411,000 people worked on Project Apollo. If the project was a hoax then thousands would have come forward by now with REAL evidence of a hoax. But what do we get? Pot head kids and anti-government trolls who were not even connected to the program: And all of them trying to use low quality flash youtube vids to hawk their 'evidence'! Give me a break!
NASA Administrator Thomas O. Paine was drawing up ambitious plans for the establishment of a "permanent base on the Moon by the end of the 1970s" and the launch of a manned expedition to "Mars as early as 1981". All U.S. Project Apollo moon landings, and the attempted moon landing of Apollo 13, took place during water gator Nixon's first term. COVERUPS COVERUPs.
Your logic is poor. Just because a gov carries out a coverup, Watergate, does not mean that everything they did was suspect & required a coverup. Going back to the moon probaly was the wish of Paine but NASA relies on gov funding & by the time of the last couple of Apollo missions both the public & gov had lost interest. Now we have a new political incentive - beat the Chinese in building a moon base.
Go to search for "NASA Moon Hoax" by JokerisWebCams I can't believe it! In the video at the :50's I looked over and over and over. I finally was satisfied to actually CLEARLY see the wire that runs from in between the helmet and the antenna. I even used a good magnifying glass. Oh how funny to think this is a puppet string. Ohhhh sshhhhiiittt!Notice how grainy the picture becomes ; so to disguise the wire. ha ha ha heee heee hooo haaah yyeee hhaaaa!
Why would someone pretend to fake SEVEN GODDAMN LUNAR LANDINGS? There's no point in doing such thing don't you think? furthermore too many people were involved...you can't silence them all. Paranoia...
Yes a wannabe; not ridiculed? I did not present a shred of evidence for the moonhoax! In fact I thought all hoaxers were nuts.I apo- logize to all brilliant scientists and common working people whose foresight and intelligence saw Nasa's in secret Gvmnt projects draining the peoples national resource pool while millions of Americans were in need of that stolen tax money to better our society stop the Viet war and end American discontent among ALL the races.
What is stopping the astronauts aiming the camera straight up? If I was taking photos of star, regardless of where from, I would aim my camera straight up. Why include horizon at all?
That will not happen until the they sort out the problems of radiation in space. Somethin they would have been better off admitting to in the first place instead of making a monkey of the world.
What problem? "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." Dr. James Van Allen.
You are missing the point about this. Future missions will require greater protection because the astonauts won't be spending a fews days in space like the Apollo missions but months at a time. The equipment will have to function for years. Deadly exposure to radiation is quantity x time.
The Astro-nots could very easily have taken a time exposure of the sky and a got a great shot of the stars. They didn't because they were not on the Moon, they were in a Sound Stage on Earth, and any picture of stars from the moon (when not really on the moon) would have given it all away, as the stars do not look exactly the same from the moon as it does on earth and it would have been impossible to create a perfect representation of the stars from that vantage point.
They would need a tripod on the moon + use a whole roll of film to photograph the stars as they would have been unable to adjust the camera in their space suits.
The photos would prove nothing. Exactly how different will the stars look from the moon than from earth at night - nil. Quite frankly it astounds me how little knowledge people have about photography (I blame all auto cameras).
OK the photos would look exactly the same as taken from earth on a clear night. And how would the horizon look different? It would be dark rather than brightly light in all the Apollo photos. Get some photography books & learn something.
But the stars would look the same - you wouldn't see more of them & they wouldn't be any bigger or brighter. Shifting ones view of stars millions of light years away by 384,403km won't change a thing. I bet you live in a city.
It would look just the same as a photo of the stars taken from earth. Moon landing deniers would then say these photos were proof that it was a hoax as they look just like they were taken on Earth. You just cannot win when confronted with retarded dickheads.
How could a photograph of the 'stars' possibly look the same as one taken from Earth? The horizon would be completely different for a start off.
The only people who are retarded dickheads is anybody 'gullible' enough to believe that the Astro-nots wouldn't have changed the camera exposure setting at least ONCE durin the six missions to capture an unbelievable photo of the Universe.
The human eye can respond to lighter & darker objects in a scene than photographic film can. The astronauts had a choice, take lots of photos of the stars that look the same as they do at night on earth or photograph the entirely new (to humans) moon surface. Perhaps they did take a photo of the stars but as it looks no different as from earth they did't use it.
BTW even the CrapAstronomer Phil Plait confirms at his website that the Astro-nots should have been able to see the stars while walking on the Moon! Not ONE sinle comment from any actor Astro-not while on the Moonset about the unbelievable view of the Cosmos. Not even keen Astronomer Neil Armstrong!
