Moon Landing Hoax Theory Debunked

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Earth

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 8:37 am » by Humanbeing


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... -pictures/

hmmmmm... well, there was a time many years ago when i totally believed that we never landed on the moon, i wasnt denying the technology, but i believed it was created to gain power amongst nations and such. then, i started reading articles in magazines and websites such as this one, and found way too much information about the whole moon landing situation.

ok, so i know we have been there. this is apparent. now i doubt the pictures they (nasa, governments) supplied us with are legitimate, but then again they very well could be real.

one side of the story says they are fake, shot in the desert in nevada or something, and the other story suggests they are from the moon, and many of the shots have been doctored to block out, and/or distort background areas to hide massive structures and such.
Either way, this of course leads me to believe, ok we've been there, why wont they show us what's there?

What are they hiding?...and of course, there are numerous theories about that. and the satellite thats gonna slam into the moon's surface in a few months, some crap-ass grainy pics of the moon from a fly-by, nasa tapes erased.....

now this, stating they have now debunked the hoax? some of the answers don't even have that much logic behind them:
You can tell Apollo was faked because ... the American flag appears to be flapping as if "in a breeze" in videos and photographs supposedly taken from the airless lunar surface.

The fact of the matter is ... "the video you see where the flag's moving is because the astronaut just placed it there, and the inertia from when they let go kept it moving," said spaceflight historian Roger Launius, of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C.

The astronauts also accidentally bent the horizontal rods holding the flag in place several times, creating the appearance of a rippling flag in photographs


yeah? well in the picture from that "fact of the matter..", where the f*ck is the shadow from the flagpole? but that's not very important, but i want to ask, why is it that when it all comes down to it, why do we only ever talk about the moon landing, and not whats on the moon itself? :headscratch:

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10861
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:36 am

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 9:16 am » by Lowsix


humanbeing wrote:where the f*ck is the shadow from the flagpole?


Actually Human, thats HUGELY important in a way.
I daresay you are the first person ive ever known to catch that in the thousands of discussions ive seen on it here an anywhere else.

hahaha
I really laughed out loud at that..
that is a GREAT catch. Im really impressed


Yes , the implications of what you asked are huge too..
Too huge for us to solve..and that bothers me..
What ARE they hiding?


but holy shit..
Flagpoles with no shadows..on a Debunk debunk page.

Brilliant damnit..


*things I (as a semi-pro photographer) notice...

ALL objects that take direct light, have NO reflected light on them..
EXCEPT for ..the astronaut.

Now even if there were a four by four light reflector...the things in his shadow areas would not be lit to zone 7-8 like that...meaning only several steps darker than white..
Not without a second light source...and not from that distance..
AND ILL BE DAMNED THERES NO FREAKIN SHADOW..NONE.
Image
Image


NOW, there have been some really good debunk attempts, the best being on Mythbusters, where they got that reflected light from the cameraman in his white suit, on the far side of the lander, BUT..(now that i look at it, there should be some detail in those shadows if hes catching that much light. I coulld not reproduce this shot without a flash..OR ELSE..the ground in the background would be blown completely to white to get the shadow side of his suit to be a zone 7 or 8.
Image

NOT fiteen feet away..OR ELSE, the rock closest to the camera (bottom right)
would also have shadow detail in them. (presuming the shadows on the astronaut were being filled in by light reflected off camera guy)

This I know for a FACT.
damn im just blown away by your catch..
and while i think we went..im defo smellin rat.
Image
warløckmitbladderinfection wrote:blasphemous new gehenna inhabitant makes god sad...

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10861
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:36 am

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 10:22 am » by Lowsix


Ugh..

For shits and giggles, i asked..
What IF?..

What if the landing photos were taken on the Scale sized recreated
Crater Lot thats been shown in the hoax videos...
Made somewhere on or close to area 51 or something like that.
What would that do to the photos weve seen?
It MIGHT explain the disappearance of the hasselblad register marks, that oddly seem to disappear in the pano shots that show completly black sky..when they show in normally exposed black portions of a normal plate. Theyve masked out a normal earth sky, and replaced it with Register black..which means Total 100% combined color black..

THEN something caught my eye again, that ive seen and wondered about before..
In the highlight (yet somewhat shadow portion) of some of these photos..(see near right side of his visor and on part of his backpack....

Ive noticed something.. a SLGITH cyan (blue) cast in some areas of relfected light that falls within a shadow area.

Now, ive always wondered what would cause reflected light to contain blue..
IF, there is no local color blue ANYWHERE in space, not on their uniforms, or lander, or sky..i ask as a photog..HOW WOULD CYAN BLUE, make it onto an exposed plate.

so I played a game..
First, I sampled this light cyan cast in question..
Then simly used proportion sliders, to increase the percentages in ALL colors, as would happen in Under, good, over, and overexposures of a Blue.

I sampled the Highlight first, and found it had 15% Cyan 8% Magenta and 7% yellow.
Well, ill tell ya, first thing that struck me, was ive seen that combo in print before..
and it is the right combination of Sky, reflected on a WHTE object that occurs in a 45º shadow. The shadow is catching ambient light reflected from a blue sky...

So I gotta say, my interest is WAY THE FUCK up at this point. Ive done a SHIT TON of advertising retouch, and those are percentages commonly used to FAKE a sky if need be..because they are natural percentages, of a sunny day sky, reflected as ambient light in a shadow area of a white object..

So then, I took that color, and increased the proportions or each color to the others across the board..meaning I took a hue slider, and merely darkened it..

And holy fuck..
(of course i could be off, but still)
This is what I got..

Those sliders gave me EXACT sky colors, and exact colors for having a ten percent yellow/orange offset for the helmet glass.

WITHOUT HAVING TO DO A THING TO THEM.

All this does is increase the number of questions..
So i dropped in a normal southwestern Summer sky color into the sky, and voila..
NO COLOR RELATIONSHIPS WERE VIOLATED>

That could be big, or it could be nothing..You decide.
I can only speak for myself when i say i now have more questions, after being convinced the photos were real..ALTHOUGH i always had soem problems with the perfect exposures..particularly, when ther is NO shadow detail onthe ground, but LOTS of shadow detail in white areas..

Its been debnked to a degree, and Mythbusters replicated SOME of this, but not all of them i dont think..now that i take hard look.

And im STILLFucked up by the absence of the Falg shadow.
Thats sorta big people..really..

Image
Image
warløckmitbladderinfection wrote:blasphemous new gehenna inhabitant makes god sad...

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7420
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 10:24 pm

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 10:27 am » by Pindz


APOLLO 11 THE GREATEST HOAX IN HUMAN HISTORY




Image

Initiate
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:34 am

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 10:52 am » by Loveandlight


WOW........tbh i do not know a lot about photoshop and retouching photos low but i can tell what u r doing and i think you should keep at it and maybe lend your expertise to some of the other nasa photos you never know what u may turn up ......gj low

and i agree about the flag its incredibly important unless natural light doesnt work the same everywhere ......LOL


:hugging: :love: :sunny:
"the love you withold is the pain that you carry"

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2184
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:21 pm

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 11:44 am » by Daemonfoe


Also notice how the fabric part of the flag is completely inside the black area. It would be easy to paste something like this in. You could use a little alpha or blending around the edges of the pole to get the aliasing to blend in like that.

Image
The two choices we have are something starting from nothing, or something existing infinitely. These are both paradoxes. The existence of everything is therefore a paradox. -daemonfoe

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 11724
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:57 pm
Location: Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 11:47 am » by -Marduk-


Area 51 Craters ...moon hoax set or bomb testing site ?!

Image

Image

ImageImage
________________________________________________________________________________
-= PREDESTINATION: Itz hard to be ze good guy when you turn into a fucking gun =-

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 11724
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:57 pm
Location: Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 11:57 am » by -Marduk-


Moon Landing Evidence



The 3:41 min vid & about the Apollo moon landings contains far earth views, earthrise in lunar orbit, lunar surface, vacuum, 1/6 gravity, stars, angle dependence of visor reflections, orange soil, Clementine data, and the Lunar Laser Reflectometer (LLR).
________________________________________________________________________________
-= PREDESTINATION: Itz hard to be ze good guy when you turn into a fucking gun =-

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7420
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 10:24 pm

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 12:03 pm » by Pindz


FAKING THE MOON LANDING IS ON ILLUMINATI CARDS
Image
Image

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 11724
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:57 pm
Location: Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin

PostSat Jul 18, 2009 12:11 pm » by -Marduk-


pindz wrote:FAKING THE MOON LANDING IS ON ILLUMINATI CARDS
Image




SPOTLIGHTS ON THE MOON ?


Artificial lighting used on the moon set. All lunar surface photos were filmed or photographed by/for the U.S. Government and are available from official internet sites.


One Giant Spotlight For Mankind


Giant Spotlights instead of "Suns" for Apollo missions film and photo shoots.
Last edited by -Marduk- on Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
________________________________________________________________________________
-= PREDESTINATION: Itz hard to be ze good guy when you turn into a fucking gun =-


Next

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook