revisiting Apollo

Yoda wrote:
Tim Auton wrote:
[snip]
I presume you meant this documentary:

http://www.cbc.ca/passionateeyesunda...oon/about.html

"This is no ordinary documentary. Its intent is to inform and
entertain the viewer, but also to shake him up - make him aware that
one should always view television with a critical eye."

Did you watch the video? Probably not.

My friends are laughing there asses off at what you just said because
they know me very well cause they listen to me all the time, and they
know that I keep watch for propaganda more than any other person they
know. So please your American ignorance is showing through....perhaps
you should lay off the Disney movies for a while.

I'm English, live in England and despise Disney movies. Remarkably
enough living in the UK I don't get to watch the CBC. A search of a
few on-line video distributors didn't find the program on video for me
to purchase. So no, I haven't seen it. Are you suggesting the CBC
website has been hijacked, or that what they say there is a cunning
double-bluff?

I would like to see it though. It sounds most interesting. Unethical
as it is I'd be willing to download a high-quality digital recording
of it if you can point me to one (by email if you prefer).


Tim
--
My last .sig was rubbish too.

"vonroach" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 16:24:00 +0100, "Jaxtraw"
wrote:

You still haven't got my original point have you? It's not an issue for
science. It's an issue for history. That was my point.

Ian
All sciences have a history that is relevant, unless you prefer to
think that this or that scientist just got this idea one day.

Well, arguably Galileo... )

Sorry about the Kennedy brothers, I'm not a Kennedy fan. RFK was shot
by Sirhan in the kitchen of an LA hotel as he was leaving a primary
rally. Not in lobby. JFK was assassinated in his limo at Dealy Plaza
in Dallas by, a gunman in Texas Schoolbook Depository Bldg, Lee Harvey
Oswald an activist who supported communist causes such as handing out
pro-Castro leaflets on streets in New Orleans. He immigrated to Russia
after leaving marine corp, got married, returned to US. Opinion: a
chronic ne'er do well like Ted Kennedy. To complete a historical
trilogy, M.L. King was assassinated on the balcony outside his second
story room at a Memphis motel.

JFK, RFK, MLK... the 60s were a rough time for people with 3 initials ending
with "K".

As to ne'er do wells, it seems all the Kennedy brothers sailed a bit close
to the wind morally. It scares the pants off me that we now know that JFK
was taking large doses of amphetamines during the Cuban Missile Crisis. )

Anyhoo, trying to stay vaguely on-topic-ish, (at least to the thread, if not
to the group) I'd just like to add that one thing seems to unite the
purveyors of anti-science krankery (and could arguably serve as a reliable
indicator of such); to whit, they never have any evidence *for* their
"theory", or indeed a theory as such. Instead they offer criticism of the
evidence in favour of the prevailing one. E.g. holocaust deniers nitpick the
overwelming evidence for the nazi genocide, moon hoaxers nitpick the
evidence for the moon landings, Creationists nitpick the evidence for
evolution; but they can never offer evidence *for* their alternative
"hypotheses". Worse, they don't even seem to think they have to

Ian

Ian

"vonroach" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 16:24:00 +0100, "Jaxtraw"
wrote:

You still haven't got my original point have you? It's not an issue for
science. It's an issue for history. That was my point.

Ian
All sciences have a history that is relevant, unless you prefer to
think that this or that scientist just got this idea one day.

Well, arguably Galileo... )

Sorry about the Kennedy brothers, I'm not a Kennedy fan. RFK was shot
by Sirhan in the kitchen of an LA hotel as he was leaving a primary
rally. Not in lobby. JFK was assassinated in his limo at Dealy Plaza
in Dallas by, a gunman in Texas Schoolbook Depository Bldg, Lee Harvey
Oswald an activist who supported communist causes such as handing out
pro-Castro leaflets on streets in New Orleans. He immigrated to Russia
after leaving marine corp, got married, returned to US. Opinion: a
chronic ne'er do well like Ted Kennedy. To complete a historical
trilogy, M.L. King was assassinated on the balcony outside his second
story room at a Memphis motel.

JFK, RFK, MLK... the 60s were a rough time for people with 3 initials ending
with "K".

As to ne'er do wells, it seems all the Kennedy brothers sailed a bit close
to the wind morally. It scares the pants off me that we now know that JFK
was taking large doses of amphetamines during the Cuban Missile Crisis. )

Anyhoo, trying to stay vaguely on-topic-ish, (at least to the thread, if not
to the group) I'd just like to add that one thing seems to unite the
purveyors of anti-science krankery (and could arguably serve as a reliable
indicator of such); to whit, they never have any evidence *for* their
"theory", or indeed a theory as such. Instead they offer criticism of the
evidence in favour of the prevailing one. E.g. holocaust deniers nitpick the
overwelming evidence for the nazi genocide, moon hoaxers nitpick the
evidence for the moon landings, Creationists nitpick the evidence for
evolution; but they can never offer evidence *for* their alternative
"hypotheses". Worse, they don't even seem to think they have to

Ian

Ian

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 21:26:55 GMT, Yoda
wrote:


Sigh....NASA releases videos promoting new satellite technology and even
their technicians and artists place stars in the background. I can take
any camera and place it on a tripod and take pictures of stars. Your
telling me NASA sent a camera to the moon, and put it on a tripod and it
couldnt take a picture of stars? Give me a break, we aren't all as
dumbass about photography as you seem to be.


