Can dirt on a lens cause flare?

[Dave Greer]

My "unwarrented attacks" are defensive blows against insulting , game playing , members here who will do whatever it takes to 'win' their argument .... So if my debating style seems a bit harsh to you , that would be the reason

Okey dokey, there's no point in playing "He said, she said" so I'll leave it at that.

...and I only dismiss evidence that I don't believe has much merit to it , not because I haven't bothered to read it .

I think it's the dismissing of evidence that plays a crucial part here. If you stated your reasons and gave good evidence for not agreeing with rebutals in the threads it would hopefully lead to more interesting debate. It tends to degenerate a bit at the moment unfortunately.

Look at it from my point of view. Would you consider it a valid rebuttal for me to say, Jack White's study has no merit, so I'll just dismiss it? I've started several threads on this forum specifically to look into his claims in detail, and show with empirical evidence why I think his studies are wrong. A lot of time goes into them. If the same amount of time went into detailed counter-rebuttals, we might have some useful debate going. We might all learn something.

I have read every post that you and lamson have written about photography and have learned a lot about the subject ... I have also learned that neither one of you are capable of ever admitting that you might be mistaken about the validity of every single Apollo photo.. and now I understand why it's so important for you to win this argument ... and it has also become very clear why I am wasting my time arguing about it with you ... Your minds are made up that Apollo was real and that the Apollo photos were really taken on the Moon ...So because of that , neither one of you knows how to be objective about this subject or open to the idea that nasa faked some , if not all of their Apollo photos ..

I have no doubt that the Apollo photos are fakes ... In fact many millions of people can see they are fake ... but there are many people who can't or won't see this , for whatever reason . ..It might have a lot to do with preconceived beliefs or certain mindsets or because you have been led to believe that anyone who doubts the official Apollo record is a " nutjob" etc. ...

Duane old bean, gotta love yer, but can you see the pot calling the kettle black here? You say my mind is made up about Apollo so I can't be objective, and in the very next sentence admit you have no doubt they were faked! I guess that means your mind isn't open to the fact that they may just be genuine?

but whatever the reason, it's a fact that we will never agree on this subject ... and as we once said in PM's to each other on YouTube , it really is pointless to continue arguing about something which can't be proven one way or the other ... I see a stage light reflection in a visor , you see a smudge ... I see a painted, fake backdrop on a moonset , you see mountains on the Moon ... and round and round it goes ... So I guess we will just have to agree to disagree once more .

Finally - we agree!

[Duane Daman]

I guess that means your mind isn't open to the fact that they may just be genuine?

It was until I saw all the proof that they're not .

[Jack White]

I guess that means your mind isn't open to the fact that they may just be genuine?

It was until I saw all the proof that they're not .

Duane...I think you and I agree that NASA did produce thousands of photographs

that ARE GENUINE PHOTOGRAPHS, right?

It is the IMAGES in the photographs which are NOT genuine, right? Genuine photos,

FAKE IMAGES.

And just think. You and I only have to prove ONE FAKE IMAGE out of thousands.

These guys have the IMPOSSIBLE JOB of proving THOUSANDS of images are

genuine.

Jack

[Dave Greer]

Duane...I think you and I agree that NASA did produce thousands of photographs

that ARE GENUINE PHOTOGRAPHS, right?

It is the IMAGES in the photographs which are NOT genuine, right? Genuine photos,

FAKE IMAGES.

And just think. You and I only have to prove ONE FAKE IMAGE out of thousands.

These guys have the IMPOSSIBLE JOB of proving THOUSANDS of images are

genuine.

Jack

Burden of proof Jack old bean. Since acceptance of Apollo as a fact is the de facto standard, the burden of proof lies upon you to prove the photos are fake. It follows that I or anyone else who accepts Apollo as being genuine only needs to address your studies.

That said, I've studied a great many Apollo photos in detail that is probably too great to be healthy. And video footage. And film footage. And PDFs of old documentation. (Life was so much simpler before the internet!) To me it all points to a different conclusion.