the moon landing is a lie. proof is just from contradiction

But is anyone going to investigate how much of a fag OP is?

>>18604559
depends on how curious you are.

File: A17-fireproofman1.jpg (691KB, 2340x2349px) Image search: [Google]

691KB, 2340x2349px

>>18604551
Here you get an interesting reflection in the astroactor visor.

File: AS17-134-20387HR-smokescreen-small.png (1MB, 1645x1387px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1645x1387px

>>18604638
very interesting indeed

>>18604551
NASA is a CIA film studio.

File: Moon.png (766KB, 888x738px) Image search: [Google]

766KB, 888x738px

>>18604551
Everyone knows the moon is made of cheese. NASA doesn't want anyone to know this due to making cows and goats obsolete and out of work. The cheese on the moon could feed everyone everyday 1 pound of cheese on Earth for 2000 years. But brands such as kraft prevent this.

>>18604697

yer mom is made of cheese tho

>>18604559
/thread

File: a17-photographer1.jpg (676KB, 2340x2350px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 2340x2350px

>>18604559

Oops the dude in charge of taking that pic wasn't carrying a Portable Life Support System (i.e the fancy backpack)

File: a17-photographer2.jpg (450KB, 2277x1807px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 2277x1807px

>>18605708
This can be confirmed by a simple comparison with of the same dude this time fully equipped.

File: footprint-AS15-86-11671HR.jpg (1MB, 2340x2335px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2340x2335px

Someone forgot to rake the stage

File: IrwinRbootsm.jpg (118KB, 1013x672px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1013x672px

>>18605770
And here is the only model of moon boot used during the entire missions on the "Moon".
Oops

>>18605709
So did he died

File: as17-book.jpg (829KB, 2340x2350px) Image search: [Google]

829KB, 2340x2350px

>>18605777
No of course not, the stage was adequately ventilated.
There is more to this pic though
a very strange book

really makes you think why do shills keep constantly spamming this moon landing hoax bullshit...

It really happened

File: Moon.jpg (36KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 128x128px

>>18605816

this is what happens when you stare at pictures for too long and succumb to pareidolia-induced brain farts - the hidden message becomes clear: you're fucking GAY.

File: pika pika chupa.png (178KB, 804x445px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 804x445px

>>18605816
>>18605816

could it be?

>>18604559
What's the point? He sucks all the cocks.

>>18604640
But those don't match. Helmets are a different shape. Why would there be steel workers and legos on a set anyway?

>>18605850
consistency and logic aren't requirements for moon hoax cultists.

File: chuck+tingle+you+weird+_4fcd9c18760.jpg (206KB, 938x1500px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 938x1500px

The real reason we haven't gone back to the moon

File: AS11-44-6581HR-composite-small.jpg (1MB, 1591x1582px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1591x1582px

>>18605850
I like the smell of a desperate shill.

File: AS12-46-6726-29HR-composite-small.png (1MB, 1299x1056px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1299x1056px

>>18605864
consistency doesn't belong to Apollo as evidenced by this set of pic.

File: 1484884665518.jpg (278KB, 1600x700px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 1600x700px

>>18604551
you're an idiot

>>18605942
the real reason is that Earth is flat and the Moon is a small immaterial orb, a luminary as described in the bible.

>>18606183

what is photoshop's fish eye lens filter, moron.

http://www.imagetrendsinc.com/news/article_Northlight_images_review_plugins_fish-eye-hemi.pdf

>>18606195
>Whenever I am confronted with evidence that doesn't support my conclusion, I claim it's a fake.

Talk about cognitive dissonance.

You can literally try this out yourself. It takes 5 seconds. Why are you so afraid of being wrong?

>>18606200
Niggers purposely immersing themselves in ignorance in the name of intellect

Beautiful

>>18604551
Moon landing deniers are bottom of the barrel autists

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9y_AVYMEUs

>>18606202
Try it yourself. It takes 5 seconds.

