The Video that shows 100% Man DID NOT land on the Moon

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   
I'll accept your challenge because I can tell the difference between the two pictures. There is a difference, but YOU don't see it for some god forsaken reason. Be sure to record the exact time stamp for the two images you present for later verification.
edit on 3-9-2012 by Tearman because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 02:19 PM
link   
I think he means the size of the detail on the image. 400 Feet high the craters should look different than just above the surface. Like if you were to land on earth at 0 Feet you could make out single strains of Gras, at 400 feet the image would look different.

Is the audio correct? Was the Lander 400 Feet high at 3:20 ? This could be a mashup of Audio and Video, where the lander is really close to the surface for the duration of the video.

Also there is the pendulum swings and the pictures of the remains, that further corroborate the landings.
edit on 3-9-2012 by Merinda because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   
that's right and why I have done the altimeter and vfr thing enough to be able to pic apart a video. actually, i am a certified altimeter repair station tech. i believe they landed....but this video is suspicious. especially at 3500 agl.....dang ...i don't like the apparent size of the craters...scaling the one they plopped down inside of....i swear.... to what was seen on the entire approach...watch it several times noticing the lz location from the start.
edit on 3-9-2012 by GBP/JPY because: Yahuweh ...coolest of names



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Look carefully t these two screen captures from the video.

At 3:20


At 4:50


If you can't see any difference in detail between the two, you need to make an appointment with your eye doctor.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by N3k9Ni
 


ofcourse I need glasses...hail, I'm 60 almost he he
your two shots....they could be identified as being 5:1 or 6:1 in respect to distance apart or lens apparent distance apart...but not so much 170:1....true the sequence is edited,I do believe!
edit on 3-9-2012 by GBP/JPY because: Yahuweh ...coolest of names



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Under normal circumstances, if you come in to land, you would surely be able to tell the difference from when you were 400 feet above the surface and when you were on it- it's just obvious yet the moon landing footage defies this logic.
edit on 3-9-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)


Hi OP,

What you've noticed isn't actually 'wrong' to an extent, you've just reached the wrong conclusion.

One of the biggest elements humans use for depth perception on Earth is the atmosphere. Air itself is not completely transparent contrary to what a person might think. Further away objects lose contrast, areas become more diffused and blurry, and distant objects often take on the color of the atmosphere as they become more distant. Essentially the detail of the objects should soften, and they should be pushed more towards grey.

On the moon this doesn't happen. It's one of the reasons why the distance looks flat and shadows remain a deep black even when they're miles away. You've lived on Earth your whole life so this should look odd to you and it should be difficult to tell differences on the moon without the atmosphere as a marker.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
We had to be so convincing that we landed on the moon because we had to be the FIRST ones on the moon to put a flag up there to claim it before the russians did. THATS WHY, and this know is what the first astro nuts do not tell you. I wonder if the chimp they sent up came back alive. I doubt it, with all the cosmic rays and rads and all. But hey, we made it to the moon, years later probably. But hey, them dang solialist ruskies cain't beat us. he,he,he,he,he

They sent up the monkey so that everyone could watch the ship float around up there, but had to do the filming of the astro nuts down here playing movie makers on a set stage, because they coulden't figure a way around the radiation killing the monkeys. The ruskies had the same problems to figure out how shield from this stuff that was new to them all. BUT we were first.
edit on 3-9-2012 by cloaked4u because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 





The Video that shows 100% Man DID NOT land on the Moon


100% proof you say?......well done!.....what's your next project?




posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


Familiarise yourself with fractals, they may help you understand zoom and detail and that the closer you are to some things, the detail can seem similar.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by nerbot
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


Familiarise yourself with fractals, they may help you understand zoom and detail and that the closer you are to some things, the detail can seem similar.



OH YEAH, LETS SEE A PIC. 50 TO 1 ODDS says that you cannot find any pics or you do and they are junk, hoaxed.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


The problem with this video is that there are no points of reference when they descend.

The moon is one giant rock. Filled with giant boulders, big, medium and small rocks. It basically looks the same, from above 400 feet or at the surface. Perspective changes but not the environment.

Example of a picture with a point of reference, on earth, 400 feet above the ground.



Example of a picture without a point of reference, on earth, 500 feet above the ground.



Now, assuming that the ground is filled with medium to small rocks, and that the bushes we see from 500 feet up were rocks, I think we could say that the environmentkinda look the same from up or on the surface, but it is not the same...

It is not.

My opinion.

edit on 3-9-2012 by SonoftheSun because: rephrasing.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by nerbot
 


You cain't find any two photo's of the same picture/landscape at different altitudes where they look simillar can U?



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by cloaked4u
reply to post by nerbot
 


You cain't find any two photo's of the same picture/landscape at different altitudes where they look simillar can U?


No. But close.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Thats what i thought, thats why i gave 50 to 1 odds. I know you cannot find ANY, PERIOD.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by N3k9Ni
 



your right , those pics are NOT the same. n3k



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 





The Video that shows 100% Man DID NOT land on the Moon


100% proof you say?......well done!.....what's your next project?





No, not in that time frame, they did not land on the moon. Thus the vid is a bust. hoax.
Movie maker attempt on t.v. terrible in todays standards.
edit on 3-9-2012 by cloaked4u because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
I wonder how many attempts and chimps they sent up to their death. I wonder if they sent more than one at a time.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Does the notion of being closer to an object revealing more detail not apply on the moon?


Show me a video where the camera stays at a one object. This is where your argument fails.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Does the notion of being closer to an object revealing more detail not apply on the moon?


Show me a video where the camera stays at a one object. This is where your argument fails.



OK, he did. If you heard the vid you would know they were trying to land next to that crater. THE same one in the photos that are DIFFERENT. Where astro nuts say are the same photo's when they are not.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
You must've watched a different video. The one I saw had a camera that was in a craft that was in constant motion.





new topics
top topics
 
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join