ApolloHoax.net

Apollo Discussions => The Hoax Theory => Topic started by: bknight on October 04, 2015, 10:04:25 PM

Title: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 04, 2015, 10:04:25 PM
Since we are in the midst of spatial recognition and Apollo 15 landing area from lunar orbit I thought I'd post a video I ran onto a week or so ago.
It concerns flag movement during Apollo 15 as Dave Scott passes between the flag and camera on the rover around 2:35.  I have my explanation but was curious what the rest of the forum thinks
What caused the flag movement?

Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: JayUtah on October 04, 2015, 10:53:14 PM
There have been several proposals, but the one I favor is that Scott is actually closer to the flag than it first seems and actually brushed it.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 04, 2015, 11:06:15 PM
That is/was my guess the camera is using a wide angle lens setting and he is much closer to the flag than he appears, very likely brushing it with his left arm/hand.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: raven on October 04, 2015, 11:46:23 PM
I really don't like Shane here's  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbJvgqoeFSU) insulting language, but his presentation and analysis is sound to the best of my knowledge.
I am fond of the electrostatic theory induced by UV radiation, but both are possible with how close he was. One thing is for sure, it ain't air, as the flag would have stopped moving far sooner in air, and the dust kicked up would be moving quite differently.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 05, 2015, 12:01:49 AM
I really don't like Shane here's  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbJvgqoeFSU) insulting language, but his presentation and analysis is sound to the best of my knowledge.
I am fond of the electrostatic theory induced by UV radiation, but both are possible with how close he was. One thing is for sure, it ain't air, as the flag would have stopped moving far sooner in air, and the dust kicked up would be moving quite differently.
Nice video I was told that I had spatial issues when I  commented he was close enough to touch the flag. The 3d was a great idea. I hadn't considered the electrostatic theory.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: onebigmonkey on October 05, 2015, 01:41:56 AM
I've always wondered if it was a simple matter of vibration from the footsteps..
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Gazpar on October 05, 2015, 05:50:14 AM
I've always wondered if it was a simple matter of vibration from the footsteps..
But you can see the astronaut walking besides the flag when he salutes for the photos and the flag does not move.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: gwiz on October 05, 2015, 06:10:09 AM
Another possibility is that he kicked some soil against the flagpole.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Bryanpoprobson on October 05, 2015, 06:16:00 AM
I have to do this from memory as I don't have the bandwidth to view the video until I'm home on Wednesday, but as I recall isn't the first movement of the flag towards the astronaut? This would seem to favour brushing against it or static!
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Count Zero on October 05, 2015, 07:33:45 AM
Oh, if ONLY the astronauts had thought to hang some reference-object, such as a 3'X5' piece of nylon (ideally one that's subdivided by high-contrast parallel stripes) in the frame at the same distance as the flag.  Then we could have measured the difference in size of the near and far edges and calculated how far it was from the camera.

Of course, if I was going to wish for that, I might as well wish for the astronaut to carry some rectangular object of known dimensions (on his back, say) so that we could calculate his distance from the camera, too.

But that would just be silly.

Oh well...
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 05, 2015, 07:48:05 AM
I've always wondered if it was a simple matter of vibration from the footsteps..
But you can see the astronaut walking besides the flag when he salutes for the photos and the flag does not move.
That is a good point that I attempted to present, but that was quickly brushed aside by the rather poorly informed poster.  Another good point is that his body blocks from view what his left arm/hand are doing, so that one can not conclusively say that it didn't touch the flag or be effected by electrostatic charge.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 05, 2015, 07:53:00 AM
I have to do this from memory as I don't have the bandwidth to view the video until I'm home on Wednesday, but as I recall isn't the first movement of the flag towards the astronaut? This would seem to favour brushing against it or static!
I had to watch again, when the body clears the flag it appears that the flag may be toward the end of its arc away from Dave, just as I would expect from a brush or the electrostatic effect.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: frenat on October 05, 2015, 09:19:23 AM
This is one of Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored's favorite clips.  IIRC Jarrah White supposedly proved the astronaut was close enough to touch it.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
This is one of Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored's favorite clips.  IIRC Jarrah White supposedly proved the astronaut was close enough to touch it.
Gwak, the blunder dis-proved a HB proposition?  I quit watching his videos after watching the Apollo 1 fire, so that may be the case.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: frenat on October 05, 2015, 09:26:32 AM
This is one of Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored's favorite clips.  IIRC Jarrah White supposedly proved the astronaut was close enough to touch it.
Gwak, the blunder dis-proved a HB proposition?  I quit watching his videos after watching the Apollo 1 fire, so that may be the case.
I haven't watched it myself but that's the story supposedly.  I've heard that in the next breath after he says they could have been close enough he makes up some reason why they weren't.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 05, 2015, 09:28:05 AM
This is one of Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored's favorite clips.  IIRC Jarrah White supposedly proved the astronaut was close enough to touch it.
Gwak, the blunder dis-proved a HB proposition?  I quit watching his videos after watching the Apollo 1 fire, so that may be the case.
I haven't watched it myself but that's the story supposedly.  I've heard that in the next breath after he says they could have been close enough he makes up some reason why they weren't.
Now that seems more like the blunder
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Count Zero on October 05, 2015, 09:43:50 AM
Nobody ever mentions the first part of the clip, where the astronaut holding the flag moves quite quickly into the frame, plants it into the base and turns it around, all without the flag flapping any more than can be explained by inertia.

Also, look at their feet throughout the clip.  Every little motion sends dust flying several inches - sometimes more than a foot.  We can see that the dust is fine enough to leave a crisp footprint, yet does not billow at all - it just falls right back to the surface.

We cannot rule-out electrostatic forces on the flag.
We cannot rule-out kicked dirt hitting the flag.
We cannot rule-out ground vibrations causing the flag to move.
We cannot rule-out the astronaut reaching out and touching the flag.

The one thing we CAN conclusively rule-out is atmospheric effects, because the behavior of the flag as they're setting it up and the behavior of the dust kicked as they move is only possible in a vacuum (and in low-gravity to boot).

Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Mag40 on October 05, 2015, 01:45:03 PM
There's a tiny movement away from Scott as he runs across, but is too far away to be static surely? It is about a metre away. My favourite is a small spray of regolith from his boot. He is going quite quickly and we can see hundreds of examples where it gets kicked in front of him. It wouldn't need much contact with the flagpole to make it move the flag. He definitely went on to hit it with his arm, I've seen a few vids that show that, one of them indeed is from the blunder.

Didn't someone do a gif showing it to be a video glitch?
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Luke Pemberton on October 05, 2015, 02:13:26 PM
This is one of Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored's favorite clips.  IIRC Jarrah White supposedly proved the astronaut was close enough to touch it.
Gwak, the blunder dis-proved a HB proposition?  I quit watching his videos after watching the Apollo 1 fire, so that may be the case.
I haven't watched it myself but that's the story supposedly.  I've heard that in the next breath after he says they could have been close enough he makes up some reason why they weren't.

Scrolling down thinking that no one would raise this, but I have been beaten to the punch. Stories certainly travel well from the dark recesses of North Sydney, the above is the story in a nut shell.

The Blunder, for once in his life, actually showed competence with mathematics. I actually think someone helped him with the sums, as based on previous experience it is far too hard for him.

Anyway, he dismissed the calculations out of hand. Error analysis Jarrah?
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on October 05, 2015, 02:18:39 PM
...

Anyway, he dismissed the calculations out of hand. Error analysis Jarrah?
If he rejected it, IMO the reason would be "Oops, this proves the video was shot on the moon.  I don't believe that men went to the moon, therefore the calculation MUST be in error".
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on May 02, 2016, 03:03:08 PM
This is one of Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored's favorite clips.  IIRC Jarrah White supposedly proved the astronaut was close enough to touch it.
I just spent the better part of this morning/afternoon reviewing a couple of threads Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored's posted to before banishment.
My thoughts concerning him are: skilled in dealing with questions/answers to his audience.  Reminds me of a lawyer in many respects.  I was interested in his lack of answers/more questions(moving the goal posts) when interacting with Jay.  Although many here took him to task that he failed to answer questions, resulting to ad hominem statements about many here now/long gone.
Has anyone researched him?  He seems like a European, but that may be totally off base.

EDIT:  It does seem that he lived in YouTube land and took all of the hoaxers information as ture, since it fit with his perception of Apollo
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Scott on June 23, 2016, 08:57:23 AM
Jarrah proved that the astroanut didn't brush the flag.

Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement



This video also shows that it had already started moving before he got close enough to touch it.

The flag that moved



This video shows that the flag movement is consistent with atmosphere.

windyz.wmv

(00:50 and 1:50 time marks)


So does this one.

Physics of the Moon Flag

(18:50 time mark)


Here's some more stuff.

Moonfaker: LRO, Flag or no Flag?




https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker%3A+The+Flags+Are+Alive
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker%3A+Flagging+The+Dead+Horses


It's pretty clear that air made it move.  This footage was taken in a studio.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: gwiz on June 23, 2016, 09:17:09 AM
It's pretty clear that air made it move.  This footage was taken in a studio.
It's pretty clear that it didn't, air can be ruled out by the way the flag moves subsequently, see Count Zero's post above for the summary of the situation.
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=993.msg33963#msg33963
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 23, 2016, 10:22:59 AM
Jarrah proved that the astroanut didn't brush the flag.

Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement



This video also shows that it had already started moving before he got close enough to touch it.

The flag that moved



This video shows that the flag movement is consistent with atmosphere.

windyz.wmv

(00:50 and 1:50 time marks)


So does this one.

Physics of the Moon Flag

(18:50 time mark)


Here's some more stuff.

Moonfaker: LRO, Flag or no Flag?




https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker%3A+The+Flags+Are+Alive
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker%3A+Flagging+The+Dead+Horses


It's pretty clear that air made it move.  This footage was taken in a studio.
Clearly the Blunder has demonstrated that he is rather uninformed with real world observations as he debunks himself in various points.  Take a look at these videos that totally debunk his stupid observations.

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com/2011/06/apollo-15-flag.html
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Scott on June 23, 2016, 01:13:26 PM
Quote
  We cannot rule-out electrostatic forces on the flag. 
There is other Apollo footage in which the astronaut is near a flag but isn't moving fast and the flag is not attracted to the astronaut.  The only time a flag moves without being touched is when the movement is consistent with the atmospere explanation.  Try trotting by a similar-sized piece of cloth hanging from a ceiling light and you'll see the same movement that you see in the Apollo flag.

Quote
  We cannot rule-out kicked dirt hitting the flag. 
If we put it on full-screen and watch a frame at a time, we can see that the movement is consistent with its having been hit by a wall of air.  There are no depressions in the flag caused by particles.  The forward movement of the flag is completely uniform as it would be if hit by a uniform wall of air.

Quote
  We cannot rule-out ground vibrations causing the flag to move. 

Ground vibrations strong enough to cause the flag to move would cause noticeable movement of the rod and pole.  The movement of the flag would also start at the rod and move downward.  The force that moves the flag comes from the direction of the astronaut - not the rod or pole.

Quote
  We cannot rule-out the astronaut reaching out and touching the flag. 

The first two videos in my other post clearly show that the flag had already started moving when the astronaut got close enough to touch the flag.


Quote
   the behavior of the dust kicked as they move is only possible in a vacuum 
The behavior of the "Dust" is consistent with footage of large-grained sand being kicked in air shown in slow-motion.  Large-grained sand would not billow as dust would.

MoonFaker - Project Sandbox
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: frenat on June 23, 2016, 01:18:21 PM
Hi Rocky/DavidC.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 23, 2016, 01:33:27 PM
Hi Rocky/DavidC.

Etc. Etc. and Etc.
Switching forums and posting observations that have been debunked since you started posting them, do not improve your spatially and visually challenged viewpoint of this video.

And from Conmoquest a question you evaded or chose not to answer
Quote

Gillianren

2013-Aug-10, 11:44 AM

My serious question is this.

 How does the waving of a flag disprove everything else?

 You see, it has to, if it's going to prove a hoax "by itself." You have to somehow have faked every single other piece of evidence, from the Saturn V to the rocks to the telemetry. All of it. That means that no piece of evidence has any weight, somehow, because of one thing that frankly doesn't even make sense as an argument. You can't even just claim that it proves that this piece of footage was faked unless you can explain how it was faked. If you can't explain that, the more logical explanation is that the flag moves through some unconsidered mechanism that was available on the Moon. Certainly that's easier than faking the movement of the regolith, the movement of the astronauts, and so forth. (I'm not even bothering to argue against the "washed sand" explanation, because I can't quite believe there's anyone who doesn't understand why you can never remove all the fine particles for long.) This is where the "smoking gun" claims fail. There's no such thing, because you still have to explain everything else that points to a Moon landing.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Scott on June 23, 2016, 01:45:02 PM
Quote
How does the waving of a flag disprove everything else?   
There's no proof that they really went to disprove.  Everything Apollo-believers present as proof has alternative explanations.  One piece of solid proof that they didn't go is all that's necessary.  The bottom line is that the flag wouldn't have moved like that in a vacuum.  Therefore, the footage wasn't taken in a vacuum.  Therefore, they weren't on the moon. 

If they had really gone to the moon, there would be a ton of proof that they really went and no proof that they didn't go. There seems to be a ton of proof that they didn't go and zero proof that they went.

If you think there's something that proves they really went, please post it and we can talk about whether it's really proof.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 23, 2016, 02:02:40 PM
Quote
How does the waving of a flag disprove everything else?   
There's no proof that they really went to disprove.  Everything Apollo-believers present as proof has alternative explanations.  One piece of solid proof that they didn't go is all that's necessary.  The bottom line is that the flag wouldn't have moved like that in a vacuum.  Therefore, the footage wasn't taken in a vacuum.  Therefore, they weren't on the moon. 

If they had really gone to the moon, there would be a ton of proof that they really went and no proof that they didn't go. There seems to be a ton of proof that they didn't go and zero proof that they went.

If you think there's something that proves they really went, please post it and we can talk about whether it's really proof.
Many links have disagreed with your interpretation of how the flag movement was filmed in an atmosphere versus a vacuum.  Simply restating your propositions as proof that they are valid begs the question.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: JayUtah on June 23, 2016, 02:12:08 PM
Everything Apollo-believers present as proof has alternative explanations.

Irrelevant.  One may always speculate about other causes for observation besides the proffered or commonly held one.  The ability to do that does not itself challenge the prevailing view.  In order to show that some new hypothesis should prevail, one must show it explains the evidence better than the prevailing one.  Noting that hypothetical alternatives exist is not probative.  It is tantamount to setting the standard of proof at the level of proving it is impossible for something to have occurred any other way, not merely that it didn't occur any other way.

Quote
One piece of solid proof that they didn't go is all that's necessary.

The Bellwether fallacy (a special case of the Fallacy of Limited Scope).  You must, in fact, explain all the evidence that supports the conclusion you disagree with, because only then does it become a rational theory.  You cannot simply suppose there must be some reasonable explanation for all the evidence if you predicated your theory solely on one piece.

Quote
The bottom line is that the flag wouldn't have moved like that in a vacuum.

Begging the question.

Quote
If they had really gone to the moon, there would be a ton of proof that they really went...

There is.  You're trying to explain it all away.  That exercise presupposes its existence.

Quote
...and no proof that they didn't go.

You have provided no proof that they didn't go.  You have merely speculated about other ways in which you think the evidence could have arisen that the did go.

Quote
If you think there's something that proves they really went, please post it and we can talk about whether it's really proof.

You are the one claiming it was hoaxed.  You have the burden to prove it was hoaxed.  Merely speculating other ways in which the evidence may have arisen that they did go does not meet that burden of proof.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Scott on June 23, 2016, 02:22:04 PM
Quote
  You are the one claiming it was hoaxed.  You have the burden to prove it was hoaxed.  Merely speculating other ways in which the evidence may have arisen that they did go does not meet that burden of proof. 
I maintain that the flag's moving withoug being touched is proof that the footage was taken in atmosphere which closes the whole case.  There's other proof such as the size of the reflection of the sun in the astronaut's visor seen at the beginning of this video.

