"Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.

  • 144 Replies
  • 24687 Views
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #90 on: April 26, 2013, 09:15:30 AM »
It Shows how easy it is to fake stuff doesn't it.

How many man and machine hours do you think the first shot of the showreel took to make ?

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #91 on: April 26, 2013, 09:35:12 AM »
It Shows how easy it is to fake stuff doesn't it.

How many man and machine hours do you think the first shot of the showreel took to make ?
1000?

1000 man hours for a 2 seconds shot is "easy" ?
And we are in 2013. They did not have computers in 1969. They did not have any digital camera either.

I'm really interested in knowing the technology they are supposedly used to fake it back then.

From there, I will be able to explain you the closest "real" technique, how it works, and why it's not easy.


Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #92 on: April 26, 2013, 10:00:05 AM »
Yes, the video is only talking about the technical aspect.

The take off alone would have been a nightmare to fake in 1969.
And the take off only dismisses the entire flat earth theory.
How does a take off dismiss the flat earth theory?

Because leaving earth is theoretically impossible in FE theory ?
Leaving the earths crust isn't...but leaving the earths atmosphere is. Are you trying to tell me you believe they sent a rocket into space?

Where do you think it went?
Into the ocean where they all go.

By what route?
The bloody ocean route, what do you mean. what route.

They very clearly go into the air. What route do they take to go into the ocean?
Yes they go into the air and they go into the ocean, where the ocean is.

Air is up. Ocean is down. How high do they go that they go out of sight of everyone before they turn around?
You actually see them all arcing in the sky. Go and look at the real pictures. And no, I don't mean the fake Saturn V lift off ones where the sky goes black and blue on command.  ;)

It's going straight up. It's just bendy light making you think it's curved.

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #93 on: April 26, 2013, 10:22:59 AM »
Are any of you aware that a reflective plates were placed on the moon by one of the moon missions which anyone can target with a sufficiently powerful laser and receive a return signal off of?

Doesn't that pretty definitively prove that we went there, which further disproves the whole flat earth thing?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment




Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #94 on: April 26, 2013, 10:43:23 AM »
Kintanon,

Welcome. You have severely missed the boat with your first post though. There are plenty of threads on just such a topic that the handy 'Search' features of these forums will reveal.

Ultimately though, no, you have no definitively proved anything. Prove we went to the moon, that the laser ranging experiment is possible and that it all corresponds to a model which is infallible (i.e, don't assume things based on a round earth model when that is not the accepted belief amongst those you are trying to persuade) and you will have a starting point.

You will quickly learn, if you stick around here, that posting evidence of experiments or claims that go against the Flat Earth model will generally result in dismissal based on lies, fabrication or simple impossibility, unless you can categorically and infallibly demonstrate it yourself. Even then, prepare to defend your stance against an onslaught of counter claims, evidence and proofs from proponents of the Flat Earth Theory.

I wish you luck, and welcome.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2013, 10:45:47 AM by Pilgrim »
You're only as good as your last simile.

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #95 on: April 26, 2013, 11:08:23 AM »
The same technology they used to film Capricorn 1.

And what is that technology ?

?

darknavyseal

  • 439
  • Round Earth, for sure, maybe.
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #96 on: April 26, 2013, 12:00:55 PM »
The same technology they used to film Capricorn 1.

And what is that technology ?

Sup, ZE_Pilot. I feel I should warn you about skeptimatic. Among the FE crowd, he is probably the least intelligent. Look up his post history. In the several thousands of posts he has made, he has not learned a single, I repeat, a single thing. He doesn't understand reference frames of motion, he thinks the Felix Baumgartner jump was faked, he thinks anything resembling a photo is fake....I could go on. Even the FE people encourage people to not respond to him.

He is either a classic troll...I think you know the other option. Also, Hoppy is a flat out troll.

I confirm that the time is not accurate Maryland, it is off by 2 hours and 10 minutes.

He frequently posts false or misleading information. He sometimes agrees with skeptimatic in a post, only so that post is riddled with more comments, making reading it impossibly difficult.
Regarding hoppy's comment, I believe the world clock is accurate if you are watching the sunset/sunrise from the coast. Otherwise, land mass will get in the way of the actual sunset. Also, elevation is important too.

