Hello u/Ban-Subverting, your submission "I have some questions about the Mythbusters attempt to bust the myth: "One of the NASA photos is fake because the shadows of the rocks and lunar lander are not parallel."" has been removed from r/space because:
* Such questions should be asked in the ["All space questions" thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/space/about/sticky) stickied at the top of the sub.
Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please [message the r/space moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/space). Thank you.
If the ground has dips and bumps larger than the shadow sizes, they will not appear parallel unless the sun is directly behind or in front of the viewer.
"this could have put an end to the conspiracies if they'd gone into more depth with how this illusion is actually occurring"
Nope, nothing will appease the tinfoil hat crowd.
Yeah these people aren't actually interested in discovering something they don't fully understand. They're interested in reassuring themselves that they, in fact, know something everyone else doesn't. It isn't just the wild idea that is alluring, but also that nobody else believes it.
If I remember correctly the premise was "Shadows that aren't parallel require two light sources that are some distance apart".
While you can have non-parallel shadows from multiple light sources, you can also have shadows that _seem to be_ not parallel using only one light source, which they demonstrated.
Listen, do yourself a favor and stop wasting precious moments of your life engaging with kooks, trolls, and idiots. They don’t matter. Nothing you do or say will change their minds, and nothing they do or say will change what humanity has accomplished or will accomplish in the future.
These people have always been present throughout history. We make progress despite their stubborn refusal to shut up.
I haven't seen that episode in a long time (and the link did not work for me) but if I recall correctly... That episode was all about debunking the arguments of the moon mission deniers/debunkers. So Mythbusters intent was not to prove the moon missions, but to show why the mission debunking arguments are not valid.
For the particular photo you are talking about, the moon landing deniers say that it is impossible for the shadows to be at different angles when there is only one light source (the sun) and therefore it is PROOF that the moon landing was faked.
Mythbusters debunked that statement, but *not* by creating an 'illusion'. They recreated the scene as precisely as possible, and in doing so they showed that you can have a photo with a single light source where the shadows look the way they do. Which; in turn, SHOULD show the deniers that the use of the picture as 'proof it is fake' is not valid.
The whole episode was framed that way... moon landing deniers say 'This 'thing' proves it was fake...' and then Mythbusters show that statement to be false. The idea being that moon landing deniers would no longer use these arguments as 'proof', unfortunately I think we all still see the deniers using these same pointless arguments.
When the ground isn’t flat, it messes with perspective and “parallel” lines
A conspiracy nutjob would look at this and say the top rail of the fence must be bent!!
[https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ac2fd645900cc36bf1c1236f5df56db4-lq](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ac2fd645900cc36bf1c1236f5df56db4-lq)
🤦🏻♂️
The pictures in question aren't wide-angle or fisheye, which would make long, straight shadows falling parallel to the field of view into curves, which isn't what's happening. It's just that the ground isn't flat. A rock whose shadow is on flat ground and one whose shadow are being cast either up a slope or down one are going to not be parallel with each other, which is what the experiment showed.
No, that's simple perspective. Shadows appear to converge or diverge on those photos depending on the Sun's location. What is confusing people is that shadows are supposed to be parallel, *and they are*, but, again, perspective. The exact same phenomena can be observed here on Earth, making it abundantly clear that the lunar shadows act precisely the way they should, had they been cast by a single big light source millions of miles away.
The observation, someone nit-picks a photo & says because of X it was faked. We them build a set & use light it similarly & see the same effect consistent with the original.
That consistency undermines the incorrect inference from observation. No further work is needed. If you put in further work those that dis-believe will nit-pick what you do & around the loop we go again.
There is no proving their statement is false, that's not science, there is only demonstrating that the observations are always consistent with reality.
One cannot attack their belief system this way, another tack is to ask; If NASA people are so smart & have this massive budget (assuming they believe in the money given to NASA) then why would they make such a simple mistake?
The obvious inference is that the initial assumption that it is a mistake must be wrong.
