Posts
Think? we went?..................but I think they used their "secret" technology ??? .......but as always ---you decide! http://www.jayweidner.com/Kubricked.html
Fig. 1a polygon-shaped crater ahead of the rover, low res photo ID: AS17-133-202
Fig. 1b closer view of polygon crater photo ID: AS17-133-202, high-res, red lines added by author
Fig. 2b closer view of junk materials, ID: AS17-133-20239, hi-res, circles added by author
Fig. 8 Note the large mesh dish, which is the high-gain antenna to communicate
with Earth. No other large objects are out in front of the rover. This is important
to know for the next image you will see.
Fig. 9 Back of studio floor lamp (red circle) was captured in this photo.
Red arrow points to gel filter holder
used for coloring light output. This photo was slightly re-sized to fit this page.
ID: AS17-135-20637, low res.
Fig. 10 - Astronaut gloves on display in the Apollo to the Moon Museum exhibit
Apollo 17 - Proof it was Kubricked
by Ted Twietmeyer
Please read all of the text before reviewing
the photos. This text provides additional information that you probably
will not otherwise notice when reviewing the photos. If there is
material that others have also discovered, so be it. My research was
done using a white room approach. Unless stated otherwise, all ideas,
discoveries and facts presented are my own work. It would be appreciated
if my inbox is not stuffed with “I found it or so-and-so found it
first” nonsense. I will respond to all sensible emails.
I need to admit here that my goal in
reviewing Moon walk and rover photos from Apollo 17 was to find possible
artifacts. When I found one particular image after many hours of
reviewing photos, my research work came to a complete stop.
After reviewing hundreds of Apollo 17
images, I found conclusive proof a stage was definitely used for most,
if not all of the Moon surface photos. The entire world has been
“Kubricked” for decades. Others in recent years found through image
processing that the black sky in Moon walk images is actually a painted
backdrop. We shall see that image processing is not even needed to see
this.
Over and over in photos taken on the surface
of the Moon I continued to find the same irregularities. Keep in mind
all these photos were supposedly taken by astronauts who trained and
practiced for weeks (their own words) to use a high quality Hasselblad
camera.
This camera is completely manual, and
requires the astronaut to set the distance to the lens (in feet) before
taking each picture. This means the focus of the camera inherently has a
limited depth of focus, controlled by the setting in feet. With this is
mind, consider the following characteristics this camera will have:
- Rocks and objects on the Moon's surface within yards of the rover will be in focus, only if that is what the camera is set for.
- Distant objects like a mountain ridges will be in focus, if that is what the camera is set for (such as infinity.)
- It is not possible to obtain razor sharp mountain peaks in the distance and sharp focus on rocks only a few yards from the rover at the same time.
And yet, there are more than 100 images that
accomplish the impossible with rocks and objects in focus up close,
while distant mountain ridges miles away are also razor sharp focus.
Forget about the old argument about “stars are not being visible means
it's faked.” This argument is invalid because the F-stop setting (iris)
had to be set for extremely bright sunlight. Sunlight on the Moon is
full brightness like that of outer space and can easily wash out a
photo. Starlight is many magnitudes dimmer than sunlight and it makes
complete sense stars cannot be seen.
Another question arises are the distant
peaks and ridges REALLY that far away? Highly skilled matte painters for
Hollywood films have long known how to fool the eye with fake distance,
decades before the first Apollo flights were every launched. Old Star
Trek TV series and others used this trick all the time to create scenes
that could not be filmed in the real world. Matte paintings were often
combined with Chroma-key to superimpose backgrounds on small objects.
Chroma-key was commonly used in TV studios
to make weather forecasters appear in front of a large map of the
country. Any blue color was substituted electronically (or “keyed”) with
another image from a different camera or video source. It was long
known in the TV news industry that no weatherman or some news reporters
should ever wear blue. Today, Chroma-blue has been replaced by green.
I mention all this because in the staged Apollo 17 (and likely other Apollo missions) Chroma-key was not used that we can tell. Keep in mind that in the late 60's and early 70's, Chroma-key was far from perfect.
Older readers may remember early weatherman having parts of their bodies disappear and re-appear in while doing the weather.
I was involved with commercial broadcasting
at that time, and Chroma-key was more like a balancing act. When a
studio video board operator used Chroma-key, he worked a joystick which
was moved around slightly in an attempt to balance the superimposed
effect. That was state-of-art 40 years ago at the same time Kubrick
did the Apollo work.
If any part of a astronaut disappeared on
live video because of a Chroma-key problem, that would have been the end
game for NASA. Kubrick wisely crafted his production without using
unreliable electronic effects. But to do so requires that everything is
constructed life-size, or as big as it can be when crammed into a
secret, closed stage housed inside a building.
In reviewing hundreds of Apollo 17 images, I
noticed that the same distant mountain peaks appeared in the distance
over and over with razor sharpness. Yet at the same time objects on the
ground were also quite sharp. The best camera you can buy today cannot
do that - almost 40 years later.
What would be most telling of being
Kubricked, is to see some part of a studio lighting instrument in a
photo. There is a film clip on youtube that shows this in as a rehearsal
to make the “One Small Step for Man.” But someone at one time claimed
this was shot for a commercial. When I challenged that and asked what
commercial, no one came forward to state what company commissioned such a
re-enactment.
