Back to main menu THE APOLLO VIDEOS I spent less time on the videos than on the photos (on which I really did a systematical study), but nevertheless there are some interesting things to notice on these ones. I'll skip the studies of the walk of astronauts and the way the jeep rides, there are youtube videos about them. Here are some interesting points about the videos (not exhaustive). 1) The flapping flag. This flapping flag has been much criticized by the apollo doubters and "explained" by the Apollo fans who see nothing abnormal in it. The demonstration of the mythbusters convinced the latter that it was normal for the flag to flap on the moon. The demonstration of the mythbusters only shows that the flag starts flapping if it is submitted to an action (and in their demonstration, this action is the removal of the air which creates a move), and that it goes on flapping for some time, for there is no air resistance to slow it down. Figure 1: The flag is rotated more than it is necessary On this video we can see that the flag if rotated in an important way. It gives the feeling of being shaken by the wind. But, if we attentively look at the top horizontal bar of the flag, we can see that it rotates before the lower part of the flag; if it was the wind which was making the flag turn, it would be the converse. So the conclusion is that it is the astronaut which makes the flag turn and not the wind; and the way the flag flaps in reaction to this rotation is normal, and needs no wind. In conclusion, this sequence could perfectly have been shot on the moon, for no wind is needed to make the flag flap. Notice that this sequence could also have been shot on the earth, for the flag is moved quite swiftly, which leaves no time to air resistance to slow down the flag. Of course the Apollo believers will say that the fact that it could also have been shot on the earth is no proof that it was not shot on the moon, and I have to agree. So, if I admit that no wind is needed to make the flag flap as it does in this sequence, the Apollo believers will think that I admit that this sequence is perfectly normal, and was probably shot on the moon? Not at all! In fact we can see that the astronaut turns the flag four times; well, why not, will the Apollo believers say, turning it eases the assembling of the two parts of the flag. I agree with that, but what's disturbing is that the astronaut didn't have to turn it that much, small rotations would have been enough. In fact, if we look at the successive rotations of the flag, we can see that the two first ones are quite important; especially the second one which covers a half turn! A half turn? When you assemble two tubes, have you ever turned that much? Why not, will the Apollo believers say, it may be a little excessive, but it's not forbidden, and it's still no proof of an anomaly! And yet there is something abnormal! Look at the astronaut during the second rotation which makes a half turn: His body doesn't move at all! That means that he made the flag turn on a half turn uniquely with a torsion of his wrist! So the astronaut would be able to turn his gloved hand in his pressurized suit on 180°??? SORRY, BUT I DON'T BUY IT!!! The astronauts could not have a such mobility with their hands in their pressurized suit, no way!!! There's no miracle, it's absolutely certain that the pressurized suit was severely restricting their mobility, and that they certainly could not have twisted their hand that much! I found this on the Web: "NASA claims that the space suits worn by the astronauts were pressurized at 5 psi over the ambient pressure (0 psi vacuum) on the moon's surface. We have examined the gloves NASA claims the astronauts wore and find they are made of pliable material containing no mechanical, hydraulic, or electrical devices which would aid the astronauts in the dexterous use of their fingers and hands while wearing the gloves. Experiments prove absolutely that such gloves are impossible to use and that the wearer cannot bend the wrist or fingers to do any dexterous work whatsoever when filled with 5 psi over ambient pressure either in a vacuum or in the earth's atmosphere. NASA actually showed film and television footage of astronauts using their hands and fingers normally during their EVAs on the so-called lunar surface. The films show clearly that there is no pressure whatsoever within the gloves ...a condition that would have caused explosive decompression of the astronauts resulting in almost immediate death if they had really been surrounded by the vacuum of space." I have found this sequence in Apollo 17: a bag moves randomly apparently under the action of wind. It certainly doesn't move from inertia, here, for it always moves on the same side. There is also a scene in which the flag is immobile, and suddenly starts to slightly flap as an astronaut passes along it, without touching it (Figure 2). I have also made an accelerated animation on figure 3. This time, the Apollo fans cannot use the excuse that the astronaut would have shaken the flag although we don't see him shaking it. An Apollo believer has claimed that the astronaut would have touched it because the flag would be in bias, but it is impossible, because the astronaut remains consistently taller than the extremity of the flag, which would not be the case if he was touching it. So now they use the excuse of "static electricity", but this excuse has no ground. Figure 2: The flag starts slightly flapping as the