[Busted] NASA caught faking Gemini-10 Spacewalk Photos?

reply to post by ArMaP


It could be I am misrepresenting a thought. I am not talking about mirror reflective, but more like light reflective. Different colors reflect light, black reflects very little to no light, white reflects the most light. Depending on the actual color of the moon would also depend on how much light it reflects.

We are able to see the moon in the sky above us due to the sunlight reflecting off of the surface that is facing the sun. This same instance is in part why we don’t see stars when pictures are taken on the moon, besides there being little to no atmosphere on the moon, the strongest sun rays are not blocked which combined with the light reflecting off the moon makes it much too bright to see the stars.

This is not my area of expertise, and such I could be wrong, but this is how I have interpreted the materials I have read. If I am incorrect I will concede.

Originally posted by AlienCarnage
I am not talking about mirror reflective, but more like light reflective.

That is what albedo means, the capability of an object to reflect diffuse light, not the specular reflectivity of a mirror or a polished piece of metal.

An obsidian mirror, although black, reflects more direct light than a piece of paper, but the paper has a higher albedo.

Lets reduce this argument to it's most basic form! Someone please tell me what the one and a half mile shard is in the south west area of central bay? I swear, someone explain that structure to me and I will never say another word. . .

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

I could talk about colour but that would upset Zorgon, it may be bad to his health.

Fair enough, let's allow him to recover from surgery first, then when his health is regained enough so he can handle it, maybe you can enlighten us.

Before the days of digital cameras I can still remember taking my film to the one hour photo processor and they had all kinds of settings on their processor to adjust the color my prints came out with, so that gave me a clue that "real color" wasn't the absolute thing I thought it was.

I also noticed from taking underwater video and pictures, that the film or videotape does not accurately match what my eyes perceive with natural light. Only by using artificial light sources did the results captured on film more closely match visual perception, so that was evidence that the eyes and the cameras don't always see the same colors!

Plus I know different films have different "temperature" ratings (not talking about thermal but color temperature) and I know NASA had a commercial camera modified for the astronauts, but I don't know if they used commercially available film, that would be a big question, and I can try to look into that while Zorgon recovers.

Zorgon, good health to you, hope you're back to 100% soon!

Does it actually say that the blacked out photo is of him in space? He may have just edited the first photo to put the second one in to fill spaceas he didn't have any other photos to fill it with. If it doesn't say that thats of him in outer space... this is much impler that it first seems.

I gave up reading after about 8 pages so please forgive me if this has been posted. There is a very simple way to tell if the images are identical.

(edit) I notice this technique is used in the avatar in the first post on page 11 to produce an embossed effect.

Two identical images, if aligned properly, will produce 50% grey if the top image is at 50% opacity and each pixel is inverted. Don't believe me? Look at this example - a quick handrawn doodle. The second doodle is a copy of the first with an extra bit of green added. The third image is the result. Only the green is visible.



So here we go with the suspect images. I've scaled one to fit the other.






Bingo. Same image.

But (and this is the question nobody seems willing to answer) WHO CARES?

NASA doesn't make any claims about the "fake" image. The astronaut is on record saying no photos exist.

The only disingenuous party is the book publisher. And the guy who started this thread.

Why does he think this is sinister?


[edit on 24-7-2009 by micktravis]

reply to post by micktravis

(edit) I notice this technique is used in the avatar in the first post on page 11 to produce an embossed effect.

Actually, I just used an emboss feature of my paint program.

[edit on 7/24/2009 by AlienCarnage]

Originally posted by micktravis
The only disingenuous party is the book publisher. And the guy who started this thread.

Disingenuous for asking a question or two?

Even the title of the thread is based on a question....

"NASA caught faking Gemini-10 Spacewalk Photos?"


Edit: I made the question mark big for you, since you missed it the first time.

[edit on 24-7-2009 by Exuberant1]

(edit) I notice this technique is used in the avatar in the first post on page 11 to produce an embossed effect.

Actually, I just used an emboss feature of my paint program.

