Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[threadworm]

As I understand it, Kodak/Ektachrome set up the film, settings and mechanisms for the bespoke Hasselblads the astronauts were to use.

As you understand it, what settings and mechanisms do the film have?

As you understand it, are those settings and mechanisms capable of photographing stars in lunar daytime?

 

[Vixen]

Because even if we allow your 'typo' explanation, electrolysis and combustion do completely opposite things with regard to oxygen and hydrogen, and to equate them in this context is to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of what you're talking about.

Not so. First the two elements need to be combined to make water. As an engine propellent, separating the two, is another process altogether quite separate from mining.

 

[LondonJohn]

As I understand it, Kodak/Ektachrome set up the film, settings and mechanisms for the bespoke Hasselblads the astronauts were to use.

Ah nope, you don't know what you're talking about again.

Kodak was a manufacturer of, amongst other things, camera apparatus and film stock.

Ektachrome was a type of film stock manufactured by Kodak.

To say "Kodak/Ektachrome set up the film, settings and mechanisms for the Hasselbad cameras" is largely wrong and nonsensical.

 

[LondonJohn]

Not so. First the two elements need to be combined to make water. As an engine propellent, separating the two, is another process altogether quite separate from mining.

LOL

No other words.

 

[Vixen]

I've read all your posts in this very thread and seen the words used in them; I don't need to be told by "hecklers"; I compare with what I was taught and what I can find out from proper sources.

I forgot at add above: Throws out attempts at insults while whinging that other folk are being nasty...

You are free to entertain whatever opinion you like. But I think in polite society it is best to understand rules of debate and logic, and avoid the logical fallacy of ad hominem just because one doesn't agree with the argument presented.

 

[LondonJohn]

I wrote 'electrolysis or combustion' and ppl misread it (or claimed to) that these are the same thing (as if). How do you know I have a lack of knowledge? Some hecklers told you so?

You claimed that electrolysis is used to combine hydrogen and oxygen into water. You were diametrically wrong. In fact, electrolysis is used to split water into its component hydrogen and oxygen,

 

[Vixen]

Ah nope, you don't know what you're talking about again.

Kodak was a manufacturer of, amongst other things, camera apparatus and film stock.

Ektachrome was a type of film stock manufactured by Kodak.

To say "Kodak/Ektachrome set up the film, settings and mechanisms for the Hasselbad cameras" is largely wrong and nonsensical.

Wrong again! Ektachrome bods designing the specs were central to the Apollo photography programme.

 

[Mojo]

You know perfectly well the sense was electrolysis OR combustion.

Your claim that electrolysis is a means of combining hydrogen and oxygen to make water, but is not combustion, betrays your ignorance of both electrolysis and combustion. It not the words that are giving you problems, it's clearly the concepts.

 

[LondonJohn]

Wrong again! Ektachrome bods designing the specs were central to the Apollo photography programme.

"Ektachrome bods" LOLOL

(Once again: Ektachrome was not a company. Ektachrome was a type of photographic film manufactured by Kodak.)

 

[threadworm]

Wrong again! Ektachrome bods designing the specs were central to the Apollo photography programme.

Were those specifications, in the film used on the surface and with the camera settings available, capable of photographing stars in lunar daytime?

As you understand it.

 

[Vixen]

You claimed that electrolysis is used to combine hydrogen and oxygen into water. You were diametrically wrong. In fact, electrolysis is used to split water into its component hydrogen and oxygen,

Ah, okay, fair enough.. Well done.

 

[zooterkin]

AIUI the Earth is always gibbous to the Moon,

Then you understand wrong, as usual.

so not difficult to add.

First, phase of the Earth is irrelevant to the settings needed to capture stars. Second, the settings needed would add unnecessary complexity to the range of options the astronauts had, and they didn't want to capture the stars. Third, we know they didn't have those settings, so it's again irrelevant to the question of whether stars should appear in the photos taken on the Moon.

Care to try again with a straight answer?

 

[LondonJohn]

Ah, okay, fair enough.. Well done.

Try typing the words. "I made a mistake".

 

[Vixen]

"Ektachrome bods" LOLOL

(Once again: Ektachrome was not a company. Ektachrome was a type of photographic film manufactured by Kodak.)

Ektachrome is a brand name but then, so is Kodak. Ektachrome supplied the bespoke film magazines to a particularly thin base AIR and fit the specifications to the Hasselblads. For example, modifying what needed to be done when changing the film. This film has never been made for the public or mass-produced.

 

[LondonJohn]

Ektachrome is a brand name but then, so is Kodak. Ektachrome supplied the bespoke film magazines to a particularly thin base AIR and fit the specific to the Hasselblads. For example, modifying what needed to be done when changing the film. This film has never been made for the public or mass-produced.

LOL what a lot of googlespeak that was. All to (try to) avoid admitting that you made yet another mistake. Keep on keeping on!

 

[Vixen]

Try typing the words. "I made a mistake".

I have no problem in immediately putting up my hand in making a mistake because unlike yourself I see nothing shameful about it.

 

[Darat]

Ektachrome is a brand name but then, so is Kodak. Ektachrome supplied the bespoke film magazines to a particularly thin base AIR and fit the specifications to the Hasselblads. For example, modifying what needed to be done when changing the film. This film has never been made for the public or mass-produced.

Nope - Kodak supplied the ektachrome film, there has never been a Ektachrome company that could supply anyone with anything.

 

[LondonJohn]

I have no problem in immediately putting up my hand in making a mistake because unlike yourself I see nothing shameful about it.

 

[Vixen]

Then you understand wrong, as usual.

First, phase of the Earth is irrelevant to the settings needed to capture stars. Second, the settings needed would add unnecessary complexity to the range of options the astronauts had, and they didn't want to capture the stars. Third, we know they didn't have those settings, so it's again irrelevant to the question of whether stars should appear in the photos taken on the Moon.

Care to try again with a straight answer?

I was responding to your query as to how come they got the position of the Moon right (as claimed by yourself).

 

[LondonJohn]

Nope - Kodak supplied the ektachrome film, there has never been a Ektachrome company that could supply anyone with anything.

You're flogging a dead horse here. Vixen DEFINITELY DIDN'T MAKE A MISTAKE, as always.