Moon Hoax Theory dead - killed by rabbit!

The images were taken by the Yutu lunar rover, more commonly known in the West as the 'Jade Rabbit', which touched down on the Moon on December 2013 as part of the Chang'e-3 Moon mission.

Of course any good conspiracy theorist will simply claim that the 'Jade Rabbit' is more evidence of the conspiracy.

Another space topic started by rabinoz  ?
So that you can criticize me when taking the bate with you usuall ‘what any of this has to do with the fact the earth is known to be a sphere for 2500 years’ ?

But i must say some really convincing copy pasting bro...... moonhoax must be dead and burried by now.....
 

Another space topic started by rabinoz  ?
So that you can criticize me when taking the bate with you usuall ‘what any of this has to do with the fact the earth is known to be a sphere for 2500 years’ ?

Well, you took the bait !

But i must say some really convincing copy pasting bro...... moonhoax must be dead and burried by now.....
 

Sure, it's dead and buried , but there seem to a lot of grave robbers, like you, that like to scrabble among the remains of these hoax ideas - good luck!

I post actual videos, that you call copy-n-paste and all you do is post is your own highly biased opinions. But since you liked BertieSlack's video so much, here's a couple more: Enjoy!
Don't worry, dutchy, I'm under no illusions that you will be influenced in the slightest! I know that you know that any and all space missions are impossible for "undisclosed reasons".

But if you want a thread on  ‘what any of this has to do with the fact the earth is known to be a sphere for 2500 years’ bring it on.

 

So glad you liked it!
And I'll leave those Greeks, Indians, Arabs, Persians, English, French and Italians that also believed the earth was a Globe right through from possibly 500 BC till the time of old Nicolaus Copernicus till another day.

Quote from: dutchy on September 28, 2018, 05:50:54 AM

So glad you liked it!
And I'll leave those Greeks, Indians, Arabs, Persians, English, French and Italians that also believed the earth was a Globe right through from possibly 500 BC till the time of old Nicolaus Copernicus till another day.

Please do !
Cherish the moment when i actually think your post is quite funny (grave robbers) ! 

Toldya ur funny.

Toldya ur funny.

Dutchy seems to think I'm trying !

Evidently one of the foundations for the Moon Landing Hoax conspiracy theory is that the photos attributed to the astronauts failed to show stars in the sky.
This is easily explained.

Keep in mind that the lunar surface is fairly beige or sandy colored -- that is to say, much lighter colored than if it were covered with grass -- and that the sun beats down on that surface with no clouds or atmosphere to moderate it -- in other words, very strong and bright sunlight on a light colored moonscape.  Using ordinary brownie-type cameras would have resulted in only useless photos completely washed out by the intense sunlight.  It was necessary, in those circumstances, to use filters and film that would tone down the strength of the sunlight, much like sunglasses, in order to get usable photos of the moon's surface.  However the same sunglasses effect would dim out the stars in the sky. 

Arguably the astronauts could have pointed a brownie-type camera (without filters) toward the sky and gotten lots of stars, but such photos had already been taken by satellites and automated spacecraft that didn't land on the moon, and the mission at hand was devoted to discoveries on the moon's surface so that particular photo-op was ignored.

I agree the mission on the moon was focussed on planting a flag, doing some handy manouvres with a moonrover, singing a jolly good (country?) song, playing golf (slice?), showing a hammer and a feather (American eagle ?) fall at the same rate on the moon, making lots of photographs (A quality Hasselblad !) of the scenery including an Apollo vehicle, Apollo astronaut, backdrop mountains preferable all three together, have a nice chat with president Nixon (landline office desk phone !), plant a laser reflector for the future scientists that like to bounce lazers off the moon, gather some moonrocks (petrified ?), walk to the shade and take your time to adjust to report seeing stars (few ?) to ground control and more....

If one is on the moon, make sure it is time well spend.
 

Another space topic started by rabinoz  ?
So that you can criticize me when taking the bate with you usuall ‘what any of this has to do with the fact the earth is known to be a sphere for 2500 years’ ?

But i must say some really convincing copy pasting bro...... moonhoax must be dead and burried by now.....
 

If you can show that NASA is in fact not lying about the moon landing, it is pretty damning to the flat earth argument that everything that NASA says is a lie.

I agree the mission on the moon was focussed on planting a flag, doing some handy manouvres with a moonrover, singing a jolly good (country?) song, playing golf (slice?), showing a hammer and a feather (American eagle ?) fall at the same rate on the moon, making lots of photographs (A quality Hasselblad !) of the scenery including an Apollo vehicle, Apollo astronaut, backdrop mountains preferable all three together, have a nice chat with president Nixon (landline office desk phone !), plant a laser reflector for the future scientists that like to bounce lazers off the moon, gather some moonrocks (petrified ?), walk to the shade and take your time to adjust to report seeing stars (few ?) to ground control and more....

