ApolloHoax.net

Apollo Discussions => The Hoax Theory => Topic started by: Graham2001 on May 15, 2012, 08:54:46 AM

Title: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Graham2001 on May 15, 2012, 08:54:46 AM
Apparently there is going to be a Conspiracy Con this year and one of the guests is the person named in the title. Apparently he is going to give a talk on how Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landings.....!

See:

http://conspiracycon.com/ (http://conspiracycon.com/)

For this and other nonsense...

Now I've never heard of this guy before this so I was wondering what his background is?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Echnaton on May 15, 2012, 09:08:06 AM
He is "considered to be a ‘modern-day Indiana Jones’ for his ongoing worldwide quests to find clues to mankind’s spiritual destiny via ancient societies and artifacts...."  At least according to his web site.  http://jayweidner.com (http://jayweidner.com)    I wouldn't put much stock in what he says. 

Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: JayUtah on May 15, 2012, 10:25:03 AM
He's just another conspiracy theorist who thinks he holds the key to interpreting Stanley Kubrick's films.  He claims to have uncovered subtle clues in Kubrick's later works, chiefly The Shining, that point to Kubrick's role in faking the Apollo film and photography.  Earlier he tried to argue that he'd discovered cues in the Apollo photography that alluded to Kubrick's front-projection techniques used in 2001: A Space Odyssey.  But of course Weidner made several elementary mistakes in basic photography that make his opinion rather ill-considered.

I correspond on and off with Anthony Frewin, Kubrick's personal assistant for decades and the screenwriter to the film Color Me Kubrick (about Kubrick's infamous impersonator -- check it out, it's Netflixable and has a great performance by John Malkovich).  Frewin chuckles at Weidner and others over their comical ignorance of Kubrick's life and works.  In this latest case Weidner simply styles himself as the diligent "discoverer" of Kubrick's real intent.  (In other words, making up a bunch of conspiratorial nonsense and attributing it to Kubrick.)

Weidner is also a coward.  He blatantly stole original artwork from Clavius (as in, artwork I produced) and used it on his own site, arguing a point that was clearly and soundly refuted on the page from which he stole the graphic.  I attempted to contact him to ask him at least to attribute the graphic to its proper source, and asking him to justify his debunked claims, but he did not respond.  So yes, as far as I'm concerned he's just another blowhard who is afraid to face his critics.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Echnaton on May 15, 2012, 10:46:16 AM
I wonder if  styling himself as a ‘modern-day Indiana Jones’ is really a clue given to reveal  that he is a fictional creation of Lucas and Spielberg.  Although he sounds more like the late Baptist pastor and crackpot archaeologist, Vendyl Jones.  OTOH, taking the "V" &"L" from Vendyl's first name results in Endy Jones.  A coincident???
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Tedward on May 16, 2012, 02:53:27 AM
People will be prepared to swallow it hook line and sinker and use it. A glowing endorsement or two in that link further up.....

What happens if you do not turn up at a conspiracy conference after booking in? Do your fellow believers think you have missed the bus or something worse?

Just wondering.

Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Chew on May 16, 2012, 03:49:45 AM
I would love to walk on stage during the presentation dressed like one of the men in black, take a few pictures of the audience, then walk off.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: raven on May 16, 2012, 06:10:15 AM
I would love to walk on stage during the presentation dressed like one of the men in black, take a few pictures of the audience, then walk off.
Heh, get a whole posse together, that would be awesome. ;D
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: advancedboy on June 16, 2012, 02:38:08 AM
J. Weidner is an interesting person. I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum, it is simply good manners that shouldn`t allow any of us, gentlemen, to talk defamatory arguments of such people. Some of his agruments still stand as `pending`.
We know that S. Kubrick was a `detail whore`, and would retake many scenes as long as it was necessary for his own standards. I still sweat cold at night thinking why would he change insignificant details in the film. Such as rename the room 237. Even if you consider the tapestry on the wall reminiscent of rockets to be a an acid trip, or the All work and no play, bla, bla to be an OCD. Little boy`s  sweater is kinda blunt poke in face  from series `clandestine hints for dummies`. Coincidences, gentlemen, coincidences.  Unfortunately coincidences tend to be either accumulative or scattered.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: raven on June 16, 2012, 03:17:51 AM
Quote
237
The moon's mean distance from the Earth is 238.8 thousand miles, which a simple googling would have told you advancedboy. Even if we round up, that's 239.
Whatever reason he made it that number, it can't be anything to do with the moon, not if he was the "'detail whore'" you say.
Sleep well.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: nomuse on June 16, 2012, 04:22:04 AM
Oh, dog yes.  Heard of him, read him, got the t-shirt.

I have to give him one point.  Every other Apollo Denier chatters on about "blue screen" and it is nice to have someone who realizes that not only are there other ways of doing things, Kubrick was one of the old-school (like Cameron, at least during "Aliens") who preferred to do things in-camera.

But then he blows it.  One of his big, big points is how he has detected the seams in the Scotchlite screens used by the Apollo film crew.  Ah, so close and yet so far.  Yes, the material came in rolls that weren't that wide.  Yes, seams could be a problem.  And the team filming 2001 figured out how to fix that issue!  In all of that film, you won't find those tell-tale seams of Weidner's, because what they did is cut the stuff in tiny irregular pieces and attach THOSE to a backing.

Exactly as I did back in high school, reinforcing styrofoam carvings with glue-muslin.  Exactly as model railroaders and other diorama makers have been doing since I don't know how long ago.  Apparently this was obvious...to everyone but Weidner.

(And he also goes on and on about the tell-tale straight line near the bottom of the images, where the studio set ran out and the scotchlite screen took over.  Exactly as you see in the matt paintings or cycloramas of every movie and television production, right?  Right?  At this point you have to stop and ask if the man has actually ever seen a film in his life, or if his understanding of Kubrick is entirely academic.)
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: ChrLz on June 16, 2012, 05:43:18 AM
I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum..
{ironically followed by..}
Quote
We know that S. Kubrick was a `detail whore`
Cute.

Quote
I still sweat cold at night thinking why would he change insignificant details in the film.
... Really? ...    :o

I think you need a different hobby, one that doesn't stress you quite as much.

Quote
Unfortunately coincidences tend to be either accumulative or scattered.
Or made up. Or abused. Or things are claimed as coincidences when they are no such thing.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Count Zero on June 16, 2012, 05:47:41 AM
I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum, it is simply good manners that shouldn`t allow any of us, gentlemen, to talk defamatory arguments of such people.

I am very glad to hear that you will be refraining from accusing anyone who participated in the Apollo program of fraud or attempting to deceive anyone through hoaxes or falsified evidence.

Such a moral stance is commendable, and I fully expect you to maintain it for the duration of this discussion.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Echnaton on June 16, 2012, 07:55:52 AM
I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum

However, anyone that puts ideas forward in a public forum has given implicit permission for a public critical examination of those ideas.  So a critique of what Weidner has said is not defamatory.  No one gets a pass on this.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Laurel on June 16, 2012, 10:04:52 AM
I've mentioned this elsewhere, but Weidner talks about how he has "gone through the entire photographic record of Apollo program" and "nearly every shot is in pristine focus." That's just not true; if he'd really gone through the entire record, he would know that there are plenty of out-of-focus Apollo photographs out there.
http://web.archive.org/web/20101123213629/http://jayweidner.com/AlchemicalKubrickIIc.html
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: raven on June 16, 2012, 10:44:18 AM
I am almost, almost, surprised CT still make that claim, with basically the entire Apollo photo record online and most of it in serious high resolution, it's much harder to continue this lie.
 This isn't just something that could conceivably be  a mistake; it is an out and out, top to bottom, lie (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5904.jpg).
Now, a lot of Apollo hoax claims can be chalked up to ignorance, regrettable but potentially curable.
But when 'professional', (oh Dear Lord is that word taking a beating) conspiracy theorists resort to blatant fabrications like that, well, it rather damages any remaining credibility they might have as honest seekers of truth. Bart Sibrel and David Percy, two of the most well known proponents, are also guilty of this, claiming that the Earth seen during TransLunar Coast TV broadcasts was either a transparency or a circular porthole.
As this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKkpfYUhkig&feature=plcp) video shows, both claims are demonstrably false, using materials both David Percy and Bart Sibrel almost certainly had to have been aware of.
Now, I don't get mad easily,advancedboy, I respect all human beings, I give politeness and courtesy even when it is not returned. I  even try to love the little bastards, but when someone lies to support their claims, that makes me quite angry and more than a little sad.
People like Weidner don't seem to care about truth; they just care about getting that next cheque for appearing at a convention, or selling their books and DVD.
That's right, irony of ironies, these people are, for lack of a better word, shills.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: VincentMcConnell on June 16, 2012, 12:20:11 PM
I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum, it is simply good manners that shouldn`t allow any of us, gentlemen, to talk defamatory arguments of such people.

Why? He spends all his time spouting defamation, lies, insults and claims of incompetence at over 400,000 people in the Apollo program that worked so hard that a lot of them lost their family life, were divorced and ruined their personal relationships... There were a lot of people that put just too much to make sure man got to the moon. For all I care, we talk crap and criticize him from the top of the tallest building with a megaphone when he's absent...
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: VincentMcConnell on June 16, 2012, 12:23:13 PM
I've mentioned this elsewhere, but Weidner talks about how he has "gone through the entire photographic record of Apollo program" and "nearly every shot is in pristine focus." That's just not true; if he'd really gone through the entire record, he would know that there are plenty of out-of-focus Apollo photographs out there.
http://web.archive.org/web/20101123213629/http://jayweidner.com/AlchemicalKubrickIIc.html

HAHA! I love when hoax believers say "every photo was in perfect framing and focus". That's such a colossal failure, it makes me laugh. It really proves they haven't done the slightest bit of research. If one were to go through the ALSJ for about 25 minutes, they'd probably stumble across 30 photos on any one mission that were either inadvertently taken or were using the wrong focus or exposure.
This Weidner fellow is a clown whom I wouldn't put much belief into anything he says...
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: VincentMcConnell on June 16, 2012, 12:25:22 PM
Quote
237
The moon's mean distance from the Earth is 238.8 thousand miles.

