Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by DJW001

They contracted Westinghouse to build a television camera! Since when is a TV show "genuine scientific data?" They save all the actual scientific data

They save all the actual scientific data huh? Care to explain the lost / taped over 700 boxes of tapes that hold that data?

You ask 'Since when is a TV show genuine scientific data?"

Well it is when NASA says it is.
As already posted from next.nasa.gov...



The part you're not getting here is that the TV broadcast quality was sacrificed in order to retain as much detail as possible from the original signal. They built these cameras without a gamma correction circuit. This means all the detail the camera recorded could later be analysed ..... provided you recorded the data to tape.

But none of that is of any use now is it... as the tapes are gone.

How could they on one hand say we're going to sacrifice the broadcast quality to the whole world to preserve the data, then later say .. oh it's not that important, we'll just tape over it. Rubbish.

Here's some basic wiki stuff to help you.

Gamma encoding of images is required to compensate for properties of human vision - to maximize the use of the bits or bandwidth relative to how humans perceive light and color.[1] Human vision under common illumination conditions (not pitch black or blindingly bright) follows an approximate gamma or power function. If images are not gamma encoded, they allocate too many bits or too much bandwidth to highlights that humans cannot differentiate, and too few bits/bandwidth to shadow values that humans are sensitive to and would require more bits/bandwidth to maintain the same visual quality.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by ppk55


I assume you have proof that NASA taped over the moon landing footage.

Originally posted by JohnnySasaki
reply to post by ppk55

 

I assume you have proof that NASA taped over the moon landing footage.

Yes here it is..

Apparently it was standard practice to record over footage that cost billions of dollars to attain.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Time to stop debating this we need to move on for the sake of science. We did not get to the moon! Time to hear the real story from the astronauts, these great men deserve peace.

reply to post by mockrock

Yes here it is..

Apparently it was standard practice to record over footage that cost billions of dollars to attain.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Time to stop debating this we need to move on for the sake of science. We did not get to the moon! Time to hear the real story from the astronauts, these great men deserve peace.

The full story is here:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

The tapes were used to record LandSat data. James P. Dawson used LandSat data to prospect for oil in order to enrich himself. If you wish to stop debating this, then by all means stop debating it and go and learn some science so you won't freak out every time someone claims the sky is falling.

reply to post by ppk55

The part you're not getting here is that the TV broadcast quality was sacrificed in order to retain as much detail as possible from the original signal. They built these cameras without a gamma correction circuit. This means all the detail the camera recorded could later be analysed ..... provided you recorded the data to tape.

The data was recorded to tape. It is still there in thousands of first generation recordings from the original broadcast. Please explain, in specific detail, what information was lost between the dish antennae of the DSN and the commercial television stations that recorded the signal for posterity. Oh, and where is that EXIF data you need to supply in order to prove that the photo you posted was not a fake?

reply to post by FoosM

So this man is in agreement with JW.

Jarrah White thinks the Earth is less than 10,000 years old?!?!?!

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

So this man is in agreement with JW.

Jarrah White thinks the Earth is less than 10,000 years old?!?!?!

We need to move this on.. The real question is will the U.S beat China to the Moon?

A combined Russian/Chinese mission would have all China's resources with vast Russian experience, but will the U.S even enter this race?

reply to post by mockrock


The U.S. already has:

The real question is will the U.S beat China to the Moon?

Frankly, I encourage China to use all of their wealth (acquired from other countries, in some cases) to mount their own Lunar explorations, and ultimately manned missions.

At least when that occurs, and THEY also bring back photographic evidence of the Apollo landing sites, the "hoax-believers" will finally go away.

Of course, that is a silly hope.....to those that see the "Apollo hoax" as a sort of religious faith, NO amount of actual evidence will ever convince them. There will always be a few who will remain permanently deluded, and divorced from reality.

For instance, "Jarrah White" will merely post yet more crap videos, and continue to make stuff up in his ever-increasingly feeble and inane attempts to "prove" himself "correct".......

Originally posted by mockrock

We need to move this on.. The real question is will the U.S beat China to the Moon?

A combined Russian/Chinese mission would have all China's resources with vast Russian experience, but will the U.S even enter this race?

