Apollo 11 - Anyone else remember watching it?

[Wild Cobra]

Something I didn’t cover yet, and 9/11 truthers had similar claims about lack of photography knowledge. The claims of doctored photos because of covered crosshairs… Anyone who is an experienced photographer, knows about a phenomena called washout. Here’s a clear example of what happens with the NASA cameras:



Notice that the crosshairs are visible over the red, but washed out in the white.

[Laker Lanny]

The rocket had 10,125 pounds of thrust. Not per square inch, idiott.

There went your credibility as an adult debating a subject you couldn't resist could you?

I see you are far too ignorant of any scientific facts to have a reasonable debate.
Goodbye.

Real mature bail out because someone didn't win the science fair back in 1989 like you did. Not every debate has to have experts that's why people debate to find out more and maybe learn something.

Both which are to much for your small mind to grasp. Maybe you mistake debates as smack offs? In either case your intelligence far exceeds your character.

Good Job!

[Wild Cobra]

There went your credibility as an adult debating a subject you couldn't resist could you?



Real mature bail out because someone didn't win the science fair back in 1989 like you did. Not every debate has to have experts that's why people debate to find out more and maybe learn something.

Both which are to much for your small mind to grasp. Maybe you mistake debates as smack offs? In either case your intelligence far exceeds your character.

Good Job!

Mouse and I have exchanged words before. There are only a few people I attack like that. I try to maintain civility with most. He simply does not deserve it.

It really gets me that people will take a position without understanding what they are talking about. A wise person either acknowledges they don't know, or doesn't speak so certain of things they don't understand. I have a hard time being nice to most conspiracy theorists. To believe as they do is simply unbelievable to me.

[DizzG.]

Mouse and I have exchanged words before. There are only a few people I attack like that. I try to maintain civility with most. He simply does not deserve it.

So you pick and choose who and when your going to be civil and intelligent with depending on their screen names?
That is not only bias but borderline split personality persona syndrome.

And no I am not a psychiatrists so save your "you idiot" lectures I don't claim to be as smart as you!

It really gets me that people will take a position without understanding what they are talking about.

Then maybe ST is not the place for you, try the MENSA forums they would love you over there.

A wise person either acknowledges they don't know, or doesn't speak so certain of things they don't understand.

You must be new to the www......

I have a hard time being nice to most conspiracy theorists. To believe as they do is simply unbelievable to me.

Sounds like you have behavior issues maybe you should seek help. And where did mouse post he was this wise person?

Sounds to me like you have no real comebacks for the youtube videos he posted so you choose to insult your opponents to make others feel you may be right, that's very Bill O'Ryly of you!
Your FOX news material!

[mouse]

I have a hard time being nice to most conspiracy theorists.

Why is it anyone who questions anything is a conspiracy theorists? I supposed if you asked the folks at red Lobster if the Crap meat cakes are made with real crab meat then your a conspiracy theorists, or work for PETA?

Don't bother with a reply, I have to many others I can converse with that don't pull out the "Idiot" card every time they are in a corner........


sorry folks back on topic.............

[Alex Jones]

Mouse is a Golden God!

[mouse]

[Wild Cobra]

So you pick and choose who and when your going to be civil and intelligent with depending on their screen names?
That is not only bias but borderline split personality persona syndrome.

Certain users here have infuriated me over the last couple years. Mouse is one of the.

And no I am not a psychiatrists so save your "you idiot" lectures I don't claim to be as smart as you!

So?

You must be new to the www......

Hardly. Been surfing since the early 90's.

Sounds like you have behavior issues maybe you should seek help. And where did mouse post he was this wise person?

No, this is the help I need. I let my mood swings loose in here rather than in real life. Well, not entirely true. I let loose on a solicitor last week.

Sounds to me like you have no real comebacks for the youtube videos he posted so you choose to insult your opponents to make others feel you may be right, that's very Bill O'Ryly of you!
Your FOX news material!

