Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Moon Landing - Hoaxed?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45, 46  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
gncxxOffline
King-Size Canary
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Total posts: 14787
Location: Eh?
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 31-07-2010 17:32    Post subject: Reply with quote

rynner2 wrote:
Mythopoeika wrote:
How did they get the camera to follow the movement of the lunar lander as it went up? Did they leave some poor bugger behind?

Ah, well, we don't talk about him... Wink


Don't worry, he's safely ensconced in Thunderbird 5. Forever.
Back to top
View user's profile 
TinFinger_Offline
Yeti
Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Total posts: 95
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-08-2010 19:07    Post subject: Reply with quote

i disagree about the pictures

i used to be a hand printer and as a matter of course would centre, dodge and burn all negatives supplyed.
that is all you would need from the 3 inch square negative is the image on there no matter how badly framed.
it would be the job of the printer to fix this (leaving impecable prints)
an example of dodging would be to hold back the light making the famous guy on the ladder lit up in the shade more possible (so long as there is some light on him)

a quick google gave this "70-mm lunar surface superwide-angle cameras"meaning most probably the prints only show a small portion of the actual film
the only way to tell the true extent of this would be to see the films obtained
Back to top
View user's profile 
MythopoeikaOffline
I am a meat popsicle
Joined: 18 Sep 2001
Total posts: 10469
Location: Not far from Bedford
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-08-2010 23:04    Post subject: Reply with quote

70 mm cameras? I thought they only came in when George Lucas started filming Star Wars?
Back to top
View user's profile 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 02-08-2010 00:41    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mythopoeika wrote:
70 mm cameras? I thought they only came in when George Lucas started filming Star Wars?

NASA used, specially modified, Hasselblad 500el photo cameras for the moon landings, They're high quality, large format, 70mm (2x35mm), cameras. Used to be very popular with up market estate agents.
http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11-hass.html

The Swedish made cameras were originally, probably, loosely based upon the back engineering a captured German aerial surveillance camera.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasselblad

The 70mm film format has been around since the 1890s. First recorded use was to film the Henley Regatta, around 1894. 'Lawrence of Arabia', 'The Sound of Music' and 'My Fair Lady', were all filmed in 70mm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/70_mm_film
Back to top
View user's profile 
eburacumOffline
Papo-Furado
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Total posts: 1657
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 04-09-2010 15:57    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mythopoeika wrote:
How did they get the camera to follow the movement of the lunar lander as it went up? Did they leave some poor bugger behind?
I don't know if anyone has answered this elsewhere, but for what it's worth, the ascent was filmed from a camera on the lunar rover. It had to be tilted by remote control, from Earth, by a manual operator who was working with a 1.3 second delay. The first time they tried it, on Apollo 16, the operator missed the launch completely. The second time the operator got it just right and tilted the cam exactly 1.3 seconds before the Ascent stage went up.

Nowadays they'd do it by computer, I suppose, but they were steely-eyed rocket men in those days.
Back to top
View user's profile 
gordonrutterOffline
The Indescribable Horror that is a
Joined: 03 Aug 2001
Total posts: 901
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 04-09-2010 16:10    Post subject: Reply with quote

And if you notice as it takes off the camera zooms out giving a greater chance of the vehicle remaining in frame.

Gordon
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
dannycheveaux1Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Total posts: 105
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 24-01-2011 14:23    Post subject: Reply with quote

One argument against the hoax scenario is that hundreds of people would need to be privvy to it, those working for NASA mission control in particular.
But surely they would have had plenty of "dress rehearsals", simulated missions or parts of missions, including built in radio delays etc
Would they neccesarily know the difference between a training simulation and a "real" mission - if told that this time it was the real mission - if not for the tv pictures being beamed to their monitors?

Also, one thing that's never struck me before:
would ANYONE trust Richard Nixon?
He was the only president during ALL the moon landings - no one before and no one since....

Cheers
Dan
Back to top
View user's profile 
gncxxOffline
King-Size Canary
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Total posts: 14787
Location: Eh?
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 25-01-2011 18:03    Post subject: Reply with quote

But what did Nixon have to do with the moon landings apart from saying "Well done everyone!" when they succeeded? It was Kennedy who announced the project in the first place.
Back to top
View user's profile 
dannycheveaux1Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Total posts: 105
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 26-01-2011 10:51    Post subject: Reply with quote

All I'm saying is it all took place during Nixon's watch at a time when the country needed it, because of the vietnam war for instance. IF it was all a simulation, did he know? did he authorise it? I don't know, but with his past record would it come as a massive surprise if it turned out he did?

Kennedy promised they would put a man on the moon, someone else made sure it would happen

Cheers
Dan
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 26-01-2011 11:48    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
IF it was all a simulation, did he know? did he authorise it?


Why the interest in Nixon?
The whole Moon hoax story started because some of the photos very probably were faked, very probably to make sure NASA had something to show Congress, and Nixon, to impress them and win further budget approval.

Since they didn't fake the landings the matter is entirely conjectural anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile 
coalyOffline
Banned
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Total posts: 831
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 26-01-2011 13:39    Post subject: Reply with quote

Exactly! There's no point speculating this and that, when clearly, the Moon landings were NOT hoaxed.
Back to top
View user's profile 
dannycheveaux1Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Total posts: 105
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 26-01-2011 16:46    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hang on there - this IS the conspiracy bit you know!
The hoax theory may have STARTED that way, but all those little doubts have crept in since and things start to add up
I would love to 100% believe they got there safely AND came back.
I remember watching in awe the live broadcasts from the moon when I was a kid, viewing the returned capsule from a couple of feet away on it's world tour and peering at the tiny bits of moon dust in the sealed glass globe display case - now I have serious doubts!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8226075.stm

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1106
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 26-01-2011 17:34    Post subject: Reply with quote

So if you were going to hand out fake rocks to perpetuate your hoax, would you choose a piece of petrified wood, thus inviting accusations of having failed to notice fossilised trees up there?
My guess is the genuine specimen had sat happily in it's glass case until public curiosity died down, then somebody nicked it, substituting the petrified wood because it resembled the original, hoping nobody would notice.
If you take the time to read this thread you will see that this is all done and dusted:- they landed, case closed. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile 
Dingo667Offline
I'm strange...but true
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Total posts: 2000
Location: Deep in the Fens, UK
Age: 47
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 26-01-2011 20:59    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes they landed eventually. I still doubt they did it the first time though, for a lot of reasons. Case open again. Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
rynner2Online
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 25304
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 26-01-2011 21:46    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dingo667 wrote:
Yes they landed eventually. I still doubt they did it the first time though, for a lot of reasons. Case open again. Cool

So which Apollo was the first to 'really' land?

And what's your evidence?

Frankly, I can't believe that two other astronauts have happily left Armstrong and Aldrin claiming to have been the first men to land on the moon if it wasn't true.

In fact, it's fecking ridiculous! Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45, 46  Next
Page 44 of 46

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group