/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2574485]

So I know there's been alot of talk on this board lately about the moon landing hoax, and I haven't been able to back of my belief too much until now.

Why are none of the pictures damaged? No film damage from radiation. No atmopshere means no protection from radiation, so how the hell weren't any of the pictures they took effected by any radiation?

[Anonymous No.2574488]

So I know there's been alot of talk on this board lately about this nigger making the same moon-landing-hoax thread each day, and I haven't been able to back of my belief too much until now.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.2574496]

Oh man, you're right, when the film was outside of the cameras and outside of the cases and outside of the spacecraft to be towed back home for no reason, why didn't the radiation effect them?

Or, you know, maybe the film was never exposed to any radiation was more protected than the already adequately protected crew?

[Anonymous No.2574497]

because you don't know what radiation is

[Anonymous No.2574504]

>>2574496
Protected how? There was no special suit or anything around the camera? It was just a camera that was exposed. Saying it wasn't exposed to any radiation is ludicrious.

[Anonymous No.2574509]

I too would like to know the answer to this puzzling question. Radiation is a huge problem that I dont think they couldve overcome

[Anonymous No.2574516]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories#Environment

[Anonymous No.2574526]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_9gMn1OYPw&feature=related

Start at 3:00. This is the only proof you will ever need that the moon landing was faked. Actually behind the scenes banter from the crew admitting to the thing being staged.

[Anonymous No.2574540]

>>2574526
Would love to see someone try and debunk this. Busted.

[Anonymous No.2574550]

>>2574526
Busted.

[Anonymous No.2574567]

>>2574526
Everyone's gotta excuse for the radiation but no one can explain this

[sage No.2574581]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories#Environment


2. Film in the cameras would have been fogged by this radiation.

The film was kept in metal containers that stopped radiation from fogging the film's emulsion.[72] Furthermore, film carried by unmanned lunar probes such as the Lunar Orbiter and Luna 3 (which used on-board film development processes) was not fogged.

[Anonymous No.2574595]

>>2574485

Because it was shot in the backyard of my house.

[Anonymous No.2574596]

>>2574526
http://www.clavius.org/bibfunny1.html

Herp

[Anonymous No.2574601]

>>2574526
They brought a jeep to the moon but not a telescope? Give me a break. Let's here someone explain this.

[Anonymous No.2574621]

>>2574596
Did you even read this page? NOTHING on it explains the clip in the movie. Try harder, bro.

[Anonymous No.2574633]

>>2574621
You see those little buttons at the bottom? Click the one labeled "Next."

[Anonymous No.2574651]

>>2574633
Again, nothing explaining the video. I read the whole thing. You can't explain the video.

[Anonymous No.2574652]

>>2574526
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_9gMn1OYPw&feature=related
Not sure if serious.
>1. sped up footage of astronauts walking on moon
Whether it's original speed or speed up, it's 100% obvious that 1/6 weight is being supported by the legs and motions. When people try to fake moon walking with slow mo, it's 100% obvious that it's fake because you can see the legs taking the full weight.
>hi-res video camera.
No hi-res video cameras did not exist then. The high res color video is from a FILM camera. You can't get that footage until the camera comes back.
>the claim that the footage from apollo 11 is actually being taken from low-earth orbit.
This just makes no sense. You can see the earth. You can't get that view of the earth from low-earth orbit.
>There is radio silence after Houston asks Apollo 11 a question
So what? Happens all the time. Astronauts are busy sometimes. lol
>Recorded video for playback later
Yep, they had film still cameras and film motion cameras for high res recording. Electronic video was only low-res. Film versions could only be played later.
>Blocked window facing sun, so they could photograph the earth without a reflection on the earth-side window
Yes, obviously, so?
>claims the earth is actually a circuluar window showing a small part of the earth.
Really? STFU bitch, you can see the continents.
Anyone who believes anything this bitch is saying needs to hang themselves now. Everything the astronauts are saying contradicts her.

[Anonymous No.2574661]

>>2574651
That's a lie. Page seven addresses the exact section you claimed was proof of a hoax.

[Anonymous No.2574666]

>>2574652
>You can't get that view of the earth from low-earth orbit.

It's a camera trick. You don't understand how it worked. Watch that part again and rethink your statement. Telling me to shut up and calling me a bitch isn't an argument, kiddo.

[Anonymous No.2574701]

>>2574666
Shut up bitch

[Anonymous No.2574697]

>>2574601
Why the fuck would they take a telescope to the moon? Well... they had a 1x power telescope on the command module for stellar navigation.

[Anonymous No.2574709]

>>2574540
>>2574550
>>2574567
>>2574601
Conspiracy theorists: Calling others gullible while immediately believing any shitty, sketchy piece of "evidence" that supports their side of the argument.

[Anonymous No.2574714]

>>2574601
Why do people keep saying this? They DID bring a telescope to the moon. They just didn't spend all their time looking at stars. If you have a limited amount of time on foreign terrain, are you going to spend all your time doing something we can do on earth, or are you going to act like you're on the fucking moon and get shit done??

[Anonymous No.2574720]

>>2574666
It's an absurd claim. You can see the sharp outline and the edge of the earth and the faded part of twilight line. You can see the continents of asia and australia. The bitch in the video says that's because it's the inside of the window on one edge and the outside on the other edge. LOL Everything she says is laughable. I don't think it was made to be taken seriously. I think it's a parody.

[Anonymous No.2575012]

FYI: OP's image is a trollface

[Anonymous No.2575025]

>>2575012
No it's not. This is a troll face.

[Anonymous No.2575029]

>>2574526
>>2574540
>>2574550
>>2574567
Watch this, fags. You're sucking Bart Sibrel's cock. He's the guy behind this movie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUFO8AGMwic

Take a good look at your source of information.

[Anonymous No.2575032]

>>2575029
>Do you think you can get to heaven without repenting?
>Why don't you swear on the Bible that you walked on the moon?
LOL

[Anonymous No.2575057]

>>2574651
>Again, nothing explaining the video. I read the whole thing. You can't explain the video.
Tide comes in, tide goes out. You can't explain that.

Seriously, how about saying something more concrete than "debunk the video, fags".

[Anonymous No.2575068]

>>2574720
>I don't think it was made to be taken seriously. I think it's a parody.
Unfortunately, Bart Sibrel was dead serious about A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon.
>>2575029

[Anonymous No.2575085]

>>2575029
He deserved what Buzz gave him.

[Anonymous No.2575088]

>>2575085
The little bitch tried to sue him for that punch, too. Didn't work.

[Anonymous No.2575106]

>>2575029
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUFO8AGMwic
never gets old

[Anonymous No.2575191]

Apollo 11 from lunar orbit, problem?

[Phantasm !agoricWOck No.2575235]

The theory that makes more sense is that the Moon landing happened, but NASA found something unsavory up there and staged the landing they showed to the public later. This would of course make their subsequent landings perfectly reasonable

[Anonymous No.2575244]

>>2575235
lol
OK
I'm guessing you just finished watching this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsw16g1wa9g

[Phantasm !agoricWOck No.2575323]

>>2575244
Nah, that theory has been thought up way way before that movie lol