NASA Website Earthrise from the Moon, but wait...

[SEAM]

This is a beautiful shot of the Earth rising from the surface of the Moon.
I was just looking at the NASA site where they have new footage of all of the Apollo landings, and the remnants left behind. I pulled this up, and...

WHAT is that Starship Enterprise doing to the center left? Made me go HMMMMmmm.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/346593main_moonimg_03_full.jpg

[Forevernyt]

I was surprised to see actual stars in the photo. :)

[fopa]

That is clearly a space hammer which was dropped by an astronaut when he was repairing [insert repaired item].



Interesting

[SomaSmith]

Space Hammer... ;) Nice find Seam!

http://k004.kiwi6.com/hotlink/73w5y1v13s/spacehammer.jpg

[Vitalux]

This is a beautiful shot of the Earth rising from the surface of the Moon.
I was just looking at the NASA site where they have new footage of all of the Apollo landings, and the remnants left behind. I pulled this up, and...

WHAT is that Starship Enterprise doing to the center left? Made me go HMMMMmmm.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/346593main_moonimg_03_full.jpg

The confusion clears up once it is understood that the image being viewed is Hollywood special effects in photography.

http://dvdmedia.ign.com/dvd/image/article/685/685428/the-adventures-of-superman-the-complete-second-season-20060202040629114-000.jpg


When my mind was more naive, I really believed Superman could fly. After all, I saw it with my very own eyes on television.




NASA, are just another twist of Hollywood information fabrication.


http://www.elllo.org/Assets/images/P1051/1055-460-MoonHoax.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Apollo17.jpg/220px-Apollo17.jpg

http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af356/stuarburstphotography/346593main_moonimg_03_full-s.jpg

All NASA Apollo Moon Images are not real.

[SEAM]

Then how do you explain this?



http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=109530371

[SEAM]

That whole Apollo hoax, Van Allen Belt, stuff deserves a permanent shelf in the WooWoo closet.

[Vitalux]

Seam ..I would enjoy having a bit of a debate with you.
All that I ask you to do is not ignore what ever evidence I submit.

Background. I am a 50 year old guy that has spent the last 30 years involved in television and the photographic arts industry.
I have a photography studio, and everyday here I work with lights and create images. Therefore, when I make a statement it is from understanding the relationships in producing images and a thing called image perspective.
Now I do not claim to be an expert, however I am just pointing out that I have a very good understanding of things which I comment on.

1. When you go outside and stand with the moon behind you, does the moon ever appear smaller than your head?

http://images.wikia.com/evolutioniststonerp/images/d/d5/Standing_in_the_moonlight.jpg

Do you think with the Earth being 3X the physical size of the Moon, would you expect the Earth to be smaller than the astronaut's head?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Apollo17.jpg/220px-Apollo17.jpg


To answer your question.
I looked the website and the host of the video claims you can see the Apollo debris and artifacts in the images.

He was playing on the viewers stupidity. If you notice he may have been flashing images but none clearly identify his claims of Apollo artifacts being on the moon.

To prove it, go and find me a still photographic image that will back up the guys claim. I went on a search and was unable to find any images taken by Earth Based telescopes or photographic satellites to support that hosts claims.

If you wish to make public statements proclaiming ('this deserves a permanent shelf in the WooWoo closet) then I invite you to explain how the images above defies photographic principles of physics.

:o

[chancy]

Seam ..I would enjoy having a bit of a debate with you.
All that I ask you to do is not ignore what ever evidence I submit.

Background. I am a 50 year old guy that has spent the last 30 years involved in television and the photographic arts industry.
I have photography studio, and everyday here I work with lights and create images. Therefore, when I make a statement it is from understanding the relationships in producing images and a thing called image perspective.
Now I do not claim to be an expert, however I am just pointing out that I have a very good understanding of things which I comment on.

1. When you go outside and stand with the moon behind you, does the moon ever appear smaller than your head?
http://images.wikia.com/evolutioniststonerp/images/d/d5/Standing_in_the_moonlight.jpg

Do you think with the Earth being 3X the physical size of the Moon, would you expect the Earth to be smaller than the astronaut's head?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Apollo17.jpg/220px-Apollo17.jpg


To answer your question.
I looked the website and the host of the video claims you can see the Apollo debris and artifacts in the images.

He was playing on the viewers stupidity. If you notice he may have been flashing images but none failed to clearly identify his claims of Apollo artifacts being on the moon.

To prove it, go and find me a still photographic image that will back up the guys claim. I went on a search and was unable to find any images taken by Earth Based telescopes or photographic satellites to support that hosts claims.

If you wish to make public statements proclaiming ('this deserves a permanent shelf in the WooWoo closet) then I invite you to explain how the images above defies photographic principles of physics.

:o

Gary: I am impressed! We need more people that stand up and say NO this is not correct!
You deserve all this clapping
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uUdtDO3CNc&feature=related

Great rebuttal
chancy

[ViralSpiral]

VENUS

http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimedia/gallery/v132_br.jpg


Venera 13 on Venus
Date: 1 Mar 1982
A Venera 13 Lander image of the surface of Venus at 7.5 S, 303. E, east of Phoebe Regio. Venera 13 survived on the surface for 2 hours, 7 minutes, long enough to obtain 14 images on 1 March, 1982. This color 170 degree panorama was produced using dark blue, green and red filters and has a resolution of 4 to 5 min. Part of the spacecraft is at the bottom of the image. Flat rock slabs and soil are visible. The true color is difficult to judge because the Venerian atmosphere filters out blue light. The surface composition is similar to terrestrial basalt.

Credit: NASA History Office



MARS

http://athena.cornell.edu/images/rovers/rover_sundial.jpg

http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/water-on-mars-3.jpg

SATURN


The Dragon Storm
Date: 15 Sep 2004
A large, bright and complex convective storm that appeared in Saturn's southern hemisphere in mid-September 2004 was the key in solving a long-standing mystery about the ringed planet.

Saturn's atmosphere and its rings are shown here in a false color composite made from Cassini images taken in near infrared light through filters that sense different amounts of methane gas. Portions of the atmosphere with a large abundance of methane above the clouds are red, indicating clouds that are deep in the atmosphere. Grey indicates high clouds, and brown indicates clouds at intermediate altitudes. The rings are bright blue because there is no methane gas between the ring particles and the camera.



JUPITER

http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/images/Jupiter.jpg

From NASA's site: A true-color image of Jupiter taken by the Cassini spacecraft. The Galilean moon Europa casts a shadow on the planet's cloud tops.

http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimedia/gallery/P50142_br.jpg


Jupiter Swirls
Date: 5 Mar 1979
This close-up of swirling clouds around Jupiter's Great Red Spot was taken by Voyager 1. It was assembled from three black and white negatives.




And yet the moon...... no colour enhancement, or filters......its all there, in black and white http://kathy.u.yuku.com/profile/bypass/images/wink.gif

[Mike Gorman]

Actually, when the moon is at this position on the horizon sure, it is much bigger than your head-however when it rises high
in the sky it can look quite small, it depends on the refractive magnification index-it can be as small as an inch or two at the zenith
if you look at the Moon photo, the Earth is high in the moon sky--it is plausible.

[Eric J (Viking)]

Yes thats excellent observation ... thanks Gary...

Another here
http://www.spaceprime.com/images/apollo-astronaut-3d.jpg

And guide of earth and moon size
http://www.uh.edu/engines/earthandmoon.jpg

viking

[Vitalux]

Actually, when the moon is at this position on the horizon sure, it is much bigger than your head-however when it rises high
in the sky it can look quite small, it depends on the refractive magnification index-it can be as small as an inch or two at the zenith
if you look at the Moon photo, the Earth is high in the moon sky--it is plausible.


Thank you GalaxyHorse for your input.

That is an interesting assumption, however it appears a false assumption.

The refractive magnification of the Moon ( or Sun) does not change whatsoever as the Moon moves between horizons. If people view the size of the Earth's Moon, as larger or smaller, it is purely imaginary.

Here is one quick link which explains in more details, which also includes some illustrations.

Why does the moon look so much bigger when it is near the horizon? (http://science.howstuffworks.com/question491.htm)


GalaxyHorse, if I am incorrect I would be very interested to view any evidence which supports your statement. My goal here is to separate illusions from facts.

[ThePythonicCow]

Actually, when the moon is at this position on the horizon sure, it is much bigger than your head
The apparent relative size of a head and a moon or earth depends on how close the camera is to the head, relative to the distance to the moon or earth.

[Maia Gabrial]

I'd also like to say that THAT'S not the color of the moon either...

[Vitalux]

I'd also like to say that THAT'S not the color of the moon either...

Here is an image of the moon in color. The Living Moon as You Have Never Seen I (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Moon7/Full_Moon/Moon_Mosaic_80_lrg.png)t
Image Credit: Mike Deegan of Mike's Astroimaging (http://mikesastroimaging.webs.com/apps/photos/)

[SEAM]

Not sure why an "official NASA picture of a UFO" turned into a "Moon Landing Hoax" thread, (Can you spell Hijack?) but, since you asked.. I'm not saying you are wrong.. I'm simply saying.. You Don't Know! .. And... For what it's worth.. (I can Spell Hijack) I also don't believe the limo driver shot JFK..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

http://www.squidoo.com/apollo-moon-landing-photos-from-space

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/07/17/apollo-landing-sites-imaged-by-lro/

http://www.space.com/13485-moon-skywatching-craters-apollo-landing-sites.html

Gotta go now..

[Vitalux]

Hey SEAM

Sorry if you feel I am thread jacking.

This will be my last post here, because so I may address your information you just posted.

(re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-p..._Moon_landings)


NASA can make any wild claims it wishes to about bringing back lunar moon rocks. There is no independent scientific body that can refute their claims, short of someone else actually going to the moon and gaining a comparative sample. If NASA wished to fake possessing fake moon rocks, very few people, if any, would be able to refute their claims.

Hence, just because a magician pulls a rabbit out of his hat, doesn't mean it's real. I have some moon rocks in my backyard if you would like to buy them.

(re: http://www.squidoo.com/apollo-moon-l...tos-from-space,
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...imaged-by-lro/, & http://www.space.com/13485-moon-skyw...ing-sites.html)

I actually have already been to this site and reviewed the information. Here are some of the images they claim show Apollo Moon artifacts on the lunar surface.

http://www.istad.org/squidoo/moon-landing-photos/apollo-11-lander-from-space.jpg http://www.istad.org/squidoo/moon-landing-photos/apollo-15-lander-from-space.jpg

http://www.istad.org/squidoo/moon-landing-photos/apollo-14-lander-from-space.jpg http://www.istad.org/squidoo/moon-landing-photos/astronaut-tracks-apollo-14.jpg

http://www.istad.org/squidoo/moon-landing-photos/apollo-16-lander-from-space.jpg http://www.istad.org/squidoo/moon-landing-photos/apollo-17-lander-from-space.jpg

As for my earlier statements. The image is not a clear image showing these artifacts. What the viewer sees would be subjective.

In a serious scientific community or a court of Law, these images would not be able to stand up as credible evidence.

Plus NASA has a history of fraudulently publicizing images of astronaut images on the lunar surface. The images or apparent tracks in the images should be viewed with the same suspicion. After all, it is what I don't see in the images that make we question more.

One thing anyone viewing images like this should ask, is why are they not in high resolution for the people of the world to see. After all if Google Earth can take a photo of my house like the image below, why can't NASA do likewise with the lunar surface?



http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af356/stuarburstphotography/mehouse-small.jpg

After all I would assume that NASA could out do a Google Satellite for images of the moon.

In conclusion, I understand fully that this is a pride issue for most Americans. Most don't want to hear anything that deflates their national self image.

In the words of Jordan Maxwell,

"People only hear and see what they want to see.
and the last thing people really want to know is the truth."

Historically, that is why they always killed the messenger.

History is a wonderful things. It repeats itself.

Remember when China got caught live, trying to fake a space walk?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBL98p0wZ7g


Thank you for your feedback.

[conk]

That whole Apollo hoax, Van Allen Belt, stuff deserves a permanent shelf in the WooWoo closet.

SEAM, I would suggest you visit these sites and review the evidence of manipulation. The photos are obvious fakes, lighting anomalies, cropping mysteries, etc. The question is not "is the landing fake"?, but "why does NASA perpetuate these fake photos as evidence"?

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/02files/Moon_Images_Menu.html

http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_index1.html

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/

[seehas]

That whole Apollo hoax, Van Allen Belt, stuff deserves a permanent shelf in the WooWoo closet.

SEAM, I would suggest you visit these sites and review the evidence of manipulation. The photos are obvious fakes, lighting anomalies, cropping mysteries, etc. The question is not "is the landing fake"?, but "why does NASA perpetuate these fake photos as evidence"?

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/02files/Moon_Images_Menu.html

http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_index1.html

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/


the hoaxed moon landing theory was very welcome for the elite, there are tons of airbrushed photos, disapeared or damaged videos ... not because they are so lazy just because there is stuff on the moon u cant tell john doe about !

so if john doe belives in a faked moon landing all is good, its a clearly win win situation ... u can explain all the anomalies on the material as a part of the hoax ... GREAT.

guys it aint that simple, im sure they faked alot of stuff because they had to, the raw material was just showing off stuff that u cant explain so i bet there were alot of scenes done in movielabs.

my opinion is the apollo11 mission was done with blackbudged help because it was a mission of first class importance and the astronauts allready on the way to the moon saw a lot of stuff they couldnt explain, then they walk on the moon and see lots of strange stuff there ... they all knew they werent the first up there and back on earth people claim u never been there, what a struggle to be a astronaut ;)

"On September 9, 2002, filmmaker Bart Sibrel, a proponent of the Apollo moon landing hoax theory, confronted Aldrin and his stepdaughter outside a Beverly Hills, California hotel. Sibrel said "You're the one who said you walked on the moon, when you didn't" and called Aldrin "a coward, and a liar, and a thief."[43] Aldrin then punched Sibrel in the face. Beverly Hills police and the city's prosecutor declined to file charges after witnesses confirmed that Sibrel had initiated physical contact, and that Aldrin had asked Sibrel to leave him alone."

the hoaxed moon theorys only holds up if u dont dig deeper, there is so much evidence that they have been there, new telescop photos, moon anomaly photos, astronaut interviews , ex-nasa officers , employes saw airbrushing going on ...etc etc..

[conk]

Yes seehas, I agree with you. Many mysterious things on the moon and about the moon. Why the obvious blurring and smudging of photos, if not hiding something. My favorite is a NASA flyover video that seems to show a HUGE thing (mile or more high) that shoots up from the surface and ejects a puff of smoke or vapor.