Duane Daman

Am I the only one who noticed that Lewis has changed his location ID to MIDDLE GEORGIA instead of a certain AFB which he used to have? But he has changed his photo to one in Air Force uniform on a motorcycle. Do his postings represent the view of the Air Force? Jack Nice detective work Jack ! ... Looks like you just outted another one of the nation's military/industrial complex's brainwashed drones . What a good little soldier , defending his country's lies about landing men on the moon .

I not only read your original post , I debunked it . Read it again... if you can .

More mindless flame baiting from our resident sociopath . The astronots never did take photographs of the really important things did they? .... I guess they were too busy photographing their bootprints .

lamson ... What is worthless here is your meaningless off topic nonsense about nothing ... You can't refute the Apollo hoax evidence and you can't prove the Apollo photos were really taken on the moon , so instead you play psycho games and nit pick things which are not even important .... Who gives a crap what the Kodac film is or isn't called ... The point is , it would have fogged under the radioactive conditions on the moon .... And how would you expect me to know the radiation levels on the moon , when nasa and their astro-actors don't even know the answer to that very important question . This is what scientists DO know today though ... The entire lunar surface is radioactive and not condusive to supporting human beings ... They also know that for humans to ever walk on the moon , they are going to need a boat load of radiation shielding and the kind of spacesuit protection which didn't exist for the Apollo astroNOTS . They also know that nasa doesn't have the technology to land humans on the moon today and most likely won't have it until they make several UNMANNED trips there first .... First, according to a recent nasa article , to crash rockets into the lunar surface ( too funny ) .... Second, to send robots to test the radiation levels on the lunar surface , and then maybe send humans , if the conditions will allow . Yet we are supossed to believe that nasa soft landed six manned missions there with 38 year old conventional technology ... That is so ludicrous it is laughable .

Can you prove that Nathan Jones is not this person ? ... And more importantly , can you prove that his Apollo FAQ are wrong ? .... Without copying Jay Utah's lame attempts of rebuttal , that is . It would seem as if you don't have anything original to offer to any subject ... except for more insults .

lamson .... I didn't see you making "toast" of any of Jones' claims ....It looks as though Matt has done all of the hard work ... Even if it is just more nasa disinformation copied form Bad Astronomy and clavius . Me thinks the sociopath never had an argument .

I believe it is Dr. Neville Jones who is the physicist and Nathan Jones who is an astronomer ... Apparently some people were claiming that Dr. Nathan Jones was a non-existant person , like Charles T. Hawkins ... but I found these sites which proves Nathan Jones does exist .. Plus some unkind comments ( go figure ) about him on Bad Astronomy . PH4011 Spring 2002 11 am, Nathan Jones, Night Sky Photometry With CONCAM. Apr. 18 4 pm, Peter Hoffmann, Dept of Physics & Astronomy, Wayne State University, "Touching Atoms ... www.phy.mtu.edu/~gagin/PH4011-s02.html http://www.phy.mtu.edu/~gagin/PH4011-s02.html Chemistry News-uwo Nathan Jones and Paul Ragogna are receipients of Early Researcher Awards from the ... along with the Department of Physics and Astronomy and the Faculty of ... www.uwo.ca/chem/aboutus/news.htm http://www.uwo.ca/chem/aboutus/news.htm President Paul Davenport ... Andrew Leask, Department of Oral Biology; Nathan D. Jones, Department of Chemistry ... Department of Physics and Astronomy, Department of Pharmacology ... www.uwo.ca/pvp/honour_roll/faculty/research/prea.htm http://www.uwo.ca/pvp/honour_roll/faculty/research/prea.htm

I proved you wrong again ...( Kodac land film ) ... The regualar Kodak film was allegedy exposed to lunar surface radiation and all of the important and informed photographers know that radiation would have fogged the Apollo film , and had an adverse effect on the photos taken on the lunar surface .... If you want to pretend that I'm ignorant , then go right ahead ... but I really doubt that you are fooling anyone but yourself ... but when it comes to those with sociopathic personality disorders , I guess that's all that really matters , isn't it ? ... Fooling yourself that you are alway right and everyone else is wrong ... Oh , and that you are more important than you really are ... You definately have that little personality problem also .

Duane, using the word ignorance in regard to your demonstrated lack of photographic knowlege is not an insult at all, it's simply the perfect word to describe the state of your understanding. ig·no·rance (ĭg'nər-əns) n. The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. lamson , using the word sociopathic in regard to your demonstrated lack of humanity is not an insult at all , it's simply the perfect word to describe the state of your sad mental condition . so·ci·o·path (ss--pth, -sh-) n. One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior. Duane, I see you have assumed you had the mental ability to either describe or insult another person....you don't. Me thinks the sociopath protests too much .

