Visor reflection and footprints

[ews]

Hi,

As stated before, I do not believe in the reality of Apollo. To avoid the confusion that my first post generated a while back, I will also state that I do not have an elaborated hoax theory to propose or discuss over here. I am just trying to understand issues that are unresolved as far as I am concerned.

I would like to submit two questions:

1- Is anyone here knowledgeable enough about Apollo 14 to explain what is the nature of the objects that are causing the reflection on the visor in this footage?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=680E6FprCHM (see at time 0:30)

I am not really interested in explanations detailing reflective properties of the different layers that make up the visors, I already read about those. I would just like to know if anyone here thinks that the reflection is indeed originating from two (or more) objects and what those objects are.

2- Anyone can explain how the astronauts who were obviously always using jumps and hops to move about (in the videos) could produce all those beautiful, clear, well defined footprints (in the pictures)? Also, what is the closest thing on earth you would say corresponds to the physical property of regolith in the moon environment. I am not referring to how it lifts or fall, I am referring to how it reacts to the pressure of a boot. Talc is often mentioned, but is that really the case?

Thanks

ews

[Ginnie]

Nov 10, 2008 22:46:02 GMT -4 ews said:

Hi,

As stated before, I do not believe in the reality of Apollo. To avoid the confusion that my first post generated a while back, I will also state that I do not have an elaborated hoax theory to propose or discuss over here. I am just trying to understand issues that are unresolved as far as I am concerned.

I would like to submit two questions:

1- Is anyone here knowledgeable enough about Apollo 14 to explain what is the nature of the objects that are causing the reflection on the visor in this footage?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=680E6FprCHM (see at time 0:30)

I am not really interested in explanations detailing reflective properties of the different layers that make up the visors, I already read about those. I would just like to know if anyone here thinks that the reflection is indeed originating from two (or more) objects and what those objects are.

2- Anyone can explain how the astronauts who were obviously always using jumps and hops to move about (in the videos) could produce all those beautiful, clear, well defined footprints (in the pictures)? Also, what is the closest thing on earth you would say corresponds to the physical property of regolith in the moon environment. I am not referring to how it lifts or fall, I am referring to how it reacts to the pressure of a boot. Talc is often mentioned, but is that really the case?

Thanks

ews

1, NO
2. Well, some footprints are well defined, and some are not so much:
history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-37-5545.jpg
Maybe they are "well defined" because it was moon soil and not earth soil.
Comparing regolith to earth based materials is probably not the best thing to do because once you do then people say things like "well, with wet sand it doesn't do ..." or whatever. Leave regolith as regolith and Talc as Talc.
Presumably, you think the missions were done back on Earth. Maybe you could explain why the footprints are so well defined in an Earth based environment then?

Also, remember that if you're cherry picking some supposed "anomalies" in the NASA missions, and you believe that they were faked, then MOST or if not all the evidence is faked. Explain that to people who picked up NASA radio transmissions from the rooftops of high schools and universities that originated on the moon.
I think you need to do a hell of a lot of reading yet, ews.

[LunarOrbit]

Nov 10, 2008 22:46:02 GMT -4 ews said:

I am not really interested in explanations detailing reflective properties of the different layers that make up the visors, I already read about those. I would just like to know if anyone here thinks that the reflection is indeed originating from two (or more) objects and what those objects are.

So basically what you're saying is that you don't want to hear an answer unless it supports your existing belief that something is fake about those reflections.

No, I do not think the reflections are originating from two (or more) objects. The double reflections are caused by the Sun reflecting off of both the outer and inner visors.

2- Anyone can explain how the astronauts who were obviously always using jumps and hops to move about (in the videos) could produce all those beautiful, clear, well defined footprints (in the pictures)?

So you've looked at every footprint and determined that every single one of them is clear and well defined?

[JayUtah]

I am not really interested in explanations detailing reflective properties of the different layers that make up the visors...

Then you're not interested in the most likely explanation. Reflections among known assemblies of reflectors have properties that apply here. Ignore them at your peril.

...if anyone here thinks that the reflection is indeed originating from two (or more) objects...

I don't. If you do, make your case.

...always using jumps and hops to move about (in the videos) could produce all those beautiful, clear, well defined footprints (in the pictures)?

Explain why those two observations are, according to you, incompatible.

Also, what is the closest thing on earth you would say corresponds to the physical property of regolith in the moon environment.

No one single substance in an Earth environment exhibits all the properties of lunar regolith in the lunar environment.

I am not referring to how it lifts or fall, I am referring to how it reacts to the pressure of a boot.

Extent of compaction? Impressibility? Please be specific.

Talc is often mentioned, but is that really the case?

I don't think it is. Talc exhibits a cementation and cohesion property that mimics that of regolith in a vacuum, but for different chemical reasons. Talc fails to exhibit other properties of regolith such as variable compression caused by variant and non-uniform grain size in the aggregate.

[ews]

So basically what you're saying is that you don't want to hear an answer unless it supports your existing belief that something is fake about those reflections.

No, I am saying that the reflections on the outer/inner visors have been explained elsewhere and I would like to know if knowledgable people might have other opinions on the matter that would satisfy me. That's it. Do you think your explaination is the only plausible one?

So you've looked at every footprint and determined that every single one of them is clear and well defined?

Nope. I just have seen enough footprints on pictures and enough hopping around on the moon on film to warrant that question. If you have any comments about this, I am all ears.

Thanks

ews

[JayUtah]

I would like to know if knowledgable people might have other opinions on the matter that would satisfy me.

What about the most probable explanation dissatisfies you and why?

Do you think your explaination is the only plausible one?

You are the one expressing dissatisfaction with it. Explain why.

I just have seen enough footprints on pictures and enough hopping around on the moon on film to warrant that question.

Unfortunately your question is predicated upon a begged premise. No one need take the question seriously until you agree to explain the premise.

[laurel]

It's interesting that sharply defined footprints are considered suspicious; in an older thread, footprints that were partially obscured by dust were considered suspicious by Ted Twietmeyer.
apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=theories&thread=1113&page=4

[raven]

Yet another Conspiracy Theory self contradiction.

[JayUtah]

In all fairness we have to allow the possibility that ews doesn't agree with Ted's assertions. Now we are justified in pointing out that at most one of the two assertions can be correct. But Ted might saw, "Ews is wrong because..." and ews might say, "Ted is wrong because..."

The problem is that the discussion isn't taking place. Ews tells us the footprints are wrong. But the responsibility for determining what they should look like, and why they look another way in the photos, belongs to someone else.

And similarly Ews doesn't like the notion that multiple reflectors will produce multiple reflections. But the responsibility to find alternative explanations belongs to someone else.

I'm simply not very impressed with opinions whose owners divert the burdens of proof in all cases to someone else.

[ews]

So,

Let me see if I get this straight.

1- The only explanation people here can provide for the multiple reflections on the visor in the video below is that there are multiple reflections of the sun on multiple layers of the visor assembly, right?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=680E6FprCHM (see at time 0:30)

2- Since it is clear that the astronauts are never seen (on film) walking slowly, making extremely short steps and being extremely careful not to disturb the regolith around their boots while lifting and planting their feet, we have to conclude that imprints like we see along the wire in the picture below were produce by jumping and hopping around with regolith flying all over the place. Is that it?

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Buzz_salutes_the_U.S._Flag.jpg


Is that all the great expertise one can hope to find on this forum? I am not interested in the multiple reflections supposedly caused by the multiple layers of the visor assembly because it does not fit what I already know from Apollo missions. But, never mind that, since you guys are experts at explaining all these difficult concepts that laymen don’t seem to grasp, let’s give the multiple layer assembly another chance.

How about a clear explanation of how those supposedly multiple reflections on multiple reflective surfaces work in this case? Any sketch? Any detailed light path? Are the multiple reflections in that particular footage only coming from the sun (if that is what causes those 4 discernable clustered spherical “aberrations”) or are other objects contributing to it? Any other pictures or movies showing similar multiple reflections of the sun in an astronaut’s visor, on the moon? Is the gold outer layer down in this video? Isn’t the gold visor known to cut the multiple reflections effects? You know, things like verifiable facts.

While we are at it, can anyone provide a movie where an astronaut on the moon is moving for a greater distance than two or three feet while leaving clear, well defined imprints behind? Shouldn’t this be easy to find considering the huge amount of footage we have? Of course the resolution won’t be the same as the picture above, but anything with clear imprints made live will do.

I come here to see if proper science is actually capable of explaining all the stuff that I feel is awkward about the Apollo missions. Is anyone here interested in helping? Anyone more interested in showing the beauty of the Apollo missions and the science behind it instead of wasting time derisively dismissing people who do not seem to grasp the “reality” of it?

Thanks

ews

[laurel]

Nov 12, 2008 0:32:03 GMT -4 ews said:

Since it is clear that the astronauts are never seen (on film) walking slowly, making extremely short steps and being extremely careful not to disturb the regolith around their boots while lifting and planting their feet.

I think Buzz Aldrin was careful not to disturb the regolith around his boots when he took the famous photo of his footprint.

history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5878.jpg

While we are at it, can anyone provide a movie where an astronaut on the moon is moving for a greater distance than two or three feet while leaving clear, well defined imprints behind?

There's video of Aldrin making this footprint in the ALSJ.
history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11.mobility.html#1102509

[Count Zero]

Nov 12, 2008 0:32:03 GMT -4 ews said:

Since it is clear that the astronauts are never seen (on film) walking slowly, making extremely short steps and being extremely careful not to disturb the regolith around their boots while lifting and planting their feet...

So, you have examined the entire video and film record before making this sweeping statement, right? Better check again (Hint: Try Apollo 12).

Nov 12, 2008 0:32:03 GMT -4 ews said:

While we are at it, can anyone provide a movie where an astronaut on the moon is moving for a greater distance than two or three feet while leaving clear, well defined imprints behind? Shouldn’t this be easy to find considering the huge amount of footage we have? Of course the resolution won’t be the same as the picture above, but anything with clear imprints made live will do.

IIRC, the Apollo 15 EVA 1 video at Elbow Crater has good examples of this. Dave & Jim do a lot of moving around, and Ed Fendell tilted the camera down and zoomed-in on the footprints. I think Apollo 16 EVA 2 had some good views after John & Charlie left Stone Mountain (it's where they find that whitish sub-layer).

Frankly, I'm mystified why you would think this is an issue. Maybe it's because I spent so many years living near a beach, I just think of it as a no-brainer. When the dry sand is particularly fine (such as near the south end of Kailua Beach, on Oahu), even a good frisbee game will leave very well defined foot (and paw) prints.

[Cavorite]

Nov 12, 2008 0:32:03 GMT -4 ews said:

I am not interested in the multiple reflections supposedly caused by the multiple layers of the visor assembly because it does not fit what I already know from Apollo missions.

Well, there's a good sized dose of handwaving.

If you want other people to go into details, how about providing a few more yourself? What "doesn't fit"?

Nov 12, 2008 0:32:03 GMT -4 ews said:

Anyone more interested in showing the beauty of the Apollo missions and the science behind it instead of wasting time derisively dismissing people who do not seem to grasp the “reality” of it?

Given your statement in the opening sentence of this thread about your lack of belief, this bit sounds dangerously close to mocking derisiveness on your own part.

[Czero 101]

Nov 12, 2008 0:32:03 GMT -4 ews said:

I am not interested in the multiple reflections supposedly caused by the multiple layers of the visor assembly because it does not fit what I already know from Apollo missions.

This one sentence of yours is most telling about your motives. You don't want the facts, you want someone to confirm your skewed perceptions.

Why don't you tell us exactly what it is you allegedly already know about Apollo? Your reluctance to do this so far is perhaps the most telling thing of all...



Cz

[echnaton]

I am not interested in the multiple reflections supposedly caused by the multiple layers of the visor assembly because it does not fit what I already know from Apollo missions.

Discussions are better if all the participants actually present their own ideas. Hiding what you believe about this particular film yet chastising others about a reticence to speak is not helpful in exchanging information. Tell us what you think it is and why, so we can discuss that alternative. Otherwise we are just guessing what you want to talk about.