If one is on the moon, make sure it is time well spend.

Ridicule all you like, but the Lunar Missions were predominantly a part of the "cold war" to show the Soviets that they could not dominate space exploration unchallenged.
That was the justification for the tremendous amount of resources, money and number of scientists dedicated to the project.
Possibly that effort was not warranted but there have been tremendous spinoffs in technology.
I guess they would have come anyway but over a longer period, which might not have been all that as technology has probably advanced too fast anyway.

After Apollo 11 showed that it could be done the US administration lost interest and cut much of the funding and NASA has had to "beg" ever since.

Now there are "plans" for crewed lunar and Mars mission but if they happen the development will be over a much longer period unless some Santa Claus with bottomless pockets turns up.

Simply repeating the Apollo missions might not be that hard, just expensive, but what would be the point?
That's been done and those conspirards that think the Apollo missions hoaxes will think the same about any new ones .
"Faking" things is so much easier now!Information can be gathered almost as well with "robotic" missions and life support is not needed for "robots".
Humans are such squishy delicate things that need such careful environmental controls.

These days sending a "lunar reconnaissance orbiter" or a "rover" to the moon is comparatively easy but a crewed mission would still need a roket comparable to the Saturn.
The early Russian Lunakod 2 rover had a mass of only 840 kg whereas the  Apollo 17 put 48,607 kg into lunar to land the LM with landing mass of 5500 kg.
Human crew have to be brought home to earth but robotic rovers don't.

Oops, sorry!
1) Apart from that " Oh so genuine BFR Launch video" I forgot all the copy-n-paste stuff  you love so much but
2) it doesn't matter because you'll take no notice anyway.

My post was an accurate summery of the superficial moon activities that had priority during Apollo.
If you cannot appreciate the way i presented it in a humerous way is up to you.

However i would expect the following ingredients to be part of the late sixties early seventies moon missions.

Take a special camera (at least during ONE mission) to take as many specialised pictures of mother earth from the lunar surface as possible,..... you ain't getting a better view.
And you know like the incredible detailed P900 consumer's camera is able to achieve from earth ( in an atmosphere ) capturing the much smaller moon.
The few pictures from earth taken during Apollo are a travesty and are hardly showing anything that could not be easily faked.... simply to little all things considered.

Point a camera to capture the 'ten times brighter and numerous stars' that Edgar Mitchell saw from the cambine's window during a manouvre that placed the CM in the most ideal position that using only your eyes revealed the best star sighting ever seen by humans.
Or preferable attach an outboard camera pointed towards the stars in the pre Hubble era.
It seems the stars were treated like the plague during the entire Apollo program.
Nobody likes to talk about stars, don't want to capture stars on film, simply ignore the trillions of stars and claim it wasn't part of the mission , the human eye is simply to insufficiant to adjust to stars and more insane excuses of Apollo mercenaries.

Do some real moon gravity and other experiments that aren't easily faked like the hammer and feather experiment.

What a load of absolute horse shit, Dutchy.

Plenty of stars were captured using Nikon, Hasselblad, and custom camera's. They also tried to capture stars with a 16mm film camera, using ultra-high speed B/W (I think the document said the film was pushed to 6400 or even higher, not sure) film, and relatively long exposures for a 16mm camera, but I do not think this experiment returned any useful results.

Apollo astronauts did indeed talk about stars during the missions.

As for photos of Earth, many hundreds were taken.

What would you define as "could not easily be faked" ?

Any Hasselblad camera mated with a Carl Zeiss lens will absolutely destroy a P900, they arent even in the same league.

Moon Hoax Theory dead - killed by rabbit! BertieSlack

Quote

The images were taken by the Yutu lunar rover, more commonly known in the West as the 'Jade Rabbit', which touched down on the Moon on December 2013 as part of the Chang'e-3 Moon mission.

Of course any good conspiracy theorist will simply claim that the 'Jade Rabbit' is more evidence of the conspiracy.

Nope

My post was an accurate summery of the superficial moon activities that had priority during Apollo.
If you cannot appreciate the way i presented it in a humerous way is up to you.

It may or may not have been accurate but it was presented with the intent to ridicule and ridicule is about the only argument you have.

However i would expect the following ingredients to be part of the late sixties early seventies moon missions.

It's a pity then that you weren't there then to advise NASA, isn't it?
But I guess that NASA didn't foresee conspiratards like your mob. That was remiss of them but they couldn't forsee everything!

Take a special camera (at least during ONE mission) to take as many specialised pictures of mother earth from the lunar surface as possible,..... you ain't getting a better view.
And you know like the incredible detailed P900 consumer's camera is able to achieve from earth ( in an atmosphere ) capturing the much smaller moon.

