Comments by "Yazzam X" (@yazzamx6380) on "Real Stories"
channel.
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@pascalxavier3367 - And hence you prove how gullible and naive hoax believers like yourself are, where you blindly believe nobodies who post nonsense on websites instead of the scientists and engineers who ACTUALLY design, build and send craft into space, unlike the idiot who wrote your link :-)
Here's what the scientist Dr Van Allen said about the radiation belts named after him (you know, the discoverer who was the leading expert on the radiation belts until his death in 2006) and about radiation in space for the Apollo missions;
Dr Van Allen quote 1: "A person in the cabin of a space shuttle in a circular equatorial orbit in the most intense region of the inner radiation belt, at an altitude of about 1000 miles, would be subjected to a fatal dosage of radiation in about one week."
In other words, it would take ONE WEEK inside the most intense region of the belts to receive a fatal dose of radiation. That is why low Earth orbit manned spacecraft like the ISS stay as far below the belts as possible, because astronauts will typically be on board for weeks or months (and some for over a year).
If the ISS was at an altitude of 1000 miles instead of 250 miles, then the astronauts would receive levels of radiation that would put their lives at risk within a week.
Dr Van Allen quote 2: "The outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage, a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights."
In other words, Dr Van Allen confirms that the Apollo astronauts passed through the weaker areas of the two belts in around 2 hours, hence the radiation wasn't a problem.
So as Dr Van Allen confirmed about the Van Allen radiation belts named after him, they are not a problem to pass through in just a few hours (as they did during the Apollo missions), but are a problem to remain inside constantly for weeks.
Any questions kid? :-)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hermanschweizer9717 - You said "It was a dark chapter in American history and Stanley Kubrick did a outstanding job directing the big lye."
To this day, no pre-CGI science fiction film or TV series has ever recreated the perfect 1/6 gravity seen in hour upon hour of Apollo footage where even the dust and objects falls down at the rate of the moon's gravity. Even CGI today doesn't look quite right (CGI often looks a bit 'off', especially when modelling people).
The Stanley Kubrick claim is nonsense on a number of levels, where the only reason some mention Stanley Kubrick is because of "2001: A Space Odyssey", and yet the moon scenes in that movie are packed full of errors, including schoolboy errors, that we never EVER see in Apollo footage, for example;
(Links are blocked, so replace DOT with . and SLASH with /)
Part 1
tinyDOTccSLASH3iykuz
Part 3
tinyDOTccSLASH5iykuz
As you can see in part 2, "2001" never attempts to recreate 1/6 gravity for 'astronauts' on the surface, instead they just got their actors to walk carefully and precisely, as if they had lead in their boots :-)
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hermanschweizer9717 - And going back to the footage;
Even the most modern high budget movies like "The Martian" with its CGI effects doesn't attempt to recreate the 1/3 gravity of Mars for the surface scenes!
That's because it's impossible to recreate such effects perfectly in real time on a studio/set with actors, so they typically don't bother at all for Mars and usually resort to rather poor attempts for moon scenes, where only recently have they improved such visuals thanks to CGI (which wasn't available back in the 60s/70s).
When the popular hoax theorists claims of slow motion or wires are used, we get amusing results like this;
(Replies with links are blocked here, so just change DOT to . and SLASH to /)
tinyDOTccSLASHe9jjuz
Gee, that looks so realistic doesn't it? No-one would ever guess that was slow motion and wires, right? ;-)
Therefore if someone successfully recreates perfect 1/6 gravity in a studio and hence demonstrates uncut fake footage that matches the Apollo footage in every way (in terms of gravity, not appearance) THEN I would drop that argument straight away, because that would be proof that it is possible to fake the Apollo footage here on Earth.
Such proof wouldn't mean the moon landings were a hoax, only that it is possible to fake the footage.
Until then it remains a fact that the footage was filmed in an environment with no air and 1/6 gravity, and hence that environment was the moon :-)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@xpez9694 - You said "yes tell me all about if you have the time.. i would like to hear what people say to debunk that."
Here's the video featuring the claimed hammering sounds, but rather than just a few cherry picked seconds, several minutes are available here to avoid the cherry picking we see in conspiracy videos.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JVtzVN3ncg
The hammering starts at 2:07 and ends at 2:56, but notice the complete lack of any so-called hammering sounds for most of the times he hits the core sampler!
At 2:08 we do hear two 'knocking' sounds, but we also hear EXACTLY the same two 'knocking' sounds at 5:04 (as revealed on the two links below);
youtu.be/5JVtzVN3ncg?t=128
youtu.be/5JVtzVN3ncg?t=304
At 2:21, we hear the 3 'knocking' sounds that the hoax claim focuses on and one sound at 2:27, but again, the rest is completely silent, therefore just like the sounds at 2:08 and 5:04 it has nothing to do with sound traveling through air as claimed.
If we really were hearing the sound of the astronaut hammering the core sampler into the lunar surface, then we should hear a knocking sound for EVERY hit, not silence for most of the 49 seconds of hammering!
Watch and listen to that FULL clip from 2:00 to 3:00 and notice that the few 'knocking' sounds heard are out of sync with the hammer, and there's no sound at all for most of the hammering. And again, notice that the same double knocking sound heard at 2:08 is also heard at 5:04 :-)
The point is, throughout Apollo footage we hear all kinds of random noises from time to time, especially clicks and pops, and sometimes sounds from the astronauts breathing out heavily when they're doing something strenuous (like hammering), where hammer strikes can also travel through the suit and sometimes be picked up by the mic, but for 99.99% of the time no-one cares or even notices all those sounds in Apollo footage.
However, the moment such a noise happens to coincide with something we see on screen (which must happen by the law of averages) then conspiracy theorists immediately pounce upon it to claim we're hearing sound traveling through air.
The Apollo hammer hoax claim is a perfect example of that.
I hope that helped :-)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1