LOVE THIS MOON PHOTO BECAUSE ...

SORRY FORGOT THE LINK...


[link to www.lpi.usra.edu]

Yes, yes I agree. To bad the Hasselblad camera measuring points do not match up. Although a very good job of cropping.

broken link...

nice

AND IN THIS MOST WONDERFUL SHOT TAKEN ON THE MOON

The Sun has come down
He has focussed on himself
So the sky around is pitch black,
And the Sun's brightness also is very concentrated...

Excellent photograph of the Sun.....
PLEASE DONT MISS THIS ONE...
[link to www.lpi.usra.edu]

The camera never lies!

DID YOU OBSERVE?

1. THE SHADOW OF THE PHOTOGRAPHER FALLS TO HIS FRONT

2. THE SHADOW OF THE SPACECRAFT TO THE LEFT

3. THE SUN IS FACING BOTH...

Shhhh!!

Shhhh!! :skillet:


INDEED! THANKS...

this photo is ok this is what i see

get the frame set where man on the right and the tripode is on the left, now look at their shadows mans is directly in front of him. tripode is 45 degres the other way. you see beauty i see

Can you find this photo on NASA's own web site? If so, it's an amazing "smoking gun." The astronaut's visor clearly reflects the photographer, who is not an astronaut at all but wearing ordinary street clothes and sneakers, with one foot on a rock. Next to the photographer is what looks like a snowman but what is probably an empty spacesuit.

Here are the two original NASA photos:

[link to www.hq.nasa.gov]

[link to www.hq.nasa.gov]

Each one has the photographer in street clothes (reflected in the astronaut's visor), but the second has the "snowman" (probably an empty spacesuit).

Last Edited by Skeptic the First on 12/16/2012 11:50 AM

Thats his shadow being reflected...

Unless the pictures are photoshopped!But then the truth may be found upon examination of the fake photo.
A faked photo can deceive many.

The "photographer in street clothes" reflected in the visor...is a reflection of the astronaut pictured's own shadow. The dome visors reflect light along their curve. you can see the outstretched right arm of the astronaut as well.

First picture is not so questionable because if you really look at it you will see it is the shadow of the astronaut pictured. Now the second photo of the lander and the sun...looks a little shooped but id love to see some sauce.

I HAVE TILL NOW POSTED LINKS TO TWO PHOTOS...

THERE WERE COMMENTS....

NOW, OBSERVE THIS PHOTOGRAPH..

You can see two astronauts here.

A third one is taking pictures--evidently!

NOW SEE THE face mask of the astronaut, there are the same reflections like in those other two photos.


[link to www.lpi.usra.edu]

how?

ANYBODY WHO LIVES IN HOT COUNTRIES WOULD LOVE THIS SUN....


He's cool, he doesn't brighten up the sky around him, and his rays are limited to a circle...

[link to www.lpi.usra.edu]

As John Lear has pointed out the sun would never look like that unless there was an atmosphere on the moon. The only way that it would make those colors are through a prism effect (i.e. shining through an atmosphere), but since NASA has told us there is no atmosphere on the moon then the sun would be in a vacuum of space and show as only a bright dot.

IT ISN'T JUST THE ATMOSPHERE, BUT THE DARKNESS THAT SURROUNDS THE SUN.

how can it be possible? you dont see your sky dark during midday...

It is a panorama photo made up of multiple pictures stitched together.

Same answer. It is stitched together from multiple photos. The site even TELLS YOU it is a panorama

Again, it is a panorama which is made by stitching together multiple photos. You really thought a single picture was that wide?

Except for the dust on the lens, the reflections inside the camera, and the blooming/overexposure on the film.

You do realize the Moon is in a vacuum right?

where is the crater under the lander.

the rocket exhaust should have left a crater under it NO?

also no moon dust covering the nice clean aluminum covered landing pods.hum????????????

there shouldn't be one. The rocket was throtlled down for landing and the overal pressure of the exhaust was close to 1 PSI. Also, they usually cut off the engine a few feet above the ground. There is however some scouring of the surface dust and that is visible in photographs.


no.



Why should there be? First, it isn't true that there is no dust. There is some and that can be seen in some photos. There isn't much though because the rocket and dust were in a vacuum. And dust kicked up wasn't suspended in the air like it would be on Earth. It doesn't hang around like we see when dust clouds up here on Earth. It falls quickly. The rocket exhaust carried it quickly away from the landing site so very little landed on the pads. Also, again, the rocket was usually turned off a few feet before touch down meaning even less chance for any dust to hit the pads.

I've built a lot of things, and been around the entertainment industry quite a bit, that isn't even a halfway decent set. The ground in a dead give away. It looks perfectly sprinkled about (remember nothing "blew away" when it landed) and the rocks look perfectly placed in the "sand". If any GLPers know somebody who works on movie sets, show them a picture cropped to just show the ground, see what they say

You do realize that's a stitched panorama, not the raw original photos, right?