40 years later

by Stormfish July. 20, 2009 4651 views

the only thing that stirs people up AT ALL these days about our first and only steps onto another world is the most stupid conspiration theory that it all has been made up in a hollywood basement.

there is a clear increase in people's minds being f*cked up by ruthless, media horny blighters. and that's the most polite way i can address them.

so, should you meet one of these oh-so informed and ah-so concerned no-gooders and can hold yourself back from doing what buzz aldrin did [bing.com], here is a well documented reference page [clavius.org] that debunks in a most scientific way any of their points.

(for wikipedia enthusiasts, a well done summarize of the most popular hoax points and their scientific debunking arguments can be found here [en.wikipedia.org].)

oh, and in a slightly less raging mood, i present you a quote by norman mailer from his fabulous 1970 essay about the apollo moon landing [en.wikipedia.org]: “The event (Apollo 11 Moonwalk) was so removed, however, so unreal, that no objective correlative existed to prove it had not been an event staged in a television studio??the greatest con of the century??and indeed a good mind, product of the iniquities, treacheries, gold, passions, invention, deception, and rich worldly stink of the Renaissance could hardly deny that the event if bogus was as great a creation in mass hoodwinking, deception, and legerdemain as the true ascent was in discipline and technology. Indeed, conceive of the genius of such a conspiracy. It would take criminals and confidence men mightier, more trustworthy and more resourceful than anything in this century or the ones before. Merely to conceive of such men was the surest way to know the event was not staged.”


(photos are public domain, courtesy of NASA)

buzz aldrin on the moon, the “famous” version, post-processed for press release by increasing contrast and adding more black head space. can you see the “spot light” that obviously shines onto the astronaut?

the original, unedited picture. unfortunately, armstrong almost cut off the head in this iconic shot… the "spot light effect is much less eminent since the contrast hasn't been boosted here. - some conspiracy people have claimed also that a picture like this, with the light source in the background, would produce the front side of the astronaut's suit completely dark; so there must be additional light sources coming from the front side to make him visible. this doesn't take into account that the moon's surface (sand) was highly reflective in the sun light, thus spreading and shattering the only light source (the sun) of this scene.

buzz aldrin stands on the moon in front of the american flag, july 20, 1969 (picture taken by neil armstrong and cropped on both sides for comparison with the one below). - does the flag move in the wind, as it might have on a movie scene filmed somewhere in the desert of planet earth?

the same motif at the same place, a couple of seconds later. the astronaut has slightly moved to make a turn to the left. the flag hasn't moved at all. it is wrinkled because it was pressed into a tight container on the journey to the moon. there is no wind on the moon.

this is actually a combination of both pictures above in .GIF file format which allows you to see that there is no momevent of the flag.

  Be the first to like this post
Join the conversation
3
There are 3 comments , add yours!
Storytaylor 8 years, 11 months ago

well, well... it´s a pont of view. great post my friend.

8 years, 11 months ago Edited
-- Lyency 8 years, 11 months ago

what a jab!

8 years, 11 months ago Edited
Tolga Ç. 8 years, 11 months ago

yep no wind space!!!

8 years, 11 months ago Edited
Up
Copyright @Photoblog.com