moon landings.
« on: September 19, 2014, 05:05:06 PM »
Hi I'm. Not new as such I'm from the other site but hello anyway.

I would just like to drop this little jem into the mix.

Further proof of the moon landings
http://io9.com/meticulous-visual-recreation-of-moon-landing-shows-it-w-1636757909

*

Offline jroa

  • *
  • Posts: 3101
  • Kentucky Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: moon landings.
« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2014, 05:20:48 PM »
So, they made a fake picture, and are claiming that it proves that the other picture is real?  Are you serious? 

Thork

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2014, 05:21:43 PM »
The Russians determined back in 1959 that it was going to take four feet of solid lead to protect a person if they wanted to walk on the Moon's surface.

How did the Americans get over the radiation inside the Van Allen belt from space outside of earth's magnetic field? How did the US manage that with tin foil and little glass windows? What were their space suits made of? I have never had a proper answer to this.

Quote from: http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2008/06/masonic-moon-landing-hoax.html
There is an area of very high radiation called the Van Allen Belt 272 miles from Earth which the Russians could never pass. In fact in 1959 Bill Kaysing reported on a Russian study which discovered that the amount of radiation on the moon would require astronauts to be clothed in 4 feet of lead in order to avoid instant death. John Mauldin, a NASA physicist, said they would need at least two meters of thick shielding.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2014, 05:25:18 PM by Thork »

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2014, 05:37:43 PM »
No they created a physics engine and input known values and the engine produced the same results as seen in the photos. The image you see isn't a drawn photo. It's a screen grab of a 3D world based on known optical laws and physical laws.

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2014, 05:40:31 PM »
And thork, I have never seen a scientific paper that supports that statement.

Ghost of V

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2014, 05:43:34 PM »
"Visual Recreation Of Moon Landing Shows It Wasn't A Hoax"

This just proves how easy it is for NASA and other agencies to make fake yet very real looking footage. Not that we needed proof to begin with, but this just cements the facts that we already know.

Thanks, Pythagoras.

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2014, 05:52:14 PM »
Oh my bad. I didn't realise NASH had physics engine in the 1960s.  Must have been one of those magic wand technology's conspicuous theorists love so much.

Ghost of V

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2014, 05:53:39 PM »
Oh my bad. I didn't realise NASH had physics engine in the 1960s.  Must have been one of those magic wand technology's conspicuous theorists love so much.

Well, now you know. Maybe do some research before you post next time?

Regardless, the moon landing footage looks a lot worse than what you've posted here, with a number of visual artifacts that prove it as a fakery.

*

Offline jroa

  • *
  • Posts: 3101
  • Kentucky Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: moon landings.
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2014, 06:11:55 PM »
Who took the original picture?  Did they have a film crew waiting on the moon in order to take the picture of the first man to step foot on the moon? 

Also, this admitted hoax picture is in color. 

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2014, 06:34:53 PM »
The answer to your 1st question can be answered by doing about 5 seconds of investigation, perhaps you could do some maybe and what has colour got to do with anything?

Ghost of V

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #10 on: September 19, 2014, 06:36:03 PM »
The answer to your 1st question can be answered by doing about 5 seconds of investigation, perhaps you could do some maybe and what has colour got to do with anything?

Your debate methods are flawed. Instead of telling us how stupid we are for not being able to find the resources you've insinuated, why don't you try to present the evidence you've found and your reasoning instead?

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: moon landings.
« Reply #11 on: September 19, 2014, 06:41:13 PM »
Who took the original picture?  Did they have a film crew waiting on the moon in order to take the picture of the first man to step foot on the moon? 

Also, this admitted hoax picture is in color.
Why would anyone need to take the original picture? Automated cameras were common enough in 1969.

So what if it is in color? Did you have a point? Have you seen the "colorized" versions of classic films, such as the "Wizard of Oz"?
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2014, 06:41:39 PM »
I have presented the evidence your inability to understand it is your falling not mine. Trying to deflect the original subject of the evidence by asking Irrelevant questions about who took the picture is a well documented technique used by conspiracies advocates when they have no rebuttal to the original statement

Ghost of V

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2014, 06:43:15 PM »
I have presented the evidence your inability to understand it is your falling not mine. Trying to deflect the original subject of the evidence by asking Irrelevant questions about who took the picture is a well documented technique used by conspiracies advocates when they have no rebuttal to the original statement

You posted a link.

How about you post an original thought next?

*

Offline jroa

  • *
  • Posts: 3101
  • Kentucky Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: moon landings.
« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2014, 06:46:36 PM »
Here is a picture of noone taking the picture of the original moon landing.  lol

*

Offline jroa

  • *
  • Posts: 3101
  • Kentucky Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: moon landings.
« Reply #15 on: September 19, 2014, 06:48:56 PM »
Oh, wait, it is actually, "here is a fake picture that proves that the other pictures are real."  lol even harder. 

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: moon landings.
« Reply #16 on: September 19, 2014, 06:49:49 PM »
Here is a picture of noone taking the picture of the original moon landing.  lol
Here's is a picture of the relevant automated camera. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_TV_camera
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #17 on: September 19, 2014, 06:53:05 PM »
Very constructive post from jora.  Nice to see you are as constructive hear as you are on the other site.

And to vaxhall, as far as I am aware this is original to this forum. If not then please point me to a previous thread.

As usual all I get are one liners deflectory questions from the flat earth socioty

Ghost of V

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #18 on: September 19, 2014, 06:53:48 PM »
As usual all I get are one liners deflectory questions from the flat earth socioty

So you're an alt. Good to know.

Re: moon landings.
« Reply #19 on: September 19, 2014, 06:55:07 PM »
No I'm from the other site. Did you not read my op
As usual all I get are one liners deflectory questions from the flat earth socioty

So you're an alt. Good to know.
???


Explains a lot lol