Read this, dumbass:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#stars





--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: TuriFake(at)hotmail.com

"Did the Venus transit occur during sunset, idiot?"
- Grant,on the GLP web board, explains to us how
sunrise happens in NY and Asia at the same time.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 21:26:55 GMT, Yoda
wrote:


Sigh....NASA releases videos promoting new satellite technology and even
their technicians and artists place stars in the background. I can take
any camera and place it on a tripod and take pictures of stars. Your
telling me NASA sent a camera to the moon, and put it on a tripod and it
couldnt take a picture of stars? Give me a break, we aren't all as
dumbass about photography as you seem to be.


Read this, dumbass:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#stars





--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: TuriFake(at)hotmail.com

"Did the Venus transit occur during sunset, idiot?"
- Grant,on the GLP web board, explains to us how
sunrise happens in NY and Asia at the same time.

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:


"Yoda" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...


The `scientific proof of the first moon walk' is one that all can
share in the very detailed records and televised pictures that
remain.
It was a fact, just as Pearl Harbor was a fact regardless of the spin
put on the facts.




The US government openly admitted recently

snip bilge

So to summarise, your belief is that NASA spent billions of dollars

hoaxing

a moon landing,

Can you read English? I said the videos shown on TV were hoaxed. Get
your story strait.


Well, I'm trying to get yours strait (sic) to be honest. Are you saying
that
they actually went to the moon, but showed fake videos?

Yes. That is all the documentary said. That the immediate televised
landing was hoaxed. It ddidn't say the landing itself was hoaxed and
indeed you would have to be pretty out to lunch to believe that.

Why bother hoaxing something that really happened? I'm perplexed.


but were so inept that they got all the basic science wrong,

and that you can prove this because things look different in hollywood
special effects?

Sigh....NASA releases videos promoting new satellite technology and even
their technicians and artists place stars in the background.


Yes, because these are *simulations* and they want them to look nice,
and
people expect stars in space.

Duh....but you forget that NASA also likes to maintain accuracy or as
realistic as possible. That is the markings of a good artist that works
for the space industry no doubt.

The markings of a good artist is their use of aesthetics and license.
Creating a simulation of a scene does not obligate the artist to simulate
particular characteristics of real imaging devices. Even if you work for
NASA.

Besides you missed my point, many images from JPL and NASA show stars in
the background. My point was they missed blackening them out like they
normally do.

But why? You're saying that they deliberately didn't include stars in the
"hoaxed" footage; which shows it to be a hoax because there are no stars to
be seen. Please explain why they would deliberately make it look incorrect,
so that people such as yourself could see the deliberate flaw later on. This
makes no sense at all.


I can take
any camera and place it on a tripod and take pictures of stars. Your
telling me NASA sent a camera to the moon, and put it on a tripod and it
couldnt take a picture of stars? Give me a break, we aren't all as
dumbass about photography as you seem to be.



Yes, but can you do that in broad daylight? Can you take pictures of the
stars if the landscape around you is floodlit to daylight levels?

Would you give me a break? You're telling me that the ISS or moon
missions were never out of the daylight? You are even kookier than I
thought possible.

Exactly. I don't believe any of the moon missions took place during the
lunar night. The place was bathed in sunlight. They would have been
stumbling around in the dark otherwise. As much light hits the moon as the
earth, you know.


Do you know what "dynamic range" is?

Depends on your optics no doubt.

No, it depends on your emulsion, or your CCD.

Ian

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:


"Yoda" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...


The `scientific proof of the first moon walk' is one that all can
share in the very detailed records and televised pictures that
remain.
It was a fact, just as Pearl Harbor was a fact regardless of the spin
put on the facts.




The US government openly admitted recently

snip bilge

So to summarise, your belief is that NASA spent billions of dollars

hoaxing

a moon landing,

Can you read English? I said the videos shown on TV were hoaxed. Get
your story strait.


Well, I'm trying to get yours strait (sic) to be honest. Are you saying
that
they actually went to the moon, but showed fake videos?

Yes. That is all the documentary said. That the immediate televised
landing was hoaxed. It ddidn't say the landing itself was hoaxed and
indeed you would have to be pretty out to lunch to believe that.

Why bother hoaxing something that really happened? I'm perplexed.


but were so inept that they got all the basic science wrong,

and that you can prove this because things look different in hollywood
special effects?

