One Giant Spotlight For All Mankind

[Duane Daman]

Also, Duane, yours are once again not originals, you can clearly see that the contrast has been increased in your images when you compare them to nasa's versions.

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20475HR.jpg

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20477HR.jpg

What, this michael st mark altered the images to make his point? Amazing I tell you .

No , what's amazing is that the three of you are now tap dancing in a chorus line of misrepresentation and deceit and you know it ... Talk about being dishonest !

I never altered the contrast in those phony A17 photos and neither did Mike ... I have the same EXACT dark contrast photos in my PB account , that were sent to me a very long time ago by your pal Gavin .

It's no surprise that nasa has now lightened these images on one of their deceptive , self serving web sites , as they are always screwing around with their faked Apollo pictures .

So before you accuse Mike or me of doing anything "intellectually dishonest " , maybe you should get your facts straight ... Projection is one of the oldest disinformation tricks in the book ... Why don't you try something new for a change ? ... Because now you're the one who is being "intellectually dishonest " .

Edited November 26, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Craig Lamson]

Also, Duane, yours are once again not originals, you can clearly see that the contrast has been increased in your images when you compare them to nasa's versions.

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20475HR.jpg

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20477HR.jpg

What, this michael st mark altered the images to make his point? Amazing I tell you .

No , what's amazing is that the three of you are now tap dancing in a chorus line of misrepresentation and deceit you know it ... Talk about being dishonest !

I never altered the contrast in those phony A17 photos and neither did Mike ... I have the same EXACT dark contrast photos in my PB account , that were sent to me a very long time ago by your pal Gavin .

It's no surprise that nasa has now lightened these images on one of their deceptive , self serving web sites , as they are always screwing around with their faked Apollo pictures .

So before you accuse Mike or me of doing anything "intellectually dishonest " , maybe you should get your facts straight ... Projection is one of the oldest disinformation tricks in the book ... Why don't you try something new for a change ? ... Because now you're the one who is being "intellectually dishonest " .

Well we can't judge the images you have at your pb pages because you have taken them private. St mark offers us the claim that these are...now how did he put it...."Here's the straight crop without the screenshot". Problem is the image is not a straight crop at all as I have shown. It DOES NOT MATCH the original that is available. I don't really care WHERE st mark got the file it has been altered and you offered up as a straight crop...and thats crap and very dishonest. You posted it, you take the rap...simple as that. If you can't admit your error`then it is YOU being intellectually dishonest.

The facts are clear. The images YOU posted are altered and that fact was hidden by you.

Edited November 26, 2007 by Craig Lamson

[Duane Daman]

Also, Duane, yours are once again not originals, you can clearly see that the contrast has been increased in your images when you compare them to nasa's versions.

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20475HR.jpg

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20477HR.jpg

What, this michael st mark altered the images to make his point? Amazing I tell you .

No , what's amazing is that the three of you are now tap dancing in a chorus line of misrepresentation and deceit you know it ... Talk about being dishonest !

I never altered the contrast in those phony A17 photos and neither did Mike ... I have the same EXACT dark contrast photos in my PB account , that were sent to me a very long time ago by your pal Gavin .

It's no surprise that nasa has now lightened these images on one of their deceptive , self serving web sites , as they are always screwing around with their faked Apollo pictures .

So before you accuse Mike or me of doing anything "intellectually dishonest " , maybe you should get your facts straight ... Projection is one of the oldest disinformation tricks in the book ... Why don't you try something new for a change ? ... Because now you're the one who is being "intellectually dishonest " .

Well we can't judge the images you have at your pb pages because you have taken them private. St mark offers us the claim that these are...now how did he put it...."Here's the straight crop without the screenshot". Problem is the image is not a straight crop at all as I have shown. It DOES NOT MATCH the original that is available. I don't really care WHERE st mark got the file it has been altered and oby you ffered up as an original...and thats crap and very dishonest. You posted it, you take the rap...simple as that. If you can't admit your errort`hen it is YOU being intellectually dishonest.

The facts are clear. The images YOU posted are altered and are claimed to be originals BY YOU.

Yes the facts are very clear ... nasa put some of their phony A17 photos on the internet a couple of years ago which had a darkend contrast to them ( probably to hide the many anomalies in the visor reflections) and now they have recently redone them in a lighter version ( which shows off the anomalies even better ) that I had never seen before ... If Mike had known about the lighter ones , I'm sure he would have preferred to use them instead of the darker ones .

The bottom line is this.....Neither one of us were being 'intellectually dishonest " , as the darker versions don't show anything different than the ligher versions do , as far as the "Sun" is concerned .

Here are the photos that your pal Gavin sent me ... He got them from a nasa site ....So if the contrast is too dark , don't blame me ... He even labeled them straydog 1 through 4 ... LOL

Oh, and you better believe my PB account is private now... It's to keep what's coming next hidden from intellectually dishonest folks like you .

Edited November 26, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Duane Daman]

Jack's new studies .... Let's all play find the missing things in the visor reflection !

And here's a real fun one too kids ! .... but I think Jack got this one all wrong , cuz the homeless guy's hat is NOT yellow , it's definately BROWN like his coat ... and the " fourth tray " is really the SHADOW OF THE ASTRONOT TAKING THE PHOTOGRAPH ! ... Well, at least his shadow doesn't look like a feathered covered horn this time around ! ROTF !!!

Edited November 26, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Craig Lamson]

Yes the facts are very clear ... nasa put some of their phony A17 photos on the internet a couple of years ago which had a darkend contrast to them ( probably to hide the many anomalies in the visor reflections) and now they have recently redone them in a lighter version ( which shows off the anomalies even better ) that I had never seen before ... If Mike had known about the lighter ones , I'm sure he would have preferred to use them instead of the darker ones .

Sadly, once again your foot is planted firmly in your mouth. Your images are not the same as the ones st. mark posted. His are taken from the originals at ALSJ. In other words you simply don't know what you are talking about. stmark's images are altered, and you posted them...without telling anyone that they were altered....bad boy duane....bad.

The bottom line is this.....Neither one of us were being 'intellectually dishonest " , as the darker versions don't show anything different than the ligher versions do , as far as the "Sun" is concerned .

You don't have a clue what you are talking about. Of course the images show something different. The contrast adjustment changes the edge data of the images, moving edges to different places. Adding unsharp mask also changes the edge detail...agaiin moving the edges. Low level jpg saves add MASSIVE jpg artifacts...which change the edge detail even more. To make a statement like yours is ignorance beyond the belief.

Here are the photos that your pal Gavin sent me ... He got them from a nasa site ....So if the contrast is too dark , don't blame me ... He even labeled them straydog 1 through 4 ... LOL

Strawman duane. These images are not in question since they are not the ones you posted upthread and are not the ones on stmarks site.

Oh, and you better believe my PB account is private now... It's to keep what's coming next a surprise from "intellectually dishonest " fools like you .

Given your dismal track record dealing with ANYTHING photographic, I'm sure its going to be a huge laugh.

Edited November 26, 2007 by Craig Lamson

[Duane Daman]

It took you over an hour to come up with that lame "rebuttal" ? ... You must be slipping ...

Yes , it will be a quite a huge laugh alright ... but the laugh will be on nasa and their phony Apollo photographs.

Oh and by the way , you misquoted me ... Which means that you copy/pasted my post , BEFORE I edited it , then took all that time racking your pea sized brain trying to come up with something hateful to post ... How sad .

Neither Mike or I altered that photograph , so kindly stop posting your silly fibs about that .... As you can see by the rest of the series of A17 photos I posted here ( which you asked about , btw ) the contrast is dark on all of them , just like nasa first released them .. So the only ones who might have altered them would be the " Never A Straight Answer " ( NASA ) crew , not me or Mike .

That means the only one posting ridiculous "strawman" arguments would be you .

Oh , and you also took this sentence out of context to suit your purposes .... Bad boy , craig .

"The bottom line is this.....Neither one of us were being 'intellectually dishonest " , as the darker versions don't show anything different than the ligher versions do , as far as the "Sun" is concerned . "

Edited November 26, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Craig Lamson]

It took you over an hour to come up with that lame "rebuttal" ? ... You must be slipping ...

Yes , it will be a quite a huge laugh alright ... but the laugh will be on nasa and their phony Apollo photographs.

Oh and by the way , you misquoted me ... Which means that you copy/pasted my post , BEFORE I edited it , then took all that time racking your pea sized brain trying to come up with something hateful to post ... How sad .

