Debunked: Moon Landing and NASA Photo - non parallel shadows

U

Unregistered

Guest
I have a question regarding a particular photo which appears to have multiple light sources even though the Sun is the only light source. If anyone could explain this that would be great or put forth theories.

The following instructions:

Go to: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS11-40-5930
Download in HiRez (4.9MB)
Put into Photoshop, Adobe Fireworks or any program that lets you turn the picture into negative
Put into negative ( this is to get better detail of the shadows)

Start from the position of the Astronaut, all shadows should be parallel as they originate from the same light source. Go to the left of the Human shadow and notice the shadows of the rocks point inwards. Then go to the right of the Human shadow and again, they point inwards. Then look at the ELM(Vehicle) and the shadow is not parallel at all.

I'm confuzzled.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
This is a very old and common moon landing hoax question that has been answered many times before.


The the shadows of flat ground point towards the vanishing point (the point directly opposite the sun) and ground is not flat, that's all.

If there were multiple light sources, there would be multiple shadows.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The wide angle accentuates the convergence that's all, it does not affect the shadows being non-radial (not converging on the same vanishing point). That's due to the uneven slopes of the ground.

Here's a good example of shadows converging on flat ground:
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Here's a similar photo on Earth, with the sun:



The shadows roughly converge, but as the ground is uneven, they don't converge perfectly.
 
Last edited:

Billzilla

Senior Member.
*bumping* an old thread, didn't think was worth starting a new one.

Here's a good video from a fellow well versed in the art of video & photography back in the late 60's & early 70's. Well worth watching.

 

frankywashere

New Member
I have a question. Some idiot friend of a friend was saying to me that the astronauts could not have survived the high levels of radiation the Van Allen Radiation belts would have givin the astronauts. I know this isn't true. Is there some good reference that disproves this?

F
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I have a question. Some idiot friend of a friend was saying to me that the astronauts could not have survived the high levels of radiation the Van Allen Radiation belts would have givin the astronauts. I know this isn't true. Is there some good reference that disproves this?

F

The official story:
http://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/books/apollo/S2ch3.htm

Some scientific discussion of the conspiracy theories:
http://www.wwheaton.com/waw/mad/mad19.html

Unfortunately the science is a little beyond most people, so it become simply an argument from authority, and the default "you can't trust the government" trumps science a lot of the time.
 

Billzilla

Senior Member.
I have a question. Some idiot friend of a friend was saying to me that the astronauts could not have survived the high levels of radiation the Van Allen Radiation belts would have givin the astronauts. I know this isn't true. Is there some good reference that disproves this?

F

The short version is that NASA is very aware of the high-radiation zones in the VAB and plotted the course of the Apollo missions to avoid them. They didn't just go directly from the Earth to the Moon, they flew a curved path hence the mid-course rocket burns to stay in the safe areas of the VAB.
 
Top