20 fake moon photo's you be the judge
23 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
- Savwafair2012
-
- Posts: 9088
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 10:10 pm
- Location: Packing my stuff and moving to Denver like you should be doing
You might like:
Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:26 pm » by Savwafair2012
from: Gerhard Wisnewski: Lügen im Weltraum [Lies In Space]; Knaur 2005
20. Excellent "moon photos" without moon photographer - photo compositions "on the moon"
How experienced photographers made perfect and faked "moon fotos" with a camera without
automatic device Hasselblad 500 EL - the astronauts were no photographers
Hasselblad camera 500 EL with opened seeker without automatic device,
and the astronauts cannot look through the seeker...
Victor-Hasselblad
The numeration of the photos
The photos of the "moon landings" of the Apollo program have the official letters "AS" which stands for "Apollo Saturn" (project "Apollo" with booster rocket "Saturn"). By this "AS-11" means "Apollo Saturn 11".
But first there must be explained other circumstances.
Suspicious secrecy
The original films of the "moon fotos" i Johnson Space Center 22 miles South East from Houston (Wisnewski, p.183) are secret and are not shown to "normal" media people. This seems very suspicious (Wisnewski, p.184).
By this the many photo compositions would be even known really.
The handling of a camera Hasselblad 500 EL without automatic device in an astronaut suit
Hasselblad camera fixed on the chest, example training foto with Jim Lovell for Apollo 13, photo no. 70-HC-74.
The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is a traditional camera of the 1960ies and has to be handled by hand. Between film and lens is a net panel with 25 black crosses, fiver crosses in five rows one below the other, and every cross has to be visible on every "moon foto" (Wisnewski, p.154).
The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is fixed on the chest of the astronaut suit. By this a controlled handling of the camera is impossible:
-- the astronauts cannot look through the seeker because it's not possible to look downwards with the helmet
-- the mirror of the camera is removed so the astronauts cannot see the object in the seeker
-- the cameras are fixed on the chest so the perspective is absolutely restricted for any foto
-- the cameras have no automatic device, all has to be adjusted by hand: illumination, shutter, sharpness, but it's not possible to look into the seeker where is an illumination measuring device installed (Wisnewski, p.153).
The only thing which facilitates the foto work is a wide angle with 60 mm focal distance, but all other factors are absolutely negative that the wide angle cannot solve all problems (Wisnewski, p.165).
Some more factors which speak against a Hasselblad during the "moon landings" are:
Heat protection: Any heat protection for the camera is missing for temperatures on the moon of plus 100 and minus 100 degrees C. The cameras are only painted in silver for that. Add to this there is missing any radiation protection for the cameras (Wisnewski, p.154).
Education: The astronauts have no photographic education. They have no idea how to handle a manual camera with exposure time, shutter and sharpness. The astronauts would not be able to make perfect fotos with a Hasselblad 500 EL even on Earth (Wisnewski, p.153).
[How shall this have happened "on the moon"?]
3 cameras: For every "moon landing" are said to be three Hasselblads 500 EL "on the moon", for every astronaut one, though on a "moon trip" every gram is important and any luggage too much was rejected (Wisnewski, p.154).
Weight: The Hasselblad 500 EL with attachments (80 mm lenses, A12-back, lens protection and batteries) has a weight of 2,130 kg.
(http://www.3106.net/photo/cam1025.htm)
So why should have been three of these operators "on the moon"?
Factor time: All in all a Hasselblad 500 EL is absolutely unsuitable for fotos under pressure of time because with a Hasselblad 500 EL much consideration and time is needed for a good foto, but a "moon walk" lasts only some hours (Wisnewski, p.155).
Factor film: The used ectachrone filmstrip of Kodak has 160 ASA and is hardly suitable for unknown illumination situations. 160 ASA have only little tolerance concerning mistakes and are very sensitive for the light circumstances "on the moon", so it seems the danger of an over illumination on the moon without an atmosphere seems over actual
(Wisnewski, p.155).
