Apollo 12 Photo Anomalies

[Duane Daman]

I find it unbelievable that the debate over these two Apollo 12 photos is still taking place on the UM site .... I posted this evidence months ago , which proved that the Apollo 12 photos are studio fakes .... One of the moderators and several of the members there , who continue to defend nasa's bogus Apollo missions and the phony Apollo photos , are still making the silly claim that this artifact is nothing but a "smudge" on the astronot's visor ..... Are these people blind , stupid or just plain dishonest ?

Smudges don't create SHADOWS on the moon set floor ... Only solid objects do , such as ceiling fans and stage lights ... Nor do "smudges " ever have the semetrical designs of what looks exactly like four blades of a ceiling fan .

What will it take for the disingenuous nasa defenders and the dishonest Apollo apoligists to stop lying for nasa ?

Here's the proof that there is indeed an anomalous object being reflected in the Apollo 12 astronot's visor , along with it's four bladed shadow .... The object's reflection even moves more to the center of the visor because of the visors convex shape, as the astronot changes his head postion in the second photo ...

[Dave Greer]

I find it unbelievable that the debate over these two Apollo 12 photos is still taking place on the UM site .... I posted this evidence months ago , which proved that the Apollo 12 photos are studio fakes .... One of the moderators and several of the members there , who continue to defend nasa's bogus Apollo missions and the phony Apollo photos , are still making the silly claim that this artifact is nothing but a "smudge" on the astronot's visor ..... Are these people blind , stupid or just plain dishonest ?

Well I agree with the first part of your sentence! I can't believe this one is still being wheeled out. But I suppose there are always going to be people who are new to the conspiracy theory.

You can't really complain at other people's treatment of yourself when you make a blanket statement about people who have a different opinion to yourself being "blind, stupid or just plain dishonest". Do you really want to reduce this to a slanging match?

Here are 8 links to photos that show the artefact on the helmet. It's clearly in the same place on the helmet in each photo. To me, that shows it's very unlikely indeed to be a reflection. I'll leave others to make up their own minds, as far as I'm concerned this "anomaly" has been well and truly explained many times.

AS12-47-6919

AS12-48-7071

AS12-48-7074

AS12-48-7133

AS12-48-7134

AS12-49-7307

AS12-49-7308

AS12-49-7309

[Jack White]

I find it unbelievable that the debate over these two Apollo 12 photos is still taking place on the UM site .... I posted this evidence months ago , which proved that the Apollo 12 photos are studio fakes .... One of the moderators and several of the members there , who continue to defend nasa's bogus Apollo missions and the phony Apollo photos , are still making the silly claim that this artifact is nothing but a "smudge" on the astronot's visor ..... Are these people blind , stupid or just plain dishonest ?

Well I agree with the first part of your sentence! I can't believe this one is still being wheeled out. But I suppose there are always going to be people who are new to the conspiracy theory.

You can't really complain at other people's treatment of yourself when you make a blanket statement about people who have a different opinion to yourself being "blind, stupid or just plain dishonest". Do you really want to reduce this to a slanging match?

Here are 8 links to photos that show the artefact on the helmet. It's clearly in the same place on the helmet in each photo. To me, that shows it's very unlikely indeed to be a reflection. I'll leave others to make up their own minds, as far as I'm concerned this "anomaly" has been well and truly explained many times.

AS12-47-6919

AS12-48-7071

AS12-48-7074

AS12-48-7133

AS12-48-7134

AS12-49-7307

AS12-49-7308

AS12-49-7309

Whom are you trying to fool? I examined all eight images you posted, and found

they did not contain the same artifacts referred to by Duane.

Jack

[Dave Greer]

I find it unbelievable that the debate over these two Apollo 12 photos is still taking place on the UM site .... I posted this evidence months ago , which proved that the Apollo 12 photos are studio fakes .... One of the moderators and several of the members there , who continue to defend nasa's bogus Apollo missions and the phony Apollo photos , are still making the silly claim that this artifact is nothing but a "smudge" on the astronot's visor ..... Are these people blind , stupid or just plain dishonest ?

