CanucksCorner.com Forums

Hmmm, I wonder why Abbotsford was chosen? To quote the Doctor, "Not that there is anything wrong with that."

Oceans under the oceans feeding water to ringwoodite.

and

Topper wrote:Oceans under the oceans feeding water to ringwoodite.

and

Oh so that's where the waters receded to after the Flood!!

Good work Toppy...

Letting the days go by
Let the water hold me down
Letting the days go by
Water flowing underground
Into the blue again
After the money's gone
Once in a lifetime
Water flowing underground

And you may ask yourself
How do I work this?
And you may ask yourself
Where is that large automobile?
And you may tell yourself
This is not my beautiful house!
And you may tell yourself
This is not my beautiful wife!

Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...

Back in '77 I received a Talking Heads song title for nickname, but I Iet him live.

Strangelove wrote:http://heiwaco.tripod.com/moontravel.htm

ukcanuck wrote:

LOL that dufus doesn't know what he's talking about!

Schmuck is assuming they'd broadcast a live hoax, rather than prerecorded + edited.

I prefer assumption-less facts + science, they go into great detail about the video/pics here:

There's clearly not enough data to say with certainty that the moon exists in the first place. Another thousand years of observation is required and in the meantime we should pray.

If it does exist it is almost definitely hollow. Or concave.

Rumsfeld wrote:There's clearly not enough data to say with certainty that the moon exists in the first place. Another thousand years of observation is required and in the meantime we should pray.

If it does exist it is almost definitely hollow. Or concave.

LOL OMG you people!!

If the moon exists it can't possibly be concave!

What part of this do you not understand:

[quote="Strangelove"][quote="ukcanuck"]




Schmuck is assuming they'd broadcast a live hoax, rather than prerecorded + edited.

um nooo....he's saying that the technology required to film or video astronauts walking around in less gravity than would be present in a studio here on earth could only be simulated with slo-motion video camera's that didn't exist in 1969.

He does mention that it might be done with 35 mm movie cameras of the kind that Stanley Kubrick used in a 2001: A Space Odyssey however the problems in creating the hours and hours of footage to convert into video to be broadcast later would contain so many flaws (splices, scratches, dust etc) that the whole "conspiracy" would have been known immediately in 1969.


face it bub, your position on this is just plain hollow

ukcanuck wrote:

Strangelove wrote: Schmuck is assuming they'd broadcast a live hoax, rather than prerecorded + edited.

um nooo....he's saying that the technology required to film or video astronauts walking around in less gravity than would be present in a studio here on earth could only be simulated with slo-motion video camera's that didn't exist in 1969.

um nooo....he says in the clip: "We've been able to do slow motion in film for as long as we have had film".

Then says the moon videos were on video (rather than film)

Then he goes on and on and on and on about how much film would be required for the length of the "Landings".



But he misses the possibility that short segments of a hoax could have been filmed, then projected in slo-mo

.... the projection then recorded on video (no splices, etc).

(keep in mind the ridiculously low-quality of the moon videos in comparison to the moon pics)

(and yes, at certain points he assumes a live hoax broadcast)

ukcanuck wrote: face it bub, your position on this is just plain hollow

I'm not your bub, man.

You didn't watch my video did you.

I'd like to see your man sgcollins respond to what the real experts in his field say in dat dere vid.

And btw the way, I don't have a position on this.

Strangelove wrote:

ukcanuck wrote:

Strangelove wrote: Schmuck is assuming they'd broadcast a live hoax, rather than prerecorded + edited.

um nooo....he's saying that the technology required to film or video astronauts walking around in less gravity than would be present in a studio here on earth could only be simulated with slo-motion video camera's that didn't exist in 1969.

um nooo....he says in the clip: "We've been able to do slow motion in film for as long as we have had film".

Then says the moon videos were on video (rather than film)

Then he goes on and on and on and on about how much film would be required for the length of the "Landings".



But he misses the possibility that short segments of a hoax could have been filmed, then projected in slo-mo

.... the projection then recorded on video (no splices, etc).

(keep in mind the ridiculously low-quality of the moon videos in comparison to the moon pics)

(and yes, at certain points he assumes a live hoax broadcast)

ukcanuck wrote: face it bub, your position on this is just plain hollow

I'm not your bub, man.

You didn't watch my video did you.

I'd like to see your man sgcollins respond to what the real experts in his field say in dat dere vid.

And btw the way, I don't have a position on this.

lol I did start watching but its three hours long its going to take a lot of skiving at work to get through it all.

I don't think you were paying much attention to my video because the "doofus" addresses your theory of "fixing the video images before hand

He points out that in 1969 it virtually impossible in practical terms to transfer 147 minutes of slow-mo moon walk filmed in a studio on high speed 35 mm film then transfer it to video without all kinds of detectable flaws. He lists them all including a thing called gate weave which is produced by the 35mm film wobbling slightly as it spools through the video lens on the telecine (the machine that transfers film to video). Digital image stabilization can correct this today ( you could probably do it on a mac book) but in 1969 the digital technology did not exist.

so he does in FACT address the idea of prerecording on film and transferring to video for a "live broadcast"

As for your position, its been pretty much the same "we did not go to the moon" since before the great migration and at least two conspiracy threads...