How do you know if you can't see them

Obviously fake. Definitely not how stars work. 😂😂 Edit: in case the emojis didn't give it away, this is a facetious comment. I can't believe smart people read this and think otherwise.

Wrong look at his eyes, STARE at them notice how he talks find the middle

The moon-landing deniers seem willing to concede that we have got as far as low-Earth orbit. But those photos from those flights, showing the brightness of the Earth and the darkness of space in the same picture, don’t show any stars either, for the same reason.

@@firstnamelastname396maybe try English next time

Of course!

You just have low esoteric knowledge

do you understand the air you breathe?

@@joycedavis9996air is fake, we breathe water, but I don’t really understand it. This is what THEY are trying to hide!

“I’m also smarter than everyone else”

Ahh Steve is wise in the ways of the world.

Ahhh ellie didn't graduate from high school. ​@@eilidh771

Unless they already knew that it was faked and *wanted (?)* to expose it, but almost immediately realised that it would actually *serve their interests* in ways never previously thought of, so they went along with the whole lie? *_Countries conspiring against all of Mankind._* *But it’s ok.* The truth *will* come out and falsehood *will* vanish, as it is ever bound to vanish.

Yep, exactly. Instead they congratulated the US (the USSR however considered themselves the real winners of the space race for landing a probe on Venus in 1972).

​@@eilidh771 USSR and China were USA allies.

Look at space odyssey made before the Mook landing so don't give me that they faked it they just need to cover it up

We have more technology in our phones then that was on that mission and we can't do it again come on u gotta be smarter than this dnt be a sheep

Love that joke!

@@lifes-A-divot Look at 2001 a Space Odyssey it breaks laws of physics and shows us what someone’s imagination looks like, but not space.

Careful with that joke, it's an antique!

😂

Excellent Dad joke. 👌

Underrated joke

Lol that's not bad.

That's a good one 👍🏽

We are all a joke for them ..

@@martinbgiles7065 real

"that's a sun idiot"

Yes you are

The sun is a star but stars are not suns

They will think the same in the next 100 years...

What amazes me is that anyone thinks it happened. People would believe the Easter Bunny is real if their government told them so.

There are people who genuinely believe that the earth is flat… it’s not that much of a stretch for people with a grade school understanding of science to think they understand all they need to in order debunk those who’ve studied for their entire career. The dunning Kruger effect is strong on the interwebs.

​@buddywhatshisname522 how would any organic being survive going through the van Allen radiation belt?

@@noellesherman4824 What convinces you that is did not happen?

Ya old Neil is cringe....

The stars are there they are just poorly rendered in 1950s 2d

ok

nobody cares that you are a "photographer" not a job anyway

​@@iamapokerface8992No one ask you kiddo better touch some grass

​@@iamapokerface8992 Do you think the moon landing was faked or something

So you admit it should've

They feed you the easiest narrative and everyone becomes a "specialist".

@@elidyson256?

@@jbhk7977This is basic photography, not a ‘narrative’?

@@tubecated_development The problem is not "photography basics". The problem is that people learned not to question the "experts". There are so many strange things surrounding the moonlanding. The "live phone call" for instance, meanwhile there are huge area's in the world (2024) where people still don't have cell service. Also the narrative that we lost the technology to go back to the moon or how they got the moon rover on the moon considering the fact that Apollo 15 was as big as apollo 11. But let's not get into that . . . The problem is that people fail to question things, only because a specialist tells you a reasonable story. Where I live we say "who checks the checker". In this case . . . no one. And if you dare to question him or question the narrative, you are a conspiracy theorist. This should scare you shitless. We entered an era where critisizm and hard questions are dismissed and rediculed. We live in an era where a virologist with 40 years of experience is "fact checked" by a 21 old woke idiot with blue hair and a nose ring banning his 30 min video with dire warning within 190 seconds. Thousands upon thousands of specialists were silenced the past 4 years by the woke liberal "experts" and look what we are facing because of that . . . excess m*rtality. Question everything my friend everything because that's the only way we evolve and stay sharp.

Russian a.i. identified the moon landing photos as fake about a month or so ago.

Sarcastically, to let Nixon know they weren't fooled.

Oh, and Russians congratulating Nixon, is not much different from the Japanese capitulating to MacArthur. It was that or see if someone would still stand in a nuclear war. Well, you should be excited, we may found out that this year. I am. I’m tired.

all govs in the same club, should know that by now

​@@MATTINCALIRight. "We spend trillions of dollars opposing each other, but let's secretly collaborate on this one thing for...reasons..."

hahahaha

😢😂

Yes this picture that you refer too is what I was talking about

And the last I think he's still up there

The rover you mean 😂

According to the real smart people (the conspiracy-theorists) NASA and their film-directors got everything wrong. Not just this or that. Everything.

Ty❤

Does that make the earth to shrink too?

​@@nikolozka1what are you talking about? People like you really do have some problem to comprehend space distances, don't ya?

​@@lazymassrelax man

tog here, confirmed.

no, no they claim the edge is guarded by military who will prevent them from reaching it. Aka why they cant go there to prove their bs

Those railings should be higher 😮

Are they Muslims?😂

​@CareBear-hi3cxThat's a coincidence

You KNOW... dontcha?!

Omg, i've been saying that for so long. You just know that soviets scientists had to go over the footage hundreds of Times in Hopes of finding a fake. The soviets would've loved to expose NASA as frauds, but they did not...

americans probably pay them off. the real question is why russia never sent there people to the moon then if it was that easy?

Yeah they were walking and driving on the moon. And made a direct call to the president while up there 😂😂😂😂

That was my mother's #1 argument when it came to moon landing denial - and her brother was into that conspiracy for a while.

@@koryburdet1317 Nixon called _them_, routed through mission control. (A direct call would have 3 seconds delay, but Nixon has to wait 7 seconds until he hears back from the astronaut.)

You do get some ornery nationalists in other countries who hate the thought of the US achieving anything, so they’ll jump on the denial wagon without a thought. but yes, the US seems particularly enmired in self-hatred, pseudoscience and conspiracy theories right now. Of course none of it has to do with trolls and other things beginning with TR… /s

​@@tubecated_developmentConsidering the fact that the USA was built on genocide and slavery, and has been starting wars across the globe for a century leading to millions of casualties.... Yeah, it kinda makes sense that most younger Americans tend to hate their own country. It's the evil empire.

If we really went to the moon, explain how we lost the technology that got us there, explain why they lost the original tapes of it? Nasa said these things

Wrong the whole world know it's a lie..

Thats a lie. The 'moon rocks' handed but to other countries were examined and turned out to be petrified wood from earth. We did not go to the moon. If you spent time going over the facts youd find out or just be a boot licking conformist your whole life.

To be fair, Rayleigh scattering makes it a lot harder on Earth than it would be on the Moon (no atmosphere). But apparently that just doesn't make enough of a difference.

Open your eyes. I'm disgusted with my own father for his role in perpetuating this illusion. Use your God given brain. No one or vessel has ever been to Mars let alone the moon

That’s an idiotic thing to say.

@@altortugas5979 says who?

⁠@@christopherscott8853I don’t believe in god. Yes we did land on the moon. And why would land in mars first?

But your brain works differently than the conspiracy-theorist brain. If they don’t understand it and/or they don’t want to accept it, then that makes it a ‘lie’.

​@@tubecated_developmentmore like he has a brain,while those idiots lost it somewhere😂

Fake news

​@@misterdee1418?

Its because theres alot of fake news online so people dont know what to believe or how to even decern real from fake. So alot of people go with the most "mind blowing facts" theyve heard

astro (nots) look up the video where Russia reviews the moon landing videos. It is obviously fake. We that know the truth are ridiculed but we don't care. We still out here alive and thriving.

Actors ?

@@eilidh771 If that's fake, then everything is a fake.🤣🤣🤣🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

​@@Workerbee-zy5nxNow you're getting it.

@@Workerbee-zy5nx That’s what conspiracy-theorists fantasise about, and that’s what they want you to believe most of all. They don’t even think physics is real. Luckily they don’t understand physics so although they (as do we all) go through life beholden to (and constrained by) it, they still pretend to dismiss it 😂

Not outside of focal length, but out of focus. Focal length refers to the distance between the center of the lens and the film or sensor.

Fun fact when a guy has a smooth ken doll package in an underwear ad, it's a slice of wonder bread.

Also, your brain development after you were born​😂😂😂@user-fb5jr9ih1w

@@user-fb5jr9ih1wyou forgot evidence to prove your claim.

