• This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!

It wasn't possible (from a technical perspective) to fake the moonladning in 1969 (1 Viewer)

I endorse the video I posted.

That is, I believe it would have been more difficult to fake the moonlandings than to actually land on the moon.
 
mummel said:
This photo has always been a mindfck. The thruster looking gizmo on the left clearly shows the direction of light coming from the back. But this photo is taken into the sun. This side of the LM should be heavily shadowed. Sure, the exposure could be tweaked to capture more shadow detail on this side, but then the surface of the moon would be blown out white. Look at the right thruster gizmo. You can clearly see the sun reflecting off it.

Check his boot too. Looks like there is a spotlight behind the cameraman..... Queue up twilight zone music haha!

Apollo_AS11-40-5866.jpg
Click to expand...
Uhhh....no. Just...no. First of all, the camera is clearly in the shadow as well, so no lens flare. However, the subject is well lit, even though it is in the shadow of the LEM. How can this be? Clearly "fill light" is being provided. But from where? Where, oh, where? Oh, I don't know...maybe the fucking surface? Aha, yes! Surprise! The surface is a very good ambient light reflector. This is repeatedly demonstrated from anyone's backyard when one looks at the fucking moon. As is also clearly apparent in the picture, the astronaut and the LEM are both being lit, mostly from below. The same principle applies in all photography...as demonstrated in this shot, which was also taken on the moon:

1421810567023.jpg


Hell, the light source (hint: the sun) is also in a similar position. So is the astronaut and her craft. And so are the photographers. And these blokes are shooting with no flash or other artificial light sources. And while their lenses aren't shielded from the sun by a massive LEM, their lens shades are serving that purpose. And that fella on the left? Providing reflected fill light, from below. I will bet you any amount that their photographs are exposed correctly, with both the astronaut in her protective gear, her lunar lander, and the surrounding lunar surface pleasingly rendered.
 
Last edited:
ohio3302016 said:
I endorse the video I posted.

That is, I believe it would have been more difficult to fake the moonlandings than to actually land on the moon.
Click to expand...

This. I enjoy a good debate and will continue to keep an open mind, but at the end of the day, they probably landed on the moon. The Russians would have done everything possible to prove it was a hoax and they couldnt. I just dont get why there are so many legitimate questions about it's authenticity.
 
12thMan said:
Been meaning to figure these thing out. How the fuck do they work?
Click to expand...
Sorcery, obv.

There was a conspiracy by Renaissance-era alchemists to preserve their trade secrets, so they made up a bunch of, like, physics and math and stuff to explain it.

People like Gauss and Tesla and Farraday were just releasing the next part of the whole thing on a predetermined time schedule.

I think it still may be going on today. I am suspicious of the Virgin Airlines guy and Elon Musk, myself.
 
mummel said:
This. I enjoy a good debate and will continue to keep an open mind, but at the end of the day, they probably landed on the moon. The Russians would have done everything possible to prove it was a hoax and they couldnt. I just dont get why there are so many legitimate questions about it's authenticity.
Click to expand...

I'll give you a hint: There aren't.
 
gopherblue said:
As is also clearly apparent in the picture, the astronaut and the LEM are both being lit, mostly from below
Click to expand...

But thats the thing. Look at the left top thruster gizmo. The shadow runs perfectly vertical, which says the light source sits at a 90 degree angle to the thruster. Look a the right thruster with the sunlight, and how it curves down, showing the light is coming from say a 45 degree angle up above.

What about the bottom thruster on the left, no shadow at all............ So much for massive light reflection from the surface.

There is something really wrong with this photo.
 
rowlin said:
Sorcery, obv.

There was a conspiracy by Renaissance-era alchemists to preserve their trade secrets, so they made up a bunch of, like, physics and math and stuff to explain it.

People like Gauss and Tesla and Farraday were just releasing the next part of the whole thing on a predetermined time schedule.

I think it still may be going on today. I am suspicious of the Virgin Airlines guy and Elon Musk, myself.
Click to expand...

Ive look'ed at some books that had know pictures in them and when someone read them to me they were saying something about all that too. I just want two no, if math is involved how da fuk do numbers that I make on a paper stick metal together. Ha! They cant. See my problem now? Seriously....how?

a01e45674cd2eb040681a35e04e7695f3cf144f70a1766740cf87489288e156a_zps71tguokp.jpg


magnets_c_zpsbhksovp8.jpg
 
Last edited:
mummel said:
But thats the thing. Look at the left top thruster gizmo. The shadow runs perfectly vertical, which says the light source sits at a 90 degree angle to the thruster. Look a the right thruster with the sunlight, and how it curves down, showing the light is coming from say a 45 degree angle up above.

What about the bottom thruster on the left, no shadow at all............ So much for massive light reflection from the surface.

