Evan Burton Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Seriously Duane, why don't you go take a couple pictures yourself. It's easy and you might learn something. That has been asked a number of times; he still fails to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 This has nothing to do with "truth" and "accuracy " ... It has to do with you and your Apollo defending friends literally flogging a dead horse just to make Jack look bad .Your politeness on this forum is completely false and hypocritical from the way you conduct yourself on other forums ... Your purpose and Lamson's ( by dragging this subject up again ) is for one purpose only ... To character assassinate Jack and everyone else who dares to speak out against the official Apollo record in any respect . If Jack defended his work honestly, or did the decent thing and removed it from Aulis, you might have a point. Unfortunately he doesn't. He keeps moving the goalposts until what he is asking is so far removed from the Apollo photos that it's meaningless. Take, for example, his insistence on showing an image with the photographer's feet in the frame. Please point out which Apollo image in his study, old or new, that has such a configuration. Speaking of character assassination - you do that to 24 astronauts and countless others involved in the Apollo programme each and every time you talk about Apollo on every forum you've posted on. Why is it OK for you to do that, but you have a problem with people demonstrating that Jack is perpetuating false claims on this forum and on Aulis? Jack has already stated his position , as have the rest of you and you are never going to come to an agreement on this .... So if you believe you have proven him wrong , then be satisfied with that and move on . The Apollo astronauts have similarly stated their position. They went to the moon. Why do you continue to call them liars, but apparently Jack is on holy ground and can't be called to account for his false studies? Or as my buddy greenmagoos just stated on his new Apollo hoax video , which busts out Neil Armstrong and author Hansen of 'First Man '..."For a friend as he battles a crew of vampiric Apollogists at a forum. Listen chaps. If an Astro-not has a camera strapped to his chest in a pressurised space suit, he can't shoot with camera stuck up at his ear. Those photos are cropped. Move on and learn to deal with it. " ... Camera at his ear? I'm assuming he's referring to images from Jack's study in question? Shame he can't spot the shadow of the top of the PLSS for what it actually is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Or as my buddy greenmagoos just stated on his new Apollo hoax video , which busts out Neil Armstrong and author Hansen of 'First Man '..."For a friend as he battles a crew of vampiric Apollogists at a forum. Listen chaps. If an Astro-not has a camera strapped to his chest in a pressurised space suit, he can't shoot with camera stuck up at his ear. Those photos are cropped. Move on and learn to deal with it. " ... Camera at his ear? I'm assuming he's referring to images from Jack's study in question? Shame he can't spot the shadow of the top of the PLSS for what it actually is. Greenmagoos is a bit vague as usual but it appears he is commenting on some of the recreation photos shot with the camera at eye level. If this is the case Greenmagoos is simply showing his decided lack of knowlege about the photographic process. It has been proven that the difference in camera height between a chest mounted camera and a eye level camera dose not matter in this instance. And for all of this babble about cropping photos I've yet to see a hoaxer produce one with the shadows pointing away from the center of the image...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 So tell me who are the people being unduly hostile on this thread? Lamson , Burton , Parker and now you . Please point out where Craig, Evan or I ever said anything equivalent to calling Jack or you a “Nazi” or “piranha”. Explain how asking Jack permission to post his updated study after Jack complained that the older study which Evan posted could have left him “confused” baiting? Because Evan is being a hypocrite ... He asks Jack a question very politely on this forum , while ripping him apart and character assassinating him behind his back on the Apollo Hoax forum ... This is what is known as a set up, and the point of it is to make Jack look bad . Please point out where Evan was rude to Jack on the linked page. Please point out he ever said anything equivalent to calling Jack a “Nazi” or “piranha”. In anycase that was on another forum I wouldn't be surprised if you slag your critics here elsewhere I know that Jack does. It seems that you ALL enjoy Craig's hobby of FLOGGING A DEAD HORSE ! You do understand that by saying repeatedly that Craig or others are “beating a dead horse” you seem to be acknowledging that Jack has been proven wrong but refuses to admit it. Jack has stated his position but people's positions can change especially if they recieve new information. RE: your comment that “It has to do with you and your Apollo defending friends literally flogging a dead horse just to make Jack look bad .” Saying Evan “LITRTALLY” flogged a dead