reynoldbot
Jupiter
A paper-white mask of evil.
Posts: 790
|
Post by reynoldbot on Jan 3, 2008 7:19:28 GMT -4
Amen to that, brother. I am often humbled by the dearth of knowledge espoused here by many of the members on this board.
It's weird that the viral video still is getting HB attention to this day. I remember it being revealed as fake years ago, years before I even started college! Are these people that woefully ignorant or are they just being deceptive?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Jan 3, 2008 10:14:55 GMT -4
Are these people that woefully ignorant or are they just being deceptive? Yes (collectively both, individually they can be either or both)
|
|
reynoldbot
Jupiter
A paper-white mask of evil.
Posts: 790
|
Post by reynoldbot on Jan 4, 2008 4:51:14 GMT -4
Yes is a good answer. Strange that the HB community doesn't seem to mind the humiliation of having some of their key "evidence" shown to be not only fake but also known to be as such for many years.
|
|
|
Post by wadefrazier3 on Jan 29, 2008 1:04:48 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jan 29, 2008 8:20:55 GMT -4
I gotta run to work, but I'm certain that a visit to ALSJ will put this photo into it's proper context.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jan 29, 2008 9:48:42 GMT -4
ALSJ says this picture was taken at, "149:01:43 Cross-Sun from the south of the double core at the ALSEP at the end of EVA-2. Charlie has pushed the first section of the core in about 2/3 of the way by hand. The rock at the upper left may be the one below center and to the right in 18555. John is in the background." So it's not the flagpole. What exactly is suspicious about not seeing an astronaut's face?
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Jan 29, 2008 9:59:17 GMT -4
Every time one of these jokers suggest that stagehands' footprints were made and/or erased from the "lunar set" I give the same answer: If I were in charge of prepping the stage I would make sure all of my stagehands wore Moon boots; thus stray footprints could be easily explained as belonging to the astronauts. No HB has ever given me a coherent reply to this argument.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jan 29, 2008 10:16:46 GMT -4
Having read that twice, I'm still not seeing what his "point" is.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jan 29, 2008 10:43:06 GMT -4
I would make sure all of my stagehands wore Moon boots;...
That's exactly what they did for From the Earth to the Moon.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jan 29, 2008 10:50:56 GMT -4
...I'm still not seeing what his "point" is.
From my correspondence with him on the previous issue, it's clear he has little if any point. It's just the same old ignorant scrambling for "inconsistencies" and "anomalies" hiding the same old "the Gub'mint is evil" agenda.
Ted thinks it's the flagpole. Although he got his image from ALSJ, he obviously didn't read any of the supporting discussion. As with his previous claims, he did no research on this one either.
In his zeal to magnify the image immediately around the core sample's base, he neglected the partially obliterated footprints to the right, where the astronaut stood to work the tool into the surface and then walked away to allow his crewmate to document it with the camera. Who stands inches from a stake he's hammering into the ground anyway, be it a flagpole or a core sampling tool?
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jan 29, 2008 10:51:13 GMT -4
How about this little bit of "logic"... He proposes unseen footprints were covered up to conceal unseen footprints. Amazing. edit to add...somehow this made more sense when I originally typed it.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jan 29, 2008 12:04:11 GMT -4
Yeah, a second quick look shows the somewhat covered bootprints in the lower right. Why not show the face of the astronaut? Because he was shooting a pic of the tube going into the surface. As for his swept surface, I think he's looking at ghosts ot something. Yet, like all the HBs, he seems so confident and certain in his findings.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Jan 29, 2008 23:57:02 GMT -4
AS16-115-18558 was intended as a stereo companion to AS16-115-18557Although the TV camera was pointing away at the time these photos were taken, ~1 minute later it panned back to John Young driving the sample tube with a hammer ( video). Two things are readily apparent: The astronaut is standing back a couple of feet from the tube, and every time he repositions he is kicking-up dust that would obscure earlier footprints.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jan 30, 2008 0:09:41 GMT -4
To set up the sequence of events, Young has hand-driven the core tube while Duke was messing with his 70mm camera, which he had suspected of misfeeding. When Duke got his camera working, his first task was to document the core sample, which meant taking cross-sun stereo pairs. Young stepped out of the way. The two partial prints that generally face the tube are likely to be the ones Young was standing it when he hand-drove the tube. He turned and walked into the background; the first steps of his retreat likely threw up the dust that obliterated the standing prints.
Conspiracy theorists don't seem to pay attention to the amount of dust displaced by footsteps. It is wrong to believe that once made, a footprint will remain undisturbed.
I'm not sure facing fully foward is the best posture for hammering. Given the range-of-motion restraints in the shoulder degrees of freedom, the best orientation for hammering may be 45 degrees off, so as to present the hammering arm to the task without requiring excessive lateral shoulder flexion.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Jan 30, 2008 8:10:19 GMT -4
He missed the shadows and a possible link to wind and a prop mark but hey ho.
If I was contemplating a hoax then I would have the set for astronauts only. Hardly a no brainer. That way only activities by the astronauts are recorded, that is recording fails and successes in experiments without intervention of a crew. To complete it as set pieces with a crew placing items then dusting steps would run all wrong and not be as complete as a full simulation from start to finish for the purposes of recording. But I suppose that will be too far from the convenience to fit a hoax.
|
|