Why do you refuse to do the experiment? Why are you so afraid of being wrong?

>>18606200
you don't see more of a sphere by zooming into it.
are you legit retarded or just shilling to feed your family?
the two left most frames are the result of a fish eye lens filter done with photoshop.

File: SPHERE.png (67KB, 1000x773px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1000x773px

>>18606210
>you don't see more of a sphere by zooming into it.
No retard, you see more of it when you zoom out.

Do I need to draw you a picture?

File: aumovies_trailers_ice_age_4_sid_lrg_17u8130-17u8130.jpg (42KB, 630x354px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 630x354px

>>18606215
Try again with the same field of view (FOV) and see what it gives.

Well people won't listen, they enjoy sleeping.

>>18606222
Why don't you try it out, anon?

Why are you so afraid of being wrong

>>18606226
Why would North America grow and not South America?

flat earth? what a shit post, however enjoy the moon aspect i think it was fake

>>18606234
Because North America is thousand of miles closer to the camera than South America. If the camera were over South America, then that would get larger faster.

>>18606234
North America is more important and contributes more. They get a bigger chunk of the globe.

>>18606180
>any clue

He's turned slightly to the left, allowing more light?

>>18606210
>Zooming into it

You didn't read the caption, did you. They're not zooming in, they're moving the camera itself.

>>18607216
round earthers BTFO
that's solid proof right there

If people would dedicate the same amount of time they spent to "disprove" moonlandings in other fields, we might've been able to go to Mars today.

>>18605770
Do you have the actual link from nasa? This one is not working.

>>18604551

Globe fags are getting absolutely rekt

Are globe earthers the very definition of insane?

They seem to do the same gay stuff everytime and it ends the same

>>18605770
The other print doesn't look like a boot print to me, could be a wheel or another tools print.

File: AS15-86-11670HR.jpg (1MB, 2340x2335px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2340x2335px

>>18607320
Here it is

File: AS15-86-11671HR.jpg (1MB, 2340x2335px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2340x2335px

>>18607320
>>18607366

and its stereotype companion.
100% positive, it's a boot print albeit not an astroactor bootprint.

File: NASA-bmarbleW.jpg (797KB, 2048x2048px) Image search: [Google]

797KB, 2048x2048px

>>18607731
*stereoscopic

>>18606237
>Because North America is thousand of miles closer to the camera than South America.

You lost me there, what are you even talking about?

>>18607320
link is working

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-86-11670HR.jpg

>>18607741
You see, the earth is a sphere. It's not a flat surface. It bulges out in the middle. That means the part in the middle is closer to you than the parts on the side. And since things appear bigger to you when they're closer, due to perspective, the parts in the middle appear bigger than the parts on the side. This difference becomes greater the closer to the sphere you get.

It's all shown in this model.

>>18606183
All they're doing is moving the camera closer and further. Far away both North America and South America are just about the same difference to the camera. But in close, that same difference is much different, proportionally.

It's very easy to understand. Viewed from space, the parts of the earth in the middle are thousands of miles closer to the viewer than the parts on the edge. If you were directly over India, then India would appear disproportionately bigger compared to africa, australia, etc. For example.

Those pictures of earth are all from the same spot And relative to the globe one would have to take those pics from much farther distances each time to get the effect you described. So far that we would be able to see the moon in the picture.

>>18607781
>they're all from the same spot

You mean pictures in the OP?

No, they're not. They're taken from very different places.

Or do you mean the ones in the pictures of the model globe? Because that's also wrong. And it's something easy to test for yourself at home.

>farther distances to get the effect

You're still confused about this simple issue anon. The farther away you get, the less the effect. The effect is only noticeable when you're very close. It is inverse to the distance.

A globe is also a flat 2d picture. The affect would not be the same on a planet.

>>18607791
What are the coordiance of each picture. Where are they each taken.

