Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post UK)   Remastered, stabilized HD footage of the Apollo 16 lunar rover is as awesome as you'd expect   (huffingtonpost.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Cool, rovers, remastered  
•       •       •

4096 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Dec 2013 at 1:13 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-22 09:55:17 PM  
Finally someone admits it was 'shopped.
 
2013-12-22 10:08:23 PM  
That is awesome, it also gives some perspective to the size of the hills and rocks.
 
2013-12-22 10:12:14 PM  

twistedmetal: That is awesome, it also gives some perspective to the size of the hills and rocks.


We already knew!  You can go see the set at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum!  I can't believe you people still don't realize it was a hoax to give us an edge in the space race and a precursor to the groundwork in the SALT negotiations.
 
2013-12-22 10:14:48 PM  

doyner: twistedmetal: That is awesome, it also gives some perspective to the size of the hills and rocks.

We already knew!  You can go see the set at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum!  I can't believe you people still don't realize it was a hoax to give us an edge in the space race and a precursor to the groundwork in the SALT negotiations.


th281.photobucket.com

 
2013-12-22 10:26:57 PM  

doyner: We already knew! You can go see the set at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum! I can't believe you people still don't realize it was a hoax to give us an edge in the space race and a precursor to the groundwork in the SALT negotiations.


Wouldn't it be great to make everyone think we landed on the moon?
 
2013-12-22 10:37:49 PM  

Ishkur: doyner: We already knew! You can go see the set at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum! I can't believe you people still don't realize it was a hoax to give us an edge in the space race and a precursor to the groundwork in the SALT negotiations.

Wouldn't it be great to make everyone think we landed on the moon?


No one denies we were sending up swarms of spy satellites in the 60's and 70's.  The idea that we's launch a fake rocket to fake the landing is preposterous.  In fact, it would make MORE sense to launch a series of spy satellites on Saturn V rockets and then stage the landings in order to hide our spying.
 
2013-12-22 10:47:08 PM  

doyner: No one denies we were sending up swarms of spy satellites in the 60's and 70's. The idea that we's launch a fake rocket to fake the landing is preposterous. In fact, it would make MORE sense to launch a series of spy satellites on Saturn V rockets and then stage the landings in order to hide our spying.


You can't spy on anything on the Earth from the moon. It's too far away.

/have you seen the Saturn V launch? In person? That motherfarker was HUGE. It was going to the god damn moon.
 
2013-12-22 10:49:45 PM  
Clearly fake. You can see the boom mic at the top of the video. In fact, if you look closely you can see one of the prop men hang himself in the background.

Seriously though, I'm curious if anyone has ever taken this video to a physicist and asked them to analyze the lunar vehicle and the debris coming off the tires of the vehicle to see if it's accelerating to the ground at the appropriate gravitational speeds.
 
2013-12-22 10:55:43 PM  

Ishkur: doyner: No one denies we were sending up swarms of spy satellites in the 60's and 70's. The idea that we's launch a fake rocket to fake the landing is preposterous. In fact, it would make MORE sense to launch a series of spy satellites on Saturn V rockets and then stage the landings in order to hide our spying.

You can't spy on anything on the Earth from the moon. It's too far away.

/have you seen the Saturn V launch? In person? That motherfarker was HUGE. It was going to the god damn moon.


I'm not saying they were spying from the moon.  I'm saying they were using spy satellite launches as cover.
 
2013-12-22 10:57:32 PM  

doyner: I'm not saying they were spying from the moon. I'm saying they were using spy satellite launches as cover.


They don't need cover for spy satellite launches. They just launch them and don't tell anybody.

Seriously, give your head a shake.
 
2013-12-22 11:04:26 PM  

Ishkur: They don't need cover for spy satellite launches. They just launch them and don't tell anybody.


And Oswald acted alone, right?
 
2013-12-22 11:16:03 PM  

doyner: And Oswald acted alone, right?


No, the secret service agent in the car behind the Presidential motorcade, George Hickey, picked up his AR-15 to respond to Oswald's shots, but the car jerked forward and he accidentally pulled the trigger and shot the President in the back of the head.
 
2013-12-22 11:21:16 PM  

Ishkur: doyner: And Oswald acted alone, right?

No, the secret service agent in the car behind the Presidential motorcade, George Hickey, picked up his AR-15 to respond to Oswald's shots, but the car jerked forward and he accidentally pulled the trigger and shot the President in the back of the head.


Yeah.  And I'm the kook...
 
2013-12-22 11:31:20 PM  

doyner: No one denies we were sending up swarms of spy satellites in the 60's and 70's.  The idea that we's launch a fake rocket to fake the landing is preposterous.  In fact, it would make MORE sense to launch a series of spy satellites on Saturn V rockets and then stage the landings in order to hide our spying.


We were launching spy satellites from Vandenberg AFB on the west coast nearly a decade before we landed on the moon. We didn't need something as preposterous as faking a moon landing to cover it up.
 
2013-12-22 11:40:56 PM  

bdub77: Clearly fake. You can see the boom mic at the top of the video.


They should fire that guy. The sound is terrible.
 
2013-12-22 11:46:26 PM  
I have always said that the epitome of human achievement was building a car, taking it to the moon and doing farking donuts on the farking moon.
 
2013-12-23 01:03:01 AM  
i1048.photobucket.com
 
2013-12-23 01:30:28 AM  

bdub77: Clearly fake. You can see the boom mic at the top of the video. In fact, if you look closely you can see one of the prop men hang himself in the background.

Seriously though, I'm curious if anyone has ever taken this video to a physicist and asked them to analyze the lunar vehicle and the debris coming off the tires of the vehicle to see if it's accelerating to the ground at the appropriate gravitational speeds.


It looks so real...

img126.imageshack.us
 
2013-12-23 01:30:54 AM  
Anyone that says the moon landings were hoaxed/faked needs to be punched in the face by Buzz Aldrin.
news.bbc.co.uk
 
2013-12-23 01:32:35 AM  

dramboxf: I have always said that the epitome of human achievement was building a car, taking it to the moon and doing farking donuts on the farking moon.


Close, but not quite.
i.imgur.com
 
2013-12-23 01:32:49 AM  

bdub77: Clearly fake. You can see the boom mic at the top of the video. In fact, if you look closely you can see one of the prop men hang himself in the background.

Seriously though, I'm curious if anyone has ever taken this video to a physicist and asked them to analyze the lunar vehicle and the debris coming off the tires of the vehicle to see if it's accelerating to the ground at the appropriate gravitational speeds.


Wouldn't matter. One show I saw about Moon landing deniers said that the "official" footage of the rover had its speed altered to give a low-gravity impression.
 
2013-12-23 01:42:59 AM  
Soon they'll be able to get Chinese take out.
 
2013-12-23 01:47:04 AM  
How was that video stabalized?  The 4:3 box around the footage was moving enough to give me a headache!
 
2013-12-23 01:59:14 AM  

bluorangefyre: How was that video stabalized?  The 4:3 box around the footage was moving enough to give me a headache!


That's sort of how stabilisation works....

It moves the frame around to keep the subject stable.
 
2013-12-23 02:05:45 AM  

bluorangefyre: How was that video stabalized?  The 4:3 box around the footage was moving enough to give me a headache!


Yeah, that's what stabilization does. The point is the middle 95% of the screen doesn't move.
 
2013-12-23 02:23:47 AM  
That's one funny looking jade rabbit.
 
2013-12-23 02:25:28 AM  
bazzalisk.org
 
2013-12-23 02:33:51 AM  
DafuQ? We spent millions to put them there and they drive around like it's spring break in Destin Fl? Weren't they there on a mission? Weren't they commissioned officers of some military force? WTH. Do your jobs yokels.
 
2013-12-23 02:39:21 AM  
Them Duke boys are always getting into trouble.

\it's amazing that car fit into the area the size of a suitcase
 
2013-12-23 02:42:33 AM  
 
2013-12-23 02:46:12 AM  

Eps05: bdub77: Clearly fake. You can see the boom mic at the top of the video. In fact, if you look closely you can see one of the prop men hang himself in the background.

Seriously though, I'm curious if anyone has ever taken this video to a physicist and asked them to analyze the lunar vehicle and the debris coming off the tires of the vehicle to see if it's accelerating to the ground at the appropriate gravitational speeds.

Wouldn't matter. One show I saw about Moon landing deniers said that the "official" footage of the rover had its speed altered to give a low-gravity impression.


There's an excellent video debunking of the moon landing deniers from a purely video point of view, proving pretty convincingly that it wasn't technologically possible for us to fake the landing. It went viral a while back.
 
2013-12-23 02:48:20 AM  

ThisIsntMe: DafuQ? We spent millions to put them there and they drive around like it's spring break in Destin Fl? Weren't they there on a mission? Weren't they commissioned officers of some military force? WTH. Do your jobs yokels.


