It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by tristar
Oh did we land on the moon, well, perhaps some should read the following and get back here
www.shriworld.com...
16. No telescope can see the parts or the flag on the moon - If the parts of the Missions are present on the moon yet, why cant any powerful telescope on the earth cant see it? when even minor details are visible? If not from earth, HST even cant make it see?
Originally posted by Monteriano
Jose Escamilla is the kind of person that gives anyone pause to consider. He is a known liar and video manipulator. You can go back to threads on this site and search the internet. he has found his audience and is in this to make a quick buck. There may be a small fraction of truth but you would never know where to look for it because it is all manipulation and lies. He is infamous as a charleton and know thief of others hard work in this genre of film. I would not bother downloading a free version if it had his name associated with it.
Originally posted by secretnasaman
Originally posted by clock1
The question here is "Did anyone watched this movie?".
YES! I have seen the whole movie. Do not judge this based on any past problems people here have about Jose E. I watched it like any other movie & did not expect to
believe it's premise that the NEW moon pics are altered! And when I finished watching...wow was I surprised at some of the amazing evidence using NASA's own High Resolution pics. I thought it was going to go over old "we never went" stuff..
But it was all new. No Watson stuff, no Rods... all very good. I had to pause & ask myself, if I could have found the NASA "blurring" etc. without a great belief that it was possible to do! And the film succeeds as you will find, like me...that there are some things in it that truly cannot be explained & you will keep thinking about these
new moon anomalies.
This is not my area of expertise, so that's all I can say...but to knock down a good film, made by a lot of people...just because of 1 person... is just wrong. The content is the only thing that counts as debatable...not a person's character. And I wish I had some way to get clips because the trailers don't show the killer evidence. For instance, I was amazed at the obvious blurred 'structure' on the moon that is larger then all L.A. & the valley! ... this one is different than any other MOON movie & we ATS members should be happy that these indie hot Docs. get made at all!
I stand by this...so it is a good deal for this long weekend.
Originally posted by Jimmy2theR
Just so you know Mr. Escamilla is making Moon Rising available for viewing at an affordable price anyone can afford.
Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
Agreed but my signature says what it means, however, could you explain to me the discrepancy's of the image and the shadow cast by :
A) Astronaut - is on lower ground than the ground immediately to his right. We see no shadow because it is being obstructed by the terrain. You can see that he is in a slightly lower position.
B) Luna Module
C) Rocks closest to the camera. - the shadows don't seem to match. I have seen explanations in the past that "debunked" the claim, but they are not satisfactory to me. I am unsure what could cause it....but it doesn't seem that there are multiple light sources, as the shadows in the hills in the background do not show the effects of multiple light sources. I believe, honestly, that it is more likely to be an example of poorly executed "touch ups" on the original image to obstruct our view of something else. A "rookie" can do a "copy/paste" in a graphics program and get similar results, with shadows being misaligned to the true light source. It seems as though the foreground is from a different image than the background, a composite meant to obscure something in the foreground.
media.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by ExPostFacto
If you have a copy of it and its okay with you , could you upload it to some rapid share or other medium and provide me a link.
Peace
Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
Agreed but my signature says what it means, however, could you explain to me the discrepancy's of the image and the shadow cast by :
A) Astronaut
B) Luna Module
C) Rocks closest to the camera.
media.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by Jimmy2theR
Originally posted by Monteriano
Jose Escamilla is the kind of person that gives anyone pause to consider. He is a known liar and video manipulator. You can go back to threads on this site and search the internet. he has found his audience and is in this to make a quick buck. There may be a small fraction of truth but you would never know where to look for it because it is all manipulation and lies. He is infamous as a charleton and know thief of others hard work in this genre of film. I would not bother downloading a free version if it had his name associated with it.
I find your comments about Mr. Escamilla disgusting and unfounded. YOU don't even know the man personally and have no reason to sling dirt as you do about him. Nor anyone else slinging mud for no reason. You need to make a public apology to him for saying such things and I am surprised how ATS allows people like you to defame this man and others on this forum. Still your mad comments do not take anything away from the truth this film delivers. You don't have any of the class and integrity Mr. Escamilla has and it's your loss for not seeing this film. Jimmy2theR
[edit on 20-5-2009 by Jimmy2theR]
Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by wmd_2008
Yes i see your picture, but on your picture the general direction (angle) of the shadow is relevant to the light source, however in my image that i uploaded the direction (angle) of the shadows that are cast have no central point of light source.
media.abovetopsecret.com...