A film makers take on why the Moon landings were impossible to fake

[mako88sb]

I haven't a clue about the specifics of what he's talking about but it's great to see him explain it all in a way that even I can understand:



Jarrah White who I'm sure some are familiar with made a video to counter some of this. Here's the response and again, he does a brilliant job:

[Rhodes]

Nice! Thanks!

[mapuc]

Thank you for the share.

I for one truly believe USA have been on the moon.

This belief have had it's torn now and then.

Markus

[Wolferz]

Those who think it was a hoax can abide by their opinions but, it happened. I witnessed the whole thing on TV, back when TV was honest in its reporting.
Mister Collins makes a good case regarding the tech available at that time and he's right. There is no way any of it could have been faked. The first television camera they set up on the moon was burned out when they inadvertently turned it toward the sun. Good thing there was a backup available or we wouldn't have witnessed anything other than astronaut home movies upon their return. That would have given the hoaxsayers plenty of ammo.
And of course we couldn't see any stars in the video feed. Can we see the moon during the day here on Earth, except during certain phases? Can we see stars during the day? The moon is always up there every day, as are the stars. They just get washed out by intense sunlight. Sunlight on the moon is much much brighter due to lack of atmo. Earth shows up in the lunar sky because it's a very brightly reflective planet.

[Rhodes]

As the author of the video explains, many of the hoax/conspiracy theorists do not have knowledge of photography or video! Many night photos that on takes, we do not see the stars, due to the exposition time.
I also laugh when during the reply video,the person that had made the refute for the first video says that 16mm film is used in TV and 35mm in cinema.

[Jimbuna]

Confirms what I have always believed...it did happen.

[Penguin]

Thanks, mako88sb for sharing this, 2 great vids.

Two things were very interesting:
in the first video, how the author pointed out how often people who want to believe, slide into "magic" explainations.
I had a similar discussion during the weekend about cryptology. My two friends, who are no hoaxers, but not very computer savy, speculated about how the authorities have supercomputers who would not be available to the public. I tried to point out that even the best computers can't beat the laws of exponentiality, though they couldn't really wrap their heads around this. Even tried the old ricecorn on a chessboard example, but it didn't help.
Point is, it is not easy to explain technology and especially its limitations. Therefore big kudos to SG Collins for trying to explain it to the layman, I think he did a great job.

The second video exposes much about how those troofers work: Google some keywords, take one of the first 10 links and quote some random stuff= proof. Nice and comfy from your home computer, why go out and ask people who know their stuff.

The book about the moon broadcast Collins' held into the camera looks also pretty interesting. For anyone who's interested in the technical aspect of the TV broadcast, I can also recommend this site: http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/Apollo_11/

Originally Posted by Rhodes

I also laugh when during the reply video,the person that had made the refute for the first video says that 16mm film is used in TV and 35mm in cinema.

To be fair, this is the only thing I saw Collins' didn't get 100% right. Many TV movies/series have been shot on 16mm, though I think it wasn't very common untill super 16 came out.
In ENG, 16mm (reverse film due to time constraints) stayed popular untill the mid 70s, untill U-Matic became popular and affordable. However this makes Collins' quality remark still valid.
The hoax guy should just have gone to any film set on the world and ask the camera assistant what the hell they are doing after every take when they check the cam for fuzz which might have landed on the film during seconds of shooting.
That's why I loved this sentence: "If you're thinking of shooting 16mm at double speed with a 2300 foot load: Don't!" True words, dat!

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Wolferz

The first television camera they set up on the moon was burned out when they inadvertently turned it toward the sun.

I am pretty sure that happened on Apollo 12. When Bean accidentally pointed the Westinghouse color TV camera at the sun while repositioning it after about 40 minutes of use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_TV_camera