You don't think testing the performance capabilities of the rover was part of their mission? No, you're too busy calling a bunch of really f*cking smart badasses "yokels" from behind your keyboard.
 
2013-12-23 03:02:21 AM  

bdub77: Clearly fake. You can see the boom mic at the top of the video. In fact, if you look closely you can see one of the prop men hang himself in the background.

Seriously though, I'm curious if anyone has ever taken this video to a physicist and asked them to analyze the lunar vehicle and the debris coming off the tires of the vehicle to see if it's accelerating to the ground at the appropriate gravitational speeds.



Neil Degrasse Tyson actually touches on a lot of that in an interview on Joe Rogan's show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8BlN72r_Xk

His big point is that it would be easier to go to the moon than to fake it all.
 
2013-12-23 03:07:16 AM  
Don't believe the moon landing? All you have to do is ask the Soviets. They had every antenna from Polyyarny to East Berlin pointed at the sky and if there was even a hint of a fake, it would have been plastered all over Pravda. Instead, there was very little coverage of it behind the Iron Curtain.
 
2013-12-23 03:13:25 AM  

TV's Vinnie: [bazzalisk.org image 850x531]


I suck at that game.  I have so many crashed rovers on the Mun.
 
2013-12-23 03:13:58 AM  
What amazing times those were.
Scientists in the early days of Apollo would never believe you if you could go back in time and tell them 1972 would be the end of the line for manned moon exploration.

The way things are going now, someone's going to have to explain "science," its process and values, to a whole new generation of schoolchildren before we can have a hope of going back.
 
2013-12-23 03:19:36 AM  

Huck And Molly Ziegler: What amazing times those were.
Scientists in the early days of Apollo would never believe you if you could go back in time and tell them 1972 would be the end of the line for manned moon exploration.

The way things are going now, someone's going to have to explain "science," its process and values, to a whole new generation of schoolchildren before we can have a hope of going back.


You're going to have to explain to me why you think not having a 4x4 on the Moon means no more science. What a childish, naive, rose-tinted world view you have.

Scientists always knew "manned space" was little more than a stunt.

"Putting man in space is a stunt. The man can do no more than an instrument, in fact can do less."  Vannevar Bush

You know who that is, right? I mean you love science so much you know its history so you can explain it to kids, and not just your particular fetish for rockets??? Right?
 
2013-12-23 03:20:09 AM  
Simply awesome.
 
2013-12-23 03:25:49 AM  

Quantum Apostrophe: Huck And Molly Ziegler: What amazing times those were.
Scientists in the early days of Apollo would never believe you if you could go back in time and tell them 1972 would be the end of the line for manned moon exploration.

The way things are going now, someone's going to have to explain "science," its process and values, to a whole new generation of schoolchildren before we can have a hope of going back.

You're going to have to explain to me why you think not having a 4x4 on the Moon means no more science. What a childish, naive, rose-tinted world view you have.

Scientists always knew "manned space" was little more than a stunt.

"Putting man in space is a stunt. The man can do no more than an instrument, in fact can do less."  Vannevar Bush

You know who that is, right? I mean you love science so much you know its history so you can explain it to kids, and not just your particular fetish for rockets??? Right?


So you're saying we should give up manned flight? To just accept that when man's time on Earth comes to an end then we should just go quietly into the night? Do you see no value to having more than one permanent habitat capable of supporting humanity?
 
2013-12-23 03:44:29 AM  
Quantum Apostrophe:

"Putting man in space is a stunt. The man can do no more than an instrument, in fact can do less."  Vannevar Bush

Proven wrong by William Anders.  You know who he is, don't you?  Because he happened to glance out of a window that had no view of his prescribed photography target, he noticed a view of the Earth that he instinctually knew had never been seen before.  So he quickly snapped an unplanned photograph that ended up significantly impacting the modern public perception of this world and everything that it contains.  A probe in that orbit wouldn't have noticed the opportunity.  The impact of the photograph is well documented and written about.
 
2013-12-23 03:47:34 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: There's an excellent video debunking of the moon landing deniers from a purely video point of view, proving pretty convincingly that it wasn't technologically possible for us to fake the landing. It went viral a while back.


thanks for that.   worth the watch
 
2013-12-23 03:49:42 AM  

DarthBart: Don't believe the moon landing? All you have to do is ask the Soviets. They had every antenna from Polyyarny to East Berlin pointed at the sky and if there was even a hint of a fake, it would have been plastered all over Pravda. Instead, there was very little coverage of it behind the Iron Curtain.


Yup. The Cold War was still very much alive in 1969, and if the Soviet's had something to make the United States look like chumps they would of fully used it. Though, this guy puts it much better on why the moon landing could of never been faked. Also, what is wrong with you as an individual that you rather believe in a world where humanity isn't capable of amazing and awesome feats of engineering. Do you like to kick puppies because they're cute too? Or do you just like to think the worse of humanity in general?


1968 was a pretty shiatty year, you know what wasn't shiatty about 1968? We put humans around the farking moon, another world for the first time ever.
 
2013-12-23 04:26:12 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: There's an excellent video debunking of the moon landing deniers from a purely video point of view, proving pretty convincingly that it wasn't technologically possible for us to fake the landing. It went viral a while back.


I cant stream youtube at work but the premise sounds preposterous.  Sounds akin to saying its impossible to make a Godzilla vs Mothra movie.

I cant imagine the argument.
 
2013-12-23 05:06:22 AM  
Kubrick tried to tell us.

pixel.nymag.com

/ducks and runs
 
2013-12-23 05:29:16 AM  
The rover is still up there.
I wonder if it would still start with a new battery in it.
 
2013-12-23 05:32:34 AM  

Frederick: shower_in_my_socks: There's an excellent video debunking of the moon landing deniers from a purely video point of view, proving pretty convincingly that it wasn't technologically possible for us to fake the landing. It went viral a while back.

I cant stream youtube at work but the premise sounds preposterous.  Sounds akin to saying its impossible to make a Godzilla vs Mothra movie.

I cant imagine the argument.


Nope.  He's saying you couldn't make a movie that LOOKS like the Godzilla movie that's coming out next year back in the 1960s.
 
2013-12-23 05:44:55 AM  

Frederick: shower_in_my_socks: There's an excellent video debunking of the moon landing deniers from a purely video point of view, proving pretty convincingly that it wasn't technologically possible for us to fake the landing. It went viral a while back.

I cant stream youtube at work but the premise sounds preposterous.  Sounds akin to saying its impossible to make a Godzilla vs Mothra movie.

I cant imagine the argument.



You really should watch it. Basically he's saying that they aired about 2 hours and 23 minutes of continuous footage from the moon for 600M people here on Earth. It was shot on video. In order to have shown people hopping around slowly, it would have been shot at high speed. In the 1960s there was no high speed video. High speed film, yes (and he goes into that too). There was a disc recorder at the time used for sports replays that could play back video slow, but it could only record for 30 seconds.Anyways, there's a lot more to his argument than just that one point. The overall gist of it is similar to Neil Degrasse Tyson's, mentioned in this thread: That at that time we had the technology to go to the moon. We did not have the technology to fake what people saw on their TV sets when it happened.
 
2013-12-23 05:47:27 AM  

DrPainMD: ducks and runs


Kubrick's assistant is already on the record calling that doc total bullshiat. (Although I enjoyed watching it.) He said the sweater was knitted by someone on the crew, I believe, and that Kubrick picked it because he wanted the kid to be in something that looked like it was homemade/knitted.
 
2013-12-23 05:48:18 AM  

DrPainMD: Kubrick tried to tell us.

[pixel.nymag.com image 560x375]

/ducks and runs


I have no idea what those are supposed to mean.
 
2013-12-23 05:59:19 AM  

DarthBart: Don't believe the moon landing? All you have to do is ask the Soviets. They had every antenna from Polyyarny to East Berlin pointed at the sky and if there was even a hint of a fake, it would have been plastered all over Pravda. Instead, there was very little coverage of it behind the Iron Curtain.


Not just the Soviets. Ask the astronomers at various observatories around the world who were able to receive signals from the retroreflectors the Apollo astronauts left on the moon, and from similar retroreflectors left by Russian probes. Or ask all of the scientists who analyzed the moon rocks, every one of whom verified that they had to have come from the moon.

They filmed these missions, they made audio recordings, they left behind reflectors, people tracked it - not just of Apollo 11, but of ALL the moon missions - they brought back rocks - literally every type of evidence you could possibly collect to prove you did something, NASA made sure they had mountains of it. And still some people don't believe. Which means there is literally nothing that NASA could have done to convince them.
 
Displayed 50 of 88 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report