Its painfully obvious that nobody is heading to the moon with men.
Chinese space program is a scam.

reply to post by FoosM


So long as they avoid the Van Allen radiation belts by keeping to the small window at the North or South poles! There is no reason why the Chinese couldn't make it.

If only we had the original high resolution footage! Then we could prove the hoax.. Until we see the evidence all we have to rely upon is moon rock.. which is available on Earth

Want to buy some.. www.meteoritemarket.com...

Lets hope the Chinese sort it out for us.. Once and for all!

reply to post by mockrock


Whatever 'evidence' is put forward, we come back to the plausibility issue.. The tapes that could prove this one way or the other were lost..

Now I want you to consider just how big a deal this is, the footage of mankind's greatest achievement gone..

If you forget all other inconsistencies and take a second to consider just how ridiculous a notion this is..

"A set of tapes of the historic 1969 moonwalk was thought to have been either reused years ago — erasing the original images in the process — or lost somewhere in NASA's archives.

The space agency embarked on a full-scale search and found them, but in badly damaged condition. Workers meticulously labored frame by frame to give the black-and-white tapes a digital makeover.

The restored footage runs for a few minutes and provides some of the best images of man's first steps on the moon."

lunarscience.arc.nasa.gov...

"restored" "digital makeover" CGI time !!

reply to post by mockrock


Your interpretation of the events is incorrect:

The tapes that could prove this one way or the other were lost..

Wrong!

Some copies were misplaced, but as the source you linked noted, they were recovered!! Nevertheless, many others had recordings, such as the dozens of news organizations.

The space agency embarked on a full-scale search and found them, but in badly damaged condition. Workers meticulously labored frame by frame to give the black-and-white tapes a digital makeover.

In any case, this ONLY refers to the Apollo 11 videos. And, there is no need for these videos to "prove" Apollo 11....mountains of corroborating evidence exist.

Now I want you to consider just how big a deal this is, the footage of mankind's greatest achievement gone..

But...it ISN'T "gone"!!

If you forget all other inconsistencies and take a second to consider just how ridiculous a notion this is..

There are no other "inconsistencies".....

reply to post by mockrock


More false statements, which are couched in ignorance:

So long as they avoid the Van Allen radiation belts by keeping to the small window at the North or South poles!

The VAB issue has been discussed to death in this very thread. It is a false claim that the VABs are "instantly deadly" to Humans who traverse them.

Until we see the evidence all we have to rely upon is moon rock..

Wrong, again. That is far from the "only" evidence.

....which is available on Earth

Again, not understanding the difference! The small number (and total weight) of Lunar meteorites discovered so far is inconsequential compared to the 862 POUNDS brought to Earth by Apollo.

And, to imply that expert scientists cannot tell the difference from a sample which has been through entry into the Earth's atmosphere, compared to the samples collected on the Moon, is the height of arrogant ignorance.

Unless the person making such a claim is an established and qualified scientist and expert in geology, and other disciplines. But, coming from a layperson with zero education in those fields?? We understand who to accept an assertion from, based on their training and education and credentials.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by mockrock

 

More false statements, which are couched in ignorance:

So long as they avoid the Van Allen radiation belts by keeping to the small window at the North or South poles!

The VAB issue has been discussed to death in this very thread. It is a false claim that the VABs are "instantly deadly" to Humans who traverse them.

Until we see the evidence all we have to rely upon is moon rock..

Wrong, again. That is far from the "only" evidence.

....which is available on Earth

Again, not understanding the difference! The small number (and total weight) of Lunar meteorites discovered so far is inconsequential compared to the 862 POUNDS brought to Earth by Apollo.

And, to imply that expert scientists cannot tell the difference from a sample which has been through entry into the Earth's atmosphere, compared to the samples collected on the Moon, is the height of arrogant ignorance.

Unless the person making such a claim is an established and qualified scientist and expert in geology, and other disciplines. But, coming from a layperson with zero education in those fields?? We understand who to accept an assertion from, based on their training and education and credentials.

edit on Sun 13 November 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)

No need to get stroppy sir..

