Photo Foto Fake

[onebigmonkey]

Radiation was showstopper, venality the motive for the Apollo fraud. Radiation is a complex subject, and there are many more unknown problems as there are known problems. On the other hand the photography and video record was executed poorly, and is easy pickings.

From the Apollo 16 fraud comes a gem of a bad photo: AS16-109-17800

1) The red lines denote where the standard stagelines between stage and background are apparent.
2) The red circles highlight that the astroNot's left leg is not casting a shadow like his right leg.
3) Laughingly, the rover is casting a shadow in a direction 90 degrees off from that of the direction of the astroNot's shadow, and the shadows of other objects in the photo. The yellow lines denote the direction of shadows, the blue circles the high-gain antenna and its shadow.

Apollo, a criminal joke.

"Ignorance is Strength" I'm weak.

Numerous people have pointed out the error of your ways when you spam expattaffy's channels, many of them are members here. Don't think they don't know that you have had your mistakes pointed out to you.

1) I've pointed out to you when you posted these in youtube comments, using 3D models, that the 'red line' is the edge of a crater.
2) The left leg is casting a shadow, what do you think is casting a shadow over his right foot?
3) As I serendipitously pointed out the other day in a different thread, conspiracy theorists lack the ability to see in 3 dimensions. Your interpretations are wildly and hilariously incorrect.

A bridge is missing you, go back under it.

[onebigmonkey]

This guy registered back in October 2018 and waited this long to post his first post.  And he's clearly trolling/spamming.

Fewer people can be bothered with the taffy's Shill Stomper nonsense channels, especially since the main one was taken down for copyright violations. This troll is obviously not getting his attention fix there. He's used these photos there, and is given away by his trite but utterly meaningless aphorisms tagged on to the end of his drivel.

He won't reply, may as well ban him now and save the server space.

[LunarOrbit]

Read Think Repeat

Stop spamming the forum with multiple threads about the same topic. There was no need to start several threads about the way the shadows appear in Apollo photographs. This is the only warning you're going to get.

I would also suggest that you slow down and let people respond to your topics before starting new ones. This is for your own good since you are vastly outnumbered here, and you will be swamped with replies.

[bknight]

Radiation was showstopper, venality the motive for the Apollo fraud. Radiation is a complex subject, and there are many more unknown problems as there are known problems. On the other hand the photography and video record was executed poorly, and is easy pickings.

From the Apollo 16 fraud comes a gem of a bad photo: AS16-109-17800

1) The red lines denote where the standard stagelines between stage and background are apparent.
2) The red circles highlight that the astronaut's left leg is not casting a shadow like his right leg.
3) Laughingly, the rover is casting a shadow in a direction 90 degrees off from that of the direction of the astronaut's shadow, and the shadows of other objects in the photo. The yellow lines denote the direction of shadows, the blue circles the high-gain antenna and its shadow.

Apollo, a criminal joke.

"Ignorance is Strength" I'm weak.

Numerous people have pointed out the error of your ways when you spam expattaffy's channels, many of them are members here. Don't think they don't know that you have had your mistakes pointed out to you.

1) I've pointed out to you when you posted these in youtube comments, using 3D models, that the 'red line' is the edge of a crater.
2) The left leg is casting a shadow, what do you think is casting a shadow over his right foot?
3) As I serendipitously pointed out the other day in a different thread, conspiracy theorists lack the ability to see in 3 dimensions. Your interpretations are wildly and hilariously incorrect.

A bridge is missing you, go back under it.

I didn't know this was taffy's nonsense, but then I don't keep too close an eye on him.

[jr Knowing]

During the Apollo 12 fraud, the NASA fraudsters' fraudlings (New word! Call Websters!) did a horrible job with compositing photos together near what is supposed to be a crater. All the photos near the bogus crater are of extreme poor quality--AS12-46-6742 is a good representation.

The most glaring of issues with the photos near the fake crater are revealing lighting and a very visible stageline. As bad as that is, it gets worse. In AS12-47-6968 the NASA fraudsters' fraudlings not only failed to obfuscate the stageline, but misaligned a rock and shadow. Oops! Too much of a Vegas weekend can lead to poor work performance on Monday.

Apollo, a criminal joke.

"Ignorance is Strength." I'm weak.

Hi RTR, I'd rather not comment on this thread because I would like to see these threads die a quick death since I don't think you have any intention of having a reasonable discourse. (if people here think I am not reasonable, then you have zero chance with your banter so far   )  But I would like to say that the two photos above are the only ones you have submitted that might have some validity in your claims. The Apollo 12 magazines have a whole series of photos that appear to be poorly 'constructed' around this crater. But I will save my argument for a more concise, reasoned thread of my own. Anything of value ie worth posting on this thread will get lost in all this 'Apollo, a criminal joke' banter.

[bknight]

During the Apollo 12 fraud, the NASA fraudsters' fraudlings (New word! Call Websters!) did a horrible job with compositing photos together near what is supposed to be a crater. All the photos near the bogus crater are of extreme poor quality--AS12-46-6742 is a good representation.

The most glaring of issues with the photos near the fake crater are revealing lighting and a very visible stageline. As bad as that is, it gets worse. In AS12-47-6968 the NASA fraudsters' fraudlings not only failed to obfuscate the stageline, but misaligned a rock and shadow. Oops! Too much of a Vegas weekend can lead to poor work performance on Monday.

Apollo, a criminal joke.

"Ignorance is Strength." I'm weak.

Hi RTR, I'd rather not comment on this thread because I would like to see these threads die a quick death since I don't think you have any intention of having a reasonable discourse. (if people here think I am not reasonable, then you have zero chance with your banter so far   )  But I would like to say that the two photos above are the only ones you have submitted that might have some validity in your claims. The Apollo 12 magazines have a whole series of photos that appear to be poorly 'constructed' around this crater. But I will save my argument for a more concise, reasoned thread of my own. Anything of value ie worth posting on this thread will get lost in all this 'Apollo, a criminal joke' banter.

There is no construction in any of these images.  They are representations of what natural forces produced over billions of years.  BTW these images were presented in fact long before any digital image revisions were thought of, you guys seem to forget this simple fact.  They were presented in analog form before being put on the web.  If you were old enough and had money you could get you hearts content of Apollo images.

[gillianren]

You know, I'd gone about 24 hours with no internet, and I was regretting that.  At first.

[bknight]

You know, I'd gone about 24 hours with no internet, and I was regretting that.  At first.

You missed the spamming initially. 

[jfb]

Radiation was showstopper, venality the motive for the Apollo fraud. Radiation is a complex subject, and there are many more unknown problems as there are known problems. On the other hand the photography and video record was executed poorly, and is easy pickings.

Troll harder.  This is weak sauce.  Cambo and Jr at least put some effort into it.  This is just ... lazy.

From the Apollo 16 fraud comes a gem of a bad photo: AS16-109-17800

1) The red lines denote where the standard stagelines between stage and background are apparent.

Or the crest of a hill.

2) The red circles highlight that the astronaut's left leg is not casting a shadow like his right leg.

The bright white suit on the right leg is acting as a reflector, filling in the shadow on the left leg.

3) Laughingly, the rover is casting a shadow in a direction 90 degrees off from that of the direction of the astronaut's shadow, and the shadows of other objects in the photo. The yellow lines denote the direction of shadows, the blue circles the high-gain antenna and its shadow.

You've heard of "perspective" and "terrain", right?

Apollo, a criminal joke.

"Ignorance is Strength" I'm weak.

You're something, all right. 

[Mag40]

http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1605.0;attach=901;image

I would also point out that this poor observation suggest that the parallel shadows are converging. Perhaps this could be accompanied by the single light source that makes this possible.

[Jason Thompson]

Radiation was showstopper,

Why bother throwing that in when you clearly have no intention of addressing it. If it was a showstopper, explain how and why.

Radiation is a complex subject

Yes, it is. How much do you know about it?

[sts60]

I’ll second Jason’s comments.  You made the assertion that “radiation is a showstopper”.  Why, exactly, do you claim that?  Or have you abandoned that claim?

[JayUtah]

Given that he hasn't acknowledged a single response to any of his posts, I'd say he's abandoned that claim and all the rest of his claims.  And he's very probably met LunarOrbit's definition of spam.

[onebigmonkey]

If I'm correct, and I'm confident that I am, our new troll is the person who deliberately posted multiple  and pointless replies to comments on taffy's videos in the deluded belief that everyone was getting spammed with notification emails.

He won't reply to any of his threads.

[Ranb]

Radiation was showstopper, venality the motive for the Apollo fraud.

I've only conversed with two people who thought Apollo was a hoax but were willing to give a number to describe the radiation environment in space between the Earth and the moon.  Maybe you could be the third?

Why was space a show stopper and where do you get your data from?