You take pictures from your vacation with a digital camera. The pictures are stored on an SD card inside the camera. When you get home, you load those pictures off the SD card onto your computer and then upload them to Facebook. You then delete the original copies of the photographs off your SD card. The notion that NASA "lost" footage that proved they went to the moon is the equivalent of me telling you that your vacation was faked because you deleted the original photographs off your SD card. This is how utterly stupid this nonsense argument is.

@@willoughbykrenzteinburg I don't believe anything about the moon landing is faked. It's just funny how this story went. And to your analogy. Always have 2 hard copies of your important stuff.

@@AToMexe They did. There are literally thousands of copies of the broadcast footage of the first moon landing. They far surpassed this arbitrary minimum you have set. There is no "missing" footage. There is only a deleted copy of that footage, and it was by no means the only copy. It was just *_a_* copy. In fact, NASA did not even discover this copy had been recorded over until 2009; literally 40 years after the first landing. So, it's kind of hard to make the argument that all the footage of the first moon landing was deleted...when we have 40 years of evidence that it clearly wasn't.

@@willoughbykrenzteinburg I would have to watch it again, but wasn't there higher definition recordings (better resolution) that got lost?

@@AToMexe Well, they were all analog, so "high definition/better resolution" is sort of a nonsensical concept in the analog concept. This wasn't pixels, it was tape. But yes - the thought is that the original SSTV scans would have been higher quality than the recorded live broadcast. Nobody has ever done a side-by-side. The only reason NASA discovered they were missing is because someone came across a Polaroid of one of the receiving stations with an SSTV monitor in the background and it appeared the quality in the photograph was slightly better. So, the search for the SSTV scans started and lasted about three years when it was concluded they were likely recorded over in the 1980s. The original broadcast was at a low bandwidth that was not compatible with broadcast television - it was SSTV, so the crude conversion done in real time was simply to broadcast the feed on a compatible SSTV monitor and essentially point a camera at that monitor which was then broadcast to the networks. What was on the Polaroid was one of these SSTV monitors, and this feed was also recorded onto telemetry tapes. While the actual live feed displayed on the SSTV was certainly higher quality than what was broadcast to the networks, there is no way to know if the feed recorded onto the telemetry tapes would have been equal to what was broadcast on the monitor - it probably would not have been, and likely would have been even worse than the broadcast footage. TL;DR It appears that the live feed being broadcast on the SSTV monitor was higher quality than what was broadcast to the networks/by the networks (because of the crude conversion process), but this does not necessarily mean that the RECORDING of that feed on the telemetry tapes would have been that good. Nobody knows. Nobody ever watched that version of the footage.

Sesame Street is more factual than the footage that was destroyed

The tapes were never made as they didn't go to the Moon!

@@charlesphillips430 you can literally still see the flag on the moon. Although it lost its color from solar radiation

@@hayosh9309 bull----!

@@hayosh9309 No you can't

Who cares if they lost the original tapes of Apollo 11. They have hours of original footage from Apollo 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17. That's like saying my dog at the homework, then saying but I re-wrote my homework another 5 times. It proves nothing apart from the fact that mistakes happen and sometimes, your homework does get eaten by your dog.

If several international networks destroyed footage of a lot of shows, why can't NASA do the same bullshit?

They must think we're really stupid.

@@nickrose8733 3:45 is not the same location as 3:57! & there are lot's of other things wrong with Apollo imagery!

@@nickrose8733 perhaps, but it's not incredibly likely that a group of organized and highly capable professionals would lose multiple tapes of arguably the most significant scientific achievement of humanity, yet meticulously chronicle the more minor missions. Also, if you are getting billions of dollars of tax paid dollars, you best be keeping all your accounting in order.

They reused them accidentally you fool

Hilarious. Maybe NASA didn't have enough budget to purchase new ones?! Yeh, right

🤣😂🤣

This is such a dumb conspiracy. Yeah they lost the original tapes, but they had already stored the recordings on a better format beforehand, several times over. The originals were treated as unnecessary and were of poor quality.

Fortunately I captured all those videos.

Yeah because a legitimate flag on the moon is a hoax. You can actually see the flag with certain telescopes.

