Curse

populationcontrol · Aug 16, 2007, 06:16 PM // 18:16

so i saw this movie on how in fact the USA never made it to the moon, at first i thought it was really far fetched until they pointed out that non of the pictures taken in the moon had any stars in the background. i mean how is that possible, i mean i can see stars from a smog covered city at night, the moon has like no atmosphere and like everything should be visible? it seems it might be that they didnt or couldnt map out the horizon and where the stars go. i mean what explanation has nasa released for there beeing no stars in the sky of their moon pictures? unless there is an explanation its a total fake. i mean my friends tease me telling me that we also live in the matrix and nothing is really real but i really dont see how you cant see stars off a planet with no significant atmosphere. in a sense it might have been in order to win the space race withought really wining it, but i eman when i turn on the news i still see space images where the space station needs repairs or whatever and its like floating in black empty space, is the whole thing really a hoax or is there and explanation to this? and if it is a hoax why does the news keep showing space images in the space "no stars" style, why do we believe them if theres no explanation???

Divinitys Creature · Aug 16, 2007, 06:46 PM // 18:46

If you wore glasses you'd notice that when you take them off, the stars go out of focus and you can't see them (if you're short-sighted). When you take a picture you focus your lens on the object you are photographing not the background - it's about focus.

You can see the international space station through a telescope.

I know the conspiracy theorists probably have a lot more questions and points but this is what comes to mind on first thought.

populationcontrol · Aug 16, 2007, 07:05 PM // 19:05

yeah but all you see is black emty space, no real evidence of unfocused stars. is that nasa`s explanation for no stars in the sky?

Jumping Is Uselss · Aug 16, 2007, 08:21 PM // 20:21

I saw documentary of this on National Geographic, they point out how the American flag was waving on the moon when there is no wind there.

2 ways to confirm that the US actually landed on the moon. Send another group of astronauts to land on the moon to confirm the first landing in 1969 (meh I just realized NASA could just hoax this too). 2nd idea build a powerful telescope to scan the surface of the moon and look for the rover or the part of the lunar lander that was left behind.

Maria The Princess · Aug 16, 2007, 08:28 PM // 20:28

well, another thing about the whole moon trip that i found suspicious and ill bring it up since the OP should also consider.

when the US guys, planted the flag, the flag was moving, as if theres wind. now, the moon has no air to create wind. where did it came from? a fan?

another thing, you can clearly see the foot steps in the "sand". the moon has no humidity, no water, otherwise there would be life on it of some sort. have you ever walked on completely dry sand? i bet you couldn't see your shoe prints, since the sand was dry and didn't stay in a shape.

just a thing i read in past, the OP made me remember it and want to post.

Wrath Of Dragons · Aug 16, 2007, 08:40 PM // 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria The Princess

well, another thing about the whole moon trip that i found suspicious and ill bring it up since the OP should also consider.

when the US guys, planted the flag, the flag was moving, as if theres wind. now, the moon has no air to create wind. where did it came from? a fan?

another thing, you can clearly see the foot steps in the "sand". the moon has no humidity, no water, otherwise there would be life on it of some sort. have you ever walked on completely dry sand? i bet you couldn't see your shoe prints, since the sand was dry and didn't stay in a shape.

just a thing i read in past, the OP made me remember it and want to post.

actually, if you step in something superfine, like some powdered sugar, it will leave a very clear footprint. normal sand, no

populationcontrol · Aug 16, 2007, 10:49 PM // 22:49

yeah i knew about the flag and thanks for bringing that up but my real concern is the stars for they still dont appear today in images of space so unless theres an explanation they would still be therefore lying to us?

Maria The Princess · Aug 16, 2007, 11:40 PM // 23:40

well, the race to the moon was mostly for glory, a competition against the USSR, and if they would admit that they were lying, it would not only destroy the image they were trying to create, but also, trading the glory they got for it for endless shame, for lying, and then admitting they lied just to have the fame for it.

populationcontrol · Aug 16, 2007, 11:46 PM // 23:46

yeah buts what our excuse if that is the case for believing it?

Exhibit A · Aug 17, 2007, 04:40 AM // 04:40

Here's a very clear and logical explanation to the lack of stars:

Quote:

On the Moon, the lack of air means that the sky is dark. Even when the Sun is high off the horizon during full day, the sky near it will be black. If you were standing on the Moon, you would indeed see stars, even during the day.

So why aren't they in the Apollo pictures? Pretend for a moment you are an astronaut on the surface of the Moon. You want to take a picture of your fellow space traveler. The Sun is low off the horizon, since all the lunar landings were done at local morning. How do you set your camera? The lunar landscape is brightly lit by the Sun, of course, and your friend is wearing a white spacesuit also brilliantly lit by the Sun. To take a picture of a bright object with a bright background, you need to set the exposure time to be fast, and close down the aperture setting too; that's like the pupil in your eye constricting to let less light in when you walk outside on a sunny day.

So the picture you take is set for bright objects. Stars are faint objects! In the fast exposure, they simply do not have time to register on the film. It has nothing to do with the sky being black or the lack of air, it's just a matter of exposure time. If you were to go outside here on Earth on the darkest night imaginable and take a picture with the exact same camera settings the astronauts used, you won't see any stars!

And the flag:

Quote:

The answer is, it isn't waving. It looks like that because of the way the flag was deployed. The flag hangs from a horizontal rod which telescopes out from the vertical one. In Apollo 11, they couldn't get the rod to extend completely, so the flag didn't get stretched fully. It has a ripple in it, like a curtain that is not fully closed. In later flights, the astronauts didn't fully deploy it on purpose because they liked the way it looked. In other words, the flag looks like it is waving because the astronauts wanted it to look that way. Ironically, they did their job too well. It appears to have fooled a lot of people into thinking it waved.

Both from http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

Divinitys Creature · Aug 17, 2007, 10:55 PM // 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by populationcontrol

yeah but all you see is black emty space, no real evidence of unfocused stars. is that nasa`s explanation for no stars in the sky?

Not sure, the post above about the exposure time is light on the numbers but it sounds good. I still don;t buy the explanation about the horizontal rod in the flag.

populationcontrol · Aug 18, 2007, 02:08 AM // 02:08

yeah but i eman dont stars radiate their own light and should be visible in a planet with no horizon? i dont buy that sun explanation for the pictures taken of the earth from space and such are always floating in empty blackness, as are all the space stations in the news, just seems to much of a strech that the picture was taken in an angle to the horizon to the sun or whatever.

Onarik Amrak · Aug 18, 2007, 02:57 AM // 02:57

Yeah I saw that documentary twice now a few months apart.

Some of the striking examples of evidence were:

1. The shadows weren't aligned like they should be when under a single source of light (the Sun). It looked like there were multiple lights.

2. On one photo the camera's cross hair was BEHIND an object. Which of course makes no sense.

The Herbalizer · Aug 19, 2007, 12:17 PM // 12:17

If the USSR suspected in the slightest that the USA did not land on the moon they would have been screaming to the world about it.

The USA did land on the moon as far as I am concerned.

Malice Black · Aug 19, 2007, 01:31 PM // 13:31

OP seems to love the old USSR a little too much.