Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Top secret cover up of Apollo 18 and more!!!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Opmmur" data-source="post: 51623" data-attributes="member: 13"><p><strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial'">Apollo 17 - Proof it was Kubricked</span></strong></p><p> </p><p>by Ted Twietmeyer</p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="font-family: 'Arial'"><strong>For completed data link and pictures use:</strong> <strong><span style="color: #ffffff"><a href="http://www.jayweidner.com/Kubricked.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #ffffff">Jay Weidner</span></a></span></strong></span></span></p><p> </p><p>Please read all of the text before reviewing the photos. This text provides additional information that you probably will not otherwise notice when reviewing the photos. If there is material that others have also discovered, so be it. My research was done using a white room approach. Unless stated otherwise, all ideas, discoveries and facts presented are my own work. It would be appreciated if my inbox is not stuffed with “I found it or so-and-so found it first” nonsense. I will respond to all sensible emails.</p><p> </p><p>I need to admit here that my goal in reviewing Moon walk and rover photos from Apollo 17 was to find possible artifacts. When I found one particular image after many hours of reviewing photos, my research work came to a complete stop.</p><p> </p><p>After reviewing hundreds of Apollo 17 images, I found conclusive proof a stage was definitely used for most, if not all of the Moon surface photos. The entire world has been “Kubricked” for decades. Others in recent years found through image processing that the black sky in Moon walk images is actually a painted backdrop. We shall see that image processing is not even needed to see this.</p><p> </p><p>Over and over in photos taken on the surface of the Moon I continued to find the same irregularities. Keep in mind all these photos were supposedly taken by astronauts who trained and practiced for weeks (their own words) to use a high quality Hasselblad camera.</p><p> </p><p>This camera is completely manual, and requires the astronaut to set the distance to the lens (in feet) before taking each picture. This means the focus of the camera inherently has a limited depth of focus, controlled by the setting in feet. With this is mind, consider the following characteristics this camera will have:</p><p> </p><p>Rocks and objects on the Moon's surface within yards of the rover will be in focus, only if that is what the camera is set for.</p><p>Distant objects like a mountain ridges will be in focus, if that is what the camera is set for (such as infinity.)</p><p>It is not possible to obtain razor sharp mountain peaks in the distance and sharp focus on rocks only a few yards from the rover at the same time.</p><p> </p><p>And yet, there are more than 100 images that accomplish the impossible with rocks and objects in focus up close, while distant mountain ridges miles away are also razor sharp focus. Forget about the old argument about “stars are not being visible means it's faked.” This argument is invalid because the F-stop setting (iris) had to be set for extremely bright sunlight. Sunlight on the Moon is full brightness like that of outer space and can easily wash out a photo. Starlight is many magnitudes dimmer than sunlight and it makes complete sense stars cannot be seen.</p><p> </p><p>Another question arises are the distant peaks and ridges REALLY that far away? Highly skilled matte painters for Hollywood films have long known how to fool the eye with fake distance, decades before the first Apollo flights were every launched. Old Star Trek TV series and others used this trick all the time to create scenes that could not be filmed in the real world. Matte paintings were often combined with Chroma-key to superimpose backgrounds on small objects.</p><p> </p><p>Chroma-key was commonly used in TV studios to make weather forecasters appear in front of a large map of the country. Any blue color was substituted electronically (or “keyed”) with another image from a different camera or video source. It was long known in the TV news industry that no weatherman or some news reporters should ever wear blue. Today, Chroma-blue has been replaced by green.</p><p> </p><p>I mention all this because in the staged Apollo 17 (and likely other Apollo missions) Chroma-key was not used that we can tell. Keep in mind that in the late 60's and early 70's, Chroma-key was far from perfect.</p><p> </p><p>Older readers may remember early weatherman having parts of their bodies disappear and re-appear in while doing the weather.</p><p> </p><p>I was involved with commercial broadcasting at that time, and Chroma-key was more like a balancing act. When a studio video board operator used Chroma-key, he worked a joystick which was moved around slightly in an attempt to balance the superimposed effect. That was state-of-art 40 years ago at the same time Kubrick did the Apollo work.</p><p> </p><p>If any part of a astronaut disappeared on live video because of a Chroma-key problem, that would have been the end game for NASA. Kubrick wisely crafted his production without using unreliable electronic effects. But to do so requires that everything is constructed life-size, or as big as it can be when crammed into a secret, closed stage housed inside a building.</p><p> </p><p>In reviewing hundreds of Apollo 17 images, I noticed that the same distant mountain peaks appeared in the distance over and over with razor sharpness. Yet at the same time objects on the ground were also quite sharp. The best camera you can buy today cannot do that - almost 40 years later.</p><p> </p><p>What would be most telling of being Kubricked, is to see some part of a studio lighting instrument in a photo. There is a film clip on youtube that shows this in as a rehearsal to make the “One Small Step for Man.” But someone at one time claimed this was shot for a commercial. When I challenged that and asked what commercial, no one came forward to state what company commissioned such a re-enactment.</p><p> </p><p>IMAGE HANDLING Below are a few images of interest I found from Apollo 17. These photos were taken straight from NASA computers, with just one exception - a photo of astronaut gloves in a museum. No image processing has been done to these images unless noted for each one.</p><p> </p><p>Most images were available as low res and high res formats. I show the source image NASA ID number and whether it was in low res or high res. Enlargement are taken from a small clip from a hi-res image of the very same scene to help reduce document size. No sharpening, contrast or color changes, etc... are used since these may introduce unwanted artifacts.