Did man land on the moon?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Did man land on the moon?


  • Total voters
    68

Ted01

Well-known member
May 14, 2022
1,055
447
83
But wouldn't all that also be true if you did this on a movie studio set?

Earth Rise is the best selling picture of all time. I suspect that pictures of the stars with the Earth floating in them would also have been a big seller. I think it is obvious they were planning on bringing back photos, used excellent equipment and no doubt trained the astronauts. How is it that this did not include a picture of the stars?

Also the pictures we are questioning are not those of the astronauts but of the Earth from the moon.
In taking an image of a subject that is brightly lit, or light itself (such as the moon, the planet and even stars) you must adjust the exposure in cooperation with the "sciences" involved in the properties of film and the camera. The camera is merely a tool to adjust the amount of light that hits the light-sensitive film. Because the subject matter is essentially light itself, it should be self-apparent that we'd need to heavily restrict the amount of light coming from the subject matter... the planet and moon in this case. That would be by using a tight aperture and fast shutter speeds.

Imaging requires a lot of concern with percentage... how much of a percentage the subject matter is occupying in the over-all image.
So, the reason that those settings would exclude the stars is because, though they are bright, light-emitting features, they are relatively small (and insignificant) to the totality of the image. The stars are small in a vast field of blackness... in an image of a stary night, the predominate feature is actually all that blackness... not the light. Therefore, in taking images of the stars, the photographer must place the settings in a way that is, essentially, the exact opposite of an image that has predominate features that are bright/brightly lit.

Hope that helps?
 

MrE

Active member
Jan 26, 2023
169
98
28
People want it to be true.

To recognize, and to admit that they have been lied to, and suckered..... well-- it makes them suckers. So they prefer the lie, over the consequences of their having been lied to and this admission of character.

It's no different with COVID. With overwhelming evidence that people were duped into taking the stupid jab-- millions would rather accept the narrative than examine any evidence that demonstrates they've been lied to. It would have taken a lot of collusion and conspiracy to pull off the pandemic hoax, yet they did. I can think of only a handful of things that 'the whole world' has come together on in full agreement despite any evidence that they are lying.... Let's see-- there's COVID crisis of course, the global warming crisis, the no-go territory of Antarctica, -- and space. Complete cooperation among all nations of the earth. It doesn't matter if we are at war with one nation or another-- we hold hands with them when it comes these things.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,326
6,612
113
In taking an image of a subject that is brightly lit, or light itself (such as the moon, the planet and even stars) you must adjust the exposure in cooperation with the "sciences" involved in the properties of film and the camera. The camera is merely a tool to adjust the amount of light that hits the light-sensitive film. Because the subject matter is essentially light itself, it should be self-apparent that we'd need to heavily restrict the amount of light coming from the subject matter... the planet and moon in this case. That would be by using a tight aperture and fast shutter speeds.

Imaging requires a lot of concern with percentage... how much of a percentage the subject matter is occupying in the over-all image.
So, the reason that those settings would exclude the stars is because, though they are bright, light-emitting features, they are relatively small (and insignificant) to the totality of the image. The stars are small in a vast field of blackness... in an image of a stary night, the predominate feature is actually all that blackness... not the light. Therefore, in taking images of the stars, the photographer must place the settings in a way that is, essentially, the exact opposite of an image that has predominate features that are bright/brightly lit.

Hope that helps?
You are not answering my question, I know all that.

Assuming they had 36 pictures on the roll of film and it was too difficult for Astronauts to change another roll of film, I would understand taking pictures of the lander and astronauts and I understand those pictures might not have stars in the background, though they could have had you wanted. I also understand taking a picture of the Earth where you would not want stars so that the earth popped out of that black background.

My question is this, given 36 pictures would a professional photographer wanted a couple of a brilliant starry night?
 

Ted01

Well-known member
May 14, 2022
1,055
447
83
You are not answering my question, I know all that.

Assuming they had 36 pictures on the roll of film and it was too difficult for Astronauts to change another roll of film, I would understand taking pictures of the lander and astronauts and I understand those pictures might not have stars in the background, though they could have had you wanted. I also understand taking a picture of the Earth where you would not want stars so that the earth popped out of that black background.

My question is this, given 36 pictures would a professional photographer wanted a couple of a brilliant starry night?
In my experience, a professional photographer is rarely given free rein to take images that aren't expressly asked for. That's more for photographers that have established some merit. A journalist would have much greater liberties. Art directors are generally looking for whatever they specifically have in mind. I'd have to assume that the astronauts were under similar restraints given that they were on a specific (scientific) mission... idk?
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,326
6,612
113
In my experience, a professional photographer is rarely given free rein to take images that aren't expressly asked for. That's more for photographers that have established some merit. A journalist would have much greater liberties. Art directors are generally looking for whatever they specifically have in mind. I'd have to assume that the astronauts were under similar restraints given that they were on a specific (scientific) mission... idk?
That would be a bizarre restraint considering the stars would prove the location of the photograph because you can triangulate whereas a single focal point like the Earth would not.

Therefore I would say if NASA specifically did not want stars in the photographs that should raise some questions right there.
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
3,757
936
113
61
There is evidence of something moving in the sky. There is insufficient evidence to prove the object seen in the sky is the same ISS propagandised on television.

There are plenty of places on Earth man is not allowed to explore. Criminals commit crimes even where police are able to obtain warrants. I'm not sure why you should think that with billions of dollars in taxpayer funding and access to areas restricted by military, NASA and its employees/accomplices would be unable to forge pictures of a moon landing.

You are thinking of Earth in terms of Heliocentric assumptions. There is no such thing as "space", hence man can't get there. There is a firmament separating the waters above from the waters below, hence (presumably), man can't even get to the waters above. Hence, no pictures of Earth from the imaginary "space", first because it doesn't exist, and second because the firmament likely would prevent his entry into the water's above.

There is no evidence of the curvature of Earth (except for the demonstrably fraudulent pictures from NASA). Why therefore should anyone believe the Earth is anything other than flat?
Well, according the water above, since genesis 6 it is not more there. ( flood)

If you dont believe your governments since 1969. Its ok.
But to sugest, that the whole world special russia, China and india believing a fake moonlanding is very strange. India some days back sent a rocket to the moon.
Do you realy believe all this governments would invest billions of dollars in there spaceprojects without any hope of sucsess?
If the moonlanding 1969 Was a fake the whole world would laughing about the US. But insteadt they believe it and make their own Projects.
I know you still dont believe it. Do you not wonder that there exist not one Single photo which proof that the world is flat. From all the flat earth believers no One was in space to made a picture from above to proof the claim, that the World is flat? Maby you should collect money under all the flat earth believers and rent a flight to the space for make a picture from the earth. So that we can be shure that the world is flat.
That would be the easiest way to proof your claim.
 
G

Gojira

Guest
Ha, ha. You know that was a Seinfeld episode? Wouldn't surprise me much if there was truth to the story.
Why does this not surprise me in the least? This is the intelligence level in this thread. I think I'm getting dumber contributing to it.

Ta ta y'all. This was fun in the beginning, but I've read one too many thoroughly embarrassing post after embarrassing post, people using National Enquirer-style retouched photos as evidence for their insane positions, a complete lack of scientific understanding passing itself off as scientific insight, and a most... interesting interpretation of God's word.

Nothing to see here folks... Going back to the comfy waters of the Pacific, as I swim AROUND the world.
 

Fundaamental

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2023
3,289
421
83
Why does this not surprise me in the least? This is the intelligence level in this thread. I think I'm getting dumber contributing to it.

Ta ta y'all. This was fun in the beginning, but I've read one too many thoroughly embarrassing post after embarrassing post, people using National Enquirer-style retouched photos as evidence for their insane positions, a complete lack of scientific understanding passing itself off as scientific insight, and a most... interesting interpretation of God's word.

Nothing to see here folks... Going back to the comfy waters of the Pacific, as I swim AROUND the world.
keep away from any possible mutations on the way 😉

Mu. ahahahahahah

But consider coming back I will miss your wit 😉😂☺️
 
G

Gojira

Guest
keep away from any possible mutations on the way 😉

Mu. ahahahahahah

But consider coming back I will miss your wit 😉😂☺️
Thanks... but if I keep reading Moses' and ZNP's posts, I'm not sure that I won't wind up punching my monitor. Like I said, this thread has ceased to be funny for me. Their posts (on this topic) are so maniacally STUPID (in my best Estelle Costanza) I can't. I CAN'T!!
 

Fundaamental

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2023
3,289
421
83
Thanks... but if I keep reading Moses' and ZNP's posts, I'm not sure that I won't wind up punching my monitor. Like I said, this thread has ceased to be funny for me. Their posts (on this topic) are so maniacally STUPID (in my best Estelle Costanza) I can't. I CAN'T!!
crumbs this is a sign you may have picked up some radiation.

Just stay calm.

And come back soon

I need your help 🙏

I can see my self going nuts too.
 
G

Gojira

Guest
crumbs this is a sign you may have picked up some radiation.

Just stay calm.

And come back soon

I need your help 🙏

I can see my self going nuts too.
What did George say to the man who was tall and bald and losing his hair?

Live d*******!!

Here's mine: Run... run while you can!!!! Before the intellectual darkness sucks you into a drooling coma!!!
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,954
5,514
113
Thanks... but if I keep reading Moses' and ZNP's posts, I'm not sure that I won't wind up punching my monitor. Like I said, this thread has ceased to be funny for me. Their posts (on this topic) are so maniacally STUPID (in my best Estelle Costanza) I can't. I CAN'T!!
This is a symptom of cognitive dissonance. The truth we are posting is penetrating your (false) worldview, and your defense mechanism is to fight (punch your monitor) or flee (ignore us). It's quite normal to experience when one's closely cherished beliefs are exposed as false.

Well, according the water above, since genesis 6 it is not more there. ( flood)
You'll have to show me chapter and verse. Just because the Earth was flooded doesn't mean the water isn't still there. I mean, you don't believe the fountains of the great deep are empty, do you? We still get water from the ground.

