D ESP
<< >>
"Moon plays": The moon was the Earth - Lies and Truth in Space - moon lie
22. Excellent "moon photos" without moon photographer - photo compositions "on the moon"
How experienced photographers made perfect and faked "moon photos" with a camera without automatic device Hasselblad 500 EL - the astronauts were no photographers - and there are flags without shadows (photo compositions)
Hasselblad camera 500 EL with opened seeker without automatic device,
and the astronauts cannot look through the seeker...
by Michael Palomino (2006 / 2010 / 2021)
| Share: |
Facebook |
|
Twitter
|
from:
-- Gerhard Wisnewski: Lügen im Weltraum [Lies In Space]; Knaur 2005
-- websites
-- books
The numeration of the photos
The photos of the "moon landings" on Earth within the Apollo program have the official code "AS" which stands for "Apollo Saturn" (project "Apollo" with booster rocket "Saturn"). By this "AS-11" means "Apollo Saturn 11".
But first there must be explained other circumstances.
Suspicious secrecy
The original films of the "moon photos" i Johnson Space Center 22 miles South East from Houston (Wisnewski, p.183) are secret and are not shown to "normal" media people. This seems very suspicious (Wisnewski, p.184).
[By this the many photo compositions would be even known really].
The handling of a camera Hasselblad 500 EL without automatic device in an astronaut suit
The family business "Hasselblad"
Logo of the Swedish company Hasselblad with seat at Gothenburg, producer of photo cameras [1]
The camera Hasselblad 500 EL
The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is a traditional camera of the 1960ies and has to be handled by hand. Between film and lens is a net panel with 25 black crosses, fiver crosses in five rows one below the other, and every cross has to be visible on every "moon photo" (Wisnewski, p.154). [So, with this camera "crossed photos" are produced].
The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is fixed on the chest of the astronaut suit. By this a controlled handling of the camera is impossible:
-- the astronauts cannot look through the seeker because it's not possible to look downwards with the helmet
-- the mirror of the camera is removed so the astronauts cannot see the object in the seeker
-- the cameras are fixed on the chest so the perspective is absolutely restricted for any photo
-- the cameras have no automatic device, all has to be adjusted by hand: illumination, shutter, sharpness, but it's not possible to look into the seeker where is an illumination measuring device installed (Wisnewski, p.153).
The only thing which facilitates the photo work is a wide angle with 60 mm focal distance, but all other factors are absolutely negative that the wide angle cannot solve all problems (Wisnewski, p.165).
Some more factors which speak against a Hasselblad during the "moon landings" on Earth are:
Heat protection: Any heat protection for the camera is missing for temperatures on the moon of plus 100 and minus 100 degrees C. The cameras are only painted in silver for that. Add to this there is missing any radiation protection for the cameras (Wisnewski, p.154).
Education: The astronauts have no photographic education. They have no idea how to handle a manual camera with exposure time, shutter and sharpness. The astronauts would not be able to make perfect photos with a Hasselblad 500 EL even on Earth (Wisnewski, p.153).
[How shall this have happened "on the moon"? Not possible].
3 cameras: For every "moon landing" are said to be three Hasselblads 500 EL "on the moon", for every astronaut one, though on a "moon trip" every gram is important and any luggage too much was rejected (Wisnewski, p.154).
Weight: The Hasselblad 500 EL with attachments (80 mm lenses, A12-back, lens protection and batteries) has a weight of 2,130 kg.
(http://www.3106.net/photo/cam1025.htm)
So why should have been three of these operators "on the moon"?
Factor time: All in all a Hasselblad 500 EL is absolutely unsuitable for photos under pressure of time because with a Hasselblad 500 EL much consideration and time is needed for a good photo, but a "moon walk" lasts only some hours (Wisnewski, p.155).
Kodak film 200 ASA [7]
Factor film: The used ectachrone filmstrip of Kodak has 160 ASA and is hardly suitable for unknown illumination situations. 160 ASA have only little tolerance concerning mistakes and are very sensitive for the light circumstances "on the moon", so it seems the danger of an over illumination on the moon without an atmosphere seems over actual (Wisnewski, p.155).
Radioactivity: The radioactive radiation has a smog effect on the Kodak films and decreasing contrasts which can nowhere be found on the "moon photos" (Wisnewski, p.157).
The photo equipment rather seems to be right for an experienced photographer of the 1960ies and 1970ies on Earth who add to this has got much time which is decisive for the illumination and the experience. By contrast the astronauts have no long experience making photos (Wisnewski, p.156).
