Why I believe the Moon landings may have been faked

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

The panoramic view is out from the start. That is distorted toward a single point and not relevant.

In AS14-68-9486 There are three yellow lines representing planes the shadows are on. The two nearest the camera are very similar in the image, however, they should not be parallel. The smaller shadows on the leftmost arrow are pointing more to the right. The line on the left should be angled also but it isn't. You can see the difference between the line and the shadows very clearly. The middle line seems to be aligned with the shadows it is referencing fairly well. The top line pointing to the astronaut is pointing straight to the right and his shadow is too. In such a short distance it is impossible to have shadows from the same light source be misaligned that much if that light source is the sun. In order to get that kind of divergence you need at least one light source much closer to the subject.

In the same photo the yellow lines represent the plane of the light/shadow at ground level. The light source is NOT on ground level. You can tell by the length of the shadows. The light source is not below ground or at ground level, so it must be above ground. The steep convergence angle indicates the light source is near by. Looking at the yellow lines at ground level they would intersect in the white box. However, if you extend those planes vertically and project the angle of the shadow from tip of shadow to tip of subject you see that the actual point of convergence is above and to the left of the camera, and out of the FOV but not by much. The sun could not be the light source producing all three of those planes of shadow. The convergence point of the planes puts the light source just a few feet out of the FOV, exactly where a directional light would be placed to take a staged photo. And with directional light you would need more than one light source for objects so far apart. All the light sources are to the left and slightly above the camera. In this particular photo the light sources are between the small rocks in the left and center of the photo and the astronaut. At least one light is pointed slightly toward the camera throwing the shadows of the small rocks. The other is pointed toward the astronaut casting his shadow farther away at a steep angle of incidence to the shadows of the smaller rocks near the camera.

If you can picture it in three dimensions you will know what I mean. I no longer have 3D software or I would make a quick sketch for you and put the light sources at the positions I indicated and project the shadows accordingly. I am fairly certain they would look just like the photo.

For reference, if the small rock shadow at the bottom of the image is one meter from the camera, and the astronaut is ten meters from the camera, I would estimate the light source to be roughly 8 meters from the camera and roughly 3 meters above ground level.

In regards to image as14-145 with all the lines... If you draw a line from the tip of the object casting the shadow to the tip of the shadow itself and extend that line back it will lead you directly to the light source. Notice the lines lead two different directions. Two light sources.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

why is there not 2 shadows ?

a reply to: Vroomfondel

as you claim that there are " 2 direct light sources " please show us a single pic that has multiple shadows

and further - take a pic yourself with 2 direct light sources - that fails to cast multiple shadows

you are claiming that shadows from multiple direct light sources are " going in different directions "

the real explaination for what you are seeing has been given - and it is NOT multiple direct light sources

your failure to comprehend and or accept this is your problem - not ours

and drop the ad hom insults -

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

If you are using perspective as your device to debunk the photos you must know that perspective deviation is determined by proximity to the light source. In the photo of the trees you used as an example of perspective you see that the variation between shadows is very minimal because the light source is so far away.

Did you even look at the photo? The picture of the trees has shadows appearing 90 degrees apart. The other examples have even more apparent variation.

Shadows are straight parallel lines which appear to converge either at the sun (if you are looking towards the sun) or at the antisolar point (if you are looking in the other direction). The closer the sun or antisolar point are to the photo frame, the more the shadows will appear to converge. If the sun or antisolar point is within the frame of the photo then you could have shadows pointing in all 360 degrees of there were suitable positioned objects to cast them!

Anyway, your claim was that you had seen photos with multiple shadows. You haven't provided any (probably because they don't exist!)

Additionally, you haven't explained why anyone trying to fake moon photos would use multiple light sources. There is only one light source on the moon, so if you were trying to represent the light on the moon you would use one light source.

As for AS11-40-5866, nice use of a cropped photo there to push the hoax agenda.

If you look at the full photo, you can see exactly what is reflecting in the heel of Buzz's boot. It's the bright aluminium insulation on the ladder, which lines up perfectly with the reflection.

flic.kr...

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Then by all means, present one. I don't even need to see all of them, just present one single photograph that shows evidence of a light source other than the sun.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

The operative word is "directional". Two light sources pointed in two directions... Think.

How do you explain shadows from one light source pointing different directions? One light source hundreds of thousands of miles away. You cant. You need two light sources much closer to the subjects.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

In the photo I showed the variation between shadows is nearly 90 degrees. There is no perspective variant that can account for that, only a nearby directional light source, much closer to the subject than the sun. In the third photo you compare it to a) a photo taken on earth with atmosphere that bends light, and b) a photo that was taken in panorama mode which by its nature curves the entire photo around a central point. And again, the variation between shadows is minimal compared to the image I showed where the shadows are in direct opposition to each other coming from both the right and the left - which is strange if the light is behind the photographer. And you did not mention the first photo at all...no explanation for that one?

Hardly a persuasive argument.

you know that Apollo 14 did not land on flat ground right?

a reply to: Vroomfondel

so where are the multiple shadows ?

i dont care if you take this as an insult - but try going outside and looking at the real world - its amazing

a reply to: Rob48

Its not a cropped photo to push a hoax...its called a close up. The full size image doesn't show the hot spot very well. Jeez, you guys are rabid lmao.