Yeah. You could be even more nit-picky with it if you wanted, too. The moon is in a slightly eccentric orbit around the Earth, so its distance varies from about 250,000 miles to 218,000 miles. Not sure the exact Perigee and Apogee. We could use this thread specifically to prove everything Weidner says wrong and then take it to his presentation, hold a presentation immediately afterward with his same audience... and PROFIT.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Zakalwe on June 16, 2012, 01:01:51 PM
I really don't get the whole Kubrick link at all. The hypothesis seems to be that Kubrick (probably from the misconception that as the director of 2001, then he MUST be able to fake Apollo) shot the whole thing.
In a movie studio.
In Essex, England???? ::)

Kubrick moved to England when making Lolita, and remained there for the rest of his life. So now, not only does the whole of NASA, its contractors and external employees have to keep scthum for 50 years, but also his English employees, set makers, tea ladies, cleaners, etc. Now given that the British Government couldn't keep things like the Profumo affair under wraps, what chance is there that Kubrick faking Apollo could be kept quiet for all these years.  The concept is so bloody laughable, it hurts.


Common sense. Sometimes it aint that common!

Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: mako88sb on June 16, 2012, 01:09:48 PM
I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum, it is simply good manners that shouldn`t allow any of us, gentlemen, to talk defamatory arguments of such people.

Why? He spends all his time spouting defamation, lies, insults and claims of incompetence at over 400,000 people in the Apollo program that worked so hard that a lot of them lost their family life, were divorced and ruined their personal relationships... There were a lot of people that put just too much to make sure man got to the moon. For all I care, we talk crap and criticize him from the top of the tallest building with a megaphone when he's absent...

Didn't they mention in "From the earth to the Moon"'s Apollo 1 episode that somebody with his family with him stopped his car in front of an oncoming train?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: peter eldergill on June 16, 2012, 01:10:01 PM
If Kubrik were to have filmed this, wouldn't the filming have taken a lot of time? Exactly when would he have done this and wouldn't someone noticed?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Glom on June 16, 2012, 01:22:37 PM
I really don't get the whole Kubrick link at all. The hypothesis seems to be that Kubrick (probably from the misconception that as the director of 2001, then he MUST be able to fake Apollo) shot the whole thing.
In a movie studio.
In Essex, England???? ::)

Kubrick moved to England when making Lolita, and remained there for the rest of his life. So now, not only does the whole of NASA, its contractors and external employees have to keep scthum for 50 years, but also his English employees, set makers, tea ladies, cleaners, etc. Now given that the British Government couldn't keep things like the Profumo affair under wraps, what chance is there that Kubrick faking Apollo could be kept quiet for all these years.  The concept is so bloody laughable, it hurts.


Common sense. Sometimes it aint that common!



It was Shepperton Studios in Surrey where he did his work, wasn't it?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: gillianren on June 16, 2012, 02:10:34 PM
If Kubrik were to have filmed this, wouldn't the filming have taken a lot of time? Exactly when would he have done this and wouldn't someone noticed?

Yes, it would have taken forever and about a million takes.  Ideally, there would be no emotion left in his actors, so they would give him exactly the performance he wanted.  In general, people who talk about Kubrick as a possible director for an Apollo hoax know nothing about his directorial style.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: carpediem on June 16, 2012, 04:01:25 PM
I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum, it is simply good manners that shouldn`t allow any of us, gentlemen, to talk defamatory arguments of such people.

Why? He spends all his time spouting defamation, lies, insults and claims of incompetence at over 400,000 people in the Apollo program that worked so hard that a lot of them lost their family life, were divorced and ruined their personal relationships... There were a lot of people that put just too much to make sure man got to the moon. For all I care, we talk crap and criticize him from the top of the tallest building with a megaphone when he's absent...

Didn't they mention in "From the earth to the Moon"'s Apollo 1 episode that somebody with his family with him stopped his car in front of an oncoming train?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Baron
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Jason Thompson on June 16, 2012, 04:24:23 PM
If one were to go through the ALSJ for about 25 minutes, they'd probably stumble across 30 photos on any one mission that were either inadvertently taken or were using the wrong focus or exposure.

Indeed. It doesn't even take that long.

On Apollo 11, precisely one roll of film was exposed on the lunar surface during the EVA. 125 pictures were taken. No less than 32 of them are obvious 'bad shots'. They are out of focus, badly framed, obvious accidental exposures and so on. A few are in perfect focus and do in fact contain things of interest, but are taken at an angle that makes it clear they were not taken deliberately. Still more are simple landscape shots that are very difficult to screw up as they contain no distinct 'subject'. Even with that, 25% of the pictures taken were not in perfect focus or perfectly framed.

Even the iconic 'man on the Moon' image is badly framed and comes close to clipping Aldrin's head off.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Andromeda on June 16, 2012, 05:51:50 PM
If one were to go through the ALSJ for about 25 minutes, they'd probably stumble across 30 photos on any one mission that were either inadvertently taken or were using the wrong focus or exposure.

Indeed. It doesn't even take that long.

On Apollo 11, precisely one roll of film was exposed on the lunar surface during the EVA. 125 pictures were taken. No less than 32 of them are obvious 'bad shots'. They are out of focus, badly framed, obvious accidental exposures and so on. A few are in perfect focus and do in fact contain things of interest, but are taken at an angle that makes it clear they were not taken deliberately. Still more are simple landscape shots that are very difficult to screw up as they contain no distinct 'subject'. Even with that, 25% of the pictures taken were not in perfect focus or perfectly framed.

Even the iconic 'man on the Moon' image is badly framed and comes close to clipping Aldrin's head off.

Very true, and I believe the next picture on the roll showed someone's sleeve.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: raven on June 16, 2012, 06:44:06 PM
Not to mention tilted.
Heck, the 'C' rock picture shows the LRV antenna 'growing' out of the astronauts head, a composition no-no.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: twik on June 17, 2012, 12:06:12 AM
Totally off topic, but I thought I'd bring it up. Advancedboy, you have repeatedly addressed the forum as "gentlemen". I'm not sure how it works in Latvia, but in many parts of the internet, women have access, and take part in intellectual discussions. Therefore, you might make a better impression if you addressed the forum as "ladies and gentlemen".
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: advancedboy on June 17, 2012, 02:42:47 AM
Jay Weidner does bring up interesting topics about Apollo missions and coincidences regarding his connections with NASA. I don`t think he is a shill or cheap  attention seeker. If you denounce him of selling books or having sellout radio interviews, then ask yourself  what is Aldrin doing ?
There are some issues that I don`t agree with Weidner, especially when he deals with occcultism and symbolism. That is a thinly woven fabric. Some interesting aspects are- NASA specialists consulting him on Space Odyssey. And front projection screen sounds very reasonable for faking moonlanding scenes, had it been necessary to be done. What bothers me in `The Shining `is room 237(K), which was a common knowledge in textbooks of that era to be median distance to the moon. The mural reminiscent of rockets, Apollo sweater, carpet pattern similar to launchpad 39a, bears and winter,.It all could be just a silly coincidence, the problem is not coincidences, the problem is that it is in Stanley Kubrick`s film, and Stanley is famous for subliminal messages, symbols and attention to tiniest details. He knew that it would lead  the audience to Apollo connections, why would he  want to mislead the public, if his message was different? If his message was different, why put non-essential ,misleading hints?
And you are naive that it would be hard to silence Kubrick. Their usual strategy is to cause accidents for your friends as a warning sign, if that doesn`t work, they get to you. In case of Kubrick they most likely didn`t resort to threats, but offered equipment and finance for shooting his next movies. Paycheck silnces everybody. Proof? How many people have been publicly complaining that their government department is too big and bloated and wastes taxpayers` money? people are afraid to lose their comfortable jobs, and will stay silent, especially when threatened.More proof? Remember in 2002 Boeing revealed a classified airplane Bird of prey. Could you get any information about it prior to unveiling? How much information can you get about concept vehicles that companies reveal in car shows? How many pictures can you get of their clay mockups? The only information you get is what company allows to be leaked. So how do they silence people? it is absurdly simple. There is a known group of people who know about the project and have access to it. If any information is leaked, everyone`s paycheck is sliced in half without any investigation. Works fine.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: gillianren on June 17, 2012, 02:47:17 AM
I suppose you have evidence to support any of what you've said?  Would it surprise you to know that corporate espionage is a real thing and that there are leaks all the time?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Andromeda on June 17, 2012, 02:49:08 AM
Does that mean you think it possible Kubrick was admitting to faking the colonisation of the USA with all the Native American imagery in The Shining?

http://www.drummerman.net/shining/essays.html

"Hidden meanings" in films are very much open to interpretation and as such cannot be taken as proof of anything.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: ka9q on June 17, 2012, 02:53:18 AM
advancedboy, you do understand, don't you, that the 2002 French "documentary" Dark Side of the Moon, directed by William Karel, was satire? What they now call a "mockumentary"?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Jason Thompson on June 17, 2012, 03:03:50 AM
Some interesting aspects are- NASA specialists consulting him on Space Odyssey.

Were they consulting him or was he consulting them? And is there any evidence of what those consultations actually included?

Quote
And front projection screen sounds very reasonable for faking moonlanding scenes, had it been necessary to be done.

Irrelevant. The question is not what was reasonable but what was done.

Quote
What bothers me in `The Shining `is room 237(K), which was a common knowledge in textbooks of that era to be median distance to the moon. The mural reminiscent of rockets, Apollo sweater, carpet pattern similar to launchpad 39a, bears and winter,.It all could be just a silly coincidence, the problem is not coincidences, the problem is that it is in Stanley Kubrick`s film, and Stanley is famous for subliminal messages, symbols and attention to tiniest details.

Or maybe he just liked space and decided to stick some references to it into his film. That is a common thing for directors to do.

Quote
He knew that it would lead  the audience to Apollo connections, why would he  want to mislead the public, if his message was different? If his message was different, why put non-essential ,misleading hints?

They are only leading somewhere by some very slight reasoning on the part of people who like to read things into every little detail.

Quote
Remember in 2002 Boeing revealed a classified airplane Bird of prey. Could you get any information about it prior to unveiling? How much information can you get about concept vehicles that companies reveal in car shows? How many pictures can you get of their clay mockups? The only information you get is what company allows to be leaked.

Irrelevant. Something on the scale of Apollo is not remotely comparable to anything you just listed.

Quote
There is a known group of people who know about the project and have access to it. If any information is leaked, everyone`s paycheck is sliced in half without any investigation. Works fine.

No. Apollo cannot have worked like that. The number of people who have to know it is fake is simply too large.

Do you actually have anything in the way of evidence to discuss, or is it all to be irrelevancies like this?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Jason Thompson on June 17, 2012, 03:06:43 AM


Even the iconic 'man on the Moon' image is badly framed and comes close to clipping Aldrin's head off.

Very true, and I believe the next picture on the roll showed someone's sleeve.
[/quote]

Indeed. It was a blurry closeup of the side of one of their spacesuits, taken accidentally as Armstrong passed the camera to Aldrin so they could continue with the next stage of their work.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Glom on June 17, 2012, 05:33:27 AM
Jay Weidner does bring up interesting topics about Apollo missions and coincidences regarding his connections with NASA. I don`t think he is a shill or cheap  attention seeker. If you denounce him of selling books or having sellout radio interviews, then ask yourself  what is Aldrin doing ?
There are some issues that I don`t agree with Weidner, especially when he deals with occcultism and symbolism. That is a thinly woven fabric. Some interesting aspects are- NASA specialists consulting him on Space Odyssey. And front projection screen sounds very reasonable for faking moonlanding scenes, had it been necessary to be done. What bothers me in `The Shining `is room 237(K), which was a common knowledge in textbooks of that era to be median distance to the moon. The mural reminiscent of rockets, Apollo sweater, carpet pattern similar to launchpad 39a, bears and winter,.It all could be just a silly coincidence, the problem is not coincidences, the problem is that it is in Stanley Kubrick`s film, and Stanley is famous for subliminal messages, symbols and attention to tiniest details. He knew that it would lead  the audience to Apollo connections, why would he  want to mislead the public, if his message was different? If his message was different, why put non-essential ,misleading hints?
And you are naive that it would be hard to silence Kubrick. Their usual strategy is to cause accidents for your friends as a warning sign, if that doesn`t work, they get to you. In case of Kubrick they most likely didn`t resort to threats, but offered equipment and finance for shooting his next movies. Paycheck silnces everybody. Proof? How many people have been publicly complaining that their government department is too big and bloated and wastes taxpayers` money? people are afraid to lose their comfortable jobs, and will stay silent, especially when threatened.More proof? Remember in 2002 Boeing revealed a classified airplane Bird of prey. Could you get any information about it prior to unveiling? How much information can you get about concept vehicles that companies reveal in car shows? How many pictures can you get of their clay mockups? The only information you get is what company allows to be leaked. So how do they silence people? it is absurdly simple. There is a known group of people who know about the project and have access to it. If any information is leaked, everyone`s paycheck is sliced in half without any investigation. Works fine.

You seem to struggle with the concept of proving something.  So far, all you've offered is contorted speculation in order to try (and fail) to suggest that maybe it was possible it was a hoax, without providing a shred of evidence it actually was.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Luke Pemberton on June 17, 2012, 06:15:52 AM
Jay Weidner does bring up interesting topics about Apollo missions and coincidences regarding his connections with NASA. I don`t think he is a shill or cheap  attention seeker. If you denounce him of selling books or having sellout radio interviews, then ask yourself  what is Aldrin doing ?

Aldrin was the second man on the moon, man's greatest technical achievement. He is clearly making money from his success. Aldrin is also passionate about the legacy of Apollo, and works hard in educational outreach. I don't consider that selling out. ALdrin has a product to sell, and he's doing that.

There are some issues that I don`t agree with Weidner, especially when he deals with occcultism and symbolism. That is a thinly woven fabric. Some interesting aspects are- NASA specialists consulting him on Space Odyssey. And front projection screen sounds very reasonable for faking moonlanding scenes, had it been necessary to be done.

Had it been necessary? So we're done here.

What bothers me in `The Shining `is room 237(K), which was a common knowledge in textbooks of that era to be median distance to the moon. The mural reminiscent of rockets, Apollo sweater, carpet pattern similar to launchpad 39a, bears and winter,.It all could be just a silly coincidence, the problem is not coincidences, the problem is that it is in Stanley Kubrick`s film, and Stanley is famous for subliminal messages, symbols and attention to tiniest details. He knew that it would lead  the audience to Apollo connections, why would he  want to mislead the public, if his message was different? If his message was different, why put non-essential ,misleading hints?

How does this prove a hoax. Speculation.


