I'll address each, a final time:
That well may be true but it's still obfuscation and evasion!
#1: Explain why you ignored this and reasserted your claim point #3 above?
Answer: This footage shows sand falling faster than John. If you insist there is a "parabola of scant dust" - we have the hi-rez photo that explains this - we CLEARLY see that "at apex" there is a considerable amount of dust well-above the boot's TOP... So this "parabola" that you love, would be explained by this dust - which CLEARLY either launched FASTER from the start, or launched off the top of the boot half-way up. There is also VERY CLEAR evidence that when he's just 6 inches off the ground, a small mass of dust is ABOVE the bottom of his boot (to the right) which is a CLEAR INDICATOR of a FASTER launch speed. The only conclusion we can collectively draw here is that "at best" this example has some ambiguity. At "worst" it shows that dust which rises alongside the foot - FALLS FASTER. My claim is stronger than yours. But I'm OK with simply backing off on my claim here, because of the ambiguities/obscurities involved.
You have given an answer that doesn't address the actual question! You accused me of supplying doctored footage and said it was not in NASA's version. A lie.
1. Here is an animated gif, taken from YOUR video in the opening post. It is clear beyond any doubt that the footage you snidely claimed was doctored has not been because the same clear parabola rises (nowhere near the soles of his boots!) to the same height and obviously at the same time.
Explain why you ignored this and reasserted your claim point #3 above?#2: Time up = time down - we see time up very clearly, explain why you keep evading this obvious evidence?
Answer: This rule only applies to simple projectile motion where there is nothing influencing the rise/fall "during flight".
Luckily that is exactly what we are seeing. A clear parabolic arc in free flight rising in perfect sync.
Also, if you launch something faster, it'll stay in the air longer (it's a function of launch velocity). So this Parabola that you love, peaks higher than the boot bottom -- so again, was the result of a different Launch velocity. It's faint, rises to a different height, and shows evidence at launch of there being a "faster moving" cluster of dust from the onset.
Oh, I see what you did there. You took the tiny bit at the top of an inch or two and used that to discount the whole thing. Physics doesn't work like that. It's more than close enough in sync and height and your response is deliberate obfuscation. You know fully well what the implication for this is.
#3: Does your "100% integrity allow you to even answer this(!) let alone admit it?
Answer: See above. IF this GIF (showing something that doesn't appear on NASA's own link) is legit, i.e.
And another lie as you avoided question 1 completely!
there is a faint mist of dust between the boots and HIGHER than the bottoms - there are a few viable scientifically sound explanations for this. See above.
Your scant inaccurate attention to the bloody questions is getting kind of irritating. Nothing in that "answer" is relevant to the question:
3. In that gif, there is a shadow of dust moving forwards on the left and when he is descending there is slight ground discolouration as the dust settles - it moves forwards as a wave.
Does your "100% integrity allow you to even answer this(!) let alone admit it?
#4: Explain why you have not honestly acknowledged this, preferring to find instances where conditions are more favourable also on modern clear footage?
Answer: Your volleyball examples had THREE critical deficiencies. (1) They were far away, (2) he was jumping sideways (causes more dispersing), and (3) whatever effect is needed to Pull the Sand up to the HEIGHT OF THE BOTTOM OF THE FOOT -- was ABSENT. Just as Young's other jump had little to no dust rise - -not much to see.
Just evasion again. My examples showed a similar distance to Young and the same dispersal and difficulty of surface material against surface material. You don't even mention video quality! The only major rise of dust on Young's jump was the parabola. The rest as you keep avoiding, tracks forwards with shadow and surface discolouration. Due to the nature of the volleyball quality, an honest person could enlarge it maybe 3 or 4 times and it would still be better than the lunar quality video, rendering your obfuscation about its distance moot!
If your example were closer, and showed thick mass of dust rising up to the bottom of their feet - then you'd have a viable comparison.
Your integrity has not increased at all:
I gave a PERTINENT volleyball example - which satisfies ALL 3 of these requirements, and we clearly see the sand falling at the SAME speed as the man.
No you didn't. Yours was sideways on. Sand was wetter underneath.
#5: Why have you ignored this? Please don't insult everyone with some bollocks about coincidence.
Answer: For Hippity example, there is a lot of chaos for each jump. When you kick up dust, it's not just "one steady stream of particles all with the same launch angle and speed". The fact that the closest example shows evidence of a "along-the-ground high point collision" - indicates that "this concept is at play here". You cannot discount it. Therefore there is enough ambiguity and missing clarity for us to make solid conclusions. Yet here again, we do see the Dust that rises beneath his feet very clearly, disappears. The only sand that keeps moving was "kicked" at a high velocity than Cernan... and SOME OF IT with an extra upward launch velocity.
You really need to start answering the bloody question given! Nowhere did you address the question:
5. The following Gene Cernan gif was presented to and ignored. It shows that the same soil impact occurs at landing on 3 jumps.
Why have you ignored this? Please don't insult everyone with some bollocks about coincidence.#6: How is this clearly not very solid proof the soil ISN'T too falling too fast?
Answer: See above. Loose/dry sand at a high horizontal/parallel velocity, will bounce, roll, and scuttle -- until it hits a high point, or the velocity dissipates. SOME of this sand could be coming in from above -- but we have NO TRAJECTORY VISIBLE -- so we cannot measure it's "parabola" at all -- if it was launched upwards faster than he's jumping himself -- the timing will be extended.
You are certainly not answering this honestly. There is clearly visible regolith coming down as he descends. If you need to lie to make your case you really need to work on that "100% integrity"
ARE YOU SERIOUSLY CLAIMING THERE IS NO DESCENDING DUST WAVE ENDING WITH THE VISIBLE SPLASH AS HE LANDS!#7: Explain to the forum how you can possibly suggest does this on Earth, that height, distance and speed? In addition, notice how the astronauts are exhibiting comedic motion when adjusted.
Answer: Watch the sharp/dramatic inflection in his backpack -- 10 degrees? This is a sign of counter balancing this leg motion. It is not "superhuman" for him to be able to conduct this maneuver, especially if this spacesuit is a facade (not the 100 lb real deal)... If you can't prove this to be a "super-human foot maneuver" this PROVES nothing. In MLH theory, this was a deliberate event, inserted for Apollogists -- and he was coached to "kick it as hard as you can, while trying to make it look effortless" -- and he only partially succeeded... his 10 degree torso flinch, shows sign of stress here.
Your whole answer is clear proof that you will jump through endless hoops to maintain your claim. Nobody with integrity looks at that activity and sees anything that you could do on Earth. This was part of an unbroken long sequence of footage and he manages to do that, for that height? What a waste of time you are being!
All are answered.
Not even close.
Thread complete.
Nope.
