The USA Fake Of The Moon Landings

[jim bell]

----- Original Message -----
From: juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com>
To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
Cc: jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: The USA Fake Of The Moon Landings

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

Again, not surprising.  Take a picture of a (non-sun) star, with a small-lens camera (under 50 inch objective) and that star should appear as a point source of light, if the camera is well-focussed.  Even then, the amount of light hitting that analog "pixel" is probably vastly lower than a camera aiming at a nearby surface illuminated by earth's Sun, as would be seen on the Moon by an astronaut taking a picture.
http://petapixel.com/2015/05/26/film-vs-digital-a-comparison-of-the-advantages-and-disadvantages/
"A release by Kodak showcased that most film has around 13 stops of dynamic range."
That's a factor of about 8000.  
           Jim Bell