Well I agree with the first part of your sentence! I can't believe this one is still being wheeled out. But I suppose there are always going to be people who are new to the conspiracy theory.

You can't really complain at other people's treatment of yourself when you make a blanket statement about people who have a different opinion to yourself being "blind, stupid or just plain dishonest". Do you really want to reduce this to a slanging match?

Here are 8 links to photos that show the artefact on the helmet. It's clearly in the same place on the helmet in each photo. To me, that shows it's very unlikely indeed to be a reflection. I'll leave others to make up their own minds, as far as I'm concerned this "anomaly" has been well and truly explained many times.

AS12-47-6919

AS12-48-7071

AS12-48-7074

AS12-48-7133

AS12-48-7134

AS12-49-7307

AS12-49-7308

AS12-49-7309

Whom are you trying to fool? I examined all eight images you posted, and found

they did not contain the same artifacts referred to by Duane.

Jack

Not trying to fool anyone Jack. I've re-checked the links to make sure they point to the correct images.

The one where I'm willing to concede it doesn't necessarily show the same artefact is AS12-47-6919 - though I'm still reasonably sure it's the same thing. I'll try and post some crops if I have the time later.

[Duane Daman]

Thanks for posting the other photos but what is your point ? .... The "artifact" looks a bit different in each photo because of the convex shape of the visor ... It's clearly an ANOMALY which is reflected IN the visor and looks very much like a ceiling fan or stage light ... Certainly NOT something which would be hanging around on the moon ....

I see that Waspie and MID have completely derailed the thread on the UM about this photo ... Do they really think they are fooling anyone with their ridiculous explanations of this artifact ? .... I actually laughed out loud when I read MID's pitiful post about his astronot buddies and the silly way they acted on the 'moon' .... It's called DISTRACTION TACTICS , and your friend MID is a pro at that ... Then he dared to call this artifact with four blades and a shadow , a "smudge" on the visor ... Oh please ... Is that the standard lie that the nasa defenders always come up with for every anomaly they can't explain away ? .... Spotlights , stagelights and ceiling fans do NOT look like smudges or smears on visors ...

It's time to face the facts Dave .... Apollo was a hoax and the Apollo photos are studio fakes shot on moon sets .

By the way ... What are those loose straps hanging out of the side of the PLSS packs in photos 7071 and 7074 ? .... Part of the fly system ?

[Dave Greer]

Thanks for posting the other photos but what is your point ? .... The "artifact" looks a bit different in each photo because of the convex shape of the visor ... It's clearly an ANOMALY which is reflected IN the visor and looks very much like a ceiling fan or stage light ... Certainly NOT something which would be hanging around on the moon ....

I see that Waspie and MID have completely derailed the thread on the UM about this photo ... Do they really think they are fooling anyone with their ridiculous explanations of this artifact ? .... I actually laughed out loud when I read MID's pitiful post about his astronot buddies and the silly way they acted on the 'moon' .... It's called DISTRACTION TACTICS , and your friend MID is a pro at that ... Then he dared to call this artifact with four blades and a shadow , a "smudge" on the visor ... Oh please ... Is that the standard lie that the nasa defenders always come up with for every anomaly they can't explain away ? .... Spotlights , stagelights and ceiling fans do NOT look like smudges or smears on visors ...

It's time to face the facts Dave .... Apollo was a hoax and the Apollo photos are studio fakes shot on moon sets .

By the way ... What are those loose straps hanging out of the side of the PLSS packs in photos 7071 and 7074 ? .... Part of the fly system ?

The point is, if this was a reflection then the artefact would not be in the same position on the visor each time. I agree the artefact looks slightly different each time due to the convex shape of the visor, and changes in viewing angle. All this is consistent with it being something on the surface of the glass itself, but not consistent with it being a reflection.

If it's on the surface of the glass, then it's likely to be a smudge, whether you like that explanation or not. Any reason you can think of for it not to be a smudge?

[Evan Burton]

The strap looks like it was probably part of the tool carrier harness, though I am not certain if they had that on the Apollo 12 suit.

[Dave Greer]

Whom are you trying to fool? I examined all eight images you posted, and found

they did not contain the same artifacts referred to by Duane.

Jack

As promised, here's two of the photos I've highlighted showing the same artefact. You can see it quite clearly on all the original images I linked to. (These images are obviously cropped and zoomed to highlight the visors).

Edited January 16, 2007 by Dave Greer

[Duane Daman]

Dave ... Your "smudge" not only changes position and size in the visor reflection as the astronot turns his head , but it also changes shape ... That is NOT something that a smudge ON a visor can do , but only a solid object being reflected IN a convex visor will do ..... Plus this 'artifact' obviously has four blades which casts a shadow of the same shape on the ground beneath it .... A smudge would not cast a shadow on the ground , nor would it look exactly like a ceiling fan or a stage light either .

You know what the most annoying aspect of a typical nasa defender is ? ... It's the fact that none of them can admit it when they are wrong about something ... They NEVER conceded any point and NEVER admit when they don't have a pat little answer for everything ..... I have no idea why you defend nasa's lies about Apollo and I don't care ... I just know that it is completley frustrating to try to discuss any of hoax evidence with those who aren't even honest enough to admit when they are wrong .

Evan .... I doubt the straps hanging off the side of the PLSS are for carrying tools ... but more like the straps for the fly system that quality control forgot to air brush out of this anomalous photograph .

Edited January 16, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Dave Greer]

Dave ... Your "smudge" not only changes position and size in the visor reflection as the astronot turns his head , but it also changes shape ... That is NOT something that a smudge ON a visor can do , but only a solid object being reflected IN a convex visor will do ..... Plus this 'artifact' obviously has four blades which casts a shadow of the same shape on the ground beneath it .... A smudge would not cast a shadow on the ground , nor would it look exactly like a ceiling fan or a stage light either .

You know what the most annoying aspect of a typical nasa defender is ? ... It's the fact that none of them can admit it when they are wrong about something ... They NEVER conceded any point and NEVER admit when they don't have a pat little answer for everything ..... I have no idea why you defend nasa's lies about Apollo and I don't care ... I just know that it is completley frustrating to try to discuss any of hoax evidence with those who aren't even honest enough to admit when they are wrong .

Evan .... I doubt the straps hanging off the side of the PLSS are for carrying tools ... but more like the straps for the fly system that quality control forgot to air brush out of this anomalous photograph .

Firstly, I disagree about the smudge changing position - it appears to me to be in the same position on the visor (making allowance for convex surface and different viewing angles).

Secondly, why should I admit to "being wrong" when I believe I'm right about something? I'm not here to "defend NASA lies", I'm putting across my point of view. I ain't going to agree with you just to make you feel better! After all, I'd have looked a wee bit silly if I'd agreed with your analysis of this photo...

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20380HR.jpg

Here's crop of the relevant bit.

I tend to err on the side of caution and fall back on Occam's Razor, rather than inventing wild and fanciful claims about stage lights, fans etc. The mundane explanation, more often than not, turns out to be the correct one.

[Duane Daman]

Like I just posted on another thread ... The nasa defenders will stop at nothing to defend nasa's lies ... and you are no exception Dave ... You pretend to be nice , unlike the others who are so blatantly and obviously hateful in their tactics to stop the conspiracy info .... but in your pretense of being nice , you now bring up and post a photo here that I posted in the past .. And one which I already conceded to being wrong about .

At least I am honest enough to admit it when I am wrong about something ... That's more than I can say about you or anyone else who works so hard trying to refute the hoax evidence .

So why are now bringing up an Apollo 17 photo in this thread ? ... More distraction tactics would be my guess ...You can't win the argument about the Apollo 12 photo , so you bring up this one again ....

What about those fly system straps on PLSS in that amomalous Apollo 12 photo ? You think maybe nasa forgot to air brush them out of their phony photo ? .. Along with forgetting to air brush out the artifact anomaly in the visor reflection ?

Are you assigned to make up a good cover story for that little problem , or has that job been assigned to Burton ?

[Steve Ulman]

What about those fly system straps on PLSS in that amomalous Apollo 12 photo ?

Duane-

Do you have any proof they are part of a "fly system"? Or is it just your imagination?

[Dave Greer]

Like I just posted on another thread ... The nasa defenders will stop at nothing to defend nasa's lies ... and you are no exception Dave ... You pretend to be nice , unlike the others who are so blatantly and obviously hateful in their tactics to stop the conspiracy info .... but in your pretense of being nice , you now bring up and post a photo here that I posted in the past .. And one which I already conceded to being wrong about .

At least I am honest enough to admit it when I am wrong about something ... That's more than I can say about you or anyone else who works so hard trying to refute the hoax evidence .

So why are now bringing up an Apollo 17 photo in this thread ? ... More distraction tactics would be my guess ...You can't win the argument about the Apollo 12 photo , so you bring up this one again ....

What about those fly system straps on PLSS in that amomalous Apollo 12 photo ? You think maybe nasa forgot to air brush them out of their phony photo ? .. Along with forgetting to air brush out the artifact anomaly in the visor reflection ?

Are you assigned to make up a good cover story for that little problem , or has that job been assigned to Burton ?

Oy! I'm always nice! I'm guessing you've had a bad day at the office so I'll "cut you some slack"

Guess what? I was wrong about that photo as well, and admitted so at the time. I didn't initially put it down to scratches, my initial thought was some kind off reflection of the various visors. I withdrew that when someone put forward what I deemed to be a better answer - scratches. Further evidence did indeed show this to be the case. So your accusation about me not admitting when I'm wrong is incorrect.

The reason I brought this picture up isn't "distraction tactics". You made this statement about people on UM (inculding myself):-

"making the silly claim that this artifact is nothing but a "smudge" on the astronot's visor ..... Are these people blind , stupid or just plain dishonest ?"

You were making similar claims about other photos on UM a few months ago. You then said:-

"Oh please ... Is that the standard lie that the nasa defenders always come up with for every anomaly they can't explain away ? .... Spotlights , stagelights and ceiling fans do NOT look like smudges or smears on visors".

In a later post you stated:-

You know what the most annoying aspect of a typical nasa defender is ? ... It's the fact that none of them can admit it when they are wrong about something ... They NEVER conceded any point and NEVER admit when they don't have a pat little answer for everything ..... I have no idea why you defend nasa's lies about Apollo and I don't care ... I just know that it is completley frustrating to try to discuss any of hoax evidence with those who aren't even honest enough to admit when they are wrong .

So, in the space of three posts, you accused me of being a xxxx, making a "silly claim" that the artefact is a smudge, and being either blind, stupid or dishonest to say that. I decided my best response would be to remind you of a very similar claim you made about a "visor artefact" a few months ago, hoping you would have learnt from that experience and would agree that it is at least a possibility that the artefact now in question could indeed be a smudge. That is the reason I mentioned the other photo - not to try and make you look silly (I've praised you on more than one board for retracting your initial claim).

Right, now that lot's out of the way...! How about we get back on topic?

I'm making the claim that the artefact is on the visor (probably a smudge). You are making the claim that it is a fan.

I'll present evidence that supports the "smudge" hypothesis over the "fan" hypothesis".

1. The artefact is in the same place on the visor each time (giving due regard to convex shaped visor, differing camera angles etc). The photos are taken from 3 or 4 different locations: hence, it is far more likely to be a surface feature on the visor, rather than a reflection in the visor.

2. It has the same shape in each photo. With photos taken from different locations, the shape should change noticeably if it was a reflection.

3. It is visible on Pete Conrad's visor in at least eight different photos - but NEVER visible on Alan Bean's visor. If it was indeed a reflection of a fan, then I would expect to be able to see it reflected in Bean's visor.

OK, over to your evidence that supports "fan" as opposed to "smudge".

I'll leave the "fly system straps" for someone else - you were moaning a few weeks ago that I was replying to too many of your claims - sheesh! I can't win!

[Duane Daman]

1. The artefact is in the same place on the visor each time (giving due regard to convex shaped visor, differing camera angles etc). The photos are taken from 3 or 4 different locations: hence, it is far more likely to be a surface feature on the visor, rather than a reflection in the visor.

Not true ... The position of the fan shaped artifact changed in location in each different photo .

2. It has the same shape in each photo. With photos taken from different locations, the shape should change noticeably if it was a reflection.

Not true ... The shape also changed with the different postions of the convex visor , proving it was a solid object reflected IN the visor ... Something a "smudge " could not do ... It also cast a shadow of the SAME EXACT SHAPE ! ... A little fact which you continue to ignore .

3. It is visible on Pete Conrad's visor in at least eight different photos - but NEVER visible on Alan Bean's visor. If it was indeed a reflection of a fan, then I would expect to be able to see it reflected in Bean's visor.

Just because the fan blade anomaly didn't show up in Bean's visor doesn't mean it isn't there .... The camera angle could have been different and not shown it .. Or a more awake quality control employee could have spoted the same amomaly in Bean's visor and air brushed it out ... There could be dozens of reasons why it only showed up reflected in Conrad's visor and not Bean's ... Even the photo shoot of the two different astro-actors could have been shot at different times and the artifact removed from the set ...

Sorry , but your argument just doesn't hold any water . ... How can you look at that fan shaped object reflected in Conrad's visor and then claim it's just a smudge ? .... Don't you care that you look like a xxxx ? ... Or is defending the bogus Apollo photos more important than your integrity ?

Edited January 16, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Dave Greer]

1. The artefact is in the same place on the visor each time (giving due regard to convex shaped visor, differing camera angles etc). The photos are taken from 3 or 4 different locations: hence, it is far more likely to be a surface feature on the visor, rather than a reflection in the visor.

Not true ... The position of the fan shaped artifact changed in location in each different photo .

The position (given the stipulations in my post) look the same to me - near the top rim, slightly to the left of centre (astronauts point of view). Agree to disagree?

2. It has the same shape in each photo. With photos taken from different locations, the shape should change noticeably if it was a reflection.

Not true ... The shape also changed with the different postions of the convex visor , proving it was a solid object reflected IN the visor ... Something a "smudge " could not do ...

Well, as with position, I see the same shape (yes, I can see why you describe it as fan-shaped) - so we'll have to agree to disagree again.

It also cast a shadow of the SAME EXACT SHAPE ! ... A little fact which you continue to ignore .

No, I'm just busy at the moment. I'll address this point when I have time to study it in a little more depth (I don't like arguing from a position of ignorance!)

3. It is visible on Pete Conrad's visor in at least eight different photos - but NEVER visible on Alan Bean's visor. If it was indeed a reflection of a fan, then I would expect to be able to see it reflected in Bean's visor.

Just because the fan blade anomaly didn't show up in Bean's visor doesn't mean it isn't there .... The camera angle could have been different and not shown it .. Or a more awake quality control employee could have spoted the same amomaly in Bean's visor and air brushed it out ... There could be dozens of reasons why it only showed up reflected in Conrad's visor and not Bean's ... Even the photo shoot of the two different astro-actors could have been shot at different times and the artifact removed from the set ...

I accept your argument that I can't use it as proof that there is no fan, but I'd describe it as circumstantial evidence. (Obviously I don't agree with the scenarios you invented!)

Sorry , but your argument just doesn't hold any water . ... How can you look at that fan shaped object reflected in Conrad's visor and then claim it's just a smudge ? .... Don't you care that you look like a xxxx ? ... Or is defending the bogus Apollo photos more important than your integrity ?

A "fan shaped object" does not necessarily have to be a fan! It can be something quite ordinary, like a boring smudge on a visor. That's what I see, and IMHO that's what the evidence supports.

Of course my integrity is important to me. If you think I'm lying about seeing a smudge on Conrad's visor, I can't help that, but I'm not changing my honest opinion just to look good in your eyes. And you're not really doing your own case any good by continually accusing people who disagree with your opinion of being "liars" - isn't that the sort of behaviour you intensely dislike on discussion forums?