It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nvidia Debunks Conspiracy Theories About Moon Landing

page: 1
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+11 more 
posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 10:52 AM
link   
One of the common complaints about the moon landing videos from conspiracy theorists is that you can't see the stars. Some people who don't seem to know much about photography seem to think you should be able to see the stars, while others who know more about photography seem to understand why you can't see them from their experience. So they post written explanations like "it's because of exposure levels" which again is something the knowledgeable photographers understand but the novices don't really grasp, and maybe they think it sounds like an excuse.

What I've never seen before now is a demonstration of what would happen if you COULD see the stars in the moon photos. What would the exposure really look like if you could see the stars?

Nvidia must have spent a lot of time on this because they modeled 84,000 stars that can be seen from Earth, they modeled the surface of the moon at the Apollo 11 landing site, modeled the lander with Buzz Aldrin climbing down the ladder, and the sun of course.

With this model they could aim the camera up at the sky so the surface of the moon isn't visible, and the stars are visible. Here is what their model shows the stars would look like from the moon, that looks like the constellation Orion near the center of this image:



Then while maintaining that exposure level, they pan the camera back down so the lunar lander and the surface of the moon are visible, and guess what? You can still see the stars! See them in the upper left? However, I think this picture is worth a thousand words. I've read "it's because of exposure" that you can't see the stars and I know some people just shake their heads and say it sounds like an excuse, but to actually see a demonstration of what the overexposed image would look like showing the stars I think adds a lot to the written explanation:



From that exposure, the Nvidia video shows how they can gradually decrease the exposure (which would be like making the camera aperture smaller, or the shutter speed shorter, or both) but as you can see, when the lander becomes visible, the stars are not:



The video makes some other interesting points so you can watch it to see those if you want. They can for example turn off reflections of light from the moon's surface in the model to show how dark Buzz Aldrin would be without those reflections, then they turn the reflections back on in the model and you can see those ARE the light source, well most of it. They weren't getting a complete match to the photo until they remembered to add one other thing, then it matched, but I'll let you watch the video to find out what that was.

Nvidia Debunks Conspiracy Theories About Moon Landing



I know this won't convince the true die-hard conspiracy theorists who are closed-minded, but any who are open minded should check this out and see if it helps you understand the issues.

This video is 4 years old but I've never seen it before now, and I didn't see it in a search of ATS to see if it had been posted before, so I'm hoping this is the first time this has been posted on ATS.

edit on 2018818 by Arbitrageur because: clarification




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Never a straight answer.
Defund NASA



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 11:25 AM
link   
The Chinese lunar pics don't show stars either. Go figure..



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 11:26 AM
link   
No one knows the truth but the astronauts themselves and they cant tell it.

Some of them tried but no one listens.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

There are more basic ways to prove the authenticity of the Moon landings, and there's no way round them.
the no stars meme, as all the other no Mooners suppositions was very weak anyway.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Curious why Nvidia would waste time trying to debunk something where everyone already laughs at moon landing deniers with no help needed.
To my observation it seems those who are more dedicated to debunking things have underlying inferiority complexes and thus feel superior by telling others how ridiculous they are for believing certain things even though those beliefs are indeed ridiculous. (Which is obvious without any need to be emphasized by anyone in the MSM or celebs who fixate on these to promote their proclaimed quest).



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

who's everyone???



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:18 PM
link   
This is pretty old news buddy this came out at the run up to the release of the Pascal GPU architecture.

ETA failure to read on my part I saw the screenshot from the Apollo 11 and made an ass out of myself.
edit on 8/18/2018 by BigDave-AR because: (no reason given)


Not Pascal, Maxwell IDK how I got that wrong being a teen green guy.
edit on 8/18/2018 by BigDave-AR because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

who's everyone???

Sorry, I should have said the majority of the world's population.

I know some folks truly believe that no man has physically been to the moon, but I know for a fact they have. So I know those folks are simply wrong, and are making a mistake. No need for ridicule, or denigration because people are entitled to think what they wish. It is best to just leave it at that and not fret about it.


Note: This does not mean that NASA has NOT lied their collective upper echelon security clearanced personell @sses off about a lot of things. I know they have.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
Well as far as tech demos for GPUs go it was one of the most useful scenarios to model so I don’t blame them for the brilliant PR that it got them for not a whole lot more effort than has put into advanced tech demos.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: BigDave-AR
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
Well as far as tech demos for GPUs go it was one of the most useful scenarios to model so I don’t blame them for the brilliant PR that it got them for not a whole lot more effort than has put into advanced tech demos.



Great point.


Public relations is always a worthwhile motivator to help the bottom line.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy
a reply to: Arbitrageur

There are more basic ways to prove the authenticity of the Moon landings, and there's no way round them.
the no stars meme, as all the other no Mooners suppositions was very weak anyway.


So prove it, with your basic ways.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:31 PM
link   
There is third party verification from other countries of orbital imagery of the Apollo Lunar landing sites.

I worked on the 'Appolo Lunar Landing Mission' so I know it did happen, however don't take mine and others word for it, as plenty of non US orbital imagery exist showing the landing sites.

That pretty much ends any unsubstantiated theory that the US did not land on the Moon.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:37 PM
link   
So Japan has mapped the lunar surface with their SELENE Lunar Radar Sounder. here is an idea what I'm talking about...


According to the JAXA press release, these new maps are ten-times more accurate than previous maps. Using the laser altimeter (LALT) instrument, 3D data of the shapes and altitudes of surface features are promising to give the most advanced relief mapping capabilities ever performed on a planetary body other than the Earth. It has also been indicated that deposits of uranium, potassium and thorium have been pinpointed through the use of one of its onboard spectrometers. This will have massive implications for the future of manned exploration of the natural satellite. It is likely that a nuclear source of energy would be required for future lunar settlements, if there are quantities of uranium to be mined, this will have an impact on where the settlement should be located.



With this they were able to match the horizon perfectly with the moon landings as seen below. I think this is end of story for moon conspiracies.

SELENE



Moon pics




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults

The astronauts talked, and talk, about the stars a lot:

onebigmonkey.com...



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Not only that but you can quite easily download the raw data they used and repeat the exercise yourself:

onebigmonkey.com...



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:49 PM
link   
If there are real people, who are stupid, ignorant, uninformed, retarded, or just plain dumb enough to actually believe that we didn't go to the moon, there's an EXTREMELY small chance that they are even going to be able to comprehend the OP.

I would think they would be much more concerned with learning to do the important things, like how to eat, walk, or understand concepts like speech, learning to walk, or even the most basic social skills.

You know, survival stuff.

Hopefully, they won't reproduce, and contaminate the rest of the gene pool.

I just don't have much tolerance lately for stupid.

However, if some of them learn to actually communicate, you know, with actual people, bring it. Seriously.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Couple of points from a "die hard moon landing denier" -

1 - Didn't know the no stars was such a strong argument anymore. I'm almost certain that was no longer a piece of evidence for the no moon landing. At least for me.
2 - My issues of the moon landing have nothing to do with stars, my issues come with other things including lack of wheel tracks in certain photos, the fact that the astronauts refused to speak about it afterwards unless forced to and even then they looked miserable (first moon landing I'm talking about).
3 - The telemetry and data was lost, then found, then possibly destroyed, then found again, then lost and then destroyed and NASA scientists have already said "Even if we had the information we wouldn't know how to read it or rebuild the machines to read it".

I should add that these are only three of my issues (would consider writing a thread for it but with ATS being taken up by Political stuff and more annoyingly Mandela effect - Hate that don't see the point) I've never said we haven't been and do believe that we have been in orbit at the very least I just don't believe that the first moon landing and possibly the second actually took place.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   
As a semi-professional photographer (I've only done a couple dozen weddings), explaining exposure to a friend who was convinced it was all faked, I truly appreciate this video and the ray tracing they did. That it's done in real time is even more impressive.

This is one conspiracy theory that I've always distanced myself from, as it was always clear people who claimed it never really took the time to understand physics and light.

I'm pretty glad we can put it behind us.

Also, how many limbs do I need to donate to get that graphics card that does real time ray tracing? lol



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kharron
As a semi-professional photographer (I've only done a couple dozen weddings), explaining exposure to a friend who was convinced it was all faked, I truly appreciate this video and the ray tracing they did. That it's done in real time is even more impressive.

This is one conspiracy theory that I've always distanced myself from, as it was always clear people who claimed it never really took the time to understand physics and light.

I'm pretty glad we can put it behind us.

Also, how many limbs do I need to donate to get that graphics card that does real time ray tracing? lol

Not many, my GTX870 could do ray tracing but not near as well as my GTX 1080.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join