Radioactivity: The radioactive radiation has a smog effect on the Kodak films and decreasing contrasts which can nowhere be found on the "moon photos"
(
The photo equipment rather seems to be right for an experienced photographer of the 1960ies and 1970ies on Earth who add to this has got much time which is decisive for the illumination and the experience. By contrast the astronauts have no long experience making photos.
With a Hasselblad 500 EL one has to handle all by hand and along the "experience". So a good photographer mostly makes several fotos from an object to choose then the best one (Wisnewski, p.154), this means the so called variated photography (Wisnewski, p.156). But the alleged films of the astronauts never show such variants but always perfect fotos with an error rate of 0 % (Wisnewski, p.158).
This is no conspiracy theory, stupid Wikipedia, but these are facts.
The perfect photos "on the moon" are impossible
Under the circumstances
-- with a camera fixed on the chest
-- in an astronaut suit where it's not possible through the seeker
-- without the mirror in the seeker .
-- with "moon astronauts" without long experience in making fotos.
-- with radioactive radiation which has a negative influence on the films.
perfect, sharp "moon photos" with partly perfect arranged sceneries are not possible.
The "moon photos" are almost all absolutely sharp an illuminated tricky (Wisnewski, p.153). On the first film of Apollo 11 all fotos are said to be perfect, with 0 % error rate. All "moon photos" are perfect at the first time, there is no second or third picture as every photographer would do it with a Hasselblad 500 EL for safety .The "moon astronauts" are said having taken the fotos all perfectly at the first time.
Wisnewski:
"He came, saw and took it."
(orig.: "Er kam, sah und knipste" (Wisnewski, p.159).
"Humans who are not even able to look through the seeker are shooting series of master fotos without one mistake", an "abnormity" which is only possible "on the moon".
(orig.: "Menschen, die nicht einmal durch die Sucher ihrer Kameras blicken können, schiessen lückenlose Serien von Meisterfotos", eine "Anomalie", die nur "auf dem Mond" möglich ist (Wisnewski, S.176).
By this all indications show that the "moon fotos" are made by an experienced photographer in a film studio with sceneries (Wisnewski, p.158).
There has never been reported that photographs would have "flown along". A big part of the fotos are foto compositions which can be seen because of impossibilities because of flags without shadows, moon car without tracks etc.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Photos of Apollo 11
Astronaut Armstrong is said having taken fotos from his friend Aldrin "on the moon" several times. It's strange that Armstrong is never producing a unusable foto (Wisnewski, p.165).
By this Armstrong is the first perfect blind photographer.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Allegedly there are many unintentional fotos, but the intentional fotos are all perfect at the first time (Wisnewski, p.166).
The first photo
Without seeker the landing foot should be precisely in the middle of the foto, and without seeker the inscription "United States" shall have been positioned precisely on the border of the foto, an impossibility (Wisnewski, p.159).
Add to this the inscription "United States" is installed for propaganda purpose and is visible in the back light [which is only possible with an additional light],
AS-11-40-5850 (Wisnewski, p.158).
Apollo 11 photo no. AS 11-40-5850: The foot of the Lunar Module is precisely in the middle of the foto, and the inscription "United States" is precisely on the border. Without seeker this arrangement is impossible.
The second photo
Apollo 11 photo no. AS-11-40-5851: Foto with a "moon soil" with a flat horizon.
The third photo
The third foto is a photo with a "moon panorama" (Wisnewski, p.158), AS 11-40-5852 (Wisnewski, p.227). According to records the "moon panorama" foto is not real, because Apollo 11 is said having landed in a plain with mountains around the plain. But on the photos cannot be seen any mountain (Wisnewski, S.227).
The fourth photo
The photo shows Buzz Aldrin coming out of the Lunar Module in the back light, and despite of the back light he is well visible [which is only possible with an additional spot light.