Welcome again to the Flat Earth Society.

?

SpiroGyra

  • 9
  • Enlightenment Period Traversing Warrior
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #97 on: April 26, 2013, 12:37:15 PM »
The same technology they used to film Capricorn 1.

And what is that technology ?

Sup, ZE_Pilot. I feel I should warn you about skeptimatic. Among the FE crowd, he is probably the least intelligent. Look up his post history. In the several thousands of posts he has made, he has not learned a single, I repeat, a single thing. He doesn't understand reference frames of motion, he thinks the Felix Baumgartner jump was faked, he thinks anything resembling a photo is fake....I could go on. Even the FE people encourage people to not respond to him.

He is either a classic troll...I think you know the other option. Also, Hoppy is a flat out troll.

I confirm that the time is not accurate Maryland, it is off by 2 hours and 10 minutes.

He frequently posts false or misleading information. He sometimes agrees with skeptimatic in a post, only so that post is riddled with more comments, making reading it impossibly difficult.
Regarding hoppy's comment, I believe the world clock is accurate if you are watching the sunset/sunrise from the coast. Otherwise, land mass will get in the way of the actual sunset. Also, elevation is important too.

Welcome again to the Flat Earth Society.

I'm new to this board, but I strongly believe the Felix Baumgartner jump was faked. Aside from the obvious, which you are missing, the earth is flat and to say otherwise is to venture down the path of folly.

Where is Felix Baumgartner now? Was there ever a post jump interview? None that I've seen. NASA, SETI, to name a few have perpetuated the hoax to such a degree that even these modern day "stunts" prove little other than how far we've come in creating science fiction for the masses.
Wandering this land with a beer in hand

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #98 on: April 26, 2013, 12:42:06 PM »
The same technology they used to film Capricorn 1.

And what is that technology ?

Sup, ZE_Pilot. I feel I should warn you about skeptimatic. Among the FE crowd, he is probably the least intelligent. Look up his post history. In the several thousands of posts he has made, he has not learned a single, I repeat, a single thing. He doesn't understand reference frames of motion, he thinks the Felix Baumgartner jump was faked, he thinks anything resembling a photo is fake....I could go on. Even the FE people encourage people to not respond to him.

He is either a classic troll...I think you know the other option. Also, Hoppy is a flat out troll.

I confirm that the time is not accurate Maryland, it is off by 2 hours and 10 minutes.

He frequently posts false or misleading information. He sometimes agrees with skeptimatic in a post, only so that post is riddled with more comments, making reading it impossibly difficult.
Regarding hoppy's comment, I believe the world clock is accurate if you are watching the sunset/sunrise from the coast. Otherwise, land mass will get in the way of the actual sunset. Also, elevation is important too.

Welcome again to the Flat Earth Society.

I'm new to this board, but I strongly believe the Felix Baumgartner jump was faked. Aside from the obvious, which you are missing, the earth is flat and to say otherwise is to venture down the path of folly.

Where is Felix Baumgartner now? Was there ever a post jump interview? None that I've seen. NASA, SETI, to name a few have perpetuated the hoax to such a degree that even these modern day "stunts" prove little other than how far we've come in creating science fiction for the masses.

#ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Felix Baumgartner : interview after jump ( english )
 Post jump video...but probably faked.

?

SpiroGyra

  • 9
  • Enlightenment Period Traversing Warrior
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #99 on: April 26, 2013, 01:01:48 PM »
If you look at the footage at around :22 in that video, it's obviously animated and shot from a 2nd party perspective. This guy is a trained professional actor.  ::)
Wandering this land with a beer in hand

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #100 on: April 26, 2013, 01:17:53 PM »
If you look at the footage at around :22 in that video, it's obviously animated and shot from a 2nd party perspective. This guy is a trained professional actor.  ::)

so first you say you think its fake because their was no post jump interview.



Where is Felix Baumgartner now? Was there ever a post jump interview? None that I've seen. NASA, SETI, to name a few have perpetuated the hoax to such a degree that even these modern day "stunts" prove little other than how far we've come in creating science fiction for the masses.

then we show you a interview. so you then say that he is a trained actor and the footage is obviously fake? i think you might need to get your theory straight.

?

SpiroGyra

  • 9
  • Enlightenment Period Traversing Warrior
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #101 on: April 26, 2013, 01:24:09 PM »
You don't expect anyone to believe that technology even exits, do you? You can scour the 4 corners of the internet and not find one piece of credible evidence that suggests we have the ability to launch a vehicle into space let alone send a man up to jump from above the stratosphere.

People are being misled to such a degree it's just incomprehensible. Wake up!
Wandering this land with a beer in hand

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #102 on: April 26, 2013, 01:39:44 PM »
If you look at the footage at around :22 in that video, it's obviously animated and shot from a 2nd party perspective. This guy is a trained professional actor.  ::)

Yes they showed an animation... but that looked nothing like the footage from the actual jump...

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #103 on: April 26, 2013, 02:04:55 PM »
If you look at the footage at around :22 in that video, it's obviously animated and shot from a 2nd party perspective. This guy is a trained professional actor.  ::)

yeah, that part at 22 seconds does look animated but I don't think anyone was implying (no round earthers here or anyone who made the video) that that was supposed to be real footage. It is however... REAL footage of a post jump interview which is what you asked for.

?

darknavyseal

  • 439
  • Round Earth, for sure, maybe.
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #104 on: April 26, 2013, 02:25:21 PM »
You don't expect anyone to believe that technology even exits, do you? You can scour the 4 corners of the internet and not find one piece of credible evidence that suggests we have the ability to launch a vehicle into space let alone send a man up to jump from above the stratosphere.

People are being misled to such a degree it's just incomprehensible. Wake up!

Hello, skeptimatic. Is that you? Why do you make new accounts?

?

SpiroGyra

  • 9
  • Enlightenment Period Traversing Warrior
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #105 on: April 26, 2013, 04:11:59 PM »
 ???
Wandering this land with a beer in hand

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #106 on: April 26, 2013, 05:40:35 PM »
The same technology they used to film Capricorn 1.

And what is that technology ?

Sup, ZE_Pilot. I feel I should warn you about skeptimatic. Among the FE crowd, he is probably the least intelligent. Look up his post history. In the several thousands of posts he has made, he has not learned a single, I repeat, a single thing. He doesn't understand reference frames of motion, he thinks the Felix Baumgartner jump was faked, he thinks anything resembling a photo is fake....I could go on. Even the FE people encourage people to not respond to him.

He is either a classic troll...I think you know the other option. Also, Hoppy is a flat out troll.

I confirm that the time is not accurate Maryland, it is off by 2 hours and 10 minutes.

He frequently posts false or misleading information. He sometimes agrees with skeptimatic in a post, only so that post is riddled with more comments, making reading it impossibly difficult.
Regarding hoppy's comment, I believe the world clock is accurate if you are watching the sunset/sunrise from the coast. Otherwise, land mass will get in the way of the actual sunset. Also, elevation is important too.

Welcome again to the Flat Earth Society.

I'm new to this board, but I strongly believe the Felix Baumgartner jump was faked. Aside from the obvious, which you are missing, the earth is flat and to say otherwise is to venture down the path of folly.

Where is Felix Baumgartner now? Was there ever a post jump interview? None that I've seen. NASA, SETI, to name a few have perpetuated the hoax to such a degree that even these modern day "stunts" prove little other than how far we've come in creating science fiction for the masses.

Felix Baumgartner has give many interviews. He gave several just after his jump, and most recently in GQ just yesterday.

I'd post the links, but for some reason FES is not letting me. Do I smell a counter conspiracy? ??? (no I don't, conspiracy theories are for the weak minded).

EDIT: Here they are!


Obviously you have not even tried to look. Pathetic.


http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2013-04/25/felix-baumgartner-space-jump-interview

http://www.forbes.com/sites/arieladams/2012/10/25/interview-with-space-jumper-felix-baumgartner/

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/24/felix-baumgartner-the-austrian-daredevil-on-his-world-record-jump-fear-and-not-saying-goodbye/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/nov/03/felix-baumgartner-space-jump-interview

#ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Felix Baumgartner Jump Interview - CNN AC360 - Oct 24 2012

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20051474

http://www.eonline.com/news/355526/fearless-felix-baumgartner-gives-first-interview-about-record-setting-supersonic-jump

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/9636188/Fearless-Felix-Baumgartner-Mars-is-a-waste-of-money.html

This is nothing but the top few Google results by the way.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2013, 05:50:27 PM by Shmeggley »
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

?

darknavyseal

  • 439
  • Round Earth, for sure, maybe.
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #107 on: April 26, 2013, 09:29:11 PM »
???

If this is not Skeptimatic, I sincerely apologize. Your posting style is very similar to his, being that you question everything. Not that it is bad, but I actually thought he made an alt account.

Cheers.

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #108 on: April 27, 2013, 02:13:25 AM »
You don't expect anyone to believe that technology even exits, do you? You can scour the 4 corners of the internet and not find one piece of credible evidence that suggests we have the ability to launch a vehicle into space let alone send a man up to jump from above the stratosphere.

People are being misled to such a degree it's just incomprehensible. Wake up!

If you find it impossible after "scouting four corners of the internet" to find evidence for existence of helium balloons you might be doing some wrong. Just sayin'.

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #109 on: April 27, 2013, 03:54:34 AM »
What's wrong with them? Seems like your clutching at straws to be honest

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5063
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #110 on: April 27, 2013, 06:20:08 AM »
What's wrong with them? Seems like your clutching at straws to be honest
What's right with them?
Why don't you compare them and tell me if that fits.
Well, when I say that, I mean, I know it will all fit with you, because you question absolutely nothing about anything, if it's deemed a conspiracy.

Why don't you try explaining what you think is wrong with them instead of telling people it's obvious and dancing around actually putting your points in words.  For example you could say "When you compare the suits, they look nearly identical after 50 years" (I haven't compared the suits yet so I don't actually know what does look different about them).
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #111 on: April 27, 2013, 06:27:58 AM »
well don sceptic. you have shown that in 70 years technology and safety has improved. round of applause for sceptic everyone

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #112 on: April 27, 2013, 06:35:15 AM »
What's wrong with them? Seems like your clutching at straws to be honest
What's right with them?
Why don't you compare them and tell me if that fits.
Well, when I say that, I mean, I know it will all fit with you, because you question absolutely nothing about anything, if it's deemed a conspiracy.

Kittinger






Look at pictures of televisions from the 1940s and from the 1990s. Do you doubt that televisions exist too?

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5063
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #113 on: April 27, 2013, 06:39:40 AM »
What's wrong with them? Seems like your clutching at straws to be honest
What's right with them?
Why don't you compare them and tell me if that fits.
Well, when I say that, I mean, I know it will all fit with you, because you question absolutely nothing about anything, if it's deemed a conspiracy.

Why don't you try explaining what you think is wrong with them instead of telling people it's obvious and dancing around actually putting your points in words.  For example you could say "When you compare the suits, they look nearly identical after 50 years" (I haven't compared the suits yet so I don't actually know what does look different about them).
Well here's a little clue.
Felix goes up in a "pressurised" capsule.
Kittinger is a tough guy and uses none of that. He's just happy to go up in his suit inside a bloody glorified basket.
They think everyone is  stupid.

One would expect a modern capsule to be more technologically advanced than the first.  When you fly in an airplane, the cabin is pressurized, is there a problem with this?  If I'm not mistaken, Felix traveled higher than Kittinger, it would make sense that they would want to have him in a pressurized capsule.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #114 on: April 27, 2013, 06:46:20 AM »
It speaks for itself as a hoax. Come on lads, what are you actually fighting against here.  ;D
Pressurised capsule V a bag of crap capsule.

is their an argument mixed into those words somewhere? ???

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #115 on: April 27, 2013, 06:54:03 AM »
you got that

It speaks for itself as a hoax. Come on lads, what are you actually fighting against here.  ;D
Pressurised capsule V a bag of crap capsule.

is their an argument mixed into those words somewhere? ???
Yes.
Kittinger didn't go very high and neither did Felix. All they did was a parachute jump in a mock up space like suit what we are led to believe work in near vacuums.

from that
It speaks for itself as a hoax. Come on lads, what are you actually fighting against here.  ;D
Pressurised capsule V a bag of crap capsule.

how?

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #116 on: April 27, 2013, 06:54:26 AM »
It speaks for itself as a hoax. Come on lads, what are you actually fighting against here.  ;D
Pressurised capsule V a bag of crap capsule.

Kittinger used a pressurized suit. So did Baumgartner. Baumgartner also enjoyed the benefit of a pressurized capsule, Kittinger did not.

So what? Honestly it's difficult to see what you're arguing about? What is the significance of the capsules being pressurized or not?

I also don't see why FE wants to claim it was faked. A guy went up in a balloon, jumped off and landed with a parachute. So friggin' what?

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #117 on: April 27, 2013, 06:54:52 AM »
What's wrong with them? Seems like your clutching at straws to be honest
What's right with them?
Why don't you compare them and tell me if that fits.
Well, when I say that, I mean, I know it will all fit with you, because you question absolutely nothing about anything, if it's deemed a conspiracy.

Why don't you try explaining what you think is wrong with them instead of telling people it's obvious and dancing around actually putting your points in words.  For example you could say "When you compare the suits, they look nearly identical after 50 years" (I haven't compared the suits yet so I don't actually know what does look different about them).
Well here's a little clue.
Felix goes up in a "pressurised" capsule.
Kittinger is a tough guy and uses none of that. He's just happy to go up in his suit inside a bloody glorified basket.
They think everyone is  stupid.

One would expect a modern capsule to be more technologically advanced than the first.  When you fly in an airplane, the cabin is pressurized, is there a problem with this?  If I'm not mistaken, Felix traveled higher than Kittinger, it would make sense that they would want to have him in a pressurized capsule.

Yeah, Kittinger jumped from 19.5 miles while Baumgartner did it from 24 miles.

It speaks for itself as a hoax. Come on lads, what are you actually fighting against here.  ;D
Pressurised capsule V a bag of crap capsule.

is their an argument mixed into those words somewhere? ???
Yes.
Kittinger didn't go very high and neither did Felix. All they did was a parachute jump in a mock up space like suit what we are led to believe work in near vacuums.

Everything you said here was true except for your implication that we are led to believe. Once again, nobody is messing with your head but yourself. Also, that's not an argument.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #118 on: April 27, 2013, 06:58:56 AM »
It speaks for itself as a hoax. Come on lads, what are you actually fighting against here.  ;D
Pressurised capsule V a bag of crap capsule.

Kittinger used a pressurized suit. So did Baumgartner. Baumgartner also enjoyed the benefit of a pressurized capsule, Kittinger did not.

So what? Honestly it's difficult to see what you're arguing about? What is the significance of the capsules being pressurized or not?

I also don't see why FE wants to claim it was faked. A guy went up in a balloon, jumped off and landed with a parachute. So friggin' what?

the part that they have a problem with is that it has footage of the earth being round. So anything that ever implies that must be fake because they think it's a fact that the earth is flat. That's reasoning I guess.

Re: "Faked" Photographic Evidence? Pfft.
« Reply #119 on: April 27, 2013, 07:48:49 AM »
Staying on topic of these jumps. Haven't FE proponents numerous times brought up that the flat disk earth would seem round from above, or even if it's not disk-shaped but infinite or whatever it may seem circular due to bendy light, sun's spotlight illumination or something else. So, what I've been saying here is, why on whatever shape earth these jumps would be impossible? Again, it's a friggin' balloon going up and a guy jumping off then deploying a parachute. According to some that requires magic but so far there has been no explanation offered whatsoever why a high altitude jump is impossible or why these particular jumps must have been faked.