes of assessing the surface mineralogy of the Moon

The Moon's surface was covered completely during the two month lunar mapping phase of the mission.

And yet there isn't a single image of the lunar landing site anywhere in these images

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/clementine.html

What are you trying to say? Btw. The mapping wasn't complete ;) You should read the text on that page. Although the landing site should be included. But then again I'm no "lunagraphist" (lunar geographist hehe) so I will not claim that I can say where what is on the moon.

Since it seems that you know more you could tell me where I should expect to see the landing site and how you can know that it's not there ;)

[Milkman 1]

Of course you can't see any signs of the lunar space landing now! Aliens stole the lunar lander in the mid 80's genious!

[Donnervogel 0]

@Kaliyuga

Ok from the site you told me I looked for the Apollo 11 landing site. Well I found it.

I took the coordinates from this page: Apollo landig site coordinates

Then I used this image archieve: Clementine Lunar Image Browser 1.5

Here is the original image from clementine:

(I'm afraid the resolution is by far too low to see anything on the surface)

here is a high res image derived from information of the clementine mission: Klicky

EDIT: btw. even full res clementine imaging would still be too low res to identify a small thing like a lunar landing craft on the surface. Even though the moon is small. It's not that small ;)

to give you a sense of the sizes: try to find the landing module on this picture from the moon:

Find Walter err the LM

Solution

[sanctuary 19]

Well, it seems that something new has been found

Maybe the "they have never been on the moon" theory is now more credible.

and some image magnification of this zone lead into this !!!

[Donnervogel 0]

Well, it seems that something new has been found

Maybe the "they have never been on the moon" theory is now more credible.

]http://img18.exs.cx/img18/2907/something1.jpg[/img]

and some image magnification of this zone lead into this !!!http://img18.exs.cx/img18/6128/revelation1.jpg[/img]

OMG zhe frommage has taken over the moon! and I always thought it was hitler who fled to the moon!!!

[The Frenchman 0]

Well of course! Everyone know the Frenchies were the first to...

[Balschoiw 0]

Haha, I have proof that they never were on the moon

Just check out this clip

Moontruth

Sorry but I had to post it

[Winters 1]

Ha Ha, thats funny Bals. It reminded me of a movie i saw as a kid, in the movie some guy (played by Elliot Gould) found evidence of a faked landing and actually found the sound stage it was done at. Of course he was promtply hunted down by the evil US gov't.

Anyway, it was a bad movie but that clip is still funny.

[CounterForce 0]

It will be funny when Japan observes the surface of the moon with their new lunar surveyor and doesn't find any evidence that the US ever was there

of course we all know how flags can wave in a vacuum right?

[.img]http://www.apfn.org/images/moonlanding.jpg[/img]

you can see on a picture that the flag is waveing???

How do you do that?

btw:

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/Flag.htm

about Clementine:

Apollo 15 left some traces what there visible with the Clementine Project:

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/Clementine.htm

[drow 0]

to whose who say the complete moon landing was a fake:

Give me at least one proof.

on the documentary i saw, (and im a graphic designer folks) it clearly shows, faults in the pictures where the little "x" 's that are supposed to be on the space cameras lens show up BEHIND OBJECTS!!! and ... the US flag was flapping in the wind...

theres no wind on the moon.

also, if u speed up the footage of the rover cruising around, it looks like some dudes driving around on EARTH, in a desert.

Quote[/b] ]about Clementine:

Apollo 15 left some traces what there visible with the Clementine Project:

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/Clementine.htm

o cmon man, those could be space terds :P (or anything)

[Commander-598 0]

Quote[/b] ]the US flag was flapping in the wind...

theres no wind on the moon.

Didn't we cover that... like twice already?

Quote[/b] ]also, if u speed up the footage of the rover cruising around, it looks like some dudes driving around on EARTH, in a desert.

Really...? I wonder why...(Sarcasm)

[Grizzlie 0]

Today i saw on Discovery movie about it

And about flag - they had AC turned on, and it made the wind :P

[Norris 0]

Today i saw on Discovery movie about it

And about flag - they had AC turned on, and it made the wind :P

Yeah, I saw that too. Very interesting.

But one thing is certain, if americans faked the landing, Russians would have definitely found that out and called the bluff.

[Grizzlie 0]

Not sure - than US could find that first flight was fake too

So they made a deal

[Donnervogel 0]

I explained why the "wind" is not there and why the flag moved.

The marking behind the objects. Common. That's really the most silly thing. You will have that with any ususal camera and short duration of exposure.

A bright surface will blend over a dark thing then the dark thing is so small. That's ebcause bright surcases reflect light while black things don't. And it has also to do with resolution.

looky here at the antenna of the insect. That's exaclty what happens with the moon photographs.

and the rover. well. What a surprise. the Film at twice the speed looks similar to earth movement. And at 1.5 times the speed it's as it would be on mars. lol common. Actually you can see that the film at 2.45 times the speed would be very much like on earth and that is another thing that indicates that it was filmed on moon. Because that's the factor one would expect if you calculate it.

And antoher thing. From the dust falling from the rover wheels you can also calculate another indication that it was filmed on moon. you can get the falling time of the dust which is 1s. If you calculate the falling time with moon gravitation you would get 1.01s ;)

[iNeo 0]

Well that insect pic is obviously faked

[Bernadotte 0]

I'm convinced the moon landing was not staged.

Had it happened in Hollywood some director would have re-dubbed the scene where Neil Armstrong said "Just one small step for man..."  He was actually supposed to say "Just one small step for a man..."

 

[bn880 5]

One small step for man, one giant boner for USA!

[Donnervogel 0]

I'm convinced the moon landing was not staged.

Had it happened in Hollywood some director would have re-dubbed the scene where Neil Armstrong said "Just one small step for man..." He was actually supposed to say "Just one small step for a man..."

and we would get a digitally remasterd dolby digital DVD box set of apollo 11-17 by now.

[Tamme 0]

I'm convinced the moon landing was not staged.

Had it happened in Hollywood some director would have re-dubbed the scene where Neil Armstrong said "Just one small step for man..." He was actually supposed to say "Just one small step for a man..."

and we would get a digitally remasterd dolby digital DVD box set of apollo 11-17 by now.

And more drama. Some tension between the astronauts. ie Armstrong banging the female astronaut. (Dunno if Hollywood would've used a female astronaut at that time, but whateva)

[Winters 1]

And the remake would be coming out soon that would have been made by Spielberg

[USSRsniper 0]

you cant see landing craft on pic of landing site cuz aliens stole it