IMAGE HANDLING Below are a few images of
interest I found from Apollo 17. These photos were taken straight from
NASA computers, with just one exception - a photo of astronaut gloves
in a museum. No image processing has been done to these images unless
noted for each one.
Most images were available as low res and
high res formats. I show the source image NASA ID number and whether it
was in low res or high res. Enlargement are taken from a small clip from
a hi-res image of the very same scene to help reduce document size. No
sharpening, contrast or color changes, etc... are used since these may
introduce unwanted artifacts.
The first group of images shows
polygon-shaped craters. What makes these unusual is that scientifically
conducted, high speed projectile impact tests of various types and sizes
were performed in laboratories to simulate meteor impacts. Results of
these tests have shown that impact craters are always round.
Fig. 1a polygon-shaped crater ahead of the rover, low res photo ID: AS17-133-202
Fig. 1b closer view of polygon crater photo ID: AS17-133-202, high-res, red lines added by author
Fig. 2a Collection of junk materials photo ID: AS17-133-20239, low
res
The reason I say “junk materials” is that since this is a film stage,
it was probably constructed with junk materials as filler. In the photo below
it looks like much of these materials is actually made of chunks of concrete.
Fig. 2b closer view of junk materials, ID: AS17-133-20239, hi-res, circles added by author
Fig 3 Both the horizon and objects on the ground (lower right and lower left corners) are all in focus. This is not possible using a Hasselblad camera which requires distance to subject to be manually set. The
only way this could be accomplished is if the distant horizon is not as
far away as it appears. Matte painters are experts at fooling the eye.
Distant black sky and ridges are probably painted on a backdrop.
Fig. 4 - The mystery ladder. Note how the bottom ladder rung is level with the
astronaut's hip joint. Life support backpack he is wearing weighs 60lbs.
in Moon's gravity, and much more on Earth. Did he jump up onto that ladder
with 60lbs pulling him backward? Why didn't NASA design the ladder to extend
downward almost to the ground to prevent possible injury or death? A cracked
faceplate, helmet or ripped suit could mean death.
Fig. 5 Descent engine should have created a large blast zone under the lander
but did not. Grey engine nozzle is visible here but there is no blast crater
or expelled material.
Fig. 6 Lander pad proves the point. Only a few feet from the engine nozzle,
this pad has almost no dust on it. Engine gases would have pushed the flour-like
fine dust outward in every direction far past these lander pads. But here
we can see the fine dusty soil is essentially undisturbed. The lunar vehicle
must have been placed by a crane. Note that struts are also free of dust
as well.
The following images are important to prove the final image will be what it
is. These low-res photos show the front and side of the lunar rover used
for Apollo 17.
Fig. 7 Astronaut with Hasselblad camera mounted on the spacesuit chest bracket.
Not the relatively
unobstructed view facing the direction of travel. This will be important later.
Fig. 8 Note the large mesh dish, which is the high-gain antenna to communicate
with Earth. No other large objects are out in front of the rover. This is important
to know for the next image you will see.
Fig. 9 Back of studio floor lamp (red circle) was captured in this photo.
Red arrow points to gel filter holder
used for coloring light output. This photo was slightly re-sized to fit this page.ID: AS17-135-20637, low res.
Closeup insert of vertical lamp height
adjustment knob was added by author. It is commonplace in film and
industry to hang property and maintenance tags on knobs using string
loops. Remnant of string is still visible wrapped around knob. No other
image processing was performed on this image.
Right edge of the filter holder (red arrow) is visible in many other rover photos on the NASA website.
In Fig. 9, note the shadow of the high gain
dish antenna on the ground in front of the rover. Antenna is also
visible in Fig. 8, upper left corner. In the communications dish shadow,
a cable is visible coming down beside the antenna post. This cable is
not present beside the studio lamp post in the left foreground. Lamp
post is not casting a shadow.
This author has used knobs just like these
in industry and has seen them on studio lamp stands. These knobs are
difficult to grab and tighten sufficiently. Astronaut multilayer gloves
have permanently attached hard plastic finger tips to protect the fabric
from punctures.
There is no question astronauts could never loosen or tighten this knob.
And there is no question this is a
studio lamp that does not belong on the Moon, which somehow was never
caught by NASA censors.
Fig. 10 - Astronaut gloves on display in the Apollo to the Moon Museum exhibit
There is no doubt that Apollo 17 photos and possibly other Apollo mission photos have been faked.
However this does not
indicate we never went to the Moon. I have one first person witness
friend of impeccable character who is still alive, and who was there at
Cape Kennedy when Apollo 11 was making it's final descent and was buzzed
by flying disks (UFOs.) NASA apparently switched the broadcast to the
Kubrick production, which is what all of us saw in 1969.
It may be possible that due to some
oversight, all the Apollo images were fogged by solar radiation. Due to
the historic nature of the Apollo missions (and NASA not wanting to look
like the world's biggest idiots and lose funding) many Apollo images
were re-created.
Ted Twietmeyer
tedtw@frontiernet.net
tedtw@frontiernet.net
