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.

 

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 377
377
<< 374  375  376    378  379  380 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



No you didnt miss it,
its called hysterical blindness.


I didn't miss it because it never happened, otherwise you would have posted a link. Talk about hysterical blindness:


Yep that what you get when you have too many shadows going different directions


Now this looks realistic:
c.photoshelter.com...
www.philippegatta.fr...
images.travelpod.com...



[snip] I like how you draw the arrows the direction YOU WANT,if you draw an arrow straight across from left to right on any of the objects the shadows ARE CORRECT and the changes in direction are due to slope look at the Astronaut for a prime example [snip]

edit on 4-3-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/3/11 by masqua because: Personal attacks removed




posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 

Well I have to agree..
The one dubious shadow in the middle that Foosm, I think, is attributing to that instrument is actually the astronauts arm IMO..



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 02:35 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:58 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Please stick to the topic at hand and refrain from personal sniping.

Thank you.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
This perfectly sums up Jarrah.

He is incapable of actual research.

www.youtube.com...


edit on 5-3-2011 by Facefirst because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2011 by Facefirst because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Facefirst
 


Pretty dull video..
So we have moon rocks, so do the Russians and no cosmonauts went there..



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Facefirst
 


Pretty dull video..
So we have moon rocks, so do the Russians and no cosmonauts went there..


What does a dull video presentation have to do with facts? Jarrah was proved wrong on just about everything.
edit on 5-3-2011 by Facefirst because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Facefirst
 


Pretty dull video..
So we have moon rocks, so do the Russians and no cosmonauts went there..


Well bib the USA brought back over 800 pounds of rock and soil how much did Russia bring back their first mission brought back about 4oz (100g)
do you want to give us their total?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 04:35 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 



Well bib the USA brought back over 800 pounds of rock and soil how much did Russia bring back their first mission brought back about 4oz (100g) do you want to give us their total?


Well WMD, who cares about the quantity..It merely proves you don't need men to get moon rocks..
BTW, have we seen all that 800 pounds..

Yes, your childish emocons are annoying..



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Well bib men dont land we get onces when men go we get HUNDREDS of pounds FUNNY EH!!!



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by backinblack
 


Well bib men dont land we get onces when men go we get HUNDREDS of pounds FUNNY EH!!!


I'm pretty sure the Russians merely got what they wanted..
If they wanted more then I see nothing that would have stopped them..FUNNY EH !!!


jra

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
I'm pretty sure the Russians merely got what they wanted..
If they wanted more then I see nothing that would have stopped them..FUNNY EH !!!


Well firstly, the Russian's sent nine sample return missions with only three of them working successfully, so they didn't get merely what they wanted and clearly it wasn't an easy thing for them to do, due to the high rate of failure.

Secondly, the Russian's didn't get any Lunar rocks, just soil samples. Unlike the Apollo missions that got rocks, core samples and soil. That their shows the difference between an unmanned sample return and a manned one. That and with a manned sample return, you can explore a greater area and pick and choose what you want to bring back, where as with an unmanned lander, you can only get what's in reach of the lander.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
SWEET 16
Episode 1: The case of the CROSS hair

So many heartaches, so many faces
So many dirty things
You couldn't even believe

I would stand in line for this
It's always good in life for this

Oh baby, oh baby
Then it fell apart, it fell apart
Oh baby, oh baby
Then it fell apart, it fell apart

Oh Baby, oh baby

Oh baby, oh baby

Then it fell apart, it fell apart Oh baby, oh baby
Then it fell apart, it fell apart Oh baby, oh baby
Then it fell apart, it fell apart
Oh baby, oh baby
Like it always does, always does




AS16-116-18649
167:45:03 Similar to 18647 and 48. Best of the three. Charlie is pointing to a sample location on the face of Outhouse Rock. Note that he has a pack of sample bags hooked to his finger. Note that the shadow of the sample bags is orange. This is normal for sunlit transmitted thru the translucent Teflon film from which the bags are made. The photo is sharp enough that we can confirm that Charlie has magazine K ("Kilo") on his Hasselblad and that his checklist is open to pages LMP-30 and LMP-31.



history.nasa.gov...

There is another version of this picture here
which is of a higher resolution

AS16-116-18649 (23 April 1972) --- Astronaut Charles M. Duke Jr., lunar module pilot of the Apollo 16 lunar landing mission, examines closely the surface of a large boulder at North Ray Crater during the third Apollo 16 extravehicular activity (EVA) at the Descartes landing site. This picture was taken by astronaut John W. Young, commander. Note the chest-mounted 70mm Hasselblad camera. While astronauts Young and Duke descended in the Apollo 16 Lunar Module (LM) "Orion" to explore the Descartes highlands landing site on the moon, astronaut Thomas K. Mattingly II, command module pilot, remained with the Command and Service Modules (CSM) "Casper" in lunar orbit.


spaceflight.nasa.gov...


