Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Jan -> Moon 'Photos'?

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@CompuServe.Com>
Date: 03 Jan 97 16:10:02 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Jan 1997 10:33:27 -0500
Subject: Moon 'Photos'?

Message sent to the most astute photographic experts I know and assorted other
researchers:

Ever hear of a fellow by the name of David Percy?  He's ARPS as well as member
of the British Industrial & Scientific Film Association according to his bio.

He's written a piece in the January issue of Fortean Times (English mag, but
sold on many US news stands) in which he purports to show that NASA's Apollo
moon photos are studio fakes.  Worth taking a look at, since the points he
makes are quite valid and require explanation from NASA.

Even though NASA says that the photos were taken in sunlight with no artificial
light, he shows clearly that multiple light sources were used to make some
photos, and either giant banks of lights or giant reflectors used in some (and
clearly reflected in the faceplates of the helmets!!!!). In many the angles of
the shadows just don't work for a point-source light at a great distance (the
sun) which would produce parallel shadows.  Here we have shadows at varying
angles across the photos, triangulating on a light source just outside the
picture area.

Moreover, the reseau marks from the etched glass plate in the special Hasselblad
cameras appear to have been artificially added to some images and actually
appear to go BEHIND objects in the pictures!  An actual camera with reseau
plate never produces this effect.

There are major discrepancies between TV video images and still images
supposedly taken at, or near, the same time.

The article is well worth a looksee.  I'd value your opinion on these photos
and his comments.  Are we looking at a 27 year old hoax?  Sure looks like it.
Other than a studio setup, I can think of no explanation for the oddities in the
lighting.  We've known for decades that some Russian space photos were fakes,
and now it looks as though NASA may have played the same game.

Not that I doubt that astronauts actually went to the moon, but maybe their
photos weren't good enough and NASA accordingly whipped up a batch in a studio
somewhere.

Bob