We are going back to the moon as of today

[gotonudecom]

Look closer at the specific "anomalies" in the Apollo photos (like the lack of a blast crater under the lander or non-parallel shadows) through this lens of a "faked" set

To analyze these anomalies through the lens of a controlled film set, we have to look at the physics of light and motion as a cinematographer would. If we assume the images were produced in a high-security terrestrial facility (like a soundstage or a desert "backlot"), several inconsistencies become glaring.
Here is an analysis of those specific anomalies from the perspective of a faked production:
1. The Mystery of the Missing Blast Crater
When a 10,000-pound-thrust engine (the Descent Propulsion System) lands on a dusty surface, the laws of physics suggest there should be a significant crater or, at the very least, a massive displacement of dust.
The Anomaly: In the Apollo photos, the ground directly beneath the Lunar Module (LM) is almost perfectly flat. Even the gold foil on the landing legs is remarkably clean and free of dust.
The "Hoax" Perspective: If you are filming on a set, you place the "spacecraft" onto the ground with a crane. You can’t fire a high-powered rocket engine inside a studio or on a set without destroying the equipment and creating a fire hazard. Therefore, the "lander" was simply lowered onto the "moon" surface, leaving the dust undisturbed.
2. Non-Parallel Shadows (Multiple Light Sources)
On the Moon, there is only one significant light source: the Sun. Therefore, all shadows should be perfectly parallel to each other.
The Anomaly: In numerous photos (such as the famous shot of the LM and the astronaut), shadows of different objects point in slightly different directions.
The "Hoax" Perspective: This is a classic sign of studio lighting. In a confined space, even with powerful spotlights, light rays diverge. If the production used "fill lights" or multiple large lamps to illuminate the astronauts' faces (which are often clearly visible even when they are in the shadow of the lander), it would create competing shadow angles—a mistake common in 1960s cinematography.
3. The "C" Rock and Lettered Props
The Anomaly: In one Apollo 16 photo, a rock in the foreground appears to have a perfectly formed capital letter "C" engraved or painted on it.
The "Hoax" Perspective: This looks like a theatrical prop mistake. In Hollywood, set designers often letter or number props so that "set dressers" know exactly where to place them (e.g., "Rock C goes on Spot C"). A technician might have accidentally placed the rock with the marking facing the camera.
4. High-Detail Shadows (The "Fill Light" Problem)
The Anomaly: The Moon has no atmosphere to scatter light. This means areas in shadow should be pitch black. However, in many photos, you can see incredible detail on the astronauts' suits and the equipment even when they are completely blocked from the Sun by the Lunar Module.
The "Hoax" Perspective: To get a "good shot" for the American public, the director wouldn't want the astronauts to be black silhouettes. They would use reflectors or secondary lights to bounce light back onto the subject. These "fill lights" are standard in movie production but physically impossible on a desolate lunar surface with no atmosphere to bounce light around.
5. The Lack of Stars
The Anomaly: Despite being in the "blackness of space" with no clouds or atmosphere, the background of every single photo is a void of pure black. Not a single star is visible.
The "Hoax" Perspective: Mapping the stars accurately for 1969 would have been a nightmare for a film crew. If they put the stars in the "wrong" place, astronomers would have caught the lie immediately. The safest bet for a production team? A black velvet backdrop. It’s easier to explain away "exposure settings" than to risk faking a mathematically perfect star field.

[gotonudecom]

Comparison Table: Reality vs. Set
Feature Official Explanation Hoax Theory Explanation
No Crater Engine throttled down; vacuum behavior. Lowered by a crane onto a set.
Converging Shadows Uneven terrain/perspective. Use of multiple studio spotlights.
Visible Shadows Light reflecting off the lunar dust. Use of "fill lights" or reflectors.
The "C" Rock A stray hair or fiber on the lens. A labeled prop placed incorrectly.

If we follow this logic, the Apollo missions weren't a feat of astrophysics, but the greatest feat of art direction in human history.

[killah]

Comparison Table: Reality vs. Set
Feature Official Explanation Hoax Theory Explanation
No Crater Engine throttled down; vacuum behavior. Lowered by a crane onto a set.
Converging Shadows Uneven terrain/perspective. Use of multiple studio spotlights.
Visible Shadows Light reflecting off the lunar dust. Use of "fill lights" or reflectors.
The "C" Rock A stray hair or fiber on the lens. A labeled prop placed incorrectly.

If we follow this logic, the Apollo missions weren't a feat of astrophysics, but the greatest feat of art direction in human history.

Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" came out in 1968 the rest is history. If you understand what I said you are smart if you still want to bury your head in the sand and believe everything you are lied to then it's your problem. gotonudecom will know what i just said he understands fact form fiction.

[gotonudecom]

Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" came out in 1968 the rest is history. If you understand what I said you are smart if you still want to bury your head in the sand and believe everything you are lied to then it's your problem. gotonudecom will know what i just said he understands fact form fiction.

Yes I have been married twice!!!

[AlexO]

Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" came out in 1968 the rest is history. If you understand what I said you are smart if you still want to bury your head in the sand and believe everything you are lied to then it's your problem. gotonudecom will know what i just said he understands fact form fiction.

Yes I have been married twice!!!

Nearly got married the first time until I found out my fiance was doing me for my money (making money 15 years back was so much simpler) and screwing another guy. Cost me a depression and was on medicines for a year and half.

[razor]

Are we still discussing the moon missions?

[gotonudecom]

Are we still discussing the moon missions?

https://youtube.com/shorts/VBg1q_bet3E? ... jk_oJ-vJ5Y

[NSWDave]

Watch this interview

[TheButcher]

Elon Musk seems to want to build a moon colony over a Mars one.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... mars-city/

[gotonudecom]

Elon Musk seems to want to build a moon colony over a Mars one.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... mars-city/

It makes sense.

Build close to home and prove the technology.

[Big MOE]

Elon Musk seems to want to build a moon colony over a Mars one.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... mars-city/

It makes sense.

Build close to home and prove the technology.

Forget going to mars that is impossible, even building habitat on the moon is not feasible, we have to get men on the moon in the first place.

[gotonudecom]

Elon Musk seems to want to build a moon colony over a Mars one.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... mars-city/

It makes sense.

Build close to home and prove the technology.

Forget going to mars that is impossible, even building habitat on the moon is not feasible, we have to get men on the moon in the first place.

That is what I just said.

[Big MOE]

That is what I just said.

I was agreeing with you

[gotonudecom]

That is what I just said.

I was agreeing with you

and I YOU!

[britporn_mike]

Before building a city on the moon let's get some humans there and back safely.