http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/18/debunked/ (http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/18/debunked/)
[yt]O9y_AVYMEUs[/yt]
Quote from: FSBlueApocalypse on September 20, 2014, 12:37:13 PM
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/18/debunked/ (http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/18/debunked/)
[yt]O9y_AVYMEUs[/yt]
Let's see what new theory come up with.
Quote from: R.E.H.W.R. on September 22, 2014, 02:39:34 AM
Let's see what new theory come up with.
They don't come up with new theories. They just go hunting for more anomalies.
Quote from: MrBogosity on September 22, 2014, 07:02:39 AM
They don't come up with new theories. They just go hunting for more anomalies.
Which, given that most of them don't know anything about the moon or photography, and those that do actively lie about it, turns out to be rather easy.
Quote from: MrBogosity on September 22, 2014, 07:02:39 AM
They don't come up with new theories. They just go hunting for more anomalies.
Welp, top comment.
Speaking of Top Comments, here's one from the video which I don't think is getting enough love:
YarisTex
www3.telus.net/summa/moonshot/fillit.htm (http://www3.telus.net/summa/moonshot/fillit.htm)
Quote from: VectorM on September 22, 2014, 10:16:15 AM
Welp, top comment.
And Jarah "2 time 10 is 15" White puts a lot of effort into typing in his pretense of having physically (rather than mathematically) modeled the scene, and gotten a much darker astronaut figure in the shadow. Of course, he also admits that her couldn't be bothered putting in a bright white figure in Neil's place, which the video notes results in Buzz coming out a lot darker than he really was. Neil wasn't very far away, and was much brighter than anything else in the vicinity (since his oversuit hadn't had a chance to get dirty yet). In the simulation, he appears to approximately DOUBLE the light on Buzz.