I did look at the full photo. Yes it appears from that single perspective that the insulation on the ladder is at least partially aligned with the hot spot. Please tell me how you determined that the alignment also included the light source, since the reflection must be aligned with the hot spot and the source in order to make sense. You cant say it was scattered reflection because the hot spot is small and precise, not scattered. And you have not said how this occurred on the shadow side of the lander where they should not have been any light source at all.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
And you have not said how this occurred on the shadow side of the lander where they should not have been any light source at all.

a reflective surface (like say a white spacesuit) is also a light source.. just saying.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I posted several images with shadows pointing in different directions supposedly coming resulting from sun light. I explained it several times but, I dont care if you take this as an insult, it appears you are incapable of understanding any part of it.

If I have to break this down any further there will be no point in even trying to discuss it. To simplify this any more than I already have and help you understand this very simple concept I would need some very tiny jumper cables and hand fire your synapses myself to get it through to you.

Over over over simplified version: go outside and look at your own shadow. (note - this works better during the daytime) Draw a line from the very tip of your shadow to the very tip of your pointed little head that made that shadow. Extend that line infinitely and it will point directly at the light source that made it. Did I go too fast for you? If not, continue...

Now, look at the images I posted. On the image with seven yellow lines... Notice that the lines are drawn in the manner I described above. The line starts at the tip of the shadow, extends through the tip of the object making the shadow, and continues on projecting toward the light source. Notice that the lines on the left side of the photo point to a light source on the left of the camera and the lines on the right side of the photo point to a light source to the right of the camera. If the light source is the sun, how is that possible?

On a side note - what in God's name made you think I could GAF if you try to insult me or not? You really think a lot of yourself don't you...Certainly a great deal more than I think of you. If you cant debate without resorting to insult you are only demonstrating how weak your position really is. I don't start off with insults. But I sure as hell don't mind returning them. Your choice. Not mine.

a reply to: choos

Agreed, but meaningless in this photo. A space suit would not reflect to the back of the heel of the person wearing it. Also, on the shadow side of the lander there isnt much light to reflect. And certainly not a pin point source such as the one reflected on the heel. That is not scattered diffused reflection. That is a focused light source where there shouldn't be one.

As I said earlier, proving that light can be reflected in no way shape or form proves that that is what is happening in this photo or any other. It only adds a potential cause for the anomaly. Potential alone is proof of nothing.

originally posted by: Vroomfondelgo outside and look at your own shadow. (note - this works better during the daytime) Draw a line from the very tip of your shadow to the very tip of your pointed little head that made that shadow. Extend that line infinitely and it will point directly at the light source that made it. Did I go too fast for you? If not, continue...

hey yo, so i tried what you were explaining using soylents image



im confused can you tell me where the light source is???

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: choos

Agreed, but meaningless in this photo. A space suit would not reflect to the back of the heel of the person wearing it. Also, on the shadow side of the lander there isnt much light to reflect. And certainly not a pin point source such as the one reflected on the heel. That is not scattered diffused reflection. That is a focused light source where there shouldn't be one.

As I said earlier, proving that light can be reflected in no way shape or form proves that that is what is happening in this photo or any other. It only adds a potential cause for the anomaly. Potential alone is proof of nothing.

it isnt a pinpoint, it just happens to be on a curved surface that happens to be directly facing the camera..

if you look at a reflection on a curved surface you will notice some parts are blinding some parts are not.. why??

what you are describing is a reflection on a flat not reflecting light directly at the camera.

oh btw. the light source from the dark side of the lander is from the lunar surface and most likely from the astronaut taking the photos (large reflective white suit and a reflective visor)

or are you claiming that it should be pitch black???

a reply to: Vroomfondel

sigh :



which bit of - multiple direct light sources create multiple shadows - do you fail to understand ?

all you have posted is divergent shadows - which has been explained to you

are you actually incapable of understanding very simple physics - or just willfully dishonest ?

ETA -

every pic you post - has ONE shadow per object - this clearly demonstrates a single source of light

each additional direct light source - in the REAL world creates an aditional shadow - every one but you every understands or accepts this

a reply to: Vroomfondel

The hot spot is small because (a) the heel is curved, and (b) the bright spot from the insulation is thin! The insulation is only up the strut of the ladder which is long and thin. The reflective foil creates a bright source of light that is more concentrated than the diffuse background light that it is reflecting.

Don't believe me? Try it yourself. Place a shiny reflective object close to a shaded wall, so that the shiny object is also in shadow. You will see a specular reflection appear on the wall, even though the shiny object is not in direct sunlight.

I just tried this myself using my phone screen (with the power off) under the desk. Even with the phone in the shade it still projects a reflection onto the wall, because the specular reflection is brighter.

This is what is reflecting in Aldrin's boot, as anybody who examines the whole photo and understands how light works will see instantly.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

This photo also illustrates why no stars are visible!

a reply to: DJW001

dont allow the goal posts to be moved either

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Over over over simplified version: go outside and look at your own shadow. (note - this works better during the daytime) Draw a line from the very tip of your shadow to the very tip of your pointed little head that made that shadow. Extend that line infinitely and it will point directly at the light source that made it. Did I go too fast for you? If not, continue...

Now, look at the images I posted. On the image with seven yellow lines... Notice that the lines are drawn in the manner I described above. The line starts at the tip of the shadow, extends through the tip of the object making the shadow, and continues on projecting toward the light source. Notice that the lines on the left side of the photo point to a light source on the left of the camera and the lines on the right side of the photo point to a light source to the right of the camera. If the light source is the sun, how is that possible?

Do you really, really not understand how perspective works?

Stand outside with your back to the sun. Your shadow appears to point straight in front of you, right? Now what if someone stands to one side of you? Which way does their shadow appear to point? Why is that? Where do the shadows appear to intersect?



Are there two light sources in this photo?