Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[zooterkin]

People go to film and photography school to learn all this stuff.

When do you start? Because so far you've not shown that you've learnt anything about photography.

(I was in the photography club at school, and learnt a bit from my dad, whose hobby it was. After a long gap, I started with digital cameras in 2012, with a few tutorial sessions with different instructors. Then, in the last six years, I've studied from a Level 3 qualification up to a BA (Hons) in Photography. That said, it's quite possible to be self-taught, and there are innumerable resources out there, on the internet, in books and in camera clubs, etc. There is absolutely no excuse for your ignorance.)

 

[Carrot Flower King]

Have we got round to the rock samples?

We had some of those in the Sheffield geology department as one of our lecturers was a national (if not international) expert in planetary geology, so I'm looking forward to the "explanations" of those...Especially as I seem to recall some, errrrrr, issues around geology a long while ago.

 

[Foster Zygote]

This is an understatement.

The scientific community very much wanted to put a trained scientist on a crew. NASA's position was that since the Apollo spacecraft were experimental spacecraft, there was no room for passengers. Every crew member would need to fulfill a flight role. Schmidt was sent to the Air Force training academy. This was not just a run-of-the-mill flight school, but the school that trained future fighter pilots and test pilots. He graduated second in his class. Not only did he become a competent pilot, he became an expert pilot.

Further, understanding his relative inexperience in engineering, he would borrow manuals from engineers and take them home at night to read. The next day he would have a list of questions to ask the engineers. By the time he flew his mission, the Apollo engineers and other test pilots considered him to be an expert in Apollo systems and procedures.

These are the people @Vixen wants to accuse of being frauds.

I've long been a big fan of Pete Conrad, who overcame dyslexia to earn an engineering degree from Princeton, become a naval aviator, and fly into space four times. My dad, born in 1938, is dyslexic. He, like young Conrad, was often dismissed by teachers as "dim" because he struggled with reading, yet he's anything but. My dad has always been intensely curious, especially about science and technology, and I'm sure if he'd been able to get the training in the sort of systems approach that helped Conrad, he'd have been a voracious reader (he's not illiterate, reading is just difficult for him). Today a student like him would be identified with no problem. A teacher would say, "I've got this kid who's really good at math, does perfectly fine with verbal language, but is struggling with written language. He needs to be tested for dyslexia or something like it". But back then dyslexia was little understood compared to today. Not that my dad didn't do well in life. Like I said, he's smart. He did well in the Air Force, very much enjoying it, until a medical discharge. Then he became a printer, running giant, four-color presses, eventually becoming a shop forman highly respected for his expertise with such immensely complex machines. But I still wonder what options would have been open to him if he hadn't been dyslexic, or had learned to compensate for it.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Here's a picture I took in January on a sunny day looking across the marsh towards the Cleveland Hills.
It's one of a few I grabbed on my phone as I was walking to the shops.
The sun is in the frame and as JayUtah says, it's overexposed but you can still see the marsh and hills.

View attachment 72262

More than a few like that in the Apollo archives.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Have we got round to the rock samples?

We had some of those in the Sheffield geology department as one of our lecturers was a national (if not international) expert in planetary geology, so I'm looking forward to the "explanations" of those...Especially as I seem to recall some, errrrrr, issues around geology a long while ago.

I'm anticipating a regurgitation of the Willem Drees petrified wood claim.

 

[JayUtah]

More than a few like that in the Apollo archives.

I'm fairly sure @Vixen believes that if you aim your camera toward the Sun, the "glare" will make the photo completely unusable. She doesn't seem to understand that different parts of a focused image are exposed to different degrees and that this is how photography works.

I'm encouraged by how many people in this thread have at least some combination of self-teaching and formal education in photography. This is really what happened when Kaysing, Allen, Percy, and others first tried out the "no stars!" argument. There was widespread laughter from the many, many people who understood the basics of photography and had some experience in it. It has been among the dumbest hoax claims for decades.

 

[steenkh]

Well, a two-year-old can point out Venus. It's sad that is all the astronauts could identify.

I’m sure the astronauts could point out much more than Venus, but why should they? They were not there to look at the stars or planets.

 

[Steve]

Here's a picture I took in January on a sunny day looking across the marsh towards the Cleveland Hills.
It's one of a few I grabbed on my phone as I was walking to the shops.
The sun is in the frame and as JayUtah says, it's overexposed but you can still see the marsh and hills.

View attachment 72262

"My God, it's full of stars!"

 

[Carrot Flower King]

I'm anticipating a regurgitation of the Willem Drees petrified wood claim.

Bugger! I'd managed to purge that one from my memory...

 

[Andy_Ross]

Have we got round to the rock samples?

We had some of those in the Sheffield geology department as one of our lecturers was a national (if not international) expert in planetary geology, so I'm looking forward to the "explanations" of those...Especially as I seem to recall some, errrrrr, issues around geology a long while ago.

They were made in a radiation oven

 

[JayUtah]

They were made in a radiation oven

Sorry for the unkind opinion, but Bill Kaysing was just so very ignorant.

 

[Foster Zygote]

I'm fairly sure @Vixen believes that if you aim your camera toward the Sun, the "glare" will make the photo completely unusable. She doesn't seem to understand that different parts of a focused image are exposed to different degrees and that this is how photography works.

I'm encouraged by how many people in this thread have at least some combination of self-teaching and formal education in photography. This is really what happened when Kaysing, Allen, Percy, and others first tried out the "no stars!" argument. There was widespread laughter from the many, many people who understood the basics of photography and had some experience in it. It has been among the dumbest hoax claims for decades.

And while the Apollo crews were using photography as a documentary tool, there are also a great many photographers who engage in it as an art form, deliberately using such camera artifacts to achieve desired effects. Take the cover of Pink Floyd's Obscured By Clouds:


And again, the Apollo crews weren't going for artsy fartsy, but even the less than perfect images are still of historical value.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

They were made in a radiation oven

You could be on to something: at Sheffield in those days geology was in the same set of buildings as chemical engineering and the like and ◊◊◊◊ knows what those buggers got up to.

 

[Foster Zygote]

I’m sure the astronauts could point out much more than Venus, but why should they? They were not there to look at the stars or planets.

If I mention to a friend that I saw a '66 Chevy Corvair Monza, it doesn't logically follow that I don't know that the car behind it was a Toyota Camry.

And if Vixen really thinks that a two year old can point to Venus and identify it, I have to wonder what experience she's had with children. "My two-year-old pointed out Venus and Jupiter to me, and then he pooped in his pants."

 

[JayUtah]

And again, the Apollo crews weren't going for artsy fartsy, but even the less than perfect images are still of historical value.

A very few have achieved iconic art status as photographic images. Astronaut Alan Bean went on to become a fairly talented painter and used his Apollo photography as reference for his space art.

 

[bknight]

I'm fairly sure @Vixen believes that if you aim your camera toward the Sun, the "glare" will make the photo completely unusable. She doesn't seem to understand that different parts of a focused image are exposed to different degrees and that this is how photography works.

I'm encouraged by how many people in this thread have at least some combination of self-teaching and formal education in photography. This is really what happened when Kaysing, Allen, Percy, and others first tried out the "no stars!" argument. There was widespread laughter from the many, many people who understood the basics of photography and had some experience in it. It has been among the dumbest hoax claims for decades.

There is an image of the sun during A12, very bright, but the rest of the image was ok.

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollopanoramas/pans/?pan=JSC2007e045376

 

[bknight]

Sorry for the unkind opinion, but Bill Kaysing was just so very ignorant.

you are too kind.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

And while the Apollo crews were using photography as a documentary tool, there are also a great many photographers who engage in it as an art form, deliberately using such camera artifacts to achieve desired effects. Take the cover of Pink Floyd's Obscured By Clouds:
View attachment 72269

And again, the Apollo crews weren't going for artsy fartsy, but even the less than perfect images are still of historical value.

Off topic, but this is the album I did the cover for. It wasn't a shot I particularly liked tbh, I preferred the interior art that I took at the same shoot, but the artist did and that's what mattered. It's entirely in camera, the only digital editing I did was to remove the guitar stand. The guitar was black in real life.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/The-World-Through-a-Glass/dp/B002IFOEFC

 

[Foster Zygote]

Sorry for the unkind opinion, but Bill Kaysing was just so very ignorant.

One of his most laughable bit of "evidence" involved his 'vacuum chamber glove' demonstration. It was bad enough that he used an industrial rubber glove instead of the A7L glove designed specifically to be usable when pressurized, but he evacuated his glass tank to a near vacuum, not understanding that the A7L wasn't inflated to earth sea level pressure of ~14.7 psi, but only 3.7 psi. He didn't understand pressure differential. To be accurate, in addition to a proper glove, he'd need to evacuate his chamber down to just 3.7 psi under ambient pressure. Guy was as much an engineer as he was the reincarnation of Napoleon.

 

[SpitfireIX]

It has been corrected to 250K because that is how we accountants speak.

No, that's not how "we" accountants speak. (As a reminder, and for anyone new, I'm a former accountant.) You pulled that out of an orifice, as usual, just like your BS claim that "nano" is British slang for "super-tiny," to try to pretend that you didn't put your foot in it yet again.