Sigh....NASA releases videos promoting new satellite technology and even
their technicians and artists place stars in the background.


Yes, because these are *simulations* and they want them to look nice,
and
people expect stars in space.

Duh....but you forget that NASA also likes to maintain accuracy or as
realistic as possible. That is the markings of a good artist that works
for the space industry no doubt.

The markings of a good artist is their use of aesthetics and license.
Creating a simulation of a scene does not obligate the artist to simulate
particular characteristics of real imaging devices. Even if you work for
NASA.

Besides you missed my point, many images from JPL and NASA show stars in
the background. My point was they missed blackening them out like they
normally do.

But why? You're saying that they deliberately didn't include stars in the
"hoaxed" footage; which shows it to be a hoax because there are no stars to
be seen. Please explain why they would deliberately make it look incorrect,
so that people such as yourself could see the deliberate flaw later on. This
makes no sense at all.


I can take
any camera and place it on a tripod and take pictures of stars. Your
telling me NASA sent a camera to the moon, and put it on a tripod and it
couldnt take a picture of stars? Give me a break, we aren't all as
dumbass about photography as you seem to be.



Yes, but can you do that in broad daylight? Can you take pictures of the
stars if the landscape around you is floodlit to daylight levels?

Would you give me a break? You're telling me that the ISS or moon
missions were never out of the daylight? You are even kookier than I
thought possible.

Exactly. I don't believe any of the moon missions took place during the
lunar night. The place was bathed in sunlight. They would have been
stumbling around in the dark otherwise. As much light hits the moon as the
earth, you know.


Do you know what "dynamic range" is?

Depends on your optics no doubt.

No, it depends on your emulsion, or your CCD.

Ian

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 23:43:01 GMT, Yoda
wrote:

Did you watch the video? Probably not.


My friends are laughing there asses off at what you just said because
they know me very well cause they listen to me all the time, and they
know that I keep watch for propaganda more than any other person they
know. So please your American ignorance is showing through....perhaps
you should lay off the Disney movies for a while.


Ah, comes now the kook's need to invoke allies, almost always
imaginary.






--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: TuriFake(at)hotmail.com

"Did the Venus transit occur during sunset, idiot?"
- Grant,on the GLP web board, explains to us how
sunrise happens in NY and Asia at the same time.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 23:43:01 GMT, Yoda
wrote:

Did you watch the video? Probably not.


My friends are laughing there asses off at what you just said because
they know me very well cause they listen to me all the time, and they
know that I keep watch for propaganda more than any other person they
know. So please your American ignorance is showing through....perhaps
you should lay off the Disney movies for a while.


Ah, comes now the kook's need to invoke allies, almost always
imaginary.






--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: TuriFake(at)hotmail.com

"Did the Venus transit occur during sunset, idiot?"
- Grant,on the GLP web board, explains to us how
sunrise happens in NY and Asia at the same time.

"Yoda" wrote in message
et.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Paul Lawler wrote:


"Yoda" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...


Don't any of you guys think for yourselves or are you all sycophants?


Sycophants to WHOM, pray tell?

To what you consider to be the big arse you must kiss so that you can be
admited into the big arse club of the neo-scientific stone age cavemen.



The US government openly admitted recently that the moon pictures
were
hoaxed on the direct order of President Nixon. And to top it all
off,
Stanley Kubrick is the man responsible for the moon landing hoaxed
pictures. In fact nothing was televised from the moon missions to
any
home in the entire world. What people watched was made in a studio.

I'm sorry... please point me to the government documents and/or

offiicials


who "openly admitted" the moon pictures were hoaxed. Names please,
not
"unnamed" or "highly placed" sources.

Againn go to the CBC and ask them. Is that so hard?



I daresay none of us have a copy of this documentary to hand, so could
you
just be a good chap and tell us what you think it said?

By the by, I'm pretty certain that if the US govt. had officially
admitted
to faking the Apollo programme,

When did I say the Apollo programme itself was hoaxed? Please quote me
on that please do.


it would have been front page news in every
country in the world, so even here in Ukay I'm surprised I missed it.

Ian



Again for those who need it spelled out for them.....take an H, take an
A, take an O, take an X, put them together,....what does that spell?

Um, HAOX?

Hoax right? Now take a V, take an I, take a D, take an E, and take an
O, and put them together ok? What does that spell? Video...right. Now
take a P, take an I, take a C, take a T, take an I, take an R, take an
E, take an S, and put that together...what does that spell?

PICTIRES? Gee. this is fun.

Pictures..right....now we are getting somewhere. Do you understand yet,
or do you still need it spelled out for you?


Well, I got HAOX VIDEO PICTIRES. In which of these HAOX VIDEO PICTIRES does
the government of the USA make an official announcement that NASA faked the
moon shots, or parts thereof?

Ian

--
____________________
A quality online comic strip for the discerning reader.
With shagging in it.

http://www.jaxtrawstudios.com