Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[BazBear]

Radio transmissions between the workmen and Mission Control as they worked to put the fake LMs on the Moon and flags:

Bob 1 ere this flag you want planted it looks weird, I haved asked Bob 2 about it Houston but he thinks its ok should we carry on?

MC: ROger Bob 1 carry on

Bob 1 Righto whens the tea break?

MC: when you run around in the Lunar Rover a bit

Bob 2: the bloody radar crew have nicked me spanners again how am I going to stir my tea now, Houston we have a problem....

Wow, the Brits were in on it too? It's way bigger than we thought...

 

[Belz...]

Wow, the Brits were in on it too? It's way bigger than we thought...

Impossible. The conspiracy includes pretty much everyone already.

 

[threadworm]

Impossible. The conspiracy includes pretty much everyone already.

That bit in "Invasion of the body snatchers" where the hero realises he's the only one left.

Welcome to FatFreddy's world

 

[Peter May]

I sent an email to Mosfilm yesterday asking for information, but no reply yet. What is interesting is that the Russian in question Vsevolod Yakubovich who according to Percy graduated from the All-Union State Cinema Institute (VGIK) in 1968 has just realise that there is something wrong with the moon rover and decides to make a 2min video´
It is very important to understand the nature of what we see, and not what we want to see. Peter May

 

[drewid]

Can you summarise it here in this thread?

 

[JayUtah]

What is interesting is that the Russian in question Vsevolod Yakubovich who according to Percy graduated from the All-Union State Cinema Institute (VGIK) in 1968 has just realise that there is something wrong with the moon rover and decides to make a 2min video

Do they teach forensic analysis of photographs there? The reason Percy won't talk to me anymore is because he wants you to think that training in photography is the same as training in photographic analysis, and he knows that I can expose his fraud.

They aren't the same techniques; and numerous photo analysts have taken Percy and his rogues' gallery to task for comically inept homegrown methods of "analysis." Photos and video of Apollo missions have been available for decades -- at least two professional generations of competent practitioners. Yet in all that time, the only people who say they see things wrong with Apollo photography are those who, in very short order, demonstrate they don't know what they're talking about. And in Percy's case, people who explicitly want to make money talking about things they know nothing about.

It is very important to understand the nature of what we see, and not what we want to see. Peter May

Yes, and Percy and his ilk very much want to see fraud.

 

[JayUtah]

Thanks I do know the Clavious site

Then you must realize that I don't consider Jack White to have any skill whatsoever in photographic analysis, and indeed far less spatial reasoning ability than the average layman. If you can tell me what's wrong with my analysis of the two White photos I review on Clavius.org, I'll talk about his spewage at Aulis.

Further, neither David Percy nor Mary Bennett will appear with me on camera or debate me directly. I have offered to do so, and I have agreed to two third-party invitations to do so. But for some reason Bennett and Percy will comment only when they control the distribution medium. Any idea why that may be?

 

[Dcdrac]

Bob 2 never did find his spanners either..

 

[R.A.F.]

It is very important to understand the nature of what we see, and not what we want to see.

It's garbage claiming that the Apollo landings were faked...what more is there to "understand"??

 

[dafydd]

It's garbage claiming that the Apollo landings were faked...what more is there to "understand"??

Nothing.

 

[Peter May]

My apologies for the typo, I think it’s age related, over 65

 

[DJW001]

I sent an email to Mosfilm yesterday asking for information, but no reply yet.

Don't bother. I just read the article on Aulis. As a scientist, I'm sure you were able to detect the deliberate flaw in their methodology. They went to great pains to assure that there was only one source of light to simulate the sun. In reality, there was a gibbous Earth providing a great deal of "fill light." They got the skewed result they were trying to achieve.

 

[Bell]

Don't bother. I just read the article on Aulis. As a scientist, I'm sure you were able to detect the deliberate flaw in their methodology. They went to great pains to assure that there was only one source of light to simulate the sun. In reality, there was a gibbous Earth providing a great deal of "fill light." They got the skewed result they were trying to achieve.

Not to forget the reflected light from the Moon's surface itself. Go outside at night when there is a full moon and see how much light there is.

 

[Dcdrac]

sign found at Apollo 11 landing site:

If the radar Crew nick my spanners again I will <expletive deleted> and <expletive deleted> and dance on their graves.

Signed Bob

 

[DJW001]

Here is what this supposed cinematographer says on Aulis:

Vsevolod Yakubovich has concluded that in his professional opinion it looks as though the rover on the Moon was created in a large studio production utilising front projection. The rover appears to him to be a radio controlled model that mimics a rover running on the lunar surface.

In addition he has concluded (as have other researchers) that the foreground is different to the backing/background, possibly resulting from the mismatching of the front projection process.

This special effects expert thinks it's possible to project black onto a highly reflective screen in a floodlit studio. He also seems to think that the color and texture of a landscape should be absolutely uniform. A clear case of seeing what one wants to see, rather than what really is.

 

[Erock]

Don't bother. I just read the article on Aulis. As a scientist, I'm sure you were able to detect the deliberate flaw in their methodology. They went to great pains to assure that there was only one source of light to simulate the sun. In reality, there was a gibbous Earth providing a great deal of "fill light." They got the skewed result they were trying to achieve.

So, apart from the 30% albedo property of a gibbous Earth at about 50%, the retro-reflective properties of the regolith combined with a shallow Sun angle opposite the exit hatch, Armstrong wearing a suit with 80%+ reflective properties, the ability of the camera to open the aperture accordingly.......their experiment was perfect

 

[JayUtah]

Not to forget the reflected light from the Moon's surface itself. Go outside at night when there is a full moon and see how much light there is.

And, in many cases, the fill from the suits themselves. Beta cloth has a geometric albedo of around 80%. In the Apollo 11 video you can see a marked effect when Armstrong walks out of the LM shadow into the sun to photograph Aldrin's egress.

Oddly enough, the reflected light from the lunar surface is an effect I demonstrated live on television, for BBC Channel 4. David Percy of Aulis was invited (twice) to appear on that program with me to defend his claims, but he declined.

David Percy will not acknowledge his critics or address demonstrations of his errors. He only wants the money.

 

[JayUtah]

This special effects expert thinks it's possible to project black onto a highly reflective screen in a floodlit studio. He also seems to think that the color and texture of a landscape should be absolutely uniform. A clear case of seeing what one wants to see, rather than what really is.

Yeah, he's never been on a film set.

 

[000063]

Or had a studio picture taken.

Or gone outside.

 

[Bell]

And, in many cases, the fill from the suits themselves. Beta cloth has a geometric albedo of around 80%. In the Apollo 11 video you can see a marked effect when Armstrong walks out of the LM shadow into the sun to photograph Aldrin's egress.

Oddly enough, the reflected light from the lunar surface is an effect I demonstrated live on television, for BBC Channel 4. David Percy of Aulis was invited (twice) to appear on that program with me to defend his claims, but he declined.

David Percy will not acknowledge his critics or address demonstrations of his errors. He only wants the money.

Can I see that demonstration on the internet somewhere? (Not the BBC iPlayer, since I'm not in the UK) Thanks!