Aside from the difference in color, the two photos are not the same!


Lets take a closer look!
One photo has a crosshair that is missing a part of its "hair", making it look like an upside-down cross or sword.
spaceflight.nasa.gov:


The other does not:
history.nasa.gov:


Why would one high resolution photo have the full cross hair and the other not?

Now remember, these crosshairs should be permanently burned, or exposed, into the negative.
So to have one scratched out, or removed should leave a noticeable mark. Say a white spot, or in this case line, showing where the crosshair should be. But as you can see, the photo looks normal, it retains information of the rock. How is that possible?

Besides the cross hair issue, we also have information in one shot, that is not in another:

Check out whats circled in blue. It looks like shadow.


But in this version its missing:


Where these photos enhanced? cleaned up? modified? Composited?

Stay tuned for more!

www.hq.nasa.gov...
spaceflight.nasa.gov...
www.sing365.com...
edit on 6-3-2011 by FoosM because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Foosm, I just have to ask WHY.???

Why would they bother messing around with a pic of a big rock.??



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Great find Foosm.

So 15 more to come ?

I can't hardly wait.

Thanks also for this great thread :-)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by jra
 



Well firstly, the Russian's sent nine sample return missions with only three of them working successfully, so they didn't get merely what they wanted and clearly it wasn't an easy thing for them to do, due to the high rate of failure.


Well the Russians are known for some failures, unlike the entire Apollo program which had very few problems and no loss of life..
Amazing really when you consider we don't have that success rate even now..
Heck, a rocket went down just last week..

But I just think the moon rock issue is moot..
NASA, judging by Apollo's remarkable success, would probably have had little trouble collecting rocks with automated systems..

I'd rather look at other aspects of the missions..



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by jra
 



Well firstly, the Russian's sent nine sample return missions with only three of them working successfully, so they didn't get merely what they wanted and clearly it wasn't an easy thing for them to do, due to the high rate of failure.


Well the Russians are known for some failures, unlike the entire Apollo program which had very few problems and no loss of life..
Amazing really when you consider we don't have that success rate even now..
Heck, a rocket went down just last week..

But I just think the moon rock issue is moot..
NASA, judging by Apollo's remarkable success, would probably have had little trouble collecting rocks with automated systems..

I'd rather look at other aspects of the missions..





Apollo 1 (originally designated AS (Apollo/Saturn)-204) was the first manned mission of the Apollo manned lunar landing program, which failed due to a cabin fire which killed all three crew members (Command Pilot Virgil "Gus" Grissom, Senior Pilot Edward H. White, and Pilot Roger B. Chaffee), and destroyed the Command Module


Apollo 1


jra

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
Where these photos enhanced? cleaned up? modified? Composited?


Yes, the photo from spaceflight.nasa.gov was obviously cleaned up. If you open up both images in separate tabs in your browser and flip back and forth between them, you can see where it was edited. Photos in Magazine E on Apollo 16 all suffered from a big vertical smear across them. Some one cleaned it up on this photo for cosmetic reasons and it seems other photos on spaceflight.nasa.gov are edited to varying degrees, which is why I don't use them as a resource. If you just want some pretty pictures to look at, they're fine, if you want relatively* untouched photos their are plenty of other, better sites out there to use.

*I say relatively, because most places tend to do some colour and contrast adjustments to get rid of the washed out appearance from a scanned photo.


Originally posted by backinblack
Well the Russians are known for some failures, unlike the entire Apollo program which had very few problems and no loss of life..


Yes it did. Three people from Apollo 1 died.


Amazing really when you consider we don't have that success rate even now..


What is NASA's success rate now vs then? Could I see some numbers? With 132 flights of the space shuttle (not counting the current mission) and two losses, while it is an extremely sad loss of life, but that's still a fairly good success rate.


Heck, a rocket went down just last week..


Which was owned and operated by Orbital Sciences Corporation and not NASA.


But I just think the moon rock issue is moot..
NASA, judging by Apollo's remarkable success, would probably have had little trouble collecting rocks with automated systems..


How do you figure that? Automated systems are very limited as to what they can pick up and how much they can bring back. You'd need literally thousands of unmanned sample return missions to collect the equivalent to what they brought back on Apollo.
edit on 6-3-2011 by jra because: Corrected typo



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 374  375  376    378  379  380 >>

log in

join