Second point, looking at the shadow, the sun is pretty low on the horizon and very bright. Look at the reflection on the back of the astronaut. But it was pitch dark in the back where the sun was supposed to be.
Third point, the front of the astronaut and the cat were very bright, as if a reflector was used to reflect light onto them to show the details in their front. Normally their front would be pretty dark relative to the strong light behind them.
Fourth
point. Remember the infamous Armstrong footprint on the moon? And also
the numerous footprints around their lunar module in an area that looked
damp? The astronaut above was walking some distance from the rover
behind. But there was no trace of any footprint behind him or around
him. It looked as if he was planted on the spot for a photo shoot and a
cat just walked past nonchalantly.
23 comments:
First cat on the moon.
But sadly cannot see the cat. Did the cat wear any space suit I wonder? Never yet heard of cats wearing space suits.
Uncle, you need help? Put on your reading glasses.
Thanks Anon 11.03. Yes I can see a big cat with reading glasses on and looking more closely. How on earth could the cat survive without wearing a space suit walking like Michael Jackson doing a spacewalk?
No, no, it is not 'How on earth could the cat be there'?.
More appropriately - 'How on the moon could the cat be there'?
They actually tried to scare others from finding out the truth. They claimed they met Aliens on the moon, who warned them not to go back and they therefore did not go back. Sounds credible. But now the cat is out of the bag, all because of the Chinese. Actually they never did go there and never had the technology to do it, so to make it sound credible, they invented the Alien story. Did they say they lie, they cheat and they steal?
Heard of a place called California Desert? In the desert, cats no need to wear anything also can.
A person putting on a space suit did not mean he is on the moon. 1960s and 70s, where got photoshop?
Now with China going there, the Americans now very brave, not afraid of aliens warning anymore. Now they also want to go to the moon to compete with China to see who get there first.
But, but, they must have a working rocket to be able to get them further than the Space Station.
Hollywood is going to be very busy again to produce another moon landing for the Americans. This time would be easier so many Indian IT talents working for them, cheap and good.
Just look up the Bruce Willis 'Armageddon' movie to find a clip of Hollywood asteroid landing. That should do the job. Can even use some clips from that movie for their Mars and Venus landings. No one has been to Venus before, right?
Remove the band,lah. Then can see the cat clearly.
Anon 12.11 who say no one been to Venus? I ever been mound of venus in KTV. 😂😂😂
This is from a news clip, so unable to remove band.
Not you lah Redbean. The gundu who put the band. They want the people to see the cat then they block with words. Lam pah pah lan.
In the video it was very clear with the cat walking slowly across the screen. It was a fairly short clip, with the cat walking about 1 foot distance.
Latest from the Olympic.
Su Bingtian, the first Asian man to break the 10 sec barrier for 100m did it again. Half an hour ago, in the semi finals in Tokyo, he came first in his heat with a time of 9.827 or 9.83 sec, an Asian record.
His time is also the fastest among the 3 semi finals. If he can maintain his form in the finals, live at 9:50pm, a medal is withing his grasp.
In this form, China's 4x100m men relay would be in contention for a medal as well.
With Usain Bolt retired, the world's fastest man title is thrown wide open. No Jamaicans in the finals but 3 Americans, a Canadian, Italian, British, Nigerian, and a South African in the line up.
Watch live at 9:50pm.
Oops, only 2 Americans made it to the finals. American Bromell, the best hope did not qualify with his 10 sec.
Su is the first Asian in this 100m event after 89 years. The last Asian was in 1932, a Japanese.
Somehow read the time wrongly. Race one hour earlier and missed it live.
Su lost his form and managed 9.98sec, and came in 6th. Italian came in first at 9.80sec. Second was America at 9.84sec and Canadian third at 9.89 sec.
Su came off very slow, not his normal self. The earlier race must have caused some strain in his muscles. No medal.
Still a remarkable performance for an Asian against a mainly African and European field.
Of the 20 gold medals the USA won to date, 11 came from one sport which is swimming. They are no more the dominant force in Athletics. Many countries are also chipping away at their dominance in swimming.
I have been examining all the photos of moon landings and the American astronauts on the moon. All the pictures were fakes. The photography technology and the difficulties in taking the pictures would not be able to produce perfect and very sharp and properly exposed photographs. Mind you, the astronauts fingers were as big as a boxer's glove.
Then all the lightings were artificial. Light coming from all angles, shadows point left and right, back and front. Areas that should be dark because of shadows were as bright as the bright side.
The photos were too perfect, perfect colour, perfect sharpness, perfect exposure, perfect angle... like taken in studios by the best photographers and with filler lights and reflectors everywhere.
Someone also commented that to and from the moon would have to go through a very strong radiation field. No negative films could survive the radiation.
Also, the relative size of the earth and the moon, looking from earth and from the moon, the earth cannot be the same size as the moon but many tens of times bigger than the moon if looking from the moon.
Enough said of the hoax.
Like they said, too good to be true, you know it is not true.
I'm just curious. Why must the earth be tens of times bigger than the moon when you look from the moon? Does it make a difference whether it is full moon or new moon?
Go back to school son.
Actually no point if at this age you have to ask this question.
The moon is 1/4 the size of the earth.
Let me make it easier to visualise the earth and moon in space.
Roughly if the earth is the size of a basketball, the moon would be about the size of a tennis ball. Looking at them from equal distance, that would be the size they appeared in the sky relative to each other.
Another way of looking at it, if one is looking from the basketball, the moon would appear like a tennis ball and vice versa. Standing on the moon looking at earth, the earth would be huge, very big. Thus a picture showing man on the moon and the earth looking like the size of the moon is definitely fake. The relative size of the earth seen from the moon should look 4 times the size of the moon seen from earth.
Redbean, I don’t like to point out mistake, but if you remember our A level Physics text, you will remember the following analogy.
When you are standing on a curved surface, you cannot tell how large the object you are standing on is. On earth, you can see the horizon about 12 miles (approx 20 km) if there are no buildings around you and the day is very clear (different if it is a desert because of texture and similarity of sand which the contrast confuses the eye. On Jupiter you can see a lot more because the planet is larger and hence appears flatter. Estimated maybe 30-40km even though Jupiter is many times bigger than the earth (the limitation is our eyesight and the combined focal length of our cornea together with the vitreous fluid and the lens in our eye). Jupiter will approximately appear the same to us like as if the earth was flat. Hence you cannot say the moon is ¼ size because you don’t know how large we (the earth) are. It is the same thing when you look from the moon. You cannot know how large the moon is when you are standing on it and looking at the earth. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Yes, you cannot tell how big the object is if you are standing on it.
We are talking about objects that we are looking at, at equidistance, and one is 4 times the size of the other. The difference in size is very obvious. Cannot be the same or nearly the same.
Post a Comment