It wouldn't look the same as from Earth because the atmosphere blocks certain frequencies. But yeah, it looks the same from the moon as it does from low earth orbit. :)
'THE REASON THE ASTRO-NOTS WENT TO THE MOON WAS TO PHOTOGRAPH THE ROCKS NOT THE STARS'
'THE VIEW OF THE STARS ON THE MOON AS THE SAME AS IT ON THE EARTH' ??????
Motor cars pulled out the side of LM's and not once did they ever think to take a tripod stand, put the camera on it, put it in the shade, change the camera exposure settings, leave it for 30 SECS, and capture a photo of the cosmos from the Moon without an atmosphere!
Nobody "thought of it" because there's no reason to do it. Yes, it's true that you can see broader ranges of starlight when outside the atmosphere, but there's no photography of the stars that could be taken on the moon which couldn't have been taken (and in fact was) taken in low earth orbit.
is this saying that the moon landing is fake?
Yozer245 1 year ago
@Yozer245 No he is pointing out the flaws in the logic people use to deny the landiings - they occurred.
mddawson1 1 year ago
411,000 people worked on Project Apollo. If the project was a hoax then thousands would have come forward by now with REAL evidence of a hoax. But what do we get? Pot head kids and anti-government trolls who were not even connected to the program: And all of them trying to use low quality flash youtube vids to hawk their 'evidence'! Give me a break!
plasmalux 3 years ago
NASA Administrator Thomas O. Paine was drawing up ambitious plans for the establishment of a "permanent base on the Moon by the end of the 1970s" and the launch of a manned expedition to "Mars as early as 1981". All U.S. Project Apollo moon landings, and the attempted moon landing of Apollo 13, took place during water gator Nixon's first term. COVERUPS COVERUPs.
EGMAG 4 years ago
Your logic is poor. Just because a gov carries out a coverup, Watergate, does not mean that everything they did was suspect & required a coverup. Going back to the moon probaly was the wish of Paine but NASA relies on gov funding & by the time of the last couple of Apollo missions both the public & gov had lost interest. Now we have a new political incentive - beat the Chinese in building a moon base.
mddawson1 4 years ago
Go to search for "NASA Moon Hoax" by JokerisWebCams I can't believe it! In the video at the :50's I looked over and over and over. I finally was satisfied to actually CLEARLY see the wire that runs from in between the helmet and the antenna. I even used a good magnifying glass. Oh how funny to think this is a puppet string. Ohhhh sshhhhiiittt!Notice how grainy the picture becomes ; so to disguise the wire. ha ha ha heee heee hooo haaah yyeee hhaaaa!
EGMAG 4 years ago
So you studied a low res YouTube video probably copied from a multi generation VHS tape & you spotted flaws. Big deal!
mddawson1 4 years ago
mddawson1 you spotted flaws<<
com'on-that's not flaws. that's cover ups.
EGMAG 4 years ago
I hope this guy don't get paid for this bullshit-cover-up-crap!
EGMAG 4 years ago
Why would someone pretend to fake SEVEN GODDAMN LUNAR LANDINGS? There's no point in doing such thing don't you think? furthermore too many people were involved...you can't silence them all. Paranoia...
ForzaSofiaLoren 4 years ago
starview1 wannabes and likely egmag <<
Yes a wannabe; not ridiculed? I did not present a shred of evidence for the moonhoax! In fact I thought all hoaxers were nuts.I apo- logize to all brilliant scientists and common working people whose foresight and intelligence saw Nasa's in secret Gvmnt projects draining the peoples national resource pool while millions of Americans were in need of that stolen tax money to better our society stop the Viet war and end American discontent among ALL the races.
EGMAG 4 years ago
Yes it would. The horizon would be completely different if the overexposed moonset was in the same frame.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
What is stopping the astronauts aiming the camera straight up? If I was taking photos of star, regardless of where from, I would aim my camera straight up. Why include horizon at all?
mddawson1 4 years ago
It's called look folks- a piture of overexposed Astro-nots in front of an overexposed LM on the overexposed Moonset with 'stars' above it.
Who in there right minds would have wanted to see that picture in the same period of time as Star Trek and 2001!
greenmagoos 4 years ago
I think you should read ww w. clavius. org /stars. html
mddawson1 4 years ago
I have already. Thanks. And BadAstronomy. In fact I also own the book.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
I wonder what conspiracy you will come up with when man finally goes back to the moon & finds several lander bases & lunar rovers.
mddawson1 4 years ago
That will not happen until the they sort out the problems of radiation in space. Somethin they would have been better off admitting to in the first place instead of making a monkey of the world.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
What problem? "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." Dr. James Van Allen.
mddawson1 4 years ago
Its still a very big major problem. Something NASA has still to sort out.
Van Allen was only reffering to time spent in the belts. Nothing else.
watch?v=oeKs826uplM
greenmagoos 4 years ago
You are missing the point about this. Future missions will require greater protection because the astonauts won't be spending a fews days in space like the Apollo missions but months at a time. The equipment will have to function for years. Deadly exposure to radiation is quantity x time.
mddawson1 4 years ago
The Astro-nots could very easily have taken a time exposure of the sky and a got a great shot of the stars. They didn't because they were not on the Moon, they were in a Sound Stage on Earth, and any picture of stars from the moon (when not really on the moon) would have given it all away, as the stars do not look exactly the same from the moon as it does on earth and it would have been impossible to create a perfect representation of the stars from that vantage point.
sunwestmovies 4 years ago
They would need a tripod on the moon + use a whole roll of film to photograph the stars as they would have been unable to adjust the camera in their space suits.
mddawson1 4 years ago
Good God! Not a whole roll of film and a tripod stand!!!!
Cancel the mission! In fact cancel the entire Space Program. We've jusy gone over budget with that roll of film and the tripod.
Wouldn't be able to adjust the camera in those space suits?
They were fine unloading and preparing the Lunar rover in those suits.
And even if that 'excuse' you've given was acceptable all they had to do was take a seperate camera on a tri-pod with those exposure settings.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
The photos would prove nothing. Exactly how different will the stars look from the moon than from earth at night - nil. Quite frankly it astounds me how little knowledge people have about photography (I blame all auto cameras).
mddawson1 4 years ago
Stars from the Moon would be different beause there would be no atmospheric conditions -i.e. clouds.
Also the horizon would be completely different!
greenmagoos 4 years ago
OK the photos would look exactly the same as taken from earth on a clear night. And how would the horizon look different? It would be dark rather than brightly light in all the Apollo photos. Get some photography books & learn something.
mddawson1 4 years ago
The horizon is closer on the Moon. You would see more stars.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
But the stars would look the same - you wouldn't see more of them & they wouldn't be any bigger or brighter. Shifting ones view of stars millions of light years away by 384,403km won't change a thing. I bet you live in a city.
mddawson1 4 years ago
It would look just the same as a photo of the stars taken from earth. Moon landing deniers would then say these photos were proof that it was a hoax as they look just like they were taken on Earth. You just cannot win when confronted with retarded dickheads.
mddawson1 4 years ago
How could a photograph of the 'stars' possibly look the same as one taken from Earth? The horizon would be completely different for a start off.
The only people who are retarded dickheads is anybody 'gullible' enough to believe that the Astro-nots wouldn't have changed the camera exposure setting at least ONCE durin the six missions to capture an unbelievable photo of the Universe.
Unbelievable stupidty!
greenmagoos 4 years ago
The human eye can respond to lighter & darker objects in a scene than photographic film can. The astronauts had a choice, take lots of photos of the stars that look the same as they do at night on earth or photograph the entirely new (to humans) moon surface. Perhaps they did take a photo of the stars but as it looks no different as from earth they did't use it.
mddawson1 4 years ago
One photo. Well it should be easy traceable.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
BTW even the CrapAstronomer Phil Plait confirms at his website that the Astro-nots should have been able to see the stars while walking on the Moon! Not ONE sinle comment from any actor Astro-not while on the Moonset about the unbelievable view of the Cosmos. Not even keen Astronomer Neil Armstrong!
greenmagoos 4 years ago
That is consistant with seeing stars at midday. Did you really want them to travel to the far side of the moon to take nighttime photos?
mddawson1 4 years ago
Plait STATES the Astro-nots would have seen the 'stars'.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
The jackass geek who gave this talk CONFIRMS the FACT that if the camera exposure was changed 'stars' would have shown up in the photos.
greenmagoos 4 years ago
It wouldn't look the same as from Earth because the atmosphere blocks certain frequencies. But yeah, it looks the same from the moon as it does from low earth orbit. :)
singedrac 3 years ago
'THE REASON THE ASTRO-NOTS WENT TO THE MOON WAS TO PHOTOGRAPH THE ROCKS NOT THE STARS'
'THE VIEW OF THE STARS ON THE MOON AS THE SAME AS IT ON THE EARTH' ??????
Motor cars pulled out the side of LM's and not once did they ever think to take a tripod stand, put the camera on it, put it in the shade, change the camera exposure settings, leave it for 30 SECS, and capture a photo of the cosmos from the Moon without an atmosphere!
Who does he think he's kidding?
greenmagoos 4 years ago
Nobody "thought of it" because there's no reason to do it. Yes, it's true that you can see broader ranges of starlight when outside the atmosphere, but there's no photography of the stars that could be taken on the moon which couldn't have been taken (and in fact was) taken in low earth orbit.
singedrac 3 years ago