- Register |
- Login |
- Quiz |
- Premium Memberships |
- Video Chat |
- Top Leakers |
- Faq |
- Contact Us |
- Set As Homepage |
- Advanced Search
- Sections:
- All |
- News/Politics |
- Middle East (Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran..) |
- Entertainment |
- Celebrity |
- Education |
- Citizen Journalism
No stars visible on Moon?
Despite how magnificient the stars are in space, there is never star on any picture from the Apollo missions. Why, if these missions are not staged? This is a part from movie "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon".
Liveleak requires flash. If you see this message, make sure you have the latest flash player installed. To install the latest version, click HERE
Comments - sort by newest to oldest
.
Posted Jul-17-2009 by "Lilleman1111" (R)
Glare, glare, glare. Dust particles fly off the moon due to the low gravity. Neil didnīt recall which stars DID they SEE while they took pictures of the solar corona. He says it clearly. Why this pathetic BS?
Why?
WHY???
What if it was fake? Wouldnt that make NASA to a superpower of its own. I mean, to pull off such a stunt? That would be 100 times harder than acctual moon landing.
Posted Jul-18-2009 by "srx" (R)
The truth is that if you were to see stars in the sky in those moon pictures it would be a definite indication that they were faked. Why? Well, all the landings were done during daylight hours on the moon. That means that even though the sky was black, the sun was up. The lunar surface is mostly a light gray and reflects light extremely well. The light levels during the landings were probably similar to those in a western desert in the morning, bright enough to warrant sunglasses, or in the case of the astronauts, sunvisors on their spacesuits.
For this reason the NASA cameras had to be stopped down (this mean a minimal amount of light was allowed to enter the camera) and the exposure times shortened to allow only enough light onto the film to properly illuminate the surface. The stars were much too faint to show up on these pictures. Expecting them to show up would be similar to going out into that western desert at midmorning, setting the camera properly to take pictures under those conditions, coming back after nightfall to take pictures of the stars without readjusting the exposure on the camera and then expecting to get something. Stars are hard enough to photograph under any conditions, let alone with an exposure setting appropriate for daylight.
Even modern NASA pictures of the space shuttle or earth from orbit do not usually show stars. This is for the same reason: When in direct sunlight the earth and and shuttle are very bright and the cameras must be stopped down too low to capture starlight.
Posted Jul-20-2009 by "fern420" (R)
That FOX show was utterly lame.
LAME LAME LAME!
Posted Aug-2-2009 by "dethaduj" (R)
What a stupid pile of crap. The moon is too bright. The moon is VERY bright (you can see it all the way from earth). Get any camera - ANY CAMERA and look at the light bulb on the ceiling. You'll see that because the light bulb is very bright, everything else goes dark.
<br>
Yes thats why you can't see stars. Cameras don't see as well as eyes do.
Posted Aug-3-2009 by "eatmyshortseatmyshorts" (R)
For this reason the NASA cameras had to be stopped down (this mean a minimal amount of light was allowed to enter the camera) and the exposure times shortened to allow only enough light onto the film to properly illuminate the surface. The stars were much too faint to show up on these pictures. Expecting them to show up would be similar to going out into that western desert at midmorning, setting the camera properly to take pictures under those conditions, coming back after nightfall to take pictures of the stars without readjusting the exposure on the camera and then expecting to get something. Stars are hard enough to photograph under any conditions, let alone with an exposure setting appropriate for daylight.
Even modern NASA pictures of the space shuttle or earth from orbit do not usually show stars. This is for the same reason: When in direct sunlight the earth and and shuttle are very bright and the cameras must be stopped down too low to capture starlight.
While your point is totally spot on accurate it is wasted on these idiots who won't accept simple truth. They would rather live in their tin foil worlds thinking themselves to be brilliant. Not once have I ever seen one of them come to the truth. They are a waste of time.
Posted Sep-12-2009 by "jaeger888" (R)
It's the way it goes. All astronauts said so. You can also find information clarifying the fact that you can't see the stars from space. A man who engaged in the 1st flight outside our atmosphere (in a jet) claimed the exact same thing in a program that had nothing to do with the moon landing. He was blown away that he could not see stars. Now, the astronauts are guilty of making up theories for why they couldn't see them but inevitably, you can't.
Also, plenty of dirt was moved from the lander...PLENTY
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "T-Luuuhh" (B)
check the body language at the press conference.. very nervous idd...
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "zwOx" (R)
It was all a Hollywood production on a sound stage, it cost billions to do....they did it to look better than the russians, all that money in vanity......oh sarcasm...LOL
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "jenva" Premium
The last time I was in space they told me not to even bother looking for them. But then again the Russians don't know what their talking about half the time.
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "BrightSmite" (R)
if they were on the light sight of the moon, the sky would still be black but the stars wouldnt be visible, its like being inside in a lit room and although its black outside, you still cant see lights because there is too much focus ont the indoor light
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "skitzysht" (R)
I heard Stanley Kubric had a hand in it and the first landing was partly filmed in Liverpool studios, but of course I must mention the documentary I watched on that, was showed on TV here in Australia on April fools Day, you draw you're own conclusions..
lol
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "smeblee" Premium
I heard Stanley Kubric had a hand in it and the first landing was partly filmed in Liverpool studios, but of course I must mention the documentary I watched on that, was showed on TV here in Australia on April fools Day, you draw you're own conclusions..
lol
showed = shown..??
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "smeblee" Premium
If it was a hoax, many would have known the truth and it would most definately be leaked out. Definately.
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "Ripnem" (R)
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#stars
Have a read of that if you don't believe.
Posted Aug-25-2007 by "lojilo" (R)