Disclosure of the Moon Landing Hoax: Part 2

this " apollo reviewer " fantasy that some people seem to self identify as - and identify others as :

what exactly is it you are claiming to do ?

its a serious question - define " apollo reviewer "


oh - and one last dig - who reviews the " reviewers " as some of the people on your list have mutually exclusive claims .

a reply to: bobbypurify

Are you visually impaired? The only rock staying still in this gif is the one I used to centre it.

The rocks behind house rock move, the rocks in front move. The perspective changed on house rock itself.

No comnent on the other images I note, or any ideas as to the supposed source of the lunar backdrop.

originally posted by: bobbypurify

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

Salute to all the Apollo Reviewers out there including Richard Hoagland, John Lear, Jay Weidner, Rob Ager, John Logsdon, Mark Feeney, William Cooper, Bill Kaysing, Ralph René, Thomas Baron and his family, Gus Grissom and his family, Bart Sibrel, Jack White, David Percy, and many, many more.

Please reply to this post with the names of other important Apollo Reviewers.

Sayonara Jupiter, Ove, Webstra, Me, FoosM, Turbonium...

...Duhn Duhn duhn....JARRAH WHITE

you really want to put your name in with charlatans?? most of those people are making money by promoting the hoax theory.. such as believing that getting man to the moon is 100% impossible, even by todays standards, yet asking for donations to fly himself to the moon..

a reply to: onebigmonkey

Quit changing focus here. House Rock remains as a 2-D billboard. Yes, after probably some CPU editing, they moved the little dots on the mountain side to confuse BUT,

House Rock, you don't see a shift from left to right as the rover passes by it, like you would for any object not far away (like miles away) in the 3-D realm. Go outside Monkey and try it yourself on your leisurely drive. House rock is about the size of a big house. See if a big house remains unmolested in perspective as you pass by from 1000M

a reply to: bobbypurify

The cut scene, the glitches in the mountain side, THE HEAVY DAMAGE CONTROL EDITING. All the marks of a production. Why cut scene on a rover cam? It's not like they're driving on a boring desert road, wait, are they?

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: bobbypurify

The cut scene, the glitches in the mountain side, THE HEAVY DAMAGE CONTROL EDITING. All the marks of a production. Why cut scene on a rover cam? It's not like they're driving on a boring desert road, wait, are they?

a boring desert road now?

can you point out the heatwaves??

a reply to: bobbypurify

where PRECISELY do you now claim that lunar rover footage was shot ??????????????

PS - what is " CPU editing " this was televised footage from 45 years ago

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: bobbypurify

where PRECISELY do you now claim that lunar rover footage was shot ??????????????

Maybe here ?



Sorry, I mean here

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: bobbypurify

where PRECISELY do you now claim that lunar rover footage was shot ??????????????

PS - what is " CPU editing " this was televised footage from 45 years ago

Did you watch that 45 years ago? Don't lie, old man!!

a reply to: bobbypurify


I did Apollo 11-17

a reply to: wmd_2008

Did you slow the footage of the 16mm rover cam to make sure that it matches up with what we see today??

But, very cool that you actually did! I wasn't born until 10 years after

ETA: have a star for witnessing it all.

I hope you guys are genuinely having fun in this thread. It's been a great discussion and fun back and forth

a reply to: bobbypurify

Yes I watched then all and my father took me to see 2001 when that was released in the UK.

The House rock was a reasonable distance from the rover if you look at its dimensions and in OBM's gif you do see a change in house rock.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Disagree, perspective remains the same. No change except for the rock in the foreground moves

originally posted by: wmd_2008
The House rock was a reasonable distance from the rover if you look at its dimensions and in OBM's gif you do see a change in house rock.

As I mentioned before, it does seem that there is s subtle change in perspective of House Rock (especially on the far right, and the right side of that highest part sticking up), but it is too small to really point out as hard evidence.


However, as you mentioned, house rock is much further away than it appears. It appears to be a car-sized rock a few meters away, but it is really a house-sized rock dozens of meters away. The illusion that it is closer than it really is adds to the lack of perspective. Something closer would have a more noticeable change in perspective than something farther away.

By the way, the illusion that it is closer than it really is is aided by the lack of depth of field clues. On Earth, we are clued into distance by the fact that more distant objects are in a bit of a haze due to the additional atmosphere between the object and the observer. With virtually no atmosphere on the moon, there is no haze for objects that are far away, hence the lack of depth perception visual clues.

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: wmd_2008

Disagree, perspective remains the same. No change except for the rock in the foreground moves

I fail to understand how the rocks behind House Rock could change perspective relative to House Rock if they were both painted on a flat screen.

Could you please help me out with your understanding of how that could happen?

a reply to: bobbypurify

yes i did actually - appollo 15 , 16 and 17

my family did not own a TV prior to that

but i remember apollo 13 and i have seen an embarrasing home movie clip of me attempting to read the newspaper account of apollo 11

now answer the question and stop deflecting

a reply to: bobbypurify

You can clearly see House Rock moving in the gif,cover up the foreground rock with something, see if that makes it clear to you.

a reply to: Ove38

please demonstrate how 1970s TV technology could edit a live broadcast to show a fake lunar sky - also you ignore the gravity issue and the lunar atmosphere pressure

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I answered the question. Why is your side so obtuse? Strawmans and playing dumb. Also, the rock doesn't change perspective like everything else in the 3-D realm. What a laughing stock your comments will be when it's disclosed that Apollo was faked to ease Cold War tensions and "bankrupt" Russia.

no you utterly failed to answer anything - and you accuse others of being obtuse here is the entire quote :

originally posted by: bobbypurify

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: bobbypurify

where PRECISELY do you now claim that lunar rover footage was shot ??????????????

PS - what is " CPU editing " this was televised footage from 45 years ago

Did you watch that 45 years ago? Don't lie, old man!!

so once again - where do you claim the lunar rover footage was shot

what is " CPU editing " ???

and talking of obtuse - why the fook are you bringing up the rock perspectve argument in a reply to me - i have not addressed it YET [ see next post ]