Moon landing faked? Lets take a look...

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Hortlund
I dont.

I do want to know what the lightsource is on those pictures though, because it is not the sun.

I find this skirting around the real issue crap to be tiring hortlund. You cant go around saying look look how wrong that sun reflection is in that moon "landing" photograph - and then just turn around and say you arent questioning the truth of the moon landings. Sorry hortlund, i'm not buying that crap. If you dont think the landings were fake why do you think the photo is fake or wrong - the issue is why would nasa make up a fake and flawed moon photo if the landings were indeed real?

[muckmaw]

You can question the lightsource in the photo without quesitoning the moon landing.

It could be any number of sources that would produce the shown effect, none of them necessarily proving the landings were falsified.

Anyone want to talk about the JFK assisination??

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I find this skirting around the real issue crap to be tiring hortlund. You cant go around saying look look how wrong that sun reflection is in that moon "landing" photograph - and then just turn around and say you arent questioning the truth of the moon landings. Sorry hortlund, i'm not buying that crap. If you dont think the landings were fake why do you think the photo is fake or wrong - the issue is why would nasa make up a fake and flawed moon photo if the landings were indeed real?

Have you ever seen anything you cannot explain Grun?

If yes, did it make you curious or did it make you scared?

If you look back in this thread, you will see alot of people posting out of their a$es. "Its the sun" (even though it is about 50 times too big in the first picture) and then clinging to that opinion of theirs.

JoeSmoe is a good example of someone who doesnt want to think for himself. He is presented with a picture that cant really be explained, and his immideate reaction is denial. So ok, we can conclude that if JoeSmoe is faced with something he cannot explain, he gets scared because (probably) for some reason the concept of critical thinking is too complext for him.
btw...ra displays the same character trait (note how I abstained from using the word flaw). As does several other posters in this thread.

I am of the opinion that there are things that science cannot explain. Those things make me curious. Those very same things scare the cheese out of others. That is all fine and well.

The thing that bugs me is when people like ra, joesmoe and you talk about stuff you really dont know anything about in a way as if it was the one and only truth.

Now, grun, I'm going to say this again. The lightsource on the first picture is not the sun. The reflection of the sun is too big in all the pictures I have posted. Why is that? I dont know. It makes me curious though.

[Dux]

Someone once told me that the SR-71 could only be built because we reverse-engineered some alien technology.

Theories like these really piss me off when I think about all the hard work, brilliant ideas, and severe sacrifices that thousands upon thousands of the world's scientists, engineers, and manufacturers that went into achievements such as the Apollo missions. All of their hard work and intelligence is instantly and callously negated whenever someone perpetuates these theories.

WTF is the thought process with someone like that? " I'm not that intelligent... I don't work very hard... I don't understand science very well... surely nobody can be smarter or work harder than me." ????

Take the time to do just a little bit of learning, then give these brilliant and hardworking people the admiration they deserve.

(yes. This is a big subject to me. I was a boy in the 60s and many relatives worked in the space program... hell, almost everyone in the 60s worked on the space program in one way or another)

Edit: Hortlund... do you suggest that every photograph ever taken on a space mission used the same f-stop setting? You look at the sun through an atmosphere which filters out most of the corona, how would you know what it should look like in a vacuum?

[GRUNHERZ]

Just to be perfectly clear and unambigous, you are saying the big yellow bright circle reflected in their visors is not the sun - correct?

In your opinion the rflection is too big - right?

Why do you think its too big? Can you prove to us that it is too big. Otherwise you are just talking like the other guys..

[ra]

The thing that bugs me is when people like ra, joesmoe and you talk about stuff you really dont know anything about in a way as if it was the one and only truth.

If you want to state that the light reflected in a visor is not the sun, you have to support it with fact, and with decent pictures.  Until then, you don't know anything about this either.  You do not offer an alternate truth, just empty speculation.

Here's another site full of pictures for you to debunk:

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo11/html/as11_40_5875.html

ra

[AKIron]

Hortlund, I don't think you can prove it isn't the sun. For one thing, we don't know the angle of the visor relative to the sun. The smaller bright spot of the sun in the clearer pics may have been the result of the increased brightness due to the angle of the sun. If the sun were at more of an oblique angle and the camera farther away then the sun may have created a larger and more uniform light spot and the camera was able to "see" all of it.

[Animal]

Its just so much easier to prove it IS the sun's reflection, than that it isnt. The fact that Hortlung stands fanatically by his belief that it ISNT makes this thread 50% funnier

I dont see anything wrong with those reflection images. They are clearly the sun.

A reflected lightspot on a convex surface will ALWAYS appear larger because the reflected light is distorted, so the reflection will appear "stretched" around its radius. Have you seen your image in a curved reflection? Remember how larger your head looked?

Its simple and plain optics, Hortlund. Just plain science.

The surface of the visor is coated with gold. Because of the color and reflective properties of gold, the visor will shine more, and this shimmer will cover a wider radius around the reflection.

Its just simple physics, Hortlund. Simple science.

But then again, we are arguing against the guy who thinks evolution and countless other scientific works are just plane REDIKULAS.

[Stringer]

I now find myself attracted to Animal....that is weird science!

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

I know what the reflection is!!!

It's the camera men of the fake moon set lighting up their crack rock!!!
-SW

[Animal]

Originally posted by Stringer
I now find myself attracted to Animal....that is weird science!

TAKE A LOOK AT MY AVATAR.

[OIO]

if it is not the sun then it may be a light from the lander. Remember , no air on the moon means no light diffraction, that camera got a full blast of the light illuminating the man.

In any case, who cares? No more lunar missions for decades.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Animal
Its simple and plain optics, Hortlund. Just plain science.

LOL yeah it is, now go curve a glass to get that reflection from the sun...because you cant.

Get an education instead of posting out of your as$.

You talk about science, but you dont know the meaning of the word. Sorry, but thanks for trying, you end up in the JoeSmoe-category.

[Animal]

Originally posted by Hortlund
LOL yeah it is, now go curve a glass to get that reflection from the sun...because you cant.

Get an education instead of posting out of your as$.

The visor is not glass, glass is not covered with gold, I dont have the camera equipment to produce the obvious results, and worst of all, I have no access to space.

I think its you who needs an education, which I'm humbly trying to provide for you, ungrateful salamander.

[Hortlund]

Curv whatever metal or glass you want, cover it with gold, snake oil or your own cheese, I dont care.  Take the picture in space, on earht, under water. You will not get a reflection of the sun that size.