Re: NASA and Space general conspiracy discussions : Mon Feb 08, 2016 4:19 pm
Stand-Offish wrote:
But you are not replicating what happens on the moon .... and has been explained there are more than one light sources ... the surface, the Earth, the other astronaut's white suit ...etc
But you won't have it, which makes you look daft.
Why on Earth (pun intended) would anyone want to replicate your one-dimensional experiment?
But you won't have it, which makes you look daft.
Why on Earth (pun intended) would anyone want to replicate your one-dimensional experiment?
He is anxious to find "anomalies". And proud of himself that he can spot all these "anomalies" in all these images. Which the fakers missed, or weren't half as clever as him, else they wouldn't have made this catalogue of basic easy-to-spot-by-rank-amateurs mistakes.
He has invested so much in his anomaly spotting being correct that he won't hear of the possibility that his amateur experiments don't disprove the veracity of the Apollo moon images.
Given that we can now actually see totally independent images proving the landers landed and are still in place, the logical thing for him to do if actually interested in the facts, is go back to his experiments and analysis to work out why he got what are clearly false result. Work out what mistakes he made.
But he cannot countenance the thought that it is his experiments/analysis that hold the error, so, in classic Black Knight stylee, will resolutely to stick to the position that he and his experiments and analysis cannot possibly be wrong, so therefore, although NASA did land men on the moon, several times, they still faked all the photos. By accurately recreating vast swathes of the Moon's surface in some studios somewhere. And pretending to take real photos. It's a novel variation, but if it makes him happy, then why not?