There is something really wrong with this photo.
Click to expand...
We must be looking at entirely different photographs, because there are no inconsistent shadows that you seem to see. Don't forget, the LEM is a faceted vehicle, with lots of reflective surfaces, so since we can't see around the left side, we don't know where the light is being thrown from. But even so, the shadows are consistent. The left thruster is being lit by ambient reflected light on one side (the left front) but on the other, so that side is shadow. All the shadows are consistent with front ambient light. Including all the shadows on the rippled mylar surfaces in the front. The main engine thruster is in full shade and close to the ground, so unlikely to be as well lit. See, eg, the front of the skidoolunar lander.
 
I clicked on this only because I just finished reading "A Man on the Moon" (which I recommend) so it was topical. The OP was interesting and, though technically difficult for me to follow, I felt more informed and, dare I say, smarter after watching the video. Sadly, many of the posts after that have made me less smart.
 
BNM said:
I clicked on this only because I just finished reading "A Man on the Moon" (which I recommend) so it was topical. The OP was interesting and, though technically difficult for me to follow, I felt more informed and, dare I say, smarter after watching the video. Sadly, many of the posts after that have made me less smart.
Click to expand...

In that vein, there was a very good recent documentary called Last Man On the Moon about...the last man to have stepped foot onto the moon. I haven't read the book (link) which is the source material for the documentary, but the movie is quite good and is currently available on Netflix.

 
gopherblue said:
We must be looking at entirely different photographs, because there are no inconsistent shadows that you seem to see. Don't forget, the LEM is a faceted vehicle, with lots of reflective surfaces, so since we can't see around the left side, we don't know where the light is being thrown from. But even so, the shadows are consistent. The left thruster is being lit by ambient reflected light on one side (the left front) but on the other, so that side is shadow. All the shadows are consistent with front ambient light. Including all the shadows on the rippled mylar surfaces in the front. The main engine thruster is in full shade and close to the ground, so unlikely to be as well lit. See, eg, the front of the skidoolunar lander.
Click to expand...

Apollo_AS11_40_5866_1.jpg
 
mummel said:
Apollo_AS11_40_5866_1.jpg
Click to expand...
Since you persist to reject evidence, I'll try one last time:

Starting on the right: Clearly, that thruster is being lit by a direct light source on one side. That light source is the sun. It is also being lit on its left side by an ambient light source. That light source is below and is called "the moon."

Both thrusters on the left are being lit from below and from the left. This is ambient light. It is also from the moon. These also appear to have been blued by heat, either prior to launch or by use in flight. The bluing is not consistent, and their surfaces are curved, thus the inconsistent lighting captured by the camera. What is clearly evident is that they are consistently lit, and cast shadows consistent with each other. See, for example, the shadow thrown inside the bell of the lower one. But the vertical line between shadow and light on both is pretty consistent.

Unfortunately, sometimes people see what they want to see. All I can tell you is that I have been an amateur photographer for decades, and there is nothing in this photograph, from a technical photography perspective, that I find suspicious.
 
jbutler said:
In that vein, there was a very good recent documentary called Last Man On the Moon about...the last man to have stepped foot onto the moon. I haven't read the book (link) which is the source material for the documentary, but the movie is quite good and is currently available on Netflix.

Click to expand...

^^^This x2^^^ Check out the movie, for sure.
 
All of the theories (photographic and others) put forth by the "moon landing faked" crowd have been thoroughly debunked -- even on one episode of Mythbusters.

So it turns out that everyone claiming to use "science" to say we didn't go was just spouting a theory based on their own mistaken beliefs about how things are here on Earth (and not on the Moon).

There is a huge amount of evidence that we went, including recent.photos taken by a Japanese satellite orbiting the Moon. Images show the Apollo 11 landing site, complete with the foot paths (and the fallen American flag witnessed by Buzz Aldrin on takeoff.)

Believe the truth. We went.
 
Personally, I doubt the existence of light. I think we're all blind and light is merely the mind's way of fooling us into thinking that we have a more complete experience from a sensory perspective.
 
jbutler said:
In that vein, there was a very good recent documentary called Last Man On the Moon about...the last man to have stepped foot onto the moon. I haven't read the book (link) which is the source material for the documentary, but the movie is quite good and is currently available on Netflix.

Click to expand...

I was lucky enough to hear him speak a little over eight years ago. I have no idea if he still delivers talks, but he was one of the most compelling speakers I've had the good fortune of hearing. Definitely worth listening to if you ever get the chance. I'll have to watch the movie on Netflix; thanks for the heads up!
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

pogona90
Real or Fake „Desert Palms“ ?
Replies
4
Views
161
allforcharity
allforcharity
ski_ex5
  • Locked
Canceled Eldorado (Gardenia, CA - 1969-96) Spotted Leaded Paulson Light Blue SCV $1s - 60x
Ends 10-06-24 at 7:30 PM Eastern Time
Replies
7
Views
508
ski_ex5
ski_ex5
Kyle
Wanted Help wanted for Hire Inlay Artist for custom label
Replies
1
Views
96
TheWhat
TheWhat
J
Tourney Two tournaments at the same time - technical questions -
Replies
2
Views
366
MrBoosh
MrBoosh
Fishman
Waffling on casino replicas/fake casino chips
Replies
14
Views
850
ekricket
ekricket
Back
Top Bottom