Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Rusty Lander
What I will say is this - you say that even with powerful lighting from 100 feet you couldn't get it to light up very much but the point is, if done in some kind of artifical setting (studio or desert) the lighting wouldn't be anywhere near as much as 100 feet away, but alot less. Surely the lighting would be strong enough at that distance.
|
Mate - you need to actually
read the replies that Jay has clearly spent some considerable time on.
The arguments that are usually put forward state that the Apollo photos show shadows that fall incorrectly for a single, distant light source. They also state that shadows should not be backfilled sufficiently to allow detail to be photographed. Both claims are nonsense. What Jay and the film crew did was show that a single distant light source will permit backlighting of shadows, and will produce shadows that the HB's incorrectly regard as anomalous. The set up was not designed to show how the missions could have been hoaxed, it was designed to show that the claims of abnormal backlighting & shadows were without basis.
If you want to argue closer lights - go ahead. But now the onus falls on
you to explain the lack of multiple shadows, sharply defined shadow edges, lack of multiple light sources in reflective surfaces, etc etc etc.