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: 456
377
<< 453  454  455    457  458  459 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



There is a pre-condition that must be applied when analyzing all Apollo videos: where is the source file? For the purpose of illustration only do we use screencaps and youtube references. We should be looking at only the highest quality versions available which is HD content produced NASA.


I assume you are talking about the Slow Scan TV tapes. These needed to be converted into the then network standards (PAL, NTSC) in order to be viewed on an ordinary television. If you don't have an SSTV player, you are out of luck. HD simply didn't exist in the 1970's.


HD did exist in the 1970's.




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 


In essence what exactly was Darkside of the Moon mocking?

It was mocking people like you.

The credit reel:



edit on 5/16/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



No its not.
Nothing about that ending reveals that the information presented in the documentary was untrue.
Second of all, you are showing SOUNDBITES. Soundbites can easily be taken out of context.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 

No.
It is showing outtakes..bloopers...people blowing their lines.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
I will have to disagree with you there NAT. Debris would be a possible explanation, but in this case, like with the cross hairs, the bright white of the suits overwhelm the debris on the lens! Watch the video again, and you will see whenever anything bright and white goes in front of the debris, the debris disappears.


The debris seems to disappear when it's over something that is completely blown out. But if the background isn't completely blown out, like on the very edge of the PLSS, you can still see it, like this:


edit on 16-5-2011 by nataylor because: (no reason given)


Nat, your example seems to be agreeing with my assertion.
That debris disappears the second it crosses over the bright white arm.
It even seems to go behind it.
The PLSS was definitely bright white, and not a dark color.





posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
I will have to disagree with you there NAT. Debris would be a possible explanation, but in this case, like with the cross hairs, the bright white of the suits overwhelm the debris on the lens! Watch the video again, and you will see whenever anything bright and white goes in front of the debris, the debris disappears.


The debris seems to disappear when it's over something that is completely blown out. But if the background isn't completely blown out, like on the very edge of the PLSS, you can still see it, like this:


edit on 16-5-2011 by nataylor because: (no reason given)


Nat, your example seems to be agreeing with my assertion.
That debris disappears the second it crosses over the bright white arm.
It even seems to go behind it.
The PLSS was definitely bright white, and not a dark color.





posted on May, 16 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

No.
It is showing outtakes..bloopers...people blowing their lines.



So? That means nothing.
Many documentaries use scripts or redo / stage interviews




Where did the documentary lie?


edit on 16-5-2011 by FoosM because: added stage



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 

Yes, it means something. I means that the actors (and real people) were not being interviewed for real. It means they were working from a script. It's fiction. It's a joke.

I don't see Bon Jovi blowing a script. I don't see anyone getting their lines wrong. I see him saying things that would not have pleased his fans. I see other band members talking about how they're going to invent things to say:
"Hey, what are you going to say? Well, f*** I'm going to say this.."

Yes, I see a newscaster blowing his lines for his commentary, his script. Show me where one of the people interviewed keeps trying to get their lines right.


edit on 5/16/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Nat, your example seems to be agreeing with my assertion.
That debris disappears the second it crosses over the bright white arm.
It even seems to go behind it.
The PLSS was definitely bright white, and not a dark color.





The very top of the PLSS (it's the OPS, really) in your picture, indicated by the green arrow, has a brightness of about 93%. The center of the PLSS (red arrow) has a brightness of about 96%.



In my example, the debris disappears where the brightness is about 99%. When it reappears, still over the arm, the brightness of that area is about 93%. So it would seem that at around 93% brightness, the debris is somewhat visible.

And the effect occurs on the OPS in the exact same spot where we've already established there is debris on the lens. And the effect produced is what we'd expect from debris on the lens. I think it is therefore most likely all we've found is the effect of debris on the lens.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

Yes, it means something. I means that the actors (and real people) were not being interviewed for real. It means they were working from a script. It's fiction. It's a joke.


