• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Moon buggy ride motion stabilized--very cool

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

pong

pong

Groupthink Must Die
It appears that an amateur video geek did for us what NASA never bothered to do: motion stabilize one of the moon rover adventures. This footage from Apollo 16 is just wonderful and the stabilization makes it much more engaging to watch.


China also has a small rover on the Moon right now. I wonder what they'll have in five years? A manned base?

Apollo 16.jpg

Little red rover.jpg
 
Still looks fake to me.. It just does not move like you would expect with only 1.622 m/s² gravity. On earth with it's 9.78 m/s² gravity field things move like we are used to. We all know our MASS stays the same in any gravity field or Zero-G. If we jumped vertically on the moon , and assuming our muscle density and reflexology is the same, as it would be in a spacesuit with artificial life support. Suppose you can jump 30 cm on Earth, you would be able to jump almost 2 meters straight up into the air. And you would be able to fall much further on the Moon. If you jumped off the roof of your house, it would only feel like you jumped off a table. You would be able to throw a ball 6 times further, hit a golf ball 6 times further. There has been ZERO pictures , videos of this effect. No astronauts jumping 10 feet in the air, moon buggies bouncing like crazy... It is painfully obvious that they are in Earths gravity field. It appears all they do is slow down the footage a bit to give it an eerie feeling. This is not conspiracy, but basic science. It always makes me laugh when people try to debunk the Apollo mission by looking at shadows and light sources, no need for that, just a basic understanding of physics is needed. I believe they went to the moon but for whatever reason they faked all the footage here on Earth...it is soooo painfully obvious.

Here is calculator to tell how much you would weigh on various astral bodies:
Your Weight on Other Worlds | Exploratorium

I would weigh 49 pounds, I would have the same muscular strength as I do on earth...I could and would be able to jump 10 feet at least... just think about it...Peace.
 
Wow nice photos, they don't show anything actually recognizable, but nice anyway. They have civilian satellites that can read a newspaper headlines from low earth orbit, or at least image the rooftop of my house pretty good (think google earth). You can see my car, my bird feeder in good detail and that is through a hundred miles of atmosphere, but this blurry crap is the best a near billion dollar project can deliver through no atmosphere..please. I truly wish people would use that grey matter between their ears when they analyse this stuff.
 
:rolleyes:

Services like Google Maps use aerial photography for the close-up images. That is, photographs shot onto huge strips of film, something like one to two feet wide, from airplanes flying at 10,000 feet. At least it was being done that way six or seven years ago when I looked into some of the strange looking things that showed up on Google Maps when it was new.

Reading newspapers from space is an old claim, backed up by nothing but other old claims, as far as I have been able to determine.

A little homework goes a long way in preventing the parroting of nonsense. Just sayin'.
 
Last edited:
Double Nought Spy said:
:rolleyes:

Services like Google Maps use aerial photography for the close-up images. That is, photographs shot onto huge strips of film, something like one to two feet wide, from airplanes flying at 10,000 feet. At least it was being done that way six or seven years ago when I looked into some of the strange looking things that showed up on Google Maps when it was new.

Reading newspapers from space is an old claim, backed up by nothing but other old claims, as far as I have been able to determine.

A little homework goes a long way in preventing the parroting of nonsense. Just sayin'.
Click to expand...

Nice post and yes I believe the high detail images are still done the way you are saying as far as I know.
 
Back
Top