If you followed the thread, you see I did explain the earlier Youtube videos. His answer was to post more nonsense without any discussion of my showing how they were wrong.

Besides. You are one of Mouse's many names. Aren't you.

[mouse]

Mouse is a Golden God!

I am not sure I agree with this post! Buts it's close!

[Wild Cobra]

OK, I'll try this one more time.

The the "fake moon" video, it starts by saying Donna Tietze saw certain things. Only what I read, is normal to put multiple photos together to create a larger one. She saw an apparent terrestrial scene." Apparent isn't good enough, and it could have just been a photographic anomaly.

Marcus Allen's claims...

He shows a picture from the book "Full Moon" and shows errors in the combining of multiple photos. I see no problem, just a mistake.

No lander in the panoramic picture doesn't mean squat. The moon is full of hills, they took the Rover, and it could be hidden by a natural feature.

Jesus. I'm already tired of showing the stupidity of these claims.

The shadow issue is a false assumption. Silica reflects light at all angles. There is enough to back light an astronaut, but not enough behind a terrain shadow to back light it at the same exposure level. Notice when we see the moon in space, we see the whole spherical area that the sun shines on, and it appears rather equally bright.

"If light was reflected from the surface, it will obviously illuminate things closer to the surface more than farther away from the surface."

Well, except fort the height of the astronaut, this is a trick of a statement. He is as close to the lunar surface as the rocks. The rocks are's mane of a light reflecting material to shed heat either.

That was really a poor example, saying the astronaut appeared about 30 to 65 cm tall. He didn't show any proof of the known height.

Wow... two more videos, fifteen more minutes. Sorry, it's a waste of time.

[Wild Cobra]

Apollo Mission Tapes

Apollo 11 Mission Tapes

[Wild Cobra]

The shadows? Wide angle and telephoto lenses distort views. The eyes are in the neighborhood of a 80 mm focal length if I remember right. Longer or shorter lenses change a photographic perspective. There are also images that the angle looks wring because the surface isn't flat. Very hard to discern 3D on a 2D photo.

For those who don't understand the shadow bit, watch this:

[Wild Cobra]

More from Myth Busters:

[Dario]

Many of these conspiracy theorist are crazy people seeking aknowledge, so i laugh at them for a while and move on.
But on the other hand, some stuff that happened in the past are downright stupid and if you think of it for just a while you realize something ain't right.
As for the moon landing i don't believe it for 1 reason - in 30+ years after apolo noone went back to the moon.

[Wild Cobra]

As for the moon landing i don't believe it for 1 reason - in 30+ years after apolo noone went back to the moon.

I'll bet NASA would love to if you'll foot the bill.

[Sportcamper]

Joe-The noise level of a NASA rocket engine is 140 to 150 decibels, yet we can clearly hear the astronauts at normal dialogue levels…Why does area 51 have an exact replica of the moon craters that Buzz walked around? No blast crater under the Lem? How is that possible? It was lowered by a movie set cable, that is why! Where is the exhaust blast? If there is no air on the moon why is the flag waving? Why are the images so grainy? We have used the same video technology since the 50’s yet TV images are clear…

[Alex Jones]

So anyone who doesn't believe in something 100% is a conspiracy theorist? Real good there son! It's just a matter of time when Neil Armstrong has a death bed confession about the fake landing and Wild Cobra will change his screen name out of shame and embarrassment.

[Wild Cobra]

The noise level of a NASA rocket engine is 140 to 150 decibels, yet we can clearly hear the astronauts at normal dialogue levels…

The burning propellant is traveling too fast to have any notable effect of transferring the noise through the physical structure of the capsule. With no atmosphere in space, there is no way to hear it. It takes matter, to carry the sound. No atmosphere, no sound. Period. Just that simple.

Why does area 51 have an exact replica of the moon craters that Buzz walked around?

