Jack White's Aulis "Apollo Hoax" Investigation - A Rebuttal

[Kevin M. West]

If the top of a picture is black, like the sky in these b&w apollo photos, then there will be no clear line between the edge of the exposure and the unexposed film. This is why a note scribbled in between frames might overlap the image, or a scan might overlap the unexposed part of the film. It is not evidence of anything other than someone not bothering to be careful with a frame that was ruined before they got it. You'll notice that it's only on the crappy images that nobody has bothered to create a better scan.

The photoshop measurements mean everything, the fiducials are there precisely to have a fixed reference in the image. You can easily use them to find the edge of a frame.

To prove that you would need to produce a photo where writing is at the TOP of the photo and also overlapping the photo image

Two frames later in the same strip you can barely see more 'anomalies' along the top edge, just less visible because they were written and/or cropped differently. Not sure how that's proof though, you'll just make the same claims that they're lights or something.

[Matthew Lewis]

Works fine for me.

[Evan Burton]

No problems here.

[Evan Burton]

Right or wrong? Jack White refuses to answer

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5911&view=findpost&p=57235

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5911&view=findpost&p=57236

What credibility can be placed in someone who refuses to defend their claims?

[Evan Burton]

Why won't Aulis - and Jack - withdraw disproven claims?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15378

[Terry Felter]

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

[Terry Felter]

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?

[Terry Felter]

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.

[Evan Burton]

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?

Hi Terry,

Which image numbers do you refer to? I'll get them back up and show where Surveyor is in each image.

[Terry Felter]

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.

[Evan Burton]

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?

Sure.

The first is AS12-46-6740HR; you have to zoom in to see it. I have cropped a section from the HR image below. Click on them to open the full size attachment:

The next is AS12-46-6741HR, Once again, a crop of the full size image:

The same again but with AS12-47-6948HR:

[Terry Felter]

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

[Evan Burton]

No probs. I knew where to look, which makes it a whole lot easier.

[Terry Felter]

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.

[Evan Burton]

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!".