No way it happened. The american flag stays up by the wind where there is no atmosphere there lol😅​@@user-fb5jr9ih1w

@@user-fb5jr9ih1wyes it did

There is no space. It is all a giant lie. These satanic organisations are orchestrating the space lie. You really think they went to the moon with that foil and umbrella frame pod? Their lie is crumbling just like their fake mars photoshoot. All lies. We lives in an enclosed earth (firmament), the moon and sun are luminaries, lights within our atmosphere. They are not solid and so nothing can land on it.

They are mostly scientifically-illiterate. Physics is just one part of it. They most often don’t even have genuine curiosity about anything. The National Science Education Standards (1996) in the USA defined scientific literacy as: "the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity. Scientific literacy means that a person can ask, find, or determine answers to questions derived from curiosity about everyday experiences. It means that a person has the ability to describe, explain, and predict natural phenomena."

wrong. you are in denial.

@@Mindvirus-ly5ed *sniff* I smell a bot.

@@Mindvirus-ly5ed Take your meds

Basic physics? How about common sense? Why haven’t we returned to moon?

And almost impossible when you aren't intentionally trying to photograph stars.

@jmoney6043 Than*

This is not accurate at all it's actually pretty easy I just did it the other day just to test the theory I live out in the country and I have a pole light and I was able to photograph the stars along with the roof of my shop at the same time with my Android phone no special settings. Although that is a digital photograph. But in turn film like what they would have used back then reacts to light. Even light from far off distance like stars which would actually be brighter on the surface of the Moon because there would be more frequencies of light like infrared which cameras pick up this is what camera flashes use to illuminate the object your photographing That's why some flashes aren't very bright or even way back when when they used a flame for their flash because if we could see infrared light that flame would be extremely bright.. I guess you wouldn't call it a flame but a very mild explosion I guess you could say

@@bretk7916 Humans can't see infra-red light at all, so if a flash is at all visible, there must be some form of light in the visible spectrum. We can only feel infra-red light, otherwise known as heat.

@jmoney6043 why would we need to go back to the moon? Is there an obligation to do so or just to proved to the scumbags in this world that we landed again on the moon? Landing on a moon is not cheap and nobody will used the same rocket and lander and you need to built the whole new system to land and that takes times and a lot of money more than the money spending on the first landing. Can your father sponsored the moon landing again just to proved to his idiot son that we landed on the moon twice?

Wishful thinking!

😂

Where ?

@@aribaariba8609 the moon

lmfao

it's level. it's a horizon not a curvizon, c'mon now

It's obviously an obtuse angle that changes degrees throughout the day

It usually goes hand in hand

It’s flat and oval shaped

The earth is flat tho

Like evolution theory or big bang theory?

​@@thegoat3109yeah. Exactly like those

@@thegoat3109 yeah or round earth theory 🤣

Yeah, just like people who doesn't understand who God is or how he can exist conclude that he is not true. Yet they can't prove he doesn't exist either.😢

How come we only went once and have never been back?

Russia would not point it out because at the time they were using the excuse as well to deceive their people

Kenny been raised on TV geopolitics.

They say there is nothing there to be collected or learned, and that would be the reason. Yet China is going there again, so they might disagree

Nasa had a blank cheque book back then and took massive risks with people's lives to get it done. There's been no political or scientific reason to take such risks since then, especially when they can use rovers instead. Does seem like there's a good enough reason to go back now, seeing as there are profits to be made.

It was never ‘easy’, (nor inexpensive). There really is no question as to why they didn’t go back since the sixth landing…

Correct.

Well I've seen Leonardo decapreo or how ever his last name is spelled..... but I've seen him die from the Titanic and thst ship went down like 40 years before he was even born..... I've also seen "a long time ago in a galaxy far far away some little "orphan" blow up a giant man made planet called the "death star" and if we really went to the moon the United States would be sending the moon money..... just sayin

So..... its a good thing the gobment wouldn't LIE to us about getting to the moon..... so if "they" say we went than we totally did

@@Da_Infamous Opinions and feelyweelies, vs physics and falsifiable evidence? I always choose physics. Your mileage may vary.

how’d they get thru the van allen belt?plus, The vacuum on the moon is almost perfect while in lower Earth orbit it's basically still thin air. Such a vacuum needs to be sealed by at least a couple of inches of metal not just zippers and fabrics. This vacuum can even weld metals together and can't be simulated on Earth in this extreme.

They aren’t planning to redo the Apollo mission, any more than they planning to go to the bottom of the ocean in homemade submarine like they did in 1960. but what happened to the Titan submersible last year? New technology doesn’t mean automatically safe and doable.. Technology has moved on, and so have the challenges. longer missions, new trajectories to different parts of space, diff regions of the moon. All of the microtechnology and new comms requirements present their own challenges. Especially around life-support systems. microtechnology is more vulnerable to space radiation. There is also the not inconsiderable fact that Apollo took about 2% of the federal budget - while the last moon mission was about 0.1% of that.

The Apollo program was incredibly expensive. And convincing Congress that NASA needed both the Saturn Rocket program and the Space Shuttle proved to be impossible.

Today there are a lot of regulation holding us back, and also today there is no reason to go there. Back then they wanted to beat soviet union in the race

All to do with $$. They spent a lot of money back then govt backed. Now it is private money and relatively a lot smaller $$

@@lancehaysom47 Is there a ‘private’ space company which doesn’t have NASA as their primary customer?

Read Anthony Ciril Sutton's books from 70s and 80s and you will figure it out. US's and SSSR's oligarchy were cooperating together behind people's back. Obviously, you can't jear about that in Legacy media.

Probably because the US has something on Russia and China too. After over 50 years why hasn’t another rover or orbiter or satellite taken a picture of the flag and original moon rover? Even the Hubble telescope could probably take a decent picture of them.

Honour among the scoundrels

Worlds a stage full of actors. WCW wrestling and politics, no difference.

@@skophansen9525 Yes, dude. Something like the Cold War never happened. Sure. :D

exactly!

Mostly people that really to this day think earth is flat, space doesnt exist and we weren't on the moon...

I'm an idiot and I know most people are

@@lazymass the guy believes that some human being stepped on the moon, LOL

@@pops8595 well... you know, education does a lot for one... You should try it some day...

So?

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Yeah. 2001: A Space Odyssey That's a great science fiction film. It is very different from NASA documentary films. Y r u SHOUTING?

EXaCtLy. THeY cAnT get paSt the VaN AlLeN rAdIaTiON bELT eVeR.

​@@TrobtwillisI think he's not impressed with Kubrick's moon footage, all caps or "shouting" often denotes sarcasm.

He had nothing to do with the missions to the Moon.

@@topherkrocknot true, space Odyssey was inspired by something whether you want to believe that or not

@@VideoRandomChannel, that's not what I was saying. We landed on the moon.

Exactly!

Was there a reason for mentioning Kubrick? Are you saying that you don't know how to use a _search engine?_

she just sounds lovely ... did she make good cookies though?

Your pants are on fire

U are correct and it's one world govt !!!

But who can you really trust anyway? You have a point somewhere? Go down in that private, unregulated submarine. Offical government projects get more scrutiny. Whether or just there is follow up depends on who is voted in charge. Just for profit means the money is the important part andeverything else fends for itself. Yeah, it was all a Hollywood movie. Have you ever visited a Saturn rocket?

True never ever believe government of any countries that claim they Landed on light meaning 🌝 or 🌞 is just lights above our ground including stars. 🙏😇👁️💫👁️💡✨

like the government even care about you

there are more types than that ! those who say later missions were real, but the early ones were faked! those who say they went but the photographs were faked! those who say some of them went but the film footage was faked, etc.

No one is calling it a conspiracy, they're calling it a hoax. Get a better bit programming

@@cpK054L nobody cares.

@@DemoNinja79 you do apparently, hence the post

@@cpK054L “No-one is calling it a conspiracy” Is this a new conspiracy-theory you are starting? Right here? Are you telling me that when film director Stanley Kubrick and a couple of Nazis and JFK all got together in secret at the South Pole and decided to conspire to lie to the world and steal hundreds billions tax-dollars to fake 7 moon-landing missions to both fool the USSR and to enrich themselves and their contractors… …you are telling me that there was no ‘conspiracy’? Is this the ‘conspiracy was not a conspiracy’, conspiracy-theory? It was just a ‘hoax’? Like putting a rubber spider in the tub to make your sister freak?

ok smart guy between the 180 degrees C in the sun and the -160 degrees in shadow, so what type of film survives these temps, the camera was stock unmodified, physics? you can't even tell me what the melting point of Kodak Tri-X film is but claim i'm the dum one

i think you're responding to your assumption that the op believes the cameras would've captured the stars, but he didn't say anything about a camera, he's just talking about nasa. i do disagree tho, nasa is part of the government. billions of tax dollars goes to them every year. u can't sell out to a group you're already a member of.

Light on Earth and on the surface of the moon act completely different. You don't have what they call light pollution on the surface of the Moon. And you don't have an atmosphere that absorbs and reflects light. It does let some frequencies of light through of course. But this means that the stars would be bigger and brighter from the surface of the Moon due to no degradation of light being blocked by dust and other things in the air along with the atmosphere. So they would be much brighter and bolder. Especially if we had a camera because they pick up infrared light that we cannot see..

​​​@@bretk7916 You're somewhat right, that's why the moon's horizon seems so bold in the videos and pictures from the surface of the moon, but it doesn't change the fact that you can't see the stars - camera, just as your eyes, tries to correct itself to see the bright thing. You can try it out with just a lamp and the camera on your smartphone; if you turn of the lights and turn on the lamp, and try rotating around the room, then you'll see the rest of the room become darker when you point the camera at the lamp. You can imagine that the lamp is the moon (since it's very reflective) and the rest of the room is open space with stars.

​@@bretk7916You dont understand how dynamic range works. Cameras have less dynamic range than our eyes. If you want to see the stars in the image, the surface of the moon would be to bright.

@@trillex1861 this is not true for one the moon absorbs 85% of the light shined upon it from the Sun what does reflect it's not exactly scattered light because there is no other medium in space for light to reflect or refract off of you can tell this by the grayish color of their space suits but when they were on the surface of the Earth they were bright white. The only time the Sun is super bright when you're in space is when you look at it it's not like walking outside after being in the movie theater and it just super bright outside it doesn't work like that there. And as far as your comment about the dynamic range. Unfortunately for you I do know a little bit about it and the camera that they use was a 70 mm black and white film camera which has huge dynamic range especially being in black and white because even with color film the dynamic range is still exceptionally high especially for the blacks and whites. Also in space there is no light pollution or restriction on the light produced from stars along with the continuum in space light just continues on without no degradation so stars would be much brighter and bolder on the surface of the moon...

@@trillex1861 IMAX uses 70 mm colored film. And if you ever been to one of them you know the dynamic range is very vast.. digital does not have near the dynamic range and I am able to take a picture of the roof of my shop with the stars at the same time

Those that agree with this video is absolutely idiots... don't they know space is vacumn ... ie no air and wind.... Why the flag that Neil Amstrong put on d moon is waving!!! Yes NASA was idiot as they couldn't simulate a vacumn environment

FACTS💯

we kinda are in terms of knowledge base

You are

Explain

between the 180 degrees C in the sun and the -160 degrees in shadow, so what type of film survives these temps, the camera was stock unmodified

Nasa threw him some moon rock....

dude he is the man who removed pluto from the planet list and you are talking about $20

😂😂

May be ur parents should have thrown 20$ on your education 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♂️

FlatEarthers threw you 2$

Because why would the most valuable company on earth say otherwise....smh

@@ralfiejr34 Maybe you should just watch den NVIDIA video before spreading some more conspiracy nonsense?

between the 180 degrees C in the sun and the -160 degrees in shadow, so what type of film survives these temps, the camera was stock unmodified, oh thats right you never did the math but like to call us dum

1. The temperature on the Moon is between 120° and -130° C. (Not 180° to -160°) 2. The astronauts (and the cameras) never were in Moon's night. So, they never experienced the freezing deep temperatures. 3. The cameras *were modified!* There were several modifications but the important one for your "argument" is, the cameras got a silver finish to minimize heat up by sun light. Also, the cameras had no contact to the hot moon surface, direct heat flow from solid to solid was not possible. Moon has no atmosphere, heat transfer by gas was impossible too. It's always the same with the conspiracy lunatics. You always think that your own experience (= lack thereof), your own knowledge (= lack thereof) is a valid argument. It's not!

@@bobmusil1458 Kodak film has specific temperature ratings to ensure optimal performance: Consumer Films and Single Use Cameras: Store at temperatures up to 21°C (70°F). Avoid excessive heat, such as in a car parked in the sun1. Professional Color Films: Store in their original sealed packaging under refrigeration at 13°C (55°F) or lower1. Color Papers and Display Materials: Store between 4°C and 24°C (40°F and 75°F) in the original sealed package1. Black-and-White Films: For short periods, store at temperatures up to 24°C (75°F). For longer periods, maintain lower temperatures1.

