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: 602
377
<< 599  600  601    603  604  605 >>

log in

join
share:
jra

posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
It was film.


And how does that answer my question? If you're filming in the desert and there is vegetation around you. It's going to show up in all formats (live video, 16mm film and 70mm still photos), so how does one remove all that with 1960's technology?


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


I clearly stated "live video" in my post you quoted. Apollo 11 with its one EVA would have had a little over 2 hours of live video.




posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 06:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by FoosM
It was film.


And how does that answer my question? If you're filming in the desert and there is vegetation around you. It's going to show up in all formats (live video, 16mm film and 70mm still photos), so how does one remove all that with 1960's technology?


With a shovel, it was all prearranged, there was no live video
edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by FoosM
It was film.


And how does that answer my question? If you're filming in the desert and there is vegetation around you. It's going to show up in all formats (live video, 16mm film and 70mm still photos), so how does one remove all that with 1960's technology?


With a shovel, it was all prearranged, there was no live video
edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: (no reason given)


what is the source of your theory ? I've been begging someone to give details of how the hoax was accomplished. please tell us everything you know, with details like names, locations, dates etc. pics would also be helpful, or maybe eyewitness accounts from a person known to be connected to the apollo program that were published in a book.

cool, thanks for taking up the challenge !



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



What a cheap shot!


I agree, you've been doing nothing but taking cheap shots by posting huge frame-grabs in order to "fast forward" the thread past points you cannot defend. Pathetic.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
what is the source of your theory ? I've been begging someone to give details of how the hoax was accomplished. please tell us everything you know, with details like names, locations, dates etc. pics would also be helpful, or maybe eyewitness accounts from a person known to be connected to the apollo program that were published in a book.

cool, thanks for taking up the challenge !


Nasa's photographic record faked by Ed Hengeveld, Mike Constantine, Michael Light, Mauro Freschi, Jon Hancock, Dave Byrne, David Harland and others.

www.hq.nasa.gov...
edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: new link



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 



Nasa's photographic record faked by Ed Hengeveld, Mike Constantine, Michael Light, Mauro Freschi, Jon Hancock, Dave Byrne, David Harland and others.


All you have done is make a list of people you accuse of of "faking" the photographic record. You still need to provide some sort of evidence.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
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???:




Provide the clips, doesn't matter which mission:
FILM or VIDEO where you have hours of footage without a cut or break on the lunar surface.
In particular the traverse over the lunar surface with the Rover uncut.
You are stalling.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by FoosM
It was film.


And how does that answer my question?


Because you said LIVE.
I dont know how that answers your question,
but you made that assertion and thats what I was pointing out.
Film is not LIVE.





If you're filming in the desert and there is vegetation around you. It's going to show up in all formats (live video, 16mm film and 70mm still photos), so how does one remove all that with 1960's technology?


A. There are deserts on this planet without any visible vegetation.
B. They could have made an artificial location. See our posts on the USGS.
C. If you think they could land men on the moon in the 1960's, what makes you think their post processing techniques weren't advanced?






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


I clearly stated "live video" in my post you quoted. Apollo 11 with its one EVA would have had a little over 2 hours of live video.





That was not a traverse with the Lunar Rover, which you were originally commenting on.
But, if you think Apollo 11 has 2 hours of live unbroken video, I would like to see it.
Post here:



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by FoosM
It was film.


And how does that answer my question? If you're filming in the desert and there is vegetation around you. It's going to show up in all formats (live video, 16mm film and 70mm still photos), so how does one remove all that with 1960's technology?


With a shovel, it was all prearranged, there was no live video
edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: (no reason given)


what is the source of your theory ?


Havent you been following this thread?
Go back and read about the USGS.



Blasting craters for a new section of the Cinder Lakes outside Flagstaff, Ariz. (July 1968). USGS Astrogeology constructed a mockup of a section of the moon’s Sea of Tranquillity in a cinder field to aid with training and time-and-motion studies. USGS Astrogeology Science Center image.





Hmm... I wonder how did they get such details for their simulated terrains?


Still in use today... probably to fake a Mars mission


How come that Apollo Rover never got stuck in a crater sized pot hole?



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps

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.


