I wasn't suggesting everyone SHOULD look, because I demanded it. I innocently meant, at least some had a look. Not everyone is an expert in everything. I certainly know nothing about image compression.
That's why I joined this site. While I loathe giving Jarrah any attention, it's always great when someone here can get to the bottom of his claims in 30 seconds, and explain to a numptee like me why he wrong.
The guy is spreading misinformation, either out of stupidity, arrogance, to prop up his low self esteem, or financial gain. For me, this board is about getting to bottom of his claims.
Whether it Jarrah or someone else, Apollo Hoax has helped me enormously understand where I have knowledge gaps.
If Jay does not want to spend time debunking Jarrah, I can understand. But it's great others took the time out to take a peek, and I offer them thanks.
That's all I meant by my statement.
Thank God for men like Armstrong. In times of war they defended our freedom and liberty. In times of peace they expanded our knowledge.
I haven't yet addressed the most recent photography. Since Clavius' primary mission is to answer conspiracy theory claims, I'm waiting until the hoax proponents' arguments have evolved sufficiently. But yes, the emerging proposal is that the photos are simply created in Photoshop.
That basically is Jarrah's claim, but it doesn't hold water for several reasons.
First, because the LRO images can be deconvolved and enhanced. Even superb Photoshop work would stand out like a sore thumb when performing image deconvolution. Why? Because every single LRO image has its own unique noise pattern introduced by a variety of electronic sources aboard the spacecraft, and introduced by the extremely fast readout of the CCD itself. This makes it virtually impossible to paste in Photoshop work without altering the noise pattern in the areas of the raw image where such work was pasted in, let alone even predicting in advance the noise pattern in a particular area of any LRO image. FFT analysis of the noise patterns in every LRO image, even images shot back to back, is at the very least subtly unique and is like a fingerprint.
Second, the LRO team would notice the long and mysterious delays in their data stream straight from the LRO via GSFC's White Sands tracking station and then to ASU whenever the LRO was transmitting any images of the Apollo landing sites to Earth.
Third, the LRO images would have to be edited after they were downloaded from the LRO since no prior high res photos exist which duplicate the LRO's look-down angles, resolution, and the particular solar elevation and azimuth relative to the lunar horizon for the target strip of interest. With regards to LRO look-down angles, all Apollo landing site photos are "targets of opportunity," meaning that the LRO frequently is not looking straight down at the landing sites and that the LRO instead is nodded in order to acquire and image the landing sites during orbital passes.
With regard to the points in the above paragraph, it would be virtually impossible to pre-fake LRO photos of the landing sites with sufficient accuracy since this would require extremely accurate digital terrain models of the landing sites which are spatially accurate to the LRO's one half meter resolution in all respects. Such accurate digital terrain models do not exist since one of the LRO's mission objectives is to determine the precise shape of the moon.