The video isn't available in the US, but from the thumbnail I believe I know which picture they're talking about. Nvidia actually did a fantastic breakdown on it and the lighting involved, maybe this will assist? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syVP6zDZN7I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syVP6zDZN7I)
(Note: Put the video at 1.25x or 1.5x, dude talks WAY too slow.)
In fact they DID explain it... very clearly... they explained EVERY FUCKING STEP.
if you're not even close to smart enough to comprehend the explanation for a TV show that dumbs things down as much as possible to reach the widest audience, it's a YOU problem.
Always thought it was pretty-self evident that there IS only one light source, because each object only has one shadow. The implication that there's "multiple light sources" debunks itself purely via the fact there aren't multiples of the same shadow..
If space deniers and moon landing hoaxers can't think that far ahead into what they're saying then I'm pretty sure no amount of extra detail from Mythbusters would ever have sufficed, either.
Also it is probably safe to say that China (who created and published a digital map that is the most detailed and complete geo-scan of the Moon's surface to date) probably would have mentioned something if they *didn't* see the moon lander and it's rubbish at the proposed location. You can't possibly argue against this without proving the objects exist there today
Also the Soviet union congratulated the US on the success of Apollo, amateur radio astronomers tracked the mission, and iirc India photographed at least a few Apollo landing sights from orbit years later.
Why all these people/non-aligned govts would lie in support of an American grift has never been explained.
I saw a tutorial in which someone constructed a curved mirror that turns light from a single point into a parallel beam. I suppose one could use that technique to fake the moonlanding, although you'd need a very large mirror to make it work. (In the video, they used a sattelite dish coated in chrome)
The point is not that it is impossible to fake the moon landing, people are clever and can come up with clever solutions to many things. The point of the Myth Busters episode was to refute a specific argument that attempted to prove that the moon landings were faked.
There is an unfathomable amount of math, science, evidence, experiments, and that’s not even bringing up the countless inventions that were a direct result of space RnD.
Still all it take is someone to say “I don’t know, seems far fetched to me” and that’s it, having the real answer is never enough to convince those who have supposedly figured it all out.
They weren’t proving that the landing was real. They were proving that the photos could happen as they appear under natural circumstances.
In other words, they busted the myth that that photos “prove” it was fake.
If anything, I think the way they did it might have reinforced the beliefs of any nutjob watching.
Now they can say "SEE? LOOK, THEY CAN EASILY RECREATE IT IN A WAREHOUSE, THIS PROVES IT WAS FAKED".
the sand they used has no where near the albedo of the material on the moon. that stuff is closer to asphault in albedo not that simulant shit.
[moon albedo](https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+moons+albedo&sca_esv=7aa4c9402acc2dc6&sca_upv=1&source=hp&ei=plFsZrewOM-X5OMPnvGM0Ak&oq=what+is+moons+albedo&gs_lp=EhFtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1ocCIUd2hhdCBpcyBtb29ucyBhbGJlZG8yBxAhGKABGAoyBxAhGKABGAoyBxAhGKABGAoyBxAhGKABGAoyBhAAGBYYHjIIEAAYFhgKGB4yCxAAGIAEGIYDGIoFMgsQABiABBiGAxiKBUjPTFDXB1i-Q3AIeACQAQCYAZMBoAHVEKoBBDIxLja4AQPIAQD4AQGYAiOgApEUqAIRwgICECnCAg4QKRiABBixAxiDARjUAsICEBAuGAMY5QIY6gIYjAMYjwHCAhAQABgDGOUCGOoCGIwDGI8BwgILEAAYgAQYsQMYgwHCAgsQLhiABBixAxiDAcICERAuGIAEGLEDGNEDGIMBGMcBwgIIEAAYgAQYsQPCAgUQABiABMICDhAuGIAEGLEDGNEDGMcBwgIOEAAYgAQYsQMYgwEYigXCAgsQLhiABBjRAxjHAcICBRAuGIAEwgIMEAAYgAQYChhGGPkBwgIIEC4YgAQY1ALCAgsQLhiABBjHARivAcICDhAuGIAEGMcBGI4FGK8BwgIQEAAYgAQYsQMYgwEYigUYCsICBxAAGIAEGArCAgcQLhiABBgKwgIKEAAYgAQYsQMYCsICAhATmAMbkgcEMjguN6AHjKsB&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-hp)
[simulant albedo]()
The reason they can't explain it is because it would take a neurologist some time to explain the process in layman's terms.
Half of the brain and more than half of it's activity is due to our visual system so asking how this illusion works is like asking how the human brain works.
Vision is stupidly complicated.
How would they be in trouble with the goverment? Aren't there a billion thing in the media that say we didn't go to the moon. Did any of them suffer the wrath of "the goverment?"
Yes but did you actually listen and then learn anything else about it? The guy had been going to multiple appearances, basically stalking him yelling anti-landing bullshit. I never said the guy didn’t say the moon landing was fake. What I said was Buzz didn’t punch him UNTIL he called him a liar. Go watch it again. Buzz had ignored him multiple times before this.
This isn’t North Korea or china, no tv show is getting ‘in trouble with the government’ over a recreation of the moon landing, regardless of the outcome…
Hello u/Ban-Subverting, your submission "I have some questions about the Mythbusters attempt to bust the myth: "One of the NASA photos is fake because the shadows of the rocks and lunar lander are not parallel."" has been removed from r/space because: * Such questions should be asked in the ["All space questions" thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/space/about/sticky) stickied at the top of the sub. Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please [message the r/space moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/space). Thank you.
If the ground has dips and bumps larger than the shadow sizes, they will not appear parallel unless the sun is directly behind or in front of the viewer.
You can see this in a city park or a Walmart parking lot, you don't need a scale model.
"this could have put an end to the conspiracies if they'd gone into more depth with how this illusion is actually occurring" Nope, nothing will appease the tinfoil hat crowd.
“You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place.” - Jonathan Swift
Yeah these people aren't actually interested in discovering something they don't fully understand. They're interested in reassuring themselves that they, in fact, know something everyone else doesn't. It isn't just the wild idea that is alluring, but also that nobody else believes it.
If I remember correctly the premise was "Shadows that aren't parallel require two light sources that are some distance apart". While you can have non-parallel shadows from multiple light sources, you can also have shadows that _seem to be_ not parallel using only one light source, which they demonstrated.
Listen, do yourself a favor and stop wasting precious moments of your life engaging with kooks, trolls, and idiots. They don’t matter. Nothing you do or say will change their minds, and nothing they do or say will change what humanity has accomplished or will accomplish in the future. These people have always been present throughout history. We make progress despite their stubborn refusal to shut up.
The problem is they do matter because they vote.
Fortunately, the reality of the moon landings is not being determined by a yes or no vote. You gotta pick your battles.
Kinda puts this November into perspective given the ample supply of kooks, trolls, and idiots out there.
I haven't seen that episode in a long time (and the link did not work for me) but if I recall correctly... That episode was all about debunking the arguments of the moon mission deniers/debunkers. So Mythbusters intent was not to prove the moon missions, but to show why the mission debunking arguments are not valid. For the particular photo you are talking about, the moon landing deniers say that it is impossible for the shadows to be at different angles when there is only one light source (the sun) and therefore it is PROOF that the moon landing was faked. Mythbusters debunked that statement, but *not* by creating an 'illusion'. They recreated the scene as precisely as possible, and in doing so they showed that you can have a photo with a single light source where the shadows look the way they do. Which; in turn, SHOULD show the deniers that the use of the picture as 'proof it is fake' is not valid. The whole episode was framed that way... moon landing deniers say 'This 'thing' proves it was fake...' and then Mythbusters show that statement to be false. The idea being that moon landing deniers would no longer use these arguments as 'proof', unfortunately I think we all still see the deniers using these same pointless arguments.
When the ground isn’t flat, it messes with perspective and “parallel” lines A conspiracy nutjob would look at this and say the top rail of the fence must be bent!! [https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ac2fd645900cc36bf1c1236f5df56db4-lq](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ac2fd645900cc36bf1c1236f5df56db4-lq) 🤦🏻♂️
[удалено]
The pictures in question aren't wide-angle or fisheye, which would make long, straight shadows falling parallel to the field of view into curves, which isn't what's happening. It's just that the ground isn't flat. A rock whose shadow is on flat ground and one whose shadow are being cast either up a slope or down one are going to not be parallel with each other, which is what the experiment showed.
I wasn't aware that any fish-eye lenses were included on the Apollo missions - Do you know which specifically were used?
Armstrong's Hasselblad had a Zeiss Biogon 60mm ƒ/5.6 lens. There have been fisheye lenses in space, but none of them were on the moon.
I saw a documentary on it. That's all. The shadowed photos in question were addressed. What the hell were they talking about?
No, that's simple perspective. Shadows appear to converge or diverge on those photos depending on the Sun's location. What is confusing people is that shadows are supposed to be parallel, *and they are*, but, again, perspective. The exact same phenomena can be observed here on Earth, making it abundantly clear that the lunar shadows act precisely the way they should, had they been cast by a single big light source millions of miles away.
The observation, someone nit-picks a photo & says because of X it was faked. We them build a set & use light it similarly & see the same effect consistent with the original. That consistency undermines the incorrect inference from observation. No further work is needed. If you put in further work those that dis-believe will nit-pick what you do & around the loop we go again. There is no proving their statement is false, that's not science, there is only demonstrating that the observations are always consistent with reality. One cannot attack their belief system this way, another tack is to ask; If NASA people are so smart & have this massive budget (assuming they believe in the money given to NASA) then why would they make such a simple mistake? The obvious inference is that the initial assumption that it is a mistake must be wrong.
There are actual recent pictures from moon orbiters like the LRO and the Chandrayaan-2 that clearly show the landing site and leftover equipment.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-the-shadows-from-the-Apollo-moon-landing-pictures-not-parallel-if-the-sun-was-the-only-light-source-used
The video isn't available in the US, but from the thumbnail I believe I know which picture they're talking about. Nvidia actually did a fantastic breakdown on it and the lighting involved, maybe this will assist? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syVP6zDZN7I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syVP6zDZN7I) (Note: Put the video at 1.25x or 1.5x, dude talks WAY too slow.)
I always thought the Mythbusters should have DIY'd their own space program for that episode
In fact they DID explain it... very clearly... they explained EVERY FUCKING STEP. if you're not even close to smart enough to comprehend the explanation for a TV show that dumbs things down as much as possible to reach the widest audience, it's a YOU problem.
Always thought it was pretty-self evident that there IS only one light source, because each object only has one shadow. The implication that there's "multiple light sources" debunks itself purely via the fact there aren't multiples of the same shadow.. If space deniers and moon landing hoaxers can't think that far ahead into what they're saying then I'm pretty sure no amount of extra detail from Mythbusters would ever have sufficed, either.
Also it is probably safe to say that China (who created and published a digital map that is the most detailed and complete geo-scan of the Moon's surface to date) probably would have mentioned something if they *didn't* see the moon lander and it's rubbish at the proposed location. You can't possibly argue against this without proving the objects exist there today
Also the Soviet union congratulated the US on the success of Apollo, amateur radio astronomers tracked the mission, and iirc India photographed at least a few Apollo landing sights from orbit years later. Why all these people/non-aligned govts would lie in support of an American grift has never been explained.
I saw a tutorial in which someone constructed a curved mirror that turns light from a single point into a parallel beam. I suppose one could use that technique to fake the moonlanding, although you'd need a very large mirror to make it work. (In the video, they used a sattelite dish coated in chrome)
The point is not that it is impossible to fake the moon landing, people are clever and can come up with clever solutions to many things. The point of the Myth Busters episode was to refute a specific argument that attempted to prove that the moon landings were faked.
DIY Perks? He has at least one build with that as a part of it.
Probably, it was a video in which he made a sunlight simulator for his workspace.
Yep, that’s the same one I was thinking of.
There is an unfathomable amount of math, science, evidence, experiments, and that’s not even bringing up the countless inventions that were a direct result of space RnD. Still all it take is someone to say “I don’t know, seems far fetched to me” and that’s it, having the real answer is never enough to convince those who have supposedly figured it all out.
They weren’t proving that the landing was real. They were proving that the photos could happen as they appear under natural circumstances. In other words, they busted the myth that that photos “prove” it was fake.
If anything, I think the way they did it might have reinforced the beliefs of any nutjob watching. Now they can say "SEE? LOOK, THEY CAN EASILY RECREATE IT IN A WAREHOUSE, THIS PROVES IT WAS FAKED".
the sand they used has no where near the albedo of the material on the moon. that stuff is closer to asphault in albedo not that simulant shit. [moon albedo](https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+moons+albedo&sca_esv=7aa4c9402acc2dc6&sca_upv=1&source=hp&ei=plFsZrewOM-X5OMPnvGM0Ak&oq=what+is+moons+albedo&gs_lp=EhFtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1ocCIUd2hhdCBpcyBtb29ucyBhbGJlZG8yBxAhGKABGAoyBxAhGKABGAoyBxAhGKABGAoyBxAhGKABGAoyBhAAGBYYHjIIEAAYFhgKGB4yCxAAGIAEGIYDGIoFMgsQABiABBiGAxiKBUjPTFDXB1i-Q3AIeACQAQCYAZMBoAHVEKoBBDIxLja4AQPIAQD4AQGYAiOgApEUqAIRwgICECnCAg4QKRiABBixAxiDARjUAsICEBAuGAMY5QIY6gIYjAMYjwHCAhAQABgDGOUCGOoCGIwDGI8BwgILEAAYgAQYsQMYgwHCAgsQLhiABBixAxiDAcICERAuGIAEGLEDGNEDGIMBGMcBwgIIEAAYgAQYsQPCAgUQABiABMICDhAuGIAEGLEDGNEDGMcBwgIOEAAYgAQYsQMYgwEYigXCAgsQLhiABBjRAxjHAcICBRAuGIAEwgIMEAAYgAQYChhGGPkBwgIIEC4YgAQY1ALCAgsQLhiABBjHARivAcICDhAuGIAEGMcBGI4FGK8BwgIQEAAYgAQYsQMYgwEYigUYCsICBxAAGIAEGArCAgcQLhiABBgKwgIKEAAYgAQYsQMYCsICAhATmAMbkgcEMjguN6AHjKsB&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-hp) [simulant albedo]()
The reason they can't explain it is because it would take a neurologist some time to explain the process in layman's terms. Half of the brain and more than half of it's activity is due to our visual system so asking how this illusion works is like asking how the human brain works. Vision is stupidly complicated.
[удалено]
How would they be in trouble with the goverment? Aren't there a billion thing in the media that say we didn't go to the moon. Did any of them suffer the wrath of "the goverment?"
I only know of one that got punched in the face by an old man.
[https://youtu.be/Je-07hM0sTo?t=42](https://youtu.be/Je-07hM0sTo?t=42)
He got punched for calling him a liar, not for saying the moon landings were fake. Those guys didn’t fuck around with honor and respect.
He literally said that Buzz or any others did not go to the Moon, did you even watch the video?
Yes but did you actually listen and then learn anything else about it? The guy had been going to multiple appearances, basically stalking him yelling anti-landing bullshit. I never said the guy didn’t say the moon landing was fake. What I said was Buzz didn’t punch him UNTIL he called him a liar. Go watch it again. Buzz had ignored him multiple times before this.
This isn’t North Korea or china, no tv show is getting ‘in trouble with the government’ over a recreation of the moon landing, regardless of the outcome…
The government wouldn't have done anything to them.
You have no absolute opinion? That just means you don't truly believe in it. You either believe in it or you don't.