|
Post by AtomicDog on May 22, 2009 8:27:55 GMT -4
A A frog that appears out of nowhere The frog do not appear out of nowhere... we realise there is a "frog" at about 23 sec when the frog begin to jump... Look attentively and you will see than the "frog" came out of view when it end its course in a small black crater at about 26 seconds. You are absolutely wrong. There is no evidence of this "frog" before the streak begins and none after the streak ends.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on May 22, 2009 10:03:33 GMT -4
Feelfree222, I have conclusively proven that this is a catadioptric effect produced in the television lens from the hot spot on Buzz Aldrin's visor. It is not a frog.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on May 22, 2009 11:14:46 GMT -4
I don't see any frogs in the video.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on May 22, 2009 12:51:20 GMT -4
Why aren't people wondering what the heck a frog would do in a fake movie set in the first place, and why nobody ever noticed it until 40 years later?
edited out possibly offensive and/or naughty word.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on May 22, 2009 13:06:31 GMT -4
Why aren't people wondering what the heck a frog would do in a fake movie set in the first place, and why nobody ever noticed it until 40 years later? Hey, I wondered that! I was informed that it showed the thing was filmed on Earth, which I think showed a fundamental misunderstanding of the question. Obviously, if there were a frog, it would be on Earth. But really, how many films do you know of that have random frogs in them?
|
|
|
Post by laurel on May 22, 2009 14:20:51 GMT -4
|
|
vq
Earth
What time is it again?
Posts: 129
|
Post by vq on May 22, 2009 15:02:09 GMT -4
He's angry because he knows the heli just picked the astronauts up from the secret frog-and-coke-bottle-infested CIA submarine recording studio...
|
|
|
Post by dragonblaster on May 22, 2009 16:00:34 GMT -4
Yet again, the eagle-eyed NASA editor, whose job was to go over the evilly faked footage with the finest of toothcombs (or is that finest-toothed of combs?) to assure that not the slightest error passed his unswerving scrutiny, has cocked it up.
The guy was a total moron.
Mind you, next to the set director who never noticed the fluttering flags, the incorrectly oriented prop rock and the menagerie of frolicking amphibians, he was a freakin' genius.
|
|
|
Post by VALIS on May 22, 2009 18:49:01 GMT -4
If there's a frog on the set, why can't we hear it croak? Something's not kosher...
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on May 22, 2009 23:02:37 GMT -4
. . . The finest of toothcombs (or is that finest-toothed of combs?) . . . . "Finest-toothed of combs." You aren't combing teeth; the individual bits of a comb are the teeth. A fine-toothed comb is intended to get . . . things . . . out of your hair.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on May 23, 2009 0:58:00 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on May 23, 2009 1:12:13 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by laurel on May 23, 2009 2:30:33 GMT -4
The author have what you need -Now, in this footage, a little green frog was kindly inserted- starting at the left of the screen- so you will know where to look- Knowing where to look isn't the problem. The bright object is easy to see even without the inserted green frog. The problem is that the bright object cannot be positively identified as a frog and there is no evidence to support the idea that it is a frog.
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on May 23, 2009 2:34:24 GMT -4
feelfree222,
Why does the "frog" move and bounce in perfect synchronization with the astronaut?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on May 23, 2009 3:29:34 GMT -4
feelfree222, Why does the "frog" move and bounce in perfect synchronization with the astronaut? You are right.... After observing the sequence many times and taking into account the perfect synchronization i agree with Jay' s explanation and the general consensus... that this is a catadioptric effect produced in the television lens from the hot spot on Buzz Aldrin's visor. Case closed to me. Thanks !
|
|