As though the astronauts where taking a photo every minute and interfering with other tasks ... bullcrap.
First there was two of them, secondly they took them in bursts and thirdly all the hard work on camera settings had been done on Earth.
Next!

You'd have be moaning like fook If they'd have taken too few.

Besides instead of cutting and pasting every single hoax claim to do with the moon landings, why don't you just type 'moon landing hoax claims debunked' into your browser and leave us alone Stan?
You know like cutting out the middlemen.

He wasn't saying they were taking photos every minuet they were on the moon, quite the opposite he was actually saying it is impossible to take a photo every minuet they were there, given the amount of photo's per mission and the total time they were there, which they would have to have done if they really went to the moon. Proved by the cold hard math he has just posted, they never went to the moon.
As stated any professional photographer would tell you given the space suits and gloves they were wearing and the other activity's and travel time upto 30 miles in some instances was IMPOSSIBLE

Go and stand in the corner with a coned hat on.
Are you telling me that pressing shutters while wearing a spacesuit was overlooked in training?
And it wasn't impossible was it, because they did it despite your dodgy maths.

'Any professional photographer would tell you' ...PMSL

Look I will spell it out for you ... they divide the total time by the number of photos to get an average time per photo.
A minute, say, disregarding two astronauts, now this totally disregards how the photos would have been taken in practice ...in bursts leaving time for other things.
Do I have to do that for you too?
By IMPLYING by statistics that on average they are involved in taking a photo every minute GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT there is no time for anything else ... but that is nonsense.

Forget setting scenes, apertures and the like. It was point and shoot photography, quick and simple.

I know it is an average......
But give over you say they were taking bursts of photos? Maybe they were but not bursts of 20 or 30 in a second i mean what would be the point? 30 images of the same thing......

But, but, but, they were wearing the wrong shoes God damn it.

Game, set and match.

You are not quite getting the idea of this ... substitute the word batches for bursts and imagine the
astronauts moving a bit like you would taking photos in real life.
Imagine them taking a load in a five /ten minute period and then doing something else for half an hour.
Then imagine two of them doing this to get twice as many photos.
You can't imagine that?
Because some lamebrain tells you it is not possible?
I bet you wouldn't put money on it in a real life scenario?

AND, I know I keep ploughing this furrow .... IF it was a hoax, do you really think they would leg themselves up by producing too many photos?
Really?

Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be.

Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be.

So to précis, the hoaxers are saying that the Apollo fakers were both cunningly clever and devious (smart cookies) and fooking thick as pig at the same time to overlook these glaring 'discrepancies'.
Cake and eat it?

Quote ="Ferocious Aardvark"Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be.'" They were all faked. That's all you will get ...along of course with some hahahahahahahas! Some of those pictures are wonderful. I'm surprised nobody has commented to the effect that how could that bacofoil thing fly? Why it's not even aerodynamic!

Quote ="Ferocious Aardvark"Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be.'" They were all faked. That's all you will get ...along of course with some hahahahahahahas! Some of those pictures are wonderful. I'm surprised nobody has commented to the effect that how could that bacofoil thing fly? Why it's not even aerodynamic!

YES!! That's exactly what they think! That when deciding how many fake photos to fake, "THEY" never gave a moment's thought to HOW MANY! The reason is because THEY thought they were smart, but were nowhere near as smart as Stan and his peers, who are waaaaay smarter.

So for example they mad a movie set with "studio lighting" all round and it never occurred to them that, as they were pretending to be on the Moon, they should be reproducing the illumination on the Moon! Hah! Dumb, eh?

And they "forgot" to put in the stars! (They forgot to do that multiple times - it so happens they forgot to do it in EVERY dark sky moon surface image! Every one! Totally slipped their minds! ) And ... the spooks controllers ALSO never noticed when approving the final fakes for release! How dumb were they?

But wait ... IIRC Stan recently explained they left the stars out because their planetarium technology at the time wasn't up to the job, or something. So (depending which day you ask him) it may be they omitted the stars DELIBERATELY. They realised they couldn't accurately do it - and so presumably just hoped no-one would ever notice!

Duhh!

That's why I love this thread, there are real comedy gems every day, but the joke is how could anyone be so gullible as to swallow this stuff whole -especially as it has been so copiously and thoroughly debunked over decades. Plus, Stan is certainly trolling, at least part of the time, but his trolling is so bad, it's hilarious

"THEY" were - it turns out - exceedingly stupid - blithering idiots, even - because there was NO aspect of ANYTHING they did that doesn't scream "obvious fake" if you KNOW about these things

Certainly would put all my money on the fact we never went to the moon.
That would make me very very rich.
Maybe rich enough to be a 'MASON' myself


It is a hoax and they have 'legged themselves up' with loads of things not just photos there are discrepancy's in just about everything they have released to do with the moon landings of which a lot of it has been posted on this thread, and IF im not wrong and you carn't prove i am and man did go to the moon then these discrepancy's simply would not exist in the first place.

To me you just seem to be here to pick arguments and tell me i'm 'dumb' because i don't believe the same bull shyster you do.

DON'T FORGET you only believe man went to the moon because you have been told they have.
I on the other hand don't believe man went to the moon, as i DON'T believe EVERYTHING i get told.
I mean would the worlds governments and the super rich would not have an agenda against me at all? i mean i am 'DUMB' so they should be able to manipulate me any which way they want right?

[iHahaha i like your sense of humour. Very funny assumptions. Claiming victories when i've never debated such a monarchist. You deserve the parrot of the year award obviously Runner Up to Ferocious Aardvark. Nobody has debunked me on here[/i


The burden of the proof lies upon him who affirms, not he who denies.

Stan - you wanted a real photo of a satellite, here ya go This addresses many of your wacky claims in a neat package 1. It's a photo of the ISS, taken through the main observation window 2. It shows a real astronaut in real space surviving in a real spacesuit 3. He and the ISS are orbiting the Earth, which is curved as it is a globe; the curved horizon is behind the astronaut, and any artificial curve produced by (eg) fisheye or very wide lens would distort the astronaut and make him appear curved. But he's not. 4. He is pictured working at the EXPOSE-E experiment. This contains Antarctic fungi collected from Antarctica’s McMurdo Dry Valleys. Of course, if Antarctica didn't exist, their presence would be difficult. The experiment tested their durability in space conditions and in Martian conditions and the fungi remarkably survived, You can read the article here: astronomy.com/news/2016/02/antar ... ons-on-iss So, in one shot, an astronaut in space, a working spacesuit, a globe, and Antarctic lifeforms. Will that suffice, or would you like more?

Stan - you wanted a real photo of a satellite, here ya go This addresses many of your wacky claims in a neat package 1. It's a photo of the ISS, taken through the main observation window 2. It shows a real astronaut in real space surviving in a real spacesuit 3. He and the ISS are orbiting the Earth, which is curved as it is a globe; the curved horizon is behind the astronaut, and any artificial curve produced by (eg) fisheye or very wide lens would distort the astronaut and make him appear curved. But he's not. 4. He is pictured working at the EXPOSE-E experiment. This contains Antarctic fungi collected from Antarctica’s McMurdo Dry Valleys. Of course, if Antarctica didn't exist, their presence would be difficult. The experiment tested their durability in space conditions and in Martian conditions and the fungi remarkably survived, You can read the article here: astronomy.com/news/2016/02/antar ... ons-on-iss So, in one shot, an astronaut in space, a working spacesuit, a globe, and Antarctic lifeforms. Will that suffice, or would you like more?

How would it?

Who is offering odds, and how would the bet be settled?

Anyway, consider this.

We now have two sets of independent images of the actual Apollo 11 landing site.

The first is from the LRO. The second is from the Chinese Science academy from their Chang'e 2 mission.



Both (of course) show exactly what should be there, as left by the Apollo 11 mission, is there, unmoved, precisely as per.

So, now your own eyes can SEE the landing site. Are you still off to the bookies?

Lol yea thats looks like a pretty detailed picture of a camera on the surface of the moon oh yes i can clearly see the LRRR aswell, oh and the discarded Cover

20 megapixel quality definitive proof i must say.
Only thing i can make out is supossed to be the LM give over that has being added in after the image using something as sophisticated as paint lol
Did you take the images yourself or are you being TOLD that this is what they are?
No chance those things were photo shopped in no?

Good lord! I'm away for three days and there must be a dozen pages to wade through. I mean, I'm interested in this subject. But I'm not sure I'm THIS interested.

I guess it's what you have to expect when you are dealing with religious beliefs and the bug-eyed zealouts who cling desperately to them.

Anyhow, let's look at those ecstatic Apollo XI astronauts fresh from their trip to the "Moon" - champing at the very bit to regale their experiences.

[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI_ZehPOMwIOh, dear.[/url

BTW, what is Michael Collins TALKING about ("I never saw any stars"icon_wink.gif - did he FORGET that never joined Armstrong & Aldrin in the LEM and stayed in orbit??

Fact is Fact the only way you can definitively prove ANYTHING is to see it in the flesh in person with your own 2 eyes.
Not get told you are looking at it.....

WB Mugwump i have been awaiting some more of your input

=#800000[i[uCome on FA. I seriously cannot take you seriously anymore. The credulity in that composite is oozing manipulation[/u[/i[i. If you still can't distinguish whats real and whats fake you're impossible to debate with Seriously. Its a composite like this below.[/i

Yes. I did. I took them myself. Because I am the Lunar Reconnaisance Orbiter, but as well as circling the moon taking pictures, I also can communicate on forums!

If you believe that those who are running the LRO programme (look it up if you don't know) have a full staff that will all tolerate such hoax Photoshopping hoax landing sites, then that's a breathtaking leap - why has not a single person involved in the project blown the whiste?

Then, you would also have to believe that the Chinese have Photoshopped their images too!

Do you believe all that?

I mean, "could" both the LRO team, and the Chinese, have photoshopped the images? Of course! I could! ANY image can be photoshopped by anyone! That is completely irrelevant. The question you eed to ask yourself is why would the LRO team do this? And why would the Chinese Chang'e mission scientists also do this?

A bit far-fetched for Occam, but I'll consider your evidence that they did it, if you have any.

You don't have to be rich to be a mason, I have friends who are masons, I have been asked to join several times. I declined.
You could be a mason, but no I don't think you would pass the interview to join NASA.



If they are as smart as you think, they would not have made such noddy mistakes would they?
And they were smart ... they put twelve men on the moon.
What have you managed?


Well you would be wrong again. I am not 'picking arguments'. I am attempting and failing to dispel myths.


Seriously funny!
I believe man went to the moon based on the evidence, evidence that fits with all I know about Science and has been corroborated over the intervening years since 1972 by independent sources.
I don't believe everything I am told either, otherwise why for instance would I be chatting to the likes of you and Stan.
The world governments are not the space administrations and none of them gives a flying fook about you and your kind anyway, never mind trying to deceive you or manipulate you.
Get real!

But if you want to go around thinking folk are out to deceive you and manipulate you, what DO you believe in?
Well, apart from hoaxes that is.

Bingo!

Too many stars on show there Stan, youve made that photo up

He got the Earth the right shape for once though ...