Evan Burton

If in fact there is no documentation for either Collins or NASA asserting that this image is an actual photograph of the Gemini-10 EVA, how can you allege that they IMPLIED it when in fact Collins explicitly states (on page 254 of the Ballantine edition) that there WERE no photographs of his EVA: "One of the great disappointments of the flight was that there were no photos of my spacewalk.

[...] All we had was the film from one movie camera, [...] which recorded an uninterrupted sequence of black sky [...] I was really feeling sorry for myself, unable to produce graphic documentation for my grandchildren of my brief sally as a human satellite [...]" Therefore, by Collin's own account, can't we conclude that any picture of him in a spacesuit is not that of the Gemini EVA?

Nice twist of words from Oberg ... The full quote was "One of the great disappointments of the flight was that there were no photos of my spacewalk OVER THE AGENA .... Collins is simply stating that there wasn't any footage of him performing a specific procedure during his spacewalk and that was approaching the Agena.... I'd be interested to know where Oberg got this misquote from given his demonstrated ignorance about the 1975 edition.

Pretty clear-cut to me. I'm not surprised Rene never answered. He'd either have to face losing $10,000 or admitting he was wrong... something that many of these Hoax Believers seem loathe to do. Instead he just ignores it.

I'm not surprised why he never answered, considering Ralph Rene' never got those supposed letters from Oberg.... The best excuse the propagandists can give is that the post office lost all the letters sent over FIVE YEARS !! ...And they still continue to insist that Rene' was privately offered this money, even after the release of video 'Carrying The xxxx ' ???

Moonfaker: Carrying The xxxx

Since Oberg is now a member of the Education Forum, why not let's see if he's willing to bet 10,000 dollars for proof that he actually sent those letters off to Ralph Rene' ?

If you want to talk about turning down money, why not start with the $5,000 that Neil Armstrong refused to accept from Bart Sibrel? ...Or the $1,000,000 that Phil Plait offered for anyone who shows video of astronauts making great jumps during lunar EVA, you know, the $1,000,000 that Plait refused to pay when greenmagoos showed such footage.

The sub-orbital lobs probably did not allow the astronaut's eyes time time adjust and see the stars.

What about Melvil's flight ? .... His was suborbital also and he could see the STARS AND PLANETS ON THE DAYLIGHT SIDE OF THE EARTH .

Sorry - you are willing to bet Jim Oberg $10,000 that he either never sent the letter to Rene, or that Rene never received it?

I just want to be totally clear about this.

Well, to be fair, you can do that but images are now regularly culled. It is preferable if you use Photobucket or whatever, though.

To quote some astronauts on the subject:

Neil Armstrong: “The sky is black, you know,” “It’s a very dark sky.”

At times it is to the astronauts. Nothing strange.

Mike Collins on Gemini 10:: “My God, the stars are everywhere: above me on all sides, even below me somewhat, down there next to that obscure horizon. The stars are bright and they are steady.” This was written 14 years after, and remember that the Gemini 10 space walk photo shown here has now been proven fake.

No, as we have been saying many times, the photo is NOT "fake"; it is the image from the C-135 with the background blanked out. Mr Brown continues to follow Rene's lead.

Mike Collins on Apollo 11: “I can’t see the earth, only the black starless sky behind the Agena,... As I slowly cartwheel away from the Agena, I see nothing but the black sky for several seconds...” “What I see is disappointing for only the brightest stars are visible through the telescope, and it is difficult to recognize them when they are not accompanied by the dimmer stars...”

Mr Brown has shot himself in the foot here; the quote mentions the Agena. The Agena target vehicles were used on the Gemini flights, not Apollo. This was probably during Gemini X again. During the EVA, Collins had to go over to the Agena and retrieve a scientific package. The second quote may have been from Apollo 11, where they had a star sighting telescope in the CM.

Gene Cernan on Apollo 17: “When the sunlight comes through the blackness of space, it’s black. I didn’t say it’s dark, I said black. So black you can’t even conceive how black it is in your mind. The sunlight doesn’t strike on anything, so all you see is black.”