The moon rocks were likely gathered using an unmanned probe or were manufactured based on the samples already found here on Earth.

Scientists only had Lunar meteorites to compare the samples too so as long as the samples resembled and had a similar composition to these lunar meteorites then they would no reason to doubt the authenticity..

Oops

and since the astronauts could not tell the difference between moon rock and petrified wood..

www.telegraph.co.uk...

reply to post by mockrock

The moon rocks were likely gathered using an unmanned probe or were manufactured based on the samples already found here on Earth.

Blithely adding another two or three thousand people to the list of those "in the know." Congratulations, you are now being even sillier than FoosM! At least FoosM digs around and finds some sort of trivia he can use as "evidence." All you do is express increasingly contradictory and bizarre opinions.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by mockrock

 

The moon rocks were likely gathered using an unmanned probe or were manufactured based on the samples already found here on Earth.

Blithely adding another two or three thousand people to the list of those "in the know." Congratulations, you are now being even sillier than FoosM! At least FoosM digs around and finds some sort of trivia he can use as "evidence." All you do is express increasingly contradictory and bizarre opinions.

No. Anyone who analyzed the samples would not have been in the 'know' I think you are getting confused.

The samples were manufactured or attained by an unmanned lander.. More likely manufactured or sourced on Earth. Only small samples have ever been available to be tested by experts and those could have been lunar meteorites..

reply to post by mockrock


But we get to witness the real space race ! That is grounds to be excited, this time we will see it all.. I also hope the astronauts live to see it, they carry a heavy burden.. I hope people do not judge them unfairly, an impossible situation to be in.

As each year passes more and more people are going to be asking the same question.. why have we not been back? Why has no space mission gone further out than approx 300 miles since the early 70's when technology has advanced so far?

Originally posted by mockrock
reply to post by mockrock

 

But we get to witness the real space race ! That is grounds to be excited, this time we will see it all.. I also hope the astronauts live to see it, they carry a heavy burden.. I hope people do not judge them unfairly, an impossible situation to be in.

As each year passes more and more people are going to be asking the same question.. why have we not been back? Why has no space mission gone further out than approx 300 miles since the early 70's when technology has advanced so far?

edit on 13-11-2011 by mockrock because: (no reason given)

I'm starting to smell a troll somewhere here abouts

reply to post by mockrock




Pure baseless speculation, easily disproven by a review of historical facts:

The samples were manufactured or attained by an unmanned lander..

"...an unmanned lander...", huh?? Tell us, when did it launch? How was this done "in secret"?

And, how did this "unmanned lander" manage to recover over 860 pounds of Lunar material??

To include the large rock known as "Big Muley"??

Big Muley

Lunar Sample 61016, better known as "Big Muley", is a lunar sample discovered and collected on the Apollo 16 mission in 1972 in the Descartes Highlands. It is the largest sample returned from the Moon as part of the Apollo program. The rock, an 11.7 kg (26 lb) breccia consisting mainly of shocked anorthosite attached to a fragment of troctolitic "melt rock", is named after Bill Muehlberger, the Apollo 16 field geology team leader.

A 26-pound rock!!

Yeah, "unmanned lander"....dream on......or, realize your 'opinion' has failed the test of reality......

reply to post by mockrock


Another lie:

...and since the astronauts could not tell the difference between moon rock and petrified wood..

www.telegraph.co.uk...

The "story" of that particular artifact has also been covered at great length in this very thread.

To re-cap:

The block of petrified wood was NOT "given" to anyone by any Astronaut claiming it as a sample from the Moon. It was given by the Apollo 11 crew on their goodwill visit to the Netherlands.....but, it was a known piece of petrified wood then, to all concerned at the time.

It was discovered after the death of the Prime Minister, in his home. The only people who claimed it to be a "moon rock" were those (ignorant) people who found it, and just assumed it to be. A terribly embarrassing mistake for those involved....since none of them bothered to verify its authenticity in any way.

And....For The Record .....gifts of Lunar samples to foreign dignitaries and nations consisted of tiny grains of sand, encased in Lucite plastic, and mounted on a decorative plaque with stand.

This petrified wood was about the size of a Human fist, and was not encased in anything.