I thought it was familiar.

This guy is just plain clueless.

Seen this before
And responded in kind

__________________
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.

Here is a link to a picture of the handsome BA.[/quote]

.... clearly showing a flying pyramid from the Moon hovering above his head. Proof! Proof!

Re: computing power -- I have more computing power in my brain than a bat (or so I hope), but that doesn't mean I can fly! Where do these people get their "refutations?"

I received the following e-mail today from Mr. Charles Yost. Mr. Yost is the editor of the magazine that originally published the NOVA frames and speculated upon the nature of the anomaly.

--- begin ---
> From: "Electric Spacecraft, Inc." <cay@electricspacecraft.com>
> Subject: recent NOVA Apollo 8 footage
> Date: 10 Sep 2003 13:42:34 -0400
>
> To: Jay Windley and all / www.clavius.org
>
> I want to thank Jay Windley for clearing up the "Moon Mystery"
> presented in Issue #36 of Electric Space Craft, August 5, 2003. Jay,
> you are absolutely right. I went back and looked at the NOVA VHS video
> "To the Moon", and sure enough the illusion of moving over the moon
> was produced by zoom photographing a still photo. It was perfectly
> obvious when looking for it as you suggested. It is easily noticed
> because the Earth grows larger and larger at the same rate as the
> entire lunar surface. I never noticed that before. Thanks -- mystery
> solved!
>
> The dark object could well have been lint or debris on the still
> photo; and the puff-like ejection, some lighting effect. But, this was
> certainly not a real-time event on the moon. It was immediately
> obvious by your e-mail to me that you knew what you were talking
> about.
>
> A little background to all who became exposed to this peculiar "Moon
> Mystery" presented in Electric Space Craft:
>
> I first noticed the dark object perhaps a year ago and showed it to
> many very respected and competent engineers, one of whom programs the
> Hubble telescope and is also an amateur moon enthusiast, like me. None
> of us had an explanation for this strange event on the NOVA video, all
> of us fooled by the rapidly mixed and changing scenes and the audio of
> the astronauts dubbed in presumably real time. Artistic license was
> employed well in the NOVA presentation to create the intended
> illusion. We all should have detected the use of trick photography,
> but did not! By the way, the particular scene occurs about 59 minutes
> 40 seconds into the VHS for those who want to look at it.
--- end ---

Despite his having named me and the Clavius web site as the decipherers of this puzzle, I merely built upon the significant and correct work of R.A.F., Phil, and many of the other regulars here. Mr. Yost's praise and gratitude more properly belong to all of you.

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

Wasn't Yost supposed to validate Greyhawk? (At least in Greyhawk's mind.) Good job Jay =D> . This reminds me of the email that (should have) squashed the 'missin phobos' deal in another discussion.

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

That was my favorite line from the whole discussion.

Approximately -1730.

__________________
Neither love nor money makes the world go round.
Unfortunately, we're down to about 17 ounces of the highly unstable stuff that does.

Man, that's cold.

Kilopi wrote No, that's colder than cold

Pun me, baby!!

__________________
"Most editorials are written by people that love to argue but got kicked off debate team for not making any sense." -Seanbaby

Sorry guys, I haven't looked in on this for a while.

I will admit that my "BS" makes mistakes and/or improper assumptions from time to time, BUT who said -1730 celsius?????

Do these people have any kind of education background or do they just print what they think with no methodology or concrete facts at all?

Gees, you guys missed the MOST Obvious mystery artifact in the photos........FINGERPRINTS......on the MOON!!

The images posted at the L.E.M.U.R. website of the alleged "smokestack" acquired by the Apollo 8 circumlunar mission were most probably a series of stills taken with the Hasselblad onboard camera, which was equipped with a motordrive. The camera motordrive would produce a series of still images, which is what the L.E.M.U.R. site appears to contain, since the lunar landscape is changing position relative to the alignment of the camera. I would tend to agree with the proposition suggested by "JimTKirk" that the image is that of an impacting Saturn V booster or an impacted booster which is outgassing at the moment of photographic capture. The difficulty here is that from a nominal orbital altitude of 70 miles, the object in the photographic series would appear to be larger than the dimensions of a Saturn booster stage.

Welcome Apollohistorian!

