Andrew

What you ask is perfectly reasonable.

If your correspondent has a problem with it, get him/her to treat it as a hypothetical question, something like this: "Okay, just humour me then. Would a computer of [insert relevant statement about Apollo computer] be sufficient for the task?"

If your correspondent hedges any more, I think we can assume s/he doesn't have an answer to the question apart from personal disbelief.

I went one better, I just asked him what would be sufficient for the task, irrespective of whether he believes it's been done or not. Of course, as I was writing that, he had responded that he was being asked to prove a negative. He does seem to be evading the question entirely.

__________________
"Earth diameter is 7,900 miles, and Moon diameter is 2,160 miles. It takes on average 90 minutes to complete one Earth orbit, so one Moon orbit should take roughly 25 minutes." - Sam "NasaScam" Colby

Bearer of the highly coveted "I found Venus in nine Apollo photos" sweatsocks.

DataCable^2008 A+

I went to the link that AstroMike posted, (thanks, AstroMike!), the picture that NOVA used is #2393...it's exactly the same.

It was definitely zoomed in.

That he believes that the moon landings were not accomplished is the whole point behind the question. He says he believes they didn't happen, he cites the alleged deficiency of Apollo era computers as one of the reasons. I'm asking him to show that they really are deficient. I don't understand this nonsense about him not having to answer the question because he doesn't believe in the moon landings.

Ha! Talk about circular reasoning:

1. He doesn't think the landings took place, because the computers weren't powerful enough;

2. He doesn't need to prove the computers weren't powerful enough, because he doesn't believe the landings took place.

#-o

Did you read his latest response? I don't think he and I are from the same planet.

I had a quick look at the thread, and had a little chuckle.

"DataCable asked the question better than you, but I won't answer him anyway."

Still, I'm curious to hear his metallurgical reason why the landings couldn't have occurred.

I don't know...he answered my post with a "you are wrong" then proceeded to say all manner of strange stuff and I have no idea what he is talking about.

Does anyone here have any idea what a pseudo frame is?

Does anyone here have any idea what a pseudo frame is?

No, and I doubt he does either.

I expect that he's just fumbling through both photo-analysis and logic.

Good stuff. I was just going to mention that there are some types of editing software that can produce these effects(such as zooming).
Not sure if that is what NOVA used in this instance.

Folks-- I have written up a synopsis of this "smoking gun" (har har) episode on the main site. Read all about it!

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

Great!

I'd like to add that on PBS - Nova and other documentaries that happen to deal with space, galaxies are depicted as majestically turning, or even approaching as they turn. If they're actual galaxies and not animation, this is accomplished in the same manner as the moon zoom shot. A still picture of a real galaxy is slowly rotated and/or zoomed in on. Although galaxies rotate, we don't see them move that rapidly while viewing through telescopes (in our lifetimes). I think the filmmakers show them turning to illustrate that they do turn, and also because its visually more dramatic for a TV show. :wink:

Good & gracious post BA .. congrats R.A.F. - you've made it on to the Main Site! 8)

It's elementary filmmaking. When you shoot a still photo with a film camera, you apply some sort of motion to it so that it fits the dynamics of its surroundings. You pan from one side to the other. You zoom in or out. You do something to create focus. If I had to put an earthrise photo in a film, I'd start on the earth and zoom out to reveal the moon. The Nova producers chose to do the opposite. But the point is that you don't just aim the camera at the picture and just leave it there for five seconds.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Jay, nice work at the LEMUR forum too. I didn't want to enumerate why it had to be a Haselblad image, but you, as usual, give enough detail to make it quite clear that people better take care when arguing with you.

I'm often accused of overkill. I simply believe in a thorough, methodical approach. I'm privileged to work with people who share that approach and can appreciate its power. It's not that I don't want people to question me. It's just that I want people to appreciate how much thought goes into what I say.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

One minor note, Jay: Apollo 8 did not carry a color camera in the CM. It was one of those junky, low resolution black-and-white ones with the streaky vidicon tubes. That NOVA image is definitely not from the TV camera.

Thanks. I don't have the Apollo 8 reference handy, so I used the most capable of the Apollo television cameras as a worst-case reference.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Sorry for arriving at this one late, but I have to make a small point.

I have just looked at the animated GIF and something is immiedeately apparent.

As the frames progress, the Earth gets significantly bigger..... perspective means it wouldn't change aparent size during an entire orbit of the moon. Therefore after about 10 seconds of vieving, it was obvious that this was a zoom in on a still.

Sorry, just wanted to rant.

I looove this board.

__________________
There we were in the park when suddenly some old lady says I stole her purse..... I chucked the professor at her but she kept coming..... So I had to hit her with this purse I found.
-- Bender

I was just lookin at those pics and it brought back a memory of a UFO report a heard a few years ago about a school project which involved kids goin out into the community and vidoe taping news style reports. During the taping of one of the reports an object whized by the camera apparently behind the student on film and it was quickly concluded to be a UFO. Some of the evidence was that if it was the size of a comercial jet liner it would have to be traveling some insane speed nearing that of the space shuttle to cover the distance the camera could view at the distance the object appeard to be at, however on further inspection it turned out to be a bug that actually flew infront of the student on film. ( i would hate to think about what would be said if the bug had flew behind thus making it impossible to realize its true nature.) With that in mind i would like to see some of the people insistant that its a smoke stack try and enhance a tape of the nova program rather then put together a couple frame gif, unless that was the extent of the tootage from the program that is involved in which case i would advise against any conclusions involving conspiracies and the like. Another note i have is that the object in question isnt the only one to ( to coin a nancy leader word, wobble) in the gif provided, making me wonder why it is the only one mentioned. Is it purely sensationalism, being the bigest one of them all, even said it took me about an hour to actually find the object, i mean i dont see anything particularly special about the object in question. To rap things up i just want to add my two cents to maybe shed some light to those who asked about other possiblilities for what the object could be. Hope i was of some assistance.

On another note is there anyone out there that might know if the three cams were stationary or if they could be turned to point in any direction. The answer to that might help determine which one or ones could of taken a shot of the module moving forward.

Just wnat to say thanks for listening, im sure its not a bug but never the less the simple answers seem to be the correct ones. So with that Peace out.

Therefore after about 10 seconds of vieving, it was obvious that this was a zoom in on a still.

Yes, the earth becomes bigger. The only zoom lens on board the spacecraft belonged to the black-and-white television camera. The zoom in the NOVA footage could not have been done in the spacecraft.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base