Apollo 11 Lunar Landing | Flashback | NBC News 

lol

😂😂😂

😂

Turns out she was deiceved , a true conspiracy between government, media and many more involved

Yep!!!! BOGUS As All Get 0ut!!!

and the moment he jumped off the capsule to stamp his tri foot into the ground to get a steady shot of the actual astronauts... so he must have been the first one to set foot on the moon and we have all been duped to think it was Armstrong hahahaha and he ain't even claiming publicity for it.. what a good soul hahaha

🤣🤣🤣🤣

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Right, because they didn't invent tripods yet

No step and one big lie

It would be impossible. They said they forgot how...

They are. NASA is training the next set of astronauts now I think

@@duncanbrown0 The first crewed Artemis mission is planned for November, 2024. It will be a flyby, with landing missions to follow.

This was faked. Y’all late smh 🤣

@@gennifertorres156 no, it wasn't. And that's not my "opinion," it's objectively provable fact.

And they still have yet to return. Hmmm

E

@@jonathanmcmenemy103 manned missions cost more than sending rovers. Hmmmmmm

@@jonathanmcmenemy103 Kenny Ben T McKormic Since you're "obviously" an expert on video and motion picture technology that was available in 1969 please tell us all how the moon landings were faked. How was 143 minutes of continuous video depicting Armstrong and Aldrin shuffling around on the moon faked and how 1/6th lunar gravity was simulated? While slow motion video was available in 1969, the video was taken with a hand-held camera. Using film shot at high speed to simulate 1/6th gravity was possible, but a 14-inch diameter 16mm film magazine containing 1,600 ft of film lasts about 48 minutes. The video is continuous. Even if multiple cameras had been used differences in emulsion would have been detected. Additionally, later missions were in color with a higher video frame rate. At the time of the broadcast, magnetic disk recorders capable of storing slow motion footage could only capture 30 seconds in total, for a playback of 90 seconds of slow-motion video. To capture 143 minutes in slow motion, you’d need to record and store 47 minutes of live action, which simply wasn’t possible. How did astronaut David Scott manage to get a hammer and a falcon feather to drop at the same rate corresponding to the "faked" 1/6th lunar gravity during the "fake" Apollo 15 mission? The technology to fake the moon landing DID NOT EXIST in 1969! It was actually "easier" to build a rocket and GO THERE!

@@mikecrownshaw1646 you’re a shill.

I was told quite the opposite, the computers were to be made simple and duplicated for backup systems. reliability over speed was the plan.

And Nixon called the moon on a landline. 😂😂😂😂 In 2024 I still loose coverage on my cell phone.

@@rbnjr How do you think that is opposite.

@@Scottiepups Right, the first computer had about 17,000 tubes, the transistor replaced the tube and the first handheld transistor radio was sold in 1954 and had 4 transistors. The current iPhone 15 has 19 billion transistors in it.

@@Scottiepups Before fibreoptics, microwave network links spanned the country. President Nixon’s ‘phone call’ to the astronauts was a patch in, set up in advance over microwave link between Washington and Mission Control in Houston, then out via microwave link to the Deep Space Network, then up to whichever DSN station had the moon in view at the time. The transmitters used in space have exponentially greater power than the few milliwatts of a household wi-fi router, using a high gain receiver and directed focused antenna arrays. The Apollo radio transmissions broadcast at 20 watts, to a dish that was 65 feet in diameter which reduced the amount of battery power needed by the lunar module. They also had line of sight, i.e. there was no obstruction between the Earth and Moon. A cell phone transmits 300-600 milliwatts to a 2-foot-long antenna and has towers to bounce signals off when there is no line of sight. They also have millions of other users that compete for bandwidth. Thus, depending on how many users there are, and whether there are enough towers to connect the signals, you might not get any service. They are entirely different scenarios.

I think that's just radio static messing with the audio

@@lmottb1041 it is radio static. He just said it "sounds like"

If you chop it up... ONE Gi-Ant leap... it wasn't 3 chops.... one De-fi-ant... it was 2 chops... it was giant leap....

wasn’t it crazy how it was all here on earth great performance from the actors at nasa

@@Prayzee maybe so, but the line overall shows how far we’ve come has human beings.

⁠shoutout to Stanley Kubrick

​@@Prayzeeit was on the moon

It took them 4 days from launch to landing but here in 2024 it takes over 30 days. WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON PEOPLE. it's impossible today for humans to leave earth orbit

You can't be serious, can you?

No dear. Not only the camera but the lighting crew as well who put the massive studio lights up as well.

Buzz Aldrin said it was an annimation .. there was no one to film them up der

@@djhago3123 Buzz never said that.

@@pf8951Yes he did, ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-1Y30VAkHtdw.htmlsi=3CWf8ZObOX2t_yKq

wake up

@@theplacebeyondthelies2429 i hope. I know it's impossible u c o u nt

It's not possible for man to live on Mars.

@@Lyns777 we all know that our body or anatomy its evolved because our gravity etc etc. But, come on juts imagine.

@@graw211 we were created by our creator. God said let there be light. And there was light. God set two lights in the firmament, the greater and lesser light. Greater sun, lesser moon. Firmament, means solid. That means something solid cannot be penetrated. This is the greatest deception to mankind. The devil is a liar... Jesus is the one who died for our sin. He is the way, the truth and the life.

Why is that funny? just curious.

@@johanngloi8461 u not that bright are you lol

@@jmoneyyy2116 What? I was just questioning him why he had a laughing emoji in his comment. I found nothing funny about it and was just wondering.

They took film camera with them as well as TV cameras. The film cameras are HD and they developed the film when they got back to Earth. How do you think they have those HD pictures of Earth from space? Film cameras! They work fine in space.

Well of course, Kubrick always does good work

Exactly…there’s no way this is the moon

hollywood's best production so far

@@theplacebeyondthelies2429 If you think the US Government is capable of fooling the world then you are just fooling yourself. Wake up yourself, sheep.

True- it impossible to relay live coverage from the moon today- the signal just can’t travel that far - forget about 1969

Looked authentic!

Cause he can't think of a lie, that's why

Edgard Martinez Oh my another one!!! Yes he did in his later life do interviews. Look on RU-vid there's loads. What a humble, shy and courageous gentlemen he was. Sadly from the generation of men who have now become on the brink of extinction.

@@juliaread2003 A Humble man? He was a Liar!

@@juliaread2003 look at thay flag waving in the wind.....😅🤣😂

@@chaboi7 The flag wasn't waving, it had an extra pole on top of it so it would look like it's waving.

hat is a product of the video camera tube they used called a Vidicon.

You’re so smart

@@DaPoopIsInDaPudding ikr

@@DaPoopIsInDaPudding Do you believe that covid19 vaccines have microchip technology from Bill Gates and Illuminati?? 😂😂😂

They will also think Saddam Hussein had WMDs ! Oops, wait...

@@goofygrandlouis6296 whataboutism fallacy

😂

There was a camera on the arm

The BBC'

Stanley Kubrick

Alex jones was the camera man

They faked it though, if you look closely there isn’t stars in the sky, space would obviously have stars-

There’s also a bunch more evidence but I’ll take you down a whole rabbit whole

Hole*

@NoTheEarthIsntFlat Uh, why is the flag waving then? That’s nit support to happen.

Not*

An exterior camera mounted on an apparatus would be logical.

Stanley Kubrick

Excecly .. This is so Fake I can't believe people still fall for this

When Neil Armstrong came down the ladder, he pulled a lever that deployed the camera.

Edgard Martinez Put your headphones in. THERE IS a delay !!!! I give up !

@@juliaread2003 The delay should be 12 SECONDS! DO YOU UNDERSTAND!?

@@hotheadedjoelhaha The moon is 1 second-light away.

@@pedrosmith221 It's a lot Closer than that! Do you really think it is 250,000 miles away? Does it Look like it?

@@hotheadedjoelhaha Yes, I am _positive_ that the Moon is on average 238,000 miles away. What makes you think it’s not?

like to videos over lapping yeah?

Old tapes and cameras did that if they got worn, the last frames would start to bind together i think.

It’s called image lag. You could look it up if you really wanted to know.

Yeah it happens because of green screen...lmao just joking... It would be harder to fake a moon landing than actually landing on the moon

@@Zain0_0 it's not green screen, it's a movie set.

This is how it was set up: images.app.goo.gl/dKDZaHmDAWkeaD1Z7

@@dansv1 horsepucky

@@DaPoopIsInDaPudding it's still true

Tricky dickie. My middle name is Richard too, Richard lol.

Lol, ikr? 😂

[ we donot know for sure, but we can with almost 100% say, that it was not a Huawei. Perhaps a bleckberry or Nokia. 😂]

Your ignarance is fascinating, keep it up!!

IPhone of course 😜

They brought it with them.

I made a video about it. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fBB3jyBxtYg.html

Yes,thats what ive been thinking of

Congrats you got physics

@@captainobvious6668 thanks, been struggling with it since second grade

there is movement in space.

@@paulinegallagher7821 yes that’s what I’m saying, im just saying it for those who think it’s wind

It was slowscan TV that was shown live.

sure we focus on the filming tech rather than the actual physics of going to space with our human bodies and what lethal consequences it has even with these ridiculous space suits... no man has ever walked the moon

@@theplacebeyondthelies2429 Your lack of Scientific and Engineering knowledge does you no good. You need to study more to understand some basics. You are way off the mark.

@@TJMoir ok lets get down to it and we will see who lacks what, cause like this your accusation is ridiculous, makes me think you're a paid actor just here to defend the lies! no engineering can escape basic physical laws, and these are clear. You can build the coolest rockets in a barn and brag about your engineering all you want, if they ain't going to the moon because of physics they ain't goin

@@theplacebeyondthelies2429 That's because you misunderstand physical laws! Your ignorance astounds me. Have you ever studied engineering or science in your life?

these guys were all military before going to NASA...discipline. I agree though, I'd be flipping out

@@michaelengle9062 bro it’s the moon. You’re not going to b that discipline. You would lose your mind landing on another planet. That’s us fake.

Also, pro at walking and balancing with the moon gravity. Every time they lift their foot a good amount of dust bounces up in the air n falls back exactly like on earth.

These guys had work to do, they didn’t have time to sit and admire (maybe a bit of time, which they used)

@@ritizasentertainmentchanne9622 Exactly, nevermind that's not how sand and dirt behave under water on earth, with effectively reduced gravity (buoyancy). The dust should have kicked up in a cloud that obscured everything for 20 minutes

Radio.

CIA … simple.

Theres a video of some guy from nbc explaining how the moonlanding was broadcasted live to hundreds of millions of viewers. I think its all cap.

The entire thing is a lie. Man never went to the moon.

fun thing the flag was actually knocked over after they left because of the exhaust and nasa tried to not mention that part.

@@damaskusseraph6046 Lol yea, they were told not to go too far from the ship so they didn’t have a choice of where to put it

@@hotheadedjoelhaha your delusional,

Good one 👍

That is a product of the video camera tube they used called a Vidicon.

But they did

We never know the full power of our technology. Plus the moon is larger than that.

The crappy video quality kinda makes it seem fake whether it's real or not haha. It's like the same grainy camera footage you see with all the "bigfoot sightings" etc lol.