@@NightyFall you can what? lol! a total dumbarse or just a liar

@@NightyFall The color on the flag is a hoax, with the kind of radiation we had on the Moon surface, it was impossible to render the color so vivid. It's like taking a picture under a fluorescent light and telling me that the color of my clothes will be the same ... IT WAS FAKE ...

@Jabir 1-is your telescope good enough? 2-the colors of the flag have Been Washed down

@@rodfel2001 not true the flag had color and then because of solar radiation now when you look for it the colors are gone and is now a white flag

So sad to see how many people fall for this. To land on the moon. I mean. Wow.

If its a lie why havent China and russia confronted us about it?

@@aprendizdecapivara2841 I guess you didn't see the even worse CGI China landing on the moon. They're all in on it.

@@NeshieTheKingSlayer link?

I am so government federal up

hahahaha,

hey you still selling that bridge in Chitungwiza? bro

Not forgetting the big mainframe computer on the ground that they used for the main number crunching.

They claim 12 people have walked on the moon. Russia and china have been there. I guess they lost their tapes too🤣

@@blue03r6 yeah they lost them in the Lodge.

If you'd actually been educated, you'd know how to do some research. But maybe you'll hit junior high in a couple years or so. The transmissions from the lander weren't in a format that could be broadcast on TV at the time, so the originals were used to make viewable copies for the public to watch. There's plenty of footage from the Apollo 11 mission out there, just like the other Apollo missions where people landed on the moon. But here's something even a dumbfucknuller like you might understand: if Superbowl II was real, that tape would never have been lost. You should try living as something other than a knuckle dragging mouth breather. It'll do you good.

So you'd spend millions probably billions to get into space and not keep the original footage, and let it be "lost". Not even to necessarily prove it but to research it. Nah I don't buy that bs nobody is going to spend that much money and let it get "lost".

@@dirtbikesarelife9075 The original Apollo 11 footage, which is what you`re referring to, was found last July and is up for auction to the highest bidder. Now find some other lie to repeat like a babbling parrot. There are thousands of pictures and hundreds of hours of original Apollo footage. Yes, some of it was misplaced. So fucking what? For your info, all the pictures and Apollo footage showing the surface details of the Moon just happen to PRECISELY MATCH the surface details seen in recent detailed RADAR MAPPING of the entire surface of the Moon. So the Apollo missions have been confirmed by that alone. But not only that...but China, Japan and India used orbiters to take pictures of Apollo landing sites and the buggy, buggy tracks, human footprints and the descent stages of landers can be seen. You idiots aren`t very intelligent.

@Uvuvwevwevwe Osas The surface details of the Moon seen in all that "fake footage" and those "fake pictures" just happen to match the surface details seen in quite recent pictures and videos taken by other space agencies around the world and they match up perfectly with surface details seen in recent radar maps made of the Moon. Odd, isn`t it? How did NASA know exactly what radar and other spacecraft would see decades later in order to pull off this amazing feat? They must know Satan personally!

@Uvuvwevwevwe Osas stop spread lies please be ignorant alone

Lol the only reason they sent man to the moon was to ensure they did something no other country would achieve in a few years. Sending men is a huge risk and costs alot more. You're saying as if we could commercialized it 🤣

@@manojajithpanicker1691 in 50 years space flight will 100% be commercialized

@@manojajithpanicker1691 thing is that’s not the point tech like that doesn’t just get “lost” and forgotten lmfao. Like regardless of what we do with it after we “accomplished” it how and why could you lose the tech that recorded it, the tech that got you there and countless other unexplainabke disappearances of the most important scientific discover in human history smh.

@@oscarsainz9865 First time I realize the size of the lies surrounding the moon landing, I was a believer before...

@@oscarsainz9865 Clearly you never used Microsoft word in 1999.

And again they couldn't find those pesky WMD none of the middle east countries they liberated. Government has a bad luck, lady luck must hate them because of their freedom.

You can. Early Dr. Who episodes were (and still are) missing because the tape contents were wiped (their magnetic contents are set back to standby) and reused.

Yes you can and they did it multiple times, like when the gun used to assassinate president mckinley Was lost and has Never been recovered

If its fake why do we have high quality film of Every Other mission?