Had more important things to do than show how wrong youare ONCE AGAIN...like taking the dog for a crap.

Hateful eh. pea-sized brain...intellectually dishonest freaks like you....

Looks like YOU have that hateful thing down pat duane.

Must be because you can't post a rebutal.

[Duane Daman]

You missed some of my post again ... In your maniacal rush to be the last one who posts , you missed some more editing ... Which I do believe would qualify as a rebuttal .

Lighten up Lamson ... You act as if your life depends on defending nasa's phony Apollo photography ... Or perhaps this is this your life ... How sad again .

[Craig Lamson]

You missed some of my post again ... In your maniacal rush to be the last one who posts , you missed some more editing ... Which I do believe would qualify as a rebuttal .

Lighten up Lamson ... You act as if your life depends on defending nasa's phony Apollo photography ... Or perhaps this is this your life ... How sad again .

Well duane, SOMEONE altered the image st mark posted, and so far it looks like it was st mark. The images you posted are not at all similar to the ones st mark posted, and you might understand that if you had the first clue abou t waht you were looking at. st mark had the abiluty to post the images as published by the ALSJ or gateway, but he chose to post ALTERED images. Just a plain fact that you cannot overcome.

I took NOTHING out of context. You ignorance betrays you once again. The alterations DID change the detail that contains the suns reflections. Just another one of those plain facts that are beyond your ability to comprehend.

[Dave Greer]

Cropped still from video footage, again featuring a square floodlight reflection in the Apollo visor. This time the light spokes are few and far between.

That's a very hexagonal looking square you've posted there Duane.

A bit like this hexagonal looking sun taken from video of a recent space shuttle launch.

Strangely, the flare in this last image is BLUE!!!

NASA are quite obviously faking space shuttle launches.

I do believe you're right about this ... I always knew that nasa faked their Apollo photography , but I never realized they faked their Shuttle photography too !

How else could the "Sun" from LEO match the spotlight in the Apollo photo ? ... Both do look very hexagonal in shape ... and we all know that the real Sun is round !

I wonder what kind of cheap visors those Soviets used that would reflect the Sun not once , but three times !?!? .... Maybe nasa can use that excuse for their phony "Sun" reflections as well .

As for the blue lens flare , that's one more thing which proves the Shuttle picture is as fake as the one showing those stars .

Duane

I was being ironic...

Please don't tell me you think NASA are faking space shuttle launch footage as well? (This is a screenshot from video footage).

Of course if you were just going along with the gag, then you still need to explain the hexagonal sun and the blue flare, otherwise your other claims have been shot into orbit

Edited November 26, 2007 by Dave Greer

[Dave Greer]

And here's a real fun one too kids ! .... but I think Jack got this one all wrong , cuz the homeless guy's hat is NOT yellow , it's definately BROWN like his coat ... and the " fourth tray " is really the SHADOW OF THE ASTRONOT TAKING THE PHOTOGRAPH ! ... Well, at least his shadow doesn't look like a feathered covered horn this time around ! ROTF !!!

I think you and Jack must have been sniffing a few too many mulled wines this thanksgiving! How else could someone mistake a mountain for a homeless man!

The image he used was AS17-134-20477.

Since I understand it's a festive time for you lot across the pond, I'll cut Jack some slack here and say he was just having a bit of holiday fun rather than being deceptive...

Edited November 26, 2007 by Dave Greer

[Duane Daman]

You missed some of my post again ... In your maniacal rush to be the last one who posts , you missed some more editing ... Which I do believe would qualify as a rebuttal .

Lighten up Lamson ... You act as if your life depends on defending nasa's phony Apollo photography ... Or perhaps this is this your life ... How sad again .

Well duane, SOMEONE altered the image st mark posted, and so far it looks like it was st mark. The images you posted are not at all similar to the ones st mark posted, and you might understand that if you had the first clue abou t waht you were looking at. st mark had the abiluty to post the images as published by the ALSJ or gateway, but he chose to post ALTERED images. Just a plain fact that you cannot overcome.

I took NOTHING out of context. You ignorance betrays you once again. The alterations DID change the detail that contains the suns reflections. Just another one of those plain facts that are beyond your ability to comprehend.

At this point I don't know why I even bother to reply to your untruthful accusations against me and my friends on this forum ... but I guess someone needs to expose your twisted little game for what it really is ... You will post any kind of dishonest nonsense just to try to make me look bad ... and for that , I really do feel sorry for you .