And you are naive that it would be hard to silence Kubrick. Their usual strategy is to cause accidents for your friends as a warning sign, if that doesn`t work, they get to you. In case of Kubrick they most likely didn`t resort to threats, but offered equipment and finance for shooting his next movies.

Speculation. How does speculation offer proof of the hoax?

Paycheck silnces everybody. Proof? How many people have been publicly complaining that their government department is too big and bloated and wastes taxpayers` money? people are afraid to lose their comfortable jobs, and will stay silent, especially when threatened.

Proof of the way public finance operates.

More proof? Remember in 2002 Boeing revealed a classified airplane Bird of prey. Could you get any information about it prior to unveiling? How much information can you get about concept vehicles that companies reveal in car shows? How many pictures can you get of their clay mockups? The only information you get is what company allows to be leaked. So how do they silence people? it is absurdly simple. There is a known group of people who know about the project and have access to it. If any information is leaked, everyone`s paycheck is sliced in half without any investigation. Works fine.

No, people leak inforamtion all the time. People that leak information get fired, any can also spend time in prison for breaking official secrets. Two reasons for protecting secrets are for national security and protecting capital investment in research. But it is great that you have destroyed your own argument with such a wonderful example of crash and burn. You acknowledge that individuals leak information from small projects, yet a project that involved 400 000 - no one has come forward and spoken. Seems ironic doesn't it?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: DataCable on June 17, 2012, 07:08:19 AM
And you are naive that it would be hard to silence Kubrick.
Are you claiming that Stanley Kubrick, and only Stanley Kubrick, produced fraudulent Apollo footage?

Quote
In case of Kubrick they most likely didn`t resort to threats, but offered equipment and finance for shooting his next movies.
Present evidence of financial remuneration to Stanley Kubrick from the alleged government conspirators.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: raven on June 17, 2012, 07:43:44 AM
advancedkid, I respect you as a fellow human being, and you raise a good point about weak arguments. What you don't seem to realize is that, in the experience of the good people of this board, they are all weak arguments, some just require more knowledge to discredit than others.
Front projection could not fake the Apollo scenes as seen. For example, if you know how front projection works, you should know  you need to keep the foreground objects and actors pretty dark, otherwise the projection will be visible on them.
 Yet the astronauts were wearing *white* suits, with mirrored visors!
 That's pretty much the opposite of dark.
Furthermore, you can't move the camera much or the shadows of the forground items will be seen the backdrop.
Yet Apollo did 360 degree panorama's, in both video and photos , as well as pans and long Rover rides captured by the 16mm DAC movie camera.
Now, I ask any better students of cinematography to please correct me, but it seems clear to me that front projection could not be used to fake Apollo as shown.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Donnie B. on June 17, 2012, 08:36:25 AM
... If any information is leaked, everyone`s paycheck is sliced in half without any investigation. Works fine.
I can't speak for the people who worked on Apollo, but I can say that having my paycheck cut in half would be a sure way to send me running to the press with every bit of information I had about my participation in a (purported) hoax.

In other words, threatening to cut off my bribe would be totally counterproductive.  You should read up on a little thing called Watergate that happened here in the USA a while back.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: frenat on June 17, 2012, 08:39:36 AM
What bothers me in `The Shining `is room 237(K), which was a common knowledge in textbooks of that era to be median distance to the moon.

No it wasn't.  They knew the distance to the Moon then almost as well as we know it today.  237 thousand was NEVER the median distance to the Moon.  You've been told this multiple times and IGNORED it.  Why?
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Echnaton on June 17, 2012, 08:44:21 AM
Jay Weidner does bring up interesting topics about Apollo missions and coincidences regarding his connections with NASA.

Care to tell us what they are, so we can have a discussion?



Quote
I don`t think he is a shill or cheap  attention seeker. If you denounce him of selling books or having sellout radio interviews, then ask yourself  what is Aldrin doing ?

We have made an effort to respond to your posts, yet you choose to respond to objections that don't exist.  Do you care to address my criticisms that your writing is so vague that it is actually meaningless?

Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: VincentMcConnell on June 17, 2012, 12:33:34 PM
Quote
I don`t think he is a shill or cheap  attention seeker. If you denounce him of selling books or having sellout radio interviews, then ask yourself  what is Aldrin doing?

Here's the difference:
Aldrin is an American hero that helped land the first LM on the moon and was the second human to walk on another world (first to urinate on one).
He was the nation's first perfectly successful spacewalker and a GENIUS at orbital rendezvous at the time. Aldrin is allowed to be as much of a me-
dia seeking public figure as he wants...
Weidner is just a jackass who discounts other people's achievements to make a name for himself...
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Echnaton on June 17, 2012, 01:07:35 PM
Aldrin is allowed to be as much of a me-
dia seeking public figure as he wants...

Both Aldrin and Weidner may of course may seek as much media attention as desired, without restriction.  It is difference between the value of there contributions rather than the skill of their PR that advancedboy doesn't seem to understand. 
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: gillianren on June 17, 2012, 02:58:58 PM
Now, I ask any better students of cinematography to please correct me, but it seems clear to me that front projection could not be used to fake Apollo as shown.

