Originally posted by LunarLooney1
ngchunter... how many pictures of Hubble have you counted?
I don't sit around counting images, if there's something I want a hubble image for I check stsci and see if it's available:
archive.stsci.edu...
There are over 100,000 hubble images available.
And I think you should scroll up this thread and see what many others like me are writing... billions of dollars and we still get garbage pictures.
Seems as though 2 grainy pictures from a billion dollar project works for you and you're okay with that.
LCROSS cost a mere $79 million, not billions. By comparison, LRO cost about $500 million and will be the star of the show with the best camera
equipment on board.
And I don't need to be up in the atmosphere to take a picture of the Moon as you so suggest... I have better pictures of the Moon from here on
Earth;
You obviously didn't comprehend what I wrote; your equipment isn't designed to work in the vacuum of space, nor is it thermally self-regulating, nor
is it capable of distinguishing water vapor in a dust cloud. LCROSS is all of those things with one of NASA's cheapest satellites.
and wouldn't you think that the closer you get to the Moon, the better quality the pictures should be? You sound like another mis-guided nieve and
un-educated ATS member.
The equipment was designed to work at its best from a few dozen kilometers away, not tens of thousands. You don't send a telephoto lens to get a
widefield shot at the most critical part of your mission. The mission isn't to please armchair conspiracy theorists who've never launched a
satellite, all while they're still in the testing and maneuvering phase. What part of that don't you understand? People in glass houses shouldn't
be tossing "naive" stones.
You should try and sign up for the Seseme Street web-site... seems more up your alley of this fantasy world you're living in. Now I have to add you
to my list of Earth puppets and children under 18. Finally, walk out your front door and look up at the Moon... now you have a better and clearer
picture of the Moon than the one NASA fooled you with.
So you're just here to troll rather than discuss the facts of the matter, got it. For your information, I've taken better photos of the moon than
you'll ever attain...
...but I know better than to assume that they should be hauling my telescope along on a mission designed to get a widefield action shot from only a
few kilometers away with no room for error.
Moreover, Carl Sagen has a book with the same picture in it. So if it wasn't taken from the book, then NASA took the same picture, from the same
position over 25 years ago and that I find hard to believe.
You hardly seem like you're qualified to examine lunar libration, lighting, crater morphology, and make a determination on whether two lunar photos
are identical or not.
So before you run your disrespectful mouth again, get out of your chair and do some real investigating... instead of pretending to know everything. I
ask a question stating these two pictures don't look right and you respond nasty, disrespectful, and ill-informored. They now have medication for
confussed sociopaths like yourself... you should give it a try! And move on from this thread and go disrespect someone else... this thread is not for
children!
Your entire post was condescending and disrespectful. I was objecting to your treatment of phage, but I wasn't attempting to disrespect you. If
it's respect you want, try giving it first.
[edit on 26-6-2009 by ngchunter]
==
=