astronaut is just passing by without touching it Figure 3: An accelerated animation of the flag starting to flap without having been touched at all The video in which we can see the flag starting to flap without having been shaken: And the video in which the flag slightly flaps whereas an astronaut passes by without touching it: 2)The flashes above the astronauts This video shows strange luminous flashes which appear above the heads of the astronauts: I have made an animation I show on figure 4. Figure 4: An animation showing the flashes of the wires On several occasions, we can see luminous flashes above the astronauts, either close to them, or farther away (Figure 5). On the left of figure 2, we can see a luminous flash just above the pack of an astronaut; the Apollo fans say that this flash comes from their antenna; but, just after, there is another flash which is on the vertical of the astronaut, but quite above, and thus cannot come from his antenna. The moon hoaxers see there the proof that the astronauts are suspended on metallic wires which help them to have a type of walk they could have on the moon. The fakers made it on purpose that these flashes would be seen, for they could have coated the wires to avoid them. Figure 5: A first flash appears just above the astronaut's pack on the first photo, but a second flash appears quite above on the second photo 3)The jumps of the astronaut in Apollo 16 In Apollo 16, the mission commander jumps twice. Here is the video of his double jump: On the slowed down animation below, which compares the two jumps of the astronaut, you can see that, on the second time, he jumps differently from the first time. On the second jump, the astronaut slightly pivots; this is visible because, unlike on the first jump, the astronaut doesn't put his both feet on the ground in the same time, he puts his left foot a little before the right one. If he really had jumped on the moon, he would not have pivoted. Figure 6: On the second jump, the astronaut slightly pivots But it's not the only strange thing that we can see on this video: Before shooting the other astronaut with his camera, the astronaut who is the photographer shifts along the flag, from left to right. What's weird is that, at the start of the shift, he appears before the flag, and, all of a sudden, like by magic, he appears after it, without having visibly backed up. It's quite obvious on this slowed down animation that I made with the pictures of the video (Figure 7): Figure 7: As he is shifting on the right, the photographer suddenly appears after the flag, whereas he previously was before it 4) The experiment of Galileo. The famous experiment of the hammer and the feather in Apollo 15 is, for the Apollo fans, the undeniable proof that the scene was shot on the moon. Here is a video showing this experiment as done by the astronauts on the "moon": The experiment consists in dropping in the same time a hammer and a feather; as the feather is more subjected to air resistance than the hammer, it will not arrive at the same time on the ground as the hammer if the experiment is conducted on the earth. In the other hand, on the moon, as there is no atmosphere and so no air resistance, the hammer and the feather will arrive in the same time. In the video, we can effectively see the hammer and the feather, which are simultaneously dropped, arrive at the same time on the ground. David Percy has shown that, if the feather was dropped vertically, it was less subjected to air resistance, and could then arrive on the ground at the same time as the hammer. However, on the video, the feather seems to be dropped horizontally. Then, was the experiment really done on the moon? It's only if we scrupulously analyze the pictures of the video that we can understand the trick. I have made a slowed down animation with pictures of the video, and I have noticed something weird. I finally understood how they managed to slow down the hammer. Figure 8: The slowed down animation of the astronaut dropping the hammer and the feather Figure 9: The same animation with added contrast in order to have a better visibility a) First look at figure 10: At the very start of the fall, the hammer is entirely visible (left on figure 10). A little after, its lower end disappears, eaten by the thermal blanket which is just behind the astronaut (right on figure 10); we only see its upper part. Figure 10: At the start of the fall, the hammer starts disappearing behind the thermal blanket b) Then the hammer completely disappears, hidden by the thermal blanket. On the animation, we can see this thermal blanket make ripples as the hammer is going down. On the two photos of figure 11, we can see that the thermal blanket's shape changes; it's the hammer, as it glides along this one, which makes it undulate. Figure 11: The hammer glides on the thermal blanket, and makes it undulate c) Finally, at the end of its fall, we can see the hammer reappear from behind the thermal blanket. On the photo of the left of figure 12, we start seeing its lower part; its upper part is still hidden by the thermal blanket. On the photo of the right, it has completely gotten out of the thermal blanket, and is completely visible again. We then can see it arrive at the same time as the feather, which, on its side, fell normally. Figure 12: At the end of its fall, the hammer reappears from behind the thermal blanket d) A little before the demonstration, the camera is closer than during the demonstration, and we can better see the astronaut (Figure 13). We can see the astronaut make moves with his arm which holds the hammer: He lowers it, and the end of the hammer disappears behind the thermal blanket. He is in fact signaling what he is about to do, he makes understand that, when he drops the hammer, this one will fall behind the white stuff, and close to it. Figure 13: Before the demonstration, as the camera is closer to him, the astronaut makes moves to make understand what he is about to do I think that you start to understand the trick now: In order to slow down the hammer in its fall, the astronaut made it glide along the thermal blanket which slowed it down by friction. He compensated the air resistance to which the feather was submitted by the friction of the hammer on the thermal blanket. But, making the hammer rub on the thermal blanket is not the only way that the fakers compensate the difference of fall between the hammer and the feather: On this picture extracted from the sequence, I show that the feather has a little advance on the hammer; it is not true that they are dropped exactly in the same time; the feather is dropped just a little before, but, as the sequence happens quite fast, it is not so visible. It is only by decomposing the images of the sequence that it can appear. And also, which proves us it is really a feather? It could as well be a bit of plastic! By decomposing the images of the sequence, I could determine the exact time of the fall of the hammer, and I have found one second. The hammer is dropped from a height which can be estimated around 1,20 meter (at least). At this height, it takes 1.2 second for the hammer to fall on the lunar ground, and 0.5 second on earth. So, the hammer falls a little faster than it would on the moon, when it should rather fall a little slower as it it is slowed down by rubbing on the thermal blanket. But in fact, it falls faster than we could think. Indeed, the fall of the hammer is not regular in fact. By decomposing the images of the sequence, I have found several duplicated pictures. I show here the sequence slowed down and with a progress bar; and you can see that, on several occasions, the progress bar moves and the image does not change. If I remove the duplicated images of the fall, the hammer falls faster (around 0.7 sec), and it takes just a little more than it would on earth, by the fact of rubbing on the thermal blanket which slightly slows it down; this proves this demonstration has been made on the earth, and cannot have been done on the moon. 5) The experiment of the pendulum. In the kind of wrong demonstration that the astronauts are on the moon, there also is the experiment of the pendulum. Here is a video showing this experiment done by the astronauts: Because of the difference of gravity, the pendulum normally beats slower on the moon then on the earth, and that's what the astronaut tries to demonstrate. In fact, look at this animation I slowed down (Figure 14): Figure 14: A slowed down animation od the demonstration of the pendulum. If you watch attentively, you can see that, when the pendulum arrives on the left side, it is not tight at all, it is curved. That is perfectly visible on this picture (Figure 15): Figure 15: A capture picture of the sequence when the pendulum arrives on the left. I have added luminosity on the pendulum's thread si that it is better visible. (Figure 16): Figure 16: By adding luminosity, it is still more that the pendulum's thread is not tight when it arrives on the left. You can also see that the second astronaut has stepped forward. The explanation is very simple: When the pendulum arrives on the left, the second astronaut briefly grabs it before releasing it (I have circled his hand in red). This way the astronauts artificially slow down the beat of the pendulum. 6) The astronaut's walk. In a video, we can see the astronaut have a most strange walk: Here is an animation showing this walk (Figure 17). Figure 17: An animation which shows the astronaut's strange walk. What's strange is that he doesn't fall down whereas it is obvious that he is unbalanced, and that his center of gravity is not supported by his feet; he is too bent over. Even on the moon, he should fall down. Indeed, for any object not to fall down, it is necessary that its center of gravity projects inside its basis of support (Figure 18). Figure 18: The center of gravity of an object must be inside its basis of support. In the animation, it is very clear that the astronaut was too bent over for his center of gravity to project inside his basis of support. He should definitively have fallen down. The only possible explanation is that he is supported by wires, there can be no other explanation. 