Do they? What evidence is there of that? Then even if true, there could be other explanations for it. Was it built before or after the Apollo missions? If it was built before the missions, could it be a training and or resting ground?

No blast crater under the Lem? How is that possible? It was lowered by a movie set cable, that is why! Where is the exhaust blast?

Nope. The moon's service is essentially one very hard clump, except for about a 2" layer of moon dust. This dust was completely blown away from the exhaust, and the rock based surfaces doesn't melt easy. Without oxygen, there is no scorching from the rocket fuel mix either.

If there is no air on the moon why is the flag waving?

It was primarily the pendulum effect. With no atmosphere to slow it down, it just kept moving. It appears to my "static cling" is also in play. Look at the Youtube I linked led Mythybusters Moon Hoax Flag Flapping.

Why are the images so grainy? We have used the same video technology since the 50’s yet TV images are clear…

No, technology has changed dramatically. In the 60's and 70, TV cameras were vacuum tubes that the light charged an internal surface of, and was scanned by an electron beam. I can assure you that electronic noise from the sun, with no protective atmosphere on the moon, would make such an electronic signal noisy. There are more reasons for the distortion than I remember, but I can also tell you that the video camera technology for broadcast quality NTSC was very large. Living the 60's, I remember. Here are two pictures from a web site called THE COLLECTION OF BOBBY ELLERBEE





A camera small enough and light enough for use on a 60's space mission would be of much lower quality.

From LabGuy's World: Extinct Westel Corp. Video Equipment:

So anyone who doesn't believe in something 100% is a conspiracy theorist? Real good there son!

No, just people who are ignorant, then stupid enough to claim something is fake, just because they lack the ability to understand. They're just talking out their ass. The earth used to be flat, partially because people didn't understand the truth. Even when others explained the truth.

It's just a matter of time when Neil Armstrong has a death bed confession about the fake landing and Wild Cobra will change his screen name out of shame and embarrassment.

I would really be surprised if that would happen. I would say it never will, because I am fully confident we actually went to the moon. It was within our technological grasp, and all the claims otherwise are well disputed.

Look at the Mythbuster Videos.

[nacho]

Looks to me if it wasn't for Mythbusters you would be up creek! And I disagree about the quality of cameras back then, how was it the camera the astronauts had on board was color, and also clear? Why wouldn't NASA get rid of their black and white fuzzy 1950 piece of and borrow the camera the astronauts had inside?

[Sportcamper]

Wild Cobra- Same moon set from several Apollo Missions…The images are exact copies over one another from Appolo 1 on…Another example of poor continuity & bad editing…

[Sportcamper]

I can post images of old microphones & claim that audio technology has greatly advanced…But the audio from the moon landing film is remarkable clear…

[Sportcamper]

So I guess these movie set photos are fake?

[Wild Cobra]

Looks to me if it wasn't for Mythbusters you would be up creek!

No. I was able to dispute the conspiracy theorists without the Mythbusters show. If you go back to my first two or three posts disputing them, it is rather clear.

And I disagree about the quality of cameras back then, how was it the camera the astronauts had on board was color, and also clear?

The color was taken with a 16 mm film movie camera, and processed once they came back to Earth. The live images were done with a portable BW TV camera.

Why wouldn't NASA get rid of their black and white fuzzy 1950 piece of and borrow the camera the astronauts had inside?

It wasn't a 50's piece of . The first portable wasn't available until the later 60's. Again, we are talking about two different media. Live video and magnetic tape vs. 16mm film.

LOL at the cat in zero gravity linked to this one. It borders on animal abuse though. The cat had to be scared less.

Wild Cobra- Same moon set from several Apollo Missions…The images are exact copies over one another from Appolo 1 on…Another example of poor continuity & bad editing…

Show me the evidence. I would especially like to see a lunar landing site with Apollo 1.

[Wild Cobra]

So I guess these movie set photos are fake?

Didn't you know, there was simulation training before the missions.

[ididnotnothat]

WC, why even bother with these idiots?