Why?
The Nikon P900 is garbage compared to the Hasselblad 500 EL used on the moon and would have been impossible to use on the moon!
And there is the other "slight problem"! There were no cameras comparable to the P900 or P1000 in the 1970's.
The only way to get high resolution was to use a high quality large format (not 35 mm) film camera and the Hasselblad was probably the best.

Notice the big levers enabling the camera to be used with gloved hands.

---

But what do you mean by "capturing the much smaller moon"?
The angular size of the moon, viewed from earth, is typically about 32′ of arc and its apparent magnitude is about -12.6.
Compare this to a very large bright star, Betelgeuse, with an angular size estimated to be about 0.05" of arc and an apparent magnitude of 0.42.
This makes the apparent size of the moon typically 38,400 times larger than that of  the large bright star Betelgeuse and 161,440 times brighter (more light).

The moon is trivially easy to photograph from earth. Even on my little Lumix DMC-TZ60 I get this sort of photo:But on Apollo 16 a special far-UV astronomical telescope was taken to the moon!This was done because the earth's atmosphere blocks far-UV.

Dutchy, you have no idea what you are talking about!

The few pictures from earth taken during Apollo are a travesty and are hardly showing anything that could not be easily faked.... simply to little all things considered.

What on earth are you talking about? They were not there to photograph earth but to do research on the moon. Nevertheless here's just a few easily found ones:

Point a camera to capture the 'ten times brighter and numerous stars' that Edgar Mitchell saw from the cambine's window during a manouvre that placed the CM in the most ideal position that using only your eyes revealed the best star sighting ever seen by humans.

What on earth is a "cambine's window"? I honestly have no idea!

But stars are NOT 'ten times brighter' in space than on earth though they would be far more numerous to well adjusted eyes.
They could easily seem "'ten times brighter' in space than on earth" because the background would be so black with none of the "air glow" we get on earth.
The human eye is very poor at judging brightness. But they were not there to photograph stars!

Or preferable attach an outboard camera pointed towards the stars in the pre Hubble era.

Why? They simply did not have the equipment to match the large telescopes on earth so why would they waste their time with that?

It seems the stars were treated like the plague during the entire Apollo program.
Nobody likes to talk about stars, don't want to capture stars on film, simply ignore the trillions of stars and claim it wasn't part of the mission , the human eye is simply to insufficiant to adjust to stars and more insane excuses of Apollo mercenaries.

Rubbish! It's simply that you totally ignore the explanations given.
The human eye can adjust to stars but:

• Not in the presence of bright objects in the field of view.
• Not with a reflective visor that is darker than most sunglasses.
• Proper adjustment can take over 20 minutes as any ship's lookout will tell you.

Do some real moon gravity and other experiments that aren't easily faked like the hammer and feather experiment.

They did. Go and read: Apollo 14 Surface Journal, Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum
What else would you suggest?

But how do you suggest that they faked the 7 hours 37 minutes continuous lunar surface excursion during the Apollo 17 mission.
That would require a high speed video disk recorder that could record continuously for some 19 hours (unless my sums are wrong) - not possible in 1972!

By the way, why are you so against the lunar landings.
Lunar landings are far from the only evidence that show that the earth is not flat.
Those ancient Greeks did. The slightly less ancient Arabs, Persians, English and Indians did. The early Italians, Danish, Germans and French did.
At least they all made observations and measurements that were quite inconsistent with a flat earth.
Even the old Dutch navigators used terrestrial Globes to plan out their voyages.
And it was Gerardus Mercator, "a 16th-century German-Flemish cartographer, geographer and cosmographer" who gave the world the Mercator pojection of the Globe that made early navigation easier.

Rab, about your post before mine, not denying anything you said, but I spotted an issue.

The last 2 photos of your 5 of Earth from the Moon aren't actual photos taken by Apollo Astronauts. The 4th obviously edited, and the 5th is a composite of two images (one of Earth-rise, the other of Aldrin descending the ladder). The 3rd I'm not as sure about, but it could be from a spacecraft. Though I'd need a link to the source to determine that.

As for other photos of Earth taken by Apollo astronauts, check the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of the Earth:

https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/

and specific missions (not every photo is of Earth, but a lot are):

Apollo 7
Apollo 8
Apollo 9
Apollo 10
Apollo 11
Apollo 12
Apollo 13
Apollo 14
Apollo 15
Apollo 16
Apollo 17

Also unmanned missions:

Apollo 4
Apollo 6

It does seem like there could be a few missing as well, especially for Apollo 14, which is lacking quite a bit of photos. Any others can be found here: https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/

P.S.
The gateway has photos from essentially all missions. Not just Apollo

Rab, about your post before mine, not denying anything you said, but I spotted an issue.