7) The demonstration of the free falling bag. A demonstration that I find perfectly hilarious is the demonstration of the free falling bag (in Apollo 16). An astronaut throws a plastic bag up , and this one falls down relatively slowly. The Apollo fans reason like the bag was thrown in an environment without air, and compute that the way that the bag falls down corresponds to the moon's gravity and not the earth's gravity. But it's perfectly ridiculous, for, if the plastic bag falls down slowly, it's just because it's slowed down by the action of air. Throw a plastic bag in the air, and you will see that it falls slowly, very differently from a hammer! Of course, the Apollo fans claim that the bag has been leaded, but it's absolutely not the case, it's a perfectly normal plastic bag, absolutely not leaded, and it falls down like a normal plastic bag does on earth, slowed down by the action of air. Now, the Apollo believers will say that, even if the bag is not leaded, I can't prove it is not falling on the moon, for it is still falling at the speed it would on the moon...in fact, yes, I can prove it can only be falling on the earth and not on the moon! Indeed, look at the way the astronaut is throwing the bag: he gives a rotation to the bag; if the bag was really falling on the moon, as there is no air to counter this rotation, the bag would keep this rotation till the end of its fall! Instead of this, you can see that the rotation of the bag stops before it has finished its fall, because this rotation has been countered by the action of air!!! This undeniably proves that the bag is thrown on the earth, and not on the moon! 8)Some excerpts from Apollo videos I show here some interesting excerpts of Apollo videos contaning anomalies. On this excerpt of an Apollo video, we see the astronaut turn a device (some sort of brush). We can see the shadow of this device on his suit. What's strange is that the device's shadow does not turn as much as the device itself! I have found this video very interesting. On it we can see the astronauts alternatively shrink and grow up. When the astronauts are shrinking, you might think that it is because they are moving away from the flag. But, if you watch attentively, you can see that they are not really moving away from the flag, but stay close to it instead. In fact, they just shuffle about, and don't really step backward; they make a sort of a dance which keeps them close to the flag, and in spite of that they magically shrink and grow up. In Apollo 17, we can see the astronaut walk like he was on the moon. And suddenly he throws an object...and this object falls like it was falling on earth!!! This object is falling too fast to be falling on the moon! So, does the moon have a variable attraction? There is another video in Apollo 17 in which an astronaut pours dust into a bag, misses the bag, and the dust falls on the "lunar" ground instead of falling into the bag: We can then see that the dust falls too fast to be falling on the moon. (the one who is holding the bag is Cernan, the taller of the two astronauts). I think that the moon has an ambition to grow to become as big as the earth! In a video of Apollo 17, we first see an astronaut very close; then the camera sweeps on the right...and we see the two astronauts working on the ALSEP. So, who was the astronaut at the beginning of the video? Apollo fans have told me that the astronaut of the beginning was one of the two astronauts working on the ALSEP when the camera catches them. Really? Then how come that we didn't see this astronaut when the camera swept from left to right? He should have been in the field of view of the camera when he moved to the ALSEP! Some Apollo believers have told me that he remained on the right of the field of view of the camera while he moved to the ALSEP till he reached it. In fact, there is a fact which makes that the camera had every chance to catch up with the astronaut as he moved to the ALSEP. This animation made with images of the video shows that the hill in the background progressively shrinks as the camera sweeps on the right; that means that the camera zooms out as it turns on the right. In order to be able to estimate the change of the zoom factor along the video, I have taken the images separated by two seconds two by two, and tried to superpose an image into the next image, two seconds later. First couple: I obtain a zoom factor difference of 0.74. Second couple; I obtain a zoom factor difference of 0.7 Third couple: I obtain a zoom factor difference of 0.78 Fourth couple: I obtain a zoom factor difference of 0.816 Fifth couple: I obtain a zoom factor difference of 0.83 Sixth couple: I obtain a zoom factor difference of 0.83 So finally, the zoom factor difference between the fist and last image is: 9.74*0.7*0.78*0.816*0.83*0.83=0.227. The camera zooms more than four times at the beginning of the video relatively to the end of the video (4.34). Of course, there may be some errors, but the difference of zoom is certainly not less than a factor 4. In fact, in the final view, the astronaut of the beginning would look something like this approximately. He is not completely close to the rover like one could think. The zoom makes the angle of view decrease. If you zoom by a factor 2, the angle of view is divided by 2; if you zoom by a factor 4, the angle of view is divided by 4. This animation illustrates what happened in the video. The scales are not respected, but it gives an idea of what happens. After the astronaut has passed the camera, the camera can easily catch up with him, not only by the fact of its rotation, but also by the fact that it zooms out! On the astronaut's waist we can see three connectors I have circled. According to the documentation (right), these connectors are the gas connector, the purge valve, and the water connector. But the problem is that, on the video, these connectors are smaller and closer to each other than what the documentation shows. In Apollo 17, an astronaut throws up an object. This object disappears above the top of the video and falls back. But, when it falls back, we can see the impact of its fall, but not the object itself. Has it become invisible? On this excerpt of video of the