NASA Exposes Their Apollo Moon Landing Hoax!

[Craig Lamson]

My comment in BLUE

Dude, its time to put on your thinking cap, if you even have one so you can get to the "AH" moment...which must come BEFORE you can have an "AH HA

HERE COMES YOUR AH MOMENT LAMSON

Regardless of what you want to think about the POD composite or any words written about it, it is simply IMPOSSIBLE to see both the sun and the stars at the same time....period. The "AH" moment is the one where you figure out that the sun would stop the eyes down way too much to see the stars.

FIRST OFF, ALL THE APOLLO MISSIONS ALLEGEDLY LANDED ON THE MOON DURING THE LUNAR MORNING! ... THEREFORE THE SUN WAS LOW IN ONLY ONE PART OF THE SKY! .... SO YOU ONLY HAVE TO SHIFT YOUR GAZE IN ANY DIRECTION AWAY FROM THE INCOMING SUNLIGHT TO SEE THE STARS !

DUANE! We are discussing the Picture of the day image in this section. I'm replying to your statment about it. The image in quetion shows the sun and the stars. It is impossible to see both at the same time. Your bullcrap about landing times etc is simply a red herring. and of no value to this subject. Try again next time

On BA's comment, he is correct you SHOULD be able to see statrs onthe moon IF...and this is a BIG IF (and also your "AH" moment) you could block the rays of the sun, AND ALL EXTRANOUS LIGHT from entering your eyes. In other words your eyes would need to dark adapt. And that ain't gonna happen by just throwing your head back in your spacesuit helmet.

ANOTHER AH MOMENT FOR YOU LAMSON. THE LUNAR SURFACE IS PRONE TO A PECUILAR PROPERTY CALLED BACKSCATTER WHERE IT TENDS TO REFLECT INCOMING LIGHT BACK TOWARDS THE DIRECTION IT CAME FROM ... SUN LOW ANGLE IN LUNAR SKY, LIGHT REFLECTING FROM SURFACE BACK IN THAT DIRECTION.... LOOKING TOWARDS AN UNFLITERED SUN IS DUMB IN THE FIRST PLACE .. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TO TURN AWAY FROM THE SUN TO SHIELD MOST OF THE LIGHT AND LOOK UP AT THE GLORIOUS VIEW OF THE UNIVERSE.

DUANE! Your suggestion that most of the light is returned totally in the direction from which it came is silly. The surface of the moon is comprised of irregular shaped material. Angle of incidence equals angle of reflection. The irregular surface structure sent the light everywhere. Shielding "most"of the light is not going to do you much good. Unless you can get your eyes DARK ADAPTED (and coming from a VERY brightly lit environment that is going to take some time ) You are not simply look up and see stars. Consider the amount of time it take just to get your eyes dark adapted at night when going outside of your house illuminated with standard household bulbs and then rethink your statement. Then maybe you can go "AH" Then consider the astronaut had a dark visor, and that the inside of their helmet was white...which is nice and reflective. ANy sudden glance to the inside of the helmet or down towards the surface that dark adaption is gone. Simple thur and look up? I don't think so.

Why did they not spend valuable time on the moon, and use up valuable payload capacity to take a tripod? Why should they? (you know your next "AH" moment is coming...right?) The view of the stars from the moon would not be any much more impressive that the view from a high, darksky spot here on earth on a perfect night. Study Seeing and Transparency for another "AH" moment. Much more important matters were at hand. After all why travel 250,000 miles to view the same stars you can see on Earth?

Why not? ... Are you seriously suggesting time lapse images of stars above an overexposed Moon setting wouldn't have been of any interest to an agency that concentrates on star photography?

What good would the overexposed moon be? What good would the star images be, seeing that they would have been taken with a standard camera and a wide angle lens. The question becomes not if they woen of interest, but if the images would have supplied any NEW information. The fact that none of the Apollo missions met YOUR expectaions is irrelevant.

valuable payload capacity to take a tripod

Your best BS yet! .... How much exactly does a simple camera tripod stand weigh more or less? .. More than a golf club head? ... A lunar rover? ... Smuggled Apollo 15 envelopes?

Whats more important a Rover or a tripod, considering that very high quality images of star fields are possible from earth.

Like it or not space and weight was a consideration.

And IIRC one mission DID take a special camera or telescope with tripdo to the moon, I'll need to check that to provide data.

And finally, you suggest they should have filled a magazine with star photos by...how did you say it?..."changing the exposure setting shows you REALLY NEED and "AH" moment here. The 'changed exposure setting would have needed to be in the area of 30 SECONDS at f2.8! With those facts your "AH HA" moment just fell flat on it face.

WOW 30 SECS! A TOTAL IMPOSSIBILITY THEN!

Well yes it would have been without a tripod. You would have known this if you had any understanding of the subject

After all why travel 250,000 miles to view the same stars you can see on Earth?

Wasn't astro-not John Young keen on setting a permanent observatory on the Moon ?? .. Being outside the Earths thick atmosphere is generally considered to be better conditions for star gazeing .

How much better? Enough that the images from a standard camera and lens would have been an improvement over the earth based images and worthy of spending valuable surface time to produce? I await the finding of your research.

But here's the real kicker ... Why is it that a discussion about SEEING STARS has now turned into one about PHOTOGRAPHING STARS ???

I am simply responding to your post.

Answer : .. Because it's the typical tap dancing distraction tactics used by ALL defenders of the Apollo lie .

Answer: Because thats where DUANE took the discussion

Edited October 3, 2007 by Craig Lamson

[Duane Daman]

LOL

[Craig Lamson]

LOL

I see you are stuck without and answer...

[Duane Daman]

And I see you edited your post after my LOL was posted .

"Answer: Because thats where DUANE took the discussion "

My LOLwas to you not posting anything but our quotes .

If you mean by my quoting Armstrong's and Collins' lies about not being able to see any stars while photographing the solar corona , those weren't my words ... It came from the very revealing A11 press conference video I posted with the original article about how magnificent the stars must look from the lunar surface .... Not that Neil and Buzz would know anything about that .

Edited October 4, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Craig Lamson]

And I see you edited your post after my LOL was posted .

"Answer: Because thats where DUANE took the discussion "

My LOLwas to you not posting anything but our quotes .

If you mean by my quoting Armstrong's and Collins' lies about not being able to see any stars while photographing the solar corona , those weren't my words ... It came from the very revealing A11 press conference video I posted with the original article about how magnificent the stars must look from the lunar surface .... Not that Neil and Buzz would know anything about that .

Well sometimes even I push the wrong button first.

I don't understand your reference to the Armstrong and Collins quote.

[Duane Daman]

You made the claim that I was the one who started the discussion about photographing the stars , when what we were suppossed to be discussing was seeing them .

I said that my words didn't start it , the A11 press conferrence quotes did .

Armstrong:

" We were NEVER able to SEE STARS on the lunar surface or on the dayside of the Moon by eye without looking through the optics ... Ah, I don't recall during the period of time while we were PHOTOGRAPHING the solar corona what stars we could see . "

Collins :

I don't remember seeing any ."

No stars from the Cosmos

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QB94E-osQQw

[Craig Lamson]

You made the claim that I was the one who started the discussion about photographing the stars , when what we were suppossed to be discussing was seeing them .

I said that my words didn't start it , the A11 press conferrence quotes did .

Armstrong:

" We were NEVER able to SEE STARS on the lunar surface or on the dayside of the Moon by eye without looking through the optics ... Ah, I don't recall during the period of time while we were PHOTOGRAPHING the solar corona what stars we could see . "

Collins :

I don't remember seeing any ."

No stars from the Cosmos

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QB94E-osQQw

No I stated the following:

That I was simply replying to your comments,

And that it was your comments that took the direction of my reply towards photography.

And in actuality in this most recent exchange it was Dave's post of Jerry Lodriguss's comments moved the conversation towards photography.

[Evan Burton]

Why not? ... Are you seriously suggesting time lapse images of stars above an overexposed Moon setting wouldn't have been of any interest to an agency that concentrates on star photography?

Why would they take images of the stars from the lunar surface when the CSM in lunar orbit was taking images of the stars when required? Noting, of course, that the large majority of images were pre-planned, both for the lunar surface exploration and the lunar orbits.

[Duane Daman]

Here's the bottom line ... again .

The Apollo astronots claimed that they couldn't see any stars from the lunar surface without looking through the optics ... This has been proven to be FALSE by the topic article I posted here and by the statement made by astronomer Phil Plait about the ability to see stars from the lunar surface , even in the day time with the Sun shining brightly .

If NASA WANTED ANY OF THE APOLLO ASTRONOTS TO PHOTOGRAPH THE STARS ABOVE THE LUNAR SURFACE ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS TO :

1. TAKE A TRIPOD ON BOARD THE LM , AS THIS WAS STANDARD PHOTOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT !

2. TAKE 30 SECONDS OUT OF THEIR EVA TIME TO AT LEAST PHOTOGRAPH ONE PICTURE OF THE STARS AS SEEN FROM THE MOON ... SOMETHING WHICH HAD NEVER BEEN ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE !

But not only were the stars never photographed , but for some strange reason , Earth looming large in the lunar sky wasn't either ... Not in the early missions anyway ... And only a few photos of Earth showed up in the later missions, where the image of Earth looked like the same fake image they tried to pass off in the CSM while pretending to be half way to the Moon . ( more to come about that little gem of a mistake later )

Neither did the Sun , looming large in the Apollo 11 sky , make an appearance , except for one composite picture , which is meaningless ... and if there were any images taken of the Sun taken during Apollo 11 , then nasa didn't bother to put them on thier Apollo Image Gallery .

So the point of all this is this .... If you are the first humans to step onto the surface of an alien planet for the first time in the history of mankind , you would not have repeatedly taken photographs of your bootprints , the LM legs , or even so much the barren landscape which looked exactly like an empty flat parking lot filled with dirt .

Instead you would have photographed something which had NEVER been seen before ... Your home planet hanging magnficent in the black sky of deep space , almost a half a million miles away , and also the Sun , which considering they allegedy landed in the Lunar morning , should have been relatively low on the horizon and even if not photographed on purpose , should have showed up in some of the Apollo 11 photographs .

The Apollo photos , especially of the early missions , look as if they were taken in an empty dirt filled moonset lot , and are about as interesting as my girlfiend's cat's litter box !

In other words , the photos of an alleged mission to an alien world for the first time ... SUCK ! ... and couldn't be more faked looking if they tried .

Edited October 4, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Evan Burton]

Here's the bottom line ... again .

The Apollo astronots claimed that they couldn't see any stars from the lunar surface without looking through the optics ... This has been proven to be FALSE by the topic article I posted here and by the statement made by astronomer Phil Plait about the ability to see stars from the lunar surface , even in the day time with the Sun shining brightly .

This is only what the Apollo 11 astronauts said. Other astronauts said they didn't see stars because they did not take the time for their to eyes to adapt to darker areas where they would be able to see. You continually ignore that Gene Cernan said that he could see stars from the surface...because he let his eyes adapt in a shadowed area.

If NASA WANTED ANY OF THE APOLLO ASTRONOTS TO PHOTOGRAPH THE STARS ABOVE THE LUNAR SURFACE ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS TO :

1. TAKE A TRIPOD ON BOARD THE LM , AS THIS WAS STANDARD PHOTOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT !

2. TAKE 30 SECONDS OUT OF THEIR EVA TIME TO AT LEAST PHOTOGRAPH ONE PICTURE OF THE STARS AS SEEN FROM THE MOON ... SOMETHING WHICH HAD NEVER BEEN ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE !

Weight was all important on the LM. NOTHING that was not necessary (stand fast astronaut's PPK) was taken. With a standard camera, what would have been the difference between a shot of a star from the lunar surface, and through a telescope on Earth? Nothing - the Earth one, because taken through a telescope, would have probably been better.

So you needed a high quality camera, specially designed to take stellar photography.... and they carried them on a couple of occasions on the CSM.

You continually ignore the fact that your pictures as seen from the moon were taken... from lunar orbit.

[Duane Daman]

Okay , if you want to pretend that NO photographs could or should have been taken of the stars , or Earth or the Sun during the first few missions, then fine ... If you want to pretend that one small , light weight tripod would have been anymore of a problem to transport than any other piece of equipment , then fine ... but this discussion has been sidetracked with the discussion of photography when it was really about the ability to SEE stars from the lunar surface ....

According to Gene Cernan , the LAST man allegedly on the Moon , he claimed that he had to allow his eyes to adapt to see the stars ... but what happened to all of the other astronots from every other mission ? .... Did none of them ever try to adapt their eyes to see the stars ? .. and if they did , why did they never mention them or how magnificent they must have looked from the lunar surface ?

Contrary to what nasa and the Apollo astronots have led us all to believe , SEEING stars from the lunar surface is obviously not quite as difficult as we thought ...

But once again the bottom line is what astronomer Phil Plait stated ... He said that stars could be clearly seen from the lunar surface during the day tme with the Sun shining brightly .. He did not include in that statement anything about adapting one's eyes , standing in a shadow or looking in any specific direction .... Nor did he include the need to look through "the optics" , as stated by Neil Armstrong , the first man allegedy on the Moon .

[Duane Daman]

Why not? ... Are you seriously suggesting time lapse images of stars above an overexposed Moon setting wouldn't have been of any interest to an agency that concentrates on star photography?

Why would they take images of the stars from the lunar surface when the CSM in lunar orbit was taking images of the stars when required? Noting, of course, that the large majority of images were pre-planned, both for the lunar surface exploration and the lunar orbits.

You have stated that the third astronaut in the orbiting CM WAS BUSY TAKING PHOTOS OF THE STARS while the two others were on the surface. ... Could you please back up that claim by providing the file numbers of those alleged photos ?

[Craig Lamson]

But once again the bottom line is what astronomer Phil Plait stated ... He said that stars could be clearly seen from the lunar surface during the day tme with the Sun shining brightly .. He did not include in that statement anything about adapting one's eyes , standing in a shadow or looking in any specific direction .... Nor did he include the need to look through "the optics" , as stated by Neil Armstrong , the first man allegedy on the Moon .[/b]

Perhaps you can tell us how it might be possible to see stars WITHOUT letting ones eyes dark adapt. Or you can ask Phil directly.

Edited October 6, 2007 by Craig Lamson

[Evan Burton]

You have stated that the third astronaut in the orbiting CM WAS BUSY TAKING PHOTOS OF THE STARS while the two others were on the surface. ... Could you please back up that claim by providing the file numbers of those alleged photos ?

The Digital Image Collection server is down right now, so I can't get you some better images but in the meantime here is one:

AS16-123-19657

Details of the experiment from Apollo 15:

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/Master...1-063A&ex=4

Details from Apollo 16:

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/Master...2-031A&ex=4

[Duane Daman]