They give us technology in reverse all the stuff is outdated they have technology that’s 100s of years ahead of time

Since you're "obviously" an expert on video and motion picture technology that was available in 1969 please tell us all how the moon landings were faked. How was 143 minutes of continuous video depicting Armstrong and Aldrin shuffling around on the moon faked and how 1/6th lunar gravity was simulated? While slow motion video was available in 1969, the video was taken with a hand-held camera. Using film shot at high speed to simulate 1/6th gravity was possible, but a 14-inch diameter 16mm film magazine containing 1,600 ft of film lasts about 48 minutes. The video is continuous. Even if multiple cameras had been used differences in emulsion would have been detected. Additionally, later missions were in color with a higher video frame rate. At the time of the broadcast, magnetic disk recorders capable of storing slow motion footage could only capture 30 seconds in total, for a playback of 90 seconds of slow-motion video. To capture 143 minutes in slow motion, you’d need to record and store 47 minutes of live action, which simply wasn’t possible. How did astronaut David Scott manage to get a hammer and a falcon feather to drop at the same rate corresponding to the "faked" 1/6th lunar gravity during the "fake" Apollo 15 mission? The technology to fake the moon landing DID NOT EXIST in 1969! It was actually "easier" to build a rocket and GO THERE!

Staying on the topic of basement, get out of yours.

You're full of jokes

Since you're "obviously" an expert on video and motion picture technology that was available in 1969 please tell us all how the moon landings were faked. How was 143 minutes of continuous video depicting Armstrong and Aldrin shuffling around on the moon faked and how 1/6th lunar gravity was simulated? While slow motion video was available in 1969, the video was taken with a hand-held camera. Using film shot at high speed to simulate 1/6th gravity was possible, but a 14-inch diameter 16mm film magazine containing 1,600 ft of film lasts about 48 minutes. The video is continuous. Even if multiple cameras had been used differences in emulsion would have been detected. Additionally, later missions were in color with a higher video frame rate. At the time of the broadcast, magnetic disk recorders capable of storing slow motion footage could only capture 30 seconds in total, for a playback of 90 seconds of slow-motion video. To capture 143 minutes in slow motion, you’d need to record and store 47 minutes of live action, which simply wasn’t possible. How did astronaut David Scott manage to get a hammer and a falcon feather to drop at the same rate corresponding to the "faked" 1/6th lunar gravity during the "fake" Apollo 15 mission? The technology to fake the moon landing DID NOT EXIST in 1969! It was actually "easier" to build a rocket and GO THERE!

Mr. Bracket, and Mr. Tripod.

A video camera on a tripod.

Radio waves transmitted the video.

you mean the greatest Hollywood sci fi

Stanley Kubrick did a great job.

@@theplacebeyondthelies2429😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

brothers grimm stories are nothing against this fairytale

It didn't. Also Santa Claus is not real.

they synced it

there was a delay, you can hear it when they talk to Mission control. But not three seconds, less than 2. So what are you saying that its fake? please..

@@paulinegallagher7821 Radio signals can't travel through space safely without any preservation. Radio waves deteriorate through air and air is the safest gas we have. You have thousands of killer gases in space with no radio towers to preserve the signals. Yeah no, not a single word is making it to that aircraft in any intelligible form

@@brainchamber99 lol you don't know what you are talking about

The audio recording was taken on earth, so we are hearing it the same way mission control heard it. There's a delay between Houston speaking and the astronauts responding, but no delay between the astronauts speaking and Houston responding

Right

[ Spider man. ]

Mr Spock

Stanley Kubrick

i..you know what a tripod is right..?

i’m not 100% sure but i think it was love all over the world

It was broadcast live on radio and television.

It’s impressive to think how they transported radio and tv transmitting equipment. It must have required some power and large antenna to send those signals back home. How did they generate the electricity? Did they have large batteries? That equipment must have been heavy. I can’t imagine the cost for every kg sent to moon and back.

@@chaldean7043 The short answer is they could transit with very low power since they had gigantic receiving antennas 70 meters (230feet) in diameter. Long answer: www.popsci.com/how-nasa-broadcast-neil-armstrong-live-from-moon/

@@chaldean7043 search it up i bet you’ll find your answers

They knew a Hollywood production could fool the masses? I guess they were the OG truthers.

@@liberatethegodseeds2001 🙄

​@@liberatethegodseeds2001 Ignoramus

What would be making the flag move right and left in a studio.

