Jump to content
The Education Forum

(Merged) Fetzer / Burton Apollo Hoax debate thread


Evan Burton
 Share

Recommended Posts

Second Fetzer/Burton Debate images, REFLECTIONS IN HELMET VISORS:

post-667-068925600 1285254728_thumb.jpg

NUMBER ONE

You're kidding, right? Jim, you really want this to be part of your "proof"?

A - It's the sun.

B & C - They're smudges on the helmet visor which are seen in other images.

D - More smudges. Come on - a "vase pouring out smoke'? These are not Rorschach tests.

E - So you can't see the camera, in an enlarged image showing the reflection off a visor? Wow! I bet if you could see it, you'd claim it was a fake for that very reason.

Please - don't waste my time with this dross.

Edited to add: if you look at this video, which should show when they were taking the images, you'll see that the camera is held in Jack Schmidt's right hand. Look at the reflection and you can see something that might be the camera (on the left in the reflection).

Edited by Evan Burton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 752
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Second Fetzer/Burton Debate images, REFLECTIONS IN HELMET VISORS:

post-667-092028700 1285254969_thumb.jpg

NUMBER THREE

So he bent down? Yes he did! You can see it in this video, and it's also remarked in the ALSJ:

118:25:51 Cernan: Get around on that side.

[Jack had moved west of the pole, and now moves back. He overshoots his mark and sprays dust as he stops.]

118:25:54 Schmitt: I don't think it's going...You're a little close, maybe, to have them both in focus. That might do it.

[Gene starts to bend his knees and, in an effort to get Earth in the picture along with Jack and the flag, almost gets down on his knees. His first effort, AS17-134-
gets the flag but very little of Jack and the Earth, his second photo, AS17-134-
, is much more successful. After he gets up, Gene gives Jack the camera and they trade places.]
[using planetarium software, we see that, had cloud cover over the southwestern Pacific been lighter, the
.]

118:26:08 Cernan: Try that one time, then we'll give up and get to work. (Long Pause)

[Jack holds the camera in his hand and gets it as low to the ground as he can without kneeling.]

118:26:26 Cernan: Point it up a little...Yeah. (Pause)

[This is AS17-134-
.]

118:26:32 Schmitt: Let me try it again. 118:26:33 Cernan: Okay.

[This is AS17-134-
. This photo shows the "red apple" actuator for the purge valve reasonably well.]

118:26:35 Schmitt: I don't know, Geno. 118:26:36 Cernan: Okay.

118:26:38 Schmitt: Let me get over here closer to you. (Pause)

[Once again, Jack almost goes to his knees.]

118:26:43 Schmitt: Okay. That might have got it.

[This photo is AS17-134-
and, in addition to having Earth in the picture, it shows Gene's checklist and watch/mirror band on his left arm, the OPS actuator on the right side of his
, and the OPS antenna on the top of his PLSS. The red bands on the suit and helmet show that this is Gene and not Jack.]

118:26:45 Cernan: Okay, very good. 118:26:47 Schmitt: Okay. All right, let's do it. (Pause)

Source: http://history.nasa....7.alsepoff.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it. Claim after claim has been dealt with years ago. What's going on? Is it a goeblerism or something like that : repeat a lie often enough and people will begin to believe it? It's like propaganda of no real value to anyone that I can concieve. The only value it seems to have is to help with basic research methods, how to and how not to. That's good, but why would Jim, Jack and Duane wish to be seen as so ridiculous? Are they really innherently that ridiculous?

Baffling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Second Fetzer/Burton Debate images, REFLECTIONS IN HELMET VISORS:

post-667-000418900 1285255458_thumb.jpg

NUMBER SIX

Jack,

You have to stop making these specious claims. Just because you made an error, it doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. The images are available here and here.

I have to repeat this Jack. This has nothing to do with Jim, but you Jack, should publicly withdraw this claim. It's plainly wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Evan,

You have removed "Mark of a Moon Rover" on some specious copyright ground. This is not a retail outlet and

we are not marketing the image. We are studying it as evidence in relation to the moon landing issues before

us. My source at fotosearch.com has advised me, after he researched its source, that it IS of a moon rover BUT

was taken in the Sahara Desert, not on the moon. That is the only correction he made to its presentation. Now

that we are looking at more rover photos, I want to have it for comparison purposes. PLEASE RESTORE IT. I

regard this as yet another instance in which you are abusing your position as MODERATOR, when you should

only be involved here as a PARTICIPANT. Surely even you can see that is not an appropriate arrangement.

