1972 Moon Landing Fakery Alert As Stagehand Spotted In Astronaut's Visor

To me it looks very much like another astronaut in a space suit...both the image in question and its shadow.

What am I missing?

im going to do some research but there is a thread from years ago that goes really in depth on this subject. in the endif i remember right its actually not out of the ordinary and exactly what happens from a reflection on a round piece of glass. its not a stagehand, its the astronaut taking the photo, the camera is mounted on the chest. ill try to find the thread

a reply to: TheScale
Here's a hint.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TheScale
Here's a hint.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

found the original thread and photo
original thread and photo

ty phage. funny how these things make the rounds every so often

a reply to: TheScale

I know. I posted it.

originally posted by: KansasGirl
To me it looks very much like another astronaut in a space suit...both the image in question and its shadow.

What am I missing?

The intention of the people presenting this as unusual.

I just want to know which moon landing was a hoax. There was something around 7 completed US moon landings?

originally posted by: neutronflux
I just want to know which moon landing was a hoax. There was something around 7 completed US moon landings?

At risk of sounding pedantic, but for the sake of accuracy, six landing missions were completed and one landing mission had to be aborted.


For what it’s worth, two others went to the Moon (Apollo 8 and 10), with Apollo 10 doing everything but land — it tested the performance of the LM in low lunar orbit.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
The fact that the photographer astronaut is turned away is consistent with what we see in the visor.

I tend to agree, here. At first, I didn't think that the reflection had a camera at all, and the fact that it's similar to a 3/4 angle at which he is standing, it made me concerned about the image.

But then I looked at the whole, original image and came to the same conclusion that you did--the angle at which he is standing would frame the shot exactly as we see it.

Plus, if there was another person taking the image (if not the person in the reflection), they, too, would be in the reflection of the visor, which is something that we don't see.

People need to remember when being concerned with the size of the reflection: Objects in [reflection on convex shape] are closer than they appear. Given the shape of the visor, the other person could have been standing less than 10 feet away, easily.

a reply to: neutronflux

I think that most people who are...concerned?...about the U.S. moon landing focus, at least, on the very first mission (where they landed) with Armstrong and company. A theory goes that, because Kennedy made the promise that we'd be on the moon in the decade of the 60s, NASA was rushing to get us there (and to beat the Rooskies, of course), but realized that it just wasn't going to happen before the end of 1969.

In order to fulfill the promise, NASA faked a moon landing on studio set or in a desert (or both), and that's what the American public saw, at least for the first mission.

Or something like that...I'm sure that others can give you a more detailed commentary on it than I.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: neutronflux

...In order to fulfill the promise, NASA faked a moon landing on studio set or in a desert (or both), and that's what the American public saw, at least for the first mission.

I realize you were playing devil's advocate, but a counterpoint to the idea that "at least the first one was faked" would be that the images taken on the surface of the Moon looked similar for Apollo 11 as it did for Apollo 17.

However, I suppose if I were to also assume the role of devils advocate (in support of the hoax), I could argue that Apollo 16 and 17 got to the Moon, but the images from those missions were faked in the same way Apollo 11's were faked, just so the moon looked the same in all of the images...

...but that is getting ridiculous

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
...but that is getting ridiculous

Or is it?

Excellent thread on Metabunk that covers it.

Metabunk Link

originally posted by: tommyjo
Excellent thread on Metabunk that covers it.

Metabunk Link

Well, everything old is new again.

What I mean is that ATS did its own debunking of this "who's reflection is in the visor" nonsense more than 7 years ago, way back in 2010.

Link to old thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: studio500

The backpack would be out of sight since you usually face the thing you are photographing. But since the sun is shining from the left side of the person a backpack figure can be seen in the shadow. No big mystery if you stop and think for a second or two.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: neutronflux

I think that most people who are...concerned?...about the U.S. moon landing focus, at least, on the very first mission (where they landed) with Armstrong and company. A theory goes that, because Kennedy made the promise that we'd be on the moon in the decade of the 60s, NASA was rushing to get us there (and to beat the Rooskies, of course), but realized that it just wasn't going to happen before the end of 1969.

In order to fulfill the promise, NASA faked a moon landing on studio set or in a desert (or both), and that's what the American public saw, at least for the first mission.

Or something like that...I'm sure that others can give you a more detailed commentary on it than I.

Well apart from the fact that the UK could track Apollo 11, Russia at the same time had sent the Luna15 probe to the Moon.
Jodrell Bank in the UK (Radio Telescopes) were tracking both on the way to the Moon more info in the link below.

Apollo 11 & Russias Luna 15