Candace Owens says Apollo was a hoax

Andy_Ross

Penultimate Amazing
Andy_Ross
Joined
Jun 2, 2010
Messages
69,333
Candace Owens tweeted
@RealCandaceO
Jan 28
Now for some light-hearted fun. What’s the one “conspiracy theory” that no matter what anyone says you believe is true. Mine is that the moon landing in 1969 was completely faked.
Just nothing about it makes sense. Especially NASA “accidentally erasing” the original footage.

The biggest thing for me is the fuel tank size, plus the live broadcast with audio from the moon. In 1969.
I just cannot.

Def believe this one too!
And heard it from an extremely reliable source…

Quote Tweet
Lauren Chen
@TheLaurenChen
Jan 28
Government knows there's aliens
 
The only thing I agree about is that it is mind-boggling that they would have not preserved the original footage.
 
On the one hand I agree with her. Nothing about it makes sense to her no matter what anyone tells her. If she had any self-awareness she would realize how much it undercuts her assumption that she has anything of value to tell anyone else. Can anyone trust her analytical skills when she so proudly trumpets her inability to learn?
 
Warp12 said:
The only thing I agree about is that it is mind-boggling that they would have not preserved the original footage.
Click to expand...

The only "original footage" that's been lost was the original tape of the TV broadcast of the Apollo 11 EVA. It probably wasn't considered important because it wasn't NTSC compatible, having been broadcast with the black & white Westinghouse camera because its lower bandwidth didn't require the crew to set up the high gain antenna during the short EVA.

We still have tapes of the NTSC conversion for broadcast.

Conspiracy theorists like to point to the erasure of telemetry recordings as somehow suspicious, but those recordings were of low significance, really, being just days and days of telemetry about voltages, and tank pressures, and cabin conditions etcetera. During the Landsat program, it was discovered that the new magnetic tapes were coming apart and gumming up the record heads because the industry had switched to a new binding agent that was failing after some time. This was a problem for the music recording industry as well. They couldn't get reliable tapes quickly enough, so they reused a lot of old tapes from the archives, because it was critical that they be able to record all the expensive data streaming in from Landsat. This is the source of the typical "they erased all the footage!" claims. All of the real data - the scientific data, photos, moving pictures and TV broadcasts, as well as all the voice communications - are preserved.
 
Last edited:
abaddon said:
Wow. You really have no clue.
Click to expand...

A team of retired NASA employees and contractors tried to find the tapes in the early 2000s but was unable to do so. The search was sparked when several still photographs appeared in the late 1990s that showed the visually superior raw SSTV transmission on ground-station monitors. The research team conducted a multi-year investigation in the hopes of finding the most pristine and detailed video images of the moonwalk. If copies of the original SSTV format tapes were to be found, more modern digital technology could make a higher-quality conversion, yielding better images than those originally seen. The researchers concluded that the tapes containing the raw unprocessed Apollo 11 SSTV signal were erased and reused by NASA in the early 1980s, following standard procedure at the time
Click to expand...

NASA held a news conference at the Newseum, in Washington, D.C. regarding the missing tapes on July 16, 2009 – the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11's launch from Cape Kennedy.[3] The multinational research team looking into the missing tapes—mostly retired engineers who had worked on the original broadcast in 1969—was represented at the event by Richard Nafzger from the Goddard Space Flight Center and Stanley Lebar, the former lead engineer at Westinghouse who developed the Apollo Lunar Camera and the Apollo Color Camera.[13] They concluded that the data tapes—with the SSTV signal—were shipped from Australia to Goddard and then routinely erased and reused a few years later.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Seems like the footage wasn't fully preserved. Amairite?
 
Last edited:
Foster Zygote said:
It probably wasn't considered important because it wasn't NTSC compatible...
Click to expand...

It wasn't compatible with anything. For Apollo 11 the television signal was embedded in the telemetry. You literally needed an Ampex telemetry recorder, properly configured, and a bunch of custom, one-off television equipment to view it. It was critical to read that out into a standard format, using the one-off equipment one time, and then that standard-format recording is considered the "original footage."

Today those recorders are exceptionally rare and I'm not sure today whether any of them are in working order. Even in their time, they were built-to-order machines. I know some of the extant telemetry tapes from some of the unmanned early probes have been read out, but that's more of a novelty than the expected operation.

During the Landsat program, it was discovered that the new magnetic tapes were coming apart and gumming up the record heads because the industry had switched to a new binding agent that was failing after some time.
Click to expand...

More specifically, the original binder was made from whale oil -- no kidding. Memorex obviously wanted a more environmentally responsible solution. The binder made from other materials couldn't survive the punishment from a high-speed, multi-head telemetry recorder.

This was a problem for the music recording industry as well.
Click to expand...

Well into the 1980s, as Boston's Third Stage recordings suffered a similar fate. I have some 9-track IBM computer tapes from long-ago projects that are getting flaky.
 
Warp12 said:
Hmm. Seems like the footage wasn't fully preserved. Amairite?
Click to expand...

You are not right. The slow-scan TV format is not just another standard. It was literally invented for one -- and only one -- Apollo mission, and then discarded as future missions would use a more standard process. Because that process and its custom-made equipment was going to be discarded, it was essential to read out the telemetry into a standard format. That copy, in the standard format, was the archival copy, and it still exists.

If, decades later, someone figures out a different way to read out the data, that a doesn't suddenly make someone decades earlier short-sighted. The previous read-out process was necessarily lossy, but it was the best available at the time. Yes, all things being equal it would have been no problem to just put the tapes in a warehouse. But all things were not equal and there was suddenly a desperate need for blank tape. At the time that was the right decision to make, far more important than preserving data in an unreadable format against the possibility that someone in the future would invent a different way of reading it.

The footage was preserved at the time in the only and best way possible.
 
JayUtah said:
You are not right. The slow-scan TV format is not just another standard. It was literally invented for one -- and only one -- Apollo mission, and then discarded as future missions would use a more standard process. Because that process and its custom-made equipment was going to be discarded, it was essential to read out the telemetry into a standard format. That copy, in the standard format, was the archival copy, and it still exists.

If, decades later, someone figures out a different way to read out the data, that a doesn't suddenly make someone decades earlier short-sighted. The previous read-out process was necessarily lossy, but it was the best available at the time. Yes, all things being equal it would have been no problem to just put the tapes in a warehouse. But all things were not equal and there was suddenly a desperate need for blank tape. At the time that was the right decision to make, far more important than preserving data in an unreadable format against the possibility that someone in the future would invent a different way of reading it.

The footage was preserved at the time in the only and best way possible.
Click to expand...

So, was the best quality original data stream from the feed lost, or not? Yes or no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom