|
Post by mndwrp on Jun 20, 2006 14:49:34 GMT -4
One i heard ..
the conversation kinda went like this
"in no pictures can we see stars .. thats suspicious" "well thats because of the camera settings, exposure time etc" .. (i explained it better than that) "why not set it to see stars and point the camera upwards then..." "they didnt go up there to take pictures of stars .. we can do it from here" "i would have .. it would have proven i was up there .." " ...... so how's the kids ?"
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Jun 20, 2006 14:54:09 GMT -4
That's three ignorant arguments for it being faked in a row.
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Jun 20, 2006 15:23:02 GMT -4
Definately would have taken some pictures of the constellations, planets, etc. What better time to have gottem them also. Six to eight days of travel to and fro. Being outside of the atmosphere. Also that would have been another way to disprove the hoaxers. Being able to track and ascertain the exact positions of the CM/LM with the knowledge of where the constellations and planets were enroute.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Jun 20, 2006 15:28:34 GMT -4
If I would be there on the moon, I would have tried to do some athletic moves on top of there. Why didn't the astronauts do this? It would've been the ultimate proof it's real, this just proves that it's fake.
Seriously asdf, the first thing the astronauts didn't have on their mind was taking pictures disprove any hoaxers 40 years in the future.
EDIT: also, with all the evidence around at the moment another piece of evidence ignored by hoax believers would be useless.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jun 20, 2006 15:47:51 GMT -4
Being able to track and ascertain the exact positions of the CM/LM with the knowledge of where the constellations and planets were enroute. The positions of the stars are no different on the Moon than they are on Earth, therefore they're useless for navigation. Stars are used to determine attitude only, not location.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jun 20, 2006 16:13:19 GMT -4
Definately would have taken some pictures of the constellations, planets, etc. … Also that would have been another way to disprove the hoaxers. Visible light photos of stars really wouldn't disprove anything since they can be obtained from here. What you can’t obtain from Earth’s surface are astro-photographs in UV light. For this reason a UV telescope was sent to the Moon on Apollo 16 and photographs of astronomical objects were obtained. This should be more convincing proof than had visible light photographs been obtained.
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Jun 20, 2006 16:25:01 GMT -4
As the Earth and Moon revolve around the sun the views of the constellations say behind the moon if enroute to the moon would be different at different times of the years.
|
|
|
Post by mndwrp on Jun 20, 2006 16:31:11 GMT -4
The positions of the stars are no different on the Moon than they are on Earth.if i can add to your comment there .. that reminded me of a video i saw a while back www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i6B7HzijSoits old but it gives a pretty good idea of how far you would have to go to have a change of perspective on the stars .. the moon just isnt far enough to make a difference
|
|
|
Post by phunk on Jun 20, 2006 16:31:46 GMT -4
they would be the same constelations you can see from the ground on earth
|
|
|
Post by phunk on Jun 20, 2006 16:34:06 GMT -4
The positions of nearby stars can change just slightly over the course of the year, when the earth moves 180+ million miles to the other side of its orbit. From the earth to the moon, the change would be immeasurable.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jun 20, 2006 16:53:18 GMT -4
The positions of nearby stars can change just slightly over the course of the year, when the earth moves 180+ million miles to the other side of its orbit.
I want to point out that this is only really detectable by advanced telescopes especially designed to study parallax of the stars and thus give us an approximate distance to them. You can't tell by looking with your naked eye.
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Jun 20, 2006 17:11:00 GMT -4
With the cold war going on the Apollo crafts were supposed to be able to ascertain their position and have the capability to guide themselves free of any help from NASA in the event of interferance from the Soviets. So one would think that they would have the capability to guide themselves optically, using star sightings, moon, earth and sun positions. Any pictures at all of the stars and planets at anytime throughout all of the Apollo missions would have been a plus to disprove the hoaxer's. Why not have one camera throughout all of the missions capable of this small feat?
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jun 20, 2006 17:25:37 GMT -4
So one would think that they would have the capability to guide themselves optically, using star sightings, moon, earth and sun positions. Apollo could determine position by dead reckoning. Sightings on stars, etc. were used only to determine the spacecraft's attitude and to verify alignment of the guidance platform. Edit: Changed "determined" to "could determine".Any pictures at all of the stars and planets at anytime throughout all of the Apollo missions would have been a plus to disprove the hoaxer's. Why not have one camera throughout all of the missions capable of this small feat? Probably because NASA couldn't in their wildest dreams conceive there would be the need to dispel the ignorant claims of a bunch of hoax believers.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 20, 2006 17:33:55 GMT -4
Any pictures at all of the stars and planets at anytime throughout all of the Apollo missions would have been a plus to disprove the hoaxer's The “no stars” argument is only a given by the HBs because there are no photos with stars (except of course for the photos taken of the stars with the ultraviolet camera, which are ignored.) If the astronauts had taken some visible light star field photos then the HBs would simply not make that argument. So in reality any such photo would not prove anything to the HBs because they do not look at the evidence for the story it tells, only for how they can make it fit their prior belief.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 20, 2006 17:36:39 GMT -4
What is a picture of some white dots out one of the viewports of the Command Module going to prove? The star positions will be the same as they are from Earth.
|
|