With a Hasselblad 500 EL one has to handle all by hand and along the "experience". So a good photographer mostly makes several photos from an object to choose then the best one (Wisnewski, p.154), this means the so called variated photography (Wisnewski, p.156). But the alleged films of the astronauts never show such variants but always perfect photos with an error rate of 0 % (Wisnewski, p.158).
And all this is not possible.
This is no conspiracy theory, stupid Wikipedia, but these are facts.
The perfect photos "on the moon" are impossible
Under the circumstances
-- with a camera fixed on the chest
-- in an astronaut suit where it's not possible through the seeker
-- without the mirror in the seeker (Wisnewski, p.157)
-- with "moon astronauts" without long experience in making photos (Wisnewski, p.153)
-- with radioactive radiation which has a negative influence on the films (Wisnewski, p.157)
perfect, sharp "moon photos" with partly perfect arranged sceneries are not possible (Wisnewski, p.157).
This is NO conspiracy theory, stupid Wikipedia, but these are facts.
The "moon photos" are almost all absolutely sharp an illuminated tricky (Wisnewski, p.153). On the first film of Apollo 11 all photos are said to be perfect, with 0 % error rate (Wisnewski, p.158). All "moon photos" are perfect at the first time, there is no second or third picture as every photographer would do it with a Hasselblad 500 EL for safety (Wisnewski, p.160). The "moon astronauts" are said having taken the photos all perfectly at the first time [so are indicating the authorities of the Stupid States].
Wisnewski:
"He came, saw and took it."
(orig.: "Er kam, sah und knipste" (Wisnewski, p.159).
"Humans who are not even able to look through the seeker are shooting series of master photos without one mistake", an "abnormity" which is only possible "on the moon".
(orig.: "Menschen, die nicht einmal durch die Sucher ihrer Kameras blicken können, schiessen lückenlose Serien von Meisterphotos", eine "Anomalie", die nur "auf dem Mond" möglich ist (Wisnewski, S.176).
By this all indications show that the "moon photos" are made by an experienced photographer in a film studio with sceneries (Wisnewski, p.158).
There has never been reported that photographs would have "flown along". A big part of the photos are photo compositions which can be seen because of impossibilities because of flags without shadows, moon car without tracks etc.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Photos of Apollo 11
Astronaut Armstrong is said having taken photos from his friend Aldrin "on the moon" several times. It's strange that Armstrong is never producing a unusable photo (Wisnewski, p.165).
By this Armstrong is the first perfect blind photographer.
(Conclusion Palomino)
Allegedly there are many unintentional photos, but the intentional photos are all perfect at the first time (Wisnewski, p.166).
Photo from the landing engine without crater
There follows a photo of the landing engine without crater, with the inscription "United States" in the shadow [only possible with additional spot illumination]: AS11-40-5864 (Wisnewski, p.160).
According to the NASA technicians an Wernher von Braun the crater is compulsory,
(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961,p.148; Wisnewski, p.161).
because the engine has a push of up to 5 tons (Wisnewski, p.162).
Braun was also predicting a huge cloud of dust. And the commented radio protocol of Armstrong is mentioning the dust like a "transparent shield".
(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961; Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, p.161)
Vertical take-off aircrafts with jet propulsion can provoke the dashing of concrete pieces and concrete panels from the ground and this can be very dangerous for the engines and for the cabin.
(In: Hafer, X. / Sachs, G.: Senkrechtstarttechnik; Berlin, Heidelberg, N.Y. 1982; Wisnewski, p.163).
With a gravitation of only 1/6 of the Earth's gravitation a vertical landing with an engine would be obliged to produce an absolutely huge cloud of dust with stones in it, and all this should be visible on the "moon photos" (Wisnewski, p.163).
But look what's coming now:
photos with landing feet without dust on it
Landing foot of the "Lunar Module" without moon dust on the foot, but with much moon dust around the foot [13]
photo of the landing foot without dust: AS 11-40-5918.
[But there is much dust (propaganda says: "moon dust") around the foot].
After a landing with a rocket engine this arrangement of the dust is impossible, because after a big cloud of dust the dust also had to fall on the landing foot.
So, because of the contradictions there is the urgent suspicion that the Lunar Module has landed with a crane on the fresh arranged studio soil (Wisnewski, p.162),
[whereas there was forgotten to make preparations for the landing feet with "moon dust"].
Fans of the moon landings and "astronomers" like Philip Plait maintain that the Lunar Module had not landed vertically (Wisnewski, p.162). The Lunar Module "left a little track of dust blown away and landed very quickly."
(orig.: "hinterliess eine schmale Spur von weggeblasenem Staub und landete sehr schnell." (Wisnewski, p.162-163)
But according to the radio transmission protocols of Apollo 11 the engine of the Lunar Module was working until the landing was finished.
(In: Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, S.161)
The photos of Aldrin's footprints with a partly blurred "moon soil" are impossible
The photo of the footprint which is taken from above is impossible. A photo from above with a fixed camera on the chest is not possible: AS 11-40-5877, 78, 79, 80 (Wisnewski, S.164). One of the photos (AS 11-40-5877) has no depth of focus in the upper half. But the Hasselblad 500 EL had a wide angle "on the moon" with a focal distance of 60 mm, and this makes a perfect depth of focus. By this the photo has to be a manipulation (Wisnewski, p.165).
Even two photos (AS 11-40-5877 and 78) are without depth of focus. So the photos seem to be photo compositions.
(Conclusion Palomino)
"Moon footprints" in a "moon soil" without depth of focus and with strange shoes
Perfect, impossible scenery photos from the "moon"
The further photos are all photographically perfectly arranged, but they seem to be unreal perfect concerning the conditions for the "moon astronauts" who even cannot see through the seeker:
Perfect arranged photos of Apollo 11
Add to this the shadow of the flag is missing. It's a photo composition.
-- Aldrin and landing foot, without seeker impossible: AS 11-40-5902.
Add to this the shadow of Aldrin is wrong.
-- Aldrin taken from above, with a fixed camera on the chest impossible: AS 11-40-5903.
Add to this the scenery shown in the helmet is not possible in the extreme back light, and Aldrin is much too bright in the extreme backlight.
-- flag in the center of the picture, without seeker impossible: AS 11-40-5905.
Photos from Apollo 15
Since Apollo 15 the photos of the "moon landings" have a variate background. But now the same background is coming several times during several missions on different landing places... (Wisnewski, p.227).
Photos from Apollo 16
Photo composition: Astronaut John Young makes a jump without jumping position
(Observation Palomino)
The impossible family photo of astronaut Charlie Duke
Astronaut Charles Duke is said having left a family photo "on the moon" shrink-wrapped in plastic. This shall document a "family story" on the photo AS 16-117-18841 (Wisnewski, S.167).-- with a minimum of 100°C on the moon the photo would convolve immediately (experiment oven).
Contradictions:
-- without atmosphere the shrink-wrapping would swell and burst
-- during the strong sun on the moon the photo would bleach soon
So, also a message on the backside of the photo to the children of the astronaut is not useful. The photo is a legend for naive people who like to romanticize the "moon landing" as photos are proofs for mountaineering. But also photos in mountaineering can be a fake.
(In: Häussler, Oliver: Dreifache Verhandelbarkeit von Authentizität im alpinistischen Diskurs; Wisnewski, p.168).
Big damage on the Lunar Module of Apollo 16
On the photos of the Lunar Module of Apollo 16 can be seen big damages on the side. A whole side is dented and teared open. A return "from the moon" with this vehicle seems doubtful. But the "return" is performed also without repair, absolutely unreal. The accident of Apollo 16 is never mentioned in written. There had to be an explosion. NASA refuses to put big photos of the defect Lunar Module of Apollo 16 into Internet with a high resolution (Wisnewski, p.184-185).
Covered reticules
Some objects covering the reticules of the net panel
Incomplete reticule with Apollo 12 at the arm of the "astronaut", NASA photo no. AS12-47-6897 [reticule 01]
Incomplete reticule with Apollo 12 at the flagpole, NASA photo no. Nr. AS12-47-6897 [reticule 02]
-- moon car of Apollo 16, photo no. AS 16-107-17446 (Wisnewski, S.179) Apollo 16, photo AS16-107-17446: Incomplete reticule at the Lunar Vehicle [reticule 03]
- at Astronaut Harrison Schmitt (Apollo 17)
AS 17-137-21011
[reticule 04]
Sometimes the reticules are crossfaded by an "overexposure effect", e.g. 12-48-7042 (Wisnewski, p.180-181, 182).
Or the reticule disappears in a bright dark granulation of a rocket. With a bad resolution the reticule cannot be recognized any more in these cases (Wisnewski, p.181). So, the reticule e.g. on the rocket has gone down in the black white gray mixture (Wisnewski, p.182).
Conclusion
Disappeared reticules are not always a sure evidence for a photo fake. But the photos are so perfectly arranged and illuminated that they cannot be made by "moon astronauts" when the astronauts cannot even look through the seeker and the camera shall have been fixed on the chest. Many photos are simple photo compositions e.g. with missing shadows and are no contribution for a "moon landing".
This is NO conspiracy theory, stupid NZZ, but these are facts.