Yeah it was supposed to be a giant leap for mankind but the tapes were just thrown out not knowing where they are exactly and someone OK'd taping over them :)

@@epicon6 omg cant you understand that they didnt do it purposefully

@@aprendizdecapivara2841 They did since NASA did not have money to buy new tapes so they rewriten old ones ;)

@@zarjesve2 or more like there’s multiple copies of what happened so basically it’s like saying that when you took a trip and took pictures on your Phone and transferred those photos onto social media then deleted the pictures from your phone. By your logic I can say that you never took that trip because the original is “deleted” and only can be found on social media and from others photos that took pictures with you..

They lost the technology of those super cameras. Ancient aliens from Sudan contacted the president and they told him how to build the cameras, then after the trip they flash their brains "a la" M.I.B so they lost the tapes, the data, and the memory to reproduce the technology. But we are the conspiratards...

They didn't, my father revealed it to me.

Well I would he surprised, it would certainly the best cover up probably in the entire history of humanity.

And what’s funny too is that China and Russia (the two countries we wanted to beat to the moon) still haven’t sent a human to the moon. Apparently they have sent vehicles, but no humans. And then NASA lost the technology to do it again. What a joke.

you give a chance that they did?

@@chrismadison7276 u

That's the best argument ever! We now have the internet, we have SpaceX, we have Tesla but not something we could do 50 years back. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Can we build a steam machine what pump water from a pool? No, it is a 150 years old technology, we don't have that technology anymore. How about a bucket, can we use a bucket to take water from the pool? No, bucket is a thousand years old technology, we don't have that technology anymore. What about those electric powered water pumps you have? Can we use those to pump water form the pool? No, our next goal is to pump water from the sea, we don't want anything with the pool.

Some of the most valuable information we’ve discovered has been destroyed and lost countless times. Library of Alexandria for example, there was some advanced stuff that we may end up never knowing or discover way later. Yet the romans fumbled the ball on that. NASA is run by people and there’s always human error even with the most valuable things. Not to mention they said that they archived it not well and sometimes people just didn’t return stuff. There’s no conspiracy that happened, libraries have the same problems because they’re achieves too.

@@hayosh9309 the Library at Alexandria was destroyed during war, there is no logical equivalence between these two events.

@@misternobody4704 The gaslight is strong in Jace...

People only talk about Apollo 11 when we talk about manned lunar missions. Don't forget the fact there should be an actual car on the moon that people drove around over a 3 day period.

​@@hayosh9309you are not an honest man. Shame on you

DEFUND 6SIDE MUSIC VIBEZ

@@aprendizdecapivara2841 I ain’t getting no funding money for my business you jackwagon

@@6sidemusicvibez901 lol it was a joke

@@aprendizdecapivara2841 lol so was I

@@6sidemusicvibez901 lol

What does the lack of cell phones has to do with live footage from the Moon?

@@Jan_Strzelecki it means that they had 'zero technology back then' dial tone phones, so there's no way they could have transmitted the footage Live, or make a phone call from the moon in real time.

@@3cs3hs Have you ever heard about video cameras?

@@3cs3hs Yes, I remember those days back then, when we had no wireless technology. Then came a marvelous new invention. That was in 1892 and they called it "radio".

What does this have to do with the video?

Michael Lucas ALL of the “lost” Apollo films NASA refuses to put on their website are on KZfaq, just buried in search results. Search WAFFAHOUSE on KZfaq and then come back and reply to this comment... I dare anyone reading this. This is not spam, being the reason I didn’t post a link to get auto blocked. There is over 17 hours of “missing” footage that is in crystal clear 480p AND IN COLOR! All the footage we have been force fed is the grainy, black and white Apollo 11 footage. Anyways, if you made it this far down this comment I beg you, search for these Apollo films by the uploader Name. KZfaq algorithm essentially make search tags useless unless your channel is monetized.... -Waffa (CZC admin) PS I’d advise against debating the moon landings until you actually watch said footage. Ignorance is the driving force behind this debate....

Click my name to go to my channel... I dare ANY of you. Let’s just say I don’t have enough nails for all these coffins...

Some people still believe we landed on the moon. 🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣🤣😂😂😂

I’ve uploaded ALL of these “lost” Apollo films to my KZfaq channel since NASA refuses to do so on their own website/KZfaq page. Click my profile picture. I dare ANYONE reading this -Waffa (CZC admin)

@@WAFFAHOUSE Ok I checked it out and i am kinda impressed. I was 90-95% NASA didn't reach the Moon but now i am maybe somewhat less sure. now your turn: click my sub/bell icons on my channel (click my icons) AND on channel "Playitalready" n stay tuned for future vids on this and other stuff. he will be interested in your opinion. there's still much to be debunked (i doubt u can debunk it all though). he already has a playlist currently called "NASA's Mooning" you should check out. if i dont reply here it's probably because this channel is overwhelmed with notifications and im too busy to read them all lol

Denise Rothwell This guy actually thinks we went to the moon.😆

Hbug13 Bug Bear Too funny isn’t it. 😂😂😂😂😂

They forgot to bring a Geiger counter to show the radiation level on the moon and inside the radioactive moon dust contaminated LEM. No duct tape in the Apollo 13 Press Kit. Hoax.

@@deniserothwell6325 I`ve noticed something that all you extremely low IQ moon hoaxers have in common. You repeat the same "clever" one liners like babbling parrots. So "original." Face it, you`re too fucking stupid to understand the most basic science or physics. The Apollo moon landings have been proven 100%. You`re far too stupid to even figure out how...even with the power of the entire internet at your fat fingertips....

@o o Apollo took thousands of pictures and a lot of films of the surface details of the Moon. Decades later the entire surface of the Moon was precisely mapped. Several space agencies from around the world have also sent probes and orbiters to the Moon. Oddly enough the surface details seen in the detailed maps of surface features of the Moon and all the thousands of pictures taken by others countries PRECISELY MATCH SURFACE DETAILS SEEN IN APOLLO PICTURES AND FILMS FROM DECADES AGO! If you`re too stupid to understand the significance of this I feel sorry for you.

You did not watch the video or pay much attention. They lost the original copy. Many copies exist and they found a better copy than the previously available one. It is identical so zero chance of being a refilm.

@@RobotSnake exactly the original copies all the copies of the original can all be tampered with just like 9/11 when it showed the news, the news tampered with the footage by taking the city are the background and just making it all blue and God knows how much other things they removed . Also, being the first time ever, somebody’s been to the moon you would’ve think that those tapes and anything to do with the mission will be locked up securely somewhere where no one can get to them.

⁠@@RobotSnakeyou believe anything. So they lost the original and now somehow found a better copy? It must’ve come from the sky

@@noelnoni7310 this literally happens often with archival footage. They lost the original copy but multiple people filmed it from live tv.

@@RobotSnake you believe anything. They just lost it lmao🤣

no footage was lost.

@@atlas8827 yes it was, the original ones were lost

Exactly! I remember that footage now it's nowhere to be found. There was also a footage of something to the far right of the screen during the moon landing, it was something peeking in the far right corner of the video

No footage was actually lost. It's all on the internet. The only tapes lost were from apollo 11. what you said doesn't make any sense.

This is the best one! I also like how we need incredibly huge fuel tanks to escape earths gravity, but apparently we don't need any obvious fuel tanks to escape the moons gravity and then accelerate back to earth at an equal pace as it took to get there.

@@anyfriendofkevinbaconisafr177 Maybe there`s something different between the moon and the earth...like mass and atmosphere.....

@@tomjones239 sure, but where's the blast crater ? And where are the fuel tanks? ... ultimately, who goes tto the moon with special cameras but don't plan to take some pictures of the stars? The question becomes, how many people will accept none/alavin as true? Skepticism is demanded, but how many have the stomach to face the cognitive diasonance? And then it must be asked, who has the guts to accept the necessity of manipulating the hers of animals? I hope you'll respond.

@@anyfriendofkevinbaconisafr177 "where's the blast crater ?" Why would you expect to see a blast crater? Show your maths. "ultimately, who goes tto the moon with special cameras but don't plan to take some pictures of the stars?" Who wanted to see pictures of the stars from the Moon? Why would you need special cameras? Do you not grasp the concept of different exposure time? "The question becomes, how many people will accept none/alavin as true?" Why do Apollo deniers hate English so much? "Skepticism is demanded" I don't think you have a clue what the word even means. "but how many have the stomach to face the cognitive diasonance?" Given that you don't even know how to spell the word... Cognitive dissonance is when you try to believe mutually exclusive things. Like, the Moon landings were filmed in a Hollywood basement. Or was it in the Nevada Desert? You can't decide... "And then it must be asked, who has the guts to accept the necessity of manipulating the hers of animals?" And then it must be asked, that does that even mean? Again, what do you deniers have against the English language?

