Apollo Hardware Spotted!

reply to post by Fuzzy1


They seem to be right where they are supposed to be. Did you look at the larger image?

The ALSEP is right there by the doublet.

All I know is if they can pull off a picture of the mars rover from space, you better be able to get decent pictures of where we landed on the moon.

Check this out: This can't be bigger than Apollo

[edit on 7/17/2009 by atzmaz]

Originally posted by atzmaz
All I know is if they can pull off a picture of the mars rover from space, you better be able to get decent pictures of where we landed on the moon.

Check this