I'd have to confer with my cousin in film school to be sure, but I'm reasonably sure it would be impossible, yes.  I'm reasonably sure it would be impossible with any technology from the era.  People do tend to go on about 2001, but it's on a list of movies where I have to say that it's revolutionary for its time.  Without that caveat?  The effects are in many places quite crude.  (The spinning room thing was done in a Fred Astaire movie once; it's cool, but there is only one way it was revolutionary.)  Cable miniseries are capable of producing better special effects these days, and they still can't accurately simulate Moon landings.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Echnaton on June 17, 2012, 03:25:47 PM
(The spinning room thing was done in a Fred Astaire movie once; it's cool, but there is only one way it was revolutionary.)

My nomination for groaner of the day. 
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Glom on June 17, 2012, 03:40:07 PM
(The spinning room thing was done in a Fred Astaire movie once; it's cool, but there is only one way it was revolutionary.)

My nomination for groaner of the day. 

Yeah, you should be denigrating the one redeeming feature of that vacuum of a movie.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Echnaton on June 17, 2012, 05:02:55 PM
Yeah, you should be denigrating the one redeeming feature of that vacuum of a movie.

Them is fightin' words in these parts, partner!
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: DataCable on June 17, 2012, 07:13:03 PM
(The spinning room thing was done in a Fred Astaire movie once; it's cool, but there is only one way it was revolutionary.)
That's rotationary.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: ka9q on June 18, 2012, 12:06:13 AM
People do tend to go on about 2001, but it's on a list of movies where I have to say that it's revolutionary for its time.  Without that caveat?  The effects are in many places quite crude.
Indeed. Youtube Apollogist astrobrant2 made two excellent videos showing various mistakes and inconsistencies in 2001: A Space Odyssey:

(Part 1)
(Part 2)

Part 1 seems to have been taken down because of a DMCA complaint, and I can't find any mirrors. Astrobrant2 has been the victim of sustained (indeed, criminal) DMCA abuse by Jarrah White, and it can take a long time to restore videos that have been taken down improperly.

Neither of us had noticed most of these mistakes before, but you only have to look for them. Many are exactly the kinds of "anomalies" in lighting and relative object size that the Apollo deniers imagine in the Apollo photography. In 2001 they're real and often quite blatant. Ever since the movie first came out, my favorite "incoherence" has been the conference room scene, supposedly set on the moon. If they had walked like that on the real moon, their heads would bounce off the ceiling.

So why was everyone so impressed by 2001 at the time? I can think of several reasons:

1. It was so much better than anything before it, even if that isn't saying much.

2. Most of what passes for "science fiction" in TV and movies is actually fantasy set in space, e.g., Star Trek and Star Wars. Clarke, an accomplished "hard" science fiction writer, actually tried to adhere to known physics when possible. The USS Enterprise and countless other fantasy spaceships simply handwave artificial gravity into existence. Kubrick and Clarke actually tried to simulate weightlessness. When they do implement artificial gravity, they do it in a physically plausible way.

3. 2001 came out in 1968, just before the first Apollo landing. We did not yet know just how inaccurate those thousands of paintings of imaginary lunar scenes really were.

4. In 1968 we didn't yet know how real astronauts would move inside a large spacecraft. The big fear was becoming stranded, unable to reach a handhold. So Kubrick and Clarke implemented what was then thought to be a good way to move in such a cabin: Velcro on shoe soles and walkways. But when the first large manned spacecraft, Skylab, was launched in 1973 astronauts quickly discovered how easy it was to get around. You just push yourself in whatever direction you want to go and grab something when you get there. How do you get to the center of a large open space without velocity, and how could you then cancel that velocity to become stranded without touching anything? It should have been obvious that stranding was a non-problem, but worrying about non-problems is a time-honored tradition in the space business. The problem is that you often won't know if something will be a problem or not until it happens, and then it's too late.

Every manned spacecraft cabin also has a substantial ventilation system to prevent hazardous bubbles of CO2 from forming around astronauts, and that also tends to move things around.

So that scene of the flight attendant retrieving Dr. Floyd's pen is now just laughable. So is her full bathing cap. In the real universe, astronauts with long hair tie it down or just let it float. Of course, a cap neatly avoids having to simulate the behavior of long hair in weightlessness when you're filming a movie.

Everybody has now seen enough video from real spacecraft to know what true weightlessness looks like and how real astronauts behave in it. Any serious space movie with a pretense of realism now has no choice but real weightlessness, either in an airplane (like Apollo 13) or by actually going up there. Only the second option would make the astronauts themselves look right, where under sustained 0g fluid moves up in their bodies and into their faces. (I suppose you could simulate that on earth by hanging the actors upside down for a while before each scene.)

Thanks to old Apollo video, almost as many people know what real 1/6 g looks like, so again they're not likely to be fooled by anything but an airplane, and then you've got not only a limited duration but a limited volume. I suppose you could always construct a small vacuum chamber on an airplane, but that's getting pretty involved. Basically, faking lunar gravity in a movie is just so intractible that no one even tries. The fans generally understand and agree to suspend disbelief. Duncan Jones' "Moon" (2009) is a good recent example.