If you dont believe your governments since 1969. Its ok.
But to sugest, that the whole world special russia, China and india believing a fake moonlanding is very strange. India some days back sent a rocket to the moon.
Do you realy believe all this governments would invest billions of dollars in there spaceprojects without any hope of sucsess?
If the moonlanding 1969 Was a fake the whole world would laughing about the US. But insteadt they believe it and make their own Projects.
I know you still dont believe it. Do you not wonder that there exist not one Single photo which proof that the world is flat. From all the flat earth believers no One was in space to made a picture from above to proof the claim, that the World is flat? Maby you should collect money under all the flat earth believers and rent a flight to the space for make a picture from the earth. So that we can be shure that the world is flat.
That would be the easiest way to proof your claim.
You know all these governments were in on the covid scamdemic, right? All working in lock-step, hand-in-glove? Lockdowns, masks, vaccine-mandates? If governments are working so closely together today, why would it surprise you that they were working so closely together 60 years ago?
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
3,757
936
113
61
This is a symptom of cognitive dissonance. The truth we are posting is penetrating your (false) worldview, and your defense mechanism is to fight (punch your monitor) or flee (ignore us). It's quite normal to experience when one's closely cherished beliefs are exposed as false.

You'll have to show me chapter and verse. Just because the Earth was flooded doesn't mean the water isn't still there. I mean, you don't believe the fountains of the great deep are empty, do you? We still get water from the ground.

You know all these governments were in on the covid scamdemic, right? All working in lock-step, hand-in-glove? Lockdowns, masks, vaccine-mandates? If governments are working so closely together today, why would it surprise you that they were working so closely together 60 years ago?
That seems to me little paranoid.
Btw Genesis 7,12 said it rained 40 days and nights.
What is you explanation that after the flood the people got less old then before? What is your explanation that flora and Fauna after the flood were different then before?
Mys is: The water was like a belt sourrouding the earth and protect it from UV radiation. Without this belt everything getting faster old then before. So this was also the out for animals like dinosaur.
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,954
5,514
113
That seems to me little paranoid.
Lol. So you believe the many governments of the freedom-loving nations all spontaneously decided, within the same time period of a year or so, to force the same unproven and disproven medical protocols and illegal restrictions on their respective populations (for which the international penalty is death according to the Nuremberg code), for fear of what amounted to a cold, by coincidence? That seems a little naive.

Btw Genesis 7,12 said it rained 40 days and nights.
What is you explanation that after the flood the people got less old then before? What is your explanation that flora and Fauna after the flood were different then before?
Mys is: The water was like a belt sourrouding the earth and protect it from UV radiation. Without this belt everything getting faster old then before. So this was also the out for animals like dinosaur.
I guess we all can theorise. My hypothesis would probably be related to oxygen and/or magnetism. But diet also certainly plays a part these days.
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,801
4,303
113
mywebsite.us
I can think of only a handful of things that 'the whole world' has come together on in full agreement despite any evidence that they are lying.... Let's see-- there's COVID crisis of course, the global warming crisis, the no-go territory of Antarctica, -- and space. Complete cooperation among all nations of the earth. It doesn't matter if we are at war with one nation or another-- we hold hands with them when it comes these things.
And, folks - this is a MAJOR clue about the true nature of the world we live in!
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
3,757
936
113
61
Lol. So you believe the many governments of the freedom-loving nations all spontaneously decided, within the same time period of a year or so, to force the same unproven and disproven medical protocols and illegal restrictions on their respective populations (for which the international penalty is death according to the Nuremberg code), for fear of what amounted to a cold, by coincidence? That seems a little naive.

I guess we all can theorise. My hypothesis would probably be related to oxygen and/or magnetism. But diet also certainly plays a part these days.
You mean the vaccine against Covid? Well, you renember? It was worldwide. So many countrys are involved. Thats normal.
And again: their was only this way. to use a medicine which had no longtime expierience. Or do nothing! You probably defend the meaning to do nothing. This can you choose for your self. But a government which sees a responsibility to care for their people has not this choice. Would covid have had the letality like the ebola virus, i suppose the most of the covid deneyer would long to get the vaccine.

The moon landing has nothing to do with the goverments.
And about your flat earth believe. Please send me a photo which proofs your claime.
 

Zandar

Well-known member
May 16, 2023
1,588
624
113
People want it to be true.

To recognize, and to admit that they have been lied to, and suckered..... well-- it makes them suckers. So they prefer the lie, over the consequences of their having been lied to and this admission of character.

It's no different with COVID. With overwhelming evidence that people were duped into taking the stupid jab-- millions would rather accept the narrative than examine any evidence that demonstrates they've been lied to. It would have taken a lot of collusion and conspiracy to pull off the pandemic hoax, yet they did. I can think of only a handful of things that 'the whole world' has come together on in full agreement despite any evidence that they are lying.... Let's see-- there's COVID crisis of course, the global warming crisis, the no-go territory of Antarctica, -- and space. Complete cooperation among all nations of the earth. It doesn't matter if we are at war with one nation or another-- we hold hands with them when it comes these things.
I can't remember which major or governor this was, but one of them announced they were going to get their own doctors to develop a vaccine and it wasnt long after that he was accused of sexual harassment by a bunch of women just out of the blue.