This is a good description of what happens when you are in sunlight in space; you eyes are adjusted to bright light levels, so you don't see any of the stars because they are too dim in comparison.

Yuri Gagarin, first Russian cosmonaut: “Astonishingly bright cold stars could be seen through the windows.”

I'm unsure of when in the flight he said this, but in this case his eyes had adjusted.

If one were to add up all the astronauts’ stated observations of the appearance of space above the atmosphere one would come to the conclusion that they were either crazy, incompetent or they never went, or, perhaps some of them were lying???

Now this is the opinion of Mr Brown... but he doesn't show evidence of this (though he gives quotes later). If one understand the circumstances, then his statement would be obviously flawed. I also have to ask - is he saying that none of the orbital missions ever happened? Reading on, this would appear to be the case.

Alan Sheppard[sic], first American to be catapulted up reported seeing no stars, ditto for Virgil Grissom. John Glenn reported seeing some brighter stars only (and he saw those weird “fireflies”).

Some quick background: Shepard's flight was sub-orbital, as was Grissom's. These were high-altitude 'lobs', lasting about 15 mins. Glenn's flight was orbital. That's why Shepard is first American in space, but Glenn was the first American in orbit.

Secondly, Shepard's Mercury capsules did not have a window; it only had a periscope to view with. Grissom and Glenn's capsules (as well as all following capsules) did have windows.

The sub-orbital lobs probably did not allow the astronaut's eyes time time adjust and see the stars; they may not have even been looking at them, concentrating on ground features and the horizon.

The 'fireflies' were determined on later flights to be ice crystals being dislodged from the spacecraft.

The television footage of the first Moon landing was very poor. While having access to the finest of technology, NASA would not allow a direct feed of the footage, but forced networks and news services to film through an optically enlarged television screen, adding quite a bit of distortion.

No, Rene has got it wrong again. Bandwidth limitations forced the use of what was called Slow Scan TV (SSTV). The priorities for transmission at the time were something like:

- Biomedical data

- Systems telemetry

- Voice

- Television

There were people who thought that television should have been given a higher priority, but mission planner put crew safety and mission success first. There would be plenty of photographic images to study; television would be a bonus. This meant that only limited bandwidth was available for the TV. This meant a system of 320 lines per scan (frame), and 10 frames per second.

This was transmitted LIVE to Earth. Commercial standard in the US, however, was 525 lines and 30 frames per second. The conversion process was done on-site and then transmitted to the world. The conversion system, though, is not dissimilar to what Rene says.

In essence, a commercial TV camera filmed the SSTV transmission being displayed on a monitor. This was a reliable conversion system for local formats (the Australian TV format was different again from the US).

Full details can be found here.

During the Apollo 16 lunar lift-off the camera followed the ship up off the surface. No one was left on the Moon, so who panned the camera?

There was a camera on the LRV which could be remotely controlled from Earth. This was used to film the ascent stage liftoff from Apollos 15, 16, and 17. It was also used to film the landing site after the astronauts had left.

NASA later claimed that the camera was radio controlled from Earth, but how could they have followed the ship so closely given the transmission time lag? Kentucky windage?

The man responsible for the camera was Ed Fendell, otherwise known as 'Captain Video'. Trying to judge the correct timing for the commands to the TV camera was very difficult. He got it pretty well perfect on the final mission (Apollo 17).

Some further details can be found here.

Don't believe them, Stephen! They are nothing but disinformation agents! After all how often do you see a hamster doing this?

Or this?

MR FLAPPY WAS AN ALIEN!

Let's see... that was resolved in several places:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=57766

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=80361

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=80376

Next!

Was it really necessary to post your messge to me on the boards though? .. You could have easily sent me an e-mail instead of throwing your misguided moderator weight around by always playing games with Jack and me , your two biggest adversaries concerning Apollo .

As I said, your PM box was full. It was necessary to ensure you knew that James Oberg was now a member, so anything you now said about him must fall within Forum guidelines. Although his biography is posted, and is noted as our newest member, you might have missed this and said something about him which would have contravened Forum rules regarding another member.

