Apollo XIII-inconsistences

[Zakalwe]

Tarkus, so your claim is that Apollo 13 didn't happen as described. So what did happen then?
What took off on April 13th 1970? Or are you claiming that the launch was fake? The whole mission was fake? What exactly?

[Jason Thompson]

This whole 'selfie' business is a distraction. Haise was not 'taking a selfie'. That was a term someone threw in for humour. He was holding the camera and filming the inside of the spacecraft, and he happened to get himself in shot for a short time. This is not suspicious, certainly not impossible, and all you want to do, tarkus, is complain about the words used.

How about dealing with some actual real points, such as the effect of perspective and camera position on whether or not the SM is visible?

[Echnaton]

all you want to do, tarkus, is complain about the words

That seems to be the gist of the presentation so far.   Let's see if tarkus takes you up on the suggestion to make a real point. 

[dwight]

Thank you Jason. It needed to be asked. This whole "debate" seems like a chain pull sourced from our resident mate Awe130.

[Count Zero]

I'm working on a response to the Apollo 16 photo "argument", but I just pulled an all-nighter at work and need to get some rest.  I'll try to finish & post it tonite.

[gillianren]

BTW Tarkus, type in "selfie not looking at camera" into google. That might change your never having seen a selfie not looking into the camera claim.

Yes, but that would require research, and if Tarkus could do proper research, he(?) wouldn't be a hoax believer.

[onebigmonkey]

I agree that the term 'selfie' is a distraction - I used it to convey something in simple terms any idiot could grasp.

I misjudged the target audience.

Meanwhile, I am at Glastonbury festival. I have more interesting things to do for a while

[dwight]

OBM, just remember to _look_ at your camera if you take a selfie, otherwise the universe might implode.

[smartcooky]

Tarkus, so your claim is that Apollo 13 didn't happen as described. So what did happen then?
What took off on April 13th 1970? Or are you claiming that the launch was fake? The whole mission was fake? What exactly?

Don't you know? Really?

It was the massive rocket (the main cost of going) that they had to build in order to fake the moon landings and not have people become suspicious about how they got there!!

(idea courtesy of the brilliant "That Mitchell and Webb Look" moon landing conspiracy sketch. If you haven't seen it, here it is

Three comedians poke the Moon landing conspiracy full of more holes than a cheese grater!!


 

[Zakalwe]

Don't you know? Really?

It was the massive rocket (the main cost of going) that they had to build in order to fake the moon landings and not have people become suspicious about how they got there!!

(idea courtesy of the brilliant "That Mitchell and Webb Look" moon landing conspiracy sketch. If you haven't seen it, here it is

Three comedians poke the Moon landing conspiracy full of more holes than a cheese grater!!

A great sketch from some very funny guys.

Loons like tarkus really do believe that mountains of impeachable evidence can be hand-waved away by what they believe to be a tiny inconsistency. So the thousands of people that saw a massive great rocket taking off were all incorrect because tarkus reckons that some bloke took a "selfie" in an unusual way. Sheesh...

[Peter B]

Speaking of selfies, I believe Mike Collins took some video selfies while in orbit around the Moon on Apollo 11. Have a look at www.apolloarchive.com in the Apollo Multimedia section.

[Echnaton]

mountains of impeachable evidence

I believe you meant "unimpeachable."

[Zakalwe]

mountains of impeachable evidence

I believe you meant "unimpeachable."

Opps...my apologies and thanks for the correction. I blame my dyslexic fingers (a terrible condition for a man of my meagre years...) 

[Echnaton]

KO

[Zakalwe]

KO

Ever hear the one about the dyslexic, insomniac, agnostic?



.



.




.
He laid awake all night wondering if there really was a dog   


Back to the OP's original point. If you view the video you can clearly see the distortion caused by the wide-angle lens as the camera pans and moves around the cabin. Straight lines and edges appear to curve and move due to the fish-eye effect. The fact that tarkus didn't realise this, but instead jumps to the ridiculous conclusion that it was filmed by a fourth person just adds to my suspicions that tarkus has absolutely no experience with ANY form of photography. In addition, it adds to my suspicions that (s)he has very poor spatial understanding. It's no wonder that tarkus cannot work out where the SM is and why it cannot be seen.