I HEREBY FORMALLY REQUEST THAT A REAL MODERATOR BE APPOINTED IN YOUR STEAD. You are

incapable of acting objectively and without bias in this situation. Anyone can see that. Replace yourself with

someone who has a real interest in these matters. I would be glad to have Gary back. Please arrange that.

Jim

Second Fetzer/Burton Debate images, REFLECTIONS IN HELMET VISORS:

post-667-000418900 1285255458_thumb.jpg

NUMBER SIX

Jack,

You have to stop making these specious claims. Just because you made an error, it doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. The images are available here and here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the debate thread, Jim Fetzer keeps asking Evan Burton to step down as a moderator of their debate.. But obviously, that is NEVER going to happen.

Jim may as well ask pigs to fly, since there's more chance of that happening, than Burton giving up his power to control or delete Jim and Jack's posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I'm a bit short at the moment. But do I have to wear it? Could it be modified to just say 'I'm an Apollogist'? Anyway, like said: thanks.

edit typos

John,

Of course you have to wear the "I'm a Jack White Apollogist" badge, created by "evilroyburton"! .. Weren't you informed by your team leader that your main purpose for posting on this forum is to pretend to debunk ALL of Jack White's photo analysis? .. Oh, and of course do that mostly using character assassinations and ridicule, which you already have proven to be quite adept at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim,

The photographer themselves said it was from a quad bike and taken at Golden Bay Beach in Malta.

Did you or Jack contact the photographer, as I suggested, and ask for permission to use the image? You were given their website address which had their e-mail address at the top.

That is the only portion where I have acted as a moderator in this thread, as we did not want to risk the Forum being accused of copyright violation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Second Fetzer/Burton Debate images, REFLECTIONS IN HELMET VISORS:

NUMBER SEVEN

(typo fixed)

Again, false claims. The high resolution scan is available here. It never went missing; Jack just didn't look correctly.

Can we identify the astronaut in the visor? It's very difficult, as the smudges on the visor obscure things. I've indicated on the image below what I think is the astronaut, but I can't be certain.

post-2326-051292700 1285373654_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted Today, 12:36 PM

Evan Burton, on 25 September 2010 - 08:14 AM, said:

Jack White, on 24 September 2010 - 02:25 AM, said:

Second Fetzer/Burton Debate images, REFLECTIONS IN HELMET VISORS:

attachicon.gifa17blackedinJIMrevise7.jpg

NUMBER SEVEN

(typo fixed)

Again, false claims. The high resolution scan is available here. It never went missing; Jack just didn't look correctly.

Can we identify the astronaut in the visor? It's very difficult, as the smudges on the visor obscure things. I've indicated on the image below what I think is the astronaut*, but I can't be certain.

attachicon.gifCrop of As14-134-20477 enlarged.jpg

I think the austronaut should be identifiable. It seems to me reasonable to have a spherical visor for structural strength? The right rear orange wheel cover is ID'able. If one assumes a spherical visor then a simple curved surface correction should flatten the visor image and then, on the whole image, various objects lines up where the austronaut should be, so working back from that as if the visor was a flat mirror should make it easy.

It seems to me likely where indicated*. I think the shadows are right and I think the photographers visor is visible too.

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it. Claim after claim has been dealt with years ago. What's going on? Is it a goeblerism or something like that : repeat a lie often enough and people will begin to believe it? It's like propaganda of no real value to anyone that I can concieve. The only value it seems to have is to help with basic research methods, how to and how not to. That's good, but why would Jim, Jack and Duane wish to be seen as so ridiculous? Are they really innherently that ridiculous?

Baffling.

These could not have been dealt with years ago. FOUR OF THEM WERE ONLY CREATED LAST WEEK.

That deserves a big horse laugh. :)

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[icon of horse laughing]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...