http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

At 2:07 into the video there is footage of an astronaut being helped up by another. While I believe (I am no expert) the reason he gets up so fast is because he is obviously a lot lighter in weight. The whole video is trash, but this was brought up at another forum and a person won't be taking my answer because I seriously don't know, though he admits the whole moon conspiracy is BS (thus meaning he believes it) and the whole video is garbage with me he keeps whoring out that part. Can someone help me out explaining in better language what is going on.

__________________
LOLonomy.

Well, looking at the arms and stuff the astronaut on the ground was being helped up by the other astronaut.

__________________
Spread the Love!

Just look at the left arm of the astronaut on the ground. He's holding the other astronaut's hand and pulling himself up.

He clearly used the rockets attached to his backpack.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916

I didn't make it that far... The opening sentence in the video stopped me.

I'm not quite sure of the exact words, but what I interpreted him as saying was: There's no evidence that they ever jumped high enough for 1/6th gravity, and on earth they wouldn't be able to jump in the suits.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

lol, loved the sound effects on the 3 replays they did on everything, thou @ the end when he said that they slowed it down 50% to make it slow mo, u can see the thing his holding move very fast when put back to its "supposed" speed, how did they overlooked that??

You can also tell that they cut the clip when it becomes obvious that at moving "normal speed" AFTER the hop that he is moving way too fast all of the sudden.
ETA: ALSO on the sequence where the astronaut is getting up- notice that they comment(They= the astronauts) "Up! there goes another bag"
Watch the bag drop without ANY air resistance.

They claim they're on wires eh? Nasa did a sweet job of attaching wires to all those dirt particles that fly up when he jumps. Those NASA engineering guys are brilliant (but obviously not smart enough to really get to the moon).
Only a few seconds into it tho, and with no sound (stupid work computer). I'll assume that adding the commentary doesn't really add anything important to the video, i'm sure it's all nonsense anyway.

__________________
I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.

"A long time ago, yet somehow in the future"

sorry i saw more of it and had to add to this. okay so they think the astonaut fell accidently and they used the wires to pull him up? then why in the name of all that is cheesey would NASA even release the footage?

__________________
I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.

"A long time ago, yet somehow in the future"

The gentleman in the video is David Percy, and the point he makes in the first few seconds is one on which I was able to engage him directly.

Percy maintains that the Apollo record contains no evidence of the astronauts jumping as high as he believes they should have been able to. That's false: Neil Armstrong jumps up onto the LM ladder as part of his post-EVA ingress -- a distance he estimated in the debriefing as 5-6 feet. This jump was recorded by the television camera.

David Percy makes a demonstrably false allegation of fact.

He behavior disappointed me when we confronted him with this evidence. Without admitting that he had wrongly characterized the Apollo record for his readers, he launched into another line of reasoning speculating how such footage could have been faked. In other words, he deftly changed the subject, probably hoping to distract away from his egregious mistake.

David Percy represents to his readers and viewers that he is an expert in photography and a further expert in the photographic record of the Apollo missions. Many of his arguments are made on that basis -- and that basis alone. But if Percy is not really as familiar with Apollo photography as he claims, then he cannot cite that familiarity as a sound basis for his judgment. Then his judgment is in question, and where his arguments depend on that judgment, they do not hold.

The question at hand is whether Percy is as familiar with the Apollo record as he claims, not how some bit of footage might have been faked. It doesn't matter whether Armstrong's leap was staged. Fake or not, it's in the footage and Percy either didn't know that or chose to ignore it. Thus he is either an incompetent or an untrustworthy reporter of the nature of the Apollo record. We can therefore question any conclusion he draws that presumes he has thoroughly and honestly examined the evidence. And that's a lot of conclusions in Dark Moon.

It's not the only example of Percy not having done his homework. He claims elsewhere that the Apollo still photographs are all perfectly framed and exposed, and that this is suspicious for field photography. We can very quickly find examples of poorly-framed, poorly-exposed, and poorly-focused photos. Lots of them. And so again we question whether Percy really has the encyclopedic knowledge he claims.

There are a number of other arguments we can attempt too. We may, for example, question Percy's expectation of how high the astronauts can have jumped. We may point out that the lack of acrobatics is also explained by the unwillingness to do them, not just by the alleged inability. And, if we charitably conclude that Percy tacitly withdrew his claim about there not being any high jumps in the record, we can then debate his further argument that Armstrong's jump was faked.

But we are not bound to pursue any of these questions if what we want to study is Percy's claim to be well-acquainted with the record. If that's the point at hand, we can stick to it if we want and demand a resolution before moving on.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Mmm-- That can't be right. I remember a figure more like 3 feet,
which makes sense to me. Three feet from the top surface of the
footpad to the top surface of the lowest rung would be a really
impressive jump, even pulling himself up with his hands. I don't
think the bottom rung could have been above waist height.

How far was the landing gear supposed to be able to compress?

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"The other planets?
Well, they just happen to be there, but the point of rockets is to explore them!"
-- Kai Yeves

As far as I recall, he jumped to the second rung, not the bottom one.

__________________
"The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head" Terry Pratchett

Armstrong jumped to the third rung. He estimated the distance himself as 5-6 feet. There is no need to try deducing anything different.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Third rung?!!! Okay, he had to move his hands up the ladder during
that jump, then-- he couldn't have kept holding onto the same spot.
I wonder which rung he was aiming for.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"The other planets?
Well, they just happen to be there, but the point of rockets is to explore them!"
-- Kai Yeves

Armstrong reported sliding his hands up the rails during the jump. He did not report which rung he was aiming for.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Nonsense, the commentary is vital to the video, it tells you the conclusions that you are supposed to be coming to, without it you might actually start thinking for yourself or something.

I have to agree. David Percy has a particularly insidious style. He starts off appropriately tentative, as if he's not making a point but rather just suggesting an alternative. As he goes, that alternative sounds more sure. He hasn't provided any proof to help it along, just kept repeating it. Then at the end of the section -- again with no proof -- Percy's original statement is now a "can only be" possibility. He's quite well-practiced at getting people used to an idea as a style of proof. Next to Percy, Bart Sibrel is downright ham-fisted.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Funny... Thats what Bart Sibrel said about Buzz Aldrin.

Truth be told, Bart Sibrel IS pretty hamfisted. He has all the subtley and grace of a derailed train.

__________________
I'm not completely heartless, the doctor who removed it told me he'd never be able to get it all.