Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

zeroxt
Just posted this in a different thread. But check this video out.

Operation moon blink.
m.youtube.com...

Please provide a summary of the video's content, per T&C.

Soylent Green Is People

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

Rob48
reply to post by choos

 

I still don't see that there's any problem with it taking four seconds. Even if it takes 2 seconds between exposures and it's actually closer to 1.5 seconds), then the elapsed time from the moment the first exposure is captured to the moment the third exposure is captured is only 4 seconds. Click (2 second gap) Click (2 second gap) Click.

Maybe it was done in four seconds, but as I mentioned before, Gene Cernan had nine seconds in between the time he told Schmitt to pose (i.e., when Cernan told Schmitt to "Get on there one time") and the time Cernan finished taking the pictures finished (when Cernan said "I got three of them that time").

Umm... no. Schmitt cuts that 9 seconds off.

How so? By Schmitt asking "Ready?" ??

[168:47:03] Cernan: Get on there one time.

[168:47:08] Schmitt: Ready?

[168:47:12] Cernan: I got three of them that time.

Schmitt could have been asking "Ready?" while Cernan was still taking pictures. Maybe Schmitt said that after the first or second picture. That is certainly extremely plausible.

edit on 3/26/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

Extremely implausible.

Why? Well how would Schmitt know when Cernan took the photos?
There is no sound in space, remember?
They didnt use a flash.

But you didnt explain why Schmitt was asking READY?
What is the point of asking READY? After CERNAN told him to jump into the seat and
CERNAN had to get into position?

Its comical how you guys are trying to twist the obvious.
Why? Why are you trying to hard to hold on to the Apollo lie?

Huh? Schmitt knew Cernan was taking pictures because (1) Cernan told him to get into the seat (he said "Get on there one time"), and (2) Schmitt could see Cernan working the camera. Between what Cernan said and what Schmitt could see him doing, it was probably obvious to Schmitt that Cernan wanted to take a picture and/or was taking pictures.

Obviously Schmitt could NOT know when Cernan was done taking the pictures because he can't hear the click -- and that's the point. Schmitt could not tell when Cernan was done, so he asked asked if Cernan was "ready?".

And as I mentioned in another post above, he wanted to know if Cernan was "Ready?" for two possible reasons (which are related). First of all, he probably wanted to know if he needed to hold the pose anymore.

HOLD THE POSE?
What pose, the one where he was suspended in mid air in two of the three photos? That pose?
And please explain how he managed that, cables?
Are you guys contortion artists or something; twisting and turning logic on its head?

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

Rob48
reply to post by choos

 

I still don't see that there's any problem with it taking four seconds. Even if it takes 2 seconds between exposures and it's actually closer to 1.5 seconds), then the elapsed time from the moment the first exposure is captured to the moment the third exposure is captured is only 4 seconds. Click (2 second gap) Click (2 second gap) Click.

Maybe it was done in four seconds, but as I mentioned before, Gene Cernan had nine seconds in between the time he told Schmitt to pose (i.e., when Cernan told Schmitt to "Get on there one time") and the time Cernan finished taking the pictures finished (when Cernan said "I got three of them that time").

Umm... no. Schmitt cuts that 9 seconds off.

How so? By Schmitt asking "Ready?" ??

[168:47:03] Cernan: Get on there one time.

[168:47:08] Schmitt: Ready?

[168:47:12] Cernan: I got three of them that time.

Schmitt could have been asking "Ready?" while Cernan was still taking pictures. Maybe Schmitt said that after the first or second picture. That is certainly extremely plausible.

edit on 3/26/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

Extremely implausible.

Why? Well how would Schmitt know when Cernan took the photos?
There is no sound in space, remember?
They didnt use a flash.

But you didnt explain why Schmitt was asking READY?
What is the point of asking READY? After CERNAN told him to jump into the seat and
CERNAN had to get into position?

Its comical how you guys are trying to twist the obvious.
Why? Why are you trying to hard to hold on to the Apollo lie?

Huh? Schmitt knew Cernan was taking pictures because (1) Cernan told him to get into the seat (he said "Get on there one time"), and (2) Schmitt could see Cernan working the camera. Between what Cernan said and what Schmitt could see him doing, it was probably obvious to Schmitt that Cernan wanted to take a picture and/or was taking pictures.

Obviously Schmitt could NOT know when Cernan was done taking the pictures because he can't hear the click -- and that's the point. Schmitt could not tell when Cernan was done, so he asked asked if Cernan was "ready?".

And as I mentioned in another post above, he wanted to know if Cernan was "Ready?" for two possible reasons (which are related). First of all, he probably wanted to know if he needed to hold the pose anymore.

HOLD THE POSE?
What pose, the one where he was suspended in mid air in two of the three photos? That pose?
And please explain how he managed that, cables?
Are you guys contortion artists or something; twisting and turning logic on its head?

That honor belongs to you. It was proven pretty conclusively when you first brought this non-issue up three years ago, that the photo sequence was continuous, and captured an astronaut settling slowly into his seat in one sixth gravity. Please stop pretending to be ignorant. This non-issue was settled long ago.

reply to post by FoosM


you see what you did here?? sayonarajupiter would be so proud of you..

you completely ignored soylents argument and focused on one tiny part which he was speculating on..

its called transfer:


his point wasnt about "holding a pose" his point was that when schmitt was asking "ready?" it could be related to asking cernan if he was ready to leave.. a view point which you have completely ignored..

so how about it?? when did Cernan begin to take pictures of schmitt?? we want to see the proof that you have, since you are 100% sure of yourself.

reply to post by FoosM


Foos, what was it that first drew your attention to these three photos? Out of all the thousands of Apollo photos, what was it about these three photographs that sparked an obsession that continues after three years? I, along with every other person that has looked at them, just see three photos, taken a few seconds apart (but nobody can tell or prove exactly how many seconds apart) that show Jack Schmitt climbing into the rover.

(Incidentally, I'm not sure why you are claiming he is "in mid air". For one thing, as we know, there is no air. For another, we can't see his left foot. Are you claiming that Jack is falling freely into the seat under the influence of gravity and not touching the rover with any part of his body that would slow that rate of fall, until the moment he is fully seated?)

Clearly Jack has had time to swap the sampler into his right hand (in the second photo), and then put it down/drop it (in the third photo). If he had time to do that then why could he not also have shifted in his seat? I am not saying this is what happened, I am saying I don't know exactly what happened, and neither do you. Because there is no video. What we do have is audio, and photographs, which are perfectly consistent with one another unless you cherry-pick individual words, ignore the context, and apply spurious logic to them.

I've watched your videos and I still don't see a single thing that is inexplicable. I ask again, why these three totally inoffensive photos? Why are you focusing on these? Is it because you have no other peg, however shaky, to hang your tinfoil hat on?

SayonaraJupiter

Well said, FoosM. And welcome back! What do you think of this picture? I posted it earlier in the thread but the Apollo Defenders didn't want to address it.




Hey SJ good to see you still active!
I didnt see that picture before, please give me some insight
on the issue.

reply to post by FoosM

Yes please do! In particular explain what you think the problems are with the image, what the image ought to look like if it is genuine, how many pieces of glass are present between the subject and the film plane, and why the reflections would be present in a hoaxed image but not a genuine image.

Then perhaps we can have a proper discussion. Making vague assertions that something looks funny isn't a good starting point for a debate.

But please, SJ, before you do that, since I asked first, could you provide me with the timeline of the switchover from the non-Nixon genuine Apollo program to the Nixon fake Apollo program? I'll keep it simple by just asking for the "when", before making you tackle the somewhat thornier problem of the "how".

Rob48
reply to post by FoosM

 

Yes please do! In particular explain what you think the problems are with the image, what the image ought to look like if it is genuine, how many pieces of glass are present between the subject and the film plane, and why the reflections would be present in a hoaxed image but not a genuine image.

Then perhaps we can have a proper discussion. Making vague assertions that something looks funny isn't a good starting point for a debate.

That violates every principle of the Moon Hoax religion! No comparisons to the real world are permitted. No question can have any answer but 'it must be fake.' Things requiring no explanation must be explained, but things that can only be explained by the reality of the evidence must be ignored.

choos
e i am not 100% sure of when cernan began taking photos and when he stopped and neither are you..

Oh no of course not. When CERNA stated:

168:47:12 Cernan: I got three of them that time.

With a timestamp, he was saying he was ABOUT to take three photos.
Of course, thats what it means. Oh, no wait, he just
shot three aliens with his ray-gun!

You have lost all credibility Choos.
Anybody can see you are trying to hide, and not take a stand, so you can
deny and obfuscate the obvious when things get too hot.

I tell you what, since you don't know anything for sure, even in the face of facts,
then you can never say for sure that the moonlanding happened.
In other words, you lost the debate.

reply to post by Rob48


Apollo was already being faked during the LBJ administration.
Nixon just took it over and continued it.

LBJ probably didnt want to continue his presidency because of it.
People think it could be he felt guilty about Vietnam, or killing JFK.
But now that I think about it, its probably because of Apollo.
He was the guy who brought in all that $$$ for the program,
and now he had to face the fact it was being faked.

