The Hills of Apollo - An Enigma

[zorgon]

[ArMaP]

I remember that case.

Then over at ATS ArMaP one day told me he had problems with the hills in the Apollo surface shots.  Now this was interesting coming from an uber skeptic like ArMaP     So we planned to do a thread on it.  But trying to match up images between the jagged hills in LO pictures with the smooth hills in Apollo was a big job and we never got it done. Mike Singh vanished and he was the LO image guy.

I think I will try to start doing some matching between photos, starting with the ones on this post.

Two things in the above images
1) the background is obviously identical
2) the cross marks are not on the image with the lander

The crosses are there, I see them.

[RUSSO]

[ArMaP]

You only need ONE image doctored to prove the case  I would say THIS set of two is the SMOKING GUN



Two things in the above images
1) the background is obviously identical

Photo AS17-136-20685 was taken some 200 metres west from where photo AS17-147-22527 was taken, so it's natural that a mountain/hill 7 km away would look the same from both sites.

2) the cross marks are not on the image with the lander

ALL images should have those cross marks as they are on a plate in front of the film

I can see the crosses in all versions of that photo I could find, including that animation.

[ArMaP]

No, the background doesn't match, look below for the most clear difference.

[ArMaP]

I suppose the people that create those images doesn't understand a thing about perspective. 

[RUSSO]

I suppose the people that create those images doesn't understand a thing about perspective. 

And i think people that claim perspective issues cannot count LEMs. 

[ArMaP]

And i think people that claim perspective issues cannot count LEMs. 

Were you the one that created that image or are you another person that cannot understand perspective?

If someone is 100 metres north of a car with a mountain 5 km behind and takes photos to make a panorama, the car will appear south of the panorama. If that person moves 100 metres south of the car and takes more photos for a second panorama the car will appear north of the panorama, and the mountain will be 4.9 km behind.

Only very small (if any) differences will be seen in the mountain, but the second panorama will show the other side of the car when compared with the first panorama.

[RUSSO]

Were you the one that created that image or are you another person that cannot understand perspective?

No i did not created those images.

Jack White's Studies – Apollo 15 File
An extensive study of Apollo imagery by photo analyst Jack White
All studies © 2005/7 Jack White

Editor's Comments: 1. The conclusion has to be that either the LM was repositioned or the backdrops were moved around, or both. See also Doing the twist during Apollo 15 below, and a later Apollo 16 study.
2. The usual definition of a panorama is that of a series of photographs, shot sequentially by standing and turning about 10 degrees for each shot, and NOT INTERRUPTING FOR OTHER PHOTOS. This does not seem to be the case for NASA. During his panorama research Jack White has found a number of anomalies, other than the visual problems he discusses within these studies. NASA still infers that these panoramas are the true representation of the lunar EVA sites. While NASA may wish to argue for poetic license in giving the public 'an idea' of the relevant lunar environment – these pictures were never initially presented as 'approximate, or idealised composites'. Nor are they today. Since it is quite obvious (from the similar conclusions drawn independently by both Jack White and David Percy) that these 'composite panoramas' are full of discrepancies, as such they CANNOT be considered the true record of their purported lunar locations.

Editor's Note: Another version of the Apollo 15 study: LEM does turnabout with same background. See comments above and Doing the twist in a later Apollo 16 study.

Source
http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_11.html

[zorgon]

Photo AS17-136-20685 was taken some 200 metres west from where photo AS17-147-22527 was taken, so it's natural that a mountain/hill 7 km away would look the same from both sites.

200 meters west... 7km   should see more of a difference using perspective  What I need to do is find the video that shows TWO missions using the same hill

Well found it on that screwball "Bad Astronomer's" site  LOL  (I guess he must be a bad astronomer because he gave it up to become a professional (paid) debunker just like Stanton gave up a career in Nuclear Physics to become a UFO expert that has never seen a UFO  )

Bad: The other ``identical background'' segment shows an astronaut on a hilltop. A second video shows two astronauts on the same hill (and this time it really is the same hill), and claims that NASA itself says these two videos were taken on two different hills separated by many kilometers. How can this be? They are obviously the same hill, so NASA must be lying!

Good: Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to a mistake. A videotape about Apollo 16 ironically titled ``Nothing So Hidden...'' released by NASA does indeed make that claim, but in this case it looks to me to be a simple error. I asked Eric Jones, who is the editor of the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, and he told me those two clips were taken about three minutes apart. Eric's assistant, Ken Glover, uncovered this problem. He sent me this transcript (which I edited a bit to make links to the video clips) of the Fox show with his comments, which I will highlight in red:

So NASA says it was an ERROR (now) 

So now we need to do our own analysis on the two videos and verify if they are indeed two missions as was originally said (according to NASA) or an ERROR as it "looks to me to be a simple error"


Narrator: Background discrepancies are also apparent in the lunar video.
[...]

[Video showing John Young at Station 4 on EVA-2, with Fox caption "Day One". Click here for the transcript and .]

Narrator: This shot was taped in what was purported to be the first of Apollo 16's lunar excursions.

[Audio of John Young dubbed over clip: "Well, I couldn't pick a better spot", actual MET of 123:58:46]

[Next, video of John Young and Charlie Duke at Station 4, EVA-2. In reality, about three minutes after the first clip. Fox caption "Day Two". Click here for the transcript and .]

Narrator: And this video was from the next day, at a different location.

[Audio of Charlie Duke dubbed over clip: "That is the most beautiful sight!", actual MET of 124:03:01]

Narrator: NASA claims the second location was two-and-a-half miles away, but when one video was superimposed over the other the locations appear identical.

[Audio of John Young dubbed over "Day Two" video: " It's absolutely unreal!", actual MET 144:16:30]

Narrator: Conspiracy theorists claim that even closer examination of the photos suggest evidence of doctoring.

That last line is pretty funny. The audio you hear of the astronauts in those clips was actually all from different times than the video!

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

So Bad Astronomer Guy thinks its FUNNY that NASA puts the wrong voice with the wrong images? 

Makes you wonder what else NASA is dubbing over 

[ArMaP]

200 meters west... 7km   should see more of a difference using perspective 

It also depends on the lens used, but I don't know what lens was used.

[RUSSO]

3 minutes in this NASA video and you will hear this about the Van Allen Radiation Belts:

"We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space"

What?

fowzie7771

I'm confused. You have to solve the problem of the dangerous radiation from the Van Alan Belts before you can send men through them? Didn't NASA go to the moon? With very little shielding? Aren't you guys basically saying you didn't land on the moon?

Freudian slip?

[ArMaP]

Freudian slip?

I think they are talking about that particular ship, as they started by saying that the radiation in the Van Allen Belts is dangerous for the electronics, and that's true, today's electronics are much more sensitive than what was used in the 1960s, and I think today's ships, with the electronics fried by radiation, may not be that easy to fly.

[Elvis Hendrix]

[ArMaP]

What's the problem with that image, are those two photos supposed to have been taken in different places?

Didn't your mother tell you not to play with the food?