|
Post by lionking on Jul 22, 2009 14:09:05 GMT -4
www.aulis.com/jackstudies_0.htmlPlease comment on the first andlast image on the site above. now before your doubtful devil drive you to thinking that I am trying to contradict Apollo, I have said earlier that I believe 99% the moon landings happened. the first one is about the flag being deployed before time as Jack says. the second is about the reflection of the astronaut not showing what is called PLSS.. Regards
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Jul 22, 2009 14:26:52 GMT -4
The window is at the wrong angle to reflect the flag, it is more likely some detail of the LM itself that is reflected - gold and black foil, perhaps. There is certainly no sign of the blue quarter of the flag. One of the supports for the RCS deflector is certainly there in the reflection. Edit to add: the area centre-right in this photo is probably what is being reflected, can you see how it resembles his "flag": www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-44-6566HR.jpgThe "no PLSS" has been analysed in detail on another forum (UM? Education?) and shown to be a reasonable representation of the astronaut with the PLSS, given the angle he is standing at and the limitations of the visor as a reflector. Edit to add: here we are: www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=113834&st=6225
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jul 22, 2009 14:28:35 GMT -4
Just in general, het tends to enlarge and manipulate the images in his "studies" to the point that it introduces inaccurate data. The "astronaut" in the reflection isn't even pointing towards Cernan...I think it's just been enlarged beyond it's reasonable limit, and we know Jack loves PhotoShop.
He's looking for "evidence" and will fiddle with the pictures till he finds, or accidently creates, something.
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Jul 22, 2009 14:40:35 GMT -4
I wouldn't trust anything from Jack White's hand. He knows nothing about how light or photos work.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jul 22, 2009 14:42:07 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by lionking on Jul 22, 2009 14:59:07 GMT -4
thanks guys. it is o.k. for the plss, but hte flag it is not clear if it is a flag or not.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 22, 2009 15:13:40 GMT -4
thanks guys. it is o.k. for the plss, but hte flag it is not clear if it is a flag or not. The reflection may have the general shape of a flag, but it's not the flag. The flag was deployed on the other side of the LM and couldn't be reflected in the CDR-side widow. If the flag were to be reflected in a window, it would be the LMP-side window.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jul 22, 2009 15:30:21 GMT -4
The ALSJ description for AS11-40-5862 says in part, "Journal Contributor Markus Mehring notes that, thru the CDR's window, we can see 'the crash bar, and a checklist/cue card that's been stuck under the overhead window with grey tape! -The same card can be seen right behind Neil in the post-EVA portrait, AS11-37-5528.'" Could White have mistaken a card for the flag?
|
|
|
Post by Czero 101 on Jul 22, 2009 15:43:10 GMT -4
Asking if Jack White can be mistaken about anything is like asking if diving into a pool will get you wet.
Cz
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jul 22, 2009 16:01:08 GMT -4
...and the "flagpole" appears to be the vertical horizon scale marker etched into the window.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Jul 22, 2009 16:18:09 GMT -4
Written before seeing posts 7-9. Just an educated guess, but not a bad one, and better than Jack White's. I also noticed what looked like the bar in Aldrin's window, but didn't know if it was the same thing. ...it is not clear if it is a flag or not. I agree. Jack says it's a flag but I certainly can't. Yes, at a quick glance it looks similar to an Apollo flag and pole, but "looks like" is not a synonym for "is." All I really see is a line that is a few degrees off vertical and a rough, four-sided figure that appears near the top of the line, on both sides of it, and beyond it, unlike an Apollo flag on a pole. None of the other marks on the figure are clearly the stars and stripes of the US flag. First off, remember that we are looking at mutiple panes of different types of glass with various coatings, in a vehicle we are personally unfamiliar with and which is situated in an alien environment. Those panes and coatings are capable of producing different colours and reflections. The near-vertical line is visible in a few of the photos following that one, and appears light-coloured, but I think it's the scale on the window, which Armstrong used when landing the LM. Notice the dots to our left of the line. I can't recall the scale's name and unfortunately can't quickly find links to appropriate photos, but perhaps someone who has broadband could. The scale is black when viewed from inside the LM, but if it looks lighter from the outside I'm not at all surprised. There could be many reasons for that such as adhesives on the back, or perhaps even something reflective to prevent sunlight affecting it. The four-sided shape isn't visible in subsequent photos, so could be anything. Many parts of the ceiling and wall in that area are white. There is some definite black around the shape -- maybe something is forming the black and we are looking beyond it to the white ceiling or back wall. Is it a piece of paper? A checklist hanging from the ceiling ready for use when the astronauts return, but up out of the way so they can't knock it and lose it when struggling in the cramped space to stow the samples and get out of their spacesuits? Once when puzzling over a strange light in the LM, which was in lunar orbit, a few of us eventually worked out that because of the flat lighting on the lunar surface outside, the sun was obviously high above the LM and the "light" was a small chink of sunlight coming through the rendezvous window above the Commander's position. And as for Jack White's "obscure figure standing behind the flag," who says it's a figure of any kind? Only Jack. It's just a blob of colour, enlarged and "enhanced," nothing more. If he can propose that, I can propose with equal validity that it is one of Queen Victoria's dresses on a clothes dummy, and naughty little Prince Albert is hiding underneath it. He's probably giggling too.
|
|
|
Post by gonehollywood on Jul 23, 2009 6:00:29 GMT -4
Asking if Jack White can be mistaken about anything is like asking if diving into a pool will get you wet. Cz Depends on what's in the pool. Filled with sand?
|
|
Ian Pearse
Mars
Apollo (and space) enthusiast
Posts: 308
|
Post by Ian Pearse on Jul 23, 2009 7:27:55 GMT -4
Asking if Jack White can be mistaken about anything is like asking if diving into a pool will get you wet. Cz Depends on what's in the pool. Filled with sand? Well-washed and sifted sand, of course...
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Jul 23, 2009 13:07:34 GMT -4
LionkingThis photo shows the scale on the window that we're talking about: web.mit.edu/digitalapollo/DigitalApolloCover.jpgI'm not sure how it works, but it tells the Commander, Armstrong, where the computer is trying to land the lunar module. It looks as if it might have similar parts on each of two window panes, and to make it work properly he moves his viewpoint to line up the parts. The dots I mentioned in the view from outside would be the numbers on the right. And this photo: www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-37-5528.jpgshows a circuit-breaker chart taped to the wall with gray tape, below the rendezvous window in the cabin roof. That's most likely what we're seeing, that makes a shape roughly like a flag. Keep in mind that the angle of view here is entirely different to one through the window from the ground. As usual, Jack White doesn't know what he is talking about. Well-washed and sifted sand, of course... Probably best to explain that. Few of our new members would understand why you said it.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jul 23, 2009 13:49:39 GMT -4
Mr White simply has a "conclusion", and is determined to "find" evidence that seems to support it, even if it requires enormous amounts of Photoshop manipulation. Somethimes the real answer is not nearly as exciting. It's unfortunate that the engineering and execution of the lunar landings are not exciting enough for him.
His lack of understanding of perspective in photograpy is exasperating. If he lived on the plains near the mountains, he would quickly understand how shifting your position by 10 feet or a mile can greatly change objects in the foreground, while leaving the appearance of the mountains 15 miles away virtually unchanged.
If he's a photoanalyst, then so am I...and I'm not.
Nice pics, Kiwi!
|
|