• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

Doesn't follow. Their film magazine was designed by Kodak to take literally hundreds of photos. Of course Kodak would allow for dud shots.
bracketing a shot with one over and one under would mean only a third of the photos would be of different subjects.

What's the point when you know what the light level is going to be for every shot?
 
Nobody said it can't. But remember how the Soviets had their module crashed into the surface (they claim) just before Apollo 11, in an effort to beat them? So whilst landing on earth, one has the buoyancy of air to help deaccelerate - hence the multiple parachutes and rapid deacceleration on earth-reentry and splashdown - and into an ocean - there is no atmosphere on the Moon, no air to cushion the impact with the ground, and no body of water. Being 1/6th of Earth's gravity doesn't make it any less highly dangerous.
That's why they practiced and used a lander specifically designed for the job
 
Err! Obviously.

But.....

Jay wrote:
Water is not the propellant. Water is the thing the propellant will be made from.

You replied
Err! Obviously

Yet just a few minutes previously you, Vixen, had written:
It is to use this water as rocket propellent.
(Post #4812)

I'm sure I heard talk of someone being hoist by their own petard............
 
Err, you were claiming that if they found "oxygen" (hahaha) on the Moon, they would need to process it in order to make water. But precisely the opposite is true: it's the very components of water - hydrogen and oxygen - which need to be separated in order to be usable as part of a rocket's propellant.

You don't know what you're talking about.

The point is, sorry I should have explained it more simply, oxygen levels on the Moon are far lower than on the Earth. Hence, little or no water. That is why the discovery of these 'ice craters' so to speak are notable. In addition, could possibly help in refuelling spacecraft.

Clear now?
 
Oh come on. You are a wedding photographer or just an amateur photographer taking a pic of the smiling couple or your kid newly-born or at their graduation. You take just one pic...? Missed taking a pic of the blushing bride apart from one, when she had her back to you? There is just one pic of Armstrong by Aldrin. Really? Yet Armstrong was the first man on the Moon. And a very poor pic at that.
There aren't any pictures of the person that took my wedding photos
 
The point is, sorry I should have explained it more simply...
You should have explained it correctly. You did not, therefore people who are better informed than you corrected you.

...oxygen levels on the Moon are far lower than on the Earth.
Lunar rocks and dust are crawling with oxides.

Hence, little or no water. That is why the discovery of these 'ice craters' so to speak are notable.
Yes, the prospect of water ice on the Moon is promising in several ways. That doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. When you say "oxygen" was discovered, you're just badly wrong.
 
Last edited:
Do you imagine the Apollo astronauts left their spacecraft while passing the Van Allen belts?

There was only the thin aluminium walls of the spacecraft and as Trevor Weaver points out, Houston didn't ask them how they felt once they'd [supposedly] passed through the Belts, which one would expect given, (a) it's the first time, (b) the real hazards of radiation sickness and (c) it had Van Allen on the NASA team who highlighted the dangers in his 1958 paper. On splashdown, the astronauts were squirted with antiseptic. Thus, radiation was never a problem here and we have to ask why.

The Gemini AIU was modified to be safer. So the issue was spotted.
 
Sounds like a good summary of the character you play here.

The more apposite - and scarily accurate - part of the wikipedia description of Peppermint Patty is as follows:

Peppermint Patty is noted for her persistent habit of profoundly misunderstanding basic concepts and ideas that most people would consider obvious and blindly ignoring any counsel against her latest fixation, resulting in embarrassments and inconveniences that she blames on those who warned her.
 
How? Set up the same Hasselblads with the settings, accordingly.
In what universe is that a meaningful response to
No that is a ridiculous point. The cameras had 2 f-stop settings and a single shutter speed. The exposure settings were basically fixed for phots in sunlight or shadow. How were they supposed to "bracket" exposures with a fixed shutter speed and 2 f-stop settings?
...
 
The point is, sorry I should have explained it more simply, oxygen levels on the Moon are far lower than on the Earth. Hence, little or no water. That is why the discovery of these 'ice craters' so to speak are notable. In addition, could possibly help in refuelling spacecraft.

Clear now?

Oh dear, no. And I see Jay has now explained the situation to you. Try harder to actually get things right.
 
The trick is to get them to agree to sit for the photos before the ceremony. My mentor was adept at getting people to abandon the custom that the bride and groom should not see each other until the Moment.

Good plan, but not always possible, the bride's arrival is often an 'event' moment (60s Lincoln in one case) and they wanted it to flow from that, and another where reception, where they wanted the post ceremony group photos was several miles from the church where everyone arrived.

TBH I wouldn't do it now, too many people with their phones getting in the way because they think they'll do a better job than the official photographer. [OT] A traditional shot in the UK is the signing of the Wedding
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom