"New"evidence proves apollo was Hoax, page 10

privacy

Pages: << 7 8 9 10 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

reply posted on 29-9-2005 @ 08:42 PM by jra

Originally posted by Sunofone
even the moon rocks could easily have been collected from the polar region where they are known to be abundant--i find it interesting the way people ignore the obvious

Moon rocks are abundant in Earth's polar region? Do you have a link with some more info? Even if true. A rock from the Moon that's been sitting on Earth would probably be a somewhat differnt than one that has been sitting on the surface of the Moon the whole time. I'd imagine it would be easy to tell them apart.

reply posted on 29-9-2005 @ 09:11 PM by HowardRoark

Lunar meteorites are found all over the earth
epsc.wustl.edu...

The big difference between a lunar meteiroite and a lunar sample from Apollo is that the lunar samples are unweathered. This is espcially impotant with some minerals like olivine the weather quickly on the earth.

reply posted on 9-5-2006 @ 01:53 PM by pepsi78

Originally posted by Sunofone
NO LONGER A CONSPIRACY THEORY...

Ps, the best way is to take a screen shoot and put it here so people can see it, take a screen shoot at the exact moment.
I see some people will not even look at the movie, some of them because it's in real player format, some of them because they are ignorant.
So the best way is to take several screen shoots of the event.

MOD EDIT: Removing a very large quote.

[edit on 5/9/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]

reply posted on 9-5-2006 @ 04:05 PM by masterp

Any image/video can be fake. The posted video can be a fake. We can not really know.

reply posted on 10-5-2006 @ 08:16 AM by pepsi78

Originally posted by masterp
Any image/video can be fake. The posted video can be a fake. We can not really know.

Not if it's from nasa's oficial site

reply posted on 10-5-2006 @ 10:01 AM by AgentSmith

Seeing as it's such poor quality it is hard to tell and there is an accompanying explanation with it which seems to fit in with what we see, also bearing in mind that NASA would not post anything that could incriminate them it pretty much is a non-issue.. I imagine that is why this thread has been dormant for so long until now.

reply posted on 3-8-2007 @ 08:21 AM by Spidersnarf

I've got one question about this picture:

found it on a Apollo picture database, and it's from Apollo 17.

Now ... the question is, ... if the light source would have been the Sun, (only source of light apparently) how come then, that the shadow of the astronaut on the left, points totally to the left? While the lunar rover, gives shadows to the front and to the right.

In my opinion, (could be wrong) then this means there is another light source than the Sun. .... And it's very closeby as well, otherwise you would not be able to get such a widely spreaded different kind of shadows.....

just my 2 cents.... (and only one pic)

reply posted on 9-10-2007 @ 10:44 PM by weedwhacker

reply to post by Spidersnarf

Spider, the 'perspective' you're accustomed to on Earth can lead you to wonder about the photos from the Lunar missions. From our Earthly experience one might think the entire foreground and background were perfectly flat. BUT, just consider that this portion of the surface undulated very slightly, as you might find here on Earth. In those conditions shadows will appear to be non-parallel, from the perspective of the camera. If you had an aerial photo of this same scene, you would see parallel shadows. This is an interesting pic because he was shooting 'into' the sun, as evidenced by the lens artifacts at the top. GO take a picture on a fairly bright day on the beach and see the results.

Cheers

Pages: << 7 8 9 10 >> ^^TOP^^