the statement: "The "best evidence" I observed on FOX's "Moon Hoax" program"
reductively prequalifys your arguments.
I do not think that was best evidence, nore do others
The "best evidence" I observed on FOX's "Moon Hoax" program
that was used to support the claim that the Apollo missions
were a hoax was two Apollo 15 photos with the same mountains
in the background and yet the lunar module (LM) was only in
the foreground of one of the two photos. The program said:
FOX Narrator: "These two photos seem to have the same mountain
backdrop, yet the lunar module was only visible in one of them.
Seemingly impossible since the Lem never moved, and its based
remained even after the mission. Some suggest the same artificial
backdrop was used when shooting two entirely separate pictures."
FOX showed: http://www.erols.com/igoddard/MoonFOX5.gif
and this: http://users.erols.com/igoddard/MoonFOX3.gif
I posted the following explanation for this anomaly, which I
have since confirmed with evidence presented following this:
Gee, the more you think about this "anomaly" the less anomalous
it gets. The LM is closer to the astronauts than the hills or
mountains behind. Each of the two photos in question was clearly
taken from slightly different angles. Being close, the LM is
fast to move out of the camera frame as the photographer changes
location, yet the same movement only shifts the mountains a touch.
So the photo without the LM is explainable as the same mountains
seen from a position in which the LM is not in the view finder.
That explanation is confirmed by the following evidence.
At the NASA site I found the two photos FOX showed:
(A) http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/images/pao/AS15/10075727.jpg
(B) http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/images/pao/AS15/10075728.jpg
Now, the following three graphics together form a 360 degree
panoramic view of the area. Image 2 below shows the mountains
seen in images A and B above -- they're a section of the full
mountain range toward the right of image 2 below. Observe
that in image 2 the lunar module (LM) isn't visible in the
foreground in front of the mountains from this view. The
mountains are obviously very large and far away since the
camera has moved to a position about 100 yards behind the
LM seen in photo A above, yet the mountains are similar.
The LM is behind the camera as it faces the mountains and
thus it is visible 180 degrees opposite in images 1 and 3:
(1) http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/images/pao/AS15/10075751.jpg
(2) http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/images/pao/AS15/10075752.jpg
(3) http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/images/pao/AS15/10075749.jpg
This means the "anomaly" of the two photos shown on FOX as
evidence of fake background is explained by the mountains
being so large they can be seen from many angles and each
point of view can have a unique set of foreground contents,
and the shape of the hills hardly changes even though the
viewer's foreground will have significantly changed. This
panorama view nullifies what I saw as the "best evidence"
(assuming it had validity) presented on the FOX program.
I pasted each of those 3 graphics last listed together
and they do form a continuos 360-degree panoramic view,
hence the LM is visible in 1 and 3 due to full rotation.
Other important points on the FOX "Moon Hoax" program:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/skeptics-forum/message/3578
and also http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
GODDARD'S JOURNAL: http://users.erols.com/igoddard/journal.htm
______________________________________________________________
Asking the "wrong" questions, challenging the Official Story
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:45 MDT
