|
Post by petereldergill on Feb 19, 2006 23:05:29 GMT -4
Nomuse: I asked you a question at BAUT, but I see you're already here ... don't bother resopding!
Pete
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 20, 2006 0:31:27 GMT -4
It's fitting that stargazer, frustrated at his inability to bluff and bluster his way past people who actually took the time to learn something about the subject, should Google up a few more 2nd and 3rd hand bits as he stomps out the door.
nomuse already pointed out some of the foolishness in stargazer's post. As for - yes, yet another HB site stargazer dredges up, unable to come up with his own claims - I really enjoyed their childlike attempts at photogrammetry. The rest appeared to be the usual Van Allen "Shields" dreck, etc., etc. Yawn.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Feb 20, 2006 0:54:38 GMT -4
Now I'm not going to waste any more time here. Please unsubscribe me from the member list. And there was much rejoicing.
|
|
|
Post by jovianmoon on Feb 20, 2006 1:10:50 GMT -4
Now I'm not going to waste any more time here. Please unsubscribe me from the member list. And there was much rejoicing. Ah, yes! "Brave, brave Sir Stargazer, Brave Sir Stargazer ran away When reason reared its ugly head He bravely turned his tail and fled..." With apologies to Monty Python. Much rejoicing, yes. It's a pity there isn't a virtual, cyber-space pub that we could all go to. Given the hard slug all you regular posters have been putting in (alas to no avail), the first round would have to be on me. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by jovianmoon on Feb 20, 2006 1:54:47 GMT -4
Okay, so I'll finally point to some more sources concerning Apollo anomalies. First we have this site here: www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/TeachRes/Movies161/Quoting from that page: " [...] the astronaut on the Moon sees: 1. The Moon always keeps the same face towards the Earth (more or less) all of the time, since the position of the Earth in the Moon's sky is the same with respect to the Lunar horizon of our imaginary astronaut. The Earth neither rises nor sets, but stays fixed in the sky... The notion that the Earth should always appear to be the same distance above the lunar surface in the Apollo photographic record is ludicrous. To begin with, such a notion fails to take into account the topography of the lunar surface against which a given photograph is being taken. The three photographs posted on the web page provided were all taken in different locations, with topography of varying elevation. To draw a parallel with an Earthly view, the Moon will appear to be higher in the sky when imaged against a flat desert that when imaged rising above the summit of a mountain (if the surrounding terrain is not readily visible, as in the cited lunar images), assuming the Moon's declination on the two occasions to be the same. This to me seems so elementary that only a moron could overlook it. Huh? Do a little math? Ignoring for the moment (or forever) that Stargazer has been either unwilling or unable to do his own calculations and research, this statement is just silly. Any subject will flare up and expand in an image if it's sufficiently over-exposed, and you can't get a more over-exposed subject than the Sun (lens filters notwithstanding). The lens flare artifacts in the posted image speak for themselves, and God only knows what Stargazer is on about when he says "Not only does it seem to have an atmosphere..." More argument from ignorance. End of story, maybe. But unfortunately for Stargazer this "Apollo was a hoax" story is entirely fictional. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Feb 20, 2006 7:40:33 GMT -4
Poor Stargazer. He can't even seem to get into his head the following fairly simple information:
Good exposure for a sunlit scene: 1/250 @ f11 Okay exposure for stars: 8 seconds @ f2.8 (These figures are for 125 ISO film.)
I wonder if he has enough knowledge to work out the difference between those two exposures, and I wonder if he has ever bothered proving this to himself.
But I only said "okay" exposure for stars. Because of reciprocity failure of film, 32 seconds @ f2.8 is a much better bet. The difference between that and the sunlight exposure is approximately 131,072:1.
If he can't get this stuff into his head, he will never understand the sun/stars situation. But I guess he doesn't want to.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Feb 20, 2006 8:08:54 GMT -4
...I've never seen a terminator line like that on the moon... This was regarding www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20471.jpgWas the late, unlamented, Stargazer telling us there that he had NEVER seen the moon a day or so before first quarter, or a day or so after last quarter? The Star gazer, the "expert" on Apollo, the physics graduate? We New Zealanders will be able to see the moon, with a terminator line like that, high in the west-northwest at about 10am on Thursday.
|
|
|
Post by Retrograde on Feb 20, 2006 10:45:12 GMT -4
"Now I'm not going to waste any more time here. Please unsubscribe me from the member list." Yay! Pete I was rather hoping, though, that Bill Thompson would have shown up and described his role in faking the moon landings. I informed him at another forum that he had caught a fish, but he didn't show up here. I was also hoping he would have his meltdown, and it seems like he did come close, but he always recovered. Pity. So where is stargazer now proclaiming his great victory over the deluded and/or paid debunking agents of NASA?
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Feb 20, 2006 20:44:29 GMT -4
Strangely enough, TV still gets noise in its uplinks, downlinks, microwaves, etc. and such noise is still captured on whatever recording means is used. You'd think that it would only stay that way whilst we all maintained our NASA-paid hoax scenario, but strangely it just continues on video that has absolutely nothing to do with Apollo, or any rocket whatsover ever. The nerve of that NASA, you'd think they'd cut uplinkers like myself a break once the facade is no longer required.
The sad truth is, people like SG will always say there is a hoax no matter what you show them.
|
|
|
Post by Retrograde on Feb 20, 2006 21:38:26 GMT -4
Strangely enough, TV still gets noise in its uplinks, downlinks, microwaves, etc. and such noise is still captured on whatever recording means is used. You'd think that it would only stay that way whilst we all maintained our NASA-paid hoax scenario, but strangely it just continues on video that has absolutely nothing to do with Apollo, or any rocket whatsover ever. The nerve of that NASA, you'd think they'd cut uplinkers like myself a break once the facade is no longer required. The sad truth is, people like SG will always say there is a hoax no matter what you show them. Please be serious. Everyone (everyone, that is, who doesn't have a pathetic need to cling to this moon landing fairy tale) knows that since NASA lacked the technology in 1969 to eliminate traces of support wires and other evidence of the hoax from the fake video footage, they introduced noise to all television signals so people would think it is normal. I can't believe you fell for it. N
|
|