PDA

View Full Version : skipped a theory from the hbs



yomamma214
2010-May-18, 04:37 PM
i read the hole page and is very interesting how dumb you made the HBs look but i got a question. How come there is nothing on there about NASA loosing the original footage of the moon landings?
i have seen it on almost every other site i have been to, because i am doing a research paper and i plan on using this page mostly in my paper but i would like to have all the information and now i have to find it somewhere else. i was just wondering why your page said nothing about it.

NEOWatcher
2010-May-18, 05:49 PM
i read the hole page and is very interesting how dumb you made the HBs look but i got a question.
Interesting? In what way?
I don't think it's anyones aim to make them look dumb, but it is an amusing side effect. The goal here is to present knowledge and facts.


How come there is nothing on there about NASA loosing the original footage of the moon landings?
Perhaps you didn't look hard enough. Lack of evidence is not evidence of a lack.
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/44254-Apollo-11-tapes-lost
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/91081-Did-NASA-Officials-Commit-A-Crime-by-Obtaining-and-Destroying-the-Apollo-Tapes


Anyway; welcome. I'm sure you'll find some other interesting conversations around here.

Jim
2010-May-18, 05:51 PM
Since this topic is CT related, I have moved it here. It will get noticed by those who can reply to you best.

I suggest you search this forum (Conspiracy Theories) for the "lost footage" argument. I believe it has been discussed here before.

Bozola
2010-May-18, 06:02 PM
...because i am doing a research paper and i plan on using this page mostly in my paper...

Might I inquire what your research paper is on?

LaurelHS
2010-May-18, 06:06 PM
i read the hole page and is very interesting how dumb you made the HBs look but i got a question. How come there is nothing on there about NASA loosing the original footage of the moon landings?
i have seen it on almost every other site i have been to, because i am doing a research paper and i plan on using this page mostly in my paper but i would like to have all the information and now i have to find it somewhere else. i was just wondering why your page said nothing about it.

"Moon landings," plural? The lost footage is only from Apollo 11, not the other five landings.

slang
2010-May-18, 06:26 PM
i read the hole page and is very interesting how dumb you made the HBs look but i got a question. How come there is nothing on there about NASA loosing the original footage of the moon landings?
i have seen it on almost every other site i have been to, because i am doing a research paper and i plan on using this page mostly in my paper but i would like to have all the information and now i have to find it somewhere else. i was just wondering why your page said nothing about it.

Was your post moved from the Bad Astronomy subforum? If so, you're probably asking this of Phil Plait, The Bad Astronomer. He doesn't have much time anymore to browse these forums, so I'll guess answers from others will have to do. Luckily, there are some very knowledgeable folks here.

As far as I know, Phil's Moon Hoax debunking was not intended to be an index of all wrong arguments brought up by HB's, just a selection from that aweful Fox documentary. For a more complete list of refuted arguments, visit http://clavius.org. The author of that website does participate here.

JayUtah
2010-May-18, 09:35 PM
For a more complete list of refuted arguments, visit http://clavius.org. The author of that website does participate here.

Hey, I resemble that remark!

Most of the answer has been covered already.

The footage in question wasn't of "the moon landings," but rather only the EVA of Apollo 11. There were many other missions, all of which produced some amount of live television coverage.

It was the "original footage" only for certain definitions of "original." The Apollo 11 television signal was sent back mixed in with telemetry. The combined signal was recorded on special telemetry recorders. But the television signal was also broken out and converted on the fly to broadcast TV standards. This broken-out signal was recorded on ordinary film and videotape recorders at the time, and we have those recordings. Those, according to NASA, were the "original" footage. The telemetry tapes were kept for a while as backups, in case the live TV conversion didn't work. If something had gone wrong, the television images could be extracted later. But since nothing went wrong with the live conversion, the telemetry versions were considered superfluous.

Of course we now realize that if we had those tapes, we could probably reconstruct a much better quality TV image from them using modern digital techniques. However, that wasn't generally known at the time. The extraction process that was used then was the best available.

NASA's disposition of those telemetry tapes requires a bit of discussion. The telemetry recorders were valuable commodities. After Apollo was done, the telemetry recorders were used for other missions. The original tapes for the recorder -- including those used to record Apollo 11 downlinks -- were of very high quality but made with an environmentally unsound process. When NASA needed new tapes, they ordered them from a different manufacturer who used a more conscientious process, but the product was of inherently lesser quality that turned out to be less than what was required. After NASA discovered that the new environmentally-responsible tapes were not up to the task, they had no choice but to reuse the older tapes. At the time they were prepared for reuse, the Apollo 11 tapes had been mixed in with other tapes of the same type in a way that the workers couldn't have known that they were destroying something of potential historical value.

Donnie B.
2010-May-19, 09:07 PM
Way off-topic, but I finally realized what Jay's avatar photo has been reminding me of at some subconscious level.

Feeders of Vaal!

He'd have to go topless, though...

JayUtah
2010-May-19, 09:34 PM
...

Feeders of Vaal!

Hm, I'm pretty sure I shouldn't resemble that remark.

He'd have to go topless, though...

And get a world-class tan.

Glom
2010-May-19, 09:50 PM
Way off-topic, but I finally realized what Jay's avatar photo has been reminding me of at some subconscious level.

Feeders of Vaal!

He'd have to go topless, though...

OMG! You're right!

Obviousman
2010-May-20, 09:33 AM
Yep - it was the original SSTV footage, which was converted to a format suitable for broadcast, that was lost. Even though it was poor by today's standards (320 lines at 10 frames per second), it would give a better image than what we see from the original converted tapes.

chaboyax
2010-May-21, 04:51 PM
i wonder if the rest of you on this forum have noticed that the apollo deniers have gotten alot quieter since the release of the photos showing the hardware on the moons surface
or is it just that they have stopped coming here

Donnie B.
2010-May-21, 05:01 PM
It seems to run in cycles. Over on ApolloHoax there has been an active HB quite recently, who suggested that the LRO photos were of "balsa wood models". But that particular individual has a lot of problems telling reality from fantasy, in my opinion.

JayUtah
2010-May-21, 05:12 PM
But that particular individual has a lot of problems telling reality from fantasy, in my opinion.

Indeed, the cork he uses to plug all the massive holes in his theory is "the Illuminati." Apparently that's a sort of wizard-did-it solution.

chaboyax
2010-May-21, 05:24 PM
It seems to run in cycles. Over on ApolloHoax there has been an active HB quite recently, who suggested that the LRO photos were of "balsa wood models". But that particular individual has a lot of problems telling reality from fantasy, in my opinion.

dont they all have that problem?i did before i came across this board i then did some research into the apollo missions and hey reality slapped me pretty hard.jay your website helped the most its really very good

Gillianren
2010-May-21, 05:36 PM
I do also think "not coming here" is an issue. Apparently, they're quite active on YouTube, where they can't actually be forced into reasoned conversation.

chaboyax
2010-May-21, 06:29 PM
Apparently, they're quite active on YouTube, where they can't actually be forced into reasoned conversation.

nail, head, bullseye

Garrison
2010-May-21, 07:11 PM
Indeed, the cork he uses to plug all the massive holes in his theory is "the Illuminati." Apparently that's a sort of wizard-did-it solution.

Coming soon....Harry Potter on the Moon! :)

ktesibios
2010-May-22, 12:58 AM
Something that I would really like to learn more about is just how NASA recorded the SSTV signals on their analog instrumentation recorders. From what I've read about the Apollo 11 camera, the recording or transmission channel needed a bandwidth extending from down around 2 Hz up to 500 kHz for optimal reproduction. I have enough background in magnetic tape recording to be rather confident that direct recording could never have delivered a -3 dB bottom of 2 Hz- not at 120 IPS with a repro head that could fit in the headblock of those 3M IsoLoop transports.

FM recording, which was commonly used in instrumentation reecorders, would have permitted a baseband bandwidth all the way down to DC, but then you run into problems getting sufficiently extended high frequency response.

I've idly brainstormed about ways to split up the signal spectrum and record the components nd then reassemble the original signal on playback, but it's only semi-informed speculation. I'd love to find out how NASA actually did it.

Does anyone know of a source of information about this?

Obviousman
2010-May-22, 07:36 AM
We have a member on Apollo Hoax (dwight) that recently wrote an entire book on the SSTV process. He's be a good place to seek info.


Something that I would really like to learn more about is just how NASA recorded the SSTV signals on their analog instrumentation recorders. From what I've read about the Apollo 11 camera, the recording or transmission channel needed a bandwidth extending from down around 2 Hz up to 500 kHz for optimal reproduction. I have enough background in magnetic tape recording to be rather confident that direct recording could never have delivered a -3 dB bottom of 2 Hz- not at 120 IPS with a repro head that could fit in the headblock of those 3M IsoLoop transports.

FM recording, which was commonly used in instrumentation reecorders, would have permitted a baseband bandwidth all the way down to DC, but then you run into problems getting sufficiently extended high frequency response.

I've idly brainstormed about ways to split up the signal spectrum and record the components nd then reassemble the original signal on playback, but it's only semi-informed speculation. I'd love to find out how NASA actually did it.

Does anyone know of a source of information about this?

slang
2010-May-22, 10:33 AM
We have a member on Apollo Hoax (dwight) [..]

I wonder if that's the same Dwight (http://www.bautforum.com/member.php/2955-Dwight) we have here.. :)

Obviousman
2010-May-22, 10:21 PM
Indeed it is!

Calling Dr Dwight, calling Dr Dwight!

Dwight
2010-May-23, 09:19 PM
I'm here! I'm here!! I was away for a week visiting north Germany and north Poland. Just got back today.

In one week the book comes out. It has a whole chapter devoted to the whole SSTV Apollo 11 video.

Indeed as has already been mentioned in this thread the scan converted video exists, as it has since july 20, 1969. The conversion process used a video disc/optical conversion process which made the 320 10fps video compatible with 30fps 525 NTSC video signal. Unfortunately due to technology available at the time, the image suffered from quality loss. Recent restoration has been applied to the best availble scan concerted video from a variety of sources. A chunk of video from the crew ingress to PLSS dump is not widely seen, mainly because it is the same unchanged shot of the LM until the PLSS's were thrown out. This PLSS video is availble on either the Spacecraftfilms DVD "Manned Spacecraft Center Reports" or on the DVDs featuring Ed von Renouards' Super 8 film of the SSTV montor.

To suggest the Apollo 11 TV has been lost forever, never to be seen again, is false. The telemetry recordings have been lost. The video one would see on the tapes has not. It is what you can see on any kinescope from NASA of the moonwalk, or on any recorded video of the moonwalk from _any_ TV network which happened to archive its telecast of the event.

regards
Dwight