Must of been NASA/NIKON cameras

Same with high school football games.

​@tubecated_development Lmao you are even gramaticaly incorrect.

@@SAN-bi2vm so what? Doesn’t mean NASA ARENT LYING You shouldn’t be convinced, it’s all lies and that’s what you want to believe. If you want to check that NASA are controlling our cameras now and removing our ability to see and photograph stars near the moon, just image- search online, any image of “super zoom moon night” See what I mean? They’re trying to cover their tracks by controlling our cameras, not allowing our cameras to see stars near the moon.

Those races are very illuminated and are near city’s

But you are not at home ur on Moon,there is vacoom,there no atmosphere!

Wow man, great analogy. Thanks 🙏

Wackado

Exactly! But photography numpties just don't get it.

Makes no sense lmao

lol how did Stanley do it in 2001 then

I dont know if the moon landing was faked or not because I wasnt there but saying it would be impossible with 1969 tech i dont know what tech was available to the US government either. I just feel like this all boils down to what you want to believe because like I said nobody was there. You literally have people in isolation telling you something happened.

1969 isn’t 2001 we had way better tech in 2001 then in 1969

32 years later, that'd be like comparing 2033 tech with 2001 tech, look at our exponential growth and you'd see there are huge changes that happened between 1969 and 2001

@@user-qe6in7yt2l the movie dummy

You wake up and turn on a light? 😂 I do everything in the dark haha

@@xbrandi12345xI assume you wake up very early

​@@lucasread1743 No. You wake up late.

People that were there, before they passed away, admitted the moon photos were fake. And it was taken in a plane hanger, and they spread cement dust and other dust all on the ground. And fooled people. Then they said they lost the blueprints to go to the moon. "By chance" And now we are all currently trying to make it there.

So if the camera can't image the stars , the Astronauts would be able to , I find picturing such a sight much more impressive for a life changing experience.

Flat earthers are insane

There’s plenty of non-flat-earthers that think the moon landing was faked

Doesn't everyone? It's really easy to prove that the earth is not flat

@@MediaSubliminal not if you disregard real science and make up your own. 🤣

​@Jordy-927 I'm assuming you're one who believes the Earth is flat. And that you somehow know the "real science", that proves the hundreds and thousands of scientists before us and currently - that have all replicated results - wrong?

KZfaq comments for conspiracy-nutz is like an even more broken adult version of their childhood selves getting others to do their homework. EDIT: On close inspection you realise that their ‘questions’ aren’t even real questions, it’s just idiotic ‘gotcha’ rhetoric, as they’re not even remotely interested in learning, they’re not genuinely curious about anything.

That's because they need to push the lie still

I was the class clown and I already know this. 🤣😂

we? ur just a viewer lol

For some people, the world is much duller, less surrounded by lures, but not that bad.

Those idiots couldn't erase the accomplishments of the Apollo missions with their silly little theories. It does highlight the need for better education standards in the US though

@@jangtheconqueror I agree, but just imagine how these guys feel when they come across such people..

I'm sure he doesn't take them very seriously.

Iirc he or one of the other apollo astronauts literally beat someone up over it so i think they do care Again i could be wrong​@kylecrowson1417

You don't have to imagine, it is on record even recently there is video of Buzz beating common sense into some of these wackos.

Well if he said that its a slam dunk, logic is like a light sabre in your hands.

@@eilidh771 Yes and Dalai Lama says don't settle for less than logic and experience.. I agree👍

Wait until they realize the astronauts never filmed the earth when all they had to do was point their cameras up since they had landed on the near side of the moon. They couldn't fake the earth in a film but they could with a still image.

@@xTROLLINGxhow would live footage of the Earth have looked any better/different than a still? What film cameras were they using?

@@tubecated_development it would have looked the same way as when they recorded themselves on the Rover they have more footages of that Rover than they do of Earth.

@@xTROLLINGx You didn’t answer my question tho. What camera was that? And what would they have gained by filming the Earth with that camera vs the stills camera/s?

​@@tubecated_development Two cameras were equipped with 60-millimeter focal length lenses; the other had a high-resolution 500-millimeter lens enough to record the earth if they had pointed it up. They would have gained a new perspective from the moon of earth to share with the world since they were all about winning the cold war and not for an actual accomplishment which is why they haven't returned to the moon if they even can because who deletes a blueprint that can help humanity in their future.