Duane I've explained this phenomenon, and Dr Jones misinterpretation of it, several times, and very clearly. Why does Dr Jones call it an "outlandish claim" that the "rays" should trace back to the sun? And what of his claims re HST, lunar illumination, stars rotating above a stationary earth? Agree or disagree? Why are you focusing on this one small point about the sun's rays ? .. Because it's the only point you could find to play games with perhaps ? I read the article by Dr. Jones and it didn't look as though he was making those claims himself , but rather quoting the writings of scientists from the 18th and 19th centuries .. But that article has NOTHING to do with his opinions and evidence about APOLLO !! ... And this is why I completely lose patience with the way you discuss this subject ... You constantly go off topic and attack the messenger and not the message . Your lame attempts to discredit Dr. Jones does nothing to prove your case .

Duane, using the word ignorance in regard to your demonstrated lack of photographic knowlege is not an insult at all, it's simply the perfect word to describe the state of your understanding. ig·no·rance (ĭg'nər-əns) n. The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. lamson , using the word sociopathic in regard to your demonstrated lack of humanity is not an insult at all , it's simply the perfect word to describe the state of your sad mental condition . so·ci·o·path (ss--pth, -sh-) n. One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior.

If you really believe that Dr. Nathan Jones is just another ordinary hoax believer , then how about trying to refute his Apollo Faq evidence ? ... Instead of worrying about his credentials , why not worry about the fact that he scientifically proves that Apollo was faked right here on Earth ? As far as what you are claiming about Dr. Neville Jones , you have taken his comments very much out of context and twisted them around to suit your position, as usual .... And why would anyone but a moron believe that Nathan and Neville are the same person ? .... One is a physicist , the other is an astronomer and they have different names . What I find so dishonorable about all of you who defend the bogus Apollo Program , is the fact that you attack the messenger instead of the MESSAGE ! ... You have all repeatedly attacked both Dr. Jones the physicist , Dr. Jones the astronomer , and me because you don't agree with our opinions about Apollo .... and you wonder why I insult you all in return ? ... Unbelievable . I can't post one topic thread here without all of you playing games and taking it completely off topic .

lamson .. To be able to burn someone's toast , you would first have to know how to use a toaster.... and so far you have shown no sign of burning anything , much less the toast of Dr. Neville Jones . Here's a web site link that seems to think some Kodak film uses the term "land" in it .. "See Sponsored Links For: Kodak land film, underwater camera , camera batteries , wholesale cameras , camera lens ..." http://search.aol.com/aolcom/search?invoca...k%20land%20film And here's some even more interesting info about the Kodak film that went to the 'moon' , copied from the book 'Dark Moon'. "KODAC KARE AN EASTMAN KODAK BROCHURE FROM THE 1950's Protection from x-rays In hospitials , industrial plants and laboratories, all films , regardless of the type of packing, must be protected from X-rays, radium ,and other radioactive materials. For example ,films stored 25 feet away from 100 miligrams of radium require the protection of 3 1/2inches of lead around the radium . AN EASTMAN KODAC BROCHURE FROM THE 1990's Protect film from x-rays X-rays can fog unprocessed film when the level of radiation is high or when the film receives several low-level doses , because the effects of x-ray exposures are cumulative ." ................................. Yet we are suppossed to believe that the regular Kodak film which was taken to the radioactive moon could be changed while on the lunar surface , without any special protection from the radiation and then take unfogged , perfect studio quality photos without any signs of radiation exposure ..... Right .

Yes , I have seen this footage before and it's just as ridiculous looking this time around ... Regardless of the fact that it took one or two astro-actors to deploy the buggy , there still should have been some still photos taken of this momentous event , don't you think ? .... After all , it was far more interesting then snapping dozens of photos of bootprints on the moon set . I saw the other video over three years ago , so I don't remember which training session it was or where to find it .... But I do recall now that it was not an astronot doing the deploying but an engineer .

In the picture you posted the sun is just above some of the clouds and just below some of the others ...Why would this picture prove Dr. Jones wrong about perspective ?

I see I will need to post other photos of the PLSS pack shadows to prove my claim of the shadow being backwards ... I cut and pasted the Dr. Jones, the physicist and Dr. Jones , the astronomer's claims here because they are not only correct but no one here has managed to refute either one of their claims , except with the typical fanatical pretense of the average dishonest nasa defender .... Should I bump Dr. Nathan Jones' article forward so you can pretend to refute that one also ? .. Because so far no one else has even gone near it . You are as laughable as those lying Apollo astronots ... Do you really think you are more intelligent than an astronomer and a physicist , who both have proven that Apollo was a hoax ? ... Nevermind , I don't even want to read your answer to that one ... What an insulting , condesceding xxxxx you turned out to be ... but since it's either your job or your sworn duty to lie for nasa , I don't know why should I be surprised by any low life tactics you choose to use . To answer your question ... The shadow conforms to being taken on a moon set because it was pasted in the photo after the fact .... BACKWARDS !

Jack ... I think Dave blew this one off before by saying that the buggy would have driven through that big rut just fine and if it did tip over , the astro-actor could have just picked up the dang thang and carried it to a safer location... Or some kind of nonsense close to that . The shadow isn't just suspicious , it's backwards ... Trust me on this ... I wouldn't have posted it here if I hadn't checked out other photos first to be sure .

Len ... It's not a question of "buying a bill of goods" from anyone ... It's a question of the fact that no one here can refute either of the Dr. Jones' claims about Apollo being a hoax , so they try to attack him personally instead by questioning his credentials .... It's a tactic known as attacking the messenger because you don't like the message ... and this tactic is an old one, used by those who can't disprove someone's evidence . Jan Lundberg's claims about the Kodak Land film can be found in the documentary 'Conspiracy Theory: Did we Land on the Moon ?' and also the book 'Dark Moon' by David Percy and Mary Bennett ... Both authors travelled to the Hasslebald Company and interviewed Mr. Lundberg in person .... That's how they found out what type of film was used in the Apollo Hassleblad cameras... Regular Kodak Land film . If you bothered to read Dr. Neville Jones' article , I think it's very obvious how extensive his photographic experience is ... He was able to blow his opponent right out the water and prove that the Apollo photography was faked right here on Earth .... That's all the credentials I need to see .

I have no idea what C is , but it sure doesn't look like his arms . I have looked at enough phony Apollo photos to know how the PLSS pack shadows look .. and this shadow is not only in an incorrect position because of how the astronot is leaning over , but it is backwards ... If you need me to post some other photos showing the PLSS pack shadows , I will be happy to show you the proof of my claims ..... Plus some other photos with impossible shadows .

What is backwards ? .... The entire shadow .... You are starting the game early , I see . Correction: D ) BACKPACK E ) HEAD Nice try .. but do you really think it will fool the other fools who lie for nasa ? Take a good look at the other astronot photos taken on the moon set and you will see that "D" is the PLSS pack .

What is this magical 'depth perception' that I believe exists in 2d photos? How about photographs of the REAL MOON taken by UNMANNED missions ... I will post some of the real moon photos here so you can see the difference between them and the Apollo fakes .

If the phony Apollo 'moon' mountains have any 3D depth to them , it's only because one painted mountain flat may have been positioned behind another one ... The fact that there is no depth perception in most of the Apollo photos is one of the main reasons the photos look so fake .... Had they really been taken on a real planet , the mountains would have appeared to be miles away from the foreground subjects , instead of only several feet away .... Plus , they would have looked like real mountains , instead of the painted scenery they so obviously were.

I am going to devote this thread to posting some of nasa's most obvious of blunders when faking the official Apollo photographic record . I expect the nasa defenders here to attempt to try to debunk this evidence of photographic fakery on nasa's part , but I do not intend to get caught up in the ridiculous game playing that always takes place here , as it is a waste of time and I have many fake photos to research ....So don't expect me to reply to your typical nonsense and off topic attacks , used as distraction tactics . This first photo has been kicked around before ... but usually because of the weird placement of the lunar buggy tire tracks that plunge right into the crater , which of course would have tipped over the buggy had the astro-actor really driven through that silly looking man made hole on the moon set ... But in focusing on the strange placement of the tire tracks, made by a possible whistle blower , I failed to notice what really proves that this photo is a studio fake .... THE ASTRONOT'S SHADOW ! ... Not only does his shadow not bend forward with him but it was placed in the photo BACKWARDS !!! ... Oppppssss .... I would say this is one of nasa's BIGGEST CLANGERS ! Look at the placement of the PLSS pack in the shadow ... and compare it to other astronot's shadows ... I don't know how I missed this one until now . AS15-85-11437 ... Commander/Actor Dave Scott pretending to be walking on the moon .

The depth perception I am referring to is the fact that the moon set stages were usually only about 50 to 100 feet in depth .. and most of the fake painted mountain scenery was obviously only a few feet away from the astro-actors, who were usually in the foreground in the faked moon photos .... The only time any real distance could be observed was when small scale models were used . All of this photographic fakery evidence is discussed and proven in the documentary 'What Happened on the Moon' . lamson ... Don't you know any other insults besides the word "ignorant" ? ... Because you've posted it so many times now that it's beginning to lose it's 'importance' ...

Well it looks as though nasa couldn't make up their minds if it took one or two astro-actors to deploy their moon ride ... The video I saw showed only one astroman doing the job . But let's give your nasa disinforamtion the benefit of the doubt and say it did take two actors to get the job done .... Why didn't anyone stop long enough to snap one of those thousands of Apollo photos while they were in the act of deploying the buggy ? Like Jack said .. It would have been a great publicity stunt for nasa if they had only remembered to somehow snap a few little piccys of this historic non-event .