Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 5 votes

NASA Edits Proof Of Apollo Moon Hoax!


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
547 replies to this topic

#406    Nameless

Nameless

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 134 posts
  • Joined:01 Sep 2005

Posted 02 September 2005 - 07:48 PM

"Arrogance diminishes wisdom"

Thats for Turbonium.


#407    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 10:00 PM

QUOTE(turbonium @ Aug 31 2005, 08:47 PM)
Hi MID,

Yes, there are other anomalies regarding the Apollo landings that have been rehashed ad nauseum here and on other sites. The reason I have focused on this video footage is because it shows, to me, the only example of Earth-bound people working on an Apollo movie set. The minute of anomalous footage is a goldmine of out of place oddities, as I see it.

Bare arms on two separate occasions..
user posted imageuser posted image
Chairs, the side of a monitor, and a man in a red shirt sitting down...
user posted image
A color monitor from the front...
user posted image
And the pulling down of a black shade by people...

user posted image
user posted image
user posted image
Now, the only explanation I have been given for all the objects in the frame sequences is that it is all gold foil from the lem. But, if you watch the video clip, you can see very clearly that the range of motion the camera makes is probably close to a 90 degree pan sweep to the right.

MID - these are people I see in the frames. The single frame of a man in a blue-green shirt, with flesh toned hands and face, with a beard. The man beside him has a white shirt, and flesh toned hands and face also. The shade is also being pulled down by the man, as he is holding rope-type loops attached to the bottom of the shade. If this is all gold foil, how can you explain the fact that the flesh toned hands and faces, and colored shirts are exactly shaped and placed for human figures? And that the shade is being pulled down by something other than these people?

View Post





Hi Turb:

Yes, I am aware that those are people that you see in those frames.  I also...as indicated before...understand how you could visualize what you are visualizing there.

However, the "sweep to the right" that you mention is actually a sweep to the left, when you view this sequence from it's actual orientation (upside-down is true--remember the point I made about the camera orientation some time back).  What you are seeing is a pan of the camera lens into the MESA area...the completely gold-foil covered area that you've seen on that photograph.   The gold foil is very visible, because it is in sunlight due to the Apollo 12 LM's right yaw at landing.  
The camera then rolls a bit and moves in varioous directions, and of course right into the sun seconds later and bam...no more camera.


Now, having said I understand how you could visualize people...I have to say that there isn't anything clear in these frames that could be truly proved as being people.  The camera is being man-handled through an array of jumbled gear and there are merely glimpsed of stuff there, and even a little lunar surface, prior to the camera frying moment.

I think that you want to see people there.

You know, a very intelligent man who graduated with distinction in mathematics from Harvard University spent many years of his life observing Mars through his telescope in Arizona.
His purpose was initially to search for intelligent life on the planet.   And the fact of the matter is, he found such evidence, publishing a book called "Mars" in 1895, a non-fiction work which described the Martian canals and oases, and concluded that these things were the result of local intelligence on the planet, at least at one time.

His name was Percival Lowell.   His observatory of course bears his name today.
This was certainly not a stupid man.  He was imminently intelligent.

Yet, his conclusions about Mars were dead wrong.   Absolutely, positively incorrect in every respect.  The reason for his conclusions was obvious.  He was looking for evidence of intelligent life.  He went into his research with a profound bias, and saw canals that did not exist, and concluded that these structures were thus the result of intelligent life.  He was vastly intelligent, but biased from the start.  He found what his bias was looking for, wrote entire books supporting his conclusions, and was proven 100% incorrect in his assumptions.

This has been a common occurrance in science.   Venus was once thought to be covered in a sea of carbonated water, and many a paper was published supporting this conclusion.   Yet, no one could see anything but a mottled, cloud covered globe. Their conclusions were based on various biases based on known scientific ideas, not on any real scientific data.  The reality of course is that Venus is a nasty place, covered in sulfuric acid clouds with a surface temperature about twice the temperature maximum obtainable in a household oven.  

Now, at the time, we had precious little information concerning Mars, save orbital data from observations, and images gathered over long periods of lousy seeing through telescopes.  

In Apollo, we have a vast repository of advanced scientific data.   It's a much more well-documented thing than Mars was at the time of Lowell.

Yet, I do not debunk your notions, nor shall I call you silly names, just as I would not call Percival Lowell an idiot for his incorrect ideas.

I will merely suggest that you are seeing in these few frames of Apollo 12 footage what you desire to see.  I suggest you have a Lowell-like bias:  you wish to disprove Apollo, and what you see is based upon that desire, just as Lowell, brilliant as he was, wished to find evidence of intelligent life on Mars, and did!  

I, for my part, can make no conclusions about people or shades in these pictures.  I know what was happening then, and can no more make out any specific detail in that quick sequence of camera jostling than any one else who was there.  Indeed, if you asked Al Bean himself what you were seeing in those few seconds, he would give you little more than I have to describe it....he certainly doesn't remember the details concerning how precisely he moved the camera back on that November day some 36 years past.   He wasn't thinking about it...which was why he inadvertently pointed the camera directly into the brilliant sun.  

I think think you are incorrect in what you're seeing.  

But please remember, that statement is not an indictment against you.  As I said, I understand why you see these things, but I would implore you, and anyone so possessed of a determination to disprove Apollo, to remove your bias and look at these things with a scientific objectivity.  Learn about what actually happened there, and then look closely at what you're seeing.  


With all due respect.

    






#408    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 10:20 PM

QUOTE(isis-999 @ Sep 1 2005, 02:24 AM)
The one problem i have always had, And i maybe wrong, but it looks as if the flag is blowing in the wind. And we all know there is no air on the moon to move a flag, I do believe we have been to the moon, But i am not 100% sure it was when they say we went, Also if you talk to older people who remember watching it on tv..most will tell you, at the time it looked faked and they did not believe we where really there. hmm.gif

View Post




Hello isis...

Perhaps I could comment on your post?

Older people, belive it or not, sometimes had a hard time believing that this thing was actually happening when it was.   I think that's somewhat understandable.   I can recall one old fellow being interviewed after the launch of Apollo 16 back in 1972, and when they asked him (a 97 year old former slave named Charlie Smith) what he thought of all this man on the moon business, he said, "Ain't nobody been there!"  original.gif

I can certainly understand how the older folks would have been incredulous about such an event.  And, I would never criticize them for their feelings in the matter.

God bless him...

As to the flag, I would invite you to take a look at the Apollo video of the EVAs conducted during the 6 lunar landing missions on the surface of the Moon.   A great deal of silliness has been put forth about flags waving in the wind...and of course there is no wind.   These examples all show the same thing... a flag moving to and fro as men manipulate it, attempting to get the pole affixed into the relatively hard, dense lunar substrate.

However, once there and affixed, it never, ever moves, even if an astronaut walks right by it.   The Apollo 11 video (all in black and white, of course) shows the American flag deployed on the lunar surface, and it is in the single field of view for the entire time.  Not once does it budge an inch, ever.   Of course, it has a rod pushed through the top of it to hold it out, and the flag itself was simply a piece of material which was rolled up around the pole and packed in a container, so it had wrinkles in it.   It kind of made it look lile it was a fluttering flag...but the fact is, you will never see a flag move in any video on the lunar surface, once the astronauts have finished affixing it in position.  I invite you to take a look.  Almost all of the Apollo video is now available to the general public.

Respectfully.


#409    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 10:40 PM

QUOTE(isis-999 @ Sep 1 2005, 03:14 AM)
I agree with you, but most do not discuss they flame, and i try hard to never be rude to other's. tongue.gif

When you say the pole was made to look as if it was waving, I am still un sure of. The shadow's where also wrong, it looks as if a black back drop is in place. I know this has been asked over and over again since we where suppose to have landed.I can see Kennedy ling about the moon landing because of the Russia.

View Post




Isis...

I am in disagreement with those who intend only to be rude.  I completely understand why a generation could subscribe to lunar landing hoax theories.  I get involved with these sorts of discussions to hopefully point them in a direction where they can find out for themselves about all of this stuff...but rudeness is not the way to do it.

Hopefully, I have been able to point you in a direction that will show you something about the flag-waving business.

I am not sure what you mean about the shadows being wrong.   Perhaps you could illustrate an example regarding the shadows you speak of?

I will say that there was indeed a black backdrop in place.   It was the absolute blackness of space.   It is of course populated by many stars, but those could not have been picked up by television, or other cameras which were focusing on very brightly lit objects like LMs and astronauts and such.  This is simply basic photographic principal.

Oh and please be assured that President Kennedy did nothing regarding lying about us having landed on the Moon.   He merely gave us the mandate to do it.
He was dead for almost 6 years when the events actually happened, so he couldn't have lied about it.   Nixon could've , of course grin2.gif .   He was President at the time.   But he actually cancelled the Apollo Program.  He had no need to lie about it.


Indeed, America had no real need to lie about it because of a "space race" with the Russians.   As I think I've pointed out somewhere here (maybe not, I can't remember); there was no race to the Moon with the Russians as of July 16, 1969, when the Apollo 11 mission launched for the first lunar landing attempt.
Despite the fact that we had already won the Moon race with Apollo 8 in December of 1968, the fact it that on July 4, 1969, the Russian capability for a lunar landing mission was destroyed in a launch pad explosion at the Baikonur Cosmodrome.

There was no space race anymore in July of 1969...although this was unbeknownst to virtually everyone in America (save the NASA hierarchy and the Department of Defense, who had photographed the entire event's aftermath).

Kindest Regards...


#410    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 10:51 PM

QUOTE(turbonium @ Sep 1 2005, 10:08 PM)
QUOTE
We have no reference other than your own visual interpretation of the image against which to compare said interpretation, threfore you can claim the faces, shirts, hands, and whatever else, to be in whatever configuration might be necessary to fit the image.

We DO, however, have plenty of references for what the features of the LM look like and their positions relative to each other. How do you explain not only the presence of the features I have described above, but also their relative placement being precisely where they should be on the LM... if we are not looking at the LM?

Obviously we would have no references to people and chairs and a shade being in the Apollo journals! The fact is that there are colors and shapes which perfectly correspond to where they should be if they are people.

And as far as the lem and relative placement - again, look at all these frames - there is a wide field of view that the camera images as it is moved around. The lem was 14 feet in diameter. The camera had a lot more than 14 feet in its field of view as it moved all around in these sequences, in addition to before and after these stills. You are saying that the astronaut, as in the image below, took the camera from here and moved it all around, but only within the confines of the gold foil area. I don't buy it, sorry to say. Btw, for the fourth time, what is the reference for your gold foil photo you posted way back? I'm still waiting for a reply.

user posted image

View Post




Turb:

Just for accuracy's sake...
This picture is not of the area where tha camera was stowed.    This is not the MESA.   It was exactly opposite this area on the other side of the LM, and attached to it.  "Here" is not where the camera was.  What you're looking at is the bay containing the ALSEP equipment, located opposite the MESA.

You can see the TV camera, connected to the LM by it's cable (although you can't really see the cable), out in the distance on the other side of the LM (just to the right of the Solar Wind experiment.  The guys didn't realize it was a dead camera when they put it in it's position out there).

Regards.


#411    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 11:09 PM

QUOTE(turbonium @ Sep 1 2005, 10:39 PM)
QUOTE(lonelyalpacafarmer @ Sep 1 2005, 07:11 PM)
I see you did a good job of just ignoring my proof that we did land. Then you went ahead and posted some more pictures of men sitting in chairs and such.  thumbsup.gif I have presented PROOF to you. Not just some photo that doesn't look right.

View Post


Really, such an extreme lack of patience while you sit and monitor my posts! Minutes later, here I am!  rolleyes.gif
To the question of tracking the Apollo missions, your source states....
The only way this could have worked is for the Russians to be in on it.
That is a standard claim to 'prove' the landings weren't faked. It doesn't hold though. The Russians could have easily brought up the numerous fallacies of the Warren Commission on the JFK assassination. Even a rookie forensic investigator can blow that story out of the water. The Russians had countless qualified people that could have spoken out on all the ridiculous claims being made. But they didn't. There are other events, like the OKC bombing, 9/11, Pearl Harbor, etc. that Russia and other countries have remained silent on. But there are so many holes in the official stories, they could have done so easily. But they didn't. Silence is not proof.

View Post




Turb:

The Soviets as a whole had absolutely no interest in the details of the Assassination of JFK, had no intelligence on it, and merely considered it tragic, especially Kruschev, who had a long running, meaningful dialogue with President Kennedy (most people don't realize that after the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy and Kruschev had a communique going...still somewhat distrusting, understandably but a meaningful discussion regarding world peace, nuclear arms, etc.).  

Of course a rookie forensic investigator could blow the Warren Commission out of the water, and better people than rookies have.  That is a conspiracy that has been proven, but it has nothing to do with Apollo.  The Soviet silence is because they know that it happened.  Be assured that the Soviets were well aware of what we were doing in space, just as we were concerning their activities.  They imaged Cape Kennedy, we imaged Baikonur.  They knew exactly what we were doing, and we knew exactly what they were doing.   Indeed, we knew that their manned lunar landing program was dead on July 4, 1969.   In fact, we continually shared data when missions into space conflicted (to wit...Luna 15, July 1969...the Soviets shared their vehicles orbital data with us so we could be assured there was no riusk to Apollo 11's crew from the Soviet unmanned lunar landing probe).

Regards.



#412    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 11:10 PM

QUOTE(Nameless @ Sep 1 2005, 10:41 PM)
Not trying to be point or anything but don't you think that the "cameraman" took the picture while the camera was vertical?

View Post




What "picture" are you talking about?


#413    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 11:38 PM

QUOTE(turbonium @ Sep 1 2005, 11:28 PM)
QUOTE(frenat @ Sep 1 2005, 08:08 PM)
Moon rocks found on earth have very different characteristics from actual moon rocks.  No geologist worth anything would mistake the two.  The Russians used unmanned missions to returns some samples from the moon.  They returned only a few grams worth.  From all the Apollo missions, more than 800 pounds  of moon rocks were returned.  This is way more than any sample found in Anarctica.  Also, the US samples were composed of more than just random rocks.  Core samples were included as well.  Are you really trying to say that all of that could have been brought back with an unmanned probe?  You should be a comedian because you're making me laugh. 

Saying the Russians could have blown other conspiracies means nothing.  They had a lot invested in the race to the moon.  They had first hand tracking of the missions.  They had direct evidence that everything went exactly as the US said it did.

View Post


First, as to the Russians - they were considered the "mortal enemy" of the US, and to say they ignored the JFK assassination but wouldn't ignore a moon hoax is ridiculous. The US and the Russians even worked together in 1975 for the Apollo-Soyuz project. Doesn't seem like they were such great arch-enemies since they undertook a joint space mission only three years after Apollo 17!!

And coming back with over 100 pounds of rocks on average per mission? Where did they pack 100+ lbs. of rocks in the lem? Weren't they concerned about the excees weight compromising the safety of the takeoff from the Moon? Why take such a needless risk, when a few rocks would be the same as over 100 lbs. worth? Seems like extreme redundancy for the very real risk of safely returning to Earth. Did they carefully place them all over the inside of the lem to lessen the risk of instability for takeoff and manouvering from lack of proper weight distribution? They would need to tape them in place everywhere so the rocks wouldn't fly around inside the module, wouldn't they?

View Post




Turb:

The "Russians" ignored neither event you mentioned. They realized they were both true.  They also knew that we knew that they couldn't get to the moon before us, and they focused their efforts elsewhere.


It is also fallacious to state average returns for Apollo missions.   One should realize that in any test program, which Apollo was, upgrades are made based on knowledge gained and requirements, if at all possible.   The LMs that flew on the J Missions (Apollos 15-17) were very different from the Apollo 11 LM.  Apollo 11 brought back about 48 pounds of samples. That was quite enough for a first landing attempt!  Thier purpose was to demonstrate capability, not to do extensive exploration.  Apollo 15  brought backabout 168 pounds, and Apollo 17 , 240+ pounds.  The final 3 missions collected about 75% of the total return, and they were designed to do that.

The LMs for these missions were upgraded, both in carrying capacity, and in consumable loads, so that stays of up to 3 days could be under-taken.  

This was not risk-taking.  It was engineering upgrading, a common process in flight testing.  There was no undue risk, and given the vast variety of landing sites, and the variety of types of lunar samples, it is no wonder thast so much was collected, and to state that a couple of pounds was as good as 100 is really not very wise, or accurate.   Everything in the J-Missions was selected very carefully and planned for well in advance.

There was no redundancy in sample collection, and sample collection never compromised the safety of the return.





#414    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,265 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 02 September 2005 - 11:39 PM

QUOTE
What you are seeing is a pan of the camera lens into the MESA area...the completely gold-foil covered area that you've seen on that photograph. The gold foil is very visible, because it is in sunlight due to the Apollo 12 LM's right yaw at landing.

Hi, MID - glad to see you back. I enjoy a discussion with someone who displays respect and maturity over rudeness.

The camera goes a fair degree in panning (to the left, you are saying). How is such a sweep only extended to within view of the lem? And, how do you explain - the black shade area raising and then lowering, with people (I see) moving in sync with this? To be specific, below I have indicated how the frame stills have a stationary object (the whitish object on a stationary surface) while the man goes from a standing to a sitting position, with his elbows resting on the surface, all the while holding and pulling down on "rope" loops. How can there be movement of objects if this is the lem?

I look forward to your reply. Thanks.

user posted image user posted image

Edited by turbonium, 02 September 2005 - 11:40 PM.


#415    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 September 2005 - 11:47 PM

QUOTE(turbonium @ Sep 2 2005, 01:47 AM)
Seriously, are you trying to make me laugh again? Suggesting that the rocks were rolling around loose inside the cabin? How ludicrous can you get?
I actually was trying to on that one - I forgot my sarcastic smiley face emoticon!  rofl.gif

But seriously - you didn't respond to my comments about the Apollo-Soyuz joint space mission. That was merely 3 years after Apollo 17. Arch-rivals in space programs and feared enemies would not conduct a mission together. The US, by supposedy having landed men on the moon while the Russians had not, actually sharing in a space mission with the now inferior Soviets?

View Post




Turb:

The Soviets were a power in space.  We beat them because they didn't have a von Braun who could cluster advanced engines. That's it in a nutshell.   They were no longer arch rivals in the mid-1970s, and the detante brought forth in the 1970s made it clear that ASTP would be a good thing to do, because America was realizing that cooperation and assistance from the Soviets would be essential to any real peace-time space project in the future.   It was just a good thing, for the future of space flight and the future of humanity...and has been  something which has been well proven out with the Shuttle debacles and the Russians being the only ones who could supply the ISS.  


The SRC's (Sample Return Containers) in the Apollo LMs were all secured in areas designed for them in the LMs.  No rocks were rolling around loose in the cabin.  They were all vacuum sealed on the surface of the moon, packed in outer containers, and stowed quite sercurely for the return to Earth, both in the LM and in the CM.


#416    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,265 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 03 September 2005 - 12:19 AM

QUOTE
How wide? What is the FOV angle of the TV camera lens at the time these images were captured? And explain how you arrived at your number.


QUOTE
14 feet at what distance? FOV measured in linear distance units is meaningless, which is why FOV is measured in angular units (degrees, for example)

Again, I can only give an estimate based on the footage. Below are some more stills from Apollo 12, showing an astronaut and ladder....
user posted image

The camera is maybe ten feet or so from the ladder, as a rough guess, with the astronaut maybe within half that distance on the right hand side. The ladder has a height we know as seen below....
user posted image
So from an object distance of about ten feet, we see about 8 feet from top to bottom, and maybe a ten foot width at that same distance. The background shows the surface horizon, which would be much wider than 10 feet in the camera's view, of course, but it would be difficult to give a decent estimate of the width.

QUOTE
Can you answer the questions I asked of you in my previous post?

Done, at least as an estimate, which is all that can be done, I think. And so, please outline the area if you could.




#417    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 03 September 2005 - 12:20 AM

QUOTE(turbonium @ Sep 2 2005, 07:39 PM)
QUOTE
What you are seeing is a pan of the camera lens into the MESA area...the completely gold-foil covered area that you've seen on that photograph. The gold foil is very visible, because it is in sunlight due to the Apollo 12 LM's right yaw at landing.

Hi, MID - glad to see you back. I enjoy a discussion with someone who displays respect and maturity over rudeness.

The camera goes a fair degree in panning (to the left, you are saying). How is such a sweep only extended to within view of the lem? And, how do you explain - the black shade area raising and then lowering, with people (I see) moving in sync with this? To be specific, below I have indicated how the frame stills have a stationary object (the whitish object on a stationary surface) while the man goes from a standing to a sitting position, with his elbows resting on the surface, all the while holding and pulling down on "rope" loops. How can there be movement of objects if this is the lem?

I look forward to your reply. Thanks.

user posted image user posted image

View Post




Hi Turb:

I would explain the fact that the LM is visible for the predominant part of the pan by saying that the camera was only about a foot and a half from the LM itself when the pan started, and remained there while the manipulations were taking place.

With an object like the LM in such close proximity to the camera, the LM occupied the best part of a 180 sweep of the camera lens.   If the camera were 10 feet away, the LM would've passed though the field of view much quicker, and if it were 20' away, much quicker yet.

However,  the camerta was basically attached to the MESA within about a foot and a half of the LM body itself, which is why when panning about 180 degrees, the LM would occupy most of the field of view.


You're looking at two frames of this video...upside down frames, mind you, that occupy much less than 1 second of time.   The "shade", as you term it, is merely appearing very momentarily in the field of view from side to side.  There is no obvious movement up or down, but again, there is nothing clear here that indicates that there is anything but a jumbled mess of reflections present, Turb.

The movement is that of the camera, as I see it.

Regards.

Edited by MID, 03 September 2005 - 12:22 AM.


#418    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,265 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 03 September 2005 - 01:05 AM

QUOTE(MID @ Sep 2 2005, 04:47 PM)
Turb:

The Soviets were a power in space.  We beat them because they didn't have a von Braun who could cluster advanced engines. That's it in a nutshell.   They were no longer arch rivals in the mid-1970s, and the detante brought forth in the 1970s made it clear that ASTP would be a good thing to do, because America was realizing that cooperation and assistance from the Soviets would be essential to any real peace-time space project in the future.   It was just a good thing, for the future of space flight and the future of humanity...and has been  something which has been well proven out with the Shuttle debacles and the Russians being the only ones who could supply the ISS. 


The SRC's (Sample Return Containers) in the Apollo LMs were all secured in areas designed for them in the LMs.  No rocks were rolling around loose in the cabin.  They were all vacuum sealed on the surface of the moon, packed in outer containers, and stowed quite sercurely for the return to Earth, both in the LM and in the CM.

View Post



Thanks, MID - your answers are reasonable. But, at the risk of veering off into another conspiracy subject, the US and USSR were also involved in many covert deals that the public was not aware of,  from after WW2 through the 1980's. This link goes into details on the US support of Russia, through money and goods (eg. grain).
US-USSR Alliance

I have heard that the Soviets knew about the moon hoax and bribed the US by exchanging their silence for tons of grain shipments free of charge. I don't know if this is true, but I honestly do not think the two nations were the mortal enemies that the mainstream press portrayed them to be. The link shows US and European bankers funding the Russian Revolution, and they continued funding them throughout the Cold War period and through the 1970's and 1980's. It seems like every "War" declared is actually a cover name for the opposite. The War on Drugs, The War on Poverty, and now, The War on Terror, all seem to result in more drugs, more poverty, and more terror, not less. The Cold War may have been just another phony name to dupe the public. Anyway, I guess I should stop digressing too much... wink2.gif

And the moon rocks bouncing around was just me having some fun - it wasn't a serious question.  original.gif

Cheers


#419    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,265 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 03 September 2005 - 02:49 AM

QUOTE
You're looking at two frames of this video...upside down frames,


Hi MID - OK, you are saying that the still is upside down, so that the black area is actually below the "people" area. But DataCable (in his photo below) claims the "people" area is the gold foil, which is below the black area.
user posted image
user posted image


#420    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 03 September 2005 - 05:46 PM

QUOTE(turbonium @ Sep 2 2005, 10:49 PM)
QUOTE
You're looking at two frames of this video...upside down frames,


Hi MID - OK, you are saying that the still is upside down, so that the black area is actually below the "people" area. But DataCable (in his photo below) claims the "people" area is the gold foil, which is below the black area.
user posted image
user posted image

View Post




Yes Turb, I think your interpretation of my orientation is correct.  

I also agree with Data Cable in his statemnent that the people area you mention is in fact the brief reflections of the gold foil clearly visible in the fantastic photo repro you've put here.

Those couple of frames are showing the boundary between the gold foil and the darker area above it,which is clearly visible in the area of the photo where you've labeled "struts".  The camera, still upside down is quickly panning through that region, then you see some evidence of struts and other rigging as the camera moves beyond the aft area of the LM and into the sun which is off to the left, and of course, on to disaster.

Funny thing about this event.   Sometimes the simplest things escape people.   A simple lens cap would've prevented this whole thing from happening (one was included on every subsequent mission's lunar surface camera...)!   \

Regards.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users