MUS. CUE: Harp arpeggios
Scene 1: DAY.INT. CENTURY C ROOM, LAX HILTON. 4:45 PM SUNDAY FEBRUARY 10th.
OK, well, that's about it. I think we have time for a few questions. OK, yes, on the right here.
1st Knowing Questioner
Mike, could we have a look at the image of Asada again, please?
Yes, that's the one. You say it's a satellite dish. That's a detail from an Apollo 16 lunar orbital shot, right? AS16-121-19438, as I recall. What's the resolution of that shot, Mike?
I don't know off the top of my head. What's your point?
Well, Asada's 12 km across. I measured before coming out here and it's 78 pixels in the image. So that's 154 metres per pixel, give or take. Are you aware that Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has shot Asada at 0.8 metres per pixel, nearly 200 times better than the Apollo 16 shot?
Yes, of course I'm aware, douchebag. How was life in that Turkish prison? Get along well with your cell-mate, did you?
My point is -- why would you use a poorly resolved, 40-year old image when a far better image is easily available from the LROC library?
Look, you abject moron, I'm fed up with explaining simple things to haters like you. The sun angle is just too high in those Reconnaissance Orbiter shots. Security!
1KQ IS HUSTLED OUT BY TWO SAMOAN BOUNCERS. HE THROWS OUT A PHOTO PRINT AS HE GETS TO THE DOOR.
Scene 2: DAY.INT. CENTURY C ROOM, LAX HILTON. 4:51 PM SUNDAY FEBRUARY 10th.
Sorry about that, folks. I think that asshole must have just come from Barney Frank's boudoir or something. Time for one more... Yes, at the back...
2nd Knowing Questioner (female)
I'd like to take another look at the image of the glass skyscrapers, from chapter 4 of your book. Yes -- No, the close-up. Yes, that's the one.
It's from Apollo 10, which stayed in lunar orbit and didn't land, right? Your skyscrapers aren't in the online version of that shot.
No, of course they aren't. NASA airbrushed the negative. Oh Christ! Not another douchebag. You're as ugly as Tara Jordan or Sarah Bilgri. Please don't reproduce.
So your version came from Ken Johnston's personal collection, right? Those were all 10x8 photo-prints, right? Well, who scanned that print?
I dunno, Richard Hoagland I assume. Yes, it was Richard.
So the NASA version was scanned in clean conditions using professional equipment, and your version was done off the cuff with a consumer-grade scanner? I ask because what you call skyscrapers look to me exactly like what you'd get from a dirty, smeared scanner glass with the brightness turned way up. Isn't that a hair, up top right?
FADE TO BLACK