SSS-666Here we go, the first reply points out an insignificant error, but offers no challenge whatsoever.
And, yes, I should have said a few thousand kilos/pounds. That is just so trivial, and has no
baring on the “unused” exhaust fact.
SSS-666Here we go, the first reply points out an insignificant error, but offers no challenge whatsoever.
And, yes, I should have said a few thousand kilos/pounds. That is just so trivial, and has no
baring on the “unused” exhaust fact.
SSS-666Okay, I am being accused of ignoring some proofs about the legitimacy of the pics. I certainly
don’t remember which ones. So, here are just about all of the pics with anomalies. Lets make a
quick run through to refresh my memory. Just a quick mention that aside from passing
references, I have not used any pics that been discussed in the many Hoax web sites. All of these
pics are put forwards by me only.
Pics go from left to right and top row to the bottom.
– Pic 1 Aldrin is kneeling to back down the ladder. The light source is directly opposite on
the other side of the LM. This is supposed to be the shady side. Yet, not only the entire “shady
side” is lit up so damn brightly, but also, some spots are reflecting a very bright light source.
That just can’t be possible without additional lights. The Yellow arrows at the bottom left are
reflecting directly from the light source and all those Red arrows are the brightest reflections of
the “other” light source(s). Conclusion, there are multiple light sources and reflectors.
– Pic 2 Same guy coming down, and same fakery. Same colour scheme plus Blue arrow is
pointing at the “Blue Sky” reflection. The sky is blue because the pic is faked.
– Pic 3 Just about everything in this pic has crisp shadow edges, except the LM. Probably
because the LM shadow was painted on.
– Pic 4 This exhaust nozzle was supposedly used to land a few thousand ton LM, and the fire
passing through it a few thousand degrees. Considering that I have yet to see one single Jet
exhaust that could remain even remotely intact after the first engine run, this exhaust has never
been used. Probably because it is attached to a dummy LM.
– Pic 5 Although there was a good attempt to disprove this pic, it was not convincing that the
Command Module would change orbit and go down a few thousand feet, before returning to a
higher orbit. Or, alternatively, the Landing Module moved to a higher orbit, before descending
back down to the surface. Keeping in mind that according to NASA there were only 60 second
of thrust remained in the LM before touch down. So it would be utterly illogical to fire up the
engine to go up, before going down. Therefore, this pic was a mistaken fake. I think the
Command Module mockup is superimposed on the Moon photo.
– Pic 6 There were hardly any challenge to this pic whatsoever. The red arrows point to the
crisp shadows and the yellow arrows point to the fuzzy LM shadow, again. As well, we can see
the LM has cast a shadow from about 100 Miles away, which essentially makes the LM as big as
the “Death Star”. “May the force be with you,” because this pic is such an obvious fake that it is
not even funny. Some idiot faked this pic while drunk.
– Pic 7 This pic has been used at other web sites to point out the Crosshair screw up. But, we
don’t. Because there are another screw up. The parallel lines show the direction, and the height,
of the light source. However, because the shadows are apparently drawn on the picture, the
shadow of the LM seems to be too short. As we see, the parallel line goes right through the LM,
where in fact the end of the LM antenna shadow should have been tens of feet further up.
If someone ids thinking about suggesting a dip on the ground, think again. The next pic shows
that the dip is minimal, and impossible to reduce the shadow length by almost half. As well, I
pointed out before, that the shadow of the landing strut mysteriously goes over the hose, or
whatever it is, instead of under it. A close up shows the hose/cable does not turn sideways to be
too thin to be seen. So, that theory is false. It appears the shadow, at the least, has been drawn by
hand.
-8 This pic accompanies the one before. It shows the hose without shadow distortion of the
last, so it essentially renders the idea of thin sideways shadow null. The red line shows the
direction and the height of the light source for comparison to the last pic.
There has been a few sarcastic replies, accompanied by whimsical photos. But no one has been
able to rebuff these claims.
SSS-666Okay, I am being accused of ignoring some proofs about the legitimacy of the pics. I certainly
don’t remember which ones. So, here are just about all of the pics with anomalies. Lets make a
quick run through to refresh my memory. Just a quick mention that aside from passing
references, I have not used any pics that been discussed in the many Hoax web sites. All of these
pics are put forwards by me only.
Pics go from left to right and top row to the bottom.
– Pic 1 Aldrin is kneeling to back down the ladder. The light source is directly opposite on
the other side of the LM. This is supposed to be the shady side. Yet, not only the entire “shady
side” is lit up so damn brightly, but also, some spots are reflecting a very bright light source.
That just can’t be possible without additional lights. The Yellow arrows at the bottom left are
reflecting directly from the light source and all those Red arrows are the brightest reflections of
the “other” light source(s). Conclusion, there are multiple light sources and reflectors.
– Pic 2 Same guy coming down, and same fakery. Same colour scheme plus Blue arrow is
pointing at the “Blue Sky” reflection. The sky is blue because the pic is faked.
– Pic 3 Just about everything in this pic has crisp shadow edges, except the LM. Probably
because the LM shadow was painted on.
– Pic 4 This exhaust nozzle was supposedly used to land a few thousand ton LM, and the fire
passing through it a few thousand degrees. Considering that I have yet to see one single Jet
exhaust that could remain even remotely intact after the first engine run, this exhaust has never
been used. Probably because it is attached to a dummy LM.
– Pic 5 Although there was a good attempt to disprove this pic, it was not convincing that the
Command Module would change orbit and go down a few thousand feet, before returning to a
higher orbit. Or, alternatively, the Landing Module moved to a higher orbit, before descending
back down to the surface. Keeping in mind that according to NASA there were only 60 second
of thrust remained in the LM before touch down. So it would be utterly illogical to fire up the
engine to go up, before going down. Therefore, this pic was a mistaken fake. I think the
Command Module mockup is superimposed on the Moon photo.
– Pic 6 There were hardly any challenge to this pic whatsoever. The red arrows point to the
crisp shadows and the yellow arrows point to the fuzzy LM shadow, again. As well, we can see
the LM has cast a shadow from about 100 Miles away, which essentially makes the LM as big as
the “Death Star”. “May the force be with you,” because this pic is such an obvious fake that it is
not even funny. Some idiot faked this pic while drunk.
– Pic 7 This pic has been used at other web sites to point out the Crosshair screw up. But, we
don’t. Because there are another screw up. The parallel lines show the direction, and the height,
of the light source. However, because the shadows are apparently drawn on the picture, the
shadow of the LM seems to be too short. As we see, the parallel line goes right through the LM,
where in fact the end of the LM antenna shadow should have been tens of feet further up.
If someone ids thinking about suggesting a dip on the ground, think again. The next pic shows
that the dip is minimal, and impossible to reduce the shadow length by almost half. As well, I
pointed out before, that the shadow of the landing strut mysteriously goes over the hose, or
whatever it is, instead of under it. A close up shows the hose/cable does not turn sideways to be
too thin to be seen. So, that theory is false. It appears the shadow, at the least, has been drawn by
hand.
-8 This pic accompanies the one before. It shows the hose without shadow distortion of the
last, so it essentially renders the idea of thin sideways shadow null. The red line shows the
direction and the height of the light source for comparison to the last pic.
There has been a few sarcastic replies, accompanied by whimsical photos. But no one has been
able to rebuff these claims.
SSS-666She will be delighted to hear but unfortunately she doesn’t speak and neither read it. But her french is better than mine. :diablo:
If I had a Dime for evry Iranian who pretended he wasn’t…….
SSS-666The other week I caught a bit of the film “Apollo 13″…in which the three astronauts take refuge in the LEM for their long flight back to earth.
If it was big enough for three guys, I would think oit would be big enough for two in suits.
Or…
Do you also believe the entire Apollo 13 flight never took place?
Did NASA stage the “emergency”?
If so why would they if the whole point of the program was supposed to be a PR piece about thge superiority of American technology?
Would they really write a story where a couple of bad wire connectors blow the whole mission and put lives in danger?
Just wondering.
If so, it’s unlike any PR I’ve ever heard of.
I’ll look forward to your answer.
I used to watch a British show called DR Who. His “Time Machine” was a British style phone
booth, measuring about 6 feet on each side. But inside of this 6×6 thing the dimensions were
about 100×100 feet, if not bigger. I wouldn’t go inside one of those booths expecting to enter an
alternate dimension, and I think neither should you.
So, watching a movie should not convince you of anything. I posted a photo of the inside of the
LM, and it is roughly 6×6 foot. In that space, there are equipments and control panels as well.
Then you got the 2 Astro guys outside of their suits supposedly flying the thing. Then they have
to get the suit and the backpack from wherever, put it on, and make sure it is sealed to withstand
the radiation of Space and the 250 degree heat of the surface. Lets remember that in every photo
provided by NASA, these guys are being helped by 2 or 3 “helpers” with donning their space
suits in practice.
As for the rest of your “good” post (thank you for being civilised), it has been asked before. I
don’t get into the philosophical questioning of this Hoax. Just one quick note that this thing was
done in the 60s. Back then the Flash Gordon “special effects” seemed pretty real. Today, we
laugh at it. “We” have become much more sophisticated, and obviously technologically more
advanced. The task of “saving face” in failing to do what an idiot president announced the US
would accomplish (which we still can’t) was enormous. There are thousands of photos, and of
those hundreds of anomalies.
I just can’t get someone who actually discusses a photo that seems to be faked, instead of
sarcasm.