The flag only moves when they handle the flagpole. When the astronauts set up the flagpole they wiggle the flagpole and their actions made the flag move, that's all. Otherwise it didn't move.

@@mikep9604 There's video showing it moving on its own without anyone touching it.

This has been explained time and time again! But I guess some people just want to see and learn what they choose to see and learn. Besides, WHY would there be wind in a studio? And WHY would they air it? 😂😂

@@jaasonmiller I will try to see it...

DansGone they brought the camera and set up a tripod, prior to their landing the camera wasn’t on the moon because they brought it...

The camera was mounted on a wheeled module, which exited the capsule first.

The camera was mounted on a device that protruded from the LM called the “MESA” Modular Electronics Stowage Assembly

The “Mesa” modular electronics stowage assembly…took Armstrong’s first steps …grow a brain

@@DaveyWest1968 lol we used to say "grow a brain cell" LOL

@@jillhomer3879 After landing as Armstrong descended the ladder, he opened a panel on the descent stage of the lunar module to the left of the foot of the ladder, by pulling a cord. As the flap came down like a drawbridge, it revealed a tv camera which took the footage. After about half an hour the camera was removed from the landing leg and placed on a tripod further away for the television transmission to Earth. A 16mm colour movie camera (fixed on a bracket) was used from inside the cockpit of the lunar module, on descent and lift off, and for some footage of the moonwalks.

I cant belive people like you still exist.

Why is it so hard to believe they went to the moon?

@@illpunchyouintheface9094 see the footage again the flag is waving (there is no winds on the moon) ...... the lights ... and the camera .

Since you're "obviously" an expert on video and motion picture technology that was available in 1969 please tell us all how the moon landings were faked. How was 143 minutes of continuous video depicting Armstrong and Aldrin shuffling around on the moon faked and how 1/6th lunar gravity was simulated? While slow motion video was available in 1969, the video was taken with a hand-held camera. Using film shot at high speed to simulate 1/6th gravity was possible, but a 14-inch diameter 16mm film magazine containing 1,600 ft of film lasts about 48 minutes. The video is continuous. Even if multiple cameras had been used differences in emulsion would have been detected. Additionally, later missions were in color with a higher video frame rate. At the time of the broadcast, magnetic disk recorders capable of storing slow motion footage could only capture 30 seconds in total, for a playback of 90 seconds of slow-motion video. To capture 143 minutes in slow motion, you’d need to record and store 47 minutes of live action, which simply wasn’t possible. How did astronaut David Scott manage to get a hammer and a falcon feather to drop at the same rate corresponding to the "faked" 1/6th lunar gravity during the "fake" Apollo 15 mission? The technology to fake the moon landing DID NOT EXIST in 1969! It was actually "easier" to build a rocket and GO THERE!

Imagine being this stupid

Yes, in this video, ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-S9HdPi9Ikhk.html at 0:33 it shows Neil Armstrong moving the camera from the lander to about 50 feet away.

33:00 not 0:33

@ManuCarc2000 j 😂😂

Right

Its the tube camera effect.

It's a bad cgi from 1969

@@growhax1590 there was no CGI in 1969

probably the best 25 billion we have ever spent

@@jerryham5659 how?

@@eh9135It wasn't "wasted" but we probably didn't need to spend the money at the time to do it. I'm just saying spending money on space travel is a generally good thing

@@jerryham5659 still no need but I get it

@@eh9135 I see

Video was sent to earth using radio waves. Technology which was available at the time. Delay was 1.28 seconds each way.

Remote signal from Earth, control from in the lander or exit vehicle or edited on Earth after recieving the raw footage. Remote control and computers did exist back then, and it does not require much processing power to switch cameras.

@@RamdomView You didn't answer the question .

@@Mike_Greene he literally answered your question directly

@@felipecampos1403 you're late. Is his response the same as yours? sigh.... . (ask my question to yourself then repeat what he wrote or explain how the guy " literally answered your (my) question directly" All he did was list the ways he THINK(THOUGHT) the camera COULD receive a signal. Fyi i did say i wasn't coming back to this foolery....

