Apollo Hardware Spotted!

I just downloaded a 252 megabyte picture and it looks terrible!

Honestly what in the world is going over at NASA?

How are there no color pictures, and how can a 252 megabyte .tif image have the same visual quality as a 200 kb jpeg image?

Stop funding NASA you crazy bsterds, this is an atrocity.

I hope NASA does a better job of editing these photos. usually there is an anomoly or two that can't be explained.

Using a color CCD would be a horrible mistake. Greyscale is SOOO much better in terms of signal strength and resolution.

Huh.. where are all the alien domes and buildings and structures and things?

Must be the super invisible only from above technology they employ.

We currently fly drones to spy, video record and kill enemies. I can't understand why we can't do something similar on the moon. We all know we've done better than what they're giving us.

Besides all that, the other fact remaims that even if we were to find these objects, doesn't mean we put them there or that long ago. They could have been up there for just a year,.......for all we would know.

The satellite photos could also be a closeup of a cake or a brownie.

[edit on 17-7-2009 by aleon1018]

Well this seals the deal for me from now on I intend to ignore anything that is trying to suggest the moon landings were hoaxed never thoght i would be saying this but thank you NASA.

The moon has no atmosphere. You can't fly a drone without one.

I don't know about that.

How many saturn V launches have happened in the last year? Where did the footprint trails come from? You can't land equipment on the moon that's that large without a very powerful rocket. Lots of people would have noticed such a powerful rocket launching.

Why does this "brownie" match the crater formations seen in the apollo images?

[edit on 17-7-2009 by ngchunter]

You have got to look closer. I can clearly see footprints in all the photos and the rover tracks. Also, you can see the golf ball and of course the flag.

These are the pictures we get to see...of course they're terrible. You might as well say why haven't we (the public) got nuclear fusion energy yet? because they don't want us to have it.

Regardless of what the pictures show, is NASA using cell phone cameras in space now? Did they tape a Razor to the bottom of a satellite? With the money spent to launch these things, they should put the best camera available on that thing. I could pick up a disposable digital camera at Target that would have done a better job.

1. That camera would take color photos

2. Its image files would not be 252mb and produce crap like this.

Forget the Moon controversy. Let's talk about NASA incompetence right now. Where is our taxpayer money going? Their agency exists solely to produce nice pictures - hundreds of billions spent just to produce nice pictures, and THESE are the best they can do? The GAO needs to audit these guys and find out where that money is going. Somebody over at NASA just got a new beachhouse using money that should have been spent to buy a half-decent camera.

[edit on 17-7-2009 by andrewh7]

[edit on 17-7-2009 by andrewh7]

reply to post by andrewh7

---

Did you look at some of the links the OP provided, like this one?

wms.lroc.asu.edu...

Zoom in, and notice the clarity, then come back and say it's a cellphone!!!

Don't forget it hasn't reached it's 'final mapping orbit' yet. When it's in the right place the boffins at Nasa will be able to get much better pictures.

Same thing with the MRO ( Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter ) a few years back. The images they got after 6 months were way better than the first few tidbits.

Personally, i'm really excited about what this machine might reveal up there. While i guess an alien spaceship is too much to hope for, the LRO should show what usable resources there are ( if any ) and provide some cool pics as well.

I see it as a massive step towards establishing a permanent base on the moon and from there? who knows....

I know Nasa costs a truckload of money and there are obvious areas were, in some people's opinion, it could be better spent. But our planet's resources won't last forever, neither will our star. We will need, at some stage in the future to get of this rock. Hopefully that time's a long way away, as serious space travel itself is still a long way away, but we need to take the first steps. And that's what these guys, and all you Americans that pay for it, are doing.

Nice one!

Wouldn't it be hilarious if China put a rover on the moon and used it to tip over the American Flag? Armstrong said they had a lot of trouble getting it to stand up properly. I'm sure it would be quite easy just to knock it over with a quick bump. They could take a picture of it tipped over in the dirt and put it on the front page of their state-run newspapers.

It's not like the US would cut off all diplomatic and trade relations over a flag on the moon.

We'd have to spend a 20 billion to send a rover back there just to stand it up again.

Finally, the two rovers would have to duel on the moon, battle bots style, to decide the fate of the flag. They'd be arm wrestling with the their robotic claws and shooting lasers at each other. I would pay $40 for pay-per-view of that match. I would mount a P90 on top of the American one, with tiny little cruise missiles fired out of the side.



[edit on 17-7-2009 by andrewh7]

I guess this is one of those "move along, nothing to see here" events.

I can't help but wonder why does NASA still release pictures in black and white, when in fact the moon is greenish. Are they affraid the general populace will freak out if they find out the moon isn't grey as observed from earth?

reply to post by BlueShaman

---

Ummmm.....do these pictures that are in color look 'greenish' to you?

www.boston.com...

Every space probe or satellite that NASA launches is armed with a greyscale camera. Even hubble. To get color pictures they have to do multiple exposures with different filters in front of the camera. For quick shots or just detail mapping they're not interested in waiting for multiple exposures when luminance data is good enough.

The 1st pic does look closer to green than grey to me.

I sure hope the conspiracy theory of a fake moon landing doesn't survive when we have tourist flights to the moon. I can see it now... they'll be saying

"Me being inside the lunar module doesn't prove a thing! Sorry NASA, you'll have to prove more than this lunar module fakery to get me to believe! There is no way this primitive technology could have landed on the moon! You guys probably just put it here 5 years ago!"

Haha, what a bunch of kooks.

reply to post by Kandinsky

---

I hear you!

Its time for the followers of a French Students myth to lie back and accept reality

The moon as seen on NASA's own World Wind program.



It does look a bit greenish, doesn't it?