Here's a PM I wrote to Mike this morning explaining your false accusations against him ..

"Mike ... Lamson is claiming that you or I altered the contrast on the A17 photo showing the square shaped Sun .

Here's his post to me .

"Well duane, SOMEONE altered the image st mark posted, and so far it looks like it was st mark. The images you posted are not at all similar to the ones st mark posted, and you might understand that if you had the first clue abou t waht you were looking at. st mark had the abiluty to post the images as published by the ALSJ or gateway, but he chose to post ALTERED images. Just a plain fact that you cannot overcome.

I took NOTHING out of context. You ignorance betrays you once again. The alterations DID change the detail that contains the suns reflections. Just another one of those plain facts that are beyond your ability to comprehend."

I know you got it off of the ALSJ exactly as nasa put it there because I have the same dark images from the same series ... So if you could write me a PM explaining this , I will post it on the EF to show everyone that Lamson's claims are not true .

Thanks ... Duane"

.......................

Duane;

That's true, I honestly altered nothing, either contrast or brightness-wise, in my simple Picasa crop of the Hi res' Hasselblad image as posted on the LSJ website; now featured on my Photobucket pages.

cheers

Mike"

So I guess it comes down to who do people want to believe about this ... You , who are known for provoking your opponent with overly aggresive and nasty tactics , or Mike , who posted nasa's phony Apollo 17 image exactly as he found it on the ALSJ .

Edited November 26, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Duane Daman]

And here's a real fun one too kids ! .... but I think Jack got this one all wrong , cuz the homeless guy's hat is NOT yellow , it's definately BROWN like his coat ... and the " fourth tray " is really the SHADOW OF THE ASTRONOT TAKING THE PHOTOGRAPH ! ... Well, at least his shadow doesn't look like a feathered covered horn this time around ! ROTF !!!

I think you and Jack must have been sniffing a few too many mulled wines this thanksgiving! How else could someone mistake a mountain for a homeless man!

The image he used was AS17-134-20477.

Since I understand it's a festive time for you lot across the pond, I'll cut Jack some slack here and say he was just having a bit of holiday fun rather than being deceptive...

It's nice to see that you have a sense of humor after all ! ... Yes, I was kidding about the shuttle photo being a fake .

As for the shape of the Sun though , it's not a match for the "pentagonal shaped" light source reflection I posted here at the beginning of this thread , but it does show that a round light source, such as the Sun or a spotlight , can have some what of a geometrical shape to it when photographed under certain conditions ....

.......................

*edited to add a message from Mike .

"Hi Duane,

I saw the shuttle photo Greer posted but nothing there to compare to the definite square or pentagonal shaped "sun" visor reflections on the Apollo Hassies concerned.

The SS image is of a handheld camera which is greatly masked by some sort of covering over the camera lens and from only a few inches way from the visor and taken by the astronaut himself.

This is obviously a false like-for-like compare, of which the propagandists are so fond.

cheers,

Mike"

........................

I'm also glad to see that you finally understand my sense of humor and also Jack's .... No , he was not trying to be "deceptive" with his "homeless man" image ... He was just having a bit of fun .

As for your new GIF ... It is definately your finest work yet !

Edited November 26, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Craig Lamson]

You missed some of my post again ... In your maniacal rush to be the last one who posts , you missed some more editing ... Which I do believe would qualify as a rebuttal .

Lighten up Lamson ... You act as if your life depends on defending nasa's phony Apollo photography ... Or perhaps this is this your life ... How sad again .

Well duane, SOMEONE altered the image st mark posted, and so far it looks like it was st mark. The images you posted are not at all similar to the ones st mark posted, and you might understand that if you had the first clue abou t waht you were looking at. st mark had the abiluty to post the images as published by the ALSJ or gateway, but he chose to post ALTERED images. Just a plain fact that you cannot overcome.

I took NOTHING out of context. You ignorance betrays you once again. The alterations DID change the detail that contains the suns reflections. Just another one of those plain facts that are beyond your ability to comprehend.

At this point I don't know why I even bother to reply to your untruthful accusations against me and my friends on this forum ... but I guess someone needs to expose your twisted little game for what it really is ... You will post any kind of dishonest nonsense just to try to make me look bad ... and for that , I really do feel sorry for you .

Here's a PM I wrote to Mike this morning explaining your false accusations against him ..

"Mike ... Lamson is claiming that you or I altered the contrast on the A17 photo showing the square shaped Sun .

Here's his post to me .

"Well duane, SOMEONE altered the image st mark posted, and so far it looks like it was st mark. The images you posted are not at all similar to the ones st mark posted, and you might understand that if you had the first clue abou t waht you were looking at. st mark had the abiluty to post the images as published by the ALSJ or gateway, but he chose to post ALTERED images. Just a plain fact that you cannot overcome.

I took NOTHING out of context. You ignorance betrays you once again. The alterations DID change the detail that contains the suns reflections. Just another one of those plain facts that are beyond your ability to comprehend."

I know you got it off of the ALSJ exactly as nasa put it there because I have the same dark images from the same series ... So if you could write me a PM explaining this , I will post it on the EF to show everyone that Lamson's claims are not true .

Thanks ... Duane"

.......................

Duane;

That's true, I honestly altered nothing, either contrast or brightness-wise, in my simple Picasa crop of the Hi res' Hasselblad image as posted on the LSJ website; now featured on my Photobucket pages.

cheers

Mike"

So I guess it comes down to who do people want to believe about this ... You , who are known for provoking your opponent with overly aggresive and nasty tactics , or Mike , who posted nasa's phony Apollo 17 image exactly as he found it on the ALSJ .

Well heres the thing, stmarks images are DIFFERENT than the ALSJ images, both in being sharpened and contrast enhanced and one having over aggressive jpg saving artifacts. . THAT is a fact, as anyone can simply check for themself by opening the ALSJ images and stmarks "altered" images up in photoshop. stmark can say whatever he likes, but the facts speak the truth, the images are altered from the ALSJ images. Period.

We shall see what Picasa does to these images, because we can check.

Oh btw, once again your "images" are not the same. Please remove this false statement.

[Dave Greer]

It's nice to see that you have a sense of humor after all ! ... Yes, I was kidding about the shuttle photo being a fake .

As for the shape of the Sun though , it's not a match for the "pentagonal shaped" light source reflection I posted here at the beginning of this thread , but it does show that a round light source, such as the Sun or a spotlight , can have some what of a geometrical shape to it when photographed under certain conditions ....

Nor does it need to be! It demonstrated that you doen't have to have a perfect circle with "rays" emanating in order to see a genuine photo of the sun. There are many dofferent factors that affect how the sun looks - point clearly demonstrated methinks.

*edited to add a message from Mike .

"Hi Duane,

I saw the shuttle photo Greer posted but nothing there to compare to the definite square or pentagonal shaped "sun" visor reflections on the Apollo Hassies concerned.

The SS image is of a handheld camera which is greatly masked by some sort of covering over the camera lens and from only a few inches way from the visor and taken by the astronaut himself.

This is obviously a false like-for-like compare, of which the propagandists are so fond.

cheers,

Mike"

........................

Hey, you got me there! Next time I'm on the moon carrying a Hasselblad 500EL fitted with a 60mm lens, and a reseau plate, loaded with whatever film they had on the Apollo missions, I'll remember to photo the sun (using the exact same exposure settings the Apollo astronauts used) and present them to you.

In the mean time, I'm sure you're beavering away removing all the other images that YOU posted that weren't an identical like-for-like comparison, now that MichaelStMark has pointed out that it's a favourite tactic of all us nasty "propagandists"! (I love that term, I'm putting it on my CV! Right alongside "anti-truth provocateur" ,and "Borg element"!)

I'm also glad to see that you finally understand my sense of humor and also Jack's .... No , he was not trying to be "deceptive" with his "homeless man" image ... He was just having a bit of fun .

Finally, I understand your "feathery horn" joke! I thought I was trapped inside a Monty Python sketch at one point, and actually thought you might have been serious! Bravo, I fell for it hook, line, sinker, foldy-up chair, and copy of the Angling Times!

As for your new GIF ... It is definately your finest work yet !

Sorry to burst Jack's bubble, he probably hoped to reel a few people in with that one. Of course, it's part of my job description as a "NASA shill" and "anti-truth agent" to spoil people's fun, even if it means using the plain and simple, ugly old truth to do so... how dull!