[edit on 7/24/2009 by AlienCarnage]

Yeah, but that's how it does it, internally.

reply to post by Exuberant1


There's nothing wrong with deeming a question disingenuous. "Have you stopped beating your mother?" is a question but I'm sure you would object to being asked it because it contains suppositions and implications which (I assume) are incorrect. But by your criterion it appears fair game.

It's disingenuous regardless of the question mark because there is no evidence at all that NASA have anything to do with it. But anyone reading the headline is going to assume that NASA is going to come up somewhere in the thread. But it doesn't, except for a few who keep pointing this out. Was NASA just there to turn heads?

Look, if I titled it "Chevy Chase caught faking moonwalk pictures?" but included no evidence of his involvement, would you consider the title misleading?

Or am I mistaken and evidence has been provided? I didn't see any, and the OP (to the best of my knowledge) has ignored requests to address the issue.

[edit on 24-7-2009 by micktravis]

Originally posted by micktravis

It's disingenuous regardless of the question mark because there is no evidence at all that NASA have anything to do with it.

That was determined during the course of the thread.

The "spacewalk" image was also proven to be a flipped copy of the first with some alterations.

We have yet to determine the name of the individual who made the decision to alter the picture. Hopefully we'll find that out later in this thread.

Do you know who made the decision? Who did they used to work for?








[edit on 24-7-2009 by Exuberant1]

No, I have no idea whose decision it was. Do you? Do you suspect NASA? Why do you suspect them? I assume you do because, out of every other possibility in the known universe you choose them as the single option in your lead line. Is it just because they fit neatly into your conspiracy theory?

You wouldn't last a day as a journalist.

Originally posted by micktravis
No, I have no idea whose decision it was. Do you? Do you suspect NASA? Why do you suspect them? I assume you do because, out of every other possibility in the known universe you choose them as the single option in your lead line. Is it just because they fit neatly into your conspiracy theory?

You wouldn't last a day as a journalist.

Well since this was taken during a NASA mission I think we can be forgiven for believing that they have manipulated the picture. Is it not a NASA picture?

Yes, the photo obviously originated with NASA. But both NASA and the astronaut seem very up front about the fact that there are no pictures of this particular event. The only misleading picture is printed in a book that didn't come from NASA. I don't understand why you need to bring NASA into this discussion. And given the facts, I don't think there's anything sinister here at all. It seems like you're grasping for straws.

So I'll ask again. How is NASA involved in this? Why are they suspect?

If I took a photograph off a table in your house, one taken by your mother, and I photoshopped it so you appeared to be floating in space, and then I published it, would you blame your mother?

Originally posted by micktravis
If I took a photograph off a table in your house, one taken by your mother, and I photoshopped it so you appeared to be floating in space, and then I published it, would you blame your mother?

Are you implying that NASA stole the image?

*If so, you'd be the first...

Originally posted by micktravis
If I took a photograph off a table in your house, one taken by your mother, and I photoshopped it so you appeared to be floating in space, and then I published it, would you blame your mother?

You'd have to credit the mom for the original. Also you wouldn't be able to claim that the picture is genuine.

I always thought the "Collins Space Walk Photo" was suspicious because it does not appear in later publications of the book. Redacted? For a good reason?

reply to post by touchdowntrojans

I always thought the "Collins Space Walk Photo" was suspicious because it does not appear in later publications of the book. Redacted? For a good reason?

Dealt with at length here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by micktravis


Conspiracies are a fact. You had better get used to them. Like UFO’s or people that distrust NASA, they are not going away.

Originally posted by Nventual
He actually did state that there were no pictures of his Gemini space walk.

“One of the great disappointments of the flight was that there were no photos of my spacewalk. [...] All we had was the film from one movie camera, [...] which recorded an uninterrupted sequence of black sky [...] I was really feeling sorry for myself, unable to produce graphic documentation for my grandchildren of my brief sally as a human satellite [...]”

That is taken from the link posted above. The person debunking the use of the photo is correct, in that it is never suggested anywhere that it is a photo of a space walk.

It is much more likely, that because there were no actual photos - as admitted by Collins himself, that the publishers did it.

No conspiracy, just shady publishing tactics.

So you are telling me that we send people into out of space and theres no photos? one of teh simpliest thing to capture for future reference and such?