These are written by Leonid Konovalov, a Russian cinematographer and Film School Professor in Moscow, who regularly writes articles detailing how various aspects of the NASA's Gemini and Apollo mission's visual documentation were likely achieved with standard and sometimes cutting edge (for the time) Hollywood special effects.
The footage in question in this series is the infamous "take-off" of the LEM from the surface of the moon during Apollo 17, which we are told was "broadcast in living color!" back to earth via a satellite and TV camera mounted on the abandoned Lunar Rover. The camera was placed in position by the Astronots and controlled from Houston with masterful predictive skill since it faithfully pans upwards to follow the LEM's assent despite the delay in transmission to and from the surface of the moon.
I say the footage is infamous because it has long been the subject of some derision as possibly the fakest looking aspect of the live action footage. However saying it's fake looking gives no insight as to how it was done, with NASA defenders as usual saying such footage would be impossible to fake back then. In fact it could have been faked with standard analogue effets in use for decades prior in Movie Production:
184. To take off from the moon, NASA used a Christmas cracker instead of an engine
185. Apollo 17 did not take off from the moon, but fell down from the ceiling of the decoration
186. A Detective investigates the rise of Apollo 17 from the moon
187. Apollo-17 astronauts could not enter the lunar module - it was a waist-high scale model
188. Still: Apollo 17 was it full size or a 10-1 scale model?
The QRD: The LEM is a scale model in the entire footage. The Astronots only pass in front of it when they can dominate the frame of the footage, ie. when they are right in front of the lens. They are careful not to pass in front of the LEM further away from the lens as this would give away the reduced size of the LEM. When approaching the LEM for takeoff, they take a large hooked flank approach, for seemingly no reason, instead of walking directly, despite time constraints of Oxygen supply. This is to avoid walking in front of the cameras cone of vision of the LEM. If they did walk in front it would be seen that they are in fact talller than it.
The Entrance to the LEM is (conveniently) directly behind the cameras focus point, ensuring the the astronots ingress is completely hidden from view. This is due to the in-camera trickery - they are in reality not just behind the full size LEM but many many meters behind a scale model lem - it's an elaborate forced-perspective technique, detailed in the articles.
The take-off then, after a convenient panning of the camera to admire an earth painted on the ceiling of the studio and a break in transmission, is achieved by filming the scale model, now upside down on an inverted "moon surface", with a "Christmas cracker" explosion and butane flame blasting the model down a wire, upside down, towards the ground. The effect would have been filmed on high speed camera, so in real time was very brief, and then was slowed down for the "live" footage.
See the articles for the details. It's really quite ingenious, despite it still looking quite fake to those skeptical. The same exact style of in-camera, forced perspective trickery is used in modern films. The most recent example I can think of being the Lord of the Rings films, when they showed the Hobbit being much smaller than Gandalf despite them being about the same height.
That "skill" should have been the tipoff to the 2+ Billion gamers who've struggled with laggy controller-drivers and internet connections fifty years later.
I remember how bad it was 20 years ago, in HALO 3 - I was dodging somebody who had that plasma sword or whatever, he was running straight at me, so I moved to his right and aimed at his flank, started blasting him, and then, all of the sudden, I was somewhere completely different, running off the edge of a cliff.
How long was the delay?
I worked as a camera op and focus puller for years, used many remote control rigs, and wireless follow focus etc.
It takes practice, but the delay is consistent and you get the hang of it.
That said I don't believe the footage is real.
The moon is 384,400 kilometers away, on average (it varies), so the lag would be about 1.25 seconds + intrinsic device lag. The device lag would be very bad as the camera would be warped.
If the camera was on the moon (of course it wasn't) the side of the camera in the sun would be heated to 200C . The side of the camera (if it was on the moon) in the shade would be in a -200C environment. The heat from the camera can only radiate (into a vacuum) as black body radiation, so there would be a, maybe, 100C (I just guessed) surface on the shaded side of the camera radiating heat out into a -200C void. If so, there would be a 100C temperature gradient across the camera. My understanding - maybe incorrect - is that the retarded official story is that they just used "hardened" commercial cameras.
Of course this is all bullshit as the camera was never on the moon, but the general public are fucking morons, so no problem
Hahaha great breakdown. Even worse they didn't have digital cameras, they had to use special film that could take extreme temperatures and cosmic radiation. Unfortunately all this film was lost or overwritten according to nasa.
After a few hours thinking "how can the cold side be -200C ? it's space, it should be 3K which is minus 270C."
So I went through the calculations, emitting radiation (boltzman's law) and the equilibrium temperature (I as in I and chatGPT, which did the calcs). Sooo, the equilibrium temperature of a body (4 kg, aluminum, surface area of 2m^2, perfect emmisivity) is not my incorrect guess of "100C" but -196C.
THAT is where the "-200C" comes from: it's not the temperature of the moon's atmosphere (which doesn't exist). It is the rough equilibrium temperatures of human-scale objects of common materials that are heated to 200C by the sun and are exposed to the 3K vacuum of space.
So:
tl;dr : there would have been a 400 C temperature gradient across the camera.
This is an important point. People often make arguments that can be disproven, and when disproven the main point appears, to outsiders, to have been "debunked".
100%. Thank you for understanding.
Kirk LeMoyne "Lem" Billings (Kennedy's Boyfriend) + Moon (buttocks) = a sodomite joke.
Interesting, thanks for posting!
I am glad we can agree on the astronots, if for differing reasons.
In my view the nasa grift is primarily for embezzlement and secondarily about circumventing public/political will so as to continue to build rockets for mass murder.
The moon is not a giant rock in the sky that never falls. Even if you could reach it, it cannot be landed upon.
I am curious to know what reasons you think such fake footage was created and what purpose the astronots serve - as i am reasonably sure they differ (if only slightly) from mine (above).
we went to the moon.. you can go see the rocks at the lunar sample lab yourself..
those rocks can only have come from the moon because of their subatomic makeup (being bombarded by cosmic rays for billions of years)
where as on earth you dont have those radiation markers...
we have been able to conclude that the moon was formed with the same material as earth...
What do you think about the Netherlands testing their lunar rock (from Nasa) and found to be petrified wood? They were trying to insure it, hence the reason for testing.
When I first came across that story a few years back, I took one look at the picture of it they included and thought, "For Christ;s sake, that's obviously petrified wood! It looks exactly like the petrified wood bookends I bought at that rock shop years ago. How could no one notice this for 40 years?"
In unrelated news, be sure to look up my eBay listing for genuine Moon rock bookends. Best price!
They could have covered it in concrete dust at least, just like the studio they filmed the moon landing.
I think what it's proof of is three things:
They don't care.
They don't care because no one's looking.
None of the rest of us have noticed that no one is looking.
For sure, agreed. I see the cabal getting exponentially more blantant since the pandemic because they know what zombies most people are.
you got a source for that bruh? besides some obscure iknoweverything.net site?
A simple Google search yields plenty of results but here you go.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna32581790
Granted you cant expect msm to give you a straight story if this allegation is true, they are going to try and give you a story to smooth it over. But this part is pretty weird to insure a worthless rock for half a million on accident:
"He said the rock, which the museum at one point insured for more than half a million dollars, was worth no more than 50 euros ($70)."
cool story bro...
My Retort
it was probably stolen and replaced with a fake --- if they could steal hundred million dollar works of art --- they can steal rocks
Wouldn't the museum collect on the 500k insurance policy then? Surely someone would notice, hey this rock looks a bit different then last week? Surely they had pictures of it for comparison.
However, if they never went to the moon, yet gave out 'moon rocks' to a bunch of people, they run the risk of it being analyzed in the future. This seems like a story you would write to make people think it was all just a misunderstanding. That is pretty embarrassing after all to find out a moon rock is definitely from earth.
Even if the "moon rocks" were real (which is highly questionable), they could have been obtained from much easier unmanned missions.
The Russians did it
Moon rocks are fake.
You are just repeating foolishness about the subatomic makeup part and radiation markers.....it sounds impressive but its BS
So just to confirm, there are zero places in the solar system other than the moon where one could obtain moon rocks?
im sure you could find bits and parts on earth (obviously from impacts over millions and millions of years) . we even found a piece of mars in the antarctic on earth...
Heres some reading material
the main point is cosmic radiation markers.. they are unique and can be only found in space.. and not earth (since we have a magnetic field protecting us)
Ok but above you said
Doesn't add up. Moon rocks could have been bombarded by cosmic rays for billions of years and then made their way to earth.
then certain carbon atoms would be embedded into the rock..
its like a genetic marker for planetary bodies... a rock on mars in not the same as a rock on earth as a rock on venus..
on an atomic level that is... like every human has unique genetic markers.. we all have different eyes.. but we all have eyes... we all have different finger prints.. but we all have hands..
Mods,
Please censor this flerfer post as it is in the rules on this site to not discuss anything related to NASA being fake or corrupt.
It is this sites take that anything NASA related, including the moon landing and all pictures taken from space of a round earth are 100% real.
Please see the sticky post with the voting from several weeks ago.
Kindly requesting that mods mark this post as FlERfER PRooF.
This type of post is ridiculous and is why people think we are crazy.
Why are you in this forum?
❗⚠️📢 Gay jew Alert ❗⚠️📢
Judging from all the downvotes, poe’s law is a bitch eh?
You are a complete piece of stupid shit. Go back to sucking your corporal's dick.