Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by FoosM

 

Doesn't look like the original ladder to me Foosm and that certainly ain't gold colored foil..

What makes the ladder look different, or not original, to you?

Originally posted by FoosM
Tell us Ove, what does Westbury Design and Optical Ltd, specialize in?
What I found about WD is that they specialize in Matte Paintings.
You know what you use matte paintings for?

Yes, they paint the backgrounds in the Apollo movies

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by Ove38

 

Ok. You make a claim. Now prove it or shut up.

If you didn't notice, it has been proven beyond doubt
that the Apollo 11 Lunar Module residing at the Science Museum, London
was made at the Pinewood film Studios by a special optical effects company.
That it is indistinguishable from the one in the Apollo 11 photos.

Now let's look at the one placed in the Apollo 11 rocket
Do you see the difference ? Look at the black legs





AS11-40-5915

Does this look like the Lunar Module in the Museum or the one they placed in the rocket ?

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by FoosM

 

Doesn't look like the original ladder to me Foosm and that certainly ain't gold colored foil..

What makes the ladder look different, or not original, to you?

Post a pic from Apollo and see...

I recall a discussion here regarding NASA photo manipulation.
Well you can always count on the UFO/Alien moon cities crowd to find anomalies:
This thread popped up:


www.abovetopsecret.com...

I never knew about the blue "astronaut". Very strange.
Early blue-screen artifacts? Does it tie in with the Blue Apollo 12 astronauts?

And the visor at the end of the video. Wow...

Originally posted by Ove38
.

Now let's look at the one placed in the Apollo 11 rocket
Do you see the difference ? Look at the black legs

Are you certain that's from Apollo 11, and not another mission?

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by FoosM
Tell us Ove, what does Westbury Design and Optical Ltd, specialize in?
What I found about WD is that they specialize in Matte Paintings.
You know what you use matte paintings for?

Yes, they paint the backgrounds in the Apollo movies

Did they have any skills in model making?
Im trying to find some evidence that they had the ability to make such a replica.
Because if they didnt, their story makes absolutely no sense.

The lunar rover in Diamonds are Forever does not look at all like the lunar rover used in Apollo.
So why make an exact replica of the LM?

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by FoosM

 

Doesn't look like the original ladder to me Foosm and that certainly ain't gold colored foil..

What makes the ladder look different, or not original, to you?

Post a pic from Apollo and see...

I believe Ove already posted the Apollo pics.
What we actually need is a close-up of the "replica"

reply to post by FoosM

I believe Ove already posted the Apollo pics.
What we actually need is a close-up of the "replica"

I thought the close up he posted WAS of the replica,

reply to post by FoosM

Did they have any skills in model making?
Im trying to find some evidence that they had the ability to make such a replica.
Because if they didnt, their story makes absolutely no sense.

Pay attention, FoosM:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Ove38
Now let's look at the one placed in the Apollo 11 rocket
Do you see the difference ? Look at the black legs

Are you certain that's from Apollo 11, and not another mission?

Yes Absolutely!

"Lunar Module (LM) 5 being moved from work stand for mating with its Spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter (SLA). LM-5 is scheduled to be flown on the Apollo 11 lunar landing mission"
spaceflight.nasa.gov...

"Lunar Module footpads are seen protruding from its launch adapter as the Apollo 11 spacecraft is hoisted for mating with its Saturn V launch vehicle"
www.apollomissionphotos.com...

It's definitely not the same Lunar Module seen in the Apollo 11 moon photos.

The Lunar Module in Londons Science Museum, matches perfectly with the Apollo 11 moon photos.

reply to post by FoosM

I never knew about the blue "astronaut". Very strange.
Early blue-screen artifacts? Does it tie in with the Blue Apollo 12 astronauts?

And the visor at the end of the video. Wow...