@@paulbeardsley4095 "And then it must be asked, that does that even mean? " You spent so much time picking at typos and then made your own. Does that mean any of the points you tried to make are less valid? Of course it doesn't. But back to the "facts" pictured in the photographs. Why don't you do some maths and explain how a ship lands on the moon and doesn't kick up any dust or sand at all. I understand that you are desperate to close your eyes and go back to the matrix, sorry bucko!

I watched it live .So did millions of others

It was not even broadcasted live... Why would they as you say...

@@CKSLAFE Yes, it was.

@@Stubrit No, they filmed the screen of a monitor. Who knows when the movie in the monitor was filmed.

@@CKSLAFE It was live. How old are you?

I feel the same way! 🙄 The most important breakthrough in the history of mankind, and all the original high resolution tapes, were never returned after being “checked out” 😂 As if they’re books from the public library?? People would rather believe a lie, than know the truth 💯

People believe ANYTHING gov says

The fact that people still believe it didn’t happen it’s even more hilarious. 🤦🏻‍♂️

@@ChrisTopheRaz lmao you learn that in the McGraw-Hill 5th grade history book or what kid? Ever read anything your government didn’t approve?

@@gpotts212 You’re an idiot. You’re the type that most people make fun of behind your back. And I did astrophysics at ASU, tell me your credentials? Did it not occur to you that our sworn enemy, “the Russians,” that we were in a space race with, admitted themselves that we did in fact land on the moon? They closely followed everything that happened on that mission. Seriously, you’re not as brilliant as you’ve internalized.

About to comment about the last part where you see the moon through the ""astronaut""....

Ready when you are.

Peyong Chan actually, the camera was attached to the landing module, it extended out, that’s why the angle was good

and the sound recordings of their voices was so excellent.

@@richkalbus4346 Yes the sound Was excellent, so?

@@aprendizdecapivara2841 I just watched Richard Branson go to space, the footage was in and out, audio was terrible and he didn't even get anywhere near the moon... but you want me to believe back then they had better signal without all the technology we have today?!... please use some commonsense here.

@@northeastrailwayproductions even if this was in the 1960s, even back then NASA had the technology um make the audio not so bad

I'm not really discounting the whole "we never landed on the moon" thing, but that doesn't mean anything. Buzz Aldrin was an advocate for more space travel and IIRC he was pretty adamant that he landed on the moon, even punched a guy over it. Back to Armstrong, since he died back in 2012 you'd think we'd hear about a deathbed confession or a letter admitting everything if he never landed on the moon since he'd have nothing to lose by admitting the truth by that point (and arguably something to gain; Armstrong's not religious but I'm sure anyone who's dying would have thoughts about the afterlife at some point).

@@GermanicusCaesar117 I have definitely taken that into consideration and is a good point to weigh. In my mind though if I look at both views....I find it much easier for the NASA coverup to be true.....than NASA never going back due to lack of money. They also claim we could never go back because the blueprints for the moon landing accidentally got destroyed or lost....and NASA cant recreate the technology due to it being out of date. Since when has technology went backwards in the world?? The news conference was CREEPY because those astronauts truly looked and acted as if they didnt even understand english rather than their profession! It's all just soooo odd.

It wasn’t guaranteed. There was confidence but not absolute guarantee because anything can go wrong but successful or not they wanted to document it.

I was thinking the same thing why I see right through the astronaut

"Theres a camera taking a video of a satellite moving with the earth as its backdrop".. heck yeah its real. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

So right. But "we've lost the technology..." Let's help NASA morons find it!

