It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

where are the Lunar Rovers ?

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edn

You cant look for your self. the only way your going to see the landing site in a good enough resolution is to send a satellite up there yourself. there are no Earth based telescopes that can resolve the moon to the detail people want.


I did not know that! Thanks!
Then again, if you could see it, it could have been dropped there by the original unmanned rocket whilst the rest of the footage was provided on Earth.
I mean it is a scenario that NASA realised that sooner or later people would be able to view the artifacts from Earth, and figured on just dumping them there.
So a fruitless search anyway

My opinion is that we did land on the moon as is Patrick Moore



Patrick Moore: Of course I do. The idea that it was a fake came from a film and how anybody can believe that I do not know. If people believe the Moon landings were fake, if ignorance is bliss, they must be very happy!

www.bbc.co.uk...

For those who dont know Sir Patrick Moore, he has excellent credentials:
In 1945, Moore was elected a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society. In 1968, he was appointed OBE and promoted to CBE in 1988. In 2001, he was knighted "for services to the popularisation of science and to broadcasting". In the same year, he was appointed an Honorary Fellow of the Royal Society. In June 2002, he was appointed as Hon. Vice President of the Society for the History of Astronomy. He also created the maps which NASA used for the lunar landings and has met both Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong.
He still hosts the programme "The Sky at Night", which is one of the longest running programmes on TV, and has missed hosting it once in 50 years.




posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I feel that is one of the points some people overlook. Pictures from different sources can have different resolutions and vantage points from different heights. I think this gets overlooked when 'objects' are pointed out in pictures. Some of these structures or whatever would be very large but unless one considers the resolution of the picture it may not be accounted for in a person's thoughts and considerations.



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   
First of all, you should check this site that answer many of the misconceptions regarding the missions to the moon, and weather or not they really happened.

moon Hoax?

As for pics of the landing sites, the only ones where you will see anything were taken from the orbiter which was about 100 miles above the surface of the moon....here's an example.





posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   
"Where are the Lunar Rovers?"

They are sitting quietly on the Moons surface minding their own business and not bothering anyone. Someday, in the not too distant future, I suspect they will become tourist landmarks for visitors on recreational flights to the Moon.


I see others have already tried to explain that at a resolution of 30 meters, meaning one pixel represents 30 meters, you could not see them even if the camera were pointed at them. You could point a laser at the target left on the Moon and prove they were there if you were inclined and had the money and equipment as others have.

How do fiction movies end up translating into conspiracy theories in the first place? I've never understood that? First this Moon nonsense and then we end up with people who think the Matrix from the movie is real. Fiction is fiction. Perhaps they no longer teach the difference between fiction and fact in school anymore?

One thing I do know; there is no human accomplishment, no matter how well documented, that someone, someday won't come along and call a hoax. It sells lots of books and makes entertaining but highly implausible movies. So, bottom line is the bottom line. There is money in it so it will be a part of our society for many years to come. Look at C2C where their guests simply invent stuff and know they will be able to hawk their book and tapes to the unsuspecting listeners. There is your real hoax.


We don't trust the kind man down the block who is elected to the City Council; even though we know them to be honest. We do trust some total con-man on the radio who sells us snake oil and books and movies full of fantasy. Why is that?????

[edit on 4/9/2008 by Blaine91555]



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
How do fiction movies end up translating into conspiracy theories in the first place? I've never understood that? First this Moon nonsense and then we end up with people who think the Matrix from the movie is real.


Easy answer to that: Shrooms!

Seriously, we probably have cameras that could pick out the stuff left behind. Question is, why would we spend the money to send them up there?

"Hey, let's spend a ton of cash to send these cameras into lunar orbit!"

"Why"

"Well, we need them to spot the stuff Apollo left behind."



posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
First of all, you should check this site that answer many of the misconceptions regarding the missions to the moon, and weather or not they really happened.

moon Hoax?

As for pics of the landing sites, the only ones where you will see anything were taken from the orbiter which was about 100 miles above the surface of the moon....here's an example.





thanks for your post,


EXCELLENT photo......thanks for sharing


question is , where did you find it and are there more ?









posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow

Originally posted by sensfan
First of all, you should check this site that answer many of the misconceptions regarding the missions to the moon, and weather or not they really happened.

moon Hoax?

