| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Were The Moon Landings Real or Hollywood? |
| Real! |
|
23% |
[ 11 ] |
| Special Effects! |
|
51% |
[ 24 ] |
| I Like Sitting On Fences, I Feel Safer... |
|
6% |
[ 3 ] |
| I Neither Know Nor Care! |
|
4% |
[ 2 ] |
| What Has This Poll Got To Do With 911? |
|
14% |
[ 7 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 47 |
|
| Author |
Message |
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TmcMistress
Mind Gamer
Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 392
|
 Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
karlos, you really need to come up with a new argument by this point. 
_________________
"What about a dance club that only let in deaf people? It would really only need flashing lights, so they'd save a lot of money on music." - Dresden Codak |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 6028
Location: East London
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jolly good, Carlos.
Pretty about the distracting flag flashing, though.
Apart from the 'wave effect', it should also be possible to prove that the height the dust rose to is exactly the height it would rise to on earth; this should be an extremely easy domo for someone to do with a beach-buggy on the sea-shore in the UK or USA.
_________________
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| outsider wrote: | Jolly good, Carlos.
Pretty about the distracting flag flashing, though.
Apart from the 'wave effect', it should also be possible to prove that the height the dust rose to is exactly the height it would rise to on earth; this should be an extremely easy domo for someone to do with a beach-buggy on the sea-shore in the UK or USA. |
One flaw that occurs is that in your experiment you're making the assumption that the densities of moon dust and sand are close or identical, as if dust is the same everywhere.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 6028
Location: East London
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | outsider wrote: | Jolly good, Carlos.
Pretty about the distracting flag flashing, though.
Apart from the 'wave effect', it should also be possible to prove that the height the dust rose to is exactly the height it would rise to on earth; this should be an extremely easy domo for someone to do with a beach-buggy on the sea-shore in the UK or USA. |
One flaw that occurs is that in your experiment you're making the assumption that the densities of moon dust and sand are close or identical, as if dust is the same everywhere. |
Good point, chek. I'm sure the height and performance of the dust kicked up will prove identical to the sand in Area 53. Whilst we cannot reproduce the experiment with moon dust, if the test is identical to earth sand, that will be 'Point Proven', in my estimation.
As you correctly point out, moon dust would be of a completely different consisency. That combined with different gravity and no atmosphere, would behave in a totally different fashion.
_________________
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
moon dust should be bone dry
there is no atmosphere
and as the gravity is one sixth the dust will rise higher and fall back more slowly than on eart
everything about the moon buggy is fake
firstly how did they fit the moon buggy into the lander?
how did they take out the moon buggy once they were on the moon's surface?
the moon's surface is 200 degrees how does the vehicle actually work in such condidtions? All the footage of unmaned Rovers has them crawling along at very low speed and being very unreliable. Here we have a virtual beach buggy bombing around.
Why in every scene is the horizon always so close. It should be 18 miles away.
Every aspect of the moon landings is fake. No man has ever set foot on the moon. It is simply laughable to watch what nasa palms off as evidence.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| karlos wrote: | how did they fit the moon buggy into the lander?
how did they take out the moon buggy once they were on the moon's surface? |
I used to wonder that, apparently;
The frame was 10 feet (3 m) long with a wheelbase of 7.5 feet (2.3 m). The maximum height was 3.75 feet (1.1 m). The frame was made of aluminum alloy 2219 tubing welded assemblies and consisted of a 3 part chassis which was hinged in the center so it could be folded up and hung in the Lunar Module quad 1 bay.
Deployment of the LRV from the LM quad 1 by the astronauts was achieved with a system of pulleys and braked reels using ropes and cloth tapes. The rover was folded and stored in quad 1 with the underside of the chassis facing out. One astronaut would climb the egress ladder on the LM and release the rover, which would then be slowly tilted out by the second astronaut on the ground through the use of reels and tapes. As the rover was let down from the bay most of the deployment was automatic.
The rear wheels folded out and locked in place and when they touched the ground the front of the rover could be unfolded, the wheels deployed, and the entire frame let down to the surface by pulleys.
The rover components locked into place upon opening. Cabling, pins and tripods would then be removed and the seats and footrests raised. After switching on all the electronics the vehicle was ready to back away from the LM.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But there is no footage of this and no photos.
In fact it sounds like a dangerous thing to be doing in zero atmosphere. Any slight slip could injure the astros or rip a gash in the spacesuit.
The lunar rover serves no purpose whatsoever.
What is gained by driving around in circles rather than walking?
They may as well have taking a set of golf clubs with them.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| karlos wrote: | But there is no footage of this and no photos.
