The USA Fake Of The Moon Landings

[juan]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 05:56:08 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> From: Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net>
> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 1:03 PM
> Subject: Re: The USA Fake Of The Moon Landings
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 12/13/2015 11:53 AM, Veg wrote:
> > http://blackbag.gawker.com/did-stanley-kubrick-fake-this-video-of-
> stanley-kubrick-1747558774
> 
> 
> >Example:  No dust on the faceplate in a very famous photo of an
> >astronaut on the moon.  This widely distributed "proof" of a moon
> >landing hoax falls flat when placed in its native context:  The
> >propaganda extravaganza around the Apollo program produced and
> >published /lots/ of high quality graphics.  Time Magazine used all
> >the photos they really liked, without referencing which were taken
> >in training environments vs. on the Moon OR hesitating to
> >extensively retouch the "real" pictures for maximum artistic quality
> 
> One ostensible 'disproof' of the moon landing was the claim that the
> video camera didn't show any stars in the moon's sky.  However, the
> scenery seen in those shots (lunar soil; equipment; astronauts) was
> extremely bright, somewhat like a beach in full sunlight.  The
> contrast ratios of (non-silicon) video pickup tubes



	I think the objection is that the stars are missing on ordinary
	pictures shot using ordinary (super amazing military grade)
	film.



> in that era were
> not wide, meaning that any star in the sky (other than the sun)
> couldn't be visible AND show the backgrounds too. Jim Bell