The Sky Was Black On The Moon?, page 21


Pages: <<  18    19    20    21    22    23    24  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 28 times


reply posted on 19-6-2010 @ 12:45 AM by DONNYxMC
reply to post by Deaf Alien



because they were inside a studio filming the moon landing on earth. no man has set foot on the moon. how did they get out of the moon lander when they cant even fit in the door


reply posted on 19-6-2010 @ 07:21 AM by ppk55
Apparently they did take some photos of stars etc. with the Far Ultraviolet Camera/Spectrograph on Apollo 16.

Here's a 3rd party site that purports to hold them
www3.telus.net...

For some reason I can't find any of these pics on NASA sites.

Here's a photo of the camera that supposedly took the photos ... it's so shiny.



edit source : AS16-114-18439 history.nasa.gov...

[edit on 19-6-2010 by ppk55]


reply posted on 19-6-2010 @ 04:48 PM by CHRLZ
Originally posted by ppk55
Apparently they did take some photos of stars etc. with the Far Ultraviolet Camera/Spectrograph on Apollo 16.
Here's a 3rd party site that purports to hold them
www3.telus.net...

And NASA purports to have taken them, and you purport to be PPK55. What's your point?

For some reason I can't find any of these pics on NASA sites.

That's because NASA probably just offers the data sets only. As it does for a LOT of non-visible-spectrum data/imagery and other scientific data sets. Anyone can request that data. Indeed, if you had done a PROPER search, you would have found this right at the top of your Google results:
www.lpi.usra.edu...
Click on Experimental Results, and the full description of what is available appears, along with an email link to request the data. It's not that difficult.

Here's a photo of the camera that supposedly took the photos ... it's so shiny.

Again, what is your point? Should it have been painted matt black to make you happy? Or are you simply proving (again) that you don't understand how much light is thrown upwards into shaded areas by the surrounding lunar surface? See all that bright stuff in the foreground? Why do you think it looks bright - what is it doing - reflecting light up, perhaps?

Just because it was a black-looking sky, doesn't mean it was nighttime, dear... things work a little differently on the Moon. People with photography experience understand that light reflects off the ground.

Given that you can SEE it doing that, I would have thought that even *you* might be able to grasp that concept. But no....


[edit on 19-6-2010 by CHRLZ]


reply posted on 19-6-2010 @ 09:21 PM by TeslaandLyne
reply to post by Deaf Alien



Why do we have a telescope in orbit.
That is also closer to outer space and the sun.
The human eye is much like a camera with a long exposure that
is needed to capture stars even in a telescope camera.
Not seeing stars on the Moon does not make sense.
Not being on the Moon makes sense.


reply posted on 20-6-2010 @ 02:00 PM by wmd_2008
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
reply to
post by Deaf Alien



Why do we have a telescope in orbit.
That is also closer to outer space and the sun.
The human eye is much like a camera with a long exposure that
is needed to capture stars even in a telescope camera.
Not seeing stars on the Moon does not make sense.
Not being on the Moon makes sense.



You never make any sense look up any astrophotography site and LEARN something about the subject.


reply posted on 25-6-2010 @ 05:27 PM by bokonon2010


reply posted on 26-6-2010 @ 05:57 AM by bokonon2010
Originally posted by ppk55
Here's an interesting bit I found from the Apollo 14 mission transcripts.
This is on the Descent orbit insertion.

>>03 15 19 30 LMP And, Houston, looking to the north, we see the
same view. It's a very sharply defined horizon. I can see the stars. I got a - a very soft gray, well-lit surface below without too many features.
You can't see sharply, just - not distinctly; but nothing's probably lost.>>

source
www.jsc.nasa.gov... (page 286)

Whilst this is not taken on the moon, iit's interesting that he can see the 'well-lit surface' and still see the stars.

and the same apollo kook elaborates:

"We were orientated such and rotating in order to keep the thermal balance of the spacecraft so that every two minutes you could see the Earth, the moon, the sun and a 360-degree panorama of the heavens came through the window every two minutes. That's powerful stuff, particularly since it's space. Without the atmosphere to block, the stars don't twinkle, and there's 10 times as many as you could possibly see on Earth because of the lack of interference and it's much closer to what you could see through the Hubble Telescope these days, ..."
-- Edgar Mitchell


reply posted on 27-6-2010 @ 03:11 PM by theability
reply to post by thesoundofbass




Jose Escamilla has no idea what he is talking about in that movie.

NONE!


He needs to visit earth and come back to reality.

Just my 0.02



reply posted on 16-8-2010 @ 07:54 AM by bokonon2010





Posting videos and video links - ALL MEMBERS PLEASE READ

AboveTopSecret.com takes pride in making every post count. Please do not create minimal posts. If you feel inclined to make the board aware of a video, please post the video or a link to the video, a description of the video's content, and one or two paragraphs offering your own opinion on the video. This will help inspire discussion or collaborative research on your subject.




[edit on 16-8-2010 by GAOTU789]
Pages: <<  18    19    20    21    22    23    24  >>    ^^TOP^^



Hubble\'s Hidden Treasures - Incredible views of the Universe
  Posted 17 days ago with 40 member flags
Mars curiosity Sol2 Anomalies
  Posted 11 days ago with 22 member flags
Curiosity Just Went Through Mud?
  Posted 0 days ago with 22 member flags
Mars: Fears Curiosity Will Contaminate Planet
  Posted 1 days ago with 21 member flags
Milky Way in detail.
  Posted 14 days ago with 13 member flags
Went to the moon, we never went, was scared off, still going!?
  Posted 15 days ago with 11 member flags