was the moon landing real?

[hookdfisherman]

.


i am listening to the podcast of rogan and degrasse on whether the moon landing was real back in '69.

at issue, did the landing actually happen and do some of the pics on the moon prove or disprove that the event happened.




the fact was brought up that all pics from the moon landing show no stars or very minimal stars in the sky (the background is dark and maybe there shows a few specks of light?).

degrasse states people don't know photography 101 and when you take a picture of a bright object, the lesser illuminated objects in the pic gets blown out? that the surrounding reflective light, specifically everything of lesser illumination with not show up in the photo so well.

i of course agree.

my question is...







oh but first...

a fact about me, when i am outside at night, i almost always look to the sky to see the stars... I peek up to see if and how much of the night sky will give up that incredible showing of stars. really... who among us (fishermen and fisherwomen) don't do that? not many i would think...




now the question...

if most people who fish do this (gaze into the night sky for the show)... why wouldn't an astronaut who is probably obsessed with the stars not look up in awe and gaze into the star show from the moon? i mean, there's no atmosphere to mess with and the show would be spectacular, would it not?




who wouldn't try to snap a picture of that night sky from the moon? i guess neil armstrong... no?





















maybe they only had one of these when apollo 11 took off? u know, weight requirements and all?

































i could also be wrong about all of this. maybe cameras back then couldn't take such a detailed picture?

that shot wouldn't have worked no matter what?







i have taken a lot of pictures but, i've never taken a shot (picture) of anything from the moon. and could it be the stars wouldn't have shown up anyway...?

maybe armstrong did try and they just didn't turn out?

i really don't know...











(but i would have tried and i'd still have those pics whether it worked or not. (i have a lot of chitty bang bang 4x5's stowed away in my photo box somewhere, guess that dates my as's ).










.

[etucker1959]

.


i am listening to the podcast of rogan and degrasse on whether the moon landing was real back in '69.

at issue, did the landing actually happen and do some of the pics on the moon prove or disprove that the event happened.




the fact was brought up that all pics from the moon landing show no stars or very minimal stars in the sky (the background is dark and maybe there shows a few specks of light?).

degrasse states people don't know photography 101 and when you take a picture of a bright object, the lesser illuminated objects in the pic gets blown out? that the surrounding reflective light, specifically everything of lesser illumination with not show up in the photo so well.

i of course agree.

my question is...







oh but first...

a fact about me, when i am outside at night, i almost always look to the sky to see the stars... I peek up to see if and how much of the night sky will give up that incredible showing of stars. really... who among us (fishermen and fisherwomen) don't do that? not many i would think...




now the question...

if most people who fish do this (gaze into the night sky for the show)... why wouldn't an astronaut who is probably obsessed with the stars not look up in awe and gaze into the star show from the moon? i mean, there's no atmosphere to mess with and the show would be spectacular, would it not?




who wouldn't try to snap a picture of that night sky from the moon? i guess neil armstrong... no?





















maybe they only had one of these when apollo 11 took off? u know, weight requirements and all?

































i could also be wrong about all of this. maybe cameras back then couldn't take such a detailed picture?

that shot wouldn't have worked no matter what?







i have taken a lot of pictures but, i've never taken a shot (picture) of anything from the moon. and could it be the stars wouldn't have shown up anyway...?

maybe armstrong did try and they just didn't turn out?

i really don't know...











(but i would have tried and i'd still have those pics whether it worked or not. (i have a lot of chitty bang bang 4x5's stowed away in my photo box somewhere, guess that dates my as's ).










.

The same people who don't think the moon landings were real, don't believe in a lot of other things normal people take for granted that are a fact. I'll bet but I don't have any numbers to back me up. (like I do for "VOTER FRAUD" which is not a real problem) That the same people who don't believe the Moon landings were real, also believe Climate Change made by man is a Hoax!!!!!! I don't have any facts to back me up, "but I just know it's true!!!!" (Damn I sound like a Republican!!!) Take me out and shoot me!!!! Like they do in those "Zombie movies" after they get bitten by another Zombie. Don't forget to burn the body too!!!!! lol lol lol

[hookdfisherman]

.

