Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Apollo Hardware Spotted!

page: 29
58
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Do you see any footprints in this photo?



It's amazing what happens when one follows the same tracks over and over.



[edit on 8/8/09 by Chadwickus]




posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Do you see any footprints in this photo?



Do you see any bootprints in the photo you just posted?



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Nope, no bootprints but no doubt lots of hoof prints.

The point of the picture is showing how people or animals walking between two points can produce the type of tracks we see in the Apollo 14 photo.


jra

posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
And apparently only the Apollo 14 astronauts left tracks anyways...


They all left tracks obviously. But only the Apollo 14 landing site has enough resolution to bring out those kinds of details. When the other sites are imaged again when the LRO is in it's proper orbit. I'm sure we'll see plenty of trails all over the place from the astronauts as well as from the rovers in the later missions.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra

I'm sure we'll see plenty of trails all over the place from the astronauts as well as from the rovers in the later missions.



You're 'sure'?
(alot of people were sure with Chang-E 1, Chandrayaan, Kaguya...)


I'll be glad when it happens. I paid good money to have those tracks made up there.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1


I'll be glad when it happens. I paid good money to have those tracks made up there.


YOU paid good money for the Apollo missions??


SO, you are A) an American? and, B) were working as an adult during the 1960s and 1970s, paying Federal Income Taxes???

WoW!!! I wasn't even in High School yet when I was watching Armstrong and Aldrin, and building plastic spacecraft models...so, no, guess I was not working and paying taxes. I got Apollo for free!



Back to the Human footpaths at the Lunar landing sites: The method of foot locomotion was not normal walking, as you well know from watching the videos. It was more of a hop/shuffle, and that is what disturbed the regolith, making the paths visible. Don't know how many round-trips they made to the ALSEP during A14 EVAs, could look it up, but I daresay they followed their own trail back to "home base", and the LM, because it was an easy way back, easy to see, and they knew it was safe ( No scary cheese monsters hiding in crevases --- and no skinny trees in their way, either
)

SO, that would make their disturbance of the upper layers of regolith quite evident. AND, for the bootprints where they stood still, and left impressions??? Do you really think you're gonna see a size ten footprint from 50km away????


jra

posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
You're 'sure'?
(alot of people were sure with Chang-E 1, Chandrayaan, Kaguya...)


Well those people were setting themselves up for some disappointment, it was well known ahead of time that those probes were not capable of imaging the landing sites. At no time do I recall the CNSA, JAXA or the ISRO ever making any claims that they'd be able to spot the Apollo hardware. Out of the three probes, Chandrayaan-1 has the highest resolution camera (5m/pixel at 100KM). The main body of the LM decent stage is a little over 4m, it would show up as a single pixel.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Yes -- the path made by the walking astronauts to the ALSEP instruments is very clear and obvious.


The path could have been photoshopped in afterward - just like the LM. The 'tracks' could even have been created with an unmanned rover or from the Earth with lasers from White Sands (SELENE Project).
And apparently only the Apollo 14 astronauts left tracks anyways...

I suppose you don't care at all about resolution and quality of the photos coming from the LRO.

Even a clear picture of a bootprint and the Apollo equipment could be faked, so why do you even care if NASA releases any pictures of them?...You would still go on biasedly believing only what you want to believe.

By the way...I noticed in the "Guy filming more than just satellites" thread over on the Aliens forum, you seemed to unquestioningly believe the guy who said he was filming UFOs. Why do you unquestioningly believe him, but assume that every picture of Apollo hardware taken by LRO is a fake?

Is it because your pre-conceived notions of what you WANT to believe are causing your judgment to become biased?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


All I said, where you quoted me last is--- I ain't see no hardware.
Honestly all I have seen is what looks to me to be photos of elephant skin.
LOL. Look I understand what all you guys are saying about the cameras and whatnot. Certainly not as professionally and completely as you all.
The point here is that the title of the thread is hardware spotted.
I honestly feel bad for the OP in this case. I bet he does too.
NASA let him down with their hype and promises. We hoaxers pounced on it. Bare in mind that I believe hoaxers are mostly patriotic folks who foot the bill (pay the taxes). They really just don't like being labeled buffoons just because they have a normal drive to question thing they think are off color or can't comprehend. I want to see an image of a real live person waving up at us all before I die. If better pictures of hardware do come back before the mission is completed I'll be the first to commend them.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
The point here is that the title of the thread is hardware spotted.
I honestly feel bad for the OP in this case. I bet he does too.
NASA let him down with their hype and promises.


I hope you won't call me "Tokyo Rose" again, but... Just kidding. I appreciated your apology.


The fact is that NASA never hyped and promised crystal clear images of objects on the Apollo landing sites. To prove that man really did land on the moon has never been the goal of this mission, the photos we have seen and the ones we will see in the future, are added bonuses.