mission APollo 17, we can see the astronaut leaning on the rover; so the fact that he appears bent is not abnormal. But, after, he moves away from the rover, and he is still bent. How do you explain he does not fall? On this excerpt of a video of Apollo 17, the astronaut is seen carrying the ALSEP. The anomaly is that the ALSEP swings too much; if he was carrying it normally, it could not swing so much; in order to make it swing that much, he would have to exert an effort of torsion on the bar which supports the two parts of the ALSEP; with bare hands it is already not so easy, but with his pressurized gloves, it is still more difficult. In some videos of Apollo 17, the background alternately becomes dark, then clear,then dark again, then clear again... Why would the luminosity change, since the conditions of lighting are always the same: the sunlight does not change, and there is no lunar cloud to change the conditions of luminosity. Furthermore, when the background becomes dark, the astronaut should also become less luminous, and he remains as luminous as when the background is clear! In this excerpt of video of Apollo 17, the camera makes a complete revoslution: It starts with the astronaut and ends with him. But in the video of Apollo 17, the shadows only make a half revolution, whereas the camera has made a complete revolution. In a video of Apollo 17, we can see the shadow of the astronaut on the ground just before he passes before the camera; and we can also see the shadow of the high gain antenna; and we can see that this shadow is about to cover a wide part of the astronaut's bust. But when the astronaut passes before the camera, we don't see the high gain antenna's shadow over him like we would have expected; we see a little shadow, but which looks nothing like what we should have seen. In a video of Apollo 17, we see the astronaut pass very close to the camera, and we have a good view of the backpack. This one looks very strange... ...Nothing like what it should have looked like! In a video of Apollo 17, for almost 5 minutes we can see stains on the camera's lens; there is no doubt these stains are on the camera's lens, for they move with the camera. These stains came to the lens after the astronaut made some cleansing on the rover. First these stains cannot adhere to the camera's lens by capillarity, for water (humidity in air) is needed for the stains to adhere by capillarity, and there is not water on the moon. By energically rubbing a plastic rule against a cloth, I can make a little bit of paper adhere to the rule, but this effect is temporary, and, after the rule has lost its electrostatic charge, the bit of paper falls. The stains cannot adhere to the camera's lens by electrostatic effect either, for there is nothing to create an electrostatic charge on the camera's lens, and to maintain it. Besides the stains should not even reach the camera's len when the astronaut cleanses the rover, for the dust cannot billow on the moon like it would on the earth, and the dust can only go down and not up to the camera's lens. Then Cernan says "Have you got a lens brush in there, Jack?", and he is seen brushing the lens to remove the stains. But how could he know there were stains on the camera's lens, as Parker (who can see the video from Houston) didn't warn him about these stains, and Cernan himself cannot see the video? In a video of Apollo 17 (at time 142-57-22), the camera sweeps the lunar landscape forth and back. There are two important items to notice on the video: The hill in the background I have circled in red, and a lateral rod of the high gain antenna I have circled in yellow. The camera can rotate alround its vertical axis, and also rotate around the horizontal axis, but it cannot make a translation. The high gain antenna also has a fixed position. On this stereoscopic view, I represent on the left view a part of the video on which the camera sweeps forth with the little hill visible in the background, and on the right view a part of the video on which the camera sweeps back also with the little hill visible in the background; the second view is played in reverse in order to be compared with the first view. Normally, as the camera and the high gain antenna both have positions which don't change along the rotation of the camera, the rod of the high gain antenna should behave the same relatively to the background...but you can see that it is not the case. When the camera sweeps forth, the rod of the high gain antenna disappears before it reaches the little hill... ...But, when the camera sweeps back, the rod of the high gain antenna already appears as it is over the little hill! In a video of Apollo 17, as the camera is sweeping upward and downward, a hill comes over another hill and vice versa. In a video of Apollo 16, an astronaut is deploying the flag. At the beginning of the video, the flag is small, and it progressively magically grows as the astronaut deploys it. In Apollo 12, there is a section "TV troubles" with several videos. Along these videos the shadow of the LM changes in a strange way which can certainly not be explained by just some TV troubles. In a video of Apollo 17, an astronaut who is behind the rover disappears in a mysterious way. He cannot be absorbed by the shadow of the LM, for he is still as some distance from it when he starts to disappear. Besides, when he comes back, he reappears when he is farther away than the distance he disappeared. And he disappears again