short version : well... youre right... no oxygen in space, so conventional engines would not function. But we do not use conventional engines in space. the most common form of propolsion are rockets, of which, liquid oxygen is a primary fuel. Basically, we have to bring our own oxygen up to burn. There are other methods of propulsion based on other fuel sources, solar, nuclear, ect. But if you plan to burn something, BYOO (bring your own oxygen)

this is the long version : Rocket engines actually produce more thrust in a vacuum than they do inside of an atmosphere, because of how they operate. A rocket's thrust comes from the force that accelerating hot exhaust gasses to far beyond the speed of sound provides, not by what the gasses themselves push against. This means that the faster the gasses can get, the more thrust you can get out of a unit of fuel. Since the atmosphere requires energy to move out of the way, it slows down your exhaust quite a bit, which results in a proportional drop in thrust. With no air outside the rocket to slow down the exhaust gasses, the amount of kinetic energy you can get out of each unit of fuel reaches it's maximum. Think of it like this. You have a gas cylinder pressurized to 100 pounds per square inch. The cylinder goes no where because the pressure is omnidirectional inside the vessel. Now say you instantly cut the top off of the cylinder. Now, the pressure of the gasses is pushing with a force of 100 psi against the walls and one end cap, and pushes on almost nothing in the other direction. This creates an unbalanced force which allows the pressurized gas to rapidly expand and move out of the cylinder, while still forcing the cylinder itself in the opposite direction. The only problem is, the moment the gas starts to depressurize, the cylinder will not be pushed as hard, until all pressure is gone and the cylinder stops accelerating. In order to keep the amount of pressure constant while still producing thrust, you need to refill the open cylinder with pressurized gas at the same rate that it leaves the cylinder. It's almost impossible to do this using gas alone, since you need to store it in a separate tank at extremely high pressure in order to feed the open cylinder for just a few seconds. Since you could never make a rocket out of this, we need to change something. So, we will use a combustible fluid to supply pressurized gas inside the cylinder. Much easier to store and handle, a liquid (or two or in some cases even three) doesn't need to be under immense pressure to have enough energy to produce thrust, only enough chemical potential energy. I'm going to use hydrogen peroxide as an example because it is a mono propellant, that is to say it only needs a hot catalyst to react and convert into hot gas, while other fuels like hydrogen or kerosene need a separate oxidizer pumped alongside them to burn. Anyway, our setup now looks like a cylinder with one open end, a large hydrogen peroxide tank, a pump, and a catalyst that the hydrogen peroxide flows through immediately before entering the cylinder. The peroxide is pumped quickly through the catalyst and into the chamber. The moment is comes in contact with the catalyst, it decomposes into hot steam and hot oxygen gas, which expands quickly and fills the cylinder, flowing quickly out of the open end of the cylinder. Congratulations, we have built a small and inefficient rocket! To improve the efficiency we could add a De Laval nozzle to the end of the cylinder, which essentially converts the heat of the exhaust into kinetic energy by accelerating the expanding gas even further. We could also use a fuel that contains more potential energy and lighter exhaust like hydrogen and oxygen, but our engine would need to be much more complex to use these fuels.

i hope i helped answer your question .

studio ghibili Damn, the short answer was the long answer and the long answer was the Gigantamax Meowth answer.

This whole charade is BS, you cant push off of anything in space therefore complete bs. Tell me where the magic line is from atmosphere to vaacuum. Whats holding our atmosphere in?? Now Nasa has reported moon is in our atmosphere. Moon is a light put in firmament by GOD almighty...man making up more lies to keep you and I enslaved!!

Exactly! Total control on the feed, allows full control of the hoax. Simple as that

If you listened carefully they’re basically saying that for example if you went on a trip took some pictures and videos. Came back home and transferred them to social media and deleted the original pictures off your phone, the nut jobs can say that you never went on your trip and is all a lie because you “deleted” the evidence yet the evidence is on social media and if other people took pictures with you.

@@hayosh9309 Your analogy is insane.

Well, first of all, there are lots of "conspiracy theories". You can believe in one, or many, or not even believe in the definition as it is portrayed at all. I am pretty sure that a conspiracy nut, is still a nut. I forever remain a skeptic with one foot in both camps, until I see proof convincing me of one camp.

@@pseudophp what are you trying to say?

@@hayosh9309 yes going to the beach for vacation is just as momentous as going To the moon 😂 that’s so insane

I think it has something to do with double exposure. (Something with the cameras)

Owing to the limited data bandwidth available for TV on Apollo 11, a low-resolution, slow-scan tv system was used on that mission, along with "interlacing'. This latter is a technique wherein the even-numbered lines are scanned in a frame, followed by the odd-numbered frames in the next frame. A long-persistence pohspor has to be used in the scan converter at the downlink site in order to make the video suitable to broadcast to the public. The effects are particularly obvious anytime there is motion in the video frme.These are the reasons why double images and ghostly trails appear.