NASA is going back to the moon — if it can figure out how to get there

a reply to: MteWamp

I didn't see this but let me give you a tip. What you posted is merely argument by intimidation.

I did not make any claims about my beliefs, I only offered a link for anyone to read.

You're welcome.

originally posted by: Maverick7
a reply to: MteWamp

I didn't see this but let me give you a tip. What you posted is merely argument by intimidation.

I did not make any claims about my beliefs, I only offered a link for anyone to read.

You're welcome.

Thanks, but I should know by now, you just can't fix stupid.

You're welcome.

Some of us are old enough that our education didn't come from watching YouTube videos, sweetie.

a reply to: Maverick7

Post pics of the visor problem give us an example from Apollo & ISS.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: Maverick7

Post pics of the visor problem give us an example from Apollo & ISS.

Have to agree there. I've just been skimming through the Apollo photos and there really aren't that many that show the sun on the visor. The ones I did find don't seem any different to the ones I found showing ISS EVAs or indeed Gemini ones. You have a bright light shining on a tinted, curved surface. It looks exactly as it should.

originally posted by: Maverick7
As to photographic evidence, one of the things that is a 'tell for me' which is not really discussed much is the reflection of the 'Sun' in the visors of the Apollo astronauts. It looks like a big glowing ball. Contrast this with the many pictures of the Sun in the visors of an astronaut on the Shuttle or the ISS. Completely different. One looks like a fairly small pointed star

Does it?



Looks quite large and blobby to me. Of course, the reflective materials and camera's lens will make it look different on photos from different sources.

a reply to: wildespace

To be fair that isn't in a visor.

This is though:



and this



They look no different to any Apollo visor sun shots I've seen.

a reply to: stonerwilliam

So, what is your point about Buzz?

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: stonerwilliam

So, what is your point about Buzz?

He acts weird and has done for decades , hardly what you would expect from a man in this position and who went through so many mental evaluations



Maybe this or has this been debunked

a reply to: stonerwilliam

Well, his mother committed suicide and he was treated for depression. All a long time after your "evaluations".

Here is all you need to know about Bart Sibrel and his lies - re that video you posted:

Bart Sibrel: Wiki

Basically he claims he got hold of a secret NASA video. It was in fact publicly available and he edited it and told a pack of lies.

a reply to: MteWamp

Well I'm in this thread to talk about the topic at hand you're just here to insult people and call them names.

Why do that?
----

As to the size of the sun in visors in the Apollo visors the sun looks about twice that size and is round and not stellate.

In the Shuttle EVA pics I've seen it looks small and stellate.

The one's posted above look like the visor is dirty or not a good reflection. I would think they'd look identical.

It's just one question I had guys.

www.techquark.com...

One link. this appears to be a light and the text says something about the size...

Gemini Space walk so same visor material:
www.angelfire.com...

Cernan and Schmitt:
whizzospace.com...

a reply to: Maverick7

Because making fun of the intellectually deficient is not only a lot of fun, it's just the right thing to do.

You should go back to watching YouTube videos, kid.

a reply to: Maverick7

So the reflection in visors varies and some match your claim and some don't?

Perhaos things aren't as simplistic as you imagine.

You don't think Apollo visors might have got dirty with all that dust?

FWIW more, on the visor Sun reflection discrepancies - although it occurs to me that a Hassleblad shot vs a movie camera shot could be a factor this is pretty blatant.

In fairness to the cringeworthy David Percy video, BertieSlack at youtube has a debunking playlist which is pretty darn funny

www.youtube.com...

David Percy - Idiot or Conman, It's insightful and hilarious unlike uh, some people who are just unintentionally funny like me,



1:36:29 to 1:38:12

HTH

a reply to: MteWamp

Well at least you spelled deficient correctly I'll give you that. How about making a factual contribution to this arc and cut out the sniping?

Since I had an apparently sincere request to post some additional YT videos, this is fun. Note the part where the guy almost neuters the MIT reporter with the landing strut and bangs the hatch cover into the astronaut backpack re-up console and couldn't get it open.

From the Vault at MIT, (Massachusetts Institute of Technology); circa 1966:

MIT Science Reporter — "Landing on the Moon" (1966)



Relevant points,

1) Near impact with his bathing suit parts; 6:55

2)Go to the part where he opens the hatch where they will egress into the LEM and listen with headphones on or speakers turned up. Right around 13:23 you can actually hear where the hatch hits that piece of furniture in front of it and goes 'clang/thud' at about 1/3 open'. If they were going to use this as a 'fit in their spacesuits' device and couldn't open the egress hatch on the model how could the practice 'egressing'? I swear I thought I saw it hit then turned it up and heard it go 'thud'.

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: stonerwilliam

So, what is your point about Buzz?

He acts weird and has done for decades , hardly what you would expect from a man in this position and who went through so many mental evaluations

Maybe this or has this been debunked

Yes it has. Sibrel lied about getting the Earth videos by mistake, they were always available and even made it onto the next day's front page. He also cherry picked which bits he showed to try and prove his point.

The image of Earth in the video thumbnail shows hurricane Bernice in a formation that only existed on the day of the broadcast.

See here for more

onebigmonkey.com...

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Dayum, Homie, good find. I'm not a huge fan of Sibrel and this looks to be well-done.

Thanks and starred.

a reply to: Maverick7

It should be, I wrote it

a reply to: Maverick7

Ever watched a football match multiple light sources multiple shadows. Shadows follow the terraim they land on so can try that here on Earth.

As for size on visors different focal lengths will change how things look you don't take a portrait close up with a wide angle lens the persons face will be distorted, also the aperture of the lens and number of blades it's made from changes the number of spikes around a light, star or sun.

Mad Internet theories from people with NO photography experience

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: stonerwilliam

Well, his mother committed suicide and he was treated for depression. All a long time after your "evaluations".

Here is all you need to know about Bart Sibrel and his lies - re that video you posted:

Bart Sibrel: Wiki

Basically he claims he got hold of a secret NASA video. It was in fact publicly available and he edited it and told a pack of lies.

Who mentioned Bart

a reply to: wmd_2008

Well then do me favor and look at that section of the stupid YT by Percy and see those two very different images.

One is a large 'globe-like' image about the size of 2" baseball no stellation and there are a bunch of them by both astronauts, and there is a close up of modern astronauts on the Shuttle which we have a reasonable belief they are real, hence a reference point.

I hope you don't say "I'm not going to waste my time..." b.c the crackpot theory is not mine, though several of the image comparisons are not correct, the set Percy has (if you can get over his barely disguised gloating', are similar in nature, although as I said the one from the Gemini mission and the Shuttle mission match up perfectly and then we have these weird globe-things. I already said it might be due to the difference between a video camera (of which I do not know the specs) and a Hassleblad quality still (IDK the camera the Gemini pic and the shuttle pic used).

But you are ENTIRELY correct the correct analysis would require an analysis of the lens system of the video camera and the Hassleblad still system and see if an expert could explain it in a non-biased way and not say 'look, they have a big baseball size globe and it looks like a super light', which is argument by booking you over and not scientific.

Anyway if you are a photographic adept, look at then and tell me what you think, please.