horse means that you actually think he found a dead horse somewhere and beat it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 (edited) Or as my buddy greenmagoos just stated on his new Apollo hoax video , which busts out Neil Armstrong and author Hansen of 'First Man '..."For a friend as he battles a crew of vampiric Apollogists at a forum. Listen chaps. If an Astro-not has a camera strapped to his chest in a pressurised space suit, he can't shoot with camera stuck up at his ear. Those photos are cropped. Move on and learn to deal with it. " ... Camera at his ear? I'm assuming he's referring to images from Jack's study in question? Shame he can't spot the shadow of the top of the PLSS for what it actually is. Greenmagoos is a bit vague as usual but it appears he is commenting on some of the recreation photos shot with the camera at eye level. If this is the case Greenmagoos is simply showing his decided lack of knowlege about the photographic process. It has been proven that the difference in camera height between a chest mounted camera and a eye level camera dose not matter in this instance. And for all of this babble about cropping photos I've yet to see a hoaxer produce one with the shadows pointing away from the center of the image...... As usual you seem to have missed the point . greenmagoos was referring to every single photo that you and your friends have linked here , not any of the Apollo photos that Jack has used . In a nutshell , Apollo astronauts can only point a camera directly ahead of them from the chest area and point to whatever direction they are facing to take that photo. You can not point a camera to the left or right when it is attached to a fixed bracket on a chest plate.... You have to point yourself to that direction. Therefore , every single shadow will converge back to the center of the picture . The Apollo astronauts did NOT hold their cameras up to their ears , as in every photo you all have linked here, which are not applicable . I believe this is the point that Jack has been making all along and all of you either can't understand this simple concept , or are just playing more games to try to make his studies look wrong . Edited January 3, 2008 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 So tell me who are the people being unduly hostile on this thread? Lamson , Burton , Parker and now you . Please point out where Craig, Evan or I ever said anything equivalent to calling Jack or you a “Nazi” or “piranha”. Explain how asking Jack permission to post his updated study after Jack complained that the older study which Evan posted could have left him “confused” baiting? Because Evan is being a hypocrite ... He asks Jack a question very politely on this forum , while ripping him apart and character assassinating him behind his back on the Apollo Hoax forum ... This is what is known as a set up, and the point of it is to make Jack look bad . Please point out where Evan was rude to Jack on the linked page. Please point out he ever said anything equivalent to calling Jack a “Nazi” or “piranha”. In anycase that was on another forum I wouldn't be surprised if you slag your critics here elsewhere I know that Jack does. It seems that you ALL enjoy Craig's hobby of FLOGGING A DEAD HORSE ! You do understand that by saying repeatedly that Craig or others are “beating a dead horse” you seem to be acknowledging that Jack has been proven wrong but refuses to admit it. Jack has stated his position but people's positions can change especially if they recieve new information. RE: your comment that “It has to do with you and your Apollo defending friends literally flogging a dead horse just to make Jack look bad .” Saying Evan “LITRTALLY” flogged a dead horse means that you actually think he found a dead horse somewhere and beat it. Sorry but I'm not taking your flame bait .... I am not interested in your confrontational nonsense , which seems to be the only reason you post on this forum . When I said that you all seemed to enjoy the hobby of flogging a dead horse , I was referring to your own .... Jack's horse isn't dead yet , even though you all have done everything in your power to kill it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 3, 2008 Author Share Posted January 3, 2008 Or as my buddy greenmagoos just stated on his new Apollo hoax video , which busts out Neil Armstrong and author Hansen of 'First Man '..."For a friend as he battles a crew of vampiric Apollogists at a forum. Listen chaps. If an Astro-not has a camera strapped to his chest in a pressurised space suit, he can't shoot with camera stuck up at his ear. Those photos are cropped. Move on and learn to deal with it. " ... Camera at his ear? I'm assuming he's referring to images from Jack's study in question? Shame he can't spot the shadow of the top of the PLSS for what it actually is. Greenmagoos is a bit vague as usual but it appears he is commenting on some of the recreation photos shot with the camera at eye level. If this is the case Greenmagoos is simply showing his decided lack of knowlege about the photographic process. It has been proven that the difference in camera height between a chest mounted camera and a eye level camera dose not matter in this instance. And for all of this babble