1972 Moon Landing Fakery Alert As Stagehand Spotted In Astronaut's Visor

a reply to: studio500


It is the other astronaut that took the photo of him not a stagehand

spaceflight.nasa.gov is hosting the original image, and they didn't edit out something that was sure to be noticed.
Looks like the shadow of a child with a large square life support backpack at his shoulders.
Isn't going to change anyone's mind about the manned moon missions.

why are we focusing on a supposed reflection of a human instead of the Totally real alien head in the bottom left? Or the fact that when they zoom in the visor Totally looks cracked?

Whatever it is I can't make an astronaut out of it.
It's the shadow that looks bizarre to me.
Look how it disappears close to the feet then looks like a big box or an Early 1970's tv camera on a boom.
My first thought on the figure was a young girl, the legs seem too short for an adult.

Note: Even if there are faked photos it wouldn't prove we didn't go to the moon?
What if they did fake the pics and film because they didn't want us to know how they actually traveled to the moon?

originally posted by: Somethingsamiss
why are we focusing on a supposed reflection of a human instead of the Totally real alien head in the bottom left? ...

That's Putin!

a reply to: smurfy

Ha!

originally posted by: Jefferton
Moon landing fakery is Internet bullsh#t.

Second line.

Despite t&c's, sometimes 1 line says plenty.

a reply to: studio500

I think it's a case of pareidolia.

I can't see a stage hand, only the guy in the chicken suit, who is taking the picture.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

I seem to remember a mysterious young girl named Tracy associated with the moon mission but that was 1963?

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: studio500

It would be nice to have the original image.

I doubt streetcap1 provided it for a reason

why would you doubt that? he said in the video itself, that he has linked the original in the description, then if you look at the description low and behold there it is what a shocker!
history.nasa.gov...

and yet you doubt he linked it at all? its like you dont even bother with the material, didnt watch it, didnt read its description, instead just jump to a conclusion.

a reply to: NobodiesNormal

I just watched the video in the OP, and skimmed through. I didn’t go go to the actual video, and you don’t need a 4 minute video for one photo.

So thanks for that, past experiences tells me these moon anomaly people very rarely want people to see the original.

I have a question regarding the shadow of the main astronaut in the picture. How come his hand shadow looks wide and the shadow of the tool sticking up out of his pocket on his leg looks about the right width but the width of the shadow of his legs and torso and head look really skinny and not at all resembling a person, and at the same time the reflected astronaut has a chunky shadow showing what looks like a back pack?

It's either a guy in the visor, or a little astronaut doll, so either way, it's just more evidence of the fake

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: studio500

the video creator

The video creator? Zooms in?

What wait Where? Who is zooming in? Is he on the moon?

The creator of the Youtube video.... sigh

It's the other astronaut, and you can clearly make out the PLSS in the shadow.



The EVA was broadcast on live TV, complete with live images of Earth.

So there were three astronauts walking on the moon per this photo. Does this jive with the official story? ATS cannot handle the moon landing fakery it's almost instant death on here to speak of this. BLUE state shills infest this site now like big mouth in this thread.

a reply to: dntwastetime

3?

Uh no, just 2.

a reply to: Chadwickus

it may not be anything...but according to that footage...that reflection guy does not appear to have front mounted camera.

But...havent we already beat this thing to death ? I'm pretty sure we have.

still...it's sunday. Why not...

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Pretty hard to tell from the photos either way..

Fortunately though, there’s Occam's razor.

a reply to: CthulhuMythos

The shape of a shadow is the result of two things: the shape of what is projecting the shadow and the shape of the surface where the shadow is projected.

If the surface where the shadow is projected is flat and horizontal then we get a relatively common shadow, but if the surface is not flat then we get distortion, exactly like those on one of those mirrors that distort images. Even if the surface where the shadow is project is flat but not horizontal, then, if it's facing the viewer (or the camera) then the shadow would appear "fatter", and if the surface is not horizontal but facing in the same direction as the viewer (or camera) then the shadow will appear "thinner".