People that were there, before they passed away, admitted the moon photos were fake. And it was taken in a plane hanger, and they spread cement dust and other dust all on the ground. And fooled people. Then they said they lost the blueprints to go to the moon. "By chance" And now we are all currently trying to make it there.

try to do it during the day instead, as the case was during apollo lunar EVAs.

@@Agarwaen Earth has a heavy atmosphere, which scatters light from the sun, basically washing out whatever light might be coming from the stars. Neil's point is about apertures, which is something completely different.

@@ebreshea except no. stars wouldn't be be visible to your eyes during the day if we lacked an atmosphere either. only specific wavelengths are even affected by this scattering, so there's no reason why stars wouldn't be visible if they were supposed to be on the surface of the moon. the limiting factor is how much light can get to the sensor (or film) and if you're going to take photos in a situation where most light is FAR stronger then you just have to set up your camera in the manner that means you just cannot catch faint objects like stars, unless you want the rest of your image to be almost entirely white.

Long exposure

How cool would it be if a billionaire made a hotel of the moon I would definitely go instead of spending $250,000 to go visit the titanic I would go to the moon hotel any day of the week you get to be in a spaceship you get to view earth from the moon that sounds like a lot more fun

Never heard this one

Naw

Neil isn’t lying

Neil Tyson is an actor.

Made up quote...

It makes you realise how few people have ever taken a photo of the moon (or have even looked at a photo of the moon)

@@tubecated_development or really paid attention to how they take photos. Look at how they argue that NASA uses CGI. Yeah, they are right, it is CGI. But the CGI used isn't to fake something, but to create a composite photo. What NASA does is no different than the Panorama or Spherical Mode we have on our cameras, which is take snapshots and combine all of them into one picture. And if you ever actually looked at your pictures after using those two modes, you will notice that they are quite accurate to what you see around you (though with some artifact errors due to your movement or things moving around you).

@@tbengineering7066 I know this. Agreed.

Yeah... that's not true

@@jasonjuarez6429 Go do an image search (guess you’re too lazy to do the experiment yourself with a zoom camera) Search ‘full moon zoom’ Count the stars around the moon. Oops. Go look at the HD footage of the IM-Lander separating from Falcon 9. Again, count the stars… Oops. It’s like your default is ‘lie about stuff’

​​@MotersickleBumuhhh... Are you implying there's less atmosphere in the woods? The guy above you is talking about light pollution. Unless you're just emulating the people who say we haven't landed on the moon, but then satire isn't always easy to read in text.

learn this, between the 180 degrees C in the sun and the -160 degrees in shadow, so what type of film survives these temps, the camera was stock unmodified

well the more people question the narrative the better.americans like to claim this is not fake to make themselves look superior than other countries.

​@@patrickjane2024, there's a difference between "questioning the narrative" and "rejecting the truth". Answer me this: what is the narrative that you are questioning? What is the purpose of your questioning? If you want the truth, should you reject all the answers that don't fit your personal bias or should you question your bias if it doesn't fit the answers you're getting?

​@@patrickjane2024 but..... we DID do it. If saying that as a fact, makes you & your country "feel" inferior, then that's a you problem. Not ours.

Nasa in hebrew means to deceive

@@patrickjane2024The more people get to undermine the truth, the more people will claim that it was ‘fake’. And the more Americans will hate their own people.

Normally communication during the Apollo Missions was using Unified S-Band signals on The Manned Space Flight Network set of tracking stations and giant satellite dishes positioned around the globe such as Goldstone, Madrid, Parkes and Honeysuckle Creek. The only "phone call" that I know of to be patched into this system was The Nixon Call to Apollo 11 on 20 July 1969 and this to the best of my knowledge was patched through a satellite over the Pacific, most likely either INTELSAT-2B or INTELSAT-2D. Take care.

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth I appreciate your kind replies, despite the questions or statements you are to reply. Thank you.

Satellite is fake! Someone said communication is only able to be reached by cable optic ! Someone kindly give me an enlightenment, please !

@@nuriy_elhasibuanalie if only cable communications work then how do mobile phones and radios work?

@Oxley016 This is also what I am questioning! But a popular person said so, that satelite is fake business! If the satellite can work to give the signal, then why do we need to stake cabble optic even under the sea?

Yes!! Those were actually mentioned in an episode of Big Bang Theory! Reflectors set up on the moon by the Apollo astronauts!

