Who shot Neil Armstrong ?

[jockndor]

Who shot Neil Armstrong ?

Many people seem prepared to believe anything NASA tells themus now or then. So please lets ask them to tell us who held the camera to take the first supposed TV shots on the Moon. It couldn’t be Buzz Aldrin because he was still in the capsule. If it wasn’t CNN then it had to be SKY.
.
But if you think about it you will realise it wasn’t possible for many many reasons. TV technology was in its infancy and we couldn’t transmit pictures any distance let alone from 243000 miles across space. There was several minutes delay in communications which is now completely ignored.
.
The simple answer is that the pictures were taken on Lot 171 in the Nevada Desert in a film studio set up by NASA to film the Moon landings. Much safer to film the astronauts there and more certain of success because their President had said that failure was not an option.
.
Now of course we have the last straw with NASA announcing that they have lost the original footage of the film and so have had to issue digitally enhanced copies which will show more clearly what happened. Pull the other leg it has got bells on. They are just destroying the proof of the greatest military hoax of all time.

[hplasm]

There is so much wrong with this- I wouldn't be surprised if this was the only reply.
Obvious troll is obvious.

[LunarOrbit]

Jul 18, 2009 15:29:47 GMT -4 jockndor said:

So please lets ask them to tell us who held the camera to take the first supposed TV shots on the Moon.

I love when an HB comes into the forum all cocky like they think they know something that will stump us.

The camera was mounted to the side of the Lunar Module and operated remotely. Pretty simple to do, even way back in 1969.

TV technology was in its infancy and we couldn’t transmit pictures any distance let alone from 243000 miles across space.

Why not? Any radio transmission of suitable power will travel endlessly through space forever and ever. Even with 1960s technology.

There was several minutes delay in communications which is now completely ignored.

Actually the delay was only a couple of seconds, not several minutes. And what do you mean it's ignored?

The simple answer is that the pictures were taken on Lot 171 in the Nevada Desert in a film studio set up by NASA to film the Moon landings.

Nice theory. Prove it.

Much safer to film the astronauts there

Not really. Lot 171 was a death trap, full of hazards. The ceiling was falling in, the water supply was radioactive from all the A-bombs dropped in the area, and several aliens had escaped from Area 51 and were on a killing spree during the summer of '69. So really, the Moon was the much safer option.

See... if you can make stuff up so can I.

and more certain of success because their President had said that failure was not an option.

No, Ed Harris said that.

A faked moon mission would be guarantied to fail. The only way three people can keep a secret is if two of them are dead. There were thousands of people involved with Apollo, and yet not one of them has spilled the beans.

Now of course we have the last straw with NASA announcing that they have lost the original footage of the film and so have had to issue digitally enhanced copies which will show more clearly what happened. Pull the other leg it has got bells on. They are just destroying the proof of the greatest military hoax of all time.

If they were destroying proof why would they even bother telling us the tapes were missing? Seriously, this conspiracy theory is pretty stupid.

[LunarOrbit]

Jul 18, 2009 15:44:07 GMT -4 hplasm said:

I wouldn't be surprised if this was the only reply.

Oops. I spoiled your prediction.

Obvious troll is obvious.

I have to wonder what motivates trolls. It's one thing if they actually believe what they're saying, but why would anyone come here and pretend to believe something like this? Isn't it far more embarrassing for them than it is for us?

I would never pretend to be a flat earther for example. Sure it might aggravate people but it would make me look stupid. Why would I want that?

[macapple]

Jockndor this subject has been expained many times on how TV pictures can be transmitted from the moon, the time delay, and how the first TV pictures were taken.

Theres a great web site here that explains how it all worked.

www.hawestv.com/moon_cam/moonctel.htm

This web site explains how the TV signals were sent from the moon to the earth and how they were transmitted around the earth

www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news_events/apollo11/tv_from_moon.html

There is a great little documentary here as well, enjoy.

www.livefromthemoon.tv/



The camera was attached upside down to the Modular Equipment Storage Assembly (MESA) on the LM. The MESA is deployed by a handle on the egress platform by the Astronaut when leaving the LM. See here www.myspacemuseum.com/g-mesa1.gif


Picture of the Camera attached to the MESA mock up.

www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/ap11-S69-31585.jpg

and here is a detailed picture of the camera in the MESA

www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/ap11-S69-31581.jpg

This shows the camera stowed upside down

www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/ap11-S69-31575.jpg

There was a c*ck up in the early transmission as you can clearly see the image is upside down and then is corrected by a technician as the camera was stored upside down.

The camera was later detached and set up on a tripod which can be seen in the image above.

There is a wealth of information on how this was all done here:-

www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-TVDocs.html

On the issue of filming on a backlot somewhere.

Well to put it into perspective.

If i take a small example .

Ok lets take a film - You only Live twice 1967 Duration of the film 117min (I dont know the exact length of TV and film from Apollo 11 but i would guess about 1.5 hours at least)

Principle Photography took 9 months with about 3 months post production.

Number of blatent c*ck ups and continuity errors. - 89 mistakes source www.moviemistakes.com/film1432.

Assuming this was all prerecorded (safest way i would guess) *cough*
Now to take it a step further, there were 9 missions which whizzed around the room. Now if there was say at least 1.5 hour of TV and film footage for each mission and the quality is just ok that would still be around 2-3 years production at least. Now this is where it all falls down, to fake this they would have needed the stars of the show, the astronauts who were actually back to back in training missions at the time and would have been missed.
Ok it was done live i here you say... well to do a multi set real time show for at least 1.5 hours of transmission spread over 7-8 days with an almost perfect record is extremely hard. Think complex lines, motion, sets and communication which all has to be synched with the real time ground control and not one serious problem..Oh come on..

Anyway its all immaterial as they photographed the landing sites now and guess what ....there are footprints and vehicle tracks from the apollo missions on the moon..

Which means that........

the insecure, discontented people who crave to find a conspiracy theory under each stone will have to move on and find something else to externalize and blame for their own personal problems and social alienation.

[dwight]

Failing all that you can get the only book to completelydescribe the camera development from 1961 thru 1972. Due out at the end of the year.

[Ian Pearse]

Jul 18, 2009 15:29:47 GMT -4 jockndor said:

So please lets ask them to tell us who held the camera to take the first supposed TV shots on the Moon. It couldn’t be Buzz Aldrin because he was still in the capsule. If it wasn’t CNN then it had to be SKY.

Why did you find it so hard to stop for a few moments and think about this? Why do you find the idea of an external camera so difficult to imagine? They had external cameras fitted to aircraft in WW2 to record gunshots... it's only a very short step to imagining something being put on the outside of the LM that could be activated by Neil as he exited... as was indeed the case (see references posted above). Is it really that difficult to imagine?

[Bob B.]

Jul 18, 2009 15:29:47 GMT -4 jockndor said:

Who shot Neil Armstrong ?

OMG, I hadn't heard this breaking news! Is he going to be okay? Have they caught the shooter? The triggerman must have been a conspiracy wacko seeking some depraved form of retribution.

Oh... wait a minute... you mean like in shooting a picture? ... Never mind.

[dragonblaster]

I t always makes me laugh when HBs come out with this gnarled, shrivelled old chestnut or:

• No stars in photos
  
• Ballooning spacesuits
  
• Lethal Van Allen belts
  
• Disappearing reseau marks
  
• Flapping American flag
  
• Non-parallel shadows
  
• Multiple light sources on the moon
  

they trot it out with a little fanfare as if we're meant to believe that they just thought of it after years of diligent research. Instead, they've just done a hit-and-run on a hoaxie site and splatted it on another blog like this, as if it's meant to impress us.

[JayUtah]

Jul 18, 2009 15:29:47 GMT -4 jockndor said:

...

So please lets ask them to tell us who held the camera to take the first supposed TV shots on the Moon.

You gotta love people whose initial premise is that all cameras must have someone attentively operating them.

TV technology was in its infancy and we couldn’t transmit pictures any distance let alone from 243000 miles across space.

Yet qualified TV engineers don't seem to have a problem with Apollo.

...because their President had said that failure was not an option.

Yet another person who has never cracked a history book. Kennedy was initially against landing on the Moon. It was really Johnson's idea, and Kennedy made Johnson cover all the details with NASA prior to agreeing to sponsor it as a national initiative. Conspiracy theorists still have this entirely incorrect notion that Kennedy came up with this idea and NASA was caught like a deer in the headlights. NASA had to prove to Johnson and then to Kennedy that they could do it before those politicians stuck their necks out.

[Czero 101]

Jul 18, 2009 17:59:49 GMT -4 Bob B. said:

OMG, I hadn't heard this breaking news! Is he going to be okay? Have they caught the shooter? The triggerman must have been a conspiracy wacko seeking some depraved form of retribution.

We haven't heard much of anything from Sibrel lately, have we...?




Cz

[macapple]

Jul 18, 2009 18:00:44 GMT -4 dragonblaster said:

I t always makes me laugh when HBs come out with this gnarled, shrivelled old chestnut or:

• No stars in photos
  
• Ballooning spacesuits
  
• Lethal Van Allen belts
  
• Disappearing reseau marks
  
• Flapping American flag
  
• Non-parallel shadows
  
• Multiple light sources on the moon
  

they trot it out with a little fanfare as if we're meant to believe that they just thought of it after years of diligent research. Instead, they've just done a hit-and-run on a hoaxie site and splatted it on another blog like this, as if it's meant to impress us.

thats 7 problems in hours of footage, photos and communications. Yet the last Harry potter film had over 200 in it.. Or maybe thats a conspiracy. Hang on.... maybe the hoaxers are apollo fans who really want to keep alive the event by creating conspiracies to show it didnt happen, whilst really knowing it did.

i need a coffee...

[BertL]

The Harry Potter movies are obviously staged. You cannot scream "EXPELLIARMUS" in a vacuum; that's just silly.

[hplasm]

Jul 18, 2009 15:56:42 GMT -4 LunarOrbit said:

Jul 18, 2009 15:44:07 GMT -4 hplasm said:

I wouldn't be surprised if this was the only reply.

Oops. I spoiled your prediction.

Obvious troll is obvious.

I have to wonder what motivates trolls. It's one thing if they actually believe what they're saying, but why would anyone come here and pretend to believe something like this? Isn't it far more embarrassing for them than it is for us?

I would never pretend to be a flat earther for example. Sure it might aggravate people but it would make me look stupid. Why would I want that?

Wow. If only I could be so right ;D
I guess it's cold and lonely under those bridges... enough to make you wish for the kiss of the clue-by-4

In space, no-one can hear you rant.

[drewid]

Jul 18, 2009 18:00:44 GMT -4 dragonblaster said:

I t always makes me laugh when HBs come out with this gnarled, shrivelled old chestnut or:

• No stars in photos
  
• Ballooning spacesuits
  
• Lethal Van Allen belts
  
• Disappearing reseau marks
  
• Flapping American flag
  
• Non-parallel shadows
  
• Multiple light sources on the moon
  

they trot it out with a little fanfare as if we're meant to believe that they just thought of it after years of diligent research. Instead, they've just done a hit-and-run on a hoaxie site and splatted it on another blog like this, as if it's meant to impress us.

I thought the lethal 'Van Halen' belt was better.