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: 601
377
<< 598  599  600    602  603  604 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 


Another fallacy, due to the fact that most people know nothing about actual film production, nor the specifics of the techniques that Kubrick used in that film. One of my hobbies is being a film buff, and learning about the craft of filmmaking.

Have you ever seen how a movie is made? Ever watched many "behind the scenes" of the process?

In terms of front-projection techniques used in "2001: A Space Odyssey", Kubrick was limited in his ability to move the camera, in order to keep the perspective correct. lest it spoil the illusion. Of course in Apollo footage, you see the camera moving in ways that were impossible to "fake" using the optical methods of the day, especially with all of the countless hours of live shots.

Kubrick and his associates actually made many, many scientific errors in the film. They would hardly be the ones to "choose" to "fake" something as important as Apollo!!:

www.imdb.com...

www.moviemistakes.com...


"Space Odyssey" was ground breaking and spectacular...but, is dated and although the best for its day, is not perfect.




re: that silly video ----


There's still several light sources.


No, there are not. Jarrah White simply doesn't understand photography, lighting, perspective, uneven terrain, countless other things....


edit on Sat 8 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
Shadows converge in photographs due to perspective,...

Yes they do, but they do not converge this much. Please explain why they converge as much as they do, without a second light source. Attacking the personal background of the people in the video gets you nowhere. Refute the evidence !


jra

posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38
All kinds of film tricks were used, just like in the 1968 Space Odyssey film


Again, could you elaborate on the kinds of special effects used in the Apollo missions? Especially for the live video that would go on, uncut, for hours. Unlike movies which are composed of many short segments that are put together after. While I love the movie 2001, it has many flaws in it. There were some things Kubrick could not over come, like faking low gravity (convincingly) and the vacuum environment of space.


...There's still several light sources.


Multiple light sources would create multiple shadows on a single object. I have yet to see any Apollo photo that shows that. Shadows that appear to be going at different angles is not a sign of multiple light sources. It's simply perspective. Uneven surfaces also play a role in changing the appearance of a shadows angle.

A photo example of shadows appearing to go at different angles due to perspective:
example
edit on 8-10-2011 by jra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 



Yes they do, but they do not converge this much. Please explain why they converge as much as they do, without a second light source.


Because the shadows are extremely long! They were taken shortly after lunar dawn. Go outside at dawn or sunset and observe the shadows down Sun of you. They will be extremely long and appear to converge towards the vanishing point, just like the Apollo 11 photographs. Like so much of the evidence against Jarrah's ridiculous claims, this is something you can actually confirm for yourself. For example, if you use two flashlights in a darkened room, you can see why Jarrah's claim about "multiple light sources" is simply wrong. Try it for yourself! Jarrah counts on people being too intellectually flabby to check out his claims for themselves. Now, please, go back and read the thread. There is useful information about exposures in photography, how curved surfaces reflect, how long it takes eyes to become dark adapted... all sorts of interesting things, none of which Jarrah wants you to know! Be a true skeptic and find things out for yourself!



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38
This is one of Jarrah White's best evidence


this again. Pop quiz. How many shadows does each object cast if there is 2 or 3 light sources? How many highlights does each object then have? What happens to the darkness of the shadows themselves?
Answer that and the whole video is then seen as what it truly is.



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 


Told you I'd search for the video I recalled seeing about Jarrah White's "shadow" problem, and especially his "double-dasher" rock shadow.

Oh, and that lady in his video, shown in the still frame when the YouTube video posts in the thread? She was his Fine Arts teacher, at the vocational school that he attended. She drew a lot of flak, and later admitted that perhaps other people would have been far better qualified....

YouTube user "blisterhiker" (oops, this is by user "kaleljordankent".....F/F to time reference 6:00 for the gist of it, it is short in that video. Of course, feel free to see it all, and Parts 1 and 2 as well...) addressed the Jarrah White claims, as have many others who actually are qualified,a nd do know what they are talking about:




Here is the one from "blisterhiker":





A bonus, from "boozyscientist":


edit on Sat 8 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
The Achilles Heel of every Apollo Cheerleader is : Accession #69A4099

Realistically, NASA lost jurisdiction over these tapes once they were entered into the Archives.

Where are the contents of Accession #69A4099? How did 700 boxes of Apollo telemetry tapes (tapes encompassing ALL APOLLO lunar missions between 1969-1972) get lost in the shuffle between National Archives & Goddard?

John Sarkissian at Parkes Observatory led the strongest effort to unravel the missing tapes. Contrary to Richard Nafzger and other Apollogists the tapes are still missing.

The tapes were never received by Goddard.


Goddard Space Flight Center is only about 15mi/24km outside of Washington DC which is where the National Archives is located.


What was Michael Collins doing immediately after Apollo 11?

After being released from a 21-day quarantine, the crew were feted across the United States and around the world as part of a 45-day "Giant Leap" tour. Prior to this trip NASA administrator Thomas O. Paine had approached Collins and said that Secretary of State William P. Rogers was interested in appointing Collins to the position of Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs. It was not until they returned to the U.S. in November that he sat down with Rogers and accepted the position on the urgings of Richard Nixon.[2]:454-455 In this position he was in charge of various areas including exhibitions, speeches and history.

A year later, Collins left this position to become director of the National Air and Space Museum. He held this position until 1978 when he stepped down to become undersecretary of the Smithsonian Institution. That same year he retired from the United States Air Force with the rank of Major General.


The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is an independent agency of the United States government charged with preserving and documenting government and historical records and with increasing public access to those documents, which comprise the National Archives.

The National Air and Space Museum (NASM) is a department of the Smithsonian Institution.

Who else was director of the National Air and Space Museum? Noel W. Hinners, 1979-1982.


Dr. Noel W. Hinners

Dr. Noel W. Hinners, LockheedMartin (retired) - Dr. Hinners retired in January2002 from Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company where he was vice president of Flight Systems with responsibility for NASA's Mars Global Surveyor, Mars Surveyor Program, Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, Stardust and Genesis Discovery missions, Space (Nuclear) Power Systems and Mission Operations for NASA/LM planetary missions. Dr. Hinners served as associate deputy administrator and chief scientist of NASA from 1987 to 1989. From 1982 to 1987, Dr. Hinners was director of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. From 1979 to 1982 he was director of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum and from 1974 to 1979 NASA's associate administrator for Space Science. From 1972 to 1974 he was NASA's director of Lunar Programs. Dr. Hinners worked on the Apollo program from 1963 to 1972 with Bellcomm, focusing on Apollo science and site selection in support of NASA HQ. He was a member of the NRC Space Studies Board (1981-1982 & 1989-1996) and chaired its Committee on Human Exploration.


Dr. Noel W. Hinners also has done an oral history available on www.jsc.nasa.gov...

Here is how Hinners got involved with Bellcomm and the Apollo program.

And then I interviewed with Bellcomm in Washington [DC]. This was early ’63, or it may have been late ’62.
I got linked to them through my thesis adviser, whose brother-in-law was working for Bellcomm. Bellcomm was an offshoot of AT&T, set up at NASA’s request in ’62 to provide systems engineering support to NASA Headquarters.
...
We were in a strange role in a sense. I didn’t realize at the time that it was so unusual, but in retrospect it was very unusual. That in itself created some early problems.



In that period NASA initiated the Lunar Orbiter program to do the orbital site surveys, which was run out of [NASA] Langley [Research Center, Hampton, Virginia].
Bellcomm got involved in the Orbiter program. A number of the people in our group there worked on developing the specs [specifications] for the camera systems. Although some of that was preordained—a lot of that is public now, but I want to be careful because I don’t know if any of it is still classified. It was a film system, very very ingenious. Obviously had its derivations in the black world [classified]. Photography coming out of the Orbiter program was phenomenal.


Accession #69A4099. 700 boxes of Apollo telemetry data. They faked the Apollo Moon landings and collected the tapes because the tapes were smoking guns. Still missing.
edit on 10/8/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Ove38
 


That is the video where his alleged "expert" is not.....he LIED about that woman, and her credentials.

She is his teacher, playing a role, to help him out.



You don't have to capitalize it. And you just outed yourself as a vicious propagandist hater of Jarrah White.
There are a lot of new moon missions coming up. The Apollo Myth is almost over.



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Could you please elaborate as to what "film trick" allows you to remove plants from live video, film and still photos with 60's tech?


It was film.



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by charlyv
All you need is one solid piece of evidence, then you can throw everything else away because you know it does not matter. The rocks, hundreds of pounds of rocks, that can only have come from the moon, and did not fall as meteorites.
Try and explain how they could be here, if someone did not go and get them.

That's it. Signed, sealed and delivered.


What independent third party has ever audited the rock collection?
You claim hundreds of pounds of rocks, who has seen them outside of NASA?



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird

Kubrick and his associates actually made many, many scientific errors in the film. They would hardly be the ones to "choose" to "fake" something as important as Apollo!!:



2001 is a work of art, not a documentary. Big difference, though even with documentaries you have room for artistic license. If Kubrick wanted to fake footage of the moon-landing, he was more than qualified. At any rate, much of the moon landing footage by todays standard looks and sounds fake.



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by Ove38
All kinds of film tricks were used, just like in the 1968 Space Odyssey film


Again, could you elaborate on the kinds of special effects used in the Apollo missions? Especially for the live video that would go on, uncut, for hours.


Now you are exaggerating. Which Apollo clip goes on for hours without any cut or break whatsoever?
Film (lol) or Video.



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by charlyv
All you need is one solid piece of evidence, then you can throw everything else away because you know it does not matter. The rocks, hundreds of pounds of rocks, that can only have come from the moon, and did not fall as meteorites.
Try and explain how they could be here, if someone did not go and get them.

That's it. Signed, sealed and delivered.


What independent third party has ever audited the rock collection?
You claim hundreds of pounds of rocks, who has seen them outside of NASA?


you can't be serious. you post here every day, and none of it has absorbed into your brain ? none of it ?

isn't jarrah an aussie ? I find this deliciously ironic. I triple dog dare you to contact Alexander Nemchin. Do you have the stones to contact him and confront him ? I don't think you have the guts. His contact info is a google search away, so I don't think it is wrong to post it here

again, the answer is right here. you don't have the guts to e-mail him, I guarantee it

A/Prof Alexander Nemchin
BSc, MSc (St Petersburg) PhD (Curtin)
Tel: +61 (0)8 9266 2445
Fax: +61 (0)8 9266 3153
Room: 312-205
A.Nemchin@curtin.edu.au


Existence and age of Moon rocksA total of 382 kilograms (842 lb) of Moon rocks and dust were collected during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 missions.[1] Some 10 kg (22 lb) of the Moon rocks have been destroyed during hundreds of experiments performed by both NASA researchers and planetary scientists at research institutions unaffiliated with NASA. These experiments have confirmed the age and origin of the rocks as lunar, and were used to identify lunar meteorites collected later from Antarctica.[2] The oldest Moon rocks are up to 4.5 billion years old,[1] making them 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks, which are from the Hadean eon and dated 3.8 to 4.3 billion years ago. The rocks returned by Apollo are very close in composition to the samples returned by the independent Soviet Luna programme.[3] A rock brought back by Apollo 17 was accurately dated to be 4.417 billion years old, with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 million years. The test was done by a group of researchers headed by Alexander Nemchin at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia.[4]

edit on 8-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


Did Alexander Nemchin actually perform the measurements on all those moon rocks or is he merely providing a summary of published data? Because there is other published data which concludes that moon rocks are very close to terrestrial rocks in mineral & water...
edit on 10/8/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


Did Alexander Nemchin actually perform the measurements on all those moon rocks or is he merely providing a summary of published data? Because there is other published data which concludes that moon rocks are very close to terrestrial rocks in mineral & water...
edit on 10/8/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



A rock brought back by Apollo 17 was accurately dated to be 4.417 billion years old, with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 million years. The test was done by a group of researchers headed by Alexander Nemchin at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia.[4]



ask him and let us know what he says
let him know you will be posting his reply in a public forum, of course
edit on 8-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


He only tested one rock then. "A rock brought back by Apollo 17.."



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


He only tested one rock then. "A rock brought back by Apollo 17.."


ladies and gentlemen, debate over

sayonara admitted apollo 17 brought back 1 moon rock

whew, we can all rest easy now !
edit on 8-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: I really can't spell



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


What a cheap shot!




posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


srsly. contact Mr. Nemchin, ask him to reply, and if you can post it here. I honestly think that would be good for the discussion



posted on Oct, 8 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


There you go...again....


It was film.



:shk: :shk:

This is what is being resorted to, now? More confabulations??

Nevermind the hours and hours of live video from the TV cameras.....and, those cameras could be mounted on the LRV, and taken along for the rides, on the so-called "Moon set" that was more than seven kilometers long and wide???:


--maximum range from the LM--
Apollo 15 (LRV-001) 17.25 miles (27.76 km) 3h 02 m 7.75 miles (12.47 km) 3.1 miles (5.0 km)
Apollo 16 (LRV-002) 16.50 miles (26.55 km) 3h 26 m 7.20 miles (11.59 km) 2.8 miles (4.5 km)
Apollo 17 (LRV-003) 22.30 miles (35.89 km) 4h 26 m 12.50 miles (20.12 km)[color=gold]4.7 miles (7.6 km)


en.wikipedia.org...

Note the Color Television Camera, where it mounted on the front of the LRV:



And:



The Apollo 17 landing site, as imaged by the LROC:





top topics



 
377
<< 598  599  600    602  603  604 >>

log in

join