A scripted documentary does not automatically mean a documentary is a LIE!
And it doesnt make it a mockumentary.
Do you not understand that?

I gave you two examples. One scripted and the other not.
Both cases you get bloopers.
Both cases the intent of the program was to give the audience factual information.

What do you think newscaster are reading when they are telling us the news?
You think they have the news memorized? No, its scripted! The news is scripted.



edit on 16-5-2011 by FoosM because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Are you "playing dumb" with everyone here?? Seems like it....

Surely, IF you had watched it (only a measly 3 minutes!) and paid attention, you wouldn't still cling to that weak claim.

Anyway, I don't have software to screen-grab, but @1:30...PAY attention!!!

READ the credits. NOW, come back and try to keep saying it's "real".....



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

David Bowman played by Tad Brown. You mean he's not real? Dang.

"Dave...
Can't we talk this over, Dave. I'm feeling much better now."

edit on 5/16/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Dark Side Of The Moon illustrates how the truth can be twisted by the manipulation of images.

www.cbc.ca...

As this thread brilliantly illustrates.

edit on 16/5/11 by ConspiracyNut23 because: wrong bb tags



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

And the effect occurs on the OPS in the exact same spot where we've already established there is debris on the lens. And the effect produced is what we'd expect from debris on the lens. I think it is therefore most likely all we've found is the effect of debris on the lens.


Here is a good example of why its important to get the original video to look at, and not a compressed youtube version.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by manmental
 


Thanks for the "word up", friend!!



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by 000063
 


I wasn't aware it was a fake documentary. Sorry about that. But I am curious as to why Nixon wasn't there at launch.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by aero56
 



I wasn't aware it was a fake documentary. Sorry about that. But I am curious as to why Nixon wasn't there at launch.


He was too busy planning the Chappaquidick incident.
(This is a conspiracy forum, after all.)



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Nat, your example seems to be agreeing with my assertion.
That debris disappears the second it crosses over the bright white arm.
It even seems to go behind it.
Find a pair of glasses. Locate or make a smudge on them that's visible with them on. Now look closely at a bright white light. Now look at a brightly lit white sleeve with the light shining off it and reflecting directly into your eyes.

Notice anything?



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:30 AM
link   
I'd throw down a bet that 95% of the Moon Landing defenders are A: American.

Only that nation can fall time and again for such things as:

Lee Harvey Oswald lone gunman

Gulf of Tonkin

9/11 terrorist attacks during drills involving hijacked planes.

Operation Gladio in Italy

Fake OBL assassination with 18 hr body disposal etc etc....

WMD presentation from Colin Powell at the UN.

$14 trillion and counting TARP fraud


the list goes on..... undiscovered tribes from Borneo are more informed, clued up and less gullible.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by nataylor

And the effect occurs on the OPS in the exact same spot where we've already established there is debris on the lens. And the effect produced is what we'd expect from debris on the lens. I think it is therefore most likely all we've found is the effect of debris on the lens.


Here is a good example of why its important to get the original video to look at, and not a compressed youtube version.
What's that? I can't hear you over the hypocrisy!



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Perpetrator
I'd throw down a bet that 95% of the Moon Landing defenders are A: American.

Only that nation can fall time and again for such things as:

Lee Harvey Oswald lone gunman

Gulf of Tonkin

9/11 terrorist attacks during drills involving hijacked planes.

Operation Gladio in Italy

Fake OBL assassination with 18 hr body disposal etc etc....

WMD presentation from Colin Powell at the UN.

$14 trillion and counting TARP fraud


the list goes on..... undiscovered tribes from Borneo are more informed, clued up and less gullible.
I'm not American, though there's a guy on one of the Osama threads who seems convinced I'm a gov't plant, even after he threatened to have the mods check my IP and I told him exactly what they'd find. He never got around to checking.

Nice attempt at a derail. Care to bring up evidence for the landings being faked?



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 453  454  455    457  458  459 >>

log in

join