You've to be good to live up to your name here...
With regards to your post: I think, the subject is already closed. You'll find out after going through through the last five pages of this thread.

By at least an order of magnitude. The real difficulty is that, instead of "a series of still images," it's been established that it's a single still image panned and zoomed, so that the smokestack has to be some sort of flaw introduced during production.

i know this thread is old, but i stil feel i have to say this because to me it is obvious. and i think that my experience as a graphic designer could bring some interesting perspective into this..


1) there are moiré patterns in the sequence

this means this footage was made by filming a TV or a monitor. ie someone took a videocamera and pointed it at a tv or computer monitor showing the image of the moon. the patterns are clearly visible in the left area of the sequence. (it looks like faint swirly lines across the image)


2) the moiré pattern's frequency is changing

this means someone is filming a monitor and zooming or moving in with the camera. if the camera would stay at a fixed distance from the monitor the patterns would also be fixed. the camera is moving relative to the monitor beeing filmed.


3) the black "thing" is in the shape of a mouse cursor

it is highly likely that someone is filming and zooming in on a computer monitor showing an image and that they forgot to move the cursor out of the image. that the cursor is black suggests that it is a macintosh computer.


4) the lower right corner edge is "bent"

if you look at the bottom right corner one can see the edge of the monitor beeing filmed. this edge is moving a little bit. this serves as a point of reference and tells us that the camera is moving relative to the monitor beeing filmed.


5) the blury "smoke" puff does not move with the monitor edge

if one simply holds one's mouse cursor over the animated gif and exactly over the blury artefact one can see that the blury thing does not move in reference to the cursor and hence it does not move in reference to the camera filming the monitor. hence it is an artefact within the camera space. because the camera is zooming in and the blury thing is fixed to the camera's frame of reference it could be some dirt coming in and out of focus on the camera lens.



hi-5
/soul8o8

Welcome onboard soul8o8,

Thanks for the excellent comments. I just goes to show that one doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to debunk these know-nothing HBs.

I just getting sick and tired of the unbelievable gullibility of supposedly intelligent individuals on this board!

FACTS:

Source: http://shadowboxent.brinkster.net/moon/esjmoon.html

1. The "puff of smoke" remains in the exact same position within frame for all three frames of the gif cycle given. This is consistant with the appearance of a micrometeorite on the external camera lens shield. Note - there are MANY recorded micrometeorite events recorded throughout the space program. It's not even at the "prove it" stage, but rather, at the gas station windshield cleaning stage.

It just is. Physical (pitted Freedom, Orbiter, etc. windshields) and photo evidence galore.

Get over it!

2. "As Apollo 8 orbited 70 miles above the lunar surface," as claimed in the video, for the surface to emit a "puff of smoke" as it claimed, it would somehow have to explain a gross aberration of modern physics, for it's impossible for any "puff of smoke" to be emitted below in such a short period of time, yet vanish between one frame and the next, regardless of whether the Moon had an atmosphere or not (and we know it does not!).

3. Since we know the Moon does not have an atmosphere, and the orbiting altitude of the camera, the propogation rates of a "puff of smoke" of any composition or pressure in a vacuum, we know beyond any shadow of a doubt that the aberration appearing on frame had absolutely nothing to do with any surface phenomena, but rather, is entirely consistant with micrometeorite activity on the protective lens cover.

Final comment: If the average, well-informed citizen of the U.S. can figure these things out, why do the incessant postings of unclutched drivel keep appearing on supposedly sound, intellectual websites like this one?

Oh, yeah - that's right - so we can debunk them with science, physics, and cool logic as above.

:wink:

Wow. Upon further review of this thread, it appears it was solved in 2003. Here I am refuting it from a different angle in 2005.

How many hours until the board closes? Nine?

Down to five, now. You'd better get busy; you've got a lot of thread/arguments to refight between now and then!

__________________
"Transport of the mails, transport of the human voice, transport of flickering pictures - in this century, as in others, our highest accomplishments still have the single aim of bringing men together." St. Exupery

I suggest you take a step back and rethink your posting method here. Your opening statement in that post was by definition ad hominem. You have posted several contentious things today. If you wish to continue to post on the new baord, I strongly urge you to cool off.