Duane Daman Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 I have reposted the standard version because the high resolution version doesn't show the complete photo here ... This way everyone can click onto the larger picture and see for themselves that nasa forgot to put the tire tracks in this photo , among many showing the lunar buggys with no tracks .. I don't think even MID on the UM could talk sweet talk his way out of this one ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 I have reposted the standard version because the high resolution version doesn't show the complete photo here ... This way everyone can click onto the larger picture and see for themselves that nasa forgot to put the tire tracks in this photo , among many showing the lunar buggys with no tracks ..I don't think even MID on the UM could talk sweet talk his way out of this one ! The text accompanying this photo says FINAL RESTING PLACE OF THE LUNAR ROVER. A question I have is this...WHY DID THEY PARK SO FAR AWAY FROM THE LEM? Why would the two guys choose to WALK a hundred yards back carrying things when they could have parked just a few feet away. Makes no sense. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 I have reposted the standard version because the high resolution version doesn't show the complete photo here ... This way everyone can click onto the larger picture and see for themselves that nasa forgot to put the tire tracks in this photo , among many showing the lunar buggys with no tracks ..I don't think even MID on the UM could talk sweet talk his way out of this one ! The text accompanying this photo says FINAL RESTING PLACE OF THE LUNAR ROVER. A question I have is this...WHY DID THEY PARK SO FAR AWAY FROM THE LEM? Why would the two guys choose to WALK a hundred yards back carrying things when they could have parked just a few feet away. Makes no sense. Jack Jack It had to be parked a set distance away from the LM so that the operator (Ed Fendell) could properly capture the take-off of the ascent stage using the TV camera on the rover. Yes, he allowed for the time difference between moon and earth, knew the rate of climb of the LM, and how fast his camera could tilt upwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 Jack .... Nothing nasa did concerning the Apollo Program made much sense ...and that's exactly why millions of people can see right through their scam . They made plenty of errors while pretending to land men on the moon ... The most glaring of all being the ridiculous moon set photographs . Did you know that in many foreign countries they teach in school that the Americans faked the moon landings ? ....How sad is that , that people in foreign countries are taught the truth about this and Americans are not ? No wonder nasa the Apollo astronots and now even this entire country is the laughing stock of the world ! None of the Apollo astronots can even get their stories straight about their stints on the way to the moon and while they were there . Alan Bean didn't remember seeing any flashes of light while traveling through the Van Allen belts but Gene Cernan did ... Then Al didn't remember hearing any rocket engine noise when he was landing the LM on the moon , but Gene remembered it as being very loud ... and these are only two small examples of how those nasa fly boys keep tripping themselves up over their moon story lies . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin M. West Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 The text accompanying this photo says FINAL RESTING PLACE OF THE LUNAR ROVER.A question I have is this...WHY DID THEY PARK SO FAR AWAY FROM THE LEM? Why would the two guys choose to WALK a hundred yards back carrying things when they could have parked just a few feet away. Makes no sense. Jack Do you think before you type jack? Why would they have to carry things, wouldn't it be easier to unload the rover and THEN park it and walk back? As has been explained, many, many times before, the remotely operated camera on the rover was used to film the liftoff. It had to be far enough back to be able to capture the whole scene and tilt at a rate that could capture the launch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 None of the Apollo astronots can even get their stories straight about their stints on the way to the moon and while they were there .Alan Bean didn't remember seeing any flashes of light while traveling through the Van Allen belts but Gene Cernan did ... Then Al didn't remember hearing any rocket engine noise when he was landing the LM on the moon , but Gene remembered it as being very loud ... and these are only two small examples of how those nasa fly boys keep tripping themselves up over their moon story lies . Duane (straydog) - So Bean and Cernan had different experiences on different missions. The fact that you find this troubling says alot about your critical thinking skills. It says you don't have any! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 Steve .... Oh but I do have critical thinking skills ... and those are what I use to determine that not only are the Apollo photos studio fakes but that the Apollo astronots are liars who are too dumb to get their stories straight . Speaking of them not getting their stories straight , did you know that the Parkes Observatory has a story about receiving the TV signal from the moon on the Apollo 11 mission that doesn't match that of the one who allegedly was the first one to walk on the moon ? Parkes claims that the only reason they were able to receive the TV pictures of the boys strolling on the moon during Apollo 11, was because Neil Armstrong luckily decided to forego their scheduled nap and go directly out onto the lunar surface . But Neil apparently didn't remember that story and changed it in his recent autobiography , by making the claim that even though he was anxious to get out onto the lunar surface , he wisely decided to take their scheduled two hours nap instead because they really needed it . Opppssss ... Talk about another nasa CLANGER !!! .... That one is a beaut !! ... Did Neil forget that the original Parkes story had him change plans and forego his nap ? ... Or maybe Neil didn't know that Parkes had already made up this different story about their EVA timeline ? Like I've always said .. if you want to expsose a lie , just go right to the source of that lie ... In this case , the liars themselves . Well, on this happy note I will leave you all to concoct some more lies on nasa's behalf ... It's been swell but I really do have more important things to do the rest of my day than spar with Bad Astronomy's brainwashed liars and fools . But I will be back with more lies from our Apollo 'heros' and more phony moon set photos containing anomalies that not even any of the game players here will be able to pretend to refute ..... Like bootprints covering up the imaginary , missing lunar buggy tire tracks .... Talk about beauts ! That one takes the cake !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 (edited) Steve .... Oh but I do have critical thinking skills ... and those are what I use to determine that not only are the Apollo photos studio fakes but that the Apollo astronots are liars who are too dumb to get their stories straight .Speaking of them not getting their stories straight , did you know that the Parkes Observatory has a story about receiving the TV signal from the moon on the Apollo 11 mission that doesn't match that of the one who allegedly was the first one to walk on the moon ? Parkes claims that the only reason they were able to receive the TV pictures of the boys strolling on the moon during Apollo 11, was because Neil Armstrong luckily decided to forego their scheduled nap and go directly out onto the lunar surface . But Neil apparently didn't remember that story and changed it in his recent autobiography , by making the claim that even though he was anxious to get out onto the lunar surface , he wisely decided to take their scheduled two hours nap instead because they really needed it . Opppssss ... Talk about another nasa CLANGER !!! .... That one is a beaut !! ... Did Neil forget that the original Parkes story had him change plans and forego his nap ? ... Or maybe Neil didn't know that Parkes had already made up this different story about their EVA timeline ? Like I've always said .. if you want to expsose a lie , just go right to the source of that lie ... In this case , the liars themselves . Well, on this happy note I will leave you all to concoct some more lies on nasa's behalf ... It's been swell but I really do have more important things to do the rest of my day than spar with Bad Astronomy's brainwashed liars and fools . But I will be back with more lies from our Apollo 'heros' and more phony moon set photos containing anomalies that not even any of the game players here will be able to pretend to refute ..... Like bootprints covering up the imaginary , missing lunar buggy tire tracks .... Talk about beauts ! That one takes the cake !!! Sorry straydog- That Parkes Observatory story was debunked years ago, personally by someone who was there - but I won't even bother to show you - I'm sure you'd just claim the person was lying - just as you accuse anyone who dosen't buy into your rantings. {edit to add} Sorry – trying to discuss this with a blank wall has inflected brain damage – the person I am speaking about was at Honeysuckle Creek, not Parkes. He does however, know the above story is as fake as everything else Duane posts about Apollo. Edited February 7, 2007 by Steve Ulman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 The text accompanying this photo says FINAL RESTING PLACE OF THE LUNAR ROVER.A question I have is this...WHY DID THEY PARK SO FAR AWAY FROM THE LEM? Why would the two guys choose to WALK a hundred yards back carrying things when they could have parked just a few feet away. Makes no sense. Jack Do you think before you type jack? Why would they have to carry things, wouldn't it be easier to unload the rover and THEN park it and walk back? As has been explained, many, many times before, the remotely operated camera on the rover was used to film the liftoff. It had to be far enough back to be able to capture the whole scene and tilt at a rate that could capture the launch. I don't remember those hills in the faked blast-off movie. But I do remember those faked confetti-like "flames" in the oxygenless moonspace. How can you have multi-colored flames without oxygen? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 The text accompanying this photo says FINAL RESTING PLACE OF THE LUNAR ROVER.A question I have is this...WHY DID THEY PARK SO FAR AWAY FROM THE LEM? Why would the two guys choose to WALK a hundred yards back carrying things when they could have parked just a few feet away. Makes no sense. Jack Do you think before you type jack? Why would they have to carry things, wouldn't it be easier to unload the rover and THEN park it and walk back? As has been explained, many, many times before, the remotely operated camera on the rover was used to film the liftoff. It had to be far enough back to be able to capture the whole scene and tilt at a rate that could capture the launch. I don't remember those hills in the faked blast-off movie. But I do remember those faked confetti-like "flames" in the oxygenless moonspace. How can you have multi-colored flames without oxygen? Jack Jack - Maybe you should actually pay attention to the video this time Apollo 17 Liftoff from the Moon The hills are there - but NO flames until the very end when you can see the glow in the engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin M. West Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 The text accompanying this photo says FINAL RESTING PLACE OF THE LUNAR ROVER.A question I have is this...WHY DID THEY PARK SO FAR AWAY FROM THE LEM? Why would the two guys choose to WALK a hundred yards back carrying things when they could have parked just a few feet away. Makes no sense. Jack Do you think before you type jack? Why would they have to carry things, wouldn't it be easier to unload the rover and THEN park it and walk back? As has been explained, many, many times before, the remotely operated camera on the rover was used to film the liftoff. It had to be far enough back to be able to capture the whole scene and tilt at a rate that could capture the launch. I don't remember those hills in the faked blast-off movie. But I do remember those faked confetti-like "flames" in the oxygenless moonspace. How can you have multi-colored flames without oxygen? Jack The 'flames' you're referring to are simply debris that was blown away by the engine moving fast enough that it was picked up in different spots in the separate red/green/blue frames of the field-sequential color camera used. Since it took the red, green, and blue images separately and then combined them, anything moving fast will be in a different position from one color frame to the next, leading to a rainbow effect. I'm suprised you couldn't figure out such a basic video effect, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your photography experience is limited to still photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 (edited) Opppssss ... Talk about another nasa CLANGER !!! Just a little nitpick here. Multiple times now you have spelled oops wrong. Its not the multiple P's and S's that bother me although they add nothing to the word. Rather it is the lack of the second O. Without that second O the pronounciation of the word changes. Is it too much to ask for you to spell it correctly? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/oops Edited February 8, 2007 by Matthew Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 I have discussed Jack's claims regarding the final resting place of the Apollo 17 LRV in this post. I also explained why it was parked that distance away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Just to expand a little on what Kevin has said... The Apollo lunar TV cameras were early generation colour TV cameras, and to reduce complexity & save weight, they used a "three colour wheel" setup to broadcast the pictures. As some people may be aware, colour televisions have three colour guns that "fire" to produce a colour picture. These are (normally) a red, a green, and a blue gun (RGB). The combination of these colours at various intensities give us our "normal" colour pictures (see here). In modern TV cameras, the RGB images are taken at the same instant. For Apollo, though, such a camera would have been excessively large (and heavy). Instead, a 'colour wheel' was used whereby a coloured filter (red / green / blue, in turn) was rapidly passed behind the lens giving in turn a red image, a green image, and a blue image. These individual images were then recombined to give a 'colour' image. For 'normal' movement, this worked very well. On the other hand, when something was moving rapidly, there would be a noticeable difference in the position of the rapidly moving object between colour frames. Think of a rapidly moving piece of debris, such as you would find when an "explosion" had taken place. When the first frame was taken (in red) the debris was in a certain position. In the next frame (green) the debris had moved some distance. In the third frame (blue) the debris had moved even further. When this was combined, instead of a 'normal' colour image you would have a section showing the debris in red and a section showing the debris in green (moving further along and in a slightly different position) and a section showing the same debris in blue (in yet another position, further along). This explains the colours we see in the videos; they are fast-moving objects. For more technical information, please refer to here and here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 (edited) To add to Evan's post - Interestingly – while some might call the color wheel technology crude – it is currently used in reverse in many computer projectors and high-end projection HD-TV’s. Its Called DLP (Digital Light Processing) To see how DLP works go here and under the “What is DLP® technology?” heading click on “Launch the Demo” (JAVA needed) {edit to fix !@#$% bbcode} Edited February 8, 2007 by Steve Ulman 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