(Yes, of course I know that’s not the Enterprise-D and that TNG came out in 1986, but you try making a better debunking joke.)

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    I have no doubt you could have faked the video.

    Nope. In order to fake the video with a live background and real shadows, you would have to have had a single sun-equivalent light source to make all of the shadows point in the exact same direction, while at the same time no light whatsoever coming from any other direction.

    CGI wasn’t a thing in 1969. Ultimately, if you wanted to fake a moon landing in 1969, you would very quickly find out that it would be far simpler and far less expensive to just go to the moon.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      That doesn’t even take into account the dust. In the moon landing footage, lunar regolith doesn’t billow like it would in an atmosphere. Whenever it’s kicked, it falls back to the surface in a neat parabola every time.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      you would have to have had a single sun-equivalent light source

      Sprinkled into the Moon Landing Hoax lore are all sorts of arguments about lighting coming from the wrong angles and producing bizarre shadows, objects moving inconsistently with microgravity, and technical components (including the cameras used to film the landing itself) being impossible to operate from the lunar surface.

      The root of hoax theory isn’t merely that it was faked, but that a savvy observer of the footage can identify the Hollywood legerdemain.

      CGI wasn’t a thing in 1969.

      If you want to get hard-core in your Moon Hoax theories, you’ll inevitably run into people who claim it was.