As for pics of the landing sites, the only ones where you will see anything were taken from the orbiter which was about 100 miles above the surface of the moon....here's an example.





thanks for your post,


EXCELLENT photo......thanks for sharing


question is , where did you find it and are there more ?












of course this picture does not show any real detail and could be anything really.


for everyone that has said there was no reason to send a camera that had the capabilities to photograph the surface in detail....i say to you....


what would be the point in sending a satellite that couldnt see detailed surface items. i mean thats why you send a satellite to another planet is to see what the heck is really there imho.

i truely believe that they just dont want you to see whats really there.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   
So you could see details of the far side of the moon? Something we had NO pictures of until sending orbiting cameras using the best cameras that were available at the time. You can still detect alot of the large features from the moon using those cameras. If we had cameras capable of .5m resolution from orbit and didn't send them at the time, then certainly it would be odd. That's not what happened.


Edn

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 02:10 AM
link   
You only use what's needed for the particular project your running. Theres a very tight budget in a lot of these projects, people are not going to spend the extra money for cameras that do .5m res if 10m res gives them the detail they need.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 02:41 AM
link   
to the people asking to paraphrase :

` where is an image of the Apollo landing sites `

and

` where are they , the " lack " of images of the landing sites " prooves " that the Apollo program as a hoax `

what would a single image , or short seies of images

hoax believers dismiss the entire body of evidence with a series of silly handwaving

you [ hoax believers ] dismiss the ALSJ as ` fake `

why would you suddenly ` volte face ` and accept a image from a telescope or lunar orbital probe ????

i personally believe that they [ hoax believers ] are well aware of the capabilities of imaging systems - and demand these images of Apollo landing sites because they know that none exist @ a high enough resolution

there is one pic of the Apollo site [ Apollo 11 IIRC ] BUT even NASA scientists and imaging experts disagree if it really is a capture of the Apollo site - or just a area of darker regolith in the same area

they [ hoax believers ] demand these images to score cheap points - because they already know that the images do not exist - its a common tactic



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 



i personally believe that they [ hoax believers ] are well aware of the capabilities of imaging systems - and demand these images of Apollo landing sites because they know that none exist @ a high enough resolution



all you have to do is replace a couple words in this statement and you would be right on the money imho


i personally believe that they [ hoax believers ] are well aware of the capabilities of imaging systems - and demand these images of Apollo landing sites because they know that THEY DO exist @ a high enough resolution



i believe photo's exist but NASA is not going to show you any EVER



[edit on 11-4-2008 by easynow]



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow im just not buying that sorry, you mean to tell me that we have spent billions of dollars and they cant get a closeup photo ?....


look at google earth for example and how detailed it is.

something dont add up

Most of the "detailed close-up" pictures on Google Earth are not taken from orbit -- they are aeriel photos take from Airplanes.

Government Spy satellites can take high resolution detailed pictures --detailed enough to be able to see something the size of a person, probably even smaller -- but they aren't giveing those photos to Google Earth, nor is the government going to bother putting a classified spy satellite in orbit around the Moon.

Next year the LRO will go into lunar orbit. That will be the first time a high-powered high res camera will view the Moon.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


thanks for your post,


Government Spy satellites can take high resolution detailed pictures --detailed enough to be able to see something the size of a person, probably even smaller


yes i agree...






nor is the government going to bother putting a classified spy satellite in orbit around the Moon.



how can you be so sure about this ?... i see alot of reasons why they would.






Next year the LRO will go into lunar orbit. That will be the first time a high-powered high res camera will view the Moon.


it may be the first time they are telling you about it.

i dont have any proof of a secret military spy satellite....but for someone to say it has never been done...imo is like you believing the world is flat because someone told you that.

next time... take the red pill



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   
/quote]
Most of the "detailed close-up" pictures on Google Earth are not taken from orbit -- they are aeriel photos take from Airplanes.

A friend of mine worked at the local airport when they were in the area taking pictures I believe they are taken from 20k feet. They fly a grid with DGPS so there's a crew on the ground and in the air.

mikell



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join