Look at the size of the reflection of the sun in the astronaut's visor at the beginning of this video.


The reflection of the sun on a convex surface is much smaller than that.  That's the reflection of a large light.


There's more stuff here.

What Happened on the Moon


Was it only a Paper Moon - James Collier - LEM Analysis


Conspiracy Theory : Did We Land on the Moon ?. (FULL) (February 2001)

Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: frenat on June 23, 2016, 02:53:54 PM

Look at the size of the reflection of the sun in the astronaut's visor at the beginning of this video.


The reflection of the sun on a convex surface is much smaller than that.  That's the reflection of a large light.


Prove it.  Prove that it is ONLY consistent with a large light.  I'm betting you can't because it isn't.  The reflection can vary based on the camera used and the surface it is reflected off of.  In this case the surface may be scratched and/or have dust on it which will affect the reflection as well.  You are making the fallacious claim that it ONLY happens one way when you haven't proven that.

Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: JayUtah on June 23, 2016, 02:55:28 PM
I maintain that the flag's moving withoug being touched is proof that the footage was taken in atmosphere...

You present the affirmative hypothesis that ambient air is what caused the movement.  You purport to establish this by ruling out a few alternatives.  This is not how an affirmative proof goes.

Quote
...which closes the whole case.

Fallacy of Limited Scope.

Quote
There's other proof such as the size of the reflection...

Start a new thread, if this isn't about the Apollo 15 flag.  Do not Gish Gallop.

Quote
There's more stuff here.

All of which was long ago debunked.  If you cannot address the debunking already on the table, do not simply attempt to reset decades-old claims as if they were new.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: Scott on June 23, 2016, 03:07:04 PM
Quote
  All of which was long ago debunked. 
I've never seen it debunked.  I've seen people try to obfuscate it and then consider it to have been debunked.

The flag anomaly has already closed the whole case.

Quote

Jarrah proved that the astroanut didn't brush the flag.

 Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement



This video also shows that it had already started moving before he got close enough to touch it.

The flag that moved



This video shows that the flag movement is consistent with atmosphere.

windyz.wmv

(00:50 and 1:50 time marks)


So does this one.

Physics of the Moon Flag

(18:50 time mark)


Here's some more stuff.

Moonfaker: LRO, Flag or no Flag?



We can talk about the other stuff but it won't be about whether they faked it.  It will about how they faked it.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: JayUtah on June 23, 2016, 03:12:56 PM
I've never seen it debunked.  I've seen people try to obfuscate it and then consider it to have been debunked.

Good thing the validity of the debunking doesn't depend on your opinion of it, especially now that you've confessed to being FatFreddy88/RockyC/Cosmored/etc.  Your reputation precedes you.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: JayUtah on June 23, 2016, 03:14:26 PM
We can talk about the other stuff but it won't be about whether they faked it.  It will about how they faked it.

No.  You may not simply wave your hands and declare your hypothesis proven, nor do you get to control what is or isn't talked about on a public forum.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: gillianren on June 23, 2016, 10:48:00 PM
And from Conmoquest a question you evaded or chose not to answer
Quote

Gillianren

2013-Aug-10, 11:44 AM

My serious question is this.

 How does the waving of a flag disprove everything else?

 You see, it has to, if it's going to prove a hoax "by itself." You have to somehow have faked every single other piece of evidence, from the Saturn V to the rocks to the telemetry. All of it. That means that no piece of evidence has any weight, somehow, because of one thing that frankly doesn't even make sense as an argument. You can't even just claim that it proves that this piece of footage was faked unless you can explain how it was faked. If you can't explain that, the more logical explanation is that the flag moves through some unconsidered mechanism that was available on the Moon. Certainly that's easier than faking the movement of the regolith, the movement of the astronauts, and so forth. (I'm not even bothering to argue against the "washed sand" explanation, because I can't quite believe there's anyone who doesn't understand why you can never remove all the fine particles for long.) This is where the "smoking gun" claims fail. There's no such thing, because you still have to explain everything else that points to a Moon landing.

