Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 75

Thread: The Flag Anomaly Proves the Hoax by Itself

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    14

    The Flag Anomaly Proves the Hoax by Itself

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn6MTrin5eU
    (2:35 time mark)

    This video shows that it started moving before he got close enough to touch it.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    The movement is one hundred percent consistent with the atmosphere explanation.

    This video shows the movement of the Apollo flag is consistent with its being in atmosphere.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

    Here's some more stuff.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr76q...x=0&playnext=1
    http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...ad+horses&aq=f

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    12,994
    Cosmored,

    Please be more specific in describing linked videos than "Here's some more stuff".
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. — Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Depew, NY
    Posts
    11,921
    In the second video, in what way could a viewer differentiate a slight sway in the camera on its mount, verses a sway in the flag?
    Solfe

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    13,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    This video shows that it started moving before he got close enough to touch it.
    How were you able to eliminate regolith movement caused by the Astronauts, as an explanation?...be very specific.


    The movement is one hundred percent consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
    It is also consistent with the Astronauts disturbing the very near by regolith.

    Again, How were you able to eliminate the Astronauts movements as an explanation??


    This video shows the movement of the Apollo flag is consistent with its being in atmosphere.
    Not even close...it is much more consistent with the Astronauts actually touching and moving the flag.


    So, no...your haven't proved a thing...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    13,531
    Quote Originally Posted by PetersCreek View Post
    Cosmored,

    Please be more specific in describing linked videos than "Here's some more stuff".

    I can understand why he wasn't more specific...if he were to state "these videos are from Jarrah White", would anyone watch them??

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,406
    My own quick analysis of the videos provided show at least several things wrong. First they are on Youtube. Compressed, of unknown provenance and frame rate, edited to within an inch of their lives to show *only* what someone wants to point out and nothing else. Intertwined are statements of opinion, breaking up the video footage as much as possible. So. Count me utterly unimpressed.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,804
    Youtube? Youtube???

    Sorry, not credible.

    Regards, John M.
    I'm not a hardnosed mainstreamer; I just like the observations, theories, predictions, and results to match.

    "Mainstream isn’t a faith system. It is a verified body of work that must be taken into account if you wish to add to that body of work, or if you want to change the conclusions of that body of work." - korjik

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    31,075
    Nothing is capable of showing a hoax "all by itself." Every piece of information must be examined on its own merits.
    _____________________________________________
    Gillian

    "Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

    "You can't erase icing."

    "I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    Firstly, there are numerous explanations for the tiny movement(before he reached the flag) captured on this sequence. Secondly, it beggars belief that Ed Fendell controlling the camera, would choose to zoom in during the movement if it is incriminating. Thirdly, at the extreme worst scenario for NASA it would prove only that this sequence was faked, not the entire Moon landing missions. Lastly, the astronaut hits the flag with his elbow, I can cite numerous analyses for it, including one by Jarrah White himself(though in keeping with his goal to discredit NASA, he dismisses this! because there is movement before)

    1. The astronaut kicked regolith in front of him as he approached and it impacted the rod. We cannot rule this out, since we cannot see the ground, but we do know that regolith kicked ahead of the astronauts does occur, particularly when they are moving quickly.

    2. There is a static discharge from the astronaut's suit. This is unlikely given the distance of 2 metres, but in a vacuum the discharge can be quite large.

    3. The pole, recently inserted into the ground support has simply dropped in further from slight ground vibration.

    4. Less likely, the ground vibration itself caused the slight initial movement.

    5. The initial movement is a blooming effect of the video. To support this, we see all sorts of odd movements with the ground itself, the whole flag shifts right and it occurs as the bright object(the spacesuit itself) enters the frame.

    The movement is one hundred percent consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
    That is the one thing we can safely rule out.

    1. The initial movement begins when the astronaut's arm and torso enter into the frame. This is a full 2 metres before he reaches the flag.

    2. There is no billowing of the flag material itself.

    3. The gentle progressive slowing of the flag is the most perfect example of a pendulum effect in low gravity in a vacuum.

    This video shows the movement of the Apollo flag is consistent with its being in atmosphere.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
    Again, that is not consistent with an atmosphere. Some points to note, during the deployment sequence(not just that footage), the astronauts cross over so this eliminates the use of wires. Any attempt to speed up the footage makes the flag swing at a very odd speed. Once again, we see no billowing in the flag material whatsoever, in itself a total indication that it is filmed in a vacuum.

    Please consider this a direct question:

    How can you possibly explain atmospheric movement of the flag when there is no billowing from the air?

