|
Post by Cavorite on Jun 6, 2008 2:56:06 GMT -4
Can I ask how this is proof of a hoax? What mechanism do you propose as responsible for what we see in the clip?
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Jun 6, 2008 3:13:43 GMT -4
I watched the video of the "Earth" being filmed through that window. It's simply amazing - the "Earth" somehow floats right out of view!.... I can't wait to read your 'explanations' for this one.... Perhaps it's explained by this amusing observation by a photographic and Apollo "expert": The cameraman is somehow able to keep filming a steady view of the Earth, while floating weightlessly, directly backwards in a pitch black capsule, packed with two other people, and various pieces of equipment everywhere. With absolutely no change to the Earth's image... Perhaps it's also explained by simply moving the camera to the right and at the same time rotating it (the front of the lens) to the left. Hell, I've done that hundreds of times. It has the effect of moving a background object out of frame to the right. Try it sometime -- you don't even need a camera. Any tube-like object or your hands cupped around your eyes will do the trick. Turbonuium, I am astonished that you should be so ignorant as to not understand how this could be done. Are you REALLY that ignorant, or are you just yanking chains for the fun of it and indulging in a bit of attention-seeking? And how about not swanning in so infrequently, not being a seagull, not changing the subject and, instead, actually getting around to answering our questions of around 18 months ago? Is that asking too much?
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jun 6, 2008 3:25:38 GMT -4
The "Earth" quickly starts to move out of view while the camera remains steady. On the contrary, the camera very clearly jerks as the earth disappears behind the window frame. The camera is shaky throughout the scene.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jun 6, 2008 3:39:27 GMT -4
Can I ask how this is proof of a hoax? I second the motion. How exactly does this video from Apollo 11 prove that Apollo 8 was faked?
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 6, 2008 9:25:09 GMT -4
Ok, Turbonium, explain to us what you think happened? Why would the fake Earth have moved? Was it an accident? If so, why didn't they do a second take? Was it on purpose? If so, why?
I want answers to this. I'm getting really tired of you dodging or ignoring any questions we ask of you. You are getting dangerously close to being banned for trolling.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jun 6, 2008 9:57:10 GMT -4
turbonium, before bringing up a new claim, kindly address the rebuttals on pages 1 and 2 of this thread to your visibility claims based on (1) angular size and (2) spacecraft orientation.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jun 6, 2008 10:10:20 GMT -4
The camera clearly moves to the right but also pans commensurately leftward in order to keep the window frame in roughly the same position in the frame.
The evidence for this is the change in aspect in the window frame, measured by the angle between the right-side bezel edge and the lower bezel edge; and the change in aspect and relative position of the reflected item as reckoned relative to the window frame. These shifts cannot occur without a change in camera position. The simultaneous pan makes the movement less readily apparent upon only casual inspection.
Parallax effects are highly sensitive to small camera motion, and there is plenty of quantifiable evidence of the camera motion.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Jun 6, 2008 10:13:01 GMT -4
The effect is perfectly in line with the optics expected of a video (or any camera) equipped with a zoom lens, and is moving. In fact the situation can be replicated using a simple camcorder. You can even enhance the effect by varying the zoom. If anything it proves the earth was pretty far away from the camera.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jun 6, 2008 10:30:34 GMT -4
Turbonium, answer the question in the original point of this thread.
You believe that Apollo 8 onwards was faked, in other words that something led you to the conclusion that they did not go to the Moon. If you have drawn that conclusion in a rational way you will have a train of evidence that we can also follow to your conclusion. You have failed to provide it. Kindly do so and tell us why Apollo 8 onwards had to be faked and exactly what led you to that conclusion. You should have all that at your fingertips, since you have derived a conclusion from it already.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jun 6, 2008 10:46:30 GMT -4
Jason, you're thinking of the "Why the Moon Landings Were Hoaxed" thread. I have reiterated the questions turbonium needs to answer there. In the OP of this thread, turbonium alleged: They're (supposedly) ~130,000 miles from Earth, and can see (and film) the entire Earth, through the 9" diameter hatch window, from a position several feet away?and At this time, the astronauts would not have had a view of the Earth through the hatch window, which was in the CSM's nose cone!Both of which were conclusively disproven by multiple replies in the first two pages. That's what turbonium needs to answer in this thread before bringing up new claims here.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jun 6, 2008 11:00:48 GMT -4
Apologies. Getting threads mixed up.
The main gist still applies, however. Turbonium, what do you say about visibility out of a nose window, and the angular diameters?
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jun 6, 2008 11:01:06 GMT -4
Those aren't logical explanations. It's certainly not due to camera movement... I don't understand how you can say this. The camera was "zoomed" to magnify the Earth through the window. Aldrin was some distance away from the window. A slight move by him to his right would have the right window frame obscure the Earth. It's right there...how are you not seeing this?
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jun 6, 2008 11:21:48 GMT -4
Indeed. Aldrin is holding the camera in his hand, is floating in zero gravity, and has the camera zoomed in, It really is not beyond the realms of possibility that a slight movement of the camera in any combination of three axes can occur sufficient to shift the relative positions of window and Earth in the frame such that Earth is blocked by the edge of the window.
I'd like to know what turbonium's alternative is. This is the key issue on these threads: what is the alternative? If they are not in fact filming Earth, what exactly is going on?
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Jun 6, 2008 11:47:20 GMT -4
Those aren't logical explanations. It's certainly not due to camera movement... There is no change in camera position which could have obscured the view of "Earth". The window edge gives us a frame of reference to verify the consistent camera angle. What do you mean, "consistent camera angle"? I don't want to sound negative, but the window edge gives us a frame of reference to verify that the camera angle is not consistent at all. Did you and I use a different window edge, or something? Something very interesting is the reflections quite visible in two of the three images. What is being reflected there? The window acts as a mirror, and there's quite some change in perspective of that reflection. Just the change of perspective expected from a camera moving slightly to the right while panning to the left.
|
|
|
Post by Czero 101 on Jun 6, 2008 22:29:51 GMT -4
Turb's is just attempting to make up for, or rather, cover up his lack of knowledge and understanding of what he is seeing by dredging up these long-debunked hoax claims.
He has no proof of a hoax or conspiracy. Never has... Never will...
All he does is repeat his same tired opinions which are not based on anything even resembling hard evidence, logic or fact, or make up incredibly obtuse stories to explain what he thinks he's seeing - anyone else remember the "That's not a crater, its a tortoise shell on the Moon!" discussion that took place a while back on UM. That's an example of how he works.
No proof... no logic... and no ability to admit when he's got something wrong.
He's trolling, pure and simple. And when he is unable to bring forth a challenge to the answers given to the "questions" he poses, he displays typical hoax proponent behavior by dodging the questions, ignoring the proof presented to him, abandoning the thread and changing topics.
For all the flapping and hand waving he does, the guy must have an incredibly developed pair of arms, in direct opposition to the development of his obviously lacking mental abilities.
Cz
|
|