Aw, thanks!  I freely admit to not being an expert on the radiation question, photogrammetry, and so forth, but I can ask a simple question!
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: ka9q on June 24, 2016, 03:30:14 AM
Jarrah proved that the astroanut didn't brush the flag.
Actually, I seem to remember him proving exactly the opposite in another video.

Do you know how the Apollo TV system worked? Do you understand its rather unique and unfamiliar artifacts?
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 24, 2016, 08:16:55 AM
Jarrah proved that the astroanut didn't brush the flag.
Actually, I seem to remember him proving exactly the opposite in another video.

Do you know how the Apollo TV system worked? Do you understand its rather unique and unfamiliar artifacts?
Are you saying that he both proved that Dave Scott didn't touch the flag and then turned around and proved he did?
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 24, 2016, 08:19:43 AM
And from Conmoquest a question Aw, thanks!  I freely admit to not being an expert on the radiation question, photogrammetry, and so forth, but I can ask a simple question!
Your question got me to thinking differently, one can't prove that Apollo was a hoax by showing one aspect was faked, but all the aspects must be proven wrong.  But the hoaxers will look at it like, one aspect proves the whole program was faked.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: gillianren on June 24, 2016, 11:18:20 AM
We're conditioned by society, I think, to look for smoking guns.  But, when it comes to this sort of thing, there aren't any.  Everything is a part of the picture.  Every piece must fit or else you're looking at the puzzle wrong.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: JayUtah on June 24, 2016, 11:50:47 AM
Are you saying that he both proved that Dave Scott didn't touch the flag and then turned around and proved he did?

I have only hearsay, but I distinctly remember someone else reporting that Jarrah had made some sort of photogrammetric computation that allowed for Scott to have been close enough to the flag to have brushed it.  In general I don't consider Jarrah competent to make any computation involving specialized techniques such as photogrammetry.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 24, 2016, 11:56:05 AM
Are you saying that he both proved that Dave Scott didn't touch the flag and then turned around and proved he did?

I have only hearsay, but I distinctly remember someone else reporting that Jarrah had made some sort of photogrammetric computation that allowed for Scott to have been close enough to the flag to have brushed it.  In general I don't consider Jarrah competent to make any computation involving specialized techniques such as photogrammetry.
Since I haven't watched any videos since I finish the series on Apollo 1 I can't say either, but raven posted a video that shows Dave was likely close enough to touch it.
Shane video here  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbJvgqoeFSU)
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 24, 2016, 11:57:33 AM
We're conditioned by society, I think, to look for smoking guns.  But, when it comes to this sort of thing, there aren't any.  Everything is a part of the picture.  Every piece must fit or else you're looking at the puzzle wrong.
It is a bunch of woo-woo voodoo to attempt to show that they are smarter than all the people who worked on the project over the dozen or so years.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: BertieSlack on June 24, 2016, 02:28:46 PM
Look at the size of the reflection of the sun in the astronaut's visor at the beginning of this video.


The reflection of the sun on a convex surface is much smaller than that.  That's the reflection of a large light.

Watch this video: and read Blisterhiker's excellent comment.
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: bknight on June 24, 2016, 03:04:14 PM
Look at the size of the reflection of the sun in the astronaut's visor at the beginning of this video.


The reflection of the sun on a convex surface is much smaller than that.  That's the reflection of a large light.

Watch this video: and read Blisterhiker's excellent comment.
Betamax101 does a great job in his vids. :)
Title: Re: Apollo 15 Flag movement
Post by: gillianren on June 25, 2016, 11:29:05 AM
We're conditioned by society, I think, to look for smoking guns.  But, when it comes to this sort of thing, there aren't any.  Everything is a part of the picture.  Every piece must fit or else you're looking at the puzzle wrong.
It is a bunch of woo-woo voodoo to attempt to show that they are smarter than all the people who worked on the project over the dozen or so years.

I think it's more ubiquitous than that.  I think the "smoking gun" thinking slips into most people, and it's just that some train themselves back out of it.