Hoax? - Flag moves without being Touched

[najak]

But it was filmed live +1.25 second delay at 60 frames per second North American standard.  You are just idly speculating

Other than idle speculation, you have proof of this?  Has anyone actors or crew stepped forward and corroborated this?  No

And you are presuming that everything we saw on TV was honest/genuine.  The MLH theory is that all (or most all) of the Moon footage was pre-filmed, possibly in June 1968, per this man's father's Deathbed confession, who was the Chief of Security for the Hanger in 1968 at Canon AF base, NM.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu5Z75ji3aU

Just because they say it's "live footage" - does that make it fact?

[Mag40]

#1: I'm juggling a dozen commenters.  You only have one.

That's gish gallup  HB bingo for you.

I made this point very clearly.  The video you showed chose to put a SMALL (2-ounce?) lock on the end of it.  MASS MATTERS. 

Mass makes no difference. You can put 10 tons on or 10lb and it makes no difference!

If you change this to a 2 lb lead weight - that changes the rate of decay a LOT.

Edit: misread your post. The decay weight is not relevant, the Apollo 14 example doesn't use a weight.

  In fact, in the Moon video, we see this amplitude approximately cut-in-half!!  So shows this decay, which could indicate air resistance IS at play.

The decay is caused by the jutting edge friction initiating smaller pendulum.

#2: ... except if you simply speed up their film by 2X -- then it matches Earth's period EXACTLY.

Sure does but the rate is 245%. But....you didn't watch the video properly. The same experiment on Earth is significantly slower by air resistance.

https://www.nasa.gov/history/alsj/a14/a14pendulum.html

[najak]

Let's see "proof by speculation".

The "proof" is a combination of factors:
a. when Apollo breaks physics, or there is behavior that was necessary for the hoax (such as losing all telemetry tapes, or discarding key LM design docs).
b. the feasibility of faking it - such as pre-filming and changing the frame rates.

[Mag40]

The "proof" is a combination of factors:

In quotes.

a. when Apollo breaks physics

You can repeat the crap all you want but you've evaded key rebuttal.

or there is behavior that was necessary for the hoax (such as losing all telemetry tapes, or discarding key LM design docs).

Is this done to irritate? The only telemetry data lost that could have been significant was the SSTV data for Apollo 11. The discussion on design docs resulted in you demonstrating how you don't properly read extensive links.

b. the feasibility of faking it - such as pre-filming and changing the frame rates.

Nothing proven, no evidence provided.

[LunarOrbit]

#1: I'm juggling a dozen commenters.

And you want to start more threads? If you have time for more threads you have time to respond to the questions and comments that have been directed at you in your existing threads. You will not be starting any new threads until you do.

[LunarOrbit]

I'm going to lock this thread. It has gone way off topic and Najak doesn't seem interested in defending his original claim.

I will try to separate the off topic posts into a new thread when I have time, but please don't allow Najak to skirt the rules by starting new threads inside his other threads. I imposed this restriction on him specifically to keep him (and us) focused on a small number of threads until they can be resolved.

Update:

The off-topic posts have been moved to the "Najak potpourri" thread. It's a dumpster fire of posts of various different topics.