Remastered and stabilised film of Apollo 16 Lunar Rover.

page: 4
43
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 03:00 PM
link   

AthlonSavage
Does anyone have the ability to take this film and speed up 6 times. I would expect at 6 times speed it will look like a buggy travelling over a desert surface. Doesn't prove anything however.



Care to explain why 6 times faster I really do need a good




posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 03:12 PM
link   

shinto
reply to post by smurfy
 

IF the moon did not have 65% of the earth's gravity, those wheels would not be kicking dust up and so quickly back down AND if the atmosphere is so thin, where are all the stars? NASA blacked out the entire background sky.


No stars yet again when will these people learn EXPOSURE, EXPOSURE, EXPOSURE has it sunk in yet.



f3.5 10 seconds at iso 1600.



f8 1/400th of a second iso 400

Look at the settings f8 lets in less light than f3.5 iso 1600 is more sensitive than iso 400 yet only 1/400th
of a second was required to record the Moon it really is that simple!!!!



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


I UNDERSTAND EXPOSURE
Since the day I learned about the moon hoax theory, I saw the comments about no stars. And I threw that away the second I read it, because of the camera exposure!





Now on to the OP. I believe we went the moon. I also believe we have been lied to about what exactly happened up there. But we were there for sure.

The video is awesome. Yes, the buggy does seem to move Earthly, but none of us have ever been to the moon, so we don't know jack about the handling of a car in space. So there.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
what was the reason to bring the buggy to the moon in the first place. Seems like a lot of weight to tow around just to joy ride.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   

jlafleur02
what was the reason to bring the buggy to the moon in the first place. Seems like a lot of weight to tow around just to joy ride.

Why do you take a car anywhere? Sure beats walking. The buggy enabled the astronauts to spend more time taking measurements and samples at farther locations from their landing point than they would have just walking there and back.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   

ArchAngel_X

jlafleur02
what was the reason to bring the buggy to the moon in the first place. Seems like a lot of weight to tow around just to joy ride.

Why do you take a car anywhere? Sure beats walking. The buggy enabled the astronauts to spend more time taking measurements and samples at farther locations from their landing point than they would have just walking there and back.


Yes sir, and it also allowed them to pick up the 800+ lbs (earth lbs) of rock from various places and bring them back to the LEM. It had a real purpose.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by brace22
 


My comment wasn't directed at YOU was it ?



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 05:59 PM
link   

brace22
reply to post by wmd_2008
 





Now on to the OP. I believe we went the moon. I also believe we have been lied to about what exactly happened up there. But we were there for sure.

The video is awesome. Yes, the buggy does seem to move Earthly, but none of us have ever been to the moon, so we don't know jack about the handling of a car in space. So there.

I don't even think the event has the need for a belief system, this picture says volumes to me,




posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


What, you can very easily see trees on these tires in these shots but even if they were mesh you would still see tracks. First because it is so heavy, even with mesh you are going to see in dated tracks. When they tested mesh on earth you still see tracks.

This is ats not steeple, try again. Take you photos into photoshop, there is tread there. No tracks, serious problem. Fake

Try again.

The Bot



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


I'm sure the cameras on the rover craft are very different from your typical DSLR. We don't know anything about the tech they used to capture this film. So yeah, exposure and other technical settings like that are hard to form a legitimate argument around.

That said, I've taken nighttime landscape photos and telephoto pictures of the moon (with my DSLR.) Yes, zoomed telephoto images of the moon typically don't show other stars, but nighttime landscape photos usually do, even with smaller apertures.

I'm suspicious of OP's video. But hell, looks like a lot of fun cruising around on the moon!



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by dlbott
 

Could you please a bit more specific by at least giving some example photos and their identification number? This way, we can see what you are referring to and give an informed answer rather than having to generalize. This way we will at least be referencing the same thing.

Gib
edit on 12/19/2013 by Gibborium because: dropped word



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 11:07 PM
link   

phantomlord
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


I'm sure the cameras on the rover craft are very different from your typical DSLR. We don't know anything about the tech they used to capture this film. So yeah, exposure and other technical settings like that are hard to form a legitimate argument around.

That said, I've taken nighttime landscape photos and telephoto pictures of the moon (with my DSLR.) Yes, zoomed telephoto images of the moon typically don't show other stars, but nighttime landscape photos usually do, even with smaller apertures.

I'm suspicious of OP's video. But hell, looks like a lot of fun cruising around on the moon!



Do those night-time landscape photos include the moon? Do you take those photographs in a brightly lit area?

The Apollo astronauts were not taking photographs in the dark, they were taking photographs in bright sunshine.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 11:12 PM
link   

smurfy

brace22
reply to post by wmd_2008
 





Now on to the OP. I believe we went the moon. I also believe we have been lied to about what exactly happened up there. But we were there for sure.

The video is awesome. Yes, the buggy does seem to move Earthly, but none of us have ever been to the moon, so we don't know jack about the handling of a car in space. So there.

I don't even think the event has the need for a belief system, this picture says volumes to me,




It speaks volumes to me too, because it's the photograph that started my research into satellite imagery and Apollo images of Earth and Apollo generally. Off the Pacific coast of central America are the remains of Hurricane Bernice, which (verified by weather satellites) existed in that particular shape only on the day that the photograph was taken. The photograph was taken at the same time as a TV broadcast that also featured the Apollo 11 crew, and images of that broadcast were on the front page of the newspapers the following day.

Because you can't get this photograph in low Earth orbit, this means that the only time and place it could have been taken was exactly where it was claimed: in space, on the way to the moon.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:04 AM
link   
I think we as a species may be "de-evolving". We used to build huge resilient pyramids, and fly to and explore the Moon with just a few years advance planning.

Now, mankind is having trouble building roads that can last a few winters, and websites that work properly. Even after investing billions of dollars, and years of planning these endeavors.

Could our brains be getting smaller and we're now too "dumbed down" to realize what's happening? (I'm now looking over at my son's hamster and wondering if he could be our future!)

-cwm



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:34 AM
link   

phantomlord
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


I'm sure the cameras on the rover craft are very different from your typical DSLR. We don't know anything about the tech they used to capture this film. So yeah, exposure and other technical settings like that are hard to form a legitimate argument around.

Cameras used by the Apollo astronauts are well-documented. Still images come from Hasselblad cameras that were adapted to space and simplified for astronauts' use. Film footage comes from 16mm cameras.

www.hq.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
www.myspacemuseum.com...



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Good example of somebody taking a very light comment and making a big hissy fit out of it. I wasn't moaning back, just commenting and AGREEING WITH YOU.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 04:34 AM
link   

jlafleur02
what was the reason to bring the buggy to the moon in the first place. Seems like a lot of weight to tow around just to joy ride.


THAT'S exactly the point! This was a time when we were enthusiastic even when the scientific value MAY have been somewhat questionable.

TODAY...we look at costs..there is no enthusiasm....we land on Mars and people complain about how much it costs.

I wish so much we had the same enthusiasm and joy we had 40 years ago.

That being said, the buggies traveled quite a bit, up to 40mls or so on the moon and some scientists say they played a vital role in exploration.

The motto here was simply: Ok, let's so this...AND LET'S DO IT RIGHT..and not HALF-ASS. And this is why I think those images and videos are so fascinating.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 04:37 AM
link   

onebigmonkey

smurfy

I don't even think the event has the need for a belief system, this picture says volumes to me,




Off the Pacific coast of central America are the remains of Hurricane Bernice, which (verified by weather satellites) existed in that particular shape only on the day that the photograph was taken. The photograph was taken at the same time as a TV broadcast that also featured the Apollo 11 crew, and images of that broadcast were on the front page of the newspapers the following day.

Because you can't get this photograph in low Earth orbit, this means that the only time and place it could have been taken was exactly where it was claimed: in space, on the way to the moon.


Exactly, and this is what you are talking about,




I forget how many times I've posted this GIF, but it speaks for itself. For the no Mooners, the BW section is the LEO satellite picture, the colour section of the image is the Earth picture resized to fit. In fact the Earth picture is the very same one that Bart Sibriel tried to say was only a LEO shot. He was a very silly man, and shot himself in the foot.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 04:44 AM
link   

wildespace

Cameras used by the Apollo astronauts are well-documented. Still images come from Hasselblad cameras that were adapted to space and simplified for astronauts' use. Film footage comes from 16mm cameras.

www.hq.nasa.gov...
history.nasa.gov...
www.myspacemuseum.com...


Just to add to that, if you haven't mentioned it already, all the landings were 'daylight' landings, and the cameras were set for daylight exposures.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ArchAngel_X
 


About samples and measurements.

I just read (the few articles) of news from the Chinese moon mission that is available to the public. According to the article I read , the Chinese scientists are puzzled by the huge variation in temperatures on the moon which seems to have given them some difficulties somehow (they don’t give more details though). That makes me wonder. Didn’t the Chinese get any such information from NASA before they launched this rover? Or did NASA somehow loose this information?





new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join