Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
the holy poopacy
May 16, 2009

hey! check this out
Fun Shoe
Jeffrey of YOSPOS is definitely not Lowtax's parachute account to allow him to continue sponging cookie money off goons as he beats his way through wives 4, 5, and 6

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

the holy poopacy
May 16, 2009

hey! check this out
Fun Shoe
Most of the moon landing footage known to the public was faked in the Nevada desert, and broadcast from... the surface of the moon. The actual moon's surface is surprisingly flat and dull; its craters are spread out so large and smooth as to be barely visible up close, and small imperfections in the surface soil have been smoothed out by millenia of gravitational forces, so the astronauts' view was more or less a flat gray plain with little variation. But decades of science fiction had built up a very specific image in the public's mind about what the moon was "supposed" to look like with broken rocky soil and the familiar big bowl craters, and the Soviets had played this up with fake photos released from their "moon probes" (actually their cover for testing a new suborbital missile platform.) At the time the scientific community wasn't entirely certain what they would find and the Soviets' early moon photos seemed plausible. By the time NASA had their own close up photos and saw what they were dealing with they realized they were in a bind: the Soviet photos had remained unchallenged for too long after confirming the public's preconceptions of what the moon's surface looked like, so trying to contradict them now with the uninspiring and featureless photos they had of the moon would look suspicious and unconvincing. So they played along right up through the end of the Apollo missions, filming a "realer than real" version of the landing to broadcast in place of the uninspiring and fake-looking live footage. The flag, landing modules, reflectors, and other equipment they left up there is all real, but the images we saw of them supposedly being planted is all Hollywood.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply