U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-18-2018, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
8,131 posts, read 7,448,490 times
Reputation: 17029

Advertisements

My friend and astronaut Leeland Melvin has been up in the space shuttle twice.

He is a NASA expert and says, yes we landed on the moon.

 
Old 09-18-2018, 01:14 PM
 
29,804 posts, read 15,184,615 times
Reputation: 15578
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
...what was the point of mentioning a "simple sighting ring" special modification?
Ready for this? There were several models of camera used. Yes, really. NASA is staffed by some fairly smart people, and they figured out that a camera designed for EVA use on the lunar surface might not be ideal for use when inside a pressurized environment.

So they made a whole range of cameras, tinkering as they got feedback. Hasselblad's braggadocious homepage here shows the range. The upper right-hand is an early model lunar SWC, with - get this - a sighting ring. Later models had more of a wireframe for a sight aid.

https://www.hasselblad.com/history/hasselblad-in-space/
 
Old 09-18-2018, 02:26 PM
 
26,834 posts, read 38,088,554 times
Reputation: 34770
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
The link you posted also gives us an example of another strange phenomena as detailed in that video I mentioned above. It is concerning the image in that link you provided.

See where the sun is coming from? From the right behind the Lunar Module(LEM) which gives us a deep shadow on the ground and on this side of the rocket nozzle underneath the LEM.

So, how come the astronaut, the ladder, the gold reflective foil, the hatch has NO shadow at all. Normally, you would expect everything in shadow to be black, particularly since the sunlight/shadow on the Moon is very contrasty. The lunar surface has about 7%-10% relectivity yet light would have to go around corners to light up the astronaut and the recesses of the hatch door.
You are ignoring the obvious. Look at the areas at the end of the arrows. Sunlight is hitting all but two of them directly. The ones that aren't are on the astronauts suit. That means the sun is off to the right of the LEM and the reason the astronaut is not in complete shadow is, in fact, reflectivity off the module and the lunar surface.

It's not difficult to see and understand.

 
Old 09-18-2018, 05:34 PM
 
Location: PRC
2,705 posts, read 2,977,558 times
Reputation: 2454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tek_Freek
Sunlight is hitting all but two of them directly. The ones that aren't are on the astronauts suit. That means the sun is off to the right of the LEM and the reason the astronaut is not in complete shadow is, in fact, reflectivity off the module and the lunar surface.
Regardless of your arrows and that I am ignoring the obvious, the shadow shows the sun from behind the LEM and from the right, with shadows coming towards the left bottom corner of the image. There is no direct sunlight anywhere this side of the LEM. No sunlight means no reflection. Sunlight does not go around corners to be 'reflectivity off the module and the lunar surface' otherwise there would be no shadows underneath and this side of the LEM. So, now who is ignoring the obvious?

There is LIGHTING this side of the LEM, but it is NOT the sun lighting the image. The fill-in light is likely next to the camera taking the picture. This is what you are seeing.

Yes, there were several models of camera used. Ones for inside and ones for outside and, where the astronauts had to wear thick gloves, it was EXTREMELY difficult to do anything because there was so little movement. Original Hasselblads of that era had viewing screens you had to look down into which would have been awkward inside the lunar module when pointing out the small triangular window.

The suited astronauts could not see anything near their feet because they could not look down due to the bulky helmet and visor arrangement. There was no way they could have used the viewing screen or the sighting ring or ANY KIND of sighting aid because the cameras were attached above-waist to their suits.

How do you think X-rays of bones work on Earth?
Outside on the lunar surface, the film, cameras, and people were subjected to cosmic radiation coming from the Sun and this is enough to fog film which was standard Kodak film possibly with one of the higher ASAs/ISO values available at the time. It was NOT specially developed for the lunar program to be radiation resistant. The astronauts have reported cosmic radiation hitting their eyes as like stardust and sparks so it would also hit the films too. Where is it?
 
Old 09-18-2018, 06:10 PM
 
29,804 posts, read 15,184,615 times
Reputation: 15578
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
Yes, there were several models of camera used. Ones for inside and ones for outside and, where the astronauts had to wear thick gloves, it was EXTREMELY difficult to do anything because there was so little movement.
Yes. Hence the chestmount, the oversized trigger button etc. for the EVA cameras.

Quote:
The suited astronauts could not see anything near their feet because they could not look down due to the bulky helmet and visor arrangement. There was no way they could have used the viewing screen or the sighting ring or ANY KIND of sighting aid because the cameras were attached above-waist to their suits.
And so NASA, being staffed with smart people, added sight rings to the IVA cameras, and not the EVA ones. Clever guys!

Quote:
Outside on the lunar surface, the film, cameras, and people were subjected to cosmic radiation coming from the Sun and this is enough to fog film...
So you keep saying, yet you produce no evidence except your insistence that it must be so.
 