I'm impressed that you've taken to visiting other threads, but you really need to read the entire thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The "blue astronaut" was probably a flaw in the film that got exaggerated by the scanning process.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

the company was founded by Cliff Culley who was a long time employee at Pinewood Studios and worked on a lot of movies of the era, and also made some of the Daleks for Dr Who

edit on 26-10-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

Thanks for that info:

Here we see Culley working on Chitty Chitty Bang Bang:

Long time Pinewood matte specialist Cliff Culley is shown here (in light sweater) putting finishing touches on his Swiss landscape top up for Albert Broccoli's CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG (1968). The film and the mattes were shot in 65mm with both the 65mm process projector and the taking camera shown here. That's famed optical man Roy Field manning the matte camera behind Culley. Incidentally I'm pretty sure significant rotoscope work has been done to eliminate the ramp under the car and to add a shadow to the grass.

2:28


Now some very interesting things pops out of that text.
First, I had no idea that Broccoli was behind the production.
Broccoli connected with Diamonds are Forever... but it makes sense
Broccoli was involved because Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is based on an Ian Fleming story.

But more importantly, the text discusses the use of rotoscoping and adding shadow to the scene. And I have maintained that many of the shadows, possibly even footprints, that we see in the photos and videos were painted in.

reply to post by DJW001

The "blue astronaut" was probably a flaw in the film that got exaggerated by the scanning process.

Does your use of the word "probably" mean that in another 100 pages if this is discussed again, someone will pipe up and say it's already been debunked?

Sorry, that seems to be the way this thread works.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by FoosM

 

I believe Ove already posted the Apollo pics.
What we actually need is a close-up of the "replica"

I thought the close up he posted WAS of the replica,

Thats what I assumed as well, but no, unless Im wrong, its basically one of these three:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Ove38

If you didn't notice, it has been proven beyond doubt
that the Apollo 11 Lunar Module residing at the Science Museum, London
was made at the Pinewood film Studios by a special optical effects company.
That it is indistinguishable from the one in the Apollo 11 photos.

It has been proven beyond doubt that the Apollo 11 Lunar Module residing at the Science Museum, London was made by Westbury, not necessarily at Pinewood studios. It is easily distinguishable from a genuine lunar module because it has no fuel tanks, avionics, etc, and significant parts of it are made of materials like wood.

Now let's look at the one placed in the Apollo 11 rocket
Do you see the difference ? Look at the black legs

Yes. The "gold foil" was put on the lander's pads during the final mating process:



Note the technicians standing inside the the coupling ring. This sure seems like a lot of dangerous work to put into a simple hoax!



Apollo 11 Lunar Surface Journal

reply to post by DJW001


That's one huge frikkin building!!..

reply to post by backinblack

Does your use of the word "probably" mean that in another 100 pages if this is discussed again, someone will pipe up and say it's already been debunked?

No, but it does mean that when when one of the hoax believers claims that the photo in question proves 100% without doubt that the photos were manipulated, you'll just let the statement slide without comment.

Sorry, that seems to be the way this thread works.

reply to post by backinblack

That's one huge frikkin building!!..

It remains the largest closed volume on Earth. It is so large that convection currents actually cause it to develop internal weather! As I said, it is a heck of a lot of work just to provide color to a hoax.

reply to post by FoosM

Now some very interesting things pops out of that text.
First, I had no idea that Broccoli was behind the production.
Broccoli connected with Diamonds are Forever... but it makes sense
Broccoli was involved because Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is based on an Ian Fleming story.

Cubby Broccoli and his partner had the rights to all of Fleming's books except "Casino Royale," which had been purchased earlier by an American TV company, so no surprise. Remember, we have proven that the LM in the London Science Museum had nothing to do with "Diamonds Are Forever."

The object formerly entered the Museum’s care in 1977. In fact original correspondence (held on nominal file 6954) with the original model makers, Westbury Design and Optical Ltd, indicates that this object was built specifically at the request of the Museum and for display purposes only. Further more the original enquiry into obtaining a quote from the above model making company was made by the Museum in 1975. Diamonds Are Forever was released in 1971 and Apollo 13 in 1995. As you can see the Museum’s model post-dates these films by several years.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But more importantly, the text discusses the use of rotoscoping and adding shadow to the scene. And I have maintained that many of the shadows, possibly even footprints, that we see in the photos and videos were painted in.

The arrows certainly were!



(Thanks, Pinke!)