A few (thousand) pics:

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/

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

Anything missing?

Hey Rusty, I am not going to take anything you say as offensive, maybe I should have made MY point a little clearer. I have been presented with enough evidence for me to belive that the moon landings were a hoax. I only needed someone to explain to me exactly how these photos are real. I dont think that everyone should belive something because someone else told them its true.

All of your points seem to be a good argument, and answer all of my questions, except the last pic, the land is obviously sloping down away from the camera, while bearing right, but my eyes still tell me there is something wrong, it a shame they are the highest res available.

Just like all fanatics and religious people I am going to have to think about this before I belive it


Andy

PS: Cheers for the links, I will have to have a browse some time.

Andyb, I think the shadows in the 3rd pic are explainable as a result of the wide-angle lens. Think of it as though the left of the picture is what you would see when you look to the left and the right of the picture is what you would see when you look to the right, rather then what you would see from the corner of your eye when looking straight.

I have the perfect example, go to this page and look at the picture of the hall, see how the two sides aren't parallel? It looks fake, right?

http://www.kestan.com/non-pub/global_cl ... /index.htm

I sort of understand what you mean, but shadows should not change direction due to using a fish-eye lens, or can they.???


Andy

I'll bet he believes it. Just another nail in the stupid coffin.

Sure they do. Shadows are just lines on the ground, and if the perspective of the ground is distorted, so are the shadows on it.

If you look at the shadows under the vehicle it looks like they're pretty close to vertical...wouldn't take much of a ground slope to tilt them from one side of a rock to the other.

Rusty, where were you on July 20, 1969, hmm?

I'm pretty he wasn't born yet. Did you mean to imply that no one on these forums has the authority to discuss the American Civil War?

C'mon, I'm not that obsessive and annoying about the "Civil War" am I? (Don't answer...)

The date I posted was the moon landing.

I was implying that Rusty is an FBI agent sent to infiltrate SPCR, become a trusted reviewer, and use his status to convince us the moon landing was real. I guess he would have had special interest in the moon landing because he was involved in it as well. Very bad joke, I know. Meant to be as if I'm paranoid and seeing bad guys everywhere.

I realise what the date meant, I can mouseover links too

I must admit I didn't get the full reference, though. I thought you were pulling the good ol' "you weren't around back then so what do you know" line. The Civil War mention was just a friendly poke

Trip, I'm very sorry that you had to come up with this little theory. Now you'll have to be, well, eliminated. IfI were you I would avoid any areas near your house that have grassy knolls.

OK, so tell us, just how big is John Lennon's file?

It's on the internet... It must be true!! .....


Actualy in all seriousness ... I read it in 'The Sun' (U.K. gutter press) too, so I guess it's validated.....


Now if someone could just quote wikipedia, we would have conclusive proof.....

Fsst, I bet you work for the FBI too

FBI !!!

MI5 if you please, I am English after all.....

As long as they pay you in American dollars amirite?

If you believe the "evidence" put forward by the conspiracy theory (which has been conclusively debunked IMO), why didn't the Soviets, who would presumably have been independently tracking the entire mission (or lack thereof), come up with something along the lines of: "yet another tissue of lies spread by the imperialists and their lackeys, these so-called moon landings are a load of bollockski..."