Terry Felter

Not much to say except that argument appears to be a cover up itself.

IIRC Nixon's aides orchestrated the break in to get whatever dirt was in the files.  That was ostensibly used to gain an advantage for the election.  IIRC this is Derek and his "John".  this had nothing to do with Apollo or to try to deflect attention away from Apollo.  It was just a paranoid individual attempting to get re-elected.

We're approaching 50 years with the probability of many videos chronicling the vogue.

Of course you could watch a different video of the same conference that doesn't cheery pick the worst parts.  Clearly this producer believes that a hoax was conducted, but nothing could be further than the truth.

I even ran onto Duane Daman on YTube.  He was much more polite than some of his posts that I have read here.

I stumble upon these threads periodically, reading from start to finish.  The debate took several days to complete.  I am truly sorry that I wasn'r a member until very recently to weigh into the willfully ignorant people and their beliefs.

Sad to think it has been that long with no exploration beyond LEO.  At least there are plans to conduct some exploration with the SLS and third party(SpaceX maybe Blue Horizon) plans for exploration beyond LEO.

I have not heard anything pro or con from any side of the issue in many months. Pre-haps the hoaxers gave up on him as he has died and can not provide anymore off the cuff statements.

I have from time to time run onto hoaxers that claim that "Photoshop" or "Ducky" in an images Metadata area proves that the image has been altered. Now from what I've read those data indicate only that the software that converted the image to digital was "Photoshop" or other. What I'm asking how would it be possible to ascertain whether or not a file was altered either using this information or in conjunction with other data in the file header?

The idiots Marcus Allen, David Percy(et al), Bart Sibrel make money by positioning against the landings and in my belief won't ever admit the landings occurred, nor get the science pertaining to the images including NVIDIA's current work.

Here is another version that does not include him cursing his superiors. It was/is difficult to ascertain the truth with such a secret society along with relying on the secretive organizations monitoring them.

http://www.wbur.org/npr/135919389/a-cosmonauts-fiery-death-retold

It would be neat to have a rover land near one the crash sites and do a photo shoot of the mess made during impact.

I see that the old "Kubrick admits he faked the landings" meme is rearing its ugly head again:

https://youtu.be/T20DS4Bynt4

I can't remember if Jack White ever supported this (maybe it was Fetzer?) but it is easily disproven garbage. Despite how laughable this is, there are the weak minded who use it to support their beliefs without doing the most basic research on its authenticity. It reminds me of the mockumentry "Dark Side of the Moon" regarding Kubrick, where people were 'coming forward' to admit that it was faked: names like Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Haig... who all appeared in roles they never held or indeed for 'enemy' countries! (I think Rumsfeld appeared as a Russian spy or as the Soviet ambassador).

It really is an indictment on the credulity of some people these days: "it's on the internet so it MUST be true!".

The video has been taken down.

"It really is an indictment on the credulity of some people these days: "it's on the internet so it MUST be true!"."

This is a sad but very often true commentary on todays society with the need for instant gratification.

From http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-48-7100HR.jpg the lander "appears" to be sitting higher in the crater than those taken from the LM area. That alone should force a re-thinking of what to expect in Lunar image expectations.

Thanks, I didn't zoom originally, but with your arrows it is in plain site.

This was posted in Apollohoax.net this morning

http://io9.com/jeff-bezos-recovered-apollo-rocket-parts-have-been-pres-1722897200

Since their recovery, conservationists at the Cosmosphere International SciEd Center and Space Museum have been hard at work preserving the machines.

“We were able to identify part numbers and serial numbers as we got deeper into the treatment process,” Remar said. “There was a stencil painted on one of the Apollo 12 thrust chambers that was still visible, so we were able to identify that via the stencil. But other components were [discerned by] finding the part number and serial number.”

Additionally, they discovered that they had recovered “a thrust chamber, a liquid oxygen (LOX) dome and injector plate, a turbo pump and a heat exchanger from Apollo 11,” as well as “two thrust chambers and a LOX dome with an injector plate from Apollo 12 and a heat exchanger, a turbine and inlet manifold from Apollo 16.” The conservators also believe that they have some parts from Apollo 13.

It is good that some younger folks have that ability, instead of just watching a HB video on YT and come away with the wrong idea/perception.

Good for you!

Interesting to see that some of the ol' rabid HBs are now loudly decrying the landing of the PRC's Chang'e 3 lunar lander and explorer, claiming it is "faked". Laughably, some are using the already debunked "classic claims" from the Apollo days.

Of course, some asked if the Chang'e 3 could image the Apollo landing sites; when told that the nearest site was about 1000KM away, a HB posted "How convenient". Thus is the mind of a HB.

Congratulations to the PRC on a great achievement.

In addition, the HB's bemoan the fact of a buffer zone around A11 and A17

http://www.space.com/13346-nasa-guidelines-protect-apollo-moon-landing-sites.html

The Blunder from Down Under has added comment is his LRO series concerning the no-fly and buffer zones.

SUSPECT SURVEYOR III IN SHADOW

According to the information from ALSJ, the object in image AS12-46-6740 is Surveyor. You can also see it in a few other images from EVA-1 (most notably the LM pans). AS12-46-6740 was taken at a GET of 116 hrs 22 min. When that image was taken, the sun angle was about 8 degrees above the horizon. The sun is hitting the top of the Surveyor.

When the other image of Surveyor (AS12-48-7133) was taken during EVA-2, it was a GET of 133 hrs 46 min; some 17-odd hours later. During that time, the sun has risen and is now about 17 degrees above the horizon, lighting up Surveyor and the crater.

If you look at AS12-46-6741 (GET 116hrs 22min), the edge of the shadow is just touching two small craters.

If you look at AS12-47-6948 (GET 118hrs 28min), the edge of the shadow is withdrawing into the crater, and has moved from the two small craters.

By the time EVA-2 happened, the crater was in full sunlight.

Jack also asks why they didn't take any photos from the LM to Surveyor. Generally, because that was into sun. There were some pan shots taken, but they were during EVA-1. During EVA-2, when the crater was lit, they approached from the opposite side. Here's a travers map of EVA-2:

Apollo 12 EVA-2 Travese Map (A12-S69-59538)

Once more, all logical explanations, and no anomolies.

I don't see any Surveyor in either of these images. Are the numbers correct? If they are could you give a position of where the Surveyor is?

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-46-6741HR.jpg'>http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-46-6741HR.jpg and http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-47-6948HR.jpg'>http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-47-6948HR.jpg

In the second image I do see a small dot that is a different color in the crater, but nothing in the first image.

Well, since Jim won't do it, would anyone else like to summarise the claim(s)? I'm quite happy to answer but am not going to waste bandwidth on downloading JW rubbish.

I only watched one, in it he complained that some rover tracks from Apollo 15 were more visible than others in the LRO photos. I assumed it was because of difference in the soil.

Or it could have been the sun angle on those tracks.

A couple of quick questions.

I see most of Jack's posts, but nowhere do I see Mr. Darman's posts? I remember that you had indicated he had a problem with email validation, so are these posts from another thread/forum?

Since I was unaware of Aulis website until about 2-3 months ago and this thread is 9 years old, have they taken down what has been debunked in the ensuing time period?

I nearly have a headache reading this whole thread, but it was worth it. My initial impression of Mr. White's ability was vastly overestimated. Like many he spouts a reel of question but never will debate a solution. The know they are right, don't confuse them with facts that prove them wrong.

Good job on the restoration, I wished I had been around here 10 years ago.

SUSPECT SURVEYOR III IN SHADOW

According to the information from ALSJ, the object in image AS12-46-6740 is Surveyor. You can also see it in a few other images from EVA-1 (most notably the LM pans). AS12-46-6740 was taken at a GET of 116 hrs 22 min. When that image was taken, the sun angle was about 8 degrees above the horizon. The sun is hitting the top of the Surveyor.

When the other image of Surveyor (AS12-48-7133) was taken during EVA-2, it was a GET of 133 hrs 46 min; some 17-odd hours later. During that time, the sun has risen and is now about 17 degrees above the horizon, lighting up Surveyor and the crater.

If you look at AS12-46-6741 (GET 116hrs 22min), the edge of the shadow is just touching two small craters.

If you look at AS12-47-6948 (GET 118hrs 28min), the edge of the shadow is withdrawing into the crater, and has moved from the two small craters.

By the time EVA-2 happened, the crater was in full sunlight.

Jack also asks why they didn't take any photos from the LM to Surveyor. Generally, because that was into sun. There were some pan shots taken, but they were during EVA-1. During EVA-2, when the crater was lit, they approached from the opposite side. Here's a travers map of EVA-2:

Apollo 12 EVA-2 Travese Map (A12-S69-59538)

Once more, all logical explanations, and no anomolies.

I don't see any Surveyor in either of these images. Are the numbers correct? If they are could you give a position of where the Surveyor is?

Evan:

I believe a short sticky at the front of this forum might help navigating. Sometime between the original postings and current (10 Aug 2015) NASA has changed the links to the ALSJ.

An example would be one of the original image link:

"http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/as15-85-11450HR.jpg"

is now:

"http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-85-11450.jpg"

The folder locations: /office/pao/Hisoryhave been deleted.

Thanks

First post here, but not other places.

I'm a graduate engineer working in the oil/gas operations area since 1969. I never published anything just use those tools that the authors have presented in ways to help optimize what I supervise.

My interests are in space, programming and gaming.