Live -- Felix Baumgartner makes record jump

In official photos it's pretty rounded, as well as camera crane:


Here is the same picture and it is pretty flat:

You can even see some ice-wall far far behind (joke:)

If you drag & drop one of these picture to Google Images page, you'll find the sources.

In official photos it's pretty rounded, as well as camera crane
...
Here is the same picture and it is pretty flat
...
If you drag & drop one of these picture to Google Images page, you'll find the sources.

Nice work.  This is the kind of stuff worth copying and retaining because it clearly shows falsification.

A similar example is the official 1966 NASA photograph of Gemini 10's alleged space walk by astronaut Michael Collins which was proven to be a reworked photograph of Collins in an airplane fuselage two years earlier circa 1964.  The original photo was actually published in Collins' 1974 book 'Carrying the Fire.'  Ralph Rene, an ardent exposer of the moon landing hoaxes, was the first to notice this particular discrepancy. 
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery
http://ralphrene.com/books.html

An abundant and well organized collection of pairs of photographs (fake photographs side-by-side their originals) like these can form a significant chapter in a book about the shape of the earth. 
I will begin such a collection.  An obvious category within this collection will be well publicized or officially endorsed photographs of the edge of the earth as round which are accompanied by originals exposing the rounded ones to be fake.  Another category will be astronaut photos such as the Collins photos which tend to expose photos of floating in space as a complete farce.  Yet another category will be the more obvious Apollo moon photo discrepancies.

A similar example is the official 1966 NASA photograph of Gemini 10's alleged space walk by astronaut Michael Collins which was proven to be a reworked photograph of Collins in an airplane fuselage two years earlier circa 1964.  The original photo was actually published in Collins' 1974 book 'Carrying the Fire.'  Ralph Rene, an ardent exposer of the moon landing hoaxes, was the first to notice this particular discrepancy. 
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery
http://ralphrene.com/books.html

Can anyone provide any evidence that the "fake spacewalk" photo was ever presented by NASA as an official photo?
No?  I didn't think so: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread566601/pg370

Quote from: kenorb on November 05, 2012, 01:36:03 AM

In official photos it's pretty rounded, as well as camera crane
...
Here is the same picture and it is pretty flat
...
If you drag & drop one of these picture to Google Images page, you'll find the sources.

Nice work.  This is the kind of stuff worth copying and retaining because it clearly shows falsification.

A similar example is the official 1966 NASA photograph of Gemini 10's alleged space walk by astronaut Michael Collins which was proven to be a reworked photograph of Collins in an airplane fuselage two years earlier circa 1964.  The original photo was actually published in Collins' 1974 book 'Carrying the Fire.'  Ralph Rene, an ardent exposer of the moon landing hoaxes, was the first to notice this particular discrepancy. 
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/nasa-photo-fakery
http://ralphrene.com/books.html

An abundant and well organized collection of pairs of photographs (fake photographs side-by-side their originals) like these can form a significant chapter in a book about the shape of the earth. 
I will begin such a collection.  An obvious category within this collection will be well publicized or officially endorsed photographs of the edge of the earth as round which are accompanied by originals exposing the rounded ones to be fake.  Another category will be astronaut photos such as the Collins photos which tend to expose photos of floating in space as a complete farce.  Yet another category will be the more obvious Apollo moon photo discrepancies.

That roundness has to do with the camera lens, if you watch the video, the earth also becomes concave at some point

By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)

That roundness has to do with the camera lens, if you watch the video, the earth also becomes concave at some point

By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)

It's not completely dark, the sky is dark blue. Usually when there is a sun visible, usually you don't see any stars.
Also they could use some additional lighting, to have a better video quality.

Quote from: robertotrevor on November 09, 2012, 06:43:27 PM

That roundness has to do with the camera lens, if you watch the video, the earth also becomes concave at some point

By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)

It's not completely dark, the sky is dark blue. Usually when there is a sun visible, usually you don't see any stars.
Also they could use some additional lighting, to have a better video quality.

I was being sarcastic, a sky with no stars was one of the argument people used to discredit moon landing videos.

Can anyone provide any evidence that the "fake spacewalk" photo was ever presented by NASA as an official photo?

Rene said NASA mailed it to him after he asked for it.  The photo is also in Collins' 1974 autobiography.

Quote from: robertotrevor on November 09, 2012, 06:43:27 PM

By the way, both photos and the video are obviously fake, you cant see any star(!)

I was being sarcastic, a sky with no stars was one of the argument people used to discredit moon landing videos.

Hmm. Interesting observation none the less.

Quote from: markjo on November 06, 2012, 06:30:47 PM

Can anyone provide any evidence that the "fake spacewalk" photo was ever presented by NASA as an official photo?

Rene said NASA mailed it to him after he asked for it. 

Which photo?  The space walk photo or the simulator photo?

The photo is also in Collins' 1974 autobiography.

Yes, I know.  I provided a link explaining how it got there.  However, I don't recall his autobiography being an official NASA document.