    I found this rebuttal video to yours, which quite frankly makes nonsense of your claim:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc6sqIe3Aio

    Please consider this a direct question:

    What steps have you taken to rule out a simple counter twist to stop the flag movement?

    I would be grateful if you could also offer a complete counter explanation for anything you disagree with - preferably without a youtube video and expecting me to watch it, rather than your own words.
    Last edited by PetersCreek; 2013-Aug-08 at 06:56 PM. Reason: Converted embeded video to link

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,135
    The flag is actually very good evidence against the hoax scenario, because it raises a question that I have never seen a hoax proponent answer:.

    How, if it is filmed in an atmosphere, does the flag hang absolutely motionless for hours at a time, only moving on very rare occasions when an astronaut is very close to it?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    14,122
    If it is such an elaborate hoax why did they allow film out with a flag moving in the wind if that is what it is?
    Rules For Posting To This Board
    All Moderation in Purple

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by captain swoop View Post
    If it is such an elaboratye hoax why did they allow film out with a flag moving in the wind if that is what it is?
    Because they are simultaneously competent and incompetent. Obviously.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Down Under
    Posts
    378
    Didn't Mythbusters actually do this in a vacuum chamber and show nearly identical behaviour of a flag? Need to dig out ye olde DVD collection.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    13,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Marakai View Post
    Didn't Mythbusters actually do this in a vacuum chamber...
    Yes, they did.


    ...and show nearly identical behaviour of a flag?
    Here's the video.


    Seems to take longer for the manipulated flag to "come to rest" in a vacuum than it does in an atmosphere, in my opinion.
    Last edited by R.A.F.; 2013-Aug-08 at 12:36 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by Marakai View Post
    Didn't Mythbusters actually do this in a vacuum chamber and show nearly identical behaviour of a flag? Need to dig out ye olde DVD collection.
    That is one of his 'points' - see the 3rd video in his list. I addressed it with the rebuttal video above.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    14
    In the second video, in what way could a viewer differentiate a slight sway in the camera on its mount, verses a sway in the flag?
    In the second video, in what way could a viewer differentiate a slight sway in the camera on its mount, verses a sway in the flag?
    Do you mean this video? It looks like pretty obvious flag movement to me.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    If the movement were caused by the camera, the pole and rod would be moving too.

    How were you able to eliminate regolith movement caused by the Astronauts, as an explanation?...be very specific.
    The flag moves uniformly the way a wall of air would make it move. If little pebbles were hitting it, the impact points would be visible. If you mean ground vibration, there would be noticable movement of the pole and rod. The flag movement is obviously not coming from the pole or rod. Something is hitting the flag itself. Since this video shows that the flag started moving before he got close enough to touch it...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    ...we can deduce that air made it move. Anyone can hang a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at about a forty five degree angle. The cloth will first move away from you, and then move back toward you with even more force because the air is going in that direction to fill the gap caused by your passing.

    Not even close...it is much more consistent with the Astronauts actually touching and moving the flag.
    The above video rules out that possibility.

    My own quick analysis of the videos provided show at least several things wrong. First they are on Youtube. Compressed, of unknown provenance and frame rate, edited to within an inch of their lives to show *only* what someone wants to point out and nothing else. Intertwined are statements of opinion, breaking up the video footage as much as possible. So. Count me utterly unimpressed.
    To me it looks pretty consistent with the original NASA footage.
    http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15v.1485317.rm

    1. The astronaut kicked regolith in front of him as he approached and it impacted the rod. We cannot rule this out, since we cannot see the ground, but we do know that regolith kicked ahead of the astronauts does occur, particularly when they are moving quickly.
    I dealt with that issue above.

    2. There is a static discharge from the astronaut's suit. This is unlikely given the distance of 2 metres, but in a vacuum the discharge can be quite large.
    According to this video, the main movement starts when he's a lot closer.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    It would be quite a coincidence for a discharge to come at the precise moment to make it move exactly like it would in air.

    3. The pole, recently inserted into the ground support has simply dropped in further from slight ground vibration.
    I dealt with this above. The flag movement is obviously not caused by the pole or rod. Also, if the flag were to suddenly drop downward, there would be noticable downward movement of the flag. There wouldn't only be back and forth movement that's consistent with the atmosphere explanation.

    Less likely, the ground vibration itself caused the slight initial movement.
    AS I said above, there would be noticable movement of the pole and rod if that were the case.

    The initial movement is a blooming effect of the video. To support this, we see all sorts of odd movements with the ground itself, the whole flag shifts right and it occurs as the bright object(the spacesuit itself) enters the frame.
    This close-up video shows it to be actual movement.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    1. The initial movement begins when the astronaut's arm and torso enter into the frame. This is a full 2 metres before he reaches the flag.
    The above video shows that he was much closer. Watch it at the 1:12 time mark.