This is the mission overview as stated on LRO's website:

On the moon we will develop technologies to survive in the infinite frontier of space, because the moon presents the same challenges we will encounter throughout the universe: harmful radiation, electrified dust, and extreme temperatures.

Just as a scout finds the safest way for expeditions on Earth, NASA will first send a robotic scout, called the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), to gather crucial data on the lunar environment that will help astronauts prepare for long-duration lunar expeditions.

LRO will spend at least a year in a low polar orbit approximately 50 kilometers (31 miles) above the lunar surface, while its seven instruments find safe landing sites, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment and test new technology.

www.nasa.gov...

If you are interested, you can go here to learn about the seven LRO instruments:
www.nasa.gov...

And here you can watch a video about the LRO mission, it's worth a look:
www.youtube.com...



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 


Well thank you again for the way you handled my blunder.
I don't want to get off topic so I will send you a u2u.
I had some things about the hardware and cameras to relate to weedwacker, maybe you can get my drift from that. Thanks for the lro info.
I have dial up and video isn't possible. so think of me as a video handicapped person



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Donny 4 million

I was attracted to this thread to see some hardware.
I have seen none.


Same here - And I haven't seen any hardware yet either..

Then neither of you are not qualified to make such judgements. Those who are have already declared that the apollo hardware has been spotted by LRO. That does not in any way mean that it must satisfy your personal aesthetic standards or meet ill-informed expectations.


Here is the best that the NASA-huggers can offer:

Once again, blowing the images up by this magnitude only proves the unreasonable level of resolution that you think they should have achieved, equivalent to that of our very best spy satellites weighing ten times as much as LRO. The number of pixels that the landers would occupy was known well in advance.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
The path could have been photoshopped in afterward - just like the LM.

Would have required arizona state university, one of the most reputable astronomy schools in the nation, researchers to be pathological liars and conspirators. It's substantively no different than any other astronomer actively participating, including myself. The only difference between this theory and ISS hoax theories at that point is the number of "liars" involved.


The 'tracks' could even have been created with an unmanned rover

If the tracks were made by a rover then the descent stages were launched afterwards as well, and seeing as how there were no unaccounted for saturn V launches, there's no way anyone could have put something that large in those places except during apollo.


or from the Earth with lasers from White Sands (SELENE Project).

Lasers from earth diverge to be at least a km wide or more by the time they reach the moon. Impossible.


And apparently only the Apollo 14 astronauts left tracks anyways...

Apollo 14 had the most favorable lighting conditions at the time and the highest resolution image as well.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Then neither of you are not qualified to make such judgements.


Then we shall let the audience Judge for themselves.


Here is what you would have them believe is the descent-stage of the Apollo 15 LM:







posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
The point here is that the title of the thread is hardware spotted.
I honestly feel bad for the OP in this case. I bet he does too.

Actually I feel vindicated; not only did it confirm predictions about where exactly down to the meter these objects would appear, but the crater formations surrounding them and their size as well. Last, but not least, it also confirmed my suspicion that some here would not accept any level of evidence confirming apollo as legitimate.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Here is what you would have them believe is the descent-stage of the Apollo 15 LM:

Are people "in the audience" intimately familiar with the layout of the apollo landing sites that they're judging in these photos? Do they know what it should look like with regards to crater formations, something established ONLY by apollo imagery down to the resolution achieved and exceeded here? Have they determined whether or not everything seen here is consistent with the apollo record, and not just the LM?

Still expecting unreasonable amounts of resolution are you? How do you propose to get a 20 ton spy satellite into lunar orbit, exactly? What currently-available booster would you use? Let's see it.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Here is what you would have them believe is the descent-stage of the Apollo 15 LM:

Are people "in the audience" intimately familiar with the layout of the apollo landing sites that they're judging in these photos? Do they know what it should look like with regards to crater formations, something established ONLY by apollo imagery down to the resolution achieved and exceeded here? Have they determined whether or not everything seen here is consistent with the apollo record, and not just the LM?

Still expecting unreasonable amounts of resolution are you? How do you propose to get a 20 ton spy satellite into lunar orbit, exactly? What currently-available booster would you use? Let's see it.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by ngchunter]







pic related I supose still if we can take stunning photos of this from mars
I would think that we could do it on the moon just saying.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPC_D
pic related I supose still if we can take stunning photos of this from mars
I would think that we could do it on the moon just saying.

Posting that without any information about the size that it shows is meaningless, as you probably know.

And yes, we could, but that was not their intention, HiRISE's mission is different from LROC. Just because it's possible it doesn't mean that it was what they want to do with this mission.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPC_D
pic related I supose still if we can take stunning photos of this from mars
I would think that we could do it on the moon just saying.


Since you didn't give a link to the source for this image, I just wanted to mention that this image is from a website and forum called "Lunar Explorer Italia", and the one who should be credited for it is Dr M. Faccin:
www.lunexit.it...





new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join