The ONLY definitive PROOF that we walked on the moon

WELL, Here it is. OBVIOUSLLY, if we landed on the moon, we have a BUGGY on the moon from when we landed, if there is so much damn conspiracy about this subject, then use NASAs coordinates for the landing, and get a super powered telescope MIGHT have to use the hubble, AND TAKE SOME DAMN PICTURES OF THE BUGGY!

God, would that not end this whole conspiracy all together?

look at my sig.
||
||
||
\ /
V



[edit on 18-1-2009 by Revolution-2012]

[edit on 18-1-2009 by Revolution-2012]

reply to post by Revolution-2012


My dad worked for NASA during the moon landing, he's an honest person, he knows we went there, I know we went there.

www.badastronomy.com...

Please, do your research, before, you, continue to repeat, this, there's probably a hundred threads on it, why open a new one?

Unfortunately the story goes that there are no telescopes on earth or Hubble that can zoom in to spot something that small.

But why is it they can spot a license plate on a car from space?

reply to post by WatchNLearn


A dime.

Anyways, they are suppose to be sending a lunar orbiter up pretty soon or they already did, and that should photograph the buggy. I mean HOW MANY DAMN TIMES have we orbiters up, and why did not ONE of them get a picture of that buggy? Did the aliens buggy jack it to the dark side of the moon?

reply to post by Revolution-2012


When the crystal clear photo is release will you be satisfied? probably not so why ask for one? One reason they might not want to release a photo of the landing site is because when they took off the US flag fell down from the force of the rocket, they should've put it further away.

Originally posted by WatchNLearn
Unfortunately the story goes that there are no telescopes on earth or Hubble that can zoom in to spot something that small.

But why is it they can spot a license plate on a car from space?

Well let's see. Satellites are between 1200 and 22000 miles above ground. The moon is 250,000 miles away. That could be a factor, no? And, as far as I know, the best satellites have 10cm resolution which is too weak to read a license plate.

The moon travels too fast across the sky for Hubble to track it, and even then hubble is limited to objects no smaller than 60-75 yards across.
www.nasa.gov...

There weren't satelite pictures of the details on a coin 30+ years ago?

reply to post by Razimus


I'm actually not saying that we didn't land.

I'm just clarifying the fact everyone can shut up about it when we get a picture of the buggy.

Although don't get your hopes up, they will be photoshoping the alien bases on the moon

Didn't the Japanese launch a satilite to obit the moon to take extremely high HD photos of it?

SELENE

On October 3, it reached the moon and entered an initial 101 by 11741 km polar orbit.[12] On October 9, the relay satellite was released to an approximately 100 by 2400 km orbit, and on October 12 the VLBI satellite was released to an approximately 100 by 800 km orbit.[3] Finally, by October 19, the orbiter moved to an approximately 100 km circular orbit.[13] The nominal operation of the mission is one year, with extension if possible.

JAXA announced on October 31, 2007 that Kaguya deployed its Lunar Magnetometer, Lunar Radar Sounder, as well as the Earth-looking Upper Atmosphere and Plasma Imager.

JAXA announced on December 21, 2007 that the operation mode of the lunar explorer, KAGUYA, was shifted to regular operations from its initial verification on December 21, 2007 (Japan Standard Time) as they were able to acquire satisfactory verification results for all fifteen observation missions.

By the end of October 2008, Kaguya completed the planned operation, and entered an extended operation phase. It is planned to continue through March 2009, then lower the orbit to 50km height circular orbit, and to 20km - 100km elliptic orbit, and by August 2009, the controlled collision to the lunar surface.[14]

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Revolution-2012
reply to post by Razimus

 

I'm actually not saying that we didn't land.

I'm just clarifying the fact everyone can shut up about it when we get a picture of the buggy.

Although don't get your hopes up, they will be photoshoping the alien bases on the moon

Erm they DID land on the moon, how do you think these Lunar Retroreflectors got there?

www.physics.ucsd.edu...

reply to post by Chadwickus



No close up no proof.

=)

reply to post by Revolution-2012


Some light reading for you:

en.wikipedia.org...

www.lpi.usra.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Chadwickus


I like reading =)

Yeah, good point... Don't think they'd go through all that money and effort to make it look like they're using that for no reason.

I still think the footage was faked

Originally posted by WatchNLearn
Unfortunately the story goes that there are no telescopes on earth or Hubble that can zoom in to spot something that small.

But why is it they can spot a license plate on a car from space?

Edit: Nevermind. bronco73 took care of this one.

[edit on 18-1-2009 by Lasheic]

Anyways, they are suppose to be sending a lunar orbiter up pretty soon or they already did, and that should photograph the buggy.

It wouldn't matter even if they did. Nobody here dead set on the moon landing conspiracy would believe it, and claim the buggy was just airbrushed in. Oh, those lying NASA bastards!

[edit on 18-1-2009 by Lasheic]

why would nasa spend so much time effort and money just to prove to you nuts that we went there? seems like a pretty brainless idea to me.

When the moon becomes a tourist destination and people can freely view the orginal landing sit there will STILL be conspiracy theorists claiming it was faked... Just as ther are still people who believe the Earth is flat.

the moonlandings are faked thats a fact,

you really think the americans will let the russians reach the moon first ?

the simple truth is, americans didnt have experience in space that time, while the russian had.

so americans faked the landings and everybody happy, 30 years later, the military sent everything on the moon to cover tracks from the past.

its really simple as that.

Just because there is a lander on the moon does not make it DEFINITIVE proof that US astronauts actually went. We already have proof we can put things on the moon remotely. Why is this concept so hard foe people to understand?

Originally posted by Chadwickus
Erm they DID land on the moon, how do you think these Lunar Retroreflectors got there?

Erm, probably the same way the Russians got all those moon rocks... hahaha...