As though the astronauts where taking a photo every minute and interfering with other tasks ... bullcrap.
First there was two of them, secondly they took them in bursts and thirdly all the hard work on camera settings had been done on Earth.
Next!

You'd have be moaning like fook If they'd have taken too few.

Besides instead of cutting and pasting every single hoax claim to do with the moon landings, why don't you just type 'moon landing hoax claims debunked' into your browser and leave us alone Stan?
You know like cutting out the middlemen.

He wasn't saying they were taking photos every minuet they were on the moon, quite the opposite he was actually saying it is impossible to take a photo every minuet they were there, given the amount of photo's per mission and the total time they were there, which they would have to have done if they really went to the moon. Proved by the cold hard math he has just posted, they never went to the moon.
As stated any professional photographer would tell you given the space suits and gloves they were wearing and the other activity's and travel time upto 30 miles in some instances was IMPOSSIBLE

Go and stand in the corner with a coned hat on.
Are you telling me that pressing shutters while wearing a spacesuit was overlooked in training?
And it wasn't impossible was it, because they did it despite your dodgy maths.

'Any professional photographer would tell you' ...PMSL

Look I will spell it out for you ... they divide the total time by the number of photos to get an average time per photo.
A minute, say, disregarding two astronauts, now this totally disregards how the photos would have been taken in practice ...in bursts leaving time for other things.
Do I have to do that for you too?
By IMPLYING by statistics that on average they are involved in taking a photo every minute GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT there is no time for anything else ... but that is nonsense.

Forget setting scenes, apertures and the like. It was point and shoot photography, quick and simple.

I know it is an average......
But give over you say they were taking bursts of photos? Maybe they were but not bursts of 20 or 30 in a second i mean what would be the point? 30 images of the same thing......

But, but, but, they were wearing the wrong shoes God damn it.

Game, set and match.

You are not quite getting the idea of this ... substitute the word batches for bursts and imagine the
astronauts moving a bit like you would taking photos in real life.
Imagine them taking a load in a five /ten minute period and then doing something else for half an hour.
Then imagine two of them doing this to get twice as many photos.
You can't imagine that?
Because some lamebrain tells you it is not possible?
I bet you wouldn't put money on it in a real life scenario?

AND, I know I keep ploughing this furrow .... IF it was a hoax, do you really think they would leg themselves up by producing too many photos?
Really?

Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be.

Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be.

So to précis, the hoaxers are saying that the Apollo fakers were both cunningly clever and devious (smart cookies) and fooking thick as pigshit at the same time to overlook these glaring 'discrepancies'.
Cake and eat it?

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be. They were all faked. That's all you will get ...along of course with some hahahahahahahas! Some of those pictures are wonderful. I'm surprised nobody has commented to the effect that how could that bacofoil thing fly? Why it's not even aerodynamic!

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Sadly for the deluded, and the increasingly desperate ramblings, all the photographs are exhaustively catalogued, indexed and timed. For example, have a look at the Apollo 11 image library https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html What a bummer when your "BIG" point about the images turns out to be such utter, utter nonsense. Demonstrable, incontrovertibly nonsensical fallacy. This has got easier than I imagine shooting fish in a barrel would be. They were all faked. That's all you will get ...along of course with some hahahahahahahas! Some of those pictures are wonderful. I'm surprised nobody has commented to the effect that how could that bacofoil thing fly? Why it's not even aerodynamic!