New smoking guns in Apollo moon hoax: White cloth canvas on floor clearly seen!

Originally posted by MortPenguin
Some astronots reported the fake moon set as tan.

Please try harder with your sarcasm, C-

Which is light brown. The photographs from the camera on the lunar module from apollo 11 and another mission showed the set to be tan. So according to you saying the moon is brown shouldn't be a problem. Should it?

The moon definitely has a brown component to its colour. If you enhance saturation of a normal moon photo you can see this clearly: www.flickriver.com...

Its 'natural' colour is however grey. There certainly are patches of darker soil in brown, white and even green, but they're not very visible at all.

It really doesn't look greyscale to me when I look up in the sky.

Please see an optician.

reply to post by Kr0nZ



That is very interesting, i found a pic of it in practice.

[img]That was an interesting post about the [/img]

Despite this, I offer some other evidence for speculation.


PS. sorry I an new to posting on ats

The photos were subjected to selective desaturation.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

So: I worked in my exhibition printing towards a neutral gray, isolating what I felt to be filmic issues and eliminating them. There is still color in my prints,

Keep trying to convince yourself of that Michael.

Transparency film from AS16, for example, is consistently, relentlessly blue (...) so one must selectively go in and desaturate that overheightened blue that never should have been there in the first place.

Only you are saying these photos weren't desaturated, Exponent.

Originally posted by MortPenguin
The photos were subjected to selective desaturation.

You will never stop trying will you? Despite all the evidence, you're always right.

www.hq.nasa.gov...
Lets look at what you didn't quote!

Different film emulsions on the Moon, and processing methods once home, were used from mission to mission, with different overall color casts and characteristics resulting. These casts are sometimes quite strong, and of course have nothing to do with the color characteristics of the Moon itself.

What's that? The official source for the photos you dispute says an identical thing to me? He even says there are no 100% reference points exactly as i have told you?

Only you are saying these photos weren't desaturated, Exponent.

edit on 7-12-2012 by MortPenguin because: (no reason given)

You've resorted to quoting people out of context so ostensibly lying to try and get your point across. Congratulations on your honesty. I hope you're proud of yourself. You're now complaining that the pictures aren't coloured incorrectly.

Originally posted by gulfbreeze12
reply to post by Kr0nZ

 

Despite this, I offer some other evidence for speculation.

PS. sorry I an new to posting on ats

Wires no doubt about that

Originally posted by I1Am1Ready1Are1You

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by I1Am1Ready1Are1You
Myth busters already proved that we went to the moon..... chalk one up for the skeptics, case laid to rest.

They did ?

I'm referring to the main proving factor of the video that you left out for whatever reason, with 'mirrors' on the moon that reflected the beam back to Earth.

the main proving factor ???

How do you know the reflectors were brought to the moon by astronauts ?

Originally posted by Ove38

the main proving factor ???

How do you know the reflectors were brought to the moon by astronauts ?

The placement of the reflectors by astronauts is very well documented. Those making claims to the contrary are responsible for proving an alternative explanation. For example, if it was an unmanned mission who designed it, tested it, built it. launched it and operated it? How could this have been accomplished without the same involvement of people and corporations as the Apollo project and why have no details surfaced after 40 years?

Originally posted by DelMarvel

Originally posted by Ove38

the main proving factor ???

How do you know the reflectors were brought to the moon by astronauts ?

The placement of the reflectors by astronauts is very well documented. Those making claims to the contrary are responsible for proving an alternative explanation. For example, if it was an unmanned mission who designed it, tested it, built it. launched it and operated it? How could this have been accomplished without the same involvement of people and corporations as the Apollo project and why have no details surfaced after 40 years?

no details ? there has been new details about the moonlanding hoax every single month the last 20 years

Originally posted by Ove38

there has been new details about the moonlanding hoax every single month the last 20 years

Actually there hasn't. It's the same theories again and again, all of them explainable. The only aspect of this subject that is ever new is the people(usually young) who stumble across the hoax story(usually on youtube) and become interested in the conspiracy, some are open minded and intelligent enough to learn about the Apollo program and the history of the hoax myths, others get caught up in the "every thing is a lie" and "don't believe the government" way of looking at things, become entrenched and refuse to accept any amount of evidence contrary to their belief systems.

On every moon hoax thread on ATS the same old theories get fielded, and proven to be the pseudo-science nonsense they are, over and over again, it's like a merry go round.

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by DelMarvel

Originally posted by Ove38

the main proving factor ???

How do you know the reflectors were brought to the moon by astronauts ?

The placement of the reflectors by astronauts is very well documented. Those making claims to the contrary are responsible for proving an alternative explanation. For example, if it was an unmanned mission who designed it, tested it, built it. launched it and operated it? How could this have been accomplished without the same involvement of people and corporations as the Apollo project and why have no details surfaced after 40 years?

no details ? there has been new details about the moonlanding hoax every single month the last 20 years

If that's the case then I'm sure you can fill me in on the details I asked about: Who designed, tested, built, launched and operated the unmanned craft that allegedly put the reflectors on the moon and what were the details of the operation?

reply to post by DelMarvel


Here's the details: there are none.

Here's the witness list: nobody.

Tonight I was just on another website that hosts documentaries. One of the documentaries was about the moon hoax, people can post comments under the videos. One person posted a bullet point list refuting every theory that was in the moon hoax video. The people who disagreed with him ignored his list and posited that "the government are liars" "the MSM are liars" "the educational system teaches lies" etc. It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with these sentiments, these statements, true or not, are mantras upon which delusional revisionism can take seed. This subject is less about hard evidence than it is about suspicion and mistrust. People don't trust their government, rightly so, but when did not trusting your government mean you had to willfully dwell in a state of stubborn ignorance?

reply to post by exponent


What did I say Exponent? The landscape was desaturated of colour and the colour of the flag, astronauts and lunar module were touched up. Which you tried to tell me wasn't true. It is admittedly true. So who is lying?

reply to post by WWu777


I am an imaging expert that gives testimony in court cases. I have worked with the FBI, secret service, us customs and interpol. The pictures of the moon have different color temp values of more than 2000 degrees k. It is in the entire image including the flag. Look at how much red hue is in the white of the flag stripes in the "brown" dirt moon image. Even someone with basic color printing knowledge can see this. Just ask a lab tech at your local Costco or Cvs photo lab.
If you don't know there is a metal plate on the moon that we have been bouncing a laser off since the 1970 to confirm distance and the orbit of the earth. How did it get there if we didn't land there.

Originally posted by DelMarvel
The placement of the reflectors by astronauts is very well documented. Those making claims to the contrary are responsible for proving an alternative explanation. For example, if it was an unmanned mission who designed it, tested it, built it. launched it and operated it? How could this have been accomplished without the same involvement of people and corporations as the Apollo project and why have no details surfaced after 40 years?

Soviet Lunokhod was also equipped with a similar reflector, and it was an unmanned mission. Actually the Lunokhod's reflector is the one that is currently used by APOLLO for experiments because of its high quality (link).

Originally posted by mrkeen
Soviet Lunokhod was also equipped with a similar reflector, and it was an unmanned mission. Actually the Lunokhod's reflector is the one that is currently used by APOLLO for experiments because of its high quality (link).

edit on 8-12-2012 by mrkeen because: minor edit

First of all, it was "found"...the Apollo, human placed, corner reflectors are superior and that is a fact, even if you check simple Wiki.

What surprised the researches is that in there own words "expected the rover's reflector to be degraded"

That said, sensory equipment and laser delivery is so far off the charts from the lat 60's and 70's, of course a greater 'return' would be expected. You comment that the Soviet ( not Russian) reflectors were superior...I would like to see that in a document.

Your article posted, shows that all the reflectors have use, including the Apollo man placed....not just the Soviet.

Now to the Hoax crud....

Aging myself, I grew-up in what is now Clear Lake, Texas. The entire neighborhood was built because of NASA Houston, Texas. Nearly everyone there was employed by NASA there at the time, including my father and grandfather. All were involved in the projects. You can't fool these people, they wrote the book back then, programmed the computers, studied the sciences, meeting after meeting on every detail. And I mean detail on the "what if's"

A launch, the entire neighborhood would close off, mom's would BBQ out front of the house. We would watch, tensions high, and the elation was there for all. All the things invented for these launches....you have no idea. The items that were used and found use for that were already invented; what was gained....so easy to look over and forget.

But to say it is a hoax...I was there when moon landings became routine and did not even make 'live' television'...one reason they stopped. But I laught at the idea they are 'fake'.

My graduate professor, was the head of NASA financial procurement from 1966-1978. My neighbors, scientists, engineers, programmers (punch card), designers, astronomers, physicists...on and on. All working on a goal.

Faked. No.

I would bet you $1 you never have spoken to anyone involved in the moon landings personally, if it is that important to you....why not?

MG

Originally posted by missed_gear
My graduate professor, was the head of NASA financial procurement from 1966-1978. My neighbors, scientists, engineers, programmers (punch card), designers, astronomers, physicists...on and on. All working on a goal.

Of course, you are biased, because this argument affects your pride in all these people and their works. If I had a professor who was the head of a NASA department, I would be proud, too. There is nothing wrong about having different opinions. Soviet space engineers always believed their technology was the best, NASA believes theirs is the best. You have to be devoted to your job and believe in yourself to achieve anything in this life. But let's get back to the topic. Soviet Lunokhod was an unmanned mission which installed a reflector as useful for research purposes as the ones brought by the Apollo missions. This means that there is no direct connection between installing a reflector on the moon and sending people there. It could all be done using an unmanned remotely controlled rover.

Originally posted by Voiceofreason1
reply to post by WWu777

 

I am an imaging expert that gives testimony in court cases. I have worked with the FBI, secret service, us customs and interpol. The pictures of the moon have different color temp values of more than 2000 degrees k. It is in the entire image including the flag. Look at how much red hue is in the white of the flag stripes in the "brown" dirt moon image. Even someone with basic color printing knowledge can see this. Just ask a lab tech at your local Costco or Cvs photo lab.
If you don't know there is a metal plate on the moon that we have been bouncing a laser off since the 1970 to confirm distance and the orbit of the earth. How did it get there if we didn't land there.

Err the Kelvin scale is due to sunlight being filtered through the atmosphere. On earth at sunset the whites in the flag should be reddish and at midday they should be white or bluish. As there is no atmosphere on the moon this should not occur and the colour temp should be closer to midday all the time. So going by your theory that image is not the moon lol.

reply to post by mrkeen


Seriously?

Biased...no I have looked at "Moon hoax" stuff for years....

Search a bit harder...many observers have been launched, China, India to name a few...how about the Soviets?

To me it is disagreeing with people such as yourself it is tantamount to claiming "Columbus never had a boat"...or..."...George Washington never existed as a leader....because there are no photos...just papers...."
Benjamin Franklin is a Legend, the Ottoman Empire never existed...Rome never got sacked, The US started all the wars in the past century...

Try proving any historical moment based on your judgement....good luck. Pictures are less that ca. 1866. Some are early 1847, trials

MG






MG

Originally posted by MortPenguin
reply to post by exponent

 

What did I say Exponent? The landscape was desaturated of colour and the colour of the flag, astronauts and lunar module were touched up. Which you tried to tell me wasn't true. It is admittedly true. So who is lying?

You are. The very source you quote explains how the person took their time to try and calibrate colours accurately, but you've tried to distort their words into implying they unreasonably desaturated the Moon.

You've decided that the truth doesn't matter and all you want to do is win the argument.

this is a very simple topic.

there is over whelming independent third party physical evidence of the apollo missions

all you have to do is look for it

larry baysinger alone is proof

do you want to find it ?

I don't think so

let toto pull the curtain back for you then

third party evidence of apollo missions

Larry Baysinger, a technician for WHAS radio in Louisville, Kentucky, independently detected and recorded transmissions between Apollo 11 astronauts on the lunar surface and in the command module.[41] Recordings made by Baysinger share certain characteristics with recordings made at Bochum Observatory by Heinz Kaminski (see above), in that both Kaminski's and Baysinger's recordings do not include the capsule communicator in Houston and the associated Quindar tones heard in NASA audio and seen on NASA Apollo 11 transcripts. Kaminski and Baysinger could only hear the transmissions from the Moon, and not transmissions to the Moon from the earth.[35][42]