We never went to the moon.

The movement of the flag is consistent with its having been hit by a wall of air. The movement doesn't come from the pole or the rod as would be the case in your scenario. It also moves at the exact moment when the wind from a passing object would make it move.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How about we all go back to the moon and you can explain exactly what you are talking about?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The wrinkles in the flag stay in the same shape after the flag it planted. You game is lame.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As noted above the wrinkles don't move. There is no impetus for the flag to move.

 

Why would the wrinkles move? A slight wind from a passing person would be strong enough to make the flag move slightly but the flag would have to be stretched somehow to make the wrinkles move.

 

You have never taken the wrinkles out of something by shaking it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

They didn't starch the freaky flag, Fat. And your idea that a limp flag needs to be stretched tells me you've never made a bed. Or you're being asinine on purpose.

 

I wonder if some people have never gotten the ... wrinkles ... out of "anything".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The slight wind caused by the astronaut's passing would make the flag move slightly but it would not make the wrinkles move.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-30#post-3493604

 

So, the wrinkles aren't part of the flag, Fat? If one part of the flag moves the rest doesn't experience any forces? Have you been weaned yet?

 

Or being hit by an astronaut.

 

Once again the whole premise of the "proof" is that the perpetrators were incompetent.
If they really were going to try and pull off such a hoax, you can be sure that they would have shot all this the moon footage long in advance, and had a team of experts pouring over every frame of the film looking for exactly this type of give-away. Anything that would have been the least bit suspect would have never made to to the final release of the footage. The fact that these little things that people claim as evidence that the landings were faked are there is actually a better indication that it wasn't faked than that it was.

 

I'm sure you know that the wrinkles in the brain give it a greater thinking capacity
I'm thinking of all those stupid people who when they hear of a achievement, such as going to be moon, shake their heads thinking that can't be right, and shake the wrinkles out of their brain
Then, just as mum told you, when you pulled a face, they become stuck like that when the wind changed

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Any capacity at all would be wonderful for some folks.

 

The astronaut is thumping on the soft, grainy regolith. That vibration of jumping will be transmitted to the flag pole. With a horizontal component like that the flag pole is very sensitive to small movements.

You can see that the horizontal spar of the pole is moving. That is what is causing the flag to sway back and forth.


You my not find that sufficiently plausible, but it's still many, many orders of magnitude more plausible than that the whole thing was faked.

 

What makes that point doubly so is that the camera man actually zooms in on the flag as it sways back and forth for about half a minute.

This mad spam about the Apollo 15 flag has been going on for almost a decade.

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/apollo-15-flag.html?m=1

 

I am surprised the flag is put forward as the compelling evidence I sort.
If that's it Freddy you have not got anything...you need something that can't be explained away.
Alex

 

One of the things Freddy does is arm wave away all the real evidence with his use of the words "plausible alternatives". With things like the laser reflectors he says "unmanned" just like the Soviets. Sadly not one single piece of evidence to support it. For rocks that have been peer reviewed by the finest geologists on the planet, he puts up really, really stupid videos that ignore copious amounts of problems in faking the samples. With the LROC pictures he says these enormous terabyte images have been faked. Once again no evidence. No photogrammetrist analysis to prove it.

No amount of evidence in support of Apollo will suffice. He is convinced of the entire thing being faked based on this stupid flag and some puerile claim about a jacket on Michael Collins!!

He constantly refers to the evidence being crushing but will never under any circumstances list it in bullet points. He knows the entire contents of his forum spam has been kicked to death for decades. Needless to say he will deny this, refer to bolded line above.

The Apollo flag has a few explanations.

1. Static repell from build up in vacuum.
2. A video artefact. The lens flares move, the whole pole moves, even the terrain appears to move.
3. Ground vibration.
4. Some regolith kicked by the running astronaut striking the flagpole.
5. The pole has just been erected. The top section may simply not be seated properly and a small vibration drops it into the holder.

If he offers his ridiculous reasons to dismiss those, it will be some crap about the flag swaying (after he hits it with his elbow!), therefore none of the above could occur! I suppose it must confuse him that two events can occur just as easily as one.

 

These two videos show that the flag had already started moving when he got close enough to touch it.

Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement


The flag that moved

This doesn't make the anomaly go away. Evidently, it was missed.

If it were ground vibration, the vertical pole would be moving in a way to cause the horizontal rod to move. The vertical pole isn't moving. I can't see any movement of the horizontal rod but if it is moving, it's perfectly plausible that wind made the flag move and the flag made the rod move.

 

There is other footage in which an astronaut is standing close to a flag and there is no attraction or repelling. It only happens in this footage at a point where the movement is perfectly consistent with the atmosphere explanation.

If this were the case, there would be no clear flag movement. Are you saying the flag is not really moving?

As I said before, there is no visible movement of the pole or rod which makes the flag move. If it were ground vibration making the flag move, there would be visible movement of the pole and rod.

There would be points where the pebbles and rocks would make little depressions in the flag where they impacted it. There are none. The flag moves in a way that's consistent with a wall of air hitting it.

The flag doesn't move up and down. It moves from left to right. If your scenario were the case, there would be some visible up-and-down movement.

Also, look at the rest of the flag info.

(post #21)
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=993.15


This flag anomaly closes the whole case. The footage was taken in a studio.

The guy who did that has said some very lame things that destroyed his credibility. He agreed with Jay Windley's* lame analysis of the dust-free sand issue.

He maintains that the Chinese spacewalk was real.
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1149.0

He knows the moon missions were faked as well as the hoax-believers do.


*
http://www.clavius.org/about.html