Old 09-18-2018, 06:43 PM
 
29,804 posts, read 15,184,615 times
Reputation: 15578
Hey, I was wrong. The ring sight was used on the EVA camera during the SEVA on Apollo 15.

Quote:
[Scott - "Yup. And the 500 is another story. Again, it comes from geology. On a field trip, we asked 'why not take a telephoto of this'? 'No telephoto cameras on Apollo.' 'Well, can you put a telephoto lens on a Hasselblad?' 'Gee, I don't know. We'll look.' 'Yeah, you can, but it weighs a pound and something.' 'Well, so that?' 'Well, you can't use it on the Moon.' 'Why not?' 'Oh, you'll never be able to hold it steady on the Moon.' 'Why not?' So we spent a lot of time and energy justifying the 500-mm lens. And the final trade-off was in abort propellant. They reduced the amount of abort propellant on the landing by whatever the mass of the telephoto lens was. And Rocco Petrone (the Apollo Program Manager) made that decision. We had to push very hard to get a 500-mm lens. There was a lot of skepticism on whether it would be useful at all. And we were always pleased that it was useful. But, gosh, you go out in the field with a bunch of geologists and you can't get to the mountain and it becomes obvious that a telephoto picture is a lot better than nothing. And yeah, we got some great pictures, because it was pretty easy. You point the dude and you've got a great scene out there to take pictures of."]

[Jones - "Did you have a gunsight on yours?"]

[Scott - "The ring sight. Yeah."]
https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15.seva.html

Love this stuff. These guys were smart.
 
Old 09-18-2018, 07:15 PM
 
26,834 posts, read 38,088,554 times
Reputation: 34770
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
Regardless of your arrows and that I am ignoring the obvious, the shadow shows the sun from behind the LEM and from the right, with shadows coming towards the left bottom corner of the image. There is no direct sunlight anywhere this side of the LEM. No sunlight means no reflection. Sunlight does not go around corners to be 'reflectivity off the module and the lunar surface' otherwise there would be no shadows underneath and this side of the LEM. So, now who is ignoring the obvious?

There is LIGHTING this side of the LEM, but it is NOT the sun lighting the image. The fill-in light is likely next to the camera taking the picture. This is what you are seeing.
You are. Your own explanation tells you where the light comes from. The light next to the camera.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. LOL!

You try too hard to make points. The problem is you don't think things through because you so badly want to be right. You're not. Plain and simple.

Not right about the lack of sending men to the moon. Not right about the size of images that you so desperately wanted to be too large for use. Not right about the shadows in the picture by your own explanation.

I can't believe you are still hounding the community with this hogwash.
 
Old 09-18-2018, 09:04 PM
 
Location: PRC
2,705 posts, read 2,977,558 times
Reputation: 2454
Oh, I see - you obviously dont understand what a 'fill-in' light is. It is a floodlight used by photographers to illuminate the shadow areas. So the photograph shows details where it would normally be too dark to see those if the fill-in lighting was not shining.

On the Moon everything is very contrasty, very deep blacks and very bright whites, so there would be almost no light in the shadow areas.

A light next to the camera MUST be a fill-in floodlight and NOT the Sun.
 
Old 09-18-2018, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
4,025 posts, read 3,256,349 times
Reputation: 7376
The radiation on the lunar missions was not strong enough or the exposure long enough to fog the camera film. Yes, there is some evidence of cosmic rays hitting the cameras in some shots - but again, the effect isn't as great as the hoax conspiracy theorists would like you to believe.

https://www.quora.com/How-did-Apollo...-being-damaged
Clavius: Environment - radiation and photographic film

From the first link:

Quote:
After processing the film was inspected for any problems and it was noted that radiation damage had caused a slight shift towards a green tint in many of the color shots and a decease in contrast. There was no noticeable damage to the black and white film.


Please note that damage to films going through airport X-Ray machines is not relative to the subject [sic - I believe the author meant "relevant"]. Firstly the film usually in such tourists’ cameras is relatively fast 200 to 400 ISO (ASA) color negative film ( easily damaged by radiation ) which are then exposed to a dose of powerful X-Rays, which are not found in the VABs or on the Moon’s surface in any great quantity. Also they are not in a container designed to resist radiation.


... The metal magazines protected the film very well, but the film itself was not very sensitive to radiation ( light and radioactivity both affect film in the same sort of way ). The fact that the film was always stored safely in the magazines until they were opened on Earth and that they were always kept inside the space crafts’ hulls also helped protect them from the relatively low radiation levels.
 
Old 09-18-2018, 10:11 PM
 
26,834 posts, read 38,088,554 times
Reputation: 34770
Arguing with you is a waste of time. You grasp at straws and try to turn them into sewer pipes.

I'll let someone with more patience for circular logic try to pound some sense into you. It's the same garbage you spewed in the Science forum trying to get a grip here.

It won't. Good luck with your endeavor. You need it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:40 AM.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top