The same people who don't think the moon landings were real, don't believe in a lot of other things normal people take for granted that are a fact. I'll bet but I don't have any numbers to back me up. (like I do for "VOTER FRAUD" which is not a real problem) That the same people who don't believe the Moon landings were real, also believe Climate Change made by man is a Hoax!!!!!! I don't have any facts to back me up, "but I just know it's true!!!!" (Damn I sound like a Republican!!!) Take me out and shoot me!!!! Like they do in those "Zombie movies" after they get bitten by another Zombie. Don't forget to burn the body too!!!!! lol lol lol

believe me, i'm not saying the moon shot didn't happen. i remember walking out of my grandma's house after watching it on tv, looking up and thinking wow, there's a man walking on the moon right now!

but when listening to the podcast, and degrasse brought up photo 101, that reverse? back light issue came to mind.

can you address that?

what do you know about taking photos from the moon? you seem so well versed in all that you do! "expert tucker" as you're known in my circles... hehe haha... jk...




this country is getting so corrupt. i think we have to believe that some crappie is going on with voter fraud. i think they're fooling you...

them: "it's just a conspiracy theory... don't believe everything you read or hear... what are you? some sort of fool?"

puck: "oh no, i'm no fool! that's right! no voter fraud exists! i have no proof but that's what i choose to believe!, yeahhhh...."

i know when you fart it changes the climate in the room, so i don't doubt for a minute on climate change...





so... whatdya think of the recent (3) attacks on US soil?




.

[etucker1959]

.






believe me, i'm not saying the moon shot didn't happen. i remember walking out of my grandma's house after watching it on tv, looking up and thinking wow, there's a man walking on the moon right now!

but when listening to the podcast, and degrasse brought up photo 101, that reverse? back light issue came to mind.

can you address that?

what do you know about taking photos from the moon? you seem so well versed in all that you do! "expert tucker" as you're known in my circles... hehe haha... jk...




this country is getting so corrupt. i think we have to believe that some crappie is going on with voter fraud. i think they're fooling you...

them: "it's just a conspiracy theory... don't believe everything you read or hear... what are you? some sort of fool?"

puck: "oh no, i'm no fool! that's right! no voter fraud exists! i have no proof but that's what i choose to believe!, yeahhhh...."

i know when you fart it changes the climate in the room, so i don't doubt for a minute on climate change...





so... whatdya think of the recent (3) attacks on US soil?




.

So many issues!!! lol

I've seen so many programs including Myth Buster's bust all the Moon Conspiracy theory's right out the door!!!! The biggest buster's if we really didn't go to the Moon would have been the Russians. If we really hadn't gone they would have brought it up and then gone to the Moon themselves. (the Russians didn't say boo!!!!) Because they knew we went!!! When it comes to the technical point of the stars, I remember them giving this great scientific explanation on how and why it would appear that way. I don't want to quote them wrong but they convinced me beyond a shadow of doubt. The jiggling (waving American Flag is another one conspiracy theorist love to point too) Same thing, another totally logical explanation, that even with no wind on the moon the flag by vibration appears to wave.

My favorite is Voter ID laws. BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!! The facts are in, a study done by the University here in San Diego, looked at 1 Billion votes cast over a 15 year period and found 31 confirmed cases of Voter Fraud!!!!!! Do you know what percentage that is of fraudulent voting. They probably had more homeless people weeing on ballots, then people casting fake votes. Let's not even talk about what the Supreme Court found in the State of North Carolina Voter ID LAWS. They went after the Negro vote with pinpoint accuracy to keep them out of the voting booths!!!!

On the Attacks on US soil. Welcome to the club, 25 years ago a police officer told me who was trained in terrorist attacks. Said only be shear luck the US hasn't suffered terrorist attacks like the rest of Europe and beyond. Our Luck has obviously run out!!!!!!!

[hookdfisherman]

.


do you think that when someone claims voter fraud, they're actually speaking of these in totality?:



Electoral fraud, election manipulation , or vote rigging is illegal interference with the process of an election. Acts of fraud affect vote counts to bring about an election result, whether by increasing the vote share of the favored candidate, depressing the vote share of the rival candidates, or both.







and

not so much that someone has 2 or more id's and is voting multiple times? that's just laughable if you're thinking that anyone is really speaking of a bunch of people voting many many times to change an election outcome... what does that ratio of extra votes add up to? not much i'm sure... so fraud claimers can't really be talking about that, right?

maybe the squeaky wheel is bunching fraud altogether and needs to be more specific, but then what the hell do i know?









are there any stats on these the other 2 types of fraud (election manipulation , or vote rigging) and how they come up with the numbers or even if they can?

i've heard that some polling places hid votes? (like in their attic ? or the hall closet?)







