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.
If Neil Armstrong came and farted moon dust in your face, that wouldn't be enough evidence to you.
Originally posted by FoosM
Im not convinced. If the only proof it was filmed at 6fps is because of the length of the sequence, that is not enough evidence for an Apollo sceptic.
Oh, and I don't think you know what time-lapse photography is, either. Time-lapse refers to footage that is recorded at a lower frame rate than it is played back, thus making time appear to run faster. The descent footage is still being played back at the same speed it was recorded (1 second recorded is 1 second played back). That's not time lapse.
Originally posted by FoosM
Now I gave benefit for the doubt when the moon was a good distance away, but when it got closer??
Does anybody else think this looks like time-lapse photography?
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
So I assume that your ignoring my post about moon dust means you are tacitly admitting defeat on that front. None of the lunar samples are weathered, or show signs of having been subjected atmospheric ablation.
I was only guessing as to camera speed. Whatever it was at any given point scarcely matters to me.
As for your challenge to "uninterested observers:" When expressing your opinions, please specify what benchmarks you are using to estimate time and distance. Specify how you determine the altitude, with reference to known landmarks.
Originally posted by nataylor
If Neil Armstrong came and farted moon dust in your face, that wouldn't be enough evidence to you.
Originally posted by FoosM
Im not convinced. If the only proof it was filmed at 6fps is because of the length of the sequence, that is not enough evidence for an Apollo sceptic.
It's quite obvious the descent footage is shot at 6fps. And all it takes is simple math to figure it out. Count the frames, divide by the time the descent takes.
Originally posted by nataylor
Oh, and I don't think you know what time-lapse photography is, either. Time-lapse refers to footage that is recorded at a lower frame rate than it is played back, thus making time appear to run faster. The descent footage is still being played back at the same speed it was recorded (1 second recorded is 1 second played back). That's not time lapse.
Originally posted by FoosM
Now I gave benefit for the doubt when the moon was a good distance away, but when it got closer??
Does anybody else think this looks like time-lapse photography?
You obviously have no problems with excrement, as your arguments are littered with it.
Originally posted by FoosM
If old geezers farting in your face is how you obtain evidence, well good for you.
But my standards are far higher than that.
Originally posted by FoosM
Well if its so obvious go for it... oh wait, you prefer the face fart.
Originally posted by FoosM
And you know its being played back at the correct or same speed how?
And you know this how? You have examples of lunar dust samples from the Apollo era?
Furthermore, as I already stated, they could have made a simulant specifically as the "real thing". Or simply use one of the found meteorites and make "dust" from that.
Mattered enough for you to offer an answer.
Why?
There have been a number of things that I have talked about elsewhere, yet strangely have not yet discussed in my MoonFaker series. Had Phil Webb's latest videos not given me the opportunity to talk about these subjects, I wouldn't have even bothered wasting my time on them.
Webb's latest videos are nothing but a ridiculous attempt to muddy the waters regarding whether the Apollo astronauts were on the ground or in earth orbit during the time they were supposed to be on their moon flights.
In addition to clearing up Webb's poisoning the well, we'll also be looking at: the fact that NASA used Apollo 13 as an excuse to cease the Apollo program having allegedly completed Kennedy's goal with Apollo 11; on all the moon flights NASA found ways to degrade and or limit the amount of footage they had to fake; and any hint of zero gravity in the Apollo 15 CSM telecasts always seem to last 30seconds or less.
We'll also emphatically establish how the telecommunications were faked on either scenario: Earth orbit mode and Grounded mode.
FRAUD noun:
1.) a : deceit, trickery; specifically : intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right b : an act of deceiving or misrepresenting : trick
2.) a : a person who is not what he or she pretends to be : impostor; also : one who defrauds : cheat b : one that is not what it seems or is represented to be
Because if you don't have objective standards of measurement, all you're doing is offering an uninformed opinion. But that's the name of the game with you, isn't it, FoosM? Avoid facts and figures wherever possible and try to convince everyone that something "looks wrong.," knowing that to an Earthling, everything in space "looks wrong."
Located on a nearby mountain ridge to the west was a tower, known as a Collimation Tower, with special equipment and antennae to simulate a spacecraft, so the main antenna could be pointed at it to run tests on all the transmitting, receiving and processing equipment. Before every pass all the equipment was checked out on the Collimation Tower. If a problem appeared while tracking a spacecraft, the station could quickly check out all its systems by going to the tower and running tests to confirm whether the problem was in the station or in the spacecraft.
Considering a tower like this was 3km's northwest of the Parkes observatory, could it have provided simulated data, video etc. if the power was set high enough to saturate the Parke's dish regardless of which direction it was pointing? Thereby fooling the operators. Fooling them to believe they were actually receiving Apollo transmissions when in fact it was simulated data and video.
The museum acquired the rock after the death of former Prime Minister Willem Drees in 1988. Drees received it as a private gift on Oct. 9, 1969 from then-U.S. ambassador J. William Middendorf during a visit by the three Apollo 11 astronauts, part of their "Giant Leap" goodwill tour after the first moon landing.
Middendorf, who lives in Rhode Island, told Dutch broadcaster NOS news that he had gotten it from the U.S. State Department, but couldn't recall the exact details.