FoosM

choos
e i am not 100% sure of when cernan began taking photos and when he stopped and neither are you..

Oh no of course not. When CERNA stated:

168:47:12 Cernan: I got three of them that time.

With a timestamp, he was saying he was ABOUT to take three photos.
Of course, thats what it means. Oh, no wait, he just
shot three aliens with his ray-gun!

Foos, slow down. THINK before you start typing and perhaps you won't keep blundering into these logical elephant traps you keep finding yourself in.

Choos said "I am not 100% sure of when Cernan... stopped taking photos and neither are you"

All you have done is demonstrate the latest point when Cernan could have stopped taking photos.

We know he took the last photo at or BEFORE 168:47:12. Do you know that he said "I got three that time" the instant he pressed the shutter for the last time? If so, how?

The point it that we don't know. If I say "I just took a photo of you", does that mean that I took the photo right at that point? Of course not.

He could have taken the last photo at 168:47:12, or it could have been 168:47:11, or 168:47:10. He could have taken two photos before Jack even said "Ready?" and then the last one after that, and he would still be telling the truth when he said he took three "that time".

You keep claiming you have proof and yet you confuse "establishing a later bound of a time period" with "establishing an instant of time".

Try again.

DJW001

That honor belongs to you. It was proven pretty conclusively when you first brought this non-issue up three years ago, that the photo sequence was continuous, and captured an astronaut settling slowly into his seat in one sixth gravity. Please stop pretending to be ignorant. This non-issue was settled long ago.

So which Apollogists are going to challenge DJ's statement?
Because I know you all dont agree with it.

He states:
3 continuous photos (three seconds)
Astronaut settling slowly into his seat - which is to explain why there are two photos of the astronaut in mid air.

Do you all agree? Choos, what about you?
Are you ready to take a stand?

Rob48

FoosM

choos
e i am not 100% sure of when cernan began taking photos and when he stopped and neither are you..

Oh no of course not. When CERNA stated:

168:47:12 Cernan: I got three of them that time.

With a timestamp, he was saying he was ABOUT to take three photos.
Of course, thats what it means. Oh, no wait, he just
shot three aliens with his ray-gun!

Foos, slow down. THINK before you start typing and perhaps you won't keep blundering into these logical elephant traps you keep finding yourself in.

Choos said "I am not 100% sure of when Cernan... stopped taking photos and neither are you"

Tut tut tut... it's clear now isn't it?
You have a problem with things being clear?
He obviously could not be taking photos after the timestamp.

So we know that last point a photo could have been taken.
And realistically, it could have ended a second or two before he made the statement.
So Im glad you are finally admitting things take more time then you can imagine taking them too.
I'll keep reminding you of that later.

reply to post by FoosM


That's not what SJ's theory states. His big conceit is that it was all Nixon's doing, that the "fake" manned missions were all conducted in Nixon's presidency because he was the criminal mastermind behind it.

The problem is that, if you will permit me a little play on words, the Apollo moon landings took place in space but they didn't take place in a vacuum. (I'm providing a link so you don't misunderstand me. I am using an idiom. I am not saying there is air on the moon.)

The manned landings weren't a standalone project. Each step of the program was an iteration of a previous step, stretching back years and years. If Nixon faked the missions during his presidency, then he must also have been telling Kennedy and Johnson what to do in order to carry out his nefarious scheme. Can you imagine JFK taking orders from Richard Nixon, the man he'd just defeated in a hard-fought and close-run election? Out of all the incredible suspensions of disbelief that are necessary to entertain the idea of a hoax, that one has to be quite high on the list

reply to post by FoosM

Is there going to be a point here? Based purely on the design of the cameras and the audio transcript, the shortest possible period between the first and the last photo is somewhere in the region of three seconds, assuming an interval between photos of approx 1.5 seconds (this is a fairly generous time period, so it could be as little as 2.5 seconds). The longest possible period of time is approximately eight seconds, between Gene finishing saying "get on there one time" and saying "I got three of them that time".

But neither your nor I know the exact timings, other than this. So, how does having three photos taken over a period of somewhere between three and eight seconds, and showing events that could easily have been completed during the same time period, disprove the whole Apollo programme?


He [DJW] states:
3 continuous photos (three seconds)
Astronaut settling slowly into his seat - which is to explain why there are two photos of the astronaut in mid air.

Do you all agree?

I agree that it is one possibility. I rather suspect that it wasn't one continuous movement, based on the movement of the sampler from hand to hand. But I don't know, and I am happy to state that I don't know (unlike HBs, for whom not knowing something is akin to an admission of guilt) because I wasn't there and there is no video of the event! And frankly I don't much care, because none of it has anything whatsoever to do with there being a hoax!

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

FoosM

Soylent Green Is People

Rob48
reply to post by choos

 

I still don't see that there's any problem with it taking four seconds. Even if it takes 2 seconds between exposures and it's actually closer to 1.5 seconds), then the elapsed time from the moment the first exposure is captured to the moment the third exposure is captured is only 4 seconds. Click (2 second gap) Click (2 second gap) Click.

Maybe it was done in four seconds, but as I mentioned before, Gene Cernan had nine seconds in between the time he told Schmitt to pose (i.e., when Cernan told Schmitt to "Get on there one time") and the time Cernan finished taking the pictures finished (when Cernan said "I got three of them that time").

Umm... no. Schmitt cuts that 9 seconds off.

How so? By Schmitt asking "Ready?" ??

[168:47:03] Cernan: Get on there one time.

[168:47:08] Schmitt: Ready?

[168:47:12] Cernan: I got three of them that time.

Schmitt could have been asking "Ready?" while Cernan was still taking pictures. Maybe Schmitt said that after the first or second picture. That is certainly extremely plausible.

edit on 3/26/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

Extremely implausible.

Why? Well how would Schmitt know when Cernan took the photos?
There is no sound in space, remember?
They didnt use a flash.

But you didnt explain why Schmitt was asking READY?
What is the point of asking READY? After CERNAN told him to jump into the seat and
CERNAN had to get into position?

Its comical how you guys are trying to twist the obvious.
Why? Why are you trying to hard to hold on to the Apollo lie?

Huh? Schmitt knew Cernan was taking pictures because (1) Cernan told him to get into the seat (he said "Get on there one time"), and (2) Schmitt could see Cernan working the camera. Between what Cernan said and what Schmitt could see him doing, it was probably obvious to Schmitt that Cernan wanted to take a picture and/or was taking pictures.

Obviously Schmitt could NOT know when Cernan was done taking the pictures because he can't hear the click -- and that's the point. Schmitt could not tell when Cernan was done, so he asked asked if Cernan was "ready?".

And as I mentioned in another post above, he wanted to know if Cernan was "Ready?" for two possible reasons (which are related). First of all, he probably wanted to know if he needed to hold the pose anymore.

HOLD THE POSE?
What pose, the one where he was suspended in mid air in two of the three photos? That pose?
And please explain how he managed that, cables?
Are you guys contortion artists or something; twisting and turning logic on its head?

I mean he could have been "posing" by making like he was getting into the LM several time by bouncing on the seat. Again, nine seconds passed between Cernan telling Schmitt to pose ("get in there one time") and the time Cernan said he took three pictures.

The fact that Schmitt asked Cernan if he was ready sometime in between is irrelevant. Cernan could have easily been taking the pictures before, after, and during Schmitt asked him if he was ready. I'm not sure why you think that Schmitt's talking marked some sort of beginning or end to Cernan's picture taking.

Besides, as I mentioned earlier, I think Schmitt's question asking "Ready?" was more of a questions "Are you done?", because he knew mission control wanted them to have wheels rolling in a few seconds.

SayonaraJupiter

FoosM
Im sure that many people who have been fervently defending, on this site,
the authenticity of the moon landing claims by the US, are not even sure if
they really believe it anymore themselves. I think they are now defending
it out of pride, or maybe just habit.

Well said, FoosM. And welcome back! What do you think of this picture? I posted it earlier in the thread but the Apollo Defenders didn't want to address it.

It was taken through a window, and the window is multi-paned.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


You mean Dick forgot to roll down the window before he started filming? What an amateur.

I personally do not believe we went to the moon for a plethora of reasons. I actually just wanted to commend each side becasue I'm extremely interested in the Apollo missions and the possible conspiracy of them being faked. This thread has been a great read and I really do learn a lot from the posters ITT.

I guess what got me is that there have been obvious "pings" of light that may denote a wire harness (Dark Mission video), which I believe Jarrah proved in some sci fi flick from the 1950s that it could be kept from being visible on film -- combined with -- the film speed being ramped up (2x I believe) and it really looks like guys prancing around on harnesses. The Apollo footage is just slowed down IMO to represent 1/6 gravity. I find it odd that they were so playful and careless on terrain they really have never experienced first hand and the dangers of damaging their suit/equipment.

Anyways, thanks for the read. It's nice taking input from both sides and plenty of times your arguments end with how each side interprets an event (like FoosM stand on Cernan photos)

reply to post by cestrup

If you are interested in the topic then I strongly suggest you read onebigmonkey's website. It's extremely well written and packed with top-notch analysis. Don't let the fact that it's created by a non-hoax believer put you off.

Give it a look: onebigmonkey.comoj.com...