No, I will not be posting any simulations

Then I reject your theory.

... it was you who bigheadedly tried to show everyone that you could prove me wrong with your pictures

... at your repeated request!

You are really something. You chew me out because I don't have any empirical examples. I provide the examples, and you say, "No, I think if you had done it this way it would have proved my point instead," and then you refuse to provide substantiation?

You have made a whole string of accusations and have admitted not wanting to spend the time or having the inclination to support them. Why should anybody take you seriously?

Now your trying to back off and not support your claim

No, I have supported my claim. And I have further given empirical evidence to disprove your claim.

You have not provided one iota whatsoever of empirical evidence to back up what you say should and would be the case. My money is firmly where my mouth is.

Do you seriously think that the pictures which show the pegs on a piece of card reproduces the angle that the astronauts were standing at on the lunar surface?

No, I don't. But it shows that the contour of the terrain will affect the apparent length of shadows in exactly the same way that the lengths of the shadows appear to be affected in my Fig. 1. It is not quantitatively exact, but then again you never answered my question whether you would accept miniatures.

Perhaps you could reproduce picture 10 with the sun to the right of the frame?

Perhaps you could actually back up with some actual evidence what you believe to be true.

Your supposed evidence doesn't even start to reproduce the shadows in the Apollo picture at all

Yes, Dave, it does. Conclusively. It shows that the type of contour I have shown is present in the Apollo photo will have that qualitative effect on the shadows in the Apollo photo.

whether your trying to create them with artificial light or natural sunlight.

The point, quite bluntly stated, is that you can't reproduce the Apollo photo using artificial light. I have demonstrated this. If you believe that it can be reproduced with artificial light, then it is up to you to devise a demonstrate to prove it. (N.B. -- This paragraph originally said "natural" instead of "artificial". I meant "artificial". Sorry for the confusion.)

You choose not to. Therefore I can quite justifiably say that you refuse to supply any evidence in favor of your argument. Are you happy with that?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JayUtah on 2002-06-04 14:38 ]</font>