when he comes near the rover, without any possible logical explanation, for, at the place he disappears, we could see the unshaded lunar ground. In a video of Apollo 11 we can also see the astronauts mysteriously disappears. The Apollo believers claim the astronauts are hidden by the LM's shadow, but it can't be the case, for they disappear as they are before the LM's shadow; indeed, when the first astronaut disappears, he disappears in an illogical way, for his head and his legs remain visible for a short moment whereas his torso has already disappeared. There also are some videos with strange behaviors of shadows. In this video of Apollo 17, a shadow, which cannot belong to an astronaut, is seen moving and is then attacked by another shadow which cannot belong to an astronaut either. And, in this video of Apollo 16, two shadows move in opposite direction; one of them moves toward the left, whereas the other one moves toward the right. In some videos, we can see strange effects created by the whistle blowers in order to attract the attention and show the fakery: Just after the landing of Apollo 12, before any astronaut descends the ladder, we can see strange objects pass before the camera: In Apollo 14, a whistle blower suddenly puts an object before the camera. The Apollo believers claims that it is because one of the astronauts near the LM has "snagged" the cable of the camera, and that it is in fact the connector of the camera which has come before the camera. The connector is behind the camera, so the cable would have been to be severy pulled for the connector to have a chance to come before the camera. But, in the next video, the camera falls down, and, at that moment, we can follow the path of the cable of the camera, and we can see that the astronauts are not near it, and that, therefore, they could not snag it. Besides, if an astronaut had really snagged the cable of the camera, the camera would have shown an oscillation it didn't show. In Apollo 15, we suddenly see a cable inexplicably fall before the camera. In a video of Apollo 17, we can see a strand of rope which comes before the camera. We can even see that it is partially hidden by an astronaut, which means that it is agitated behind this astronaut. It would be of course impossible if this scene was happening on the moon, and it therefore proves it did not happen on the moon. These photos, referenced AS17-133-20341 and AS17-133è20342, have been taken by Schmitt inn station 5 of EVA2 of Apollo 17. They show Cernan coming back to the rover. Effectively, on AS17-133-20341, we can see Cernan in the distance behind the rover. On AS17-133-20342, we seem not to see him any more, though he has not still arrived at the rover, but in fact, he is at the same distance from the rover, and hidden by an element of the rover. On AS17-133-20342, we also see how the rover's camera is currently oriented, and we can see that it faces to pole of the high gain antenna. There is also a video which films the return of Cernan to the rover (left of the stereoscopic view). On the video, the pole of the high gain antenna always remains out of the field of the camera, on the right of the image, as long as Cernan has not arrived to the rover; it is only when he has arrived near the rover that the camera starts turning clockwise, and then passes the pole of the high gain antenna...But, on the photo AS17-133-20342, the pole of the high gain antenna is full before the camera, although Cernan is still at some distance from the rover! In the Apollo 17 video library, in EVA 3 close-out, at time 169:59:40, they say this: "Transmission to Earth requires that the high-gain antenna be pointed almost exactly and, here, we get a bit of video by luck. The LM can be seen at the left side of the image." I have circled the high gain antenna on this representation of the rover They really had much luck, for they propose the following video clip to illustrate this. We see the shadow of the high-gain antenna on the rover: See how it plays the gig! It certainly was "almost exactly pointed" during this ride! SUPER LOL!!! 9) Who filmed Armstrong when he descended the ladder after Apollo 11 landed? This is the video showing Neil Armstrong descending the ladder to be first one to walk on the moon. The big question is: How was this sequence filmed. This is an image of the video showing Armstrong descending the ladder in Apollo 11. Observe the angle of view under which he is seen. It is obvious that the camera of the MESA (circled in red) could not take Armstrong under the angle of view we see in the video. Moreover, on this picture, there is a problem with the orientation of the handle of the camera; it should be vertical. If the image is upside down, it is possible to invert it. But if the camera is in oblique, then it is completely different; it is then not possible to make a correction to obtain a normal image. It is true that the horizon is effectively seen in oblique on the video. But Armstrong is not seen bent like he should be due to the inclination of the camera. So, is he standing obliquely so he is seen vertical on the video? On this drawing from the LM's handbook, it is obvious that the angle under the camera of the MESA sees Armstrong (red arrow) is very different from what we see on the video (blue arrow). And on this view from above (which uses a view of the LM taken from the CM in Apollo 14), it is also obvious that Armstrong is not seen under the angle of the MESA's camera could see