    There is no billowing of the flag material itself.
    Do you mean like a sail on a sailboat? The wind cause by his passing isn't strong enough to make it do that. It's just strong enough to make it move a little.

    The gentle progressive slowing of the flag is the most perfect example of a pendulum effect in low gravity in a vacuum.
    It can also be explained by slow-motion.


    Any attempt to speed up the footage makes the flag swing at a very odd speed.
    I think we could find a speed at which it's consistent with earth gravity in atmosphere.

    3. The pole, recently inserted into the ground support has simply dropped in further from slight ground vibration.
    I dealt with this above. The flag movement is obviously not caused by the pole or rod. Also, if the flag were to suddenly drop downward, there would be noticable downward movement of the flag. There wouldn't only be back and forth movement that's consistent with the atmosphere explanation.

    Less likely, the ground vibration itself caused the slight initial movement.
    AS I said above, there would be noticable movement of the pole and rod if that were the case.

    The initial movement is a blooming effect of the video. To support this, we see all sorts of odd movements with the ground itself, the whole flag shifts right and it occurs as the bright object(the spacesuit itself) enters the frame.
    This close-up video shows it to be actual movement.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    1. The initial movement begins when the astronaut's arm and torso enter into the frame. This is a full 2 metres before he reaches the flag.
    The above video shows that he was much closer. Watch it at the 1:12 time mark.

    There is no billowing of the flag material itself.
    Do you mean like a sail on a sailboat? The wind cause by his passing isn't strong enough to make it do that. It's just strong enough to make it move a little.

    The gentle progressive slowing of the flag is the most perfect example of a pendulum effect in low gravity in a vacuum.
    It can also be explained by slow-motion.


    Any attempt to speed up the footage makes the flag swing at a very odd speed.
    I think we could find a speed at which it's consistent with earth gravity in atmosphere.


    How can you possibly explain atmospheric movement of the flag when there is no billowing from the air?
    I dealt with that above. The wind he creates isn't strong enough.


    What steps have you taken to rule out a simple counter twist to stop the flag movement?
    We can't exactly tell from just watching his wrist but we can tell by watching the rod.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
    (2:00 time mark)

    The rod shows that not to be the case. The rod is not pulling the flag to make it stop moving. It stops moving the same way the flag does in air. It's consistent with the way the flag moves in air in the MythBusters experiment (see above video) and it's inconsistent with the way the flag moves in a vacuum in the MythBusters experiment.

    does the flag hang absolutely motionless for hours at a time
    This video shows that's actually not the case.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

    Before the astronaut gets close enough to make it move, there is some ever-so-slight motion caused by slight drafts in the studio.


    (Sorry that there's some repetition above. I'm having technical problems)

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Clanger View Post
    That is one of his 'points' - see the 3rd video in his list. I addressed it with the rebuttal video above.
    I didn't look at any of the videos until this post.

    So; the landing is a hoax because the flag waves, and it is a hoax because it doesn't. Now there's solid consistant proof.

    And that first video is good proof of no atmosphere. If he was walking (hopping) that fast while holding the flag forward as he did, then the corner of the flag would be blown back for the majority of the time and not just wiggle back and forth.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    14,122
    So you claim it is in a studio and the movement is caused by the astronauts arm moving the air?
    How much air do you think he moves with his arm?

    I just did an experiment. I tried to get a light cotton shirt hung on a coat hanger to move by waving my arms around close to it.
    I had to thrash pretty violently and close to get even the slightest movement.
    Rules For Posting To This Board
    All Moderation in Purple

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by captain swoop View Post
    So you claim it is in a studio and the movement is caused by the astronauts arm moving the air?
    How much air do you think he moves with his arm?

    I just did an experiment. I tried to get a light cotton shirt hung on a coat hanger to move by waving my arms around close to it.
    I had to thrash pretty violently and close to get even the slightest movement.
    I found this short gem on youtube on that very subject -

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JixGapxKURc

    For those who like a description before venturing into youtube, it shows Jarrah White attempting to debunk ground vibration by jumping next to a 4 legged bed(a face palm moment in itself), trying to move the sheet, whilst beautifully debunking himself actually moving the sheet with air. Love it.


    eta: What Cosmored usually says at this point is that anybody can trot by a piece of cloth and make it move just like the Apollo flag, then when challenged to put up a video, is unable to!
    Last edited by PetersCreek; 2013-Aug-08 at 06:59 PM. Reason: Converted embeded video to link

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Clanger View Post
    For those who like a description before venturing into youtube, it shows Jarrah White attempting to debunk ground vibration by jumping next to a 4 legged bed(a face palm moment in itself), trying to move the sheet, whilst beautifully debunking himself actually moving the sheet with air. Love it.
    That really shows the deliberate ignorance of related factors that will change things
    1) bed with 4 legs vs a single contact point.
    2) top of fabric a little over a foot above the ground vs at least 7 feet.
    3) Nice strong frame of a bed vs a thin flagpole.
    4) Square footage of hanging fabric.
    5) Fabric resting against a bed vs freely hanging.
    6) an induced folding of the fabric vs freely hanging.
    Should I continue?