The last 2 photos of your 5 of Earth from the Moon aren't actual photos taken by Apollo Astronauts. The 4th obviously edited,

Let dutchy have his fun though he'll just say that none of them "look right" to his "trained eye". Might we ascribe the 4th to a Carolyn Mariegard?

and the 5th is a composite of two images (one of Earth-rise, the other of Aldrin descending the ladder). The 3rd I'm not as sure about, but it could be from a spacecraft. Though I'd need a link to the source to determine that.

As for other photos of Earth taken by Apollo astronauts, check the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of the Earth:

https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/

and specific missions (not every photo is of Earth, but a lot are):

Apollo 7, Apollo 8, Apollo 9, Apollo 10, Apollo 11, Apollo 12, Apollo 13, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16, Apollo 17

Also unmanned missions:

Apollo 4, Apollo 6

It does seem like there could be a few missing as well, especially for Apollo 14, which is lacking quite a bit of photos. Any others can be found here: https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/

P.S.
The gateway has photos from essentially all missions. Not just Apollo

Thanks. But I get "Error: missing query results file" from those links.

The stars not being visible has already been answered. And dutchy was caught red-handed not wanting to ask about that specific thing from his partner, who, according to him, is or has been a photographer.

Ostrich defence.

This is actually maybe the most intellectually dishonest thing someone can do.

1. They claim something
2. Their claim is disputed
3. There is a way to verify said claim by the person who presented it
4. They choose not to, as they are afraid the answer does not fit their narrative
5. Keep on trucking, knowing what they claim is false, like that would make it real

It's all academic anyway.  Once commercial tourism becomes prevalent that flat earth as a concept will be dead.  We're rapidly marching towards that inevitability.

Mike

That makes me feel good. It is quite petty to feel this way, but I can't help it.

It's all academic anyway.  Once commercial tourism becomes prevalent that flat earth as a concept will be dead.  We're rapidly marching towards that inevitability.

Mike

Don't you believe it!
Plenty of people visit and explore Antarctica, including the South Pole itself, yet FEers still claim that there is no single point South Pole.

More evidence simply strengthens conspiracy theorists' resolve. They regard the extra evidence is simply a further manifestation of "the conspiracy".

Thanks. But I get "Error: missing query results file" from those links.

Weird. Well I guess you can go to the search function, go to the bottom where you can search by camera roll, and type in “AS04”, “AS06”, “AS07”, “AS08”, and so forth to AS17

Rab, about your post before mine, not denying anything you said, but I spotted an issue.

The last 2 photos of your 5 of Earth from the Moon aren't actual photos taken by Apollo Astronauts. The 4th obviously edited, and the 5th is a composite of two images (one of Earth-rise, the other of Aldrin descending the ladder). The 3rd I'm not as sure about, but it could be from a spacecraft. Though I'd need a link to the source to determine that.

As for other photos of Earth taken by Apollo astronauts, check the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of the Earth:

https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/

and specific missions (not every photo is of Earth, but a lot are):

Apollo 7
Apollo 8
Apollo 9
Apollo 10
Apollo 11
Apollo 12
Apollo 13
Apollo 14
Apollo 15
Apollo 16
Apollo 17

Also unmanned missions:

Apollo 4
Apollo 6

It does seem like there could be a few missing as well, especially for Apollo 14, which is lacking quite a bit of photos. Any others can be found here: https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/

P.S.
The gateway has photos from essentially all missions. Not just Apollo

I am working on scanning several of the missing Apollo 14 photos, once done the files will be published. Scans from low-res prints are done at 300 DPI and high-red prints at 800 DPI. This may seem low, but the prints are 20 by 24 inch, so the resulting scan frames are massive. I need to scan each print in 6 sections even with my Epson Perfection V750 which has quite a large scannerbed!

The 3rd image = AS11-44-6548

This archive is very expansive as wel, contains some photos not found in other archives. The files are saved as  highres-TIFFs: http://tothemoon.ser.asu.edu/

I am working on scanning several of the missing Apollo 14 photos, once done the files will be published. Scans from low-res prints are done at 300 DPI and high-red prints at 800 DPI. This may seem low, but the prints are 20 by 24 inch, so the resulting scan frames are massive. I need to scan each print in 6 sections even with my Epson Perfection V750 which has quite a large scannerbed!

The 3rd image = AS11-44-6548

This archive is very expansive as wel, contains some photos not found in other archives. The files are saved as  highres-TIFFs: http://tothemoon.ser.asu.edu/

I love To The Moon! Has tons of unseen mercury and gemini photos.

Another great resource for Apollo photos is here (This also has AS04 and AS06): https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/

Definitely message the Apollo Flight Journal, Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, Project Apollo Archive, and Apollo Image Archive editors with your photos when you get the scans done. They'd love to add the photos to their collections, and I'd love to see them as well. Maybe buy a print from you.