Did Neil Armstrong land on moon??

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

more share options
Embed For WordPress.com

Without related presentations

27 comments

Comments 1 - 10 of 27 previous next Post a comment

+ d 4 months ago
Hi,
well I can answer a couple of the questions just from general knowledge.

Issue 1 . Odd shadow directions. If the moon was flat the shadows would be the same but it’s not, your own picture [ for issue 2] illustrates that the ground has both hills and ditches. All of which read as grey to a distant camera. A shadow falling on a bump will appear to rise and one falling on a ditch would appear to be going down. Hence the different angles.

Issue 2. The fill light .The astronaut taking the pictures was wearing a bright white suit, this would have bounced back a certain amount of light but these aren’t LIVE photo’s. They were taken on the moon ,brought back and given to a team of top photo printers to get the best possible prints from the negs. These were the most expensive holiday snaps in the world , so they made sure there was no harsh shadows before they released them to the worlds press. Google ’photographic dodging techniques’

Issue 3. No stars in the frame ; it’s daytime. The sun is out, no camera then or now, can expose for both the delicate light of stars and the harsh spotlight of the sun.

Issue 5: film burns at 250 degrees..These are quite clearly Tv images not film. Especially as the lander is taking off, who would have brought back the film ? There was a remote camera left on the moon, this had an operator at mission control. I’ve seen an interview with the guy. There was a 10 second delay on his commands to the camera actually moving, so he had to use his best guess to sync the pan up with the take off.

Oh, and to answer one of the guest comments, the reason the flag isn’t there anymore is because it was blow to pieces when the lander took off. It was only about 20 feet from the lift off zone and it was made of the lightest thinnest materials possible.
+ Explicit-Ayce Illicitness 4 months ago
u americans are cheats!! replying to guest15fdc3 comments.

there was no fukin digital cameras at that time u plonka! there wer only film ones. digital cameras are recently invented!

HE DID NOT LAND!!! HE’S A TYPICAL AMERICAN CHEAT!!! GEORGE BUSH’S SIDEKICK!!
+ Sean Almond 4 months ago
OK...so if someone came up to me and asked me if i believe that they really did land on the moon...i’d be uncertain as to all the conspiracy in the news...however...if they REALLY did land on the moon 40 YEARS AGO.. then my only question is...how come they never went back up?? seems obvious...maybe... they have better technology this time around to go up...oh wait...it seems to me as tho this day in age people aren’t as gullible as they were back then! just my opinion!
+ guest15fdc3 6 months ago
ok seriously?
you dont have to have a man on the moon to take pictures. if they can make space ships than they can obviously make machines to take pictures. and the film would melt?? its called a digital camera! it transmits colors back to earth, it doesnt use film. And the flag wasnt moving. it looks like it because the moon has 0 gravity, which means everything stays still. so the flag stayed where they put it. thats why its in the same position in every picture you look at. and maybe the other issues are too technical for you because you dont have a brain! this is the stupidest thing i’ve ever seen.
+ gueste52738b 6 months ago
you dont have a penis... get a life
+ guest3d0679ef 7 months ago
ok there is no wind or aur on the moon so if he really did land on the moon it would be there today ha!!!!!!!!!!! look it up on the nasa website
+ guest184235 7 months ago
of corse he did:( (duh)
+ guesta59ab1 7 months ago
I AGREE HE DID LAND!!!!1
+ guest41da707 7 months ago
he did land!!!!!! idoit
+ guest8e04e0b3 7 months ago
There was no 'Moon Landing' Because If You Look Closely At Moon Tapes, you will see that there is no dust present on the moon and they semm to be running so wouldnt dust be kicked up from the moon if they were actually there??

Comments 1 - 10 of 27 previous next

Notes on slide 1

3 Favorites

Alfredo Blandon, Training Specialist / Designer at eTelecare Global Solutions, favorited this 3 months ago
Tags neil armstrong
ramansiva1995 favorited this 4 months ago
babariajignasha favorited this 3 years ago
Tags landing moon

Did Neil Armstrong land on moon?? - Presentation Transcript

NEIL ARMSTRONG WAS NOT THE FIRST PERSON TO LAND ON MOON………. THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE
Issue 1 : Since the Moon has only one light source, the Sun, the shadows must be in line. But in this cases, it looks as if there are multiple light sources in moon, which is not possible.
Issue 2: The foreground of many images of the astronauts on the Moon are filled in with light, while the shadows remain absolutely black, again proving that there are multiple light sources.
Issue 3 : There are no stars in the background from pictures taken on the Moon.
Issue 4 : In some images, a huge light source can be seen reflected in the astronaut's visors. This has to be a very bright, nearby source. There is no possibility of external light source in moon.
ISSUE 5 How could NASA take TV images of the LM ascending on Apollo 15, 16, and 17 if there was no one on the Lunar surface to man the camera? ISSUE 6 There can't be any pictures taken on the Moon because the film would melt in the 250° temperatures. Any film exposed to 250° would indeed melt at that temperature
Issue 7 The LM engine was very powerful. How come it did not leave a crater below the spacecraft? Why didn't it kick up any dust when it landed?
issue 8: The footprints left by the astronauts are proof that the Moon landings are fake. This one is also essentially a two pronged argument. First, the Fox show charged that the LM engine was so powerful that the upper layer of dust should have been blown away around the LM, so there should not be any footprints. Others have charged that the footprints should not be there since in the absence of water as a bonding agent, they should not maintain coherent shapes and sharp outlines.
issue 9: There is no dust on LM footpads. -- According to Kaysing and Fox, this is the strongest evidence that the Moon landings are faked. They allege that with the swirling dust from LM descent engine, the foot pads should be covered with dust.
issue 11 : The pictures below show that flags are waving. And they never will. The flag was on the airless Moon, just as we all knew.
THERE ARE MANY MORE ISSUES ON THIS, BUT THOSE ARE TOO TECHNICAL FOR US. ….. NEIL ARMSTRONG WAS NOT THE FIRST PERSON TO LAND ON MOON