I posted here on this thread (where you made your initial accusations) as a courtesy to you in order to avoid such a situation... but you would seem to dislike such courtesy. Fair enough; I won't give you a heads-up about any matters in future. I expect you will note whatever changes / situations occur yourself and react to them appropriately.

Duane, your PM box is indicating full so I'll post this here:

You should be made aware of the fact that James Oberg has joined the Forum.

As he is now a Forum member, you may not call him a xxxx or anything similar unless you have undeniable proof, and you should clear your accusations with a Mod before you make any such accusations.

Since your previous comments were made prior to him joining, I see no need for them to be edited and the accusation removed. If Mr Oberg objects to you having previously called him a xxxx, we'll discuss the matter amongst the Mods and come to a consensus.

FYI

Thanks for letting me know about my PM box .. I have now deleted several messages to make room for future ones .

FYI ... Was it really necessary to post your messge to me on the boards though? .. You could have easily sent me an e-mail instead of throwing your misguided moderator weight around by always playing games with Jack and me , your two biggest adversaries concerning Apollo .

There is some rather conflicting evidence about Jim Oberg and his alleged contact and offer to Ralph Rene' ... As you already know , I tought he was asking Ralph to prove that the phony Collins photo was in the book, not that it might have a caption with it as to it's reality .... But as we all now know , there was no caption with the photo, nor was there any disclaimer either that the PICTURE WAS A FAKE.

If you want to delete any reference I made to him being a xxxx , I have no problem with that .

No, that has been pointed out several times. Jim's original letter to Rene said it, and we have repeated it several times here:

He wants to know where NASA has ever said it was an "official" image, that it was taken during a mission, etc. I'll iterate part of the letter, just to refresh everyones memory:

First question: Where does Collins or anyone else allege that this image shows him on his EVA, as you state that he does and is this “a xxxx”. Please provide citation to the book’s text or to any public statements made by Collins in discussing his book. You write that the picture was “allegedly taken during a space walk”. Please cite that allegation. Would you be willing to bet $10,000 that you can find such explicit evidence?

Second question: where does NASA present this image as portraying the Gemini-10 EVA? Is there any press release photograph, any publication, any non-NASA publication citing NASA as source of this image, any website, that presents this image with NASA’s explicit description of it as showing the Gemini-10 EVA. You claim they have done so, and your exact words: “Why did NASA feel it necessary to fake pictures and lie to us as early as July 1966?” Please cite exactly where this lie originally occurred. Would you be willing to bet $10,000 that you can find such explicit evidence?

Third question: If in fact there is no documentation for either Collins or NASA asserting that this image is an actual photograph of the Gemini-10 EVA, how can you allege that they IMPLIED it when in fact Collins explicitly states (on page 254 of the Ballantine edition) that there WERE no photographs of his EVA: “One of the great disappointments of the flight was that there were no photos of my spacewalk. [...] All we had was the film from one movie camera, [...] which recorded an uninterrupted sequence of black sky [...] I was really feeling sorry for myself, unable to produce graphic documentation for my grandchildren of my brief sally as a human satellite [...]” Therefore, by Collin's own account, can’t we conclude that any picture of him in a spacesuit is not that of the Gemini EVA?

Pretty clear-cut to me. I'm not surprised Rene never answered. He'd either have to face losing $10,000 or admitting he was wrong... something that many of these Hoax Believers seem loathe to do. Instead he just ignores it.

Way to go, Rene.

Craig,

I took a copy of both normal sized images and placed them side-by-side. The fiducials on the Apollo 17 image are generally hidden by the dark background, but the bottom row is visible and seemed to match up (horizontally) with Apollo 12 image. That said to me that both images were the same size.

I then just did a "looks like it to me" assessment of the relative sizes of each astronaut, and thought they they looked roughly the same size.

Trying to determine how you can estimate the relative size of each is problematic. Each would be a different height, posture might be different, which would introduce error in determining the relative distance of each to the other.

I suppose I could do a better check, and compare the vertical height of the OPS on each one; scale one to the other and note the difference. The OPS is something that will be the same size regardless... though they are at slightly different angles.

More thinking required.

Ooops - you are right. I should have used the hi-res version; the astronaut is a lot smaller in the Apollo 17 colour image.

Can you take me through how you determine that the distance are different? At first glance they seem to be about the same.

Sorry Evan but they were not taken from anywhere near the same camera to subject distance. The A17 helmet is about 20% smaller than the A12 helmet which indicates a change in distance.

Added on edit:

The A17 photo shows the astronaut reflection to be about 35% smaller than the A12 reflection. Thats a bit more tha the 20% reduction in size of the A17 Visor.

However I think the sizes are a perfect fit considering this:

118:26:08 Cernan: Try that one time, then we'll give up and get to work. (Long Pause)

[Jack holds the camera in his hand and gets it as low to the ground as he can without kneeling.]

1

18:26:26 Cernan: Point it up a little...Yeah. (Pause)

[This is AS17-134- 20385.]

I thought they looked about the same distance. I didn't check which lens were being used, etc, just a rough assessment.

Ref the visor image: what are you taking as the astronaut? I am using part of the smudge. I'll check the hi-res version and see if I am wrong.

Cheers.

Duane, your PM box is indicating full so I'll post this here:

You should be made aware of the fact that James Oberg has joined the Forum.

As he is now a Forum member, you may not call him a xxxx or anything similar unless you have undeniable proof, and you should clear your accusations with a Mod before you make any such accusations.

Since your previous comments were made prior to him joining, I see no need for them to be edited and the accusation removed. If Mr Oberg objects to you having previously called him a xxxx, we'll discuss the matter amongst the Mods and come to a consensus.

FYI

I had a look at the two images, side by side. They are AS12-48-7071 (left) and AS17-134-20385 (right).

Comparison of AS12-48-7071 (left) and AS17-134-20385 (right), with inset copy of visor area from AS17-134-20385

As you can see, they appear to be taken from about the same distance (there is a small difference). I have copied the visor section of the image on the right and placed it next to the visor on the left so you can compare the size of the reflections.

Here is an enlarged crop of that section:

As you can see, the reflected figures in each of the images is about the same size.

This comparison used the standard, and not hi-res, versions of the images.

I don't think that story is totally correct, either. I looked up that citation about being allowed to conduct tests on civilians (Title 50, Chapter 32, Section 1520) in the 1988 version of the United States Code and this is what I got:

The Secretary of Defense may not conduct any test or experiment involving the use of any chemical or biological agent on civilian populations unless local civilian officials in the area in which the test or experiment is to be conducted are notified in advance of such test or experiment, and such test or experiment may then be conducted only after the expiration of the thirty-day period beginning on the date of such notification.

it was the same in the 1994 version of the code. I'll see if I can find the 1977 version.

Someone may want to check me on this, because I am not familiar with searching through US laws.

But the Illuminati are the NWO. Has the Skull and Bones Auxiliary broken away from the NWO? I wonder how this affects the relationship with the Black Hats? Are they supporting only one faction, or both?

BTW, I have had some sources contact me to say although they cannot be certain in your specific situation, they believe it is unlikely your White Hat hamster will ever be seen alive again.

I don't know didley about electronic voting machines in the US, but I'd agree with Dave.

I mark my ballot forms, and they go into the ballot box to be counted. I'd be very wary of electronic voting.

But Stephen - the KGB is now the SVR and is merely an arm of the NWO!

Yes, yes, Jack. Just take a pill and calm down, okay?

Yet another attack by Jack White against me. Nothing new, and as always, no substance.

Jack,

To remove an attachment in a post you have made:

- Find the post you want to edit. In the bottom right-hand corner there is a button marked EDIT. Select that button.

- A drop down menu will appear with two options: QUICK EDIT and FULL EDIT. Select FULL EDIT.

- When the window changes, down the bottom right-hand area will be a section marked MANAGE CURRENT ATTACHMENTS followed by a down arrow. Hitting the down arrow brings up a list of the attachments for that post.

- The list will have a green plus sign (+) or a red cross sign (X) next to each attachment, and the name of the attachment. To remove the attachment, select the red (X) next to the attachment you want to remove.

- It will ask you to confirm that you want to remove that attachment. Select OK.

- Hit the SUBMIT MODIFIED POST button to save the post.

Stephen,

This is of interest to me and think I can explain what has happened.

The theory of Spontaneous Hamster Combustion is not correct, although this is what it appears to be to the untrained observer. In actual fact, it is a life form undergoing a Trans-dimensional Teleportation. Let me explain:

In the universe, there are basically two sets of intelligent races that actually control everything, one peaceful and benevolent, the other exploitive and malevolent. These creatures are pan-dimensional, and sometimes take a different form when in a specific dimension or reality.

The 'evil' force (whom I'll call Black Hats) will often use agents in the dimensions they are seeking to conquer or influence. In our case, they have aligned themselves with the New World Order (NWO) and Illuminati. The 'good' force (whom I'll call White Hats), on the other hand, has a principle of non-interference and act only when necessary and only against the Black Hats. They do not reveal themselves to us, do not align themselves with us, etc.

When the White Hats appear in our dimension, they take the form of hamsters. Not all hamsters are White Hats; in fact very, very few are. Most are just your run-of-the-mill hamsters. These White Hat hamsters are basically observers. They gather intelligence, conduct studies, and keep watch for Black Hat activity.

The Black Hats and their NWO minions are always trying to capture White Hats. Locating and tracking them can be very difficult, but the White Hats are apparently vulnerable to detection when sending their reports via Trans-dimensional Data Stream. If detected and under threat of imminent attack, they do an emergency Trans-dimensional Teleportation back to the safety of their own plane-of-existence. To us, this appears as spontaneous combustion.

You don't see or hear anything about this, though, because the NWO immediately removes any records of this happening. I fully expect that this thread itself, due to the revealing nature of its content, will soon disappear, no trace of it to be found, and the owners denying all suggestions that it ever existed.

Occasionally though, the Black Hats can successfully capture and interrogate White Hats (utilising human assistance under a sub-section of the infamous RENDITION programme).

This is what I believe has happened in this case.

The NWO, through the Black Hats, have a compound that when sprayed via chemtrails has the startling affect of slowing and stopping time to all those within its effective radius that are not protected against it. This means that the Black Hats / NWO can 'dust' an area, go in and take whatever action they want, and there will be absolutely no perception that anything ever happened - except a slight metallic odour. You can imagine the enormous tactical advantage this gives the Black Hats against we mere ordinary folk.

The one drawback with the system is that it is ineffective against a small number of terrestrial species, notably Felis catus. A cat can watch the whole thing occurring, witness an event of which you know nothing even though it happened in your presence! For reasons I don't yet understand, the Black Hats seem to fear cats witnessing their covert activities and so if detected in an area that they intend to operate, they will normally sedate them with a special drug call TRANQ-ILL. The cat is 'knocked out' but an after-effect for the pussy is nausea and vomiting.

So there we have it. In summary, the NWO dosed the area with a time-stopping compound in order to kidnap your hamster which was in actual fact an interdimensional observer.

On a slightly, but perhaps in some way connected, I'd like to add as an Environmental Scientist, it has long been known that contrails add to the 'cloud' cover that reflects solar radiation. An interesting experiment was done in the few days after 9/11 when most planes were grounded. The entire USA experienced about a statistically significant average 1-2 degree increase in temperature those days.

Yep, it was a very strong argument for the reduction in air services. Jet aircraft, specifically airliners, are coming under increasing pressure as they are a significant contributer to greenhouse gases (IIRC).

Nice excuse ...I wonder if NASA dreamt that one up after Rene' wrote his book ?

Can't win if they do, can't win if they don't.

According to you they either a) Faked the entire thing and forgot about the whip antenna

or Faked it and then faked the documentation.

You never consider option c) The HF Whip Antenna, was designed like that, from conception; that document was written around 40 years ago!!!

This also raises the question: WHY?

WHY fake an image? What was the purpose of having the antenna in the image if it could not survive re-entry? Why would it be placed there afterwards? (BTW, Rene was also wrong when he said HF was not used in space; it was).

WHY fake an image of an EVA when Collins himself says that there were no images of it; and there were plenty of other EVA images to use instead?

Is Rene claiming that the Gemini programme was faked?

That was answered in this post on this Forum.

BUZZ SALUTE ENDS UP ON THE CUTTING ROOM FLOOR

Or did it? Jack asks "Where are the missing photos?".

Simple answer - there aren't any.

WHAT? Why was Buzz saluting if not to pose for the camera?

Buzz Aldrin is a very patriotic man, and a proud military man - and he was saluting (he did so twice here) when he and Armstrong were talking to President Nixon.

From The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal:

110:16:25 McCandless: All right. Go ahead, Mr. President. This is Houston. Out.

110:16:30 Nixon: Hello, Neil and Buzz. I'm talking to you by telephone from the Oval Room at the White House, and this certainly has to be the most historic telephone call ever made. I just can't tell you how proud we all are of what you (garbled). For every American, this has to be the proudest day of our lives. And for people all over the world, I am sure they, too, join with Americans in recognizing what an immense feat this is. Because of what you have done, the heavens have become a part of man's world. And as you talk to us from the Sea of Tranquility, it inspires us to redouble our efforts to bring peace and tranquility to Earth. For one priceless moment in the whole history of man, all the people on this Earth are truly one; one in their pride in what you have done, and one in our prayers that you will return safely to Earth. (Pause)

[A frame from the 16-mm film shows Buzz on the left saluting at about 110:17:54, with Neil partially hidden by a LM thruster.]

110:17:44 Armstrong: Thank you, Mr. President. It's a great honor and privilege for us to be here representing not only the United States but men of peace of all nations, and with interests and the curiosity and with the vision for the future. It's an honor for us to be able to participate here today.

110:18:12 Nixon: And thank you very much and I look forward...All of us look forward to seeing you on the Hornet on Thursday.

110:18:21 Aldrin: I look forward to that very much, sir. (Pause)

[buzz salutes a second time, as does Neil a few seconds later. The Apollo 11 recovery ship is the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Hornet. An article adapted from the National Archives and Records Administration includes the relevant section of the President's Daily Diary and the split-screen TV image seen by most of the watching world.]

The clip from the television camera is also available.

A New Zealand correspondent also pointed out the following -

Buzz salutes five times, at 49:36, 51:11, 51:29, 57:34, and 57:46 in the first film of the EVA on the Spacecraft Films' DVD. Jack White, being such a good researcher, should know this. ;D

The first salute occurs between Mike Collins saying, "...just beautiful," and Neil Armstrong saying, "See if you can pull that end," so roughly between GET 110:09:50 and 109:10:16. The flag is nearly up and Buzz steps backwards to the right of the screen, almost up against the RCS thruster from that angle. As Buzz salutes, Neil is holding the flagpole in his right hand.

The next salute at 51:11 is probably when Neil takes his photo, AS11-40-5874. Buzz's right fingertips can be seen up at his visor and he holds them there for quite a long time.

Interestingly, White says that the next picture, AS11-40-5875, is of Buzz saluting, but it's not. In that one Buzz has dropped his right hand, swiveled his body a little to the left and is looking directly at Neil -- his face can be seen in hi-res versions of the photo.

Buzz salutes a third time soon after this at 52:29 and Neil is working with the camera but apparently not taking a photo.

For his fourth and fifth salutes, Buzz is facing the TV camera and saluting President Nixon, not the flag as White says. He does this at 57:34 just before the end of Nixon's call at about the time Neil stops speaking, and after saying "I look forward to that very much, sir" salutes briefly again at 57:46.

Until now, during the President's phone call, Neil has had both hands in front of his hips (nowhere near the camera) as he listens to and speaks to Nixon, and as Buzz's right hand comes down, Neil's comes up to salute too.

White says, "Clearly the movie shows Buzz following posing instructions and then saluting twice at each location." He missed the first salute, but why does he mention "posing instructions"? None are obvious at all, except for Bruce McCandless saying, "We'd like to get both of you in the field of view of the camera for a minute..."

And why does White claim that Neil is taking photos of Buzz's fourth and fifth salutes? We can't see what he's doing in the 16mm film because he is partly hidden, and the TV images clearly show that he doesn't take photos. It would have been disrespectful for him to do so while the President was speaking.