My father was in computer science and worked on the worlds fastest super computers during the 1970s. (As I said before, he grew up close enough to Johnson Space Center to make a habit of dumpster diving there.)
My mother was a geologist who worked for E.A. King, the first lunar geologist and custodian for NASA lunar rock collection.
After my parents got divorced my mother dated a geologists for many years with his own NASA connections, his father helped design the Saturn V rocket.
I grew up hanging around internationally known scientists, including several from NASA.
I have been programming myself since 1984, and building/repairing computers since the late ‘80s today build replicas of computers from the ‘70s and early ‘80s (granted, not super computers) from individual components, not manufactured boards.
I high school, one of my hobbies was making detailed observations of the orbits of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn.
I studied physics and rocket engineering (and studied a considerable amount of geology and astronomy) in college, until I developed a serious neurological issue forced me to drop out. Now that the issue (narcolepsy) has finally been diagnosed and hopefully successfully treated (after 20 years, the average proper diagnosis time for narcolepsy is 15 years, unfortunately).
After discovering that I suddenly had unbelievable sleep requirements and was under such stress I had difficultly committing anything new to memory for about a year or two... (I assumed it to be something like PTSD or some kind of psychological guilt thing at the time because the onset of my narcolepsy roughly overlapped with 9/11 and taken the oath of enlistment as a US Naval Sea Cadet as a teenager, but never would’ve been accepted into the military due to developing several other comparative lesser health issues like asthma and food allergies) ... I eventually went back to school, lightened my course-load and started studying history... much of it the history of all the sorts of things I was already interested in that you seem to think are important components of some grand conspiracy to deceive the world into thinking a pancake was a ball for... reasons?
Instead, I later went into the somewhat less demanding field of medium and large format photography. I have become expert in photographic film (and digital) equipment, and have particularly the cameras and emulsions of the late 1960’s and early ‘70s, the cameras because I use them, and the emulsions because I have a horrendous historical film collecting habit and because of the people I grew up around I have a particular fondness for early NASA stuff. (I also collect atomic bomb footage, but fondness isn’t really the right word there.)
Today, my day job involves directing programmers, artists, and animators who have all worked in the film industry, producing 3d CGI films, we’re currently games, but they all came from a (CGI motion picture film) background. I direct people who have worked for Lucasfilm, and one who currently works for Pixar.
I am literally either part of “the conspiracy” (which does not exist), or possibly, due to the weird twists and turns of my life and family associations, the one person on this planet with the Perfect Storm of skillsets to point out in detail every single aspect of this kind of conspiracy claims that crop up online. I’ve done extensive work restoring, editing,and compositing photos. I know all the tricks and techniques, working digitally, or in the darkroom (it’s not called “manual” photoshop btw), and in terms of hollywood films I’ve studied how the special effects of just about every groundbreaking special effects film were achieved in the pre-digital era (I dabble in 16mm film and would like to use many of these traditional effects to use eventually). I am approaching the level of a special effects historian, if not, a film historian in general. I have 20/10 vision (with correction) which is how I got the job overseeing Hollywood artists; I can quickly pick out all of their mistakes. Of the originals and 1st run dupes I own hold significantly higher resolution than is available anywhere online, and I’ve examined each and every frame I own at high magnification... there’s not a single tell or blemish on any of them. Whether it’s with 1960’s technology or today’s there should be something visible some flaw in at least one of the photos. There aren’t. I’ve watched a 70mm print of 2001, and if they’re fakes they were way beyond Kubrick, that’s for damn sure.
BTW, they’re few and dim, but in spite of the low dynamic range of Kodachrome slide film and being exposed for the extremely bright lunar surface, there actually were a handful of stars bright enough to show in these slides. I was surprised my that myself, but they are too small and faint to show on a computer screen without zooming in. Unfortunately, my plans to scan my acquisitions at extremely high resolution has been thwarted a bit by the fact that they are 70mm format not the usual 120 format you’d see from a Hasselblad. Those sprocket holes make them just a tad too wide to fit in my medium format scanner, and my flatbed isn’t nearly as high resolution as my medium format scanner and certainly not higher than what NASA has put online, you obviously don’t cut the sprocket holes off a historically significant piece of film, even if they are, as you believe, historically significant fakes (if they’re fake they’re the greatest fake in the world, bar none) I’ll eventually get them drum scanned, but I have higher priorities than expensive drum scans at the moment. I can pop ‘em up on the light table and take a snap to show that I do own such things, if you like, but I don’t know what that would accomplish. So what say you? What further insights can I possibly gain at this point from a trigonometry flunkee who thinks the world is flat?
One would think the accomplishments you listed would be solid enough ground to stand on without attacking someone of different beliefs with the presumed accusation in your closing line.
Don't you think introducing assumptions that add nothing to the evidence you offered makes it difficult to keep future replies to your argument within the lines of civility?
Where would you position yourself if the many investigations into the Jeffery Epstein pedophile ring start focusing on human/child sacrifice as the engine that drives technocracy? Would you think an assumption that you and your family approve pedophilia would be acceptable?
Would you care that someone might resort to a grade school tactic and use an unproven (but within the realm of plausibility) accusation in an attempt to besmirch you or would you not care what others might think?
Granted there is a galaxy (pardon the pun) of perceived difference between a flunkee and a pedophile but how many people would use their gift of discernment to recognize that?
There are said to be scientific instruments that measure the difference of impact on humans being called a trigonometry flunkee and another being called a pedophiliac used in psyche labs; is that the type of thing that enables a technocrat to feel and express superiority?
Inquiring minds and all that.