Regarding front projection, there's a very big giveaway in the "Dawn of Man" sequence at the beginning of "2001". A resting leopard is seen at twilight with glowing eyes. Cats, like many animals (but not humans) have a tapetum lucidum behind the retina to reflect light that would otherwise not be detected. We were seeing the reflection of Kubrick's front projector in the leopard's eyes. It was unintentional but the effect was so striking that Kubrick kept it.




Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: JayUtah on June 18, 2012, 02:02:00 PM
J. Weidner is an interesting person.

No, he's a dishonest plagiarist.  He has blatanly stolen my original content from my site and has ignored all my attempts to contact him to talk about it.  He is absent by choice, not by accident.

Quote
I would refrain from criticizing a person who is absent from the forum, it is simply good manners that shouldn`t allow any of us, gentlemen, to talk defamatory arguments of such people.

Nothing that has been said here qualifies legally as defamation against him.  However, your insistence on labeling Apollo astronauts and functionaries as frauds and liars does qualify as defamation under the law.  What do you say to that?

Further, Weidner has published his statements extensively and seeks to be published further.  Apollohoax is a public forum that anyone can read and contribute to.  He is therefore being criticized in an equally public forum.  I am not a member of Jarrah White's YouTube channel, yet on that channel is said the most vile and despicable things about me personally.  Where is your passionate defense of me?  Where is your vigorous condemnation that I am being vilified in a place I do not frequent?  Or is your one-sided defense purely hypocritical?

If Jay Weidner seeks public attention for his claims, then neither he nor you gets to limit what others may say about him in a public forum.  That's simply the way the world works.  If you don't want to be spoken about, don't attract attention.

Quote
We know that S. Kubrick was a `detail whore`...

We also know from Tony Frewin, a correspondent of mine and Kubrick's long-time assistant, that he had nothing to do with hoaxed Moon landings, and that he regarded the people who tried to implicate him in one as nosy crackpots or worse.  He considered them extremely ignorant of his life and work, and really didn't consider them worthy of his attention.

Quote
Unfortunately coincidences tend to be either accumulative or scattered.

Weidner can spend all the time he wants trying to trump up an "accumulation" of "coincidences."  But when he tries to say that this is what Kubrick really intended, we have contrary evidence from a much closer, much more reliable source than Weidner.  I can guarantee you that no one in Kubrick's estate pays the least attention to Weidner or considers him in any way an authoritative or even particularly knowledgeable interpreter of Kubrick's work.

Weidner is just another attention-seeking blowhard who carefully avoids any real test of his claims.  He wants to attach himself to famous men and famous things just enough to get a little for himself, without attracting so much attention that he's slapped down once and for all.  If you want to get me to pay attention to him, convince him he should talk to me about plagiarism.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: twik on June 19, 2012, 11:45:27 AM
You know, the argument that Kubrick left clues in later movies refering to a "moon hoax" shows just how desperate people like advancedboy are to focus on any inanity.

Let's say there are, perhaps, references to rockets and the distance to the Moon in Kubrick's later movies. Why does this have to indicate he's saying "I really faked the Lunar landing footage" and not "Hey, I'm making a sly reference to that movie of mine about the Moon. Maybe you've seen it, it was called 2001...."?

But to HBs, it's entirely inconceivable that Kubrick could be referencing his own (very public) work. To them, it MUST be a clue to something nefarious.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Jason Thompson on June 19, 2012, 03:28:01 PM
I still loved the idea that Kubrick faked the Moon landings. In a studio just up the road from where I live here in good ol' England...
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: nomuse on June 19, 2012, 03:34:31 PM
Well, heck, I was just watching a few episodes of "UFO" over the weekend.  You can't tell me Pinewood can't do a lunar surface!
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: twik on June 19, 2012, 04:19:41 PM
I still loved the idea that Kubrick faked the Moon landings. In a studio just up the road from where I live here in good ol' England...

You heard the story of how they first tried to film Cleopatra in England? All the footage had to be scrapped because you could see the actors' breaths, and Elizabeth Taylor got pneumonia.
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: nomuse on June 19, 2012, 04:30:41 PM
Heh.  In the commentary to "Aliens" they talk about how filming in England really got them in the right mood for the scenes on Asheron -- cold, overcast, windy and always raining.  It is amusing to think that no matter how miserable the Marines seemed on the surface, when the actors left the studio that evening it was worse...
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Al Johnston on June 19, 2012, 06:25:29 PM
I still loved the idea that Kubrick faked the Moon landings. In a studio just up the road from where I live here in good ol' England...

You heard the story of how they first tried to film Cleopatra in England? All the footage had to be scrapped because you could see the actors' breaths, and Elizabeth Taylor got pneumonia.

Well they would try filming it in summer... ;D
Title: Re: Has anyone heard of this person - Jay Weidner?
Post by: Luke Pemberton on June 19, 2012, 07:04:02 PM
Well they would try filming it in summer... ;D

That's funny.