Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[JayUtah]

Still a dumb argument. If astronomers can check to see if the stars are in the right places, then NASA could have put them in the right places.

And if astronomers and photographers rightly expect stars then their absence is immediately suspicious.

 

[Ranb]

Oh, yeah, the "I'm an expert because I worked on a nuclear submarine" guy.

I was so shocked when I saw that post where he responded to requests about his field of expertise. I put on my gloves and pounded away with context.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Well, the debunkers concentrate on things such as shutter speed and film quality as being unable to cope with the brightness of the ground, and the glare from the sun.

What the ◊◊◊◊ do you even think that means? It's not a matter of "coping", it's a matter of film sensitivity and exposure time. The inability to expose stars with the settings used isn't a failure of the equipment. It just doesn't work that way.

The deniers, such as Allen, points out that the galactic cosmic radiation would have damaged the gelatin layer (being of organic material), transparency film gives off solvents and the silver halide grains would likewise be affected and would cause the type of classic fogging we see in film that has been exposed to this type of radiation.

And they're full of ◊◊◊◊. They lied to people who want to believe the lie because it tells them that they're super-dooper smart.

As you know, Ilford had [has?] a superfast 1200 version, so one can`t even claim ASA 600 was the fastest.

When was that available?

And? Since ASA is a linear scale, we (well most of us) can do the math to see how much more sensitive that is than ASA 160. It turns out that the sensitivity increase for 1,200 film would be equivalent to 160 film exposed 7.5x as long. So instead of 0.008 seconds of exposure, it would be like leaving the shutter open for 0.06 seconds. So if you exposed the film starlight for, say, 20 seconds with ASA 160, that would be equivalent to 2⅔ seconds with ASA 1,200. That's still 44x longer than the longest exposure times used on the Hasselblads.

 

[Foster Zygote]

The Nevada desert bit is a nice touch. Brings in the whole Area 51 vibe.

Plus it looks exactly like the surface of the moon.

 

[EHocking]

Still a dumb argument. If astronomers can check to see if the stars are in the right places, then NASA could have put them in the right places.

And, of course, the Apollo 16 crew placed the Far Ultraviolet Camera/Spectrograph that, amongst many more important experiments, recorded Star and galaxy positions as seen from the surface of the moon.

They Probably intended to use that to photoshop stars into the Apollo 17 photos.

 

[bknight]

Oh, good. The only Tim Finch I remembered was a serial killer character in Unforgotten.

Thanks for the link, I reread about 20 pages of his getting his head handed to hm by Jay and he didn't recognize that fact or didn't admit it. In his sock posts he never again admitted to his "radiation education or that he was in a nuke boat, but as they say you can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy.
Ranb did the first link and the thanks should be attributed to both he and Trebuchet.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

I was so shocked when I saw that post where he responded to requests about his field of expertise. I put on my gloves and pounded away with context.

His whole fantasy of dropping knowledge on the sheeple fell apart in real time. It was glorious.

 

[catsmate]

Or, simpler still...just use the TET-RA satellite in LEO.

Why bother using an unsuitable experimental satellite at all, to solve a non existent problem?
All this has been explained to you.

 

[catsmate]

The `advantage` surely would be that people could compare the constellations as seen on the Apollo11 pics, with those taken by the aforementioned telescopes. This, of course, would only be a problem if they weren`t there, where they said they were. So it becomes expedient to simply leave the stars out and blame the film.

More puerile conspiratorial rubbish.

 

[catsmate]

The deniers, such as Allen, points out that the galactic cosmic radiation would have damaged the gelatin layer (being of organic material),

As hass been pointed out, by people far more knowledgeable than you, this is utter nonsense.

 

[catsmate]

Only in your ad hoc opinion.

Again, stop using terms you don't understand, if just makes you appear more stupid.

 

[Mojo]

And? Since ASA is a linear scale, we (well most of us) can do the math to see how much more sensitive that is than ASA 160. It turns out that the sensitivity increase for 1,200 film would be equivalent to 160 film exposed 7.5x as long. So instead of 0.008 seconds of exposure, it would be like leaving the shutter open for 0.06 seconds. So if you exposed the film starlight for, say, 20 seconds with ASA 160, that would be equivalent to 2⅔ seconds with ASA 1,200. That's still 44x longer than the longest exposure times used on the Hasselblads.

And it would also result in reduced exposures being necessary to photograph objects in sunlight. The ratio of the exposures needed for sunlit objects to those needed for stars wouldn't change.

Film speed is not relevant to the issue.

 

[Axxman300]

If the satellite images were coming from TET-R

What is a TET-RA satellite?

which was a series of satellites used in space training in the Nevada deser

Why would we use satellites to train for space...in Nevada?

well, how much easier is it to transmit `live tv` broadcasts from there?

Why Nevada? And why would it be harder to broadcast from somewhere else?

 

[Darat]

The Nevada desert bit is a nice touch. Brings in the whole Area 51 vibe.

I think that comes from the documentary Capricorn One...

 

[Carrot Flower King]

So, Humpty Dumpty, having been kicked out of the bar in that rather ornate Middle European hotel, has wandered off, taking Finn Mac Cool, Sweeney and MacPhellimey the pooka with him, planted a very large patch of mulberry bushes, hired Ouroboros to guard said patch and they are all getting merrily pissed on fermented mulberry juice...

That is about where we've got to, isn't it?

 

[Mojo]

Why would we use satellites to train for space...in Nevada?

Geopositioning requires them to be on the surface of the earth.

 

[Foster Zygote]

His whole fantasy of dropping knowledge on the sheeple fell apart in real time. It was glorious.

And oddly familiar.

 

[Steve]

So, Humpty Dumpty, having been kicked out of the bar in that rather ornate Middle European hotel, has wandered off, taking Finn Mac Cool, Sweeney and MacPhellimey the pooka with him, planted a very large patch of mulberry bushes, hired Ouroboros to guard said patch and they are all getting merrily pissed on fermented mulberry juice...

That is about where we've got to, isn't it?

This would be an excellent response to all future Vixen posts. Should be copied for use bt all in this thread.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

This would be an excellent response to all future Vixen posts. Should be copied for use bt all in this thread.

Feel free to use it.

 

[Axxman300]

I think that comes from the documentary Capricorn One...

The original moon-landing hoax crowd claimed it was filmed in a hangar in New Mexico, not Nevada, because Groom Lake was still off the general public's radar. And it's classic CT blundering since all CTs evolve over time. It ignores the basic fact that between the Army, Navy, USAF, and a host of defense contractors there were hundreds of secure locations to use as a sound stage. The other irony is Groom Lake is part of the Nevada test range, only a few miles from where we tested our "crowd pleasers"...so there was probably more radiation in the soil there (depending on the wind) than there ever will be on the moon.