</p><p> </p><p>The first group of images shows polygon-shaped craters. What makes these unusual is that scientifically conducted, high speed projectile impact tests of various types and sizes were performed in laboratories to simulate meteor impacts. Results of these tests have shown that impact craters are always round.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Opmmur, post: 51623, member: 13"] [B][FONT=Arial]Apollo 17 - Proof it was Kubricked[/FONT][/B] by Ted Twietmeyer [SIZE=5][FONT=Arial][B]For completed data link and pictures use:[/B] [B][COLOR=#ffffff][URL='http://www.jayweidner.com/Kubricked.html'][COLOR=#ffffff]Jay Weidner[/COLOR][/URL][/COLOR][/B][/FONT][/SIZE] Please read all of the text before reviewing the photos. This text provides additional information that you probably will not otherwise notice when reviewing the photos. If there is material that others have also discovered, so be it. My research was done using a white room approach. Unless stated otherwise, all ideas, discoveries and facts presented are my own work. It would be appreciated if my inbox is not stuffed with “I found it or so-and-so found it first” nonsense. I will respond to all sensible emails. I need to admit here that my goal in reviewing Moon walk and rover photos from Apollo 17 was to find possible artifacts. When I found one particular image after many hours of reviewing photos, my research work came to a complete stop. After reviewing hundreds of Apollo 17 images, I found conclusive proof a stage was definitely used for most, if not all of the Moon surface photos. The entire world has been “Kubricked” for decades. Others in recent years found through image processing that the black sky in Moon walk images is actually a painted backdrop. We shall see that image processing is not even needed to see this. Over and over in photos taken on the surface of the Moon I continued to find the same irregularities. Keep in mind all these photos were supposedly taken by astronauts who trained and practiced for weeks (their own words) to use a high quality Hasselblad camera. This camera is completely manual, and requires the astronaut to set the distance to the lens (in feet) before taking each picture. This means the focus of the camera inherently has a limited depth of focus, controlled by the setting in feet. With this is mind, consider the following characteristics this camera will have: Rocks and objects on the Moon's surface within yards of the rover will be in focus, only if that is what the camera is set for. Distant objects like a mountain ridges will be in focus, if that is what the camera is set for (such as infinity.) It is not possible to obtain razor sharp mountain peaks in the distance and sharp focus on rocks only a few yards from the rover at the same time. And yet, there are more than 100 images that accomplish the impossible with rocks and objects in focus up close, while distant mountain ridges miles away are also razor sharp focus. Forget about the old argument about “stars are not being visible means it's faked.” This argument is invalid because the F-stop setting (iris) had to be set for extremely bright sunlight. Sunlight on the Moon is full brightness like that of outer space and can easily wash out a photo. Starlight is many magnitudes dimmer than sunlight and it makes complete sense stars cannot be seen. Another question arises are the distant peaks and ridges REALLY that far away? Highly skilled matte painters for Hollywood films have long known how to fool the eye with fake distance, decades before the first Apollo flights were every launched. Old Star Trek TV series and others used this trick all the time to create scenes that could not be filmed in the real world. Matte paintings were often combined with Chroma-key to superimpose backgrounds on small objects. Chroma-key was commonly used in TV studios to make weather forecasters appear in front of a large map of the country. Any blue color was substituted electronically (or “keyed”) with another image from a different camera or video source. It was long known in the TV news industry that no weatherman or some news reporters should ever wear blue. Today, Chroma-blue has been replaced by green. I mention all this because in the staged Apollo 17 (and likely other Apollo missions) Chroma-key was not used that we can tell. Keep in mind that in the late 60's and early 70's, Chroma-key was far from perfect. Older readers may remember early weatherman having parts of their bodies disappear and re-appear in while doing the weather. I was involved with commercial broadcasting at that time, and Chroma-key was more like a balancing act. When a studio video board operator used Chroma-key, he worked a joystick which was moved around slightly in an attempt to balance the superimposed effect. That was state-of-art 40 years ago at the same time Kubrick did the Apollo work. If any part of a astronaut disappeared on live video because of a Chroma-key problem, that would have been the end game for NASA. Kubrick wisely crafted his production without using unreliable electronic effects. But to do so requires that everything is constructed life-size, or as big as it can be when crammed into a secret, closed stage housed inside a building. In reviewing hundreds of Apollo 17 images, I noticed that the same distant mountain peaks appeared in the distance over and over with razor sharpness. Yet at the same time objects on the ground were also quite sharp. The best camera you can buy today cannot do that - almost 40 years later. What would be most telling of being Kubricked, is to see some part of a studio lighting instrument in a photo. There is a film clip on youtube that shows this in as a rehearsal to make the “One Small Step for Man.” But someone at one time claimed this was shot for a commercial. When I challenged that and asked what commercial, no one came forward to state what company commissioned such a re-enactment. IMAGE HANDLING Below are a few images of interest I found from Apollo 17. These photos were taken straight from NASA computers, with just one exception - a photo of astronaut gloves in a museum. No image processing has been done to these images unless noted for each one. Most images were available as low res and high res formats. I show the source image NASA ID number and whether it was in low res or high res. Enlargement are taken from a small clip from a hi-res image of the very same scene to help reduce document size. No sharpening, contrast or color changes, etc... are used since these may introduce unwanted artifacts. The first group of images shows polygon-shaped craters. What makes these unusual is that scientifically conducted, high speed projectile impact tests of various types and sizes were performed in laboratories to simulate meteor impacts. Results of these tests have shown that impact craters are always round. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Top secret cover up of Apollo 18 and more!!!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top