.

[etucker1959]

.


do you think that when someone claims voter fraud, they're actually speaking of these in totality?:



Electoral fraud, election manipulation , or vote rigging is illegal interference with the process of an election. Acts of fraud affect vote counts to bring about an election result, whether by increasing the vote share of the favored candidate, depressing the vote share of the rival candidates, or both.







and

not so much that someone has 2 or more id's and is voting multiple times? that's just laughable if you're thinking that anyone is really speaking of a bunch of people voting many many times to change an election outcome... what does that ratio of extra votes add up to? not much i'm sure... so fraud claimers can't really be talking about that, right?

maybe the squeaky wheel is bunching fraud altogether and needs to be more specific, but then what the hell do i know?









are there any stats on these the other 2 types of fraud (election manipulation , or vote rigging) and how they come up with the numbers or even if they can?

i've heard that some polling places hid votes? (like in their attic ? or the hall closet?)







.

The original voter fraud was on a massive level run by Machines. (no not the terminator kind) Political machines in some of the larger city's. New York City & Chicago were some of the most notorious but there were other's too. I'm sure most of you have heard of Daly running a Chicago machine for decades. That was REAL voter fraud!!!!! Voter ID laws don't go after the massive machine kind of fraud but voter impersonation. (which has never been a real problem!!!!) Voter ID laws are merely an excuse to bring back Jim Crow kinda laws and go after the minority voter while pretending to catch fraudulent voting. (which it does not!!!!)

[hookdfisherman]

.



i didn't bring up the topic in this thread... i'm just posting recent news on voter fraud.

which would be a rebuttal to puck's observation...










you know my name... and you choose to read my crappie.

so honestly, who's the real loser?

oh wait, don't forget you even responded, to ME!, with your tremendous wit and insight.






did you even read the link?





maybe if you did you could add to the subject... (instead of proving yourself to be an as's).





what's your take on climate change? that was brought up too... maybe it's too deep a topic for a pea brain?

no worries...

wasn't it a climate change that killed off all the dinos?







you could be next... t-wrecks... get in line... pee wee.

The same people who don't think the moon landings were real, don't believe in a lot of other things normal people take for granted that are a fact. I'll bet but I don't have any numbers to back me up. (like I do for "VOTER FRAUD" which is not a real problem) That the same people who don't believe the Moon landings were real, also believe Climate Change made by man is a Hoax!!!!!! I don't have any facts to back me up, "but I just know it's true!!!!" (Damn I sound like a Republican!!!) Take me out and shoot me!!!! Like they do in those "Zombie movies" after they get bitten by another Zombie. Don't forget to burn the body too!!!!! lol lol lol

so, if you can't stay on topic, maybe you should start a hookd is a loser thread and we can stay on your topic until someone brings up voter rights there...

then all hell'll break loose...




.

[Lady Quagga]

maybe you should start a hookd is a loser thread.

Why bother?

Every time you reply, the current thread suddenly becomes that.

[hookdfisherman]

.

Why bother?

Every time you reply, the current thread suddenly becomes that.

that's right!

lol




in case you missed this in the other thread... but really, you only do it when you get gagged using my pipetionary... lol...

.



Selective response

Techniques > Resisting persuasion > Selective response

Method

Ignore that which is uncomfortable and which you are unable to deal with or which is disadvantageous to you.

Choose something that has been mentioned that is essentially harmless and talk about this. Alternatively select areas that are of particular interest to you and ignore those which will not yield any benefit.

When you have selected what should be talked about, you can then talk about it to your heart's content, thus edging out conversation about other areas.

Example

You mentioned building standards. I think this is of particular interest and it is essential that it is included in future discussions.

You're quite right about rainfall and not only that it is going to change in the future. I was talking about this the other day with a local expert and...



Hehe, sorry I just can't face da truth... sorry, I have no idea what you mean... sorry, are you making things up again? Yeah, I don't know how to respond to your imaginary elephant.... what you talkin' 'bout Wills?











.
.

.

[Lady Quagga]

in case you missed this in the other thread...

Nothing has been missed. You do a great job of responding to own your meth-induced lunacy (with even more meth-induced lunacy). No need to jump into that fray.