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.

 

Who took this photo on the moon ?

page: 12
105
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Truth1000
 


Wow! Can you star & flag a response? You pretty much summed up the reason I finally decided to make the move from ATS "lurker" to ATS member. Thank you for your well-articulated response which, personally, seems to me, that it would be an appropriate posting on any thread on the ATS site. Gold star. And some flags...& a bag of chips.




posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
In looking at the actual Nasa photo, the angle of the photographer(lil astronaut) looks dead on.Our Op's section of the photo gives the impression that the angle is bad, based on the way he posted it.Now,,,the REAL issue is the shadow. look at the rock just below the main astronauts feet, then look at the astronauts shadow. does anyone alse see two different angles,,,,insinuating artificial light? Or am I at a bad angle?



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Ok sorry to be a nay sayer but this is pretty apparent. The second guy did take the pic (guy in visor). Heres how:

1)Firstly, yes the cameras are chest mounted but on this trip they were removable. Look in photo and you can see a rod protruding from bottom of camera system. the rod has a hand grip. This is used to hold the camera and to get better positioned photos.
2) Look in the refection at second astronaut, he is side on and the camera is not on his chest. there is nothing where the camera would of been if it was on his chest. Also it looks loke the camera is in his hand aligned with his body. He is holding high up the stick so camera is low.
3) Look in the visor for the angle that reflects back towards camera (perfectly flat at 90 degrees) that point is right where the second guy is. And there is nothing or no one else that could have take picture in reflection. Since it is a fishbowl shape you get alot area relected back.
4) Finally the reason the second astronaut looks sooo far away in the reflection is because the visor is convex shaped. this makes everything look small. Try looking in a convex mirror at a sevice station or train station.

These combined answer this mystery. Cheers



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry

Originally posted by ppk55

Then who took this photo of BOTH OF THEM?


[edit on 22-4-2010 by ppk55]



There are only Two men in that picture

...


Two figures in the picture...so who was holding the camera to take the picture?

Keep up, this is the whole point...well, besides the reflected figure isn't wearing a standard issue Apollo space suit...(Psssst...no life support backpack)



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BungleX
 


For my money, the '4th astronaut' (3 on mission, 2 on moon) in the reflection, is actually facing N/East as we view it in the image...what everyone thinks is his right foot, is a rock/prop.

Look carefully at his legs and visor area, they are facing North East, not South East (as we view it)



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Thank you, WashMoreFeet, that is a very kind assessment of my efforts.

As you stated, I also went from a luker to a member because I truly thought that with the expertise God had seen fit to allow me to experience, there were areas where I could truly contribute. It was for this reason I signed on to this site.

With all of the varied personages who post, or lurk, at this site, if we were to utilize the beneficial aspects of what each person knew, and were able to access their training and experience, we could gain some valuable insights into the amazing area of topics that are discussed here. If there's an astrophysicist available, certainly we should highly value the knowledge that person could impart. If there are doctors, engineers, electricians, college professors, computer specialists, professionally trained photographers, and so forth, wh read these topics and can add pertinent insights that would likely not be matched by the "Joe Doe" guy off the street, then that would allow us, by focusing on those areas of personal interest, a free opportunity for good things. We could learn and grow mentally, and could expand the knowledge base of ourselves, and those with whom we contact every day of our existence.

The problem that seems overly burdensome is that people who have only a rudimentary understanding of the topic will promote their opinions with extreme vigor. If they were actually trying to learn and gain knowledge, even an error could be easily overlooked. But , instead of learning from an error, that seems to make many people ever more determined to push forward their already-failed agendas, becoming increasingly obstinate to recognizing when someone has a higher level of knowledge than them, they should use that opportunity to learn. Error feeds on error, and the thread becomes increasingly untenable to their arguments. This makes them eve more resistent to any knowledgable discussion points. Little by little, the whole thread deteriorates until it becomes two sets of stories, so diametrically opposed that no resemblance to a true debate can be drawn.

You get more educated by listening to those who know what they are talking about, rather than simply trying to find those who will agree with any concepts, erroneus or not, that you have chosen to promote.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Truth1000
 





The problem that seems overly burdensome is that people who have only a rudimentary understanding of the topic will promote their opinions with extreme vigor. If they were actually trying to learn and gain knowledge, even an error could be easily overlooked.


Perhaps these burdensome people come here for fun and recreation, rather than pure and 100% accurate science and conveyance of information.

I suggest if it dismays you as much as you profess, since this is the second occasion you have said as much, you instead visit a pure science related forum, and not a speculative and conspiratorial forum such as this.

Welcome to ATS membership.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by consigliere
 


Shadows can be at different angles due to the terrain they fall on plenty of examples on the net and it happens here on earth as well



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   
OK, I'm winding down. Please review this image:

www.hq.nasa.gov... (left Sidebar : Jack's Flown Suit.) Sorry can't direct link.

It is Schmidt post EVA #3 ( the one in question.) Please pay particular attention to 3 things:

1. His PLSS DOES NOT seem to appear as big and bulky as others have depicted. ( Especially at that angle, opposite but similar to visor reflection)

2. His suit is quite dirty. (Ties in with previous suggestion of blending into background)

3. His Visor contains interesting "flaps/blinders" which might explain oddity of visor shape in reflection.

Additionally there are some awesome detail images of Flown Flight Suit including Visor, Gloves, Boots etc.

According to this link, it is one of the best preserved, least damaged suits.

That's all I got. It's been fun. Thanks to OP.
Regards...kk


[edit on 23-4-2010 by kinda kurious]

[edit on 23-4-2010 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
If I'm not misteaken the chest mounted cameras were detacthable. It would simply be a matter of removing his camera taking a picture of his face/visor and the other astranaut was in the reflection.

Why don't they call proctologists astronauts? Seems more appropriate.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


This all fits in with actual personal accounts by Gene Cernan in his biography.


1. His PLSS DOES NOT seem to appear as big and bulky as others have depicted. ( Especially at that angle, opposite but similar to visor reflection)


PLSS looks about right, to me. If I have time I'll look up the various versions, as the technology improved between missions.


2. His suit is quite dirty. (Ties in with previous suggestion of blending into background)


Yeah, at Taurus-Littrow they found a LOT more loose regolith, and much darker, than on other Apollo mission EVAs. Combined with the broken Rover fender (the makeshift repair did not last for very long) and they got covered in a lot of soil, as they drove along.


3. His Visor contains interesting "flaps/blinders" which might explain oddity of visor shape in reflection.


Not addressed in the book, but can look it up other places. Looks to me as if Jack jerry-rigged that visor. Probably taped it onto his helmet, before beginning EVA #3.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Mercy sakes WW, I was hoping you'd be pushing for the Kermit the Frog Alien Baby Reflection angle and we could enjoy a little alernate reality role reversal.


But seriously, it did seem to be quite dusty on that EVA. Here is a clip from the video links I posted before where Cernan is kicking up some dust and takes a tumble. (Quicktime movie)

www.hq.nasa.gov...



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


I think that was Schmidt. But, I didn't hear the audio (was that the "strolling through the park" bit)?

Cernan mentioned, several times, that Jack tended to fall more, between the two of them. ('Course, Gene is the military guy, and Jack is the civilian...some ego at work, there...)

Also, the CMDR had the red stripe on the helmet. Didn't see it, there.

It is also interesting to note, never mentioned much, just how difficult it was for them, in the suits, when inflated. Even at only ~3.5 PSI, those were still a bear to wear, and to bend at one's joints. Modern suits are much better, today I imagine.

In the light gravity, it was easier to "hop" as you see...mostly using just the ankle and calf muscles. Full-on hip flexing was very tiring.

Another thing I found interesting, was how raw and bloodied their fingers would get, by the third EVA. Rubbing from the glove liners, as they bent and flexed their hands, abraded the skin.

This is why I love the Library, and the selection of books there....much, much better info than you can usually get from the Internet, a lot more detailed.






[edit on 23 April 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Gene comes bounding energetically down the mountain towards the rover. He loses his balance and falls to his knees, bounces forward on all fours, and his left foot kicks out an impressive spray of dust, perhaps 3 meters long, towards the rover camera. He rises and continues his traverse with undiminished attack.


Source

Clip 165:36:33

Plus mentioned in audio.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious
This comparison below is from a different Apollo controversy (12). I present it to show how lack of detail can distort things. Bear in mind, this is a relatively direct frontal view and the PLSS outline is very diminished. Add the curvature of face shield, low resolution and further distance from subject and Wah Laa!



i142.photobucket.com...



[edit on 23-4-2010 by kinda kurious]


KK, that's exactly what I was talking about - thanks for the excellent example showing how in greyscale, everything can blend in so you don't know what exactly you are seeing.. Don't have time today to do further analysis, but I will get back to this.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 
Why doesn't the guy in the reflection on the helmet glass not have a pack?



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ozzieman
 


he does have a pack on, the shadow he casts shows it. The quality is so low though that it appears he is facing to the right when in fact hes facing straight at the astronaut he is taking a picture of. if he were facing to the right his left leg would be illuminated by the sun. some people say he couldnt be taking a picture cause his arm is at his waist but that is his left arm and not his right which is used to take the picture since thats the side the button was placed on the camera. more or less people see what they want to see much like a Rorschach test.

[edit on 23-4-2010 by TheScale]



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Uh oh this guy found the picture Nasa and the rest of the US Govt was trying to hide! The photo E.T. took on the moon


grow some brain cells.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   
I have no idea where this thread is going or where it is going to end up



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 

NASA typically used Hasselbalds on all of those missions. They had wonderful lenses. All one has to do to make such a shor ot hold the camera facing oneself, arm extended, and then press the shutter release. Amazing how you guys see evidence of conspiracy where there isn't any. Ever seen a Saturn V? It could indeed heft a payload into orbit. After that, the moon is just a short burn and a three day ride away.



new topics

top topics



 
105
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join