They showed pictures of the American flag waving.  The scientist they
interviewed for the show said that could not happen where there is no
atmosphere.

jm
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Darnell <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Did We Go To The Moon


> in line responses.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jim Phillips [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 6:51 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: OT: Did We Go To The Moon
> > 1)  Why are there no stars in the black lunar "sky" in any of the
> > photographs or movies?
> Probably the dynamic range of the recording equipment or media.  Direct
> sunlight on light lunar material, white space suits, so affective apeture
or
> F-stop is so low that the stars would not show up.
>
> >
> > 2)  Why was there no blast crater from the rocket engine on
> > the LEM when it
> > landed?
> Dunno.  I question the assumptions.
>
> >
> > 3)  If the moon is supposedly covered in dust, why was there
> > no dust on the
> > LEM after it landed?
> Perhaps in a vaccumm, the dust will not billow up and then settle slowly.
> Probably all the dust from the landing was blown away from the site.  It's
> lateral speed will not be slowed down in a vacuum as it would be in an
> atmosphere.  None of the dust would have been blown straight up, so none
> would fall back onto the lander.
>
> >
> > 4)  How did they take that neat picture of the astronaut with
> > the sun behind
> > him
> > and still able to see the detail of his suit and images in
> > his visor?  The
> > astronaut should have been in silhouette.
> In a vacuum there is no diffusion.  The sun would show up at the maximum
of
> the recording medium's dynamic range, which would be white on film.  There
> would be blooming on a TV camera.  There would be no silhouetting.
>
> >
> > 5)  Why are the shadows going different directions in the
> > pictures if there
> > was
> > only one light source (the Sun)?
> >
> The appearance of divergent shadows is caused by the use of a wide-angle
> lens.
>
> > 6)  With the Sun behind the LEM, how did they get a picture
> > of the shadowed
> > side with full detail of the lander?
> The shadowed side still received reflected light from the surface.
>
> >
> > 7)  Some of the pictures and films that are supposed to be at
> > different
> > locations have the exact same land features/details.
> Dunno.
>
> >
> > Inquiring minds want to know!
> >
> > Jim Phillips                           Information Systems Manager
> > Email: [log in to unmask]     Therm-O-Link, Inc.
> > Phone: 330-527-2124                         P. O. Box 285
> > Fax:   330-527-2123                           10513 Freedom Street
> > Web:   http://www.tolwire.com          Garrettsville, OH  44231
> >
>