In fact it sounds like a dangerous thing to be doing in zero atmosphere. Any slight slip could injure the astros or rip a gash in the spacesuit.
The lunar rover serves no purpose whatsoever.
What is gained by driving around in circles rather than walking?
They may as well have taking a set of golf clubs with them. |
I guess oxygen carried, combined with potential distance covered is the answer.
The astronauts had a number of locations to visit which were impractical/impossible to do on foot. So they drove there - it really is that simple - the LRV (assuming they went), dramatically increased the range and the amount of time they could spend in certain locations that otherwise would have not been possible to reach.
Of course, it wasn't designed to be of much use here, so it would be 6x more efficient in a lunar environment??
The lunar horizon is really 18 miles distant?
The reason no pictures were taken of the deployment, is because it took two people to do it safely;
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: | The lunar horizon is really 18 miles distant?
|
That seems highly unlikely, given a horizon distance on Earth is about 20 miles (sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore with this to look it up exactly. Suffice to say it's obvious Karlos has obviously never timed a ship coming up over the horizon and into the bay).
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Horizon on earth is 30 miles.
On the moon it is 18 miles.
These are facts which you can check anywhere.
On a movie set however the horizon is the black backdrop behind the pile of sharp sand.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| karlos wrote: | The Horizon on earth is 30 miles.
On the moon it is 18 miles.
These are facts which you can check anywhere. |
May I ask where you exactly you did check to arrive at that figure? As according to my calculations, on Earth you'd require an altitude of 600ft to see 30 miles, whereas from the 200ft highpoint of my town, it works out at 17.3 miles.
By contrast, the moon's radius is 1100 miles compared to the Earth's 4000 and its horizon is correspondingly closer.
It doesn't make your basic grasp of the facts look good.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 6028
Location: East London
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another little problem for those who believe that the lunar landings were genuine - we've all seen the 'flying beadstead' that crashed spectacularly on earth, with the test-pilot just managing to eject to safety some 15 months (if my memory serves me, which would make a change!) before the more-than-perfect 'landing' on the 'moon'; where is the interim film footage, showing the progressive stages which perfected the 'lander'? Did they not bother to film the stages? Have they 'lost' the footage? Is it kept from being shown for 'commercial confidentiality' reasons? Or perhaps 'National Security' considerations? Would they not proudly show this footage, to make the doubters' case much more questionable, if they had it?
_________________
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSL1481372220080514?feedT ype=RSS&feedName=scienceNews&rpc=22&sp=true
| Quote: | Russia and Europe may team up for moon flights
Wed May 14, 2008 2:25pm EDT
By Dmitry Solovyov
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia and Europe are teaming up to build a spaceship which will fly astronauts to the moon, Russia said on Wednesday, although the European Space Agency struck a more cautious note.
The first test flight is set for 2015 and the first manned flight is planned for 2018, Russian space agency Roskosmos said.
"The European Space Agency (ESA) and Roskosmos both have the technologies and unique experience in designing various space systems to be able to create jointly a hi-tech vehicle," Roskosmos said on its website (www.roscosmos.ru).
"(This would) enable us to carry crews of up to six people to near-earth and lunar orbits." Roskosmos said the craft would allow "expeditions to the moon" but did not say whether landings were envisaged.
Russia's single-use Soyuz, lately prone to risky landings, has borne the brunt of carrying crews to the International Space Station while U.S. space shuttles are set to be retired in 2010.
The ESA was more cautious about the plan.
"This is factually correct in the sense that indeed this is the outline of the system," ESA spokesman Franco Bonacina said by telephone from Paris.
"But we haven't decided upon anything yet ... It's too premature. It's still at the level of studies.
"In November, at a ministerial meeting, it's not taken for granted this option will be the one that finally takes shape."
The new spacecraft, with wings and a cone-shaped module, would be launched by a Russian booster rocket from the Vostochny cosmodrome in Russia's Far East region of Amur, Roskosmos said.
Russia currently rents the Soviet-era Baikonur cosmodrome from Kazakhstan.
Russia's Soyuz manned spacecraft and the Progress cargo vehicle have been the workhorses delivering crews and cargo to the ISS since the U.S. space shuttle Columbia broke up on re-entry in 2003.
WORKHORSES STUMBLE
But crews returning from the space outpost suffered from huge gravitational forces and rough landings after Soyuz capsules slid off into so-called "ballistic descents" twice in a row in October and April.
In the latest case, the Soyuz-TMA capsule with South Korea's first astronaut Yi So-yeon, U.S. commander Peggy Whitson and Russian flight engineer Yuri Malenchenko made a rough landing hundreds of kilometers (miles) off target on April 19.
Russia called an inquiry into the accident. Roskosmos strongly denied media reports at the time that the crew could have died because, for some time, the capsule had been falling upside down and the escape hatch had started burning.
"It was really very serious and dangerous," a Russian space industry source told Reuters, requesting anonymity.
"One of the two modules attached to the capsule failed to separate from it on re-entry, and for quite a while the capsule was plummeting upside down and its hatch -- normally on top of the capsule -- was exposed to extremely high temperatures."
"As they were falling, Peggy saw the unseparated module dangling by the capsule. Then it fell off somehow."
The temperature was so high that the outside metal antenna for radio contacts burned out, the source said.
The United States is also worried about the reliability of the Russian program.
"They (Russians) understand the risk of what's going on. They're as concerned as we are about this event," Congressional Quarterly, which covers Capitol Hill, quoted NASA administrator William Gerstenmaier as telling a House of Representatives hearing on the ISS program last month.
(Reporting by Dmitry Solovyov; Editing by Robert Woodward)
© Thomson Reuters 2008 All rights reserved |
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the LRV all squished and folded up being snuk away in the storage bay.
In addition, having thought about all this distance to the horizon stuff;
The distance is based solely upon the height of the observer - there follows a chart based upon terrestrial heights, the higher you are, the further you can see. As our planet is bigger than the moon, these distances are greater, being on the moon = not so great.
As the (supposed) 'viewer' on the moon was only around 4'10" off the ground (a camera strapped to the chest), which is about 1.5m.
So, at a viewing height of 1.5m, on the earth, you could see 4.5km. On the moon, for the sake of argument, let's say 3.5km - which equals just over 2 miles.
Distance to horizon table (metric)
Eye height Distance to horizon
0.0 m 0.0 m
1.0 cm 370 m
10 cm 1.2 km
20 cm 1.7 km
30 cm 2.0 km
40 cm 2.3 km
50 cm 2.6 km
60 cm 2.9 km
70 cm 3.1 km
80 cm 3.3 km
90 cm 3.5 km
1.0 m 3.7 km
1.1 m 3.9 km
1.2 m 4.1 km
1.3 m 4.2 km
1.4 m 4.4 km
1.5 m 4.5 km
1.6 m 4.7 km
1.7 m 4.8 km
1.8 m 5.0 km
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSL1481372220080514?feedT ype=RSS&feedName=scienceNews&rpc=22&sp=true
| Quote: | Russia and Europe may team up for moon flights
Wed May 14, 2008 2:25pm EDT
By Dmitry Solovyov
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia and Europe are teaming up to build a spaceship which will fly astronauts to the moon, Russia said on Wednesday, although the European Space Agency struck a more cautious note.
The first test flight is set for 2015 and the first manned flight is planned for 2018, Russian space agency Roskosmos said.
"The European Space Agency (ESA) and Roskosmos both have the technologies and unique experience in designing various space systems to be able to create jointly a hi-tech vehicle," Roskosmos said on its website (www.roscosmos.ru).
"(This would) enable us to carry crews of up to six people to near-earth and lunar orbits." Roskosmos said the craft would allow "expeditions to the moon" but did not say whether landings were envisaged.
Russia's single-use Soyuz, lately prone to risky landings, has borne the brunt of carrying crews to the International Space Station while U.S. space shuttles are set to be retired in 2010.
The ESA was more cautious about the plan.
"This is factually correct in the sense that indeed this is the outline of the system," ESA spokesman Franco Bonacina said by telephone from Paris.
"But we haven't decided upon anything yet ... It's too premature. It's still at the level of studies.
"In November, at a ministerial meeting, it's not taken for granted this option will be the one that finally takes shape."
The new spacecraft, with wings and a cone-shaped module, would be launched by a Russian booster rocket from the Vostochny cosmodrome in Russia's Far East region of Amur, Roskosmos said.
Russia currently rents the Soviet-era Baikonur cosmodrome from Kazakhstan.
Russia's Soyuz manned spacecraft and the Progress cargo vehicle have been the workhorses delivering crews and cargo to the ISS since the U.S. space shuttle Columbia broke up on re-entry in 2003.
WORKHORSES STUMBLE
But crews returning from the space outpost suffered from huge gravitational forces and rough landings after Soyuz capsules slid off into so-called "ballistic descents" twice in a row in October and April.
In the latest case, the Soyuz-TMA capsule with South Korea's first astronaut Yi So-yeon, U.S. commander Peggy Whitson and Russian flight engineer Yuri Malenchenko made a rough landing hundreds of kilometers (miles) off target on April 19.
Russia called an inquiry into the accident. Roskosmos strongly denied media reports at the time that the crew could have died because, for some time, the capsule had been falling upside down and the escape hatch had started burning.
"It was really very serious and dangerous," a Russian space industry source told Reuters, requesting anonymity.
"One of the two modules attached to the capsule failed to separate from it on re-entry, and for quite a while the capsule was plummeting upside down and its hatch -- normally on top of the capsule -- was exposed to extremely high temperatures."
"As they were falling, Peggy saw the unseparated module dangling by the capsule. Then it fell off somehow."
The temperature was so high that the outside metal antenna for radio contacts burned out, the source said.
The United States is also worried about the reliability of the Russian program.
"They (Russians) understand the risk of what's going on. They're as concerned as we are about this event," Congressional Quarterly, which covers Capitol Hill, quoted NASA administrator William Gerstenmaier as telling a House of Representatives hearing on the ISS program last month.
(Reporting by Dmitry Solovyov; Editing by Robert Woodward)
© Thomson Reuters 2008 All rights reserved |
|
They could announce now that after 2015 everyone will live forever. By then the mask will have been removed and those left will be ruled by force not deception. Ether that or we win.
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You know, in our heart of hearts, we know there is something odd about those Moon videos. They LOOK like they are on a set. There is no sense whatsever of distance.
The Clangers were no less convincing
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rodin wrote: | You know, in our heart of hearts, we know there is something odd about those Moon videos. They LOOK like they are on a set. There is no sense whatsever of distance.
|
Doesn't it seem so because everything in view is completely alien?
There's no colour, few features, the sky's black and the horizon isn't where we're used to it being.
'It's artificial' is our instinctive reaction, but even our sci-fi designers have artistic clouds of multi-coloured gas plonked in space backdrops these days to try to make infinite nothingness look interesting.
We don't like the look of nothingness, it's alien to us.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chekismo, is there any subject you are uninformed about ?
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: | | Chekismo, is there any subject you are uninformed about ? |
Well clearly I'm not as familiar with irrelevance as you, Markletossa.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would agree that the lunar surface offers no points of familiar reference, no trees or houses, or objects of known size with which to orientate yourself.
Once you are able to 'comparisize' - then depth and scale fall into place;
The problem I cannot reconcile with my beliefs, is the lighting aspect. If a set, then how is flat, even lighting obtained over such a huge area?
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tele - it wasn't on the earlier footage. They got better at fakery as the 'mission' progressed and image resolution expectations were raised. They had to...
Trick photography is older than me and what you see a piece of cake to create. There were some specific effects that needed to be filmed in a vacuum. Coincidentally they had a huge vacuum chamber built completed months before the first trip.
I have recently (like yesterday) put together a collection of evidence omitting all the straw men.
http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=266188
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Okay Rodin, but how is the following image lit? with no hot spots? Completely uniformally with no rigs in view? Are you saying they were simply 'touched' out?
Look at the LRV for size perspective.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well of course I don't actually know. How did they do Star Wars? 2001?
Just for fun here's an idea that occured just now. Suppose the footage is daytime in the desert. Clear blue sky.
Then recall that 'blue screen' technology was extensively used in the above movies. Chromakey in black - hey presto!
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually. know what. I think that's how they did it!
Afterwards use the area as target range to mess it up. Practice explosive charge detonation of any tell-tale rocks as per foreground
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rodin wrote: | Actually. know what. I think that's how they did it!
Afterwards use the area as target range to mess it up. Practice explosive charge detonation of any tell-tale rocks as per foreground |
I was more focused on the stills than the moving stuff, hence the medium format images above. These would have to be impeccable in terms of quality and stand up to intense scrutiny. Are you saying that the Hasselblad photographs were also 'tricked' into being moon shots in camera, or done post-event then copied to produce a new 'original'? They shot both mono and colour stock.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rodin wrote: | Well of course I don't actually know. How did they do Star Wars? 2001?
Just for fun here's an idea that occured just now. Suppose the footage is daytime in the desert. Clear blue sky.
Then recall that 'blue screen' technology was extensively used in the above movies. Chromakey in black - hey presto! |
As a point of historical interest, chroma key matte inlay technology before cheap powerful computers recently became available was a cumbersome process.
I recall a Lucas documentary in which he explained how in the original '70's Star Wars the process for producing a simple spacecraft flight across the backdrop scene lasting few seconds or so took days to shoot and render to final frame.
Though I suppose 'they' could always have begun shooting 'moon footage' in Mack Sennett's day...
Btw, nice work Tele. Although for authenticity they should be monotone to match the originals.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lose the clouds arnd you've just abiut got it Tele. I thionk I will post one of those over @ GIM and freak them out lololol
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
