Post by: Guest on December 09, 2005, 08:34:11 AM
Heroic images or NASA fraud? At last we have the conclusive proof! The image on the left clearly shows the supposed 25,000 of thrust generated by the lunar lander to arrest its descent. Yet in the image on the right, where is the giant crater this would have created? Looks like the complex web of NASA lies is about to unravel!
Another apparently inspirational image from the NASA archive. All seems fine at first but notice the numerous directions in which the shadows are falling (marked with arrows). This indicates that the image is probably coposed of several images taken at different times (probably in a top secret studio guarded by government agents) and joined together using advanced technology NASA always denies existed at the time.
This is the photographic equivalent of an automotive "cut-and-shut" job. If this image was your car, you wouldn't trust it to take you to the end of your road without breaking in half!
Not much wrong with this picture you may think. Yet, by thinking that, you would just become yet another of NASA's conspiracy victims.
Firstly, despite the absence of an atmosphere, no stars can be seen in the sky.
Secondly, the interior of the shopping basket can clearly be seen when all areas in shadow should be pitch black due to the absence of air molecules.
Nice try NASA but we are not fooled that easily!
Just way too many things wrong with this picture!
Notice the absence of stars again.
The arrows indicate the various directions in which shadows are falling, again showing evidence of inconsistent scene illumination. Yet there is something even more obviously wrong with this picture.
If the length of the lower support column of the lunar lander was 4 feet tall, this would indicate that the astronaut was over 8 feet tall, which none of the astronauts were.
Another careless mistake from NASA.
Oh yes NASA, it's all very well adding stars on this picture just to make us realise how wrong we have been. We are not fooled so easily!
If we look a bit more closely, we spot the constellation of Pegasus with the planet Saturn (marked S1) clearly visible in the top left corner. Yet at the time of the mission, although Saturn appeared to be near Pegasus from Earth, from the Moon it would have appeared to be in a completely different position (marked S2).
It is almost insulting to think that NASA could get away with this obvious howler!
Well, with this image where does one begin?!
Inconsistent shadows, too much ambient light and incorrect planetary positioning in the sky are all evident here.
Also notice how the focal length of the camera lens has changed compared to the pictures above, even though the astronauts' Hasselblad cameras were only fitted with a single type of prime lens.
Just how stupid did the NASA officials think the public were?
Post by: MillCreek on December 09, 2005, 09:23:49 AM
Post by: Moondoggie on December 09, 2005, 09:39:05 AM
I've got waaaay more important things to worry about.
But this IS funny!!!
Post by: K Frame on December 09, 2005, 10:17:05 AM
The biggest reason that most of them quote is "no stars."
Once again, the impossibility of keeping that massive a conspiracy a conspiracy...
Funny pictures, though!
Post by: Unisaw on December 09, 2005, 12:05:14 PM
Post by: crt360 on December 09, 2005, 12:34:22 PM
Post by: 280plus on December 09, 2005, 01:29:14 PM
If you remember he used a fire truck with a looooooong ladder and just climbed hisself right up there. Them moon creatures gave him quite a time though.
Post by: Lo.Com.Denom on December 10, 2005, 01:54:24 PM
Post by: lysander on December 18, 2005, 07:03:50 AM
The funniest thing to come out of the "moon hoax" is the story of 72 year old Buzz Aldrin landing a haymaker on the jaw of the leading conspiracy filmmaker who cornered him at a Hotel in an attempt to do an interview.
Post by: MillCreek on December 18, 2005, 08:13:21 AM
Quote from: lysander
The funniest thing to come out of the "moon hoax" is the story of 72 year old Buzz Aldrin landing a haymaker on the jaw of the leading conspiracy filmmaker who cornered him at a Hotel in an attempt to do an interview.
I remember that, and I also recall how the prosecutor in that jurisdiction declined to file any charges. Can you imagine taking a case like that to a jury?
Post by: lysander on December 18, 2005, 08:19:52 AM