MoonFaker: Reflect On This. PART 4

This film took considerably longer to finish than expected due to severe computer problems on my end.

There have been many photographs taken from the various Apollo missions showing brightly lit objects that should be in shade. Conspiracy theorists believe fill-lights or reflectors were used to fill in the shadows. Propagandists claim that it's just light bouncing off the lunar surface that's causing the illumination.

In this video Jarrah White responds to the Mythbusters, ZigZag Productions and Jay Windley by doing what no propagandists has bothered to do - get the albedo right.

Watch what happens when we shoot photographs of shadowed objects on an asphelt surface. We know that the moon has an average albedo of 0.07. According to the American Concrete Pavement Association, this is within the vicinity of the albedo of asphelt - which makes it the perfect surface material for testing the lunar reflectivity.

http://www.pavement.com/Downloads/RT/RT3.05.pdf

Asphalt
0.05 - 0.10 (new)
0.10 - 0.15 (weathered)

Gray Portland cement concrete
0.35 - 0.40 (new)
0.20 - 0.30 (weathered)

White Portland cement concrete
0.70 - 0.80 (new)
0.40 - 0.60 (weathered)

Why has no propandist ever done their tests on an asphelt road? And why do some even pretend that their choice of surface material has the same albedo as the moon when they know it doesn't?


Ralph Earnest Cascarelli René
24th of August 1933 - 10th of December 2008
http://www.ralphrene.com/
Rest In Peace

http://www.moonmovie.com
http://www.billkaysing.com
http://www.ralphrene.com
http://www.moonhoax.us


Jarrah White would like to invite you to see the Apollo 11 footage that Svector, Phantom Wolf and Shane Killian have tried to suppress from public view.

APOLLO XI: THE LITTLE GEM
http://moonhoax.us/littlegem.htm

See also the evidence of faked and suppressed Apollo 10 footage that Mark Gray doesn't want you to see.

FLAGGING THE GEMS
http://moonhoax.us/flagginggems.htm

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Apollo
• moon
• landing
• hoax
• hoaxed
• shadow
• photography
• fake
• faked
• photos
• Buzz
• Aldrin
• Neil
• Armstrong
• Adam
• Savage
• Jamie
• Hyman
• Mythbusters
• Jay
• Windley
• Phil
• Plait
• Bad
• Astronomy
• Clavius
• space
• spacesuit
• regolith
• albedo
• portland
• cement
• asphelt
• reflectivity
• reflector
• fill
• light
• sun
• exposure
• aperture
• shutter
• speed
• f-stop

[Waniou137]

Regarding your point about his backpack not being illuminated about 1 minute into the video, perhaps it's because there's no lunar surface above him? You know, where the light would have to be coming from? And where fill lights would be placed?

I hate to tell you, but your experiments were performed in horrid and unrealistic conditions. Mythbusters carried out theirs far more accurately.

[WhiteJarrah]

"Regarding your point about his backpack not being illuminated about 1 minute into the video, perhaps it's because there's no lunar surface above him? You know, where the light would have to be coming from? And where fill lights would be placed?"

His backpack is in the same position as Aldrin when he stepped into the ladder. If it is indeed reflected light I would expect there to be the same results.

[Waniou137]

You're not comparing the same things as I am there. Doesn't matter anyway, same sort of scenario. The back of Aldrin's backpack in the ladder picture is darker than the rest of him, which is again consistent with a light source below him, where the moon's surface is, not with a light source above him, where studio lighting would be placed.

[WhiteJarrah]

"You're not comparing the same things as I am there."

Yes I am. You're talking about AS12-46-6820, right? Look at Aldrin and Bean in their respective photos - they are both leaning slightly forward so you would expect them to be equally lit.

The only way to get an object as lit as Aldrin, without the aid of fill-lights or reflectors, would be to use a surface with a much higher albedo than the moon's 0.07.

[Waniou137]

Two different pictures taken in two different circumstances. There's other things that need to be taken into account, such as the angle of the sun in each picture.

[WhiteJarrah]

"such as the angle of the sun in each picture."

The transit of the sun on the moon over a 31hr period is barely noticible. The picture of Bean in the LM shadow, his portrait photo and AS12-46-6820 were all taken under the same lighting conditions. You'd expect to get the same results.

[adiohead]

i found it amazing that they tagged their video with your name Jarrah! they're scared of you :D

if i win the lottery i'll happily fund you to make a feature docu-film about it.

[greenmagoos]

Al Bean is standing in front of a screen in the photo beside the lm on the moonset

[MrTerrificII]

Jarrah, regarding the extra reflectivity on Bean, what about "Earth shine?"

[yesiamawizardjonny]

@adiohead And grass or sand. Plait is a dumbass.

[TheGrotesqueReality]

great choice for the music for the ending credits

[MaskelynMage]

@Colt2571 Hi

Never mentioned the Mythbusters dude!

Ignorant??

The Moon's surface is mostly silica, which is waaay more reflective in a vacuum than asphalt/ sand is in our atmosphere!

Why is this bit of science so hard for you all to grasp???

I love Jarrah's videos! But his science is below that of a 1st grader!

You'll tell me also, 3000 Americans involved in the Apollo missions, can keep their mouths shut? Naaa

You'd rather believe Kaising...A drunken librarian & Jarrah.

Sheesh!!

[wardydave]

mythbusters=pwned

[therealistone2003]

@thesoulhack yo dude yes his experiment is flawed but it doesnt matter how much light you use the results will be the same.because the albedo of the asphalt or moondust will stay the same.. a brighter light will only create darker shadows which will then require a even higher albedo of the asphalt or moondust to produce a higher reflectivity to illuminate the astronaut. so his experiment is not spot on but the point he is making is clear. the moonlanding footage is 100 percent hollywood

[thesoulhack]

@therealistone2003

he haven't proved anything by doing all of his experiments wrong. You are just as gullible as anyone could be on the opposite side haven't you noticed? At least I'm trying to have a discussion and stated solid points that Jarrah has done wrong in his experiments. You on the other hand, haven't put forward any own thinking whatsoever and just are just a sheep on the opposite side. Bäähhh!

[therealistone2003]

@thesoulhack hey jarrah you clearly proved the myth busters wrong but you are fighting a losing battle because people will always come up with the most absurd arguments....the thing i hate about this country is that the government know that most of us are gullible, and that in the eyes of sheeple they can do no wrong.....i believe we went to the moon but i dont believe the footage shown to the public back in the 60's is real...its the same with 911 people cant handle the truth

[drmanmohanss]

you are good....i must say ...keep up the brilliant work....

[thesoulhack]

One more point, your headlights aren't coming from the same direction as in the real photos. So this and the other points I've talked about in the other parts disprove this video series.

You easily claim that Mythbusters and others don't do their experiments in the same conditions as it was on the lunar surface, but yet you yourself fail to do so also.