>>18607796
>the globe is a flat 2d picture

No, globes are 3d. You can try it with a globe at home. Or even just a ball.

Yes, the image on your computer is now 2D. So the proportions of the continent don't change if you get closer or further to and from your monitor. But in 3D they do. Which is why they took pictures of a real 3D globe.

>>18607804
Here's the original source.

https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-blue-marble-photos-show-a-changing-earth.t6616/

They don't state precisely, but they show photos of their own setup. In the near shot it looks about six inches. In the far shot it looks about ten feet.

>>18607814
Its a recreated image? Enough said. You can't compare the picture of the globes or ball to the two differnt picture types of the earth.

And still a globe is not comparable to a real life planet. Just like seeing a person in a picture isnt comparable to seeing them irl. More like a colored drawn picture actually.

>>18607856
>recreated image

What's a recreated image?

Those are three different pictures of the same globe, taken from different positions.

>a globe is not comparable to a real life planet

Uh, in terms of issues of perspective, yes, it is.

>>18607875
No the actual planet pictures are. Its right in the link you provided. Have you not read it? You were only told to referr ppl there if they dismissed or disagreed with you?

>>18607771
explain why North America appears so big in the left most frame here
>>18606183
we are visibly at the same distance since the globe has the same relative size in the three frames. So what's up with that?

>>18607735
>Not knowing how satellites work
>2017

File: 9981.png (882KB, 1156x848px) Image search: [Google]

882KB, 1156x848px

>>18606243
other pics taken that day show no trace of that pushbutton.
or was It another mysterious "c"?

>>18607914
>taking a SCI-FI novel for reality
>looking down at others
LOL

>>18604697
/disinfo

>>18607904
>explain why North America appears so big in the left most frame

Because in the left most frame, the camera is closest to the globe.

So North America is, say, six inches away from the camera. But the edges are, estimating here, 9 inches away.

So that's a difference over 1.5.

However, in the right most image, North America is 10 feet away. While the edges are 10.25 feet away. Which isn't nearly as much a difference.

No you cant take pictures of a small one layered globe with a regular camera and compare them to recreated, real life, multidimentional giant planet then say, look this is the same thing, thats why it looks bigger and smaller.

>>18607897
The pictures of the real earth, as shown in the OP, are the same with the globe.

When the picture is taken very close the the earth, North America appears very large.

When the picture is taken from very far away, the continents are more properly proportioned.

>>18605823
I think they are on the moon but that weve been there for at least 20 years and this was all for show so the people could see progress

We havent been back because were there all the time.
It feels like a hoax because its just for show

Also one of the main reasons for the suit is the vacuum people cant survive in but if there was a way to climatize? Then you'd just need to be insulated and have an oxygen source. These men are indeed on the moon however it was not the first time and the way it was shown isnt how we really do it for the most part.

>>18605942
They always try to derail with jokes
Admittedly i did smile but still go nsa

>>18607944
I get What you are trying to convince ppl with but
You can't compare a single image photograph, like the globe ones with composite images or scanned created images. If you were into photography you would know this.

>>18607944
Some are even 3d models not even actual pictures.

>>18607771
There are subterennes that drill miles in a day as patented by scientists at los alamos laboratory.

The world is not flat its just a distraction from the real conspiracies

Try to sort out the fake from the truth
Thats the game i guess
Just know the cia and nsa make up counter conspiracies

>>18607940
>So North America is, say, six inches away from the camera. But the edges are, estimating here, 9 inches away.
>So that's a difference over 1.5.
3

>However, in the right most image, North America is 10 feet away. While the edges are 10.25 feet away. Which isn't nearly as much a difference.
the edges are 10 ft + 3 inches away
Delta between the center and edges remain the same no matter how you look at your globe.

> Which isn't nearly as much a difference.
it is the same difference.

File: nt.png (624KB, 1269x947px) Image search: [Google]

624KB, 1269x947px

>>18607955

no star :(
murka is still obese :(

>>18607924
>taking fantasy for reality
>looking down on others
Ironic

>>18604697
Is this confirmed?

To the guy who talked about NASA at least they gave Americans Something to Believe In in a time when the country needed hope hope against the Germans against those Nazi m************ who everybody hate it and it was a lie that everybody believe if it was a lie no doubt there's certain Mysteries and certain things but if you do your in-depth research rather than knock NASA one would analyze that it's better to give people hope it's something to work for there was also a time of depression around when Kennedy was pushing for us to go to space at the end of the day America is a superpower we are the greatest country for a reason and if you want to knock Masa and you want to knock the compliment then go your ass to f****** China and see what the f*** those Chinese bastards are doing or take your ass to one of those foreign countries God bless NASA God bless our country and anyone that wants to sell hope real or fake or not what are you doing besides spreading hate tell us something we don't know tell us something about the UFOs and the aliens tell us something about technology that would help benefit mankind as a matter of fact don't tell us none of that s*** either show your dick or show your pussy either one but don't waste nobody's time on 4chan were only here to get off to have fun and to move on so this is coming from somebody who has an IQ of 220 unless you have something else to contribute to 4chan you're really wasting everybody's time but that conspiracy s*** okay

>>18604551

No, but the OP IS a gigantic faggot...

>>18606173
that's not what shill means, idiot. you might as well say cuck.

File: cheese-gromit-o[1].gif (427KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 320x240px

>>18604697
Cheese, Gromit!

Thats where we'll find it!

>>18604551
The moon landing was only faked because they didnt want to risk the astronauts dying or something going wrong on national television. The moon landing still happened, they just wanted to be prepared for the worst, because the moon landing fucking up would have been devastating to the public.

>>18604551
the moon landing may be a lie but I landed my dick in your moms pussy last night OP what do you think of that huh was that fake I know you watched it through a crack in the door faggot

>>18609321
>The moon landing still happened
No

>>18604551
I was almost tempted to give a serious reply but then I noticed just where exactly the thread I clicked on the homepage was from.

>>18608422
On the subject of satellites and their origin.

>The first depiction of a satellite being launched into orbit was a short story by Edward Everett Hale, The Brick Moon.
>The idea surfaced again in Jules Verne's The Begum's Fortune

As for everything else coming from modern sciences, it came from a SCI-FI novel.

>>18609381
>flying machines appeared in fiction first
>that means airplanes aren't real!

File: composite-AS11-44-6592HR.jpg (2MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2340x2327px

>>18609367
NASA?

>>18609390
It means satellites were invented by a SCI-FI novel author.
>>flying machines appeared in fiction first
you don't know

>>18609400
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXVhOPiM4mk

File: composite-AS11-44-6591HR.jpg (3MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2340x2327px

>>18609407
You like the taste of a warm hotdog in your mouth, boi?

File: FULL_MOON_lou.jpg (24KB, 352x257px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 352x257px

These threads are always hilarious.

Nothing but pareidolia and logical fallacy claims regarding photography and anti-science nonsense.

File: composite-AS11-44-6588HR.jpg (2MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2340x2327px

>>18608571
>God bless NASA

and God bless the $25.4 billion of tax payer money used to conquer da M00n

>>18609450
m-moonmoon™©?

>>18609313
Don't forget the crackas!

File: composite-AS11-44-6585HR.jpg (2MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2340x2327px

>>18609579
Shouldn't moonmoon be $50 billion of tax payer money?

wow dude you single handedly figured it all out!
great job!

File: composite-AS11-44-6584HR.jpg (2MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2340x2327px

Have a bump with the tin foil garbage.

File: composite-AS11-44-6582HR.jpg (1MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2340x2327px

>>18610116
hehe funny
more tin foil garbage for this man right here!

>>18610124
jpgs compress around the edges of areas of pictures with great colour differences, leaving behind artifacts

File: composite-AS11-44-6581HR.jpg (1MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2340x2327px

>>18610176
Yes artifacts are a real problem

File: kJC2d.png (46KB, 576x384px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 576x384px

>>18610176
here have some artifacts

>>18610226
>this picture proves there's no such things as mountains.

File: sh_20071106T172003_ti1_0004_bl.jpg (1MB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1200px

Ever take a look at the chinese moon landing stuff?

Geeze, kind of funny that the rest of the world doesn't really seem to share, it's just a lot of Nasa propaganda! I wonder why....

Let's take a look and see, could it be CGI!

File: PCAMR-C-001_SCI_N_20131221194448_0005_A_2A.png (3MB, 2352x1728px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2352x1728px

>>18610239
Look at just how ... amazing.... this is.

File: sh_20080530T195804_ti1_0001_bl.jpg (1MB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1200px

>>18610243

It's like a different world when the Chinese look at Earth!

It's gotta be a different camera, sure, that'll explain it.

File: vf1Lhhs.jpg (385KB, 1145x552px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1145x552px

>>18610248

If anyone wants to see some more unique and super rare images from the Chinese space-capade -

http://darts.isas.jaxa.jp/pub/pds3/sln-l_e-hdtv-2-edr-v1.0/browse/large/


https://planetary.s3.amazonaws.com/data/change3/pcam.html


http://darts.isas.jaxa.jp/planet/project/selene/hdtv/menu.html.en


Enjoy!

File: composite-AS11-44-6579HR.jpg (1MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2340x2327px

>>18610233
No it shows you what are jpg artifacts LOL

more on this

Three kinds of distortions

JPEG tends to introduce two three kinds of distortions:

general loss of sharpness and oscillations around high-contrast edges: these are due to approximating intensity transitions with smooth functions (cosines); you see them as small "dots" or "halos" around the edges; they are particularly easy to see in the images of text of hand-drawings.
blocking structure: image is processed separately for every 8x8 block (or bigger in case of chroma downsampling), block edges become visible at high compression ratios.
loss of color detail: it depends on saving parameters, the program may aggressively "downsample" (reduce resolution of) chromaticity channels; it is rarely an issue for the natural photography.

>>18610248
Nah, looks pretty similar to me.

File: 1429858399552.png (566KB, 540x446px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 540x446px

>>18604551
Please view and read this image.

File: 203554-night-sky-milky-way-galaxy-wallpaper_31.jpg (1MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2160px

>>18610248
it's look like a .... CGI
it's on the level of NASA, no better desu.

>>18607731
Same boot print smeared into the lunar soil at a different angle. never mess with silly putty?

File: footprints.png (556KB, 733x949px) Image search: [Google]

556KB, 733x949px

>>18610293
> at a different angle.

No, prints are pretty much at the same angle

File: composite-AS11-44-6577HR.jpg (2MB, 2340x2327px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2340x2327px

bump with more tinfoil shit

>>18610305
Looks like the same boot.

File: space - china.webm (2MB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x576px

>>18610248
>>18610243
>>18610239

on the topic of china space program

File: sh_20071028T171615_wm1_0001_bl.jpg (1MB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1200px

>>18610251
mother of LOLs. I just had a look in their repository and it's pretty amazing, their fake moon is not even a sphere. Looks like a big chunk of a medipack cheese.

>PAREIDOLIA: THE THREAD

>>18610518

I think there is a benis in your mouth
is it PAREIDOLIA or jpeg artifact?

>>18610537
>is it PAREIDOLIA or jpeg artifact?

don't know. hard to tell from your mom's bedroom.

>>18604551

You people should be removed from society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU

>>18606173
looks like a developing trick used by any film developer. Used to make objects pop in frame, especially when the original picture is of a dim object. All they do is expose it differently to make the picture look better

>>18610116
I didn't realize this was facetious for like 90 seconds

>>18610856
>You people should be removed from society.
i dont know if thats a good thing or a bad thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--AaixSNCUg