SSS-666The other week I caught a bit of the film “Apollo 13″…in which the three astronauts take refuge in the LEM for their long flight back to earth.
If it was big enough for three guys, I would think oit would be big enough for two in suits.
Or…
Do you also believe the entire Apollo 13 flight never took place?
Did NASA stage the “emergency”?
If so why would they if the whole point of the program was supposed to be a PR piece about thge superiority of American technology?
Would they really write a story where a couple of bad wire connectors blow the whole mission and put lives in danger?
Just wondering.
If so, it’s unlike any PR I’ve ever heard of.
I’ll look forward to your answer.
I used to watch a British show called DR Who. His “Time Machine” was a British style phone
booth, measuring about 6 feet on each side. But inside of this 6×6 thing the dimensions were
about 100×100 feet, if not bigger. I wouldn’t go inside one of those booths expecting to enter an
alternate dimension, and I think neither should you.
So, watching a movie should not convince you of anything. I posted a photo of the inside of the
LM, and it is roughly 6×6 foot. In that space, there are equipments and control panels as well.
Then you got the 2 Astro guys outside of their suits supposedly flying the thing. Then they have
to get the suit and the backpack from wherever, put it on, and make sure it is sealed to withstand
the radiation of Space and the 250 degree heat of the surface. Lets remember that in every photo
provided by NASA, these guys are being helped by 2 or 3 “helpers” with donning their space
suits in practice.
As for the rest of your “good” post (thank you for being civilised), it has been asked before. I
don’t get into the philosophical questioning of this Hoax. Just one quick note that this thing was
done in the 60s. Back then the Flash Gordon “special effects” seemed pretty real. Today, we
laugh at it. “We” have become much more sophisticated, and obviously technologically more
advanced. The task of “saving face” in failing to do what an idiot president announced the US
would accomplish (which we still can’t) was enormous. There are thousands of photos, and of
those hundreds of anomalies.
I just can’t get someone who actually discusses a photo that seems to be faked, instead of
sarcasm.
SSS-666Well, the argument about the flag still waving was disproved with simple physics…
Nobody has actually proved that the background was faked, either. Also, I showed you earlier how you can be in two different locations with different foregrounds yet have a damn near identical background in the distance. You can jump in a car and prove that one to yourself easily, provided you can find a straight stretch of road with some mountains a good bit off in the distance.
That’s a pretty good point right there.
The flag waving was not a major argument. Nevertheless, no one agreed on anything and it was
left as it were. Some of us believe a flag can keep on waving after the initial disturbance, as in
Newton’s law. However, we tend to overlook the fact that we are not talking about the Space.
Newton’s Law of motion does not apply to the flag because Moon HAS Gravity. But I guess I am
wasting my breath, again.
The background argument can not be disproved, regardless of any earthly, or heavenly,
examples. The same background was used in 2 different missions and in 2 different segments of
the same mission. That’s it.
However, the point of discussion here, for the time being, is the pics I have been attaching.
((( Why is the reflection on the LM Blue. Where the Blue sky in an Earthly phenomenon ??? )))
SSS-666Well, the argument about the flag still waving was disproved with simple physics…
Nobody has actually proved that the background was faked, either. Also, I showed you earlier how you can be in two different locations with different foregrounds yet have a damn near identical background in the distance. You can jump in a car and prove that one to yourself easily, provided you can find a straight stretch of road with some mountains a good bit off in the distance.
That’s a pretty good point right there.
The flag waving was not a major argument. Nevertheless, no one agreed on anything and it was
left as it were. Some of us believe a flag can keep on waving after the initial disturbance, as in
Newton’s law. However, we tend to overlook the fact that we are not talking about the Space.
Newton’s Law of motion does not apply to the flag because Moon HAS Gravity. But I guess I am
wasting my breath, again.
The background argument can not be disproved, regardless of any earthly, or heavenly,
examples. The same background was used in 2 different missions and in 2 different segments of
the same mission. That’s it.
However, the point of discussion here, for the time being, is the pics I have been attaching.
((( Why is the reflection on the LM Blue. Where the Blue sky in an Earthly phenomenon ??? )))
SSS-666I think it is rather pathetic how some people stick to their “fading” dreams of glory by any means
possible. Some of us come here with claims that this or that theory of hoax has been disproved at
such and such web site. Others take that at the face value and drop a few sarcastic remarks and
live happily ever afer.
Rather pitiful I think. Particularly, that the belief of “absolute correctness” is always presented in
the same fashion. Being preceded by smart ass comments, stating of the “absolute correctness”
and “how dare anybody believe otherwise,” and ended with more smart ass comments.
I know it is my own misconception, thinking the ones sitting behind their computer and joining
in this rather interesting “discussion” and “debate” would be able to carry on in a civil manner.
Hey, one can be wishful thinker, can’t he ?
I visited the web site which, with much fanfare and snicker, was to supposedly disproves the
“identical background” claim. As always, it is aimed at a certain kind of people, and it obviously
works on them. The so called proof corrals the reader, not all of us, into the “the mountains are
real” trick. And, states the supposed “proof” that the Astronauts actually “walked” on the
mountains which the “hoax people” claim to be posters in the background.
The site never disproves the fact that the mountain backdrop was used for 2 different missions.
There has not been even one (1) single post even coming close to explaining why the window of
the LM supposedly on the Moon, is blue. Not even one (1). As a matter of the fact, with the
exception of the flag shadow, none of the anomalies I have put forth have been disproved, none
whatsoever.
Although there are many more, for the time being, can anybody explain why the window is blue,
without sarcasm ?? I think not.
SSS-666I think it is rather pathetic how some people stick to their “fading” dreams of glory by any means
possible. Some of us come here with claims that this or that theory of hoax has been disproved at
such and such web site. Others take that at the face value and drop a few sarcastic remarks and
live happily ever afer.
Rather pitiful I think. Particularly, that the belief of “absolute correctness” is always presented in
the same fashion. Being preceded by smart ass comments, stating of the “absolute correctness”
and “how dare anybody believe otherwise,” and ended with more smart ass comments.
I know it is my own misconception, thinking the ones sitting behind their computer and joining
in this rather interesting “discussion” and “debate” would be able to carry on in a civil manner.
Hey, one can be wishful thinker, can’t he ?
I visited the web site which, with much fanfare and snicker, was to supposedly disproves the
“identical background” claim. As always, it is aimed at a certain kind of people, and it obviously
works on them. The so called proof corrals the reader, not all of us, into the “the mountains are
real” trick. And, states the supposed “proof” that the Astronauts actually “walked” on the
mountains which the “hoax people” claim to be posters in the background.
The site never disproves the fact that the mountain backdrop was used for 2 different missions.
There has not been even one (1) single post even coming close to explaining why the window of
the LM supposedly on the Moon, is blue. Not even one (1). As a matter of the fact, with the
exception of the flag shadow, none of the anomalies I have put forth have been disproved, none
whatsoever.
Although there are many more, for the time being, can anybody explain why the window is blue,
without sarcasm ?? I think not.
SSS-666I think there are many pictures I have submitted here, with discrepancies and as obvious fakes,
and so far no one has been able to disprove my observations.
Case and point, the “deductive reasoning” seem to fail here. Because the window is not
reflecting uniformly. So, reflecting the Sun’s Blue light is not why the window is blue, and the
whole “prism” idea goes out the window (no pun intended) ^_^
If my claim, that the blue on the window is superimposition, can not be disproved, then it must
be more likely than not the explanation.
SSS-666I think there are many pictures I have submitted here, with discrepancies and as obvious fakes,
and so far no one has been able to disprove my observations.
Case and point, the “deductive reasoning” seem to fail here. Because the window is not
reflecting uniformly. So, reflecting the Sun’s Blue light is not why the window is blue, and the
whole “prism” idea goes out the window (no pun intended) ^_^
If my claim, that the blue on the window is superimposition, can not be disproved, then it must
be more likely than not the explanation.
SSS-666Actually I’m German, but my collegeau (and neighbor) is half-Iranian. So, maybe you are partly right. :confused:
Anyways, I am now fearful of God’s revenge issued from your side. Somebody around here seems to be a little bit full of hatred.
Which Russian poster had the brilliant stategy, what did I miss out? You mean the long wave radar or the MiG-31 pointing its radar 90deg downwards. Brilliant strategy, if Iran stick to it the Americans can spare their B-2s (even Stealth airframes have limited lifetimes) and rather use B-1s or simple B-24. The “strategy” of this Russian “expert” is non-sense, based on his desktop-experiences in electronic warfare.Iran has 250 bombs. So why do they still play idiot’s ball with IAEO? “High-Ranking Russian” source, … that is … to lousy to be commented.
I am pretty sure our Russian friend can defend himself against your unnecessary insult, instead
of just disagreeing. So, I’ll leave it to him.
Your “colleague” must be looking over your shoulder and translating Farsi for you. Because, you
seem to be able to translate things the Iranians quote.
Just a little reminder that it is spelled “nonsense,” and it is the “IAEA”. Which, incidentally,
makes the Iranians’s signing up to the NPT the stupidest thing the Iranians have done.
Goes to show that it does not matter how much you revere a “religious” leader, military and
national security decisions should be made by educated “military” men.
SSS-666I just assumed it was a reflection from the studio wind machine that they put there to make the flag blow about.
Moggy
Who knows you may be right and not know it yet ^_^
Sarcasm is sometimes used to mask difficulty to disprove.
Sign In