    The problem with the flag proof is that every one of them does not consider all the factors involve. Yes; the Mythbusters was inconclusive because it didn't consider nearby static fields and ground movement. But; they were making a single point. The flag does sway.

    Even the behavior over time will change because:
    -The way the folds in the flag will slowly relax after unfolding is a factor in how the flag will behave.
    -The static will be different due to accumulation and/or discharges.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    13,531
    Contrary to what the OP poster thinks, this so called flag anomaly is certainly not an argument for any sort of hoax. It's actually more of an argument that "amateur investigators" will steadfastly "stick" to an argument they like...even if it is irrational, and without merit.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,099
    I actually think that some of these conspiracy pushers are just gleefully winding people up for a good belly laugh.
    It's a game with some of them.
    “Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were, but without it we go nowhere.”
    ― Carl Sagan

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    49,472
    Quote Originally Posted by ASTRO BOY View Post
    I actually think that some of these conspiracy pushers are just gleefully winding people up for a good belly laugh.
    It's a game with some of them.
    ASTRO BOY,

    That is not an appropriate post. Do not make assumptions about other people's motives, nor back-handed accusations of trolling.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    The movement is one hundred percent consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
    Except for the part where it kept moving for over 15 seconds.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    14
    Concerning this video.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc6sqIe3Aio

    He expects us to take his word on the speeds he cites. We don't know whether the MythBusters footage shown has been manipulated, or the Apollo footage is really being shown at 150%. Anyway, this doesn't make the fact that the flag started moving before he got close enough to touch it go away.

    At the 1:50 time mark we can see that the rod isn't what is making the flag come to a stop so the wrist motion theory is obviously wrong. Air is making the flag stop.
    Last edited by Cosmored; 2013-Aug-08 at 08:46 PM.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    Concerning this video.
    Once again, please summarize the videos that you're linking to.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. — Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Mytho-poetic dreams.
    Posts
    11,944
    What is it with conspiracy theorists?? Especially this topic.

    If you're convinced it was all just a big hoax, why keep trying to prove it?

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    14
    So you claim it is in a studio and the movement is caused by the astronauts arm moving the air?
    I never said that. It's his whole body that causes the wind that moves the flag.

    I'll have to look for Jarrah's video to see if anything is being shown out-of-context.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JixGapxKURc

    For now though, it's obviously not a good comparison; a flag is needed.

    The movement is one hundred percent consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
    Except for the part where it kept moving for over 15 seconds.
    Slow motion explains the speed that the flag sways and the length of time it sways.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    12,994
    <sigh>

    Folks, this thread is about Cosmored's claims in regard to the 'flag anomoly'. It is not for general hoax discussion, speculation/questioning of hoax proponent motives, etc. Please stay on topic.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. — Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    If the movement were caused by the camera, the pole and rod would be moving too.
    The pole is moving, the entire flag and pole assembly are shifting right - at 1min on full screen it looks like the flagpole itself is also dropping slightly as well:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4gbMT-Zs2Y

    The flag moves uniformly the way a wall of air would make it move.
    That is just a repeat incorrect assertion. What exactly is a wall of air!! How does that work from 2 metres away?

    If little pebbles were hitting it, the impact points would be visible.
    Complete nonsense. We can't see the base of the flag at all. How can you make that claim? Consider that a direct question.

    If you mean ground vibration, there would be noticable movement of the pole and rod.
    There is noticeable movement of both. Your exclusive conclusion seems to be made from bias not from assessing all evidence.

    The flag movement is obviously not coming from the pole or rod.
    Incorrect, there is nothing to suggest it isn't.

    Something is hitting the flag itself.
    Maybe and maybe that something is regolith, but there is more than enough also to suggest a video anomaly, static discharge or the flag settling from ground vibration as possibilities.

    Since this video shows that the flag started moving before he got close enough to touch it...
    But way too far away for it to be from his air wake.

    ...we can deduce that air made it move.
    No, you can do that when you also ignore pieces of evidence that don't fit. The evidence suggests that air is the only thing it couldn't possibly be!

    Anyone can hang a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at about a forty five degree angle. The cloth will first move away from you, and then move back toward you with even more force because the air is going in that direction to fill the gap caused by your passing.
    As predicted in my post above your standard claim. And as predicted you won't film this to prove it. Your claim is bogus, since there is no way you would be able to approach a cloth(or anything) and see the movement before you got there - certainly not from anything over a foot away.

    The above video rules out that possibility.
    It only rules it out for the initial movement not as he passed by.

    I dealt with that issue above.
    No you didn't, we cannot even see the base of the flag. The possible explanation still stands.

    According to this video, the main movement starts when he's a lot closer.
    Irrelevant when the "main movement" occurs, what we see is the flag begin to shift to the right as soon as the astronaut enters the frame, 2 metres away.

    It would be quite a coincidence for a discharge to come at the precise moment to make it move exactly like it would in air.
    It doesn't move like it is in air, and discharges DO occur under circumstances where static builds up - just like we see. I am not advocating this as the cause, but it still stands as a possibility.

    I dealt with this above. The flag movement is obviously not caused by the pole or rod. Also, if the flag were to suddenly drop downward, there would be noticable downward movement of the flag. There wouldn't only be back and forth movement that's consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
    You didn't deal with it, the flag pole DOES move right. Anybody can do a couple of easy screen-prints and make an animated gif to show this. As also can be seen there is a slight downward movement and it is slight enough to potentially cause a small movement horizontally. Nothing about this sequence is consistent with there being atmosphere, notably a complete lack of any billowing and the actual discernible movement too far away to be effected by his air wake.

    AS I said above, there would be noticable movement of the pole and rod if that were the case.
    Your whole case is now relying on faulty data. The flag and pole DO noticeably move. Your claim is becoming flimsier by the minute.

    This close-up video shows it to be actual movement.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0
    It is only zooming in on the bottom corner. The whole flag and pole itself moves to the right.

    The above video shows that he was much closer. Watch it at the 1:12 time mark.
    I don't need to. The video I put up shows it starting as soon as he enters the frame. Anybody can do some full screen prints and make an animated gif showing this.

    Do you mean like a sail on a sailboat? The wind cause by his passing isn't strong enough to make it do that. It's just strong enough to make it move a little.
    No, I mean like Jarrah White's flag in this video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0RsDqmPa_s

    (video shows Jarrah White's comical attempts at moving a flag, whilst hilariously debunking his own claims again)

    Clearly, Jarrah is doing exactly what you claim to have done. Trotting past something and make it move like the Apollo flag. BIG difference, not even close, it only moves when he is level with it and it billows!

    It can also be explained by slow-motion.
    Speeded up 1.5 times makes the kicked regolith a weird speed, but the flag still takes over 20 seconds to come to a progressive halt.

    I think we could find a speed at which it's consistent with earth gravity in atmosphere.
    Can we indeed!? You clearly have not watched the video, or the whole sequence. The astronauts cannot be on wires as they crossover. Schmitt's little hop is too slow at 150% and now the flag is moving at a very fast speed compared to mythbusters. So what speed are you going to come up with? Consider that a direct question.

    I dealt with this above. The flag movement is obviously not caused by the pole or rod. Also, if the flag were to suddenly drop downward, there would be noticable downward movement of the flag. There wouldn't only be back and forth movement that's consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
    You keep making the same claim and the same mistake. The pole and whole flag move, it is nothing like a movement in air and it begins when the astronaut is nowhere near close enough to effect it with his air wake.

    AS I said above, there would be noticable movement of the pole and rod if that were the case.
    Sheesh! What is that half a dozen times the same erroneous statement? The pole moves, end of discussion.

    We can't exactly tell from just watching his wrist but we can tell by watching the rod.
    Complete nonsense. There are all sorts of up and down, left to right and turning movements.

    I ask again, what have you done to rule out a counter twist as a means to slow the flag? Saying there is no rod movement is a) irrelevant and b) false.

    The rod shows that not to be the case. The rod is not pulling the flag to make it stop moving.
    The rod involves a disturbance of the pole's vertical state and needn't be anything to do with any lateral motion to stop the flag twisting around.

    It stops moving the same way the flag does in air. It's consistent with the way the flag moves in air in the MythBusters experiment (see above video) and it's inconsistent with the way the flag moves in a vacuum in the MythBusters experiment.
    It shows NO BILLOWING at all. Your explanation above(if indeed you can call it that!) doesn't apply, when you said the movement was slight for Apollo 15, for Apollo 17 it is anything but!
    Last edited by Clanger; 2013-Aug-08 at 09:20 PM. Reason: unimbed video

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •