From further up this page
Can you actually read the posts between your repetitious sock puppetry?
That is just stupid. If the quote was from Shepard, or whoever, it clearly refers to the visibility of stars in photographs
No, that is not correct. The statement by "Shepard" in Moon Shot clearly indicates that even though stars were not readily photographed as aperture and shutter were geared to photographing the astronauts and the lunar landscape, they were quite visible. As a matter of fact, the stars were easily visible. Take a look and read again Erock.
“Where were the stars?” the myth believers then asked. The cameras that NASA sent to the moon had to use short-exposure times to take pictures of the bright lunar surface and the moonwalkers’ white spacesuits. Stars’ images, easily seen by the moonwalkers, were too faint and underexposed to be seen as they are in photographs taken from space shuttles and the International Space Station."
What is being said here? Well several things. First of all and foremost, this is a statement made in defense of the reality of Apollo. The intent of this posthumous statement by "Shepard" is to debunk hoax claims that make reference to star visibility denial as their base. Let us break it down;
1) "Where were the stars?” the myth believers then asked."
Introduces the subject's context. Specifically this context is one dealing with and refuting the hoax. This is not a casual statement about star visibility. It is an arguement for the truth of the landings. It is clearly written as an attempt to debunk the hoax argument. Next line;
2)"The cameras that NASA sent to the moon had to use short-exposure times to take pictures of the bright lunar surface and the moonwalkers’ white spacesuits."
"Shepard" tells us here that short exposure times were necessary given the subject matter of the photos. This implies what in fact comes next. Even though the stars were easily seen by the moonwalkers, "Shepard" tells us they were not captured in the photos because the shutter speeds were brief. Longer exposures would have been needed to capture the stars. Here's the line;
3)"Stars’ images, easily seen by the moonwalkers, were too faint and underexposed to be seen as they are in photographs taken from space shuttles and the International Space Station."
And this is in fact the case. The last line(number 3 above) indicates contrary to what Ed Mitchell told JayUtah, star images were EASILY SEEN by Alan Shepard. Easily seen but not captured given the brief exposures.
In conclusion the "Alan Shepard" character of the book is telling us the confusion about star sightings is readily explained. They see the stars no problem, but they are not captured in the photos as the exposure time is too brief for the film to pick up the starlight.
This is all straightforward and would seem to most like a fair statement but for the fact that it contradicts what we have been told prior to 2011 when this statement ostensibly attributed to Shepard was published. And one concludes then this is in fact not a fair statement. It is one half of a contradiction constituting 50% of a larger and rather complex lie.
Ed Mitchell "flew" with Shepard and JayUtah tells us Ed Mitchell did not easily see stars. Ed Mitchell told Jay Utah, "He(Mitchell) said the only way to see stars from the lunar surface was to go into the shadow of the LM, crane one's head upward for as long as possible and hold it there for approximately 30 seconds until one's eyes had dark-adapted."
Neil Armstrong denied star visibility in his interview with Moore;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtdcdxvNI1o
and prior to that in his August 1969 press conference. A nice discussion of that event by youtube's GreaterSapien(Apollo landing believer) ;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxnLHEpwQjM
Here you can see and listen to Shepard tell us that his Moon Shot book was the truth and nothing but the truth. The real deal says Al;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XNv6_6x7D0
But the 1994 edition of the book does not contain the quote being discussed here.
“Where were the stars?” the myth believers then asked. The cameras that NASA sent to the moon had to use short-exposure times to take pictures of the bright lunar surface and the moonwalkers’ white spacesuits. Stars’ images, easily seen by the moonwalkers, were too faint and underexposed to be seen as they are in photographs taken from space shuttles and the International Space Station."
This was added in 2011. Alan Shepard died in 1998. The book's other principal author was Deke Slayton. He died in 1993 before the book's publication. Armstrong did the introduction. He was plenty alive in 2011. Barbree was the primary coauthor and is still alive. He'll be 80 in November of this year.
Our alternatives are;
1) Shepard said it and told Barbree and/or other coauthors that "stars were easily seen" but this was not published until the 2011 "easily seen stars" explicit statement as above. In this case he directly contradicts claims by Mitchell, Armstrong and the other Astronauts and given this is not a trivial contradiction, hoax is affirmed.
2) Jay Barbree or another unknown coauthor made the addition specifically addressing the hoax issue as above. In such a case Barbree or the unknown coauthor might be instructed to do this as it is difficult to conceive a coauthor never having walked on the moon making this up independent of Shepard's informing the journalist. But in ANY case, Barbree or an unknown coauthor doing this on their own or directed to do so, given the fact that the statement is explicitly directed to debunking the hoax and given the fact that it contradicts everything previous put out there officially by NASA on the subject and given the fact that the 2011 book still carries the imprimatur of Armstrong, Slayton, Shepard, Barbree, one can come to one and only one conclusion, the clearly motivated contradiction equates to hoax.
It's a done deal any way you read it.
(PS, we are as well connected as the other side. We are every bit as effective in the passing of info from one to the other as the pro real Apollo landings side. I would argue we are almost certainly more effective.)