AS-11-40-5863 (Wisnewski, S.159).
The fith photo
photo from the landing engine without crater
There follows a foto of the landing engine without crater, with the inscription "United States" in the shadow [only possible with additional spot illumination]: AS11-40-5864 (Wisnewski, p.160).
According to the NASA technicians an Wernher von Braun the crater is compulsory,
(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961,p.148; Wisnewski, p.161).
because the engine has a push of up to 5 tons (Wisnewski, p.162).
Braun was also predicting a huge cloud of dust. And the commented radio protocol of Armstrong is mentioning the dust like a "transparent shield".
(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961; Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, p.161)
Vertical take-off aircrafts with jet propulsion can provoke the dashing of concrete pieces and concrete panels from the ground and this can be very dangerous for the engines and for the cabin.
(In: Hafer, X. / Sachs, G.: Senkrechtstarttechnik; Berlin, Heidelberg, N.Y. 1982; Wisnewski, p.163).
With a gravitation of only 1/6 of the Earth's gravitation a vertical landing with an engine would be obliged to produce an absolutely huge cloud of dust with stones in it, and all this should be visible on the "moon photos" (Wisnewski, p.163).
But look what's coming now:
Photos with landing feet without dust on it
photo of the landing foot without dust: AS 11-40-5918.
[But there is much moon dust around the foot].
After a landing with a rocket engine this arrangement of the dust is impossible, because after a big cloud of dust the dust also had to fall on the landing foot.
So, because of the contradictions there is the urgent suspicion that the Lunar Module has landed with a crane on the fresh arranged studio soil (Wisnewski, p.162),
[whereas there was forgotten to make preparations for the landing feet with "moon dust"].
Fans of the moon landings and "astronomers" like Philip Plait maintain that the Lunar Module had not landed vertically (Wisnewski, p.162). The Lunar Module "left a little track of dust blown away and landed very quickly."
(orig.: "hinterliess eine schmale Spur von weggeblasenem Staub und landete sehr schnell." (Wisnewski, p.162-163)
But according to the radio transmission protocols of Apollo 11 the engine of the Lunar Module was working until the landing was finished.
(In: Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, S.161)
The photos of Aldrin's footprints with a partly blurred "moon soil" are impossible
The photo of the footprint which is taken from above is impossible. A foto from above with a fixed camera on the chest is not possible: AS 11-40-5877, 78, 79, 80 (Wisnewski, S.164). One of the photos (AS 11-40-5877) has no depth of focus in the upper half. But the Hasselblad 500 EL had a wide angle "on the moon" with a focal distance of 60 mm, and this makes a perfect depth of focus. By this the foto has to be a manipulation (Wisnewski, p.165).
Even two photos (AS 11-40-5877 and 78) are without depth of focus. So the photos seem to be foto compositions.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Moon footprints" in a "moon soil" without depth of focus and with strange shoes
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5877: Impossible footprint in the "moon soil" taken from above without depth of focus, probably a foto composition
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5880: Moon footprint with an astronaut's boot of the astronaut who takes the photo, impossible.
Perfect, impossible scenery fotos from the "moon"
The further fotos are all photographically perfectly arranged, but they seem to be unreal perfect concerning the conditions for the "moon astronauts" who even cannot see through the seeker:
Photo with a flag on the left edge and the Lunar Module on the right edge: The section is absolutely perfect, but when you cannot see through the lens so the foto is impossible: AS 11-40-5886.
Add to this the shadow of the flag is missing. It's a photo composition.
Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5902: Aldrin left, the shadow is wrong, Lunar Module right. The foto should be arrenged perfectly which is not possible when the camera is fixed on the chest. And with wrong shadows the photo is impossible.
Aldrin taken from above, with a fixed camera on the chest impossible: AS 11-40-5903.
Add to this the scenery shown in the helmet is not possible in the extreme back light, and Aldrin is much too bright in the extreme backlight.
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5905: The flag is in the middle of the foto. This perfect foto without looking through the seeker is impossible.
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5875. Aldrin is said to be on the moon here next to a flag which has no shadow. So, this picture is not possible.
Photos from Apollo 16
The photo AS16-113-18339 is said showing John Young with a "jump" on the moon. But the shady side of the astronaut is much too bright again and this is not a jumping position at all (e.g. with two spread arms). So, also this foto is a bad photo composition.
The impossible family photo of astronaut Charlie Duke
Astronaut Charles Duke is said having left a family photo "on the moon" shrink-wrapped in plastic. This shall document a "family story" on the photo AS 16-117-18841 (Wisnewski, S.167).
Contradictions:
-- without atmosphere the shrink-wrapping would swell and burst
-- during the strong sun on the moon the photo would bleach soon
-- with a minimum of 100°C on the moon the foto would convolve immediately (experiment oven).
So, also a message on the backside of the foto to the children of the astronaut is not useful. The photo is a legend for naive people who like to romanticize the "moon landing" as fotos are proofs for mountaineering. But also fotos in mountaineering can be a fake.
(In: Häussler, Oliver: Dreifache Verhandelbarkeit von Authentizität im alpinistischen Diskurs; Wisnewski, p.168).
Big damage on the Lunar Module of Apollo 16
On the photos of the Lunar Module of Apollo 16 can be seen big damages on the side. A whole side is dented and teared open. A return "from the moon" with this vehicle seems doubtful. But the "return" is performed also without repair, absolutely unreal. The accident of Apollo 16 is never mentioned in written. There had to be an explosion. NASA refuses to put big fotos of the defect Lunar Module of Apollo 16 into Internet with a high resolution (Wisnewski, p.184-185).
Photos of the Lunar Module of Apollo 16 which must have been damaged "on the moon"
Apollo 16 photo no. AS16-113-18332: Lunar Module. The ascent stage (the bottom part) seems to be really done by handicraft.
Apollo 16, photo no. AS16-122-19533: Broken Lunar Module: The defect ascent stage is said flying over the moon without engine flame. The photo seems to be a foto composition with the moon from the planetarium LOLA at Langley.
Apollo 16 photo no. AS16-122-19535: Defect ascent stage flying "over the moon", foto no. AS16-122-19535:
The defect ascent stage has no engine flame. So, the photo seems to be a bad foto composition with the moon model of the planetarium LOLA at Langley.
This is NO conspiracy theory, but these are facts.
20. Excellent "moon photos" without moon photographer - photo compositions "on the moon"
How experienced photographers made perfect and faked "moon fotos" with a camera without
automatic device Hasselblad 500 EL - the astronauts were no photographers
Hasselblad camera 500 EL with opened seeker without automatic device,
and the astronauts cannot look through the seeker...
Victor-Hasselblad
The numeration of the photos
The photos of the "moon landings" of the Apollo program have the official letters "AS" which stands for "Apollo Saturn" (project "Apollo" with booster rocket "Saturn"). By this "AS-11" means "Apollo Saturn 11".
But first there must be explained other circumstances.
Suspicious secrecy
The original films of the "moon fotos" i Johnson Space Center 22 miles South East from Houston (Wisnewski, p.183) are secret and are not shown to "normal" media people. This seems very suspicious (Wisnewski, p.184).
By this the many photo compositions would be even known really.
The handling of a camera Hasselblad 500 EL without automatic device in an astronaut suit
Hasselblad camera fixed on the chest, example training foto with Jim Lovell for Apollo 13, photo no. 70-HC-74.
The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is a traditional camera of the 1960ies and has to be handled by hand. Between film and lens is a net panel with 25 black crosses, fiver crosses in five rows one below the other, and every cross has to be visible on every "moon foto" (Wisnewski, p.154).
The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is fixed on the chest of the astronaut suit. By this a controlled handling of the camera is impossible:
-- the astronauts cannot look through the seeker because it's not possible to look downwards with the helmet
-- the mirror of the camera is removed so the astronauts cannot see the object in the seeker
-- the cameras are fixed on the chest so the perspective is absolutely restricted for any foto
-- the cameras have no automatic device, all has to be adjusted by hand: illumination, shutter, sharpness, but it's not possible to look into the seeker where is an illumination measuring device installed (Wisnewski, p.153).
The only thing which facilitates the foto work is a wide angle with 60 mm focal distance, but all other factors are absolutely negative that the wide angle cannot solve all problems (Wisnewski, p.165).
Some more factors which speak against a Hasselblad during the "moon landings" are:
Heat protection: Any heat protection for the camera is missing for temperatures on the moon of plus 100 and minus 100 degrees C. The cameras are only painted in silver for that. Add to this there is missing any radiation protection for the cameras (Wisnewski, p.154).
Education: The astronauts have no photographic education. They have no idea how to handle a manual camera with exposure time, shutter and sharpness. The astronauts would not be able to make perfect fotos with a Hasselblad 500 EL even on Earth (Wisnewski, p.153).
[How shall this have happened "on the moon"?]
3 cameras: For every "moon landing" are said to be three Hasselblads 500 EL "on the moon", for every astronaut one, though on a "moon trip" every gram is important and any luggage too much was rejected (Wisnewski, p.154).
Weight: The Hasselblad 500 EL with attachments (80 mm lenses, A12-back, lens protection and batteries) has a weight of 2,130 kg.
(http://www.3106.net/photo/cam1025.htm)
So why should have been three of these operators "on the moon"?
Factor time: All in all a Hasselblad 500 EL is absolutely unsuitable for fotos under pressure of time because with a Hasselblad 500 EL much consideration and time is needed for a good foto, but a "moon walk" lasts only some hours (Wisnewski, p.155).
Factor film: The used ectachrone filmstrip of Kodak has 160 ASA and is hardly suitable for unknown illumination situations. 160 ASA have only little tolerance concerning mistakes and are very sensitive for the light circumstances "on the moon", so it seems the danger of an over illumination on the moon without an atmosphere seems over actual
(Wisnewski, p.155).
Radioactivity: The radioactive radiation has a smog effect on the Kodak films and decreasing contrasts which can nowhere be found on the "moon photos"
(
The photo equipment rather seems to be right for an experienced photographer of the 1960ies and 1970ies on Earth who add to this has got much time which is decisive for the illumination and the experience. By contrast the astronauts have no long experience making photos.
With a Hasselblad 500 EL one has to handle all by hand and along the "experience". So a good photographer mostly makes several fotos from an object to choose then the best one (Wisnewski, p.154), this means the so called variated photography (Wisnewski, p.156). But the alleged films of the astronauts never show such variants but always perfect fotos with an error rate of 0 % (Wisnewski, p.158).
This is no conspiracy theory, stupid Wikipedia, but these are facts.
The perfect photos "on the moon" are impossible
Under the circumstances
-- with a camera fixed on the chest
-- in an astronaut suit where it's not possible through the seeker
-- without the mirror in the seeker .
-- with "moon astronauts" without long experience in making fotos.
-- with radioactive radiation which has a negative influence on the films.
perfect, sharp "moon photos" with partly perfect arranged sceneries are not possible.
The "moon photos" are almost all absolutely sharp an illuminated tricky (Wisnewski, p.153). On the first film of Apollo 11 all fotos are said to be perfect, with 0 % error rate. All "moon photos" are perfect at the first time, there is no second or third picture as every photographer would do it with a Hasselblad 500 EL for safety .The "moon astronauts" are said having taken the fotos all perfectly at the first time.
Wisnewski:
"He came, saw and took it."
(orig.: "Er kam, sah und knipste" (Wisnewski, p.159).
"Humans who are not even able to look through the seeker are shooting series of master fotos without one mistake", an "abnormity" which is only possible "on the moon".
(orig.: "Menschen, die nicht einmal durch die Sucher ihrer Kameras blicken können, schiessen lückenlose Serien von Meisterfotos", eine "Anomalie", die nur "auf dem Mond" möglich ist (Wisnewski, S.176).
By this all indications show that the "moon fotos" are made by an experienced photographer in a film studio with sceneries (Wisnewski, p.158).
There has never been reported that photographs would have "flown along". A big part of the fotos are foto compositions which can be seen because of impossibilities because of flags without shadows, moon car without tracks etc.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Photos of Apollo 11
Astronaut Armstrong is said having taken fotos from his friend Aldrin "on the moon" several times. It's strange that Armstrong is never producing a unusable foto (Wisnewski, p.165).
By this Armstrong is the first perfect blind photographer.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Allegedly there are many unintentional fotos, but the intentional fotos are all perfect at the first time (Wisnewski, p.166).
The first photo
Without seeker the landing foot should be precisely in the middle of the foto, and without seeker the inscription "United States" shall have been positioned precisely on the border of the foto, an impossibility (Wisnewski, p.159).
Add to this the inscription "United States" is installed for propaganda purpose and is visible in the back light [which is only possible with an additional light],
AS-11-40-5850 (Wisnewski, p.158).
Apollo 11 photo no. AS 11-40-5850: The foot of the Lunar Module is precisely in the middle of the foto, and the inscription "United States" is precisely on the border. Without seeker this arrangement is impossible.
The second photo
Apollo 11 photo no. AS-11-40-5851: Foto with a "moon soil" with a flat horizon.
The third photo
The third foto is a photo with a "moon panorama" (Wisnewski, p.158), AS 11-40-5852 (Wisnewski, p.227). According to records the "moon panorama" foto is not real, because Apollo 11 is said having landed in a plain with mountains around the plain. But on the photos cannot be seen any mountain (Wisnewski, S.227).
The fourth photo
The photo shows Buzz Aldrin coming out of the Lunar Module in the back light, and despite of the back light he is well visible [which is only possible with an additional spot light.
AS-11-40-5863 (Wisnewski, S.159).
The fith photo
photo from the landing engine without crater
There follows a foto of the landing engine without crater, with the inscription "United States" in the shadow [only possible with additional spot illumination]: AS11-40-5864 (Wisnewski, p.160).
According to the NASA technicians an Wernher von Braun the crater is compulsory,
(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961,p.148; Wisnewski, p.161).
because the engine has a push of up to 5 tons (Wisnewski, p.162).
Braun was also predicting a huge cloud of dust. And the commented radio protocol of Armstrong is mentioning the dust like a "transparent shield".
(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961; Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, p.161)
Vertical take-off aircrafts with jet propulsion can provoke the dashing of concrete pieces and concrete panels from the ground and this can be very dangerous for the engines and for the cabin.
(In: Hafer, X. / Sachs, G.: Senkrechtstarttechnik; Berlin, Heidelberg, N.Y. 1982; Wisnewski, p.163).
With a gravitation of only 1/6 of the Earth's gravitation a vertical landing with an engine would be obliged to produce an absolutely huge cloud of dust with stones in it, and all this should be visible on the "moon photos" (Wisnewski, p.163).
But look what's coming now:
Photos with landing feet without dust on it
photo of the landing foot without dust: AS 11-40-5918.
[But there is much moon dust around the foot].
After a landing with a rocket engine this arrangement of the dust is impossible, because after a big cloud of dust the dust also had to fall on the landing foot.
So, because of the contradictions there is the urgent suspicion that the Lunar Module has landed with a crane on the fresh arranged studio soil (Wisnewski, p.162),
[whereas there was forgotten to make preparations for the landing feet with "moon dust"].
Fans of the moon landings and "astronomers" like Philip Plait maintain that the Lunar Module had not landed vertically (Wisnewski, p.162). The Lunar Module "left a little track of dust blown away and landed very quickly."
(orig.: "hinterliess eine schmale Spur von weggeblasenem Staub und landete sehr schnell." (Wisnewski, p.162-163)
But according to the radio transmission protocols of Apollo 11 the engine of the Lunar Module was working until the landing was finished.
(In: Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, S.161)
The photos of Aldrin's footprints with a partly blurred "moon soil" are impossible
The photo of the footprint which is taken from above is impossible. A foto from above with a fixed camera on the chest is not possible: AS 11-40-5877, 78, 79, 80 (Wisnewski, S.164). One of the photos (AS 11-40-5877) has no depth of focus in the upper half. But the Hasselblad 500 EL had a wide angle "on the moon" with a focal distance of 60 mm, and this makes a perfect depth of focus. By this the foto has to be a manipulation (Wisnewski, p.165).
Even two photos (AS 11-40-5877 and 78) are without depth of focus. So the photos seem to be foto compositions.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Moon footprints" in a "moon soil" without depth of focus and with strange shoes
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5877: Impossible footprint in the "moon soil" taken from above without depth of focus, probably a foto composition
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5880: Moon footprint with an astronaut's boot of the astronaut who takes the photo, impossible.
Perfect, impossible scenery fotos from the "moon"
The further fotos are all photographically perfectly arranged, but they seem to be unreal perfect concerning the conditions for the "moon astronauts" who even cannot see through the seeker:
Photo with a flag on the left edge and the Lunar Module on the right edge: The section is absolutely perfect, but when you cannot see through the lens so the foto is impossible: AS 11-40-5886.
Add to this the shadow of the flag is missing. It's a photo composition.
Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5902: Aldrin left, the shadow is wrong, Lunar Module right. The foto should be arrenged perfectly which is not possible when the camera is fixed on the chest. And with wrong shadows the photo is impossible.
Aldrin taken from above, with a fixed camera on the chest impossible: AS 11-40-5903.
Add to this the scenery shown in the helmet is not possible in the extreme back light, and Aldrin is much too bright in the extreme backlight.
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5905: The flag is in the middle of the foto. This perfect foto without looking through the seeker is impossible.
Apollo 11, foto no. AS11-40-5875. Aldrin is said to be on the moon here next to a flag which has no shadow. So, this picture is not possible.
Photos from Apollo 16
The photo AS16-113-18339 is said showing John Young with a "jump" on the moon. But the shady side of the astronaut is much too bright again and this is not a jumping position at all (e.g. with two spread arms). So, also this foto is a bad photo composition.
The impossible family photo of astronaut Charlie Duke
Astronaut Charles Duke is said having left a family photo "on the moon" shrink-wrapped in plastic. This shall document a "family story" on the photo AS 16-117-18841 (Wisnewski, S.167).
Contradictions:
-- without atmosphere the shrink-wrapping would swell and burst
-- during the strong sun on the moon the photo would bleach soon
-- with a minimum of 100°C on the moon the foto would convolve immediately (experiment oven).
So, also a message on the backside of the foto to the children of the astronaut is not useful. The photo is a legend for naive people who like to romanticize the "moon landing" as fotos are proofs for mountaineering. But also fotos in mountaineering can be a fake.
(In: Häussler, Oliver: Dreifache Verhandelbarkeit von Authentizität im alpinistischen Diskurs; Wisnewski, p.168).
Big damage on the Lunar Module of Apollo 16
On the photos of the Lunar Module of Apollo 16 can be seen big damages on the side. A whole side is dented and teared open. A return "from the moon" with this vehicle seems doubtful. But the "return" is performed also without repair, absolutely unreal. The accident of Apollo 16 is never mentioned in written. There had to be an explosion. NASA refuses to put big fotos of the defect Lunar Module of Apollo 16 into Internet with a high resolution (Wisnewski, p.184-185).
Photos of the Lunar Module of Apollo 16 which must have been damaged "on the moon"
Apollo 16 photo no. AS16-113-18332: Lunar Module. The ascent stage (the bottom part) seems to be really done by handicraft.
Apollo 16, photo no. AS16-122-19533: Broken Lunar Module: The defect ascent stage is said flying over the moon without engine flame. The photo seems to be a foto composition with the moon from the planetarium LOLA at Langley.
Apollo 16 photo no. AS16-122-19535: Defect ascent stage flying "over the moon", foto no. AS16-122-19535:
The defect ascent stage has no engine flame. So, the photo seems to be a bad foto composition with the moon model of the planetarium LOLA at Langley.
This is NO conspiracy theory, but these are facts.
FAIR USE NOTICE.
Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, . http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:07 am » by Spirit23
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mefEKqzq8cg&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mefEKqzq8cg&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube] [youtube][<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mefEKqzq8cg&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mefEKqzq8cg&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RfKItI-cHPM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RfKItI-cHPM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NOv_zvM-oJQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NOv_zvM-oJQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oCNV1hiKpLI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oCNV1hiKpLI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0dTATMEJSuQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0dTATMEJSuQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RfKItI-cHPM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RfKItI-cHPM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NOv_zvM-oJQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NOv_zvM-oJQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oCNV1hiKpLI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oCNV1hiKpLI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0dTATMEJSuQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0dTATMEJSuQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:16 pm » by Naranja
Mythbusters they are just a bunch of patriotic jerkoffs, they probably support the oooh so brave soldiers going away to a foreign land killing women and children and i bet they vote too because its sooo important to be able to feel like you can choose which jerkoff who will be filling you with lies and hopes for the next 4 years. The real question is, should we trust people who play around on a tv-show all day? NO! 
If God is the eternal supreme creator of everything,
why would God want you to cut yourself in your penis?
why would God want you to cut yourself in your penis?
- Marduk2012
-
- Posts: 9826
- Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:57 pm
Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:21 pm » by Marduk2012
Kickass Avatar, Spirit! 
________________________
"I don't know which me that I love.
Got no reflection."
"I don't know which me that I love.
Got no reflection."
Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:40 pm » by Naranja
slushpup wrote:Everyone is a skeptic.... Come on.. I found one I know is the real deal of an Astronaut in space... Not photoshop in the least..
http://en.justin.tv/s/kv6vRKs/slushpup
FAKE! Someone has erased the background, there should be tons of pillars and underground bases there.
If God is the eternal supreme creator of everything,
why would God want you to cut yourself in your penis?
why would God want you to cut yourself in your penis?
23 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
-
- Related topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- Obama's fake family photo
1 ... 5, 6, 7by oxygen » Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:57 pm - 60 Replies
- 4992 Views
- Last post by epicfailure
Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:33 am
- Obama's fake family photo
-
- Media Runs Fake Photo To Illustrate Bin Laden Death.
by georgedragon » Mon May 02, 2011 2:50 pm - 0 Replies
- 333 Views
- Last post by georgedragon
Mon May 02, 2011 2:50 pm
- Media Runs Fake Photo To Illustrate Bin Laden Death.
-
- Apollo 17 Who took this photo on the moon?
by savwafair2012 » Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:27 pm - 4 Replies
- 789 Views
- Last post by lowsix
Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:30 pm
- Apollo 17 Who took this photo on the moon?
-
- Mythbusters moon landing photo hoax
by abyssdnb » Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:04 pm - 1 Replies
- 608 Views
- Last post by doommongerer
Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:00 pm
- Mythbusters moon landing photo hoax
-
- FAKE MOON LANDING SCENES. (QUITE ON THE SET)
by savwafair2012 » Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:15 pm - 9 Replies
- 935 Views
- Last post by ridee
Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:31 am
- FAKE MOON LANDING SCENES. (QUITE ON THE SET)