>> ....that presupposes that the Apollo astronauts actually did go to
the moon. A recent TV programme here in the UK showed what seemed, on the
face of it, compelling evidence of strange irregularities in the
photographs from the moon. In one shot the lunar landing module is
positioned against a backdrop of hills, while in another, against THE SAME
backdrop, it is not there! They could not have moved it, and the chances of
getting two shots of a range of irregular distant hills which superimpose
exactly, must be astronomical. Others showed strange lighting effects,
shadows from two directions simultaneously, and objects cutting out the
graticule markings on the camera lenses (used for alignment of
images)....and of course the fluttering star spangled banner. As a worker
in geosciences, I would also have to ask why NASA are so obsessed with even
the tiniest quantity of rock getting into the public arena (except mounted
in such a way that access to it is denied)? Could it be that any competent
laboratory could show that it is identical to terrestrial material? Until I
saw this programme I could not believe anything other than the grainy
images I saw in 1969 were historic beyond belief. Now, I'm not quite so
sure......
 Peter Tandy <<

Check out the book 'Bad Astronomy' or the website www.badastronomy.com
for evidence that the astronauts did go to the Moon (much better than
the 'evidence' for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction in my opinion) also
the messages on the survey being run by the BBC (at www.bbc.co.uk/space, if
memory serves)

Richard.


  E-mail from: Richard Mallett, 27-Sep-2002
-

Reply via email to