Comments by "Kevin Skinner" (@kevinskinner4986) on "Global News" channel.

And yet the people claiming that have been caught repeatedly lying about the evidence it was faked, time after time after time for the last 20 years. Why would they need to do that if it was actually fake?
6
"Everybody with a brain knows it was faked" and yet you big brain woke critical thinkers are so desperate for actual proof that they have to flat-out lie over and over and over. Hmmmmmm....
5
It's easy to get "perfect framing" when you have a professional publicity department to search through thousands of photographs and select the best ones for publication.
5
Shame that A Funny Thing is also proof that the hoaxers are lying bastards. The creator got caught editing his "faking the distance" video to remove clips from the segments he used that flat-out disproved him, including shots less than 20 seconds after ones he himself used where you can see them filming the Earth WITHOUT the "round window trick"
4
I remember somebody posting one of those "no tracks" pictures. I looked closely at their picture and found that about ten feet behind the rover in that picture (I don't remember which one it was), you could just see a little bit of the tracks right in the bottom left corner of the picture. They ended with a patch where dust appeared to have had dust cast over top of them and the whole area around them was covered in footprints. The rover had tracks. They'd just been buried and trampled.
4
As the saying goes "Pics or it didn't happen"
4
Head's up, modern electronics are weaker to radiation than 1960s electronics. Apollo used a type of hardware called "core rope memory". Magnetic core memory is extremely resistant, but was abandoned as obsolete in the 70s because integrated circuits are smaller and faster. The downside to integrated circuits is that they become weaker to both radiation and static electricity the smaller and more compact you make them.
3
That video's already been analyzed and shredded. The biggest reason there's no debunking video is because it's three hours long and nobody wants to put in the effort to slog through that, especially given that it's largely the exact same claims that have been made repeatedly for the last twenty years. I mean... the video was so pathetic that they pretended to analyze COMPOSITE ARTWORK and pretended that it was from Apollo's photo gallery. Also, I hope you realize this, but before he jumped on the Apollo circlejerk, the creator of that video made money killing people by shilling fake medical cures.
3
News flash buddy: every object you can see reflects light like the moon. Things that don't are black.
3
They didn't have all of the footage lost. ONE BACKUP COPY was, of one mission, while the originals are still available.
2
No offense, but the idea that the rocket "always explodes" is pure Grade A Oscar Meyer Baloney. The space shuttle had a 98% success rate for thirty years with well over a hundred launches; you only hear about the disasters because the other ones are basically ignored.
2
@waltright648 No, the astronauts do NOT respond "with no delay". The footage, the actual full footage, contains both constant long pauses and parts of the footage where the astronauts and mission control talk over one another as if they can't hear each other. The claim that there was no delay on the Nixon call is an outright bold-faced lie. There's an almost 10 second pause before the first response and about 4 after the second. Round trip, the delay should be less than 3. ---------- Dust on Earth tends to form clouds when the particles get trapped in the air. There's not a single second of that in 20+ hours of footage, not only of the rover, but of the astronauts kicking it around every five seconds. By the way, there's a scene from.... I think it's 15 or 16, where the astronauts are digging a hole. Not only do they throw the dust clear over their heads with scoops that don't even reach their knees, one of the astronaut sends the dust cascading at least ten feet sideways from about a one-inch foot shuffle. Not a single grain floats during this sequence like it would on Earth. -------------- According to Webb, he stepped down over party politics regarding the 1968 election. He was a staunch democrat and Johnson loyalist, so left when Nixon won. -------- No, rocks from Antarctica would not work. Meteorites are burnt black and contain glass from the heat of entry, and exposure to air and water (these were sitting in snow) causes the minerals in the rock to rust. Measuring how rusted the rocks are is how scientists tell how long a meteorite's been on Earth, by the way. A raw meteorite will be spotted instantly without any testing required, and trying to remove the bad parts will most likely be spotted the instant that geologists put the rocks under the microscope and see all of your chisel marks. ------------ No, it would not be easier. it is impossible to fake low gravity TODAY, 50 years later, without CGI. Wires do not affect any thrown object or the dust, and will clip every single time the astronauts cross paths. Slow motion would slow down ALL footage; low gravity would only vertical movement . That's why the hoaxers only show a few seconds at a time. If they left it on "normal" speed, their other movements would become way too fast when watched for extended periods of time. There are parts where when sped up to Earth speed, the astronauts limbs flail faster than the human body is is comfortably capable of. Do you know how long a special effect lasts in a movie? 3-5 SECONDS. The Apollo 11 footage is three continuous hours, and contains one of the astronauts performing a brief mobility test directly in front of the camera about twenty minutes in where he does a slow hop then immediately starts waving his arms. Lets see the hoaxers speed that up to "Earth gravity". -------- Short note: the fact that the hoaxers can't agree on where the sets are, whether it's Area 51 or Pinewood Studios where 2001 was filmed or someplace else, means there's no evidence of them.
2
@waltright648 I unfortunately don't remember which mission it was from. It had to have been 15, 16, or 17 because the camera was on the rover, but i don't know which mission and station it was. I think it was Apollo 15, maybe 16, I do not believe it was 17. I haven't watched it since Youtube changed their search algorithm to make it hard to find actual Apollo stuff. Also, as I recall, if you speed that footage up to "Earth speed" the astronauts become more fidgety than a 5-year-old after a 2 liter of Mt Dew. Fun fact, 17 on the other hand has a section where the cameraman (the rover's camera is remote controlled from Earth) gets bored watching the astronauts and turns the camera almost straight up at the Earth for a few moments. This comes after the camera rotated the full 360 degrees over an extended period.
2
@nickrose8733 You should add that the photograph of the non-parallel shadows used is the same photograph David Percy got caught red-handed cropping to hide that the shadows can be seen changing direction as they pass across uneven ground.
2
Photographs are not actual size. The lens you use causes objects in them to change size in proportion to one another. Wide angle lenses cause background objects to shrink. There's a really neat montage floating around the internet... somewhere that I don't remember where I saw it, where a person takes about a dozen pictures with different lenses of a truck sitting in front of a barn and you can watch the two completely swap which one looks larger.
2
Because it cost hundreds of billions of dollars and Congress doesn't really want to pay for that for very little actual use.
2
If you have to lie about your evidence, you've admitted that you're wrong.
2
@travissharon1536 Okay. First, prove that the laser is actually 22 miles away. Anybody that wants to lie is going to have an extremely easy time doing so because all they have to do is put the laser closer and lie. If it's over water, you put it on a boat and find a way to stabilize it so it doesn't rock. If it's over a dry lake bed, they don't even need to do that.
1
@travissharon1536 I will warn you that the Convex Earth crew, who supposedly did a lake test, almost certainly faked their test. They're cons who previously faked tests in an alien video. You'd be able to tell if the windows were creating a curve because everything seen out them would be curved, and the curve would change when the plane banked to the left or right. Might i suggest going skydiving.
1
@mayam.235 There should be a link in my second post unless Youtube deleted it again.
1
Considering that a number of the missing rocks have appeared on the black market and in private collections, wouldn't that suggest that the "mysterious disappearance" were the results of thieves, not secret government ninjas?
1
If Trump wins, it's going to be a close election. A few hundred thousand voters, tops, out of 150 million. That's not a landslide.
1
The one where he says it's a simulation? He's talking about the pre-EVA mockups the networks created to accompany the radio chatter because there was no external camera watching them land. Or the one where "we didn't go"? Because that one's clearly about going BACK. The hoaxers cut the audio short before he talks about why they stopped.
1
Here's your ambulance bill. It's 1600 dollars with insurance.
1
Obama, Biden, and Pelosi have all had attempts on their lives too.
1
Probably played golf
1
You mean the "fake" rocks that NASA had nothing to do with, which were never claimed to be a moon rock by anybody except the idiots that owned it, who submitted it without having them appraised, and which nobody would have ever claimed to be one because they were given a year before anybody else in the world got one? You're right the lies never end. And you can't get enough of them, can you? You have no business talking when your own side is about as trustworthy as pedo mall Santa.
1
..... then why is the US the worst first world country to actually live in?
1
...... California's been getting fires every year my entire life because it's dry brush for hundreds of miles starting literal feet from the beach. Why didn't you mention South Carolina for their "fraud" fires? Oh wait, they're Republican...
1
WideAwake, lead is used for x and gamma radiation. The Belts aren't x-rays, they're beta radiation, loose electrons and protons. Beta radiation requires LOW-DENSITY shielding because it CREATES secondary radiation when it hits heavy metals. This process is called bremsstrahlung and it's how your dentist creates the x-rays in the first place.
1