about cropping photos I've yet to see a hoaxer produce one with the shadows pointing away from the center of the image...... As usual you seem to have missed the point . greenmagoos was referring to every single photo that you and your friends have linked here , not any of the Apollo photos that Jack has used . In a nutshell , Apollo astronauts can only point a camera directly ahead of them from the chest area and point to whatever direction they are facing to take that photo. You can not point a camera to the left or right when it is attached to a fixed bracket on a chest plate.... You have to point yourself to that direction. Therefore , every single shadow will converge back to the center of the picture . The Apollo astronauts did NOT hold their cameras up to their ears , as in every photo you all have linked here, which are not applicable . I believe this is the point that Jack has been making all along and all of you either can't understand this simple concept , or are just playing more games to try to make his studies look wrong . Why is Duane the only person who understands this very simple concept? Why does Lamson say no astronaut shadow point AWAY from the center when my revised study on Aulis shows ONLY the ones that do so? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 (edited) Or as my buddy greenmagoos just stated on his new Apollo hoax video , which busts out Neil Armstrong and author Hansen of 'First Man '..."For a friend as he battles a crew of vampiric Apollogists at a forum. Listen chaps. If an Astro-not has a camera strapped to his chest in a pressurised space suit, he can't shoot with camera stuck up at his ear. Those photos are cropped. Move on and learn to deal with it. " ... Camera at his ear? I'm assuming he's referring to images from Jack's study in question? Shame he can't spot the shadow of the top of the PLSS for what it actually is. Greenmagoos is a bit vague as usual but it appears he is commenting on some of the recreation photos shot with the camera at eye level. If this is the case Greenmagoos is simply showing his decided lack of knowlege about the photographic process. It has been proven that the difference in camera height between a chest mounted camera and a eye level camera dose not matter in this instance. And for all of this babble about cropping photos I've yet to see a hoaxer produce one with the shadows pointing away from the center of the image...... As usual you seem to have missed the point . No I fully understand the point, you on the other hand... greenmagoos was referring to every single photo that you and your friends have linked here , not any of the Apollo photos that Jack has used . Thats what I said, and he is wrong and has been proven here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm You simply are in the dark...again. In a nutshell , Apollo astronauts can only point a camera directly ahead of them from the chest area and point to whatever direction they are facing to take that photo. You can not point a camera to the left or right when it is attached to a fixed bracket on a chest plate.... You have to point yourself to that direction. Not true. The camera bracket was not fixed to the suit but was attached with straps and as such could be pointed from side to side and up/down. In any case given the angle of view of the lens the astronaut only had to turn his body or lens as little as 15 degrees to place his shadow to the edge of the frame. Therefore , every single shadow will converge back to the center of the picture . Wrong again. As proven here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm You can erase your ignorance in this matter by taking a camera and TESTING. The Apollo astronauts did NOT hold their cameras up to their ears , as in every photo you all have linked here, which are not applicable . Again proven wrong here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm Jack, Percy, Greenmagoos and now YOU are simply ignorant on this matter. I believe this is the point that Jack has been making all along and all of you either can't understand this simple concept , or are just playing more games to try to make his studies look wrong . We all understand. And more to the point we have all provided empirical evidence that proves you all wrong. Where your's? It's you and your pals who are out to lunch on this one.... Edited January 3, 2008 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 (edited) Why is Duane the only person who understands this very simple concept?Why does Lamson say no astronaut shadow point AWAY from the center when my revised study on Aulis shows ONLY the ones that do so? Jack Camera held in front of my chest (or was it my chin? Let me guess, that renders my photo invalid?) Shadow pointing away from centre. I'm fairly sure my feet were beneath my body at the time, but this photo was taken nearly a year ago so I may be mistaken. I'm sure I would remember something like that though. Are we done yet, or are the goalposts going to move again? Edited January 3, 2008 by Dave Greer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Stone Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Dave, that's obviously a fake picture. You claim it was taken a year ago, yet at this time a year ago it was dark. Your picture is light. Normal peoples arms hang down beyond their waist line, yet your arm seems to appear above the waist. Debunker becomes whistle blower, or freak accident with the beach CIA squad? It's obvious the sun is behind you, yet your shadow is not completely black. There was obviously a spotlight. You can do better than this Dave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Or as my buddy greenmagoos just stated on his new Apollo hoax video , which busts out Neil Armstrong and author Hansen of 'First Man '..."For a friend as he battles a crew of vampiric Apollogists at a forum. Listen chaps. If an Astro-not has a camera strapped to his chest in a pressurised space suit, he can't shoot with camera stuck up at his ear. Those photos are cropped. Move on and learn to deal with it. " ... Camera at his ear? I'm assuming he's referring to images from Jack's study in question? Shame he can't spot the shadow of the top of the PLSS for what it actually is. Greenmagoos is a bit vague as usual but it appears he is commenting on some of the recreation photos shot with the camera at eye level. If this is the case Greenmagoos is simply showing his decided lack of knowlege about the photographic process. It has been proven that the difference in camera height between a chest mounted camera and a eye level camera dose not matter in this instance. And for all of this babble about cropping photos I've yet to see a hoaxer produce one with the shadows pointing away from the center of the image...... As usual you seem to have missed the point . No I fully understand the point, you on the other hand... greenmagoos was referring to every single photo that you and your friends have linked here , not any of the Apollo photos that Jack has used . Thats what I said, and he is wrong and has been proven here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm You simply are in the dark...again. In a nutshell , Apollo astronauts can only point a camera directly ahead of them from the chest area and point to whatever direction they are facing to take that photo. You can not point a camera to the left or right when it is attached to a fixed bracket on a chest plate.... You have to point yourself to that direction. Not true. The camera bracket was not fixed to the suit but was attached with straps and as such could be pointed from side to side and up/down. In any case given the angle of view of the lens the astronaut only had to turn his body or lens as little as 15 degrees to place his shadow to the edge of the frame. Therefore , every single shadow will converge back to the center of the picture . Wrong again. As proven here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm You can erase your ignorance in this matter by taking a camera and TESTING. The Apollo astronauts did NOT hold their cameras up to their ears , as in every photo you all have linked here, which are not applicable . Again proven wrong here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm Jack, Percy, Greenmagoos and now YOU are simply ignorant on this matter. I believe this is the point that Jack has been making all along and all of you either can't understand this simple concept , or are just playing more games to try to make his studies look wrong . We all understand. And more to the point we have all provided empirical evidence that proves you all wrong. Where your's? It's you and your pals who are out to lunch on this one.... Apparently Craig not only enjoys flogging his dead horse , but enjoys riding it as well ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Stone Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Apparently Craig not only enjoys flogging his dead horse , but enjoys riding it as well ! Duane, I'm not being funny but instead of posting absolute rubbish, how about dealing with the evidence instead? I've been reading through a lot of posts on this forum and all you conspiracy theorists seem to say is "Lamson this" and "Lamson that" and "Lamson stole my lunch box in the playground" and "Lamson is the reason that kittens die everyday" but how many times have I actually seen you try to debunk his evidence? That's right; NONE. Why? Because you can't. You talk and complain of character assassination and to be honest it's the ultimate example of the pot calling the kettle black. This leads me to ask you a direct question. Can you actually tell me why the findings presented by Craig here www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm are false? Why is this not a legitimate reason for the effects observed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Dave, that's obviously a fake picture. You claim it was taken a year ago, yet at this time a year ago it was dark. Your picture is light. Normal peoples arms hang down beyond their waist line, yet your arm seems to appear above the waist. Debunker becomes whistle blower, or freak accident with the beach CIA squad? It's obvious the sun is behind you, yet your shadow is not completely black. There was obviously a spotlight. You can do better than this Dave! I wonder if Gavin realizes that mockery in the guise of humor , is one of the silly methods used by those who defend government lies, by using their program of insults and ridicule , to pretend to debunk their opponents ? This method of disinformation is also taught at the clavius moon base school of pick and choose a way to attack the CT's .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 (edited) Why is Duane the only person who understands this very simple concept?Why does Lamson say no astronaut shadow point AWAY from the center when my revised study on Aulis shows ONLY the ones that do so? Jack Camera held in front of my chest (or was it my chin? Let me guess, that renders my photo invalid?) Shadow pointing away from centre. I'm fairly sure my feet were beneath my body at the time, but this photo was taken nearly a year ago so I may be mistaken. I'm sure I would remember something like that though. Are we done yet, or are the goalposts going to move again? So if it's mockery you want then ... Hey Dave ... Didn't you forget to wear your Apollo astronot costume with the attached camera chestplate to the beach that day ? .... I'm sure the other people at the beach wouldn't have laughed at you too hard if you had ... In fact , they might have thought that NASA was faking another Moon landing right there on that beach in Red Car !!! The only ones "moving the goalposts" would be you and your pals from Baut and clavius .... My PC mouse is broken but as soon as I get a new one I will post the Apollo video evidence here which proves all of you wrong about this ... Not that it will matter much , because you all will just continue to flog and ride this dead horse anyway ... and then ressurect it all over again in the future . Are we done yet ? .... Apparently not . Edited January 3, 2008 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Or as my buddy greenmagoos just stated on his new Apollo hoax video , which busts out Neil Armstrong and author Hansen of 'First Man '..."For a friend as he battles a crew of vampiric Apollogists at a forum. Listen chaps. If an Astro-not has a camera strapped to his chest in a pressurised space suit, he can't shoot with camera stuck up at his ear. Those photos are cropped. Move on and learn to deal with it. " ... Camera at his ear? I'm assuming he's referring to images from Jack's study in question? Shame he can't spot the shadow of the top of the PLSS for what it actually is. Greenmagoos is a bit vague as usual but it appears he is commenting on some of the recreation photos shot with the camera at eye level. If this is the case Greenmagoos is simply showing his decided lack of knowlege about the photographic process. It has been proven that the difference in camera height between a chest mounted camera and a eye level camera dose not matter in this instance. And for all of this babble about cropping photos I've yet to see a hoaxer produce one with the shadows pointing away from the center of the image...... As usual you seem to have missed the point . No I fully understand the point, you on the other hand... greenmagoos was referring to every single photo that you and your friends have linked here , not any of the Apollo photos that Jack has used . Thats what I said, and he is wrong and has been proven here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm You simply are in the dark...again. In a nutshell , Apollo astronauts can only point a camera directly ahead of them from the chest area and point to whatever direction they are facing to take that photo. You can not point a camera to the left or right when it is attached to a fixed bracket on a chest plate.... You have to point yourself to that direction. Not true. The camera bracket was not fixed to the suit but was attached with straps and as such could be pointed from side to side and up/down. In any case given the angle of view of the lens the astronaut only had to turn his body or lens as little as 15 degrees to place his shadow to the edge of the frame. Therefore , every single shadow will converge back to the center of the picture . Wrong again. As proven here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm You can erase your ignorance in this matter by taking a camera and TESTING. The Apollo astronauts did NOT hold their cameras up to their ears , as in every photo you all have linked here, which are not applicable . Again proven wrong here: www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm Jack, Percy, Greenmagoos and now YOU are simply ignorant on this matter. I believe this is the point that Jack has been making all along and all of you either can't understand this simple concept , or are just playing more games to try to make his studies look wrong . We all understand. And more to the point we have all provided empirical evidence that proves you all wrong. Where your's? It's you and your pals who are out to lunch on this one.... Apparently Craig not only enjoys flogging his dead horse , but enjoys riding it as well ! Tell you what Duane, why don't you go out at sunset and reproduce the images in my article and then tell me it's a dead horse. Until you do you are just being a parrot for the guys who are pulling the wool over your eyes. I thought you were looking for the truth? Well here is your chance to actually find it yourself instead of listening to guys who have no problems telling you lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now