him (red arrow), but under an angle which would be turned more counterclockwise (the blue arrow). But that's not all: This stereoscopic view shows on the left an image taken before Armstrong descended the ladder, and on the right an image just after he descended it. Normally, apart from the astronaut, the images should be identical; yet they are not, there are details which are different, those that I have circled in red and green. Furthermore, Armstrong (or rather the actor who stands for him) appears in an abnormal way, especially the part I have circled in yellow which is unexplainable! And, like it was not sufficient, there also is a problem with the ladder: On the left, you can see that the ladder was stuck on the leg; but, on the video of the descent, the ladder is detached from it (as we can see on the detail I have circled). At a given moment in the video, there is a glitch, and the frame of the camera goes up. You could say: Why couldn't have the camera have a glitch? Well it could, but what's abnormal is that the frame of the camera goes up at that moment, and remains up for the rest of the video. This should not have happened, as the camera is not hand held! So, this is absolutely impossible...Unless an obliging selenian (moon dweller) kindly helped the astronauts and accepted to hold the camera and film Armstrong while he was descending the ladder. Yes, this must be the explanation, it is the most rational one! The camera (circled in red) and the high gain antenna (circled in green) have a fixed position on the rover. The camera can turn, but cannot move on the rover. When the rover is still, the earth also has a fixed position relatively to the camera. Consequently, when the camera turns, the high gain antenna and the earth both move on the image of the camera, but they move THE SAME! That means that the earth does not move relatively to the high gain antenna on the image. It would be different if the camera could move on the rover, but as it can't... ...Yet, on this excerpt of video of Apollo 17 at time 170-37-29, little before the return to orbit, the earth moves up relatively to the high gain antenna! It is contradictory with what I just said! I name "X", "Y", and "Z" the three axes of the camera, X being its lengthwise axis, Y the horizontal axis perpendidular to this axis, and Z the vertical axis. The camera could turn around the "Y" axis, which corresponds to a pitch for a plane, and also around the "Z" axis, which corresponds to a yaw for a plane. But it could not turn around the "X" axis, which corresponds to a roll for a plane... ...Yet, on this excerpt of video of Apollo 17 at time 170-39-59, the high gain antenna turns on the image, which means that the camera would have turned around the only axis it could not turn around, the "X" axis (corresponding to a roll for a plane). Once again, the camera behaves in a theoretically impossible way! 10) Landing in the valley of Taurus-Littrow (Apollo 17) In a video of the mission Apollo 17, we see an astronaut walking in the "lunar" dust, after Apollo landed in the valley of Taurus-Littrow. This is another version of the video I have cleared. The first impression I have is that the astronaut is projecting dust farther away when he makes little steps than when he makes bigger ones. Now, I'd like someone to explain me why, when the astronaut pivots on the left, he projects dust in all directions, except on his left! I have tried myself, and I have always projected dust mainly on my left! Then we can see problems on the astronaut's shadow: the astronaut has his right arm raised, but lowered on his shadow. The orientation of the left arm on the top picture and the orientation of the right arm on the bottom picture are not very different; but the orientation of the same arms on the shadow is very different! I confess that I have some difficulty to take this sequence seriously. 11) The ride of the rover on the lunar ground In the Apollo 17 footage, there is a nice video of the rover riding on the moon...Do you realize, the rover riding on the moon!!! Hmm, let's see closer! At the beginning ot the video, the rover first goes in the direction of the LM and comes back from it. We can see the rover make a extremely sharp turn as it comes near the LM. Yet, given the respectives sizes of the LM and the rover, the LM is then still at some distance from the LM...unless this LM is a small model, and the rover is in fact very close to it and had to make a sharp turn in order to avoid it and not bump into it! Then we can see the astronaut very close riding the jeep. But where is the camera which is filming this??? There is no camera to film the astronaut under this angle of view. In fact, if we look into the visor, we can see the reflection of a camera; I have circled it in red. First this camera is not correctly oriented to take the video we see. But there is even much better! In fact the things we see in the visor's reflection (I have circled in red) are not on the right side of the astronaut, but in front of him. So the camera of the rover (circled in blue) should take him frontally, and not on his right side, and what we see on the extreme right side of the visor should in fact appear on the middle of it! This is what we should see his visor: the items which are in front of him reflecting on the center of his visor. An Apollo fan has told me that the camera was not on the right of the camera, for he was seen under an angle (he largely exaggerated this angle, saying it was of 45°, when it is visible that this angle is much less than 45°). I also pointed it out to him that it could not be the camera of the rover taking this scene, because we could see the pole of the low gain antenna on the right of the video. He then told me that it was possible that the camera could take both the astronaut and the pole of the low gain antenna because the camera had a wide angle of 60°. But the camera would need to have an angle of more than 90° to take both the pole of the low gain antenna, and the astronaut; and the astronaut would be seen frontally anyway and not on his side! These Apollo fans have no sense of perspective! And if it was the camera of the rover filming the scene, as this camera is fixed on the rover, the astronaut and the pole of the low gain antenna would not move laterally on the video like we can see they do; only the landscape would move. Then we can see what the astronaut is filming with his camera, that is the landscape which rolls past in front of him. For what follows, I need to give some explanations about perspective. On this animation, the rover is riding on a straight line, and the camera is shooting in front; the items which are on the middle of the image stay on the middle of the image. On this animation, the rover is riding on a straight line, but the camera is shooting in bias; this time the items which are on the middle of the image move on the right of the image, they don't stay on the middle of the image. On the front of the jeep we can see the high gain antenna on the left (the thing which looks like a reversed umbrella) and the front camera on the right. This photo shows how the high gain antenna and the camera are positioned on the front of the rover; the high gain antenna is on the right and the camera on the left, but, of course, when the astronaut sees them from his seat, they are in reversed order. This means that, on this part of the video, the rover's camera is shooting right in front, in the direction that the rover moves. Effectively, if we consider a trio of stones in the distance on the middle of the video, this trio of stones remains at the same lateral position as the rover comes near it, which is natural since the camera is currently shooting in the direction the rover moves. Then, suddenly, the view of the front of the rover changes: The pole of the high gain antenna disappears on the left, and the front camera moves from the right to the left: This means that the rover's camera has been turned on the right (or turned it clockwise if you prefer); and this is not to make us admire the right of the rover, but for a more vicious reason instead. As the camera is no more shooting in the direction that the rover moves, but sideways to that direction, the rocks which are on the middle of the video when far away should shift on the right of the video as the rover moves forward. But it is not at all the case; I am showing here a couple of stones which does not move on the right when it comes near the rover. Even though the camera is no more shooting in the direction the rover moves, the terrain continues to react like the camera was still shooting in the direction the rover moves! Now, someone has suggested that the rover might be turning on the right, which would explain that the items on the middle of the video remain on the middle of the video; by examining the background, I have seen that it was shifting on the left, so his suggestion is not stupid. In this animation, in which I represent a road which makes a turn, I show that the trees which are on the right of the curve first move on the left of the image before moving on the right. That means that the items we see on the right of the image should not move in a linear way, but in a curved way, if effectively the rover turns. But it is not what we see on the video, the rocks move in a linear way! One really has to have a serious level of delusion to think that this sequence has been filmed on the moon! 12) A strange transparency In Apollo 11, we can see a strange TV transmission, in which the astronaut seems to be transparent. But, how did they obtain this effect? Some explain it with the "burn" effect. We can see this effect on the arms of this drummer: when his arms pass very fast before the brilliant spotlights, we sometimes see the spotlights through his arms because of the remanence of the light. But this effect cannot explain what we see in Apollo 11, for two reasons: - This effect works when a dull object is before a brilliant light or eventually a very brilliant object, not when the object is before an object which is not more luminous. - This effect is very temporary and can only be observed when the object passes very fast before the brilliant light. Here, in Apollo 11, the astronaut is not less luminous than the objects we can see through him, and the transparence persists for a too long time, so, definitively not, the "burn" effect is not the good explanation! I rather think that the good explanation is the one I propose here: They first filmed the LM alone without the astronaut. Then they filmed a second sequence, with the same background, but this time they asked the astronaut actor to hop before the LM. Finally, they mixed the signals of the two videos to obtain a superposition of the images they contain which creates the strange effect we can see on the Apollo video, on which the astronaut seems to be transparent. Of course, that totally excludes a live transmission!