Help needed to clear up some apollo misconceptions

[stanzler]

Hey guys

I've browsed through many threads posted here and i've found them very interesting. I've noticed that many members here have debunked load's of Apollo hoax theories. Most members here seem to be experts about the Apollo missions and have excellent understanding to debunk most wacko theories

I was wondering if people here can help me debunk some apollo hoax stuff that i've found on the web. It would be good if all my misconceptions were cleared. Thanks for helping.

I will be posting some random photos/articles/theories... which i'm having problems with, not all at once of course. ( i'm 99% convinced that man had landed on the moon )

I'll start with this photo ( Is it faked or what?)



The image wasn't showing so i've uploded elsewhere, here is the link where the original came from : apollomoonhoax.blogspot.com/

[PhantomWolf]

This is a Jack White study. He's clueless. He claims to be an expert on photography and Apollo, and he still doesn't know the difference between the Rover and the MESA. The object he identifies as the rover is the MESA, the rover was on the other side. The photos are from EVA 2, well after the rover was unpacked and used, by Jack just doesn't have a clue.

[stanzler]

phantomwolf said:

This is a Jack White study. He's clueless. He claims to be an expert on photography and Apollo, and he still doesn't know the difference between the Rover and the MESA. The object he identifies as the rover is the MESA, the rover was on the other side. The photos are from EVA 2, well after the rover was unpacked and used, by Jack just doesn't have a clue.

Thanks! - What's MESA by the way ?

[PhantomWolf]

It stands for Modular Equipment Storage Assembly. It is where the equipment for the missions was stored, including the TV Camera, the ASLEP (Apollo Science Lunar Experiment Package), the batteries and scrubber cartidges for the PLSS (Personal Life Support System), and items that the LM would need while on the surface such as its CO₂ scrubber cartriages.

[Bob B.]

Welcome to the forum, Stanzler. Here's a picture that may help:

[PhantomWolf]

Actually checking out the top photo, it was actually taken at the start of EVA (ExtraVehicular Activity) THREE!!!! Jack could have easily found this out, but he refuses to check anything because he claims that the ALSJ is all faked as well.

Here's a picture of the Rover as it was stored on 15. 16's and 17's were the same

[PhantomWolf]

Here is the High-Res photo of 17

You can see the empty frame the Rover was on to the right side of the leg with the ladder on it.

[stanzler]

phantomwolf said:

Here is the High-Res photo of 17

You can see the empty frame the Rover was on to the right side of the leg with the ladder on it.

ha ha ha. Thats really cool guys, thank you everyone - you've compeletly debunked it. , from the hi-rez photo, it's now obvious, come to think of it. It does in no way look anything like the rover.

I knew there would be an answer. This actually means that whole darn site is faked. Good job!

Another photo, if you don't mind : ( Could this have been taken just after it was built on that site? )

[grashtel]

stanzler said:

ha ha ha. Thats really cool guys, thank you everyone - you've compeletly debunked it. , from the hi-rez photo, it's now obvious, come to think of it. It does in no way look anything like the rover.

I knew there would be an answer. This actually means that whole darn site is faked. Good job!

Another photo, if you don't mind : ( Could this have been taken just after it was built on that site? )

A) Look just behind the wheel and you can see a partially covered track.
B) The dust kicked up by the astronauts walking around is covering the tracks, which aren't always terribly visible anyway, see AS15-88-11899 for a good example of this.

[Count Zero]

grashtel said:

B) The dust kicked up by the astronauts walking around is covering the tracks, which aren't always terribly visible anyway, see AS15-88-11899 for a good example of this.

Wow! That's an excellent example. You can see the tracks coming in from the left, then the footprints and the darker, kicked-up dirt where the tracks would have been. Good find!

[JayUtah]

I knew there would be an answer.

It's best when dealing with Jack White just to assume he doesn't know what he's talking about. One thing he's especially bad at is telling which way the lunar module is facing. White has acquired quite a following among conspiracy theorists who consider him some sort of crack image analyst, but he has no discernible skills in that area or any recognition among qualified photographic analysts. So best to take much or all of what he says with a grain of salt.

[JayUtah]

Conspiracists often have a hard time believing footprints can obliterate rover tracks so completely and effectively. When the astronauts are working around the rover, they tend to move by shuffling their feet. This is as opposed to the loping and bounding they perform when covering short distances.

Pay attention to the behavior of the dust under the effect of shuffling; a lot of it is displaced to the area immediately surrounding the place where the astronauts stand. The example photo shows this clearly. There are three distinct patterns of regolith: the pristine surface, the actual footprint, and the ejected material around the prints which extends for several centimeters on either side of the prints. The prints themselves clearly obliterate the tracks. The ejecta covers the tracks.

[HeadLikeARock (was postbaguk)]

Welcome to Stanzler

The notion that Apollo tracks could not possibly be obscured by bootprints and scuffed up dust is on that many HBers subscribe to, no matter how much evidence is placed in their way.

Here's another example - there is a single set of bootprints which has clearly scuffed up enough dust (it's slightly darker than the pristine surface) to cover the rover track.

www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/AS16-107-17436HR.jpg

There are many other examples in other Apollo photos. I've had extended "discussions" with one person on another site who simply cannot grasp the idea that the astronauts movements disturbed quite a lot of dust - certainly enough to obscure or partially obscure rover tracks.

[grashtel]

countzero said:

grashtel said:

B) The dust kicked up by the astronauts walking around is covering the tracks, which aren't always terribly visible anyway, see AS15-88-11899 for a good example of this.

Wow! That's an excellent example. You can see the tracks coming in from the left, then the footprints and the darker, kicked-up dirt where the tracks would have been. Good find!

Thanks, I have to give credit to Jack White and cygnusx1 for pointing me towards it though Without cygnusx1 posting Jack's claims of the lack of visible tracks in AS15-88-11901being evidence of a Hoax I would have never looked at the rest of the pan

[Alliterative Andy]

Getting back to the first image. A quick search of the ALSJ Apollo 17 Image Library indicates that that picture (lo-res) is part of a panoramic set. The picture taken immediately before (looking to the left of this one) (lo-res)shows both the deployed LRV on the left and part of the opened MESA on the extreme right.