You ask this question... and you work in photography?
You should be explaining how you do it.
So let me ask you then directly, how do filmmakers and photographers use multiple light sources but
but not create multiple shadows?



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
what is the source of your theory ? I've been begging someone to give details of how the hoax was accomplished. please tell us everything you know, with details like names, locations, dates etc. pics would also be helpful, or maybe eyewitness accounts from a person known to be connected to the apollo program that were published in a book.

cool, thanks for taking up the challenge !


Nasa's photographic record faked by Ed Hengeveld, Mike Constantine, Michael Light, Mauro Freschi, Jon Hancock, Dave Byrne, David Harland and others.

www.hq.nasa.gov...
edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: new link



Wait wait... how is that image fake?
Didnt they bring along a lunar rover for each astronaut?
I mean, that looks as real as any other Apollo photo.
LOL.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


are you following the thread ?

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

don't punk out. this is a direct challenge

put up or shut up



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
Still in use today... probably to fake a Mars mission




I don't recall seeing trees in the apollo missions pictures or video

holy fail batman, at least put up a fight !!!

lol
edit on 9-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 





The concept of *testing* a design to work out any engineering issues before you launch the thing on a one-way trip to another planet....that never occurs to you???? (.....hope you don't work in any industry that builds things people rely upon for safety and functionality......):


Still in use today... probably to fake a Mars mission








How come that Apollo Rover never got stuck in a crater sized pot hole?


See above....and, gee I dunno.......because they were being driven by people far smarter than anyone who would ask that kind of question??



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



I?


You are stalling.


I expect the concept of irony is lost on some people.....

In any case, as I recall....*you* made that particular challenge to someone else. Then, you pulled my full quote (I was going to say "naughty, naughty", but you did edit it down to remove the images, good....), apparently confusing me with someone else, then accused me of 'stalling'. (There's that irony again, it follows some people, just like a black pot calling a kettle...well, you know the rest..).

Of course, good thing (this time) the full quote is there, since it's obvious that I never said, nor implied, that there are "hours" of uninterrupted footage. I'd think those in the audience with normal ability to read will understand that the statement referred to aggregate collection of images from all the Apollo missions.





edit on Sun 9 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

Originally posted by FoosM
Still in use today... probably to fake a Mars mission




I don't recall seeing trees in the apollo missions pictures or video

holy fail batman, at least put up a fight !!!

lol
edit on 9-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)


This is really silly, you know how they did it.



edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: link fix



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Yes cause in the 60's and 70's they had the amazing special effects industry.
Yeah so next "theory" please.
edit on 9/10/2011 by PsykoOps because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 


the 1969 version of photoshop ?

you can't be serious. Are you suggesting they photoshopped live video ? that's hilarious

I'm glad you brough that up tho, it gives me the perfect opportunity to add this third party evidence the apollo manned missions happened


Ultraviolet photographs
Long-exposure photograph taken from the surface of the Moon by Apollo 16 using a special ultraviolet camera. It shows the Earth with the correct background of stars (some labeled).Long-exposure photos were taken with a special far-ultraviolet camera by Apollo 16 on 21 April 1972 from the surface of the Moon. Some of these photos show the Earth with stars from the Capricornus and Aquarius constellations in the background. The joint Belgian/British/Dutch satellite TD-1 later scanned the sky for stars that are bright in UV light. The TD-1 data obtained with the shortest passband is a close match for the Apollo 16 photographs.[19]



link to see photo


external link
edit on 9-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
the 1969 version of photoshop ?

Are you suggesting they photoshopped live video ? that's hilarious

You just don't get it do you ? It wasn't live, it was pre recorded video.

Apollo photos are "airbrushed photos" a technique known since the 1930s
edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: more info



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
the 1969 version of photoshop ?

Are you suggesting they photoshopped live video ? that's hilarious

You just don't get it do you ? It wasn't live, it was pre recorded video.

Apollo photos are "airbrushed photos" a technique known since the 1930s
edit on 9-10-2011 by Ove38 because: more info


boy, the hoaxers really don't like third party evidence. any comment on the UV pics ? were they airbrushed ?


you just don't get it, do you ?
edit on 9-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
377
<< 599  600  601    603  604  605 >>

log in

join