Oh look, the serial forum spammer posts one of his idiotic "translations" trying to goad me into a reply.. Neither are evidence for any hoax, neither need obfuscation and I'll get round to them when I can be bothered to. Unlike you, I have integrity and answer all the batshit you post. You just run away from all the inconvenient posts which kick your butt.
These anomalies are so clear that they will convince any person of normal intelligence that the moon missions were faked. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ers-are-corrupt.441261/page-2#post-1072215068 You can pretend all you want.
No they are not. They have been disproven and ONLY peop;le of the LOWEST intelligence believe that the missions were faked. You have lost every argument and every one knows it. You have never managed to convince ANYONE and EVERYONE knows your claims are childish
They aren't anomalies, you've had child proof explanations and it is not my fault you aren't qualified to understand them. You fail by virtue of not having even normal intelligence. How in your crazy world do you flit from one set of idiotic claims to another? You argue like a big baby. No pretence is needed, you are just completely clueless. One minute you post an idiotic video that says the LRV footage was stationary with a moving video (that uses the damn EVA footage from the rover!), the next you claim it is going so fast a wall of air holds up a thermal covering. It takes colossal stupidity to see how that is not possible. 1. The DAC footage referenced by the lying Marcus Allen is prefaced on every mission by film/camera testing panels prior to mission. But since this clown has no honesty or inherent research skills his failure to even check this is his failure and your stunning gullibility. 2. The aluminum handles on the video image are Apollo 15, they are probably ground spare replacements for transportation - or have been cleaned up for museum display. This image shows what happened to the ones on Apollo 11: And this is what Apollo 15 looked like in the sea: You lose again with your pathetic "clear anomalies" and idiotic translation spam.
You didn't address the Orion capsule's upper part being scorched while the Apollo capsule wasn't. You also didn't address this issue from post #319.
Then we see the Apollo capsule also scorched. How clueless must a person be not to be able to look at the pretty pictures and see this. Orion uses a more modern heat dissipation process. So very ignorant are you that you can't even understand what is written in front of your eyes. Addressed in 1. above you troll.
Regarding post #316,... http://www.politicalforum.com/index...apollo-landing.519410/page-13#post-1073760326 ...your response was not that of an objective truth-seeker. You seemed to have a foregone conclusion. (from post #317) http://www.politicalforum.com/index...apollo-landing.519410/page-13#post-1073760328 It's been alleged that a vacuum destroys film. According to the video he got the info from an expert who designed satellites. An objective person using the scientific method* would want this theory to be tested in a vacuum chamber before coming to a conclusion. It may turn out to be untrue. It may turn out that it's true but the process of the film getting ruined takes so long that the astronauts would have had time to take those pictures. Knee-jerk dismissal is not going to impress anyone of normal intelligence. * https://www.google.com/search?q=sci...&ved=0ahUKEwjin-ns_sD6AhWOYMAKHS_aC9sQ4dUDCA0
Sometimes I drink too much coffee. Does this look like the response of a gullible person? (from post #319) You are so predisposed to name-calling that you sometimes jump the gun. ...or maybe it was made to look that way before they pushed it out of the transport aircraft. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...apollo-landing.519410/page-13#post-1073688545
You are neither of those. You have no objectivity whatsoever and the search for confirmation bias is your goal. The sheer damn irony in that statement is stunning. A ludicrous claim. It invalidates pre-digital age space photography! Says who? The proven liar? That rules you out on both counts. You are the complete opposite. As for the "scientific method" you don't understand any of the science, any of the methodology involved or any subsequent processes. The cameras use special polyester based films and emulsions to combat any degradation from vacuum.
The stock spam response for your failures and incompetence. I have no idea what you are even talking about and since neither do you this is saying nothing. Every DAC camera featured a test process at the start of each section. It's what efficient people do. Now clowns, who have no idea, subsequently look at the dates for the test frames and wrongly deduce that it means that it applies to the entire reel. Kind of moronic, but that's what conspiracy theorists do. Nope. You are just too clueless to understand. Maybe you've drunk a gallon of coffee again! So, you are denying that the command modules were even in space? Really? Are you going to join the stupid fools who claim this?
(from post #334) Start watching this at the 4:24 time mark. Moonfaker: Radioactive Anomaly II. PART 9 A guy who worked for Kodak says it was ordinary film.
The batshit from the thrashing-elephant-spam. You're done, you've got nothing but idiotic old "Blunder" videos. What manner of person does this without verifying this cherry picked crap? The serial forum spammer does. No integrity, no balanced logical approach, zero scientific method! A slide film legend: Kodak Ektachrome Reviewed (ramblingpolymath.com) "During the Apollo era, Kodak was commissioned to develop thinner 70mm films for use by NASA astronauts. These included specially modified Kodak Panatomic-X fine-grained, black and white film and two varieties of Ektachrome. " Space Imaging | Kodak "In the mid-sixties, NASA launched a series of five Lunar Orbiter spacecraft that collectively photographed 99% of the moon's surface in preparation for an Apollo moon landing. Each carried an ingenious photographic system, designed and built by Kodak. The system took photographs, processed and scanned the film, and converted imagery into a continuous video signal for pickup by Kodak-built receivers on Earth. At that time, it was the most complex instrumentation payload ever launched aboard a spacecraft. In addition to medium-resolution images that were taken to analyze the moon's surface topography, the system took a number of high-resolution pictures that were clear enough to show objects the size of a card table on the surface." Look at that - a Kodak system was able to withstand all the lies and crap about "deadly radiation" and the vacuum degrading the images!
All you're doing is parroting the official version. It's plausible that whatever kind of unmanned craft that NASA had that could orbit the moon and take pictures was designed to protect the film from vacuum and radiation.
Pathetic. All you are doing is denying it You cowardly avoided the point about radiation. Bullshit. You are making up crap that you know nothing about. Is it plausible that they could protect it from the "deadly radiation"?
You seem oblivious to something. Let me explain. YOU have no qualifications in spacecraft design, YOU have no qualification in camera design. YOU have no qualification in anything. You have shown failure in critical thinking, logic, honesty and objectivity. So, in short, when YOU say anything is "plausible" it almost certainly isn't.
That's right. I don't, so I listen to people who do and try to see who makes the most sense. This guy makes sense. Moon Photographs - Expert Analysis By A World Famous Photographer The comment section is very interesting. Here are a few. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I had to comment..respect men..in 95 i was in UNI doing my studies and i had a discussion were i said that: -" men on the moon was the biggest lie ever , specially in 69" , of course i was insulted many ways, there was even a teacher that told me that he didn t understand what was i doing in UNI anyway, i wish to live enough to see this lie vanish, and by the way, i live in Portugal, i m graduated in graphic design and i am photographer since 98, i worked with hasselblad, bronica and mamiya cameras, all your information is correct. thanks for your video. best regards ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Besides temperature and radiation, there's also the detrimental effects of vacuum. The cameras were not pressurized and the film emulsion will break down and slowly evaporate. Even a short time in a vacuum will cause noticeable alterations of colors and degradation of resolution. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your forensic analysis is excellent. Color film contains layers of organic pigment molecules that have melting points below 200°C. It 's like putting the camera into a thermal oven or microwave or exposing the film directly to cosmic rays, uv etc. My view as organic chemist and scientific photographer (Hasselblad and Leica)... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXACTLY MY THOUGHTS MAN!! Being a hardcore film photographer myself, from 2005 until now, I can say that the materials we have cannot withstand the extreme temperatures and x-rays of outer space. Film is very sensitive. What ISO were they using? Did the have speedlights? If the ISO was too high, then the X-rays would have burned the film. If they had covered the cameras with some centimeters of lead, they would be way too heavy and the metal coating would make them even hotter. No way around these limitations. 1.5 years ago I acquired a Mamiya RB 67 Pro, and I know that they require photo metering (did the astronauts have a photo meter? ) to get the right exposure settings, being capable to look downwards to see the area and the focus of the photo, and after you press the button, to clock both the lens and the back of the camera. All these actions seem WAY too difficult into their pseudo space suits. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Gary.. I have always wondered why nobody, including yourself ever mention the fact that THE CONSTANT SATURATION of ULTRA VIOLET radiation would make the film worthless. There is no protection of atmospheric layers or all the other things we have on earth that either absorbs or reflects the DEADLY ULTRA VIOLET energy found in solar winds cosmic particles etc. Mix that with X RAY AND GAMA RADIATION. I dont care what kind of camera was being used I am telling you and everyone else the film would have been worthless. fORGET SHUTTER SPEED, EXPOSURE , The moment any film is removed from a slid sealed lead container anywhere above hi earth orbit the film is useless. The type of UV filter needed for the lenses on the lunar surface still do. not exists . Perfect crisp black and white photos from slide film used to take photos in an environment equal to the inside of a powered on microwave oven. Im sorry but you are CORRECT SIR, THESE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE NOT TAKEN ON THE MOON, THE UV RADIATION ALONE SHOWS THE IMPOSSIBILITY -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You don't even have a level of experience to determine who makes sense! All you do, all you ever do is your bullshit and dishonest confirmation bias. I will rebut this post completely and you will do what you always do, run away and ignore it. You are not qualified in any discipline to rebut it either! You don't even have level of experience to determine who makes sense! From predominantly very ignorant people. The world of photographers both amateur and professional rightly have no issues. But of course you ignore THEIR expertise. Pathetic. This says nothing - total hearsay! Could be you doing your spamming "everything that moves" routine! Right there his "expertise" goes down the crapper! There is no temperature. Every object will heat differently to equilibrium and any heat affecting internals, can only be passed by conduction! What does this clown think the "temperature" is? The film was specially developed by Kodak and this claim is bullshit anyway since it would invalidate every pre-digital image ever taken in space! Bare assertion. On normal film I would estimate prolonged exposure would do that, but the development phase can combat any deficiencies accordingly. Such stupidity it beggars belief. Where is this imbecile getting the 200°C temperature from? Film is in a cartridge in a protected case and only touches the advance mechanism internally! Once again, where does this clueless fool get the extreme temperatures from? Where are these "x-rays" from? Solar x-rays outside of major emissions are designated soft and wouldn't go through paper! I can see why you think this clown "makes sense". My god the ignorance of this person. So the film inside an aluminum case, is subject to this UV light? Imbecile. Now he says the UV light that cannot even get through the aluminum case is actually "deadly"? X-rays from the Sun are soft, Gamma rays are non-existent as the scattering effect in the outer layers of the Sun remove almost all of their energy (absent of solar flare activity). An imbecile who thinks UV light will penetrate aluminum. Notwithstanding that it wouldn't even go through the cartridge casing. There's a very good reason the film is kept away from all forms of light - your list of comments are from morons.
Here's something else on the camera issue. Modern protection for a camera in space vs the Apollo camera, obviously on the moon set in the Southwest desert during the faked moon landings. https://www.reddit.com/r/moonhoax/comments/pxnbkk/modern_protection_for_a_camera_in_space_vs_the/
(from post #332) I found an article about such a test. https://www.aulis.com/vacuum.htm If it's not a bogus test, it shows that the vacuum on the moon would have affected the quality of the pictures.
Absolutely. There would be nothing bogus about a clown website such as Aulis, the hub of deception and lying conducting a so called vacuum test. Because, of course it would never be done with any fakery. The ultimate in irony involves a serial forum spammer suggesting fakery from a space agency using a source that is one of the most deceptive of all.