Yup! Moon landing denial is just reality denial. It’s so unbelievably obvious that we went to the moon, it’s scary what people will believe with zero evidence.

Your 4 words are meaningless and not provable, I’m not arguing for or against the moon landing but you have no evidence either

And how many people have access to the equipment to actually test that? This isn't a persuasive argument for lunar landing deniers. I'm not one of those people, but just saying. If you say you know humans landed on the moon because they've placed reflectors there, the obvious response would be "Prove it!". The only people with access to a suitable laser, and the know-how to function it, would already believe in the moon landing.

@eugene9852 🤣 Are you serious dude? Astrophysicists use the reflectors every day to measure the distance the moon is retreating from the Earth, currently 3 or so cm per year. But hey, they are probably a natural occuring phenomena up there right? 🤡

you would think that with the technology we have now there would have been over one thousand expeditions to the moon. but none have been made ever since the propaganda stun.

@@kxr842ok i will educate you now sk we can easily go back to the moon if we wanted to but there are 3 problems 1 the cost its just way too expensive 2 it could be dangerous for humans 3 what would we do on the moon? There is nothing there

@@user-qe6in7yt2l that is because it was a hoax and anti soviet propaganda. the soviet union were beating the west when it came to space exploration. so they had to come up with the moon landing hoax.

Aren't they the same people?

@@never_give_up90no. Often, but not always, not even close.

You sound like someone with a booster shot..

@@tubecated_development well, the ones I seem to meet are always both. I meant, the same people, not the same denials.

No many scientist belive that moon landing is a hoax

My managers mom AND dad worked for the apollo missions (cant remember which ones and think they worked on several of them) and he gets very upset when people try and say the moon landing was fake. Like personally offended and he can shoot down all their counter points like he's speed running COD.

​@zachnoll6245 just curious, did he ever go to the moon or seen others do it from position

Its critical thinkig, wether they worked on just the math for vectors or worked with engineering or any of the other 400,000 jobs they had to do. They worked on it. They know it was possible because math never lies. Like when the we asked one of the scientist who worked on the nuclear bomb if they ever thought it might not work he said No, he knew exactly what was gonna happen and how big it was going to be (did mention a thing about numbers on a page get so beg they can become impossible for the human mind to comprend and once seeing it go off didnt expect it to be so massive) @@FUNNYMANERICWHITE

@@zachnoll6245 Offended by what? That people can’t believe some Americans and later some Russians went to the moon 50 years ago and that was it? They should be embarrassed to have been part of a disguised battle for world supremacy in a war that’s still being fought and we’ll all lose. Why don’t we go to the moon? Because the real answer is not that it was fake, but we went there to define who would own the world for the following decade or two. We don’t go now because it’s pointless, there are no rewards, space exploration is physically impossible, sci-fi magic is not real to make us go beyond the moon and back safely, fast, with long stays with benefits for everyone. Today, Russians rather want to destroy their enemies and conquer the world than going to the moon while Americans are on the brink of both the end of democracy and a civil war. At least with the “we never went to the moon” answer you don’t end up disappointed in mankind.

@@zachnoll6245So Basically U Know Someone That Knows Someone Who Pushes Nasa Lies…Good For U 👏🏿

Next time on a clear night, ask him to take a super-zoom photograph of the Moon’s surface ;) or even to do an image search for some…

So you base your decisions on personalities rather than evidence? Interesting.

Your S.M.A.R.T. smart. NDGT dun goofed when he started covering for NASA/NIKON!!! I found that NASA are removing our stars off of cameras to try and cover up. WHY when I take close up pics of the moon on my Nikon P1000 superzoom camera I can’t see stars around it???????? Look for yourself online to prove me right (do an image search of ‘superzoom nikon moon night’ ). What do you see? Correct. You can see the moon but NO STARS. Are Nikon secretly owned by NASA? Think about the word Nikon ie N(ASA) + Ikon literally means _deceitful image_ in Hebrew and Greek… As for the ‘flag' well it’s the same as the rest of there dumb movies, The director left clues and made everything wrong like clues. So people of the future when the Internets made us smart could uncover all there lies.

​@@tubecated_developmentI don't have a power to debunk all of these, but I can assure you “Ikon" doesn't mean ti deceive, I can't even find a translation or the word in a Dictionary.

@@vpansf IKON means image lmaoooooooo. I even typed it

@@tubecated_development You said IKON means to deceive, where did you get that information?