Strong Evidence of a Staged Moon Landing is Easy to Find.

Please do not post the following:

-Responses without actual Substance ( That means if you have an argument you need actual evidence to back it up )

-Opinions without Stating Reason ( Not saying opinions aren't welcome, in fact we love them. We just don't want them if there's nothing backing them up )

-Irrelevant Comments

-----------------------------------

With that made clear, I will start out by making it clear that this forum is being created as a collective for all information regarding the authenticity of the original moon landing.

I will start out by posting a picture taken from NASA's panoramic view, which can be found on their site or from google.

i623.photobucket.com...

and I took about 20 seconds out to point out several anomalous images.

i623.photobucket.com...

It is common knowledge that taring occurs often in panoramic images, but the degree to which these anomalies appear makes even an experienced debunker question.. well.. the entirety of the moon landing.

Look for yourself, the pictures that NASA gives to the public is crawling with these.

Posting more later.

[edit on 7-9-2009 by thegagefather]

reply to post by thegagefather

It helps to look at the individual frames which make up the panorama:
AS17-147-22543
AS17-147-22544
AS17-147-22545
AS17-147-22546
AS17-147-22547
AS17-147-22548
AS17-147-22549
AS17-147-22550
AS17-147-22551
AS17-147-22552
AS17-147-22553
AS17-147-22554
AS17-147-22555
AS17-147-22556
AS17-147-22557
AS17-147-22558
AS17-147-22559
AS17-147-22560
AS17-147-22561

The ones which caught your eye are these:
AS17-147-22551
www.hq.nasa.gov...

AS17-147-22550
www.hq.nasa.gov...


It is a matter of stitching and it does appear in all of the panoramas. By consulting the source frames it becomes obvious.






[edit on 9/7/2009 by Phage]

I have never seen any debunkers explain this, even a little.

I'm not denying the possibility of taring causing the anomalies.

However, if this is true, then why was the stitching overlapping vertically when the images themselves are all diagonal?

Furthermore, why does the surrounding terrain of the stitched images not repeat?

I'll post images to show you my point in just a moment, need to edit the image.

reply to post by thegagefather

Oh...this one as well. This is the one in which the fiducial mark is on one of the rocks.
AS17-147-22552
www.hq.nasa.gov...

I don't know what you mean about the images being "diagonal" but maybe this will help you understand what the guy who assembled the panoramas was dealing with:

These panoramas were not easy to produce. The astronauts’ movements on the lunar surface were encumbered by spacesuits. The astronauts were also unable to align the cameras with a view-finder. Because the astronauts were wearing helmets, the cameras were mounted on the chests of the spacesuits. Without a view finder, the crew had to learn how to point, shoot, turn slightly, point and shoot again, etc., until a panorama of overlapping photographs was generated. This required a lot of training on Earth, before they traveled to the Moon.

www.lpi.usra.edu...

The distant terrain does not repeat because it is what the "focus" of the panoramas is. That is why the near terrain does repeat. If the panoramas were assembled so the near terrain did not repeat, then the distant terrain would.

First off..

Note that typical panoramas are created by taking images at an angle and putting them together.

These NASA images were taken horizontally/vertically, as shown here:
i623.photobucket.com...

(will edit post when finished)

Part 2:

i623.photobucket.com...

Let the red lines represent the area torn, given that this is the typical panoramic stitching error. Please note that (although the distance I have given is not exact) it is clearly approximately the same distance.

Taking this into consideration, not only the rocks, but the surround terrain should be identical. While the rocks are, the surrounding area is not. This is a tell-tale sign of eyedropper/brush palette tools.

Also, the images should not have diagonal stitching errors since the panorama is composed of vertical/horizontal images.

[edit on 7-9-2009 by thegagefather]

reply to post by Phage


For once I agree with you. In fact I believe the myth busters addressed this very issue. Take that for what it is worth.

Ultimately, Hyneman, Savage and the others settled on three major areas of the hoax: how light interacted with the lunar surface

www.space.com

One of the NASA photos is fake because the shadows of the rocks and lunar lander are not parallel.

busted

The Mythbusters built a small-scale replica of the lunar landing site based on the photograph, using reflective sand similar to that found on the Moon, and a single light to represent the Sun. Next, they took a photo which was exactly the same as the NASA photo, including the differing shadows. The Mythbusters explained that the shadows were not parallel because of the way the light falls on the Moon’s natural topography.

mythbustersresults.com

like I said take it for what it is worth as it is the mythbusters still good info imo.

Originally posted by Phage
The distant terrain does not repeat because it is what the "focus" of the panoramas is. That is why the near terrain does repeat. If the panoramas were assembled so the near terrain did not repeat, then the distant terrain would.

The "moon dust" like terrain surrounding the rocks must repeat if the rock themselves also repeat in order for this to be a product of poor stitching.

Am I being too vague?

reply to post by thegagefather

You seem to be assuming that the photographs were taken from exactly the same location and with the camera held at exactly the same angle. As pointed out, they were not. Because of slight changes, parallax causes a greater offset on near objects than distant objects. The photographs cannot be perfectly aligned in the near view and the far view.

But I'm not really sure what the point of this is. Are you saying that the "stage" had duplicated rocks? How can that be if the source frames do not show this and only the panoramas do? It doesn't make much sense.

[edit on 9/8/2009 by Phage]

I've never even thought this as an issue that points out anything but the fact that they took photos. I've stiched panoramas from hand held and badly taken shots and such dublication is either going to be there or you can manipulate it away. If they'd airbrush those dublicate rocks away people would go insane claiming NASA is hiding something not to mention it would be a huge pain in the butt to do it

reply to post by thegagefather


so.. im not sure what your saying, because of a few duplicates along the merge lines from the panoramic the moon landing was a hoax? um i not quite sure how to counter something so epically pointless. have you ever even taken a panoramic photo? my flipping cell phone take panoramic photos and it does the same damn thing. If you look at your picture with the numbers on it (a1,a2 ect) i623.photobucket.com...
you will notice that a lot of the duplicates appear slightly warped or at a different angle. in particular A1 and A2. this is EXACTLY what happens when u make a panoramic.

Originally posted by thegagefather

Originally posted by Phage
The distant terrain does not repeat because it is what the "focus" of the panoramas is. That is why the near terrain does repeat. If the panoramas were assembled so the near terrain did not repeat, then the distant terrain would.

The "moon dust" like terrain surrounding the rocks must repeat if the rock themselves also repeat in order for this to be a product of poor stitching.

and the ground around the rocks does repeat... maybe you should take a closer look. took me about 5 seconds to find repeated terrain.

reply to post by superevoman


Um my first thought is. You do realize they didn't have high Def cameras back in 1969? Horrible contrast with a horrible shot with a horrible camera. It tends to happen. Especially when the image is being sent from a point that is 238857 miles away. it tends to happen.

I don't think that those were sent. Taken with film and then developed back on earth

reply to post by PsykoOps


Still, the point is there. it was 1969!!!! Cameras sucked. P

When creating a Panoramic picture, unless you have a tripod with you on hand. Your pictures will come out uneven. You move up and down, side to side, back and forth. It is impossible to be still for even a second you are always moving. Even when using a tripod to get the pictures dead on you would have to pretty much be a robot. There is bound to be over lapping.


[edit on 8-9-2009 by Benihime]

reply to post by Benihime

No they didn't. The Hasselblads that were used were and still are some of the finest cameras ever made.


[edit on 9/8/2009 by Phage]

Well not that badly. Film quality wasn't the best possible perhaps but the camera was very good. Also the process of making a panorama back in the day was a bitch, I wouldn't be surprised if the panorama was done from old stills with photoshop recently.

reply to post by Phage


Again fully understanding that, you need to focus, you move, you need to be a robot to get dead on pictures.

[edit on 8-9-2009 by Benihime]

[edit on 8-9-2009 by Benihime]

reply to post by PsykoOps

Individual photographic frames within the panoramas were recently digitized and re-assembled by NASA’s Information Resources Directorate at the Johnson Space Center with support from the Advanced Projects Office. These re-rendered panoramas are breathtaking and are being used again to illustrate the types of lunar surface conditions that future missions to the lunar surface will encounter. Fortunately, they have also been made available to us so that we can make them available to the rest of the lunar community, students, and the general public. We hope that you enjoy the views.

www.lpi.usra.edu...