|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 7, 2010 8:13:48 GMT -4
Can an HB provide one plausible explanation for how to shoot hours upon hours of video footage in an Earth environment and make all the dust kicked up by astronauts, the rover, all the objects thrown, dropped, etc etc etc look like it was filmed in a 1/6 g vacuum environment on the moon? No they cannot. Their stupid film filmed at half speed argument looks ridiculous when speed up over the course of Apollo EVA footage. The truth is they like to cherry pick certain segments of footage without a lot of movement to show speed up. But if you look at the whole thing speedup up you realize theres not way you could have shot that at full speed then run it at half speed to create the moon footage. Check out the video below. It illustrates this perfectly. I especially love the footage form Apollo 16 and 17. Really shows the ridiculousness of it. The TV was getting real good by those missions. www.youtube.com/user/BlisterHiker#p/a/u/0/JBICR4PTLfc
|
|
|
Post by supermeerkat on Oct 7, 2010 12:35:49 GMT -4
They can't, so they relentlessly concentrate on tiny details which they then insist proves the falsity of the whole. Rodin is a good example of this - check out his recent threads.
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 7, 2010 13:35:58 GMT -4
"From the Earth to the Moon" is a pretty good miniseries shot on the Apollo program and uses modern filming techniques that they didn't have in the 70's and it doesn't look anything like real EVA footage. They had computer graphics and blue screens to create moonscapes.
They even did what HB's accuse NASA of they hung actors on wires from helium ballons to relieve the weight. Still doesn't look anything real.
Its simply laughable that anybody can think they had the movie tech now or even then to falsify hours upon hours of Apollo footage and have it all look real. Especially when you look at state of the art movie making in the late 1960's early 1970's. Does the spaceflight or the astronauts in 2001: A space Odyssy look anything like real?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Oct 8, 2010 11:17:58 GMT -4
Its simply laughable that anybody can think they had the movie tech now or even then to falsify hours upon hours of Apollo footage and have it all look real. Especially when you look at state of the art movie making in the late 1960's early 1970's. Does the spaceflight or the astronauts in 2001: A space Odyssy look anything like real? Not the stuff that supposedly takes place on the moon. Kubrick made no attempt to simulate lunar gravity.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Oct 9, 2010 9:10:17 GMT -4
Rodin seems to be unable to do this on the other thread. Keeps dodging the issue.
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Oct 10, 2010 18:31:21 GMT -4
Can an HB provide one plausible explanation for how to shoot hours upon hours of video footage in an Earth environment and make all the dust kicked up by astronauts, the rover, all the objects thrown, dropped, etc etc etc look like it was filmed in a 1/6 g vacuum environment on the moon? Firstly, welcome to the board. No they cannot. It's a very good question. I think this is the most deceitful part of the 'research' they put forward. They concentrate on the John Young jump salute. If they were to apply their various theories on how much the film was slowed down with any rigor or honesty, then there are segments of footage where the film would have to be slowed down to 41% speed to replicate lunar g. Yet at the same time, they quote a 67% playback speed. Of course, they run when this is pointed out to them.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 10, 2010 23:31:52 GMT -4
"From the Earth to the Moon" is a pretty good miniseries shot on the Apollo program and uses modern filming techniques that they didn't have in the 70's...I was privileged to work with some of the grips from this show. They indeed had advanced techniques, such as pushing their rover into place on its own wheels. And having the crew wear Apollo overshoes to avoid leaving "foreign" tracks on the set. Real rocket scientists, these guys.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Oct 11, 2010 3:52:38 GMT -4
It's almost like they knew what they were doing....
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Oct 11, 2010 9:15:47 GMT -4
That's because they were TV people and not NASA.
|
|
|
Post by ineluki on Oct 11, 2010 10:10:41 GMT -4
Real rocket scientists, these guys. Unlike those guys, who according to Fetzer worked for NASA, and preferred a crane to move the rover...
|
|
|
Post by Glom on Oct 24, 2010 14:54:56 GMT -4
"From the Earth to the Moon" is a pretty good miniseries shot on the Apollo program and uses modern filming techniques that they didn't have in the 70's and it doesn't look anything like real EVA footage. They had computer graphics and blue screens to create moonscapes. They even did what HB's accuse NASA of they hung actors on wires from helium ballons to relieve the weight. Still doesn't look anything real. Its simply laughable that anybody can think they had the movie tech now or even then to falsify hours upon hours of Apollo footage and have it all look real. Especially when you look at state of the art movie making in the late 1960's early 1970's. Does the spaceflight or the astronauts in 2001: A space Odyssy look anything like real? Those works were done deliberately badly in order to gave people a misleading impression of what fakery is possible.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Oct 24, 2010 23:30:50 GMT -4
You mean, Kubrick intentionally messed up the space scenes in 2001 in order to make his Apollo movies more believable? Why? Wouldn't the point of working for NASA be to get money and access to make the films he wanted to make, the way he wanted to make them?
I guess you can never go broke underestimating an audience, then. Because the hoax believers seem to think 2001 is more realistic.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Oct 25, 2010 5:09:14 GMT -4
There in lies another problem for the hb if this is a valid claim (HB valid claim that is with all the bits that go with it) and one that mimiks the USSR and the US and the USSR not spilling the beans because there are none to be spilled. People worked on the film, they would not have been recruited because they made nice tea. And they would have known how good they were and they would have had peers in the business looking on. You don't half hear some chatter behind the scenes (not worked on films myself but suspect camera persons for example are the same wherever... chatter natter so and so is useless... so and so is excellent...). So where are the people in the business supporting this I would ask?
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Oct 25, 2010 21:00:11 GMT -4
I have never heard of a professional in any kind of entertainment industry confirm any of the contentions that HBs make as to how the lunar special effects were supposedly done.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 25, 2010 23:08:56 GMT -4
That is because they know exactly as much about film making as they do rocket science. Nothing.
|
|