EARTHRISE

[reel.deal]

besides, flip Bill's famous Apollo 8 shot back...
& its actually Apollo 11's, anyway...



At this point i have no fkn clue whats goin' on.
if anyone knows which mission/spaceship/spaceman
shot which or what shot, hit me up !!!

[reel.deal]

Apollo 11 Earthrise - How One Photo Proves it was Real

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGc0sdo32is

well this videos 'proved' Apollo 11 was 'real'...




so, all thats left to wonder, is why "EARTHRISE" takes barely 5 minutes,
& why the 'moon' dont hardly move, why so static ? '120km below'.

The answers to that then, must be:
"EARTHRISE" to "EARTHSET" from the moon takes under an hour,
and Apollo 11 was a helicopter hovering at a fixed point
above the moon, rather than the usual Apollo moon 'orbits'
where the 'moon-terrain' positively races by below.

sure...

[reel.deal]

just for good measure, heres the "first 2 ever" "EARTHRISE" 'SHOTS' by 'MAN' again - 'APOLLO 8'

In under 1 minute, 58 seconds to be exact,
the 'moon' 'terrain' has raced miles beneath,
and the "EARTHRISE" is streaking through space.

If Sunrise to Sunset on Earth ran at the same rate as this,
1 days' daylight hours - the full East>West parabolic traverse,
would last almost exactly 20 minutes,
and so 1 full Earth rotation 'day' would be approx 40 minutes.

[reel.deal]

* * * * *

Apollo 12 VERSUS Apollo 14 "EARTHRISES"...





viewtopic.php?f=23&t=59&p=2369019&hilit=Earthrise#p2369019

ultra props to hollycrap

[reel.deal]

http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html




APOLLO 11 "EARTHRISE" @ 2X "REALTIME" SPEED (i.e. 30, not 60 SECONDS)
full 5-shot Earth emerges/rises sequence



Apollo 8 "EARTHRISE" 2-shot sequence, '58 seconds apart'



Apollo 11, first & last "EARTHRISE" shots

[reel.deal]

Hey Buzz, stop wasting precious camera-film on that Earthrise,
you've just rattled off AS11-44-6547 > AS11-44-6559, wasting
12 shots in under 1 minute on the sooo boring "EARTHRISE";
lets take some shots of the LM instead...


12 shots, 60 seconds. that'll do, who wants to look at boring
shitty "EARTHRISE" TM pictures anyway?

Screw the camera to the wall-mount and set the 1-sec exposure
to get some shots of the stars...

nah, who wants to see boring shitty stars pictures? are you nuts?





later, back on Earth...

Buzz, what happened to the missing "EARTHRISE" photos AS11-44-6548,
AS11-44-6550, AS11-44-6552, AS11-44-6554, AS11-44-6555, AS11-44-6556,
AS11-44-6557, & AS11-44-6558 ? whys there only 5 shots ?

Neil, i got so bored waiting for the 60 seconds stoopid "EARTHRISE" to happen,
i killed time taking 8 shots of your ass.

[arc300]

If you take the reddish-brown blob in the upper-left of the Earth as a reference point in the 5-shot sequence above, you can see that even though the camera's position relative to Earth has changed significantly, our view of the planet has not changed at all. It really does look like a 2-D image 'scrolling' to the heavens.

[reel.deal]

from the Full Hasselblad Magazines...
http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html

AS11-26-5366 > AS11-26-5381 - 16 'CONSECUTIVE SHOTS'




so... Buzz's 16 'CONSECUTIVE SHOTS' cover almost 24 hours, nearly 1 whole Earth rotation... sure !

he took 10 million photos over 6 days, but only these 16 in like, say 22 1/4 hours ?!?

course he did ! ...yeah, thats right !

[reel.deal]

Apollo 16 - did the Earth move for you ?

[reel.deal]

great shots of the crescent moon-rising !


Apollo 15 sequential - "EARTHSLUMP"
AS15-88-11989 > > > AS15-88-11997

[diagonal2]

Fake images are fake

How the *censored* can people believe them to be real?

[Sunkat]

Did you notice that all of the earth rise photos are taken from lunar orbit? This is because when observing from a fixed point on the lunar surface, the earth appears fixed in the lunar sky - it does not rise or set. It is because of gravitational, or 'tidal', locking; and is the same reason why we can only see one side of the moon from the earth.

[brianv]

Did you notice that all of the earth rise photos are taken from lunar orbit? This is because when observing from a fixed point on the lunar surface, the earth appears fixed in the lunar sky - it does not rise or set. It is because of gravitational, or 'tidal', locking; and is the same reason why we can only see one side of the moon from the earth.

Is the the lunar surface in orbit? Your first two sentences imply that!

I take it you mean theoretically observing the Earth from the lunar surface?

[Sunkat]

Did you notice that all of the earth rise photos are taken from lunar orbit? This is because when observing from a fixed point on the lunar surface, the earth appears fixed in the lunar sky - it does not rise or set. It is because of gravitational, or 'tidal', locking; and is the same reason why we can only see one side of the moon from the earth.

Is the the lunar surface in orbit? Your first two sentences imply that!

I take it you mean theoretically observing the Earth from the lunar surface?

Hi Brianv
I don't see how my comment implies that but of course I am not saying the surface is in orbit. You cannot observe an earth rise from a fixed point on the lunar surface
No, I do not mean theoretically as it is a basic astronomy fact- you could say theoretical for a 'human' To be observing from the lunar surface, but that is not the point I was making

Cheers

[Maat]

Did you notice that ...

...you were supposed to introduce yourself per our forum's rules here? viewtopic.php?f=32&t=838