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: 390
377
<< 387  388  389    391  392  393 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Maybe we can post now without being called liars.


No one (lately) has been directly called a "liar" (in this thread) except the topic, who is deserving of that moniker.

The "ATS members" who post in 'favor' of the "Appallingly Stupid Jarrah White" ( ® ) ...I think that is an apt description of the man-boy....who REFUSES to come here, and defend his "beliefs".

What does that say to his so-called "character" and conviction of "belief"??

"Oh", you may shout...."Just another ad hom levelled at our 'prophet', the all knowing 'Wizard of Wonderland Jarrah White!! ' All Hail!! to our 'fearless'... (sorry, CLUELESS) 'leader'!! We bow to His awesomeness, since we, O! poor servants that we are, struggle mindlessly to supplant the history books, and collected works of science and technological development acquired over decades, nay CENTURIES of Human endeavour, with His 'singular wisdom'...."....

Right.

To borrow a wonderful phrase, from a time more pertinent to the Apollo era....

"Gag me with a spoon......"

It is a "Valley Girl" throw-back, for those who may not be as well-versed on the common vernacular of that time period...the "lingo", as it were. Truly, typically American and localized to Southern California...but, it DID enjoy a (brief) nationwide notoriety, for a few years. Became "idiomatic", as a result. It is in the history....something that the Apollo "hoax" believers would never understand....THEY seem to have no ability to comprehend history....

NOR, physics, astronomy, science, orbital mechanics....did I say PHYSICS???

Et Al......




Since It seems to be de rigueur to post OFF TOPIC youtube videos, at a whim.....THIS one is to illustrate (for those too young, or otherwise socially-challenged) an example....from the daughter of Frank Zappa.....

....appropriately named "Moon Zappa", and the song "Valley Girl":

]


Pretty much sums up the general level of discourse, of late....emmmmmm?


"Totally......."



edit on 16 March 2011 by weedwhacker because: it is CLASSIFIED.




posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 



Your not liars ,confused yes, have a lack of knowledge of the principles of photography thats a given but not liars!


I'm not confused and I don't see where my lack off photography experience has affected my opinions..
Definitely not a liar....



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Another one Bites the Dust


You mean another one leaves in frustration and disgust. Personally, I find your victory celebration pre-mature. You've managed to respond to several posts, but not to these:


Why? What makes these three photos so important? And why would NASA make the effort to produce them? Or, if you think these represent a mistake, why did they release them. Unless you can explain how and why they were produced, you have nothing but an opinion about an event you didn't see.




Now, let's assume you are correct, and that these photos were "faked" at great expense. What purpose are they intended to serve? Why did Stanley Kubrick say: "We really need to take a series of stills that show Gene's limbs flailing around with a stick in his hands?"


Until you address these, you can pit the cork back in the champagne bottle... junior.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


No one (lately) has been directly called a "liar" (in this thread) except the topic, who is deserving of that moniker.

The "ATS members" who post in 'favor' of the "Appallingly Stupid Jarrah White" ( ® ) ...I think that is an apt description of the man-boy....who REFUSES to come here, and defend his "beliefs". (What does that say to his so-called "character" and conviction of "belief"??


Well I was called a liar only a few pages ago and the poster was proven wrong..

I don't see how you can personally talk about JW being scared to come here when I have seen you invited to other forums to display you aircraft experience but haven't taken up the challenge..
Pot calling kettle??



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


"Now that the tourists are gone, let's play some music...." -- Frank Zappa.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 

None of those questions are relevant..

All that matters is if they are fake or not..
IMO, I've seen nothing to convince me they are...



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



None of those questions are relevant..

All that matters is if they are fake or not..
IMO, I've seen nothing to convince me they are...


On the contrary: what we have is a series of photos taken at awkward intervals. They may or may not have been taken on the Moon. FoosM needs to prove they can only have been taken on Earth... and why.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Proving that they WERE taken on the Earth would pobably be a coup too


However like others I am morbidly following this thread and wondering what the point of his concentration on those 3 pictures is.

"True believers" in various...um.....let's call them "dodgy propositions" seem to love playing "20 questions" with little tibits of info rather than coming out and saying e\xactly what they think their evidence is.

I have a theory why this is so - they like the attention. It gives them control - everyone is playing the game by their rules, waiting for their revelation, dancing to their tune.

To some extent it doesn't really matter to them whether they "win" the argument or not (they never do othe than in their own mind when no-one can actually rebut them 'cos no-one understands what they are on about!!) but ther's always another titbit of info ready to present for the next thrilling installment of the train crash......



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by FoosM
So this really got you stumped, huh:



I'm totally losing track of this thread so sorry. But exactly what's the problem here?


based on the location and angle of that camera,
what is that a reflection of, and why wouldnt it be the blackness of space?


Omg I was afraid you would say that. Look at the edge. It's a curved surface. Also you have no idea what the angle of camera is to boot.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


I don't see a curve and the original pics give you a reasonable idea of the angle..



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by wmd_2008
 




You can roughly judge the angle from the pics...


So whats the angle then ? Taken from the centre line through the lens what was the angle.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 



So whats the angle then ? Taken from the centre line through the lens what was the angle.


Mate, you can judge it roughly..Please don't play childish games..
I'm really over them and refuse to answer anymore silly posts..

IMO it's a reflection of his left arm..



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by wmd_2008
IMO it's a reflection of his left arm..


Yeah that's what I reckoned when I saw his question too - fits with the apparent angle the shot is taken at.

But perhaps it's really a chemtrail?!!



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Reflect on This





@DJW
This is where they keep the LRV Sampler.

Not on the back of the Rover.
So that blows your 'Schmitt turning around to hide the LRV Sampler behind him', out of the water. But you would have already looked into this. For not bringing it up after several pages of debate would be intellectual dishonesty.



@PsykoOps

Originally posted by PsykoOps


Omg I was afraid you would say that. Look at the edge. It's a curved surface. Also you have no idea what the angle of camera is to boot.

Intellectual dishonesty PsykoOps. You could have checked to see if it was indeed curved:



Its not... Not to any extent that is worth bringing up.



@wmd_2008

Originally posted by wmd_2008
So whats the angle then ? Taken from the centre line through the lens what was the angle.

Im glad you brought this up, because in bringing this up, you have unveiled another key problem with these photos.
Check out the terrain:

www.hq.nasa.gov...


Now do you see any significant hills close to the astronaut and Lunar Rover?
I dont. Ok, lets take a look at the Astronaut height in relation to the Lunar Rover:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Now lets draw some lines.


As you can see, the chest mounted hasselblad sits below the TV camera mounted on the rover.
So how high would the Astronaut have to be to capture the top of the TV camera?
That we see in these photos?




Did Gene jump up?
Did step on the Rover?
Was the TV camera pointing up?

And before you say he took the camera off his chest and raised it to take the photos...
you better find some back up for that.

The 3 "Dollar Bill" Photos.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Not on the back of the Rover.
So that blows your 'Schmitt turning around to hide the LRV Sampler behind him', out of the water. But you would have already looked into this. For not bringing it up after several pages of debate would be intellectual dishonesty.


Thank you for solving the mystery. The LRV sampler was hanging from Cernan's waist. When it bounced up he snagged it with his right hand and placed it in its stowage place. Even simpler than my first explanation. In any event, you still haven't explained why NASA would go through the effort of "faking" this puzzling sequence. Surely you must have one.
edit on 17-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct typo.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Your analysis seems to rely upon a trick of perspective.

This photo - shows the top of hte camer is at teh same level as teh top of the control consol at the crew station.

This section of the rover operating manual (5mb pdf) identifies that dimension as 44.8" maximum (see page 13 for eth rover dimensions)

And of course the chest camers were actually higher than the chest - that's just where the mount was - see

I see no problem at all with the "chest mounted" camers being higher than the rover camera.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by FoosM
 


Your analysis seems to rely upon a trick of perspective.

This photo - shows the top of hte camer is at teh same level as teh top of the control consol at the crew station.



Different mission.
We are dealing with Apollo 17.
Best to find examples within the same mission for the sake of this particular discussion.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Was the Apollo 17 rover a different design?

I see nothing on it here that is higher than the consol - - the rover camera is still not higher than the consol, but it also looks like the ground slopes away to the astronaut.....which would also make him lower......



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001

Thank you for solving the mystery. The LRV sampler was hanging from Cernan's waist. When it bounced up he snagged it with his right hand and placed it in its stowage place. Even simpler than my first explanation. In any event, you still haven't explained why NASA would go through the effort of "faking" this puzzling sequence. Surely you must have one.
edit on 17-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct typo.


I dont understand what you are suggesting.
Plus, Cernan was busy taking photos, how did the Sampler find itself to the rover?

What do you mean why did NASA fake these photos... all the photos are fake from all the missions.
This is like finding goofs and mistakes in movies.
This just happens to be one of their biggest mistakes.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


[qupte]I dont understand what you are suggesting.
Plus, Cernan was busy taking photos, how did the Sampler find itself to the rover?

My bad... I've been paying so little attention that I got the astronauts mixed up. It's Schmidt, the geologist, who would have had the LRV tool attached to his waist as he mounted the LRV.



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 387  388  389    391  392  393 >>

log in

join