@@Mike_Greene yes they did answer the question. Mission control controlled the camera

No

Yep! And the billions of dollars spent on it were all fake too!

Kubrick was drunk when he did this movie.

hoax

hoax forever

Because it cost $25,400,000,000?

Right?

@@dansv1 suuuuuure. They have no problem wasting money on other things of less significance. Plus the original trip wasn’t free now was it.

@@DaPoopIsInDaPudding well yes, that tells you their priorities. But they still did it then.

@@dansv1 they waste that amount annually on foreign aids...small price to pay to prove they actually went to the moon.

There were cameras attached to the lander. Also the astronauts set up more cameras.

@@RamdomView so those cameras can survive that radiation?

@@moss93 Yes. All space programs worthy of the name take radiation into account.

@@moss93 yes. Even then, they had enough protection against alpha, beta, x-ray...gamma radiation, just enough to keep the astronauts alive. But they all later developed chronic health problems because of said gamma rays. Esp. those on the two week apollo mission.

@@moss93 yes. my former next door neighbor helped design the camera. radiation and temp extremes were two of their main design concerns

What about aldrin saying it was an animation

Thank you 🙏🏼 someone with sense 😂 how anyone can think this is real? I don’t know 🙈

@@happydays2190 bruh he said that it was an animation because it was. The audio was 100% real from the moon but the footage was only released a few days after. Tv stations had to use the audio to portray what was happening on the moon through tiny figures

@@lxre6763 uhhhh no. The lander had a small monochrome TV camera stowed in the MESA compartment in the lunar lander, which broadcasted the footage LIVE to Mission Control in Houston at which point they were broadcast to the world. The translation process left the image significantly degraded, but it was still live footage of man’s first steps on the Moon. It also wasn't tiny figures as if they were, then the footage would've had to been slowed down to be made realistic, but 1., it is still possible to tell, and 2., in the footage you can see it isn't slowed down what so ever.

I'm sure you can vacuum a sealed room to have some simulated environment.

Lol it's all about control

space race

@@thenigerianjew1698 ur definitely a FLAT Earther

@@Alex_Aramayo I'm not

@@thenigerianjew1698 ik, u just sound like 1 bc u mentioned "control"

Sue Kennedy Oh My !!!! Its not on here! Its called editing the ICONIC moments. Nasa has reels and reels of footage in their archives. Nobody is listening to your half baked theroies anymore. They went another 5 times or didn't you know? Probably not. Lots to watch on RU-vid. They just got better and better at it. Watch Apollo 17 (Full Trip) before you make false claims that it was all a hoax.

@@juliaread2003 Mankind has never been to the moon. You may believe the lies if you wish.

@@hotheadedjoelhaha well .... soviet ... japan and india tracked and observed the landing with their space stations live so that they cant fake it ... if it was fake then there would have been a third world war you dumbfuck

@@hotheadedjoelhaha it happened. point a laser at the landing site.

@@nopeeeeee3852 india had a space station in 1969 ?

They went back five times after this.

They never went to the moon lol

@@WhoIsJohnnyLange Can you prove it? I have my doubts but there’s no evidence for that.

@@googlegoogle9712 he can’t

Artemis program is establishing a permanent base on the moon in 2024

We never did it in the first place it’s fake

You mean, 'why didn't the US send an Apollo 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17?' They did ... Or do you mean now-a-days? New Moon landings are planned for the next few years, 2023 onwards

No, Houston called Nixon on a landline and patched in the radio transmission.

@@petersearls4443 it is BS. You can’t maintain cell coverage in 2023 in rural areas. Not to mention a craft getting past the Van Allen belts. People were naive. Technology today proves it wasn’t possible then and it is t now. Like Musk saying he is going to g to have people on Mars. How does he plan to build cities up there? Will he be sending excavating equipment up in a space ship? “Professing to be wise they prove themselves fools”. Romans 1:22

​@@Scottiepups Dr Van Allen himself said the belts were non-lethal when traversed at the right velocity. And does your phone have a 30 story tall antenna attached to it? No? Ok then, false equivalence fallacy. Your worthless buy-bull verse refutes squat.

@@Lexi2019AURORA if you believe we landed on the moon you are sad & pitiful .

​@@Scottiepups The other way around. If you believe the moon landing was faked, then not only are you sad and pitiful, you're a massive ignoramus on top of that.

Image lag. It was an issue that all video cameras using the vidicon tube had.

The ‘ghosting’ effect on the Apollo 11 film footage whereby it seems you can see through the astronauts is a well-known feature of a vidicon tube of the kind used on the TV camera. If you point a vidicon tube at a bright object, the screen becomes oversaturated and is still able to remain charged for multiple frames. What was seen was the previous image fading with the new one on top of it.

Imagine thinking that tiny, thin, rickety thing landed on the moon, in the one spot that was lit up lol with perfect tv and telephone signal, and then they unpacked a dune buggy, thats bigger than the ship i might add, drove it around, packed it back up and lifted off again

Imagine not having any imagination and just blindly believing what you are told

Imagine thinking Van Allen Belt isn't real

Far-right wing hypocrites continue to attack science people for being "sheep" while they blindly believe everything uttered by Faux News, conspiracy videos, and by the walking talking cheeto puff who was in the oval office for 4 years and has no degree in science. ​@@aqilshamil9633 @j0nGka26 and @jirtz5

@@jirtz5what do you expect to land on the moon? Your logic doesn’t make sense. You want a thick 1000 ton mega spacecraft to land on the moon? That’s not how it works

They put the camera down first, then went back to broadcast their “First steps”

The camera was attached to the lander and when activated was positioned to cover the ladder.

The astronaut is moving the flag. He's literally touching it and moving it around.

horizontal rod holding it out straight so the russians could see it better.

This not so big camera: images.app.goo.gl/dKDZaHmDAWkeaD1Z7

Hollywood studios

@@DaPoopIsInDaPudding You’re delusional if you think the moon landing was fake

People shouldnt ask stupid questions.

@@mehol1920 yeah they set up a live broadcasting station on the moon, all the equipment required to broadcast would have required several additional moon-landers to accompany them with copious amounts of heavy broadcasting equipment

r/ihadastroke

Votre anglais est beaucoup plus pire que mon français. Ou n'importe quelle autre langue d'ailleur

time stamp?

@@JamesWilson-wy7ys around 4:06

Who are you going to believe -- NASA or your lying eyes?

No it wasn’t waving. It was moving because the astronauts touched it. If you look at some of the longer videos it never moves after it was set up.

Odd anomaly, for sure. Stanley Kubrick was known for creating some ground breaking productions.

Bad camera sending transmissions from the Moon? That anomaly can be seen on security cameras even today. No wonder if it didnt register a part of pixels.

@@anto.xyvccff it's better to look at the Apollo missions objectively. The house of cards doesn't stand to the slightest resistance

@@myotheraccount5947 What do you mean by house of cards? The LMS?

@@anto.xyvccff This was all cinematography... a huge hoax perpetrated upon a very simple and unsuspecting population

?

Winds? Where??

This is a hoax thats why

There isn't. Newton's First Law: objects at rest will stay at rest, and an object in motion will stay in motion unless acted on by a net external force. In this case, the astronauts are acting on the flag. There is also no atmosphere to dampen the effects of the astronaut's muscles on the flag.

@@danijruss5195 It's not a hoax, if it was why didn't the Soviets call us out

The flag eventually stops moving once it's momentum wears off.

@@dylan3488 probably sold out $$$$

The camera was sealed in a container attached to the leg. Neil turned a latch that unlocked the container allowing the camera to fall out, positioned to cover the ladder. Pretty simple.

its not true .. dont be deceive. its easy to film and make people believe during 70's but not now so that they cant cheat to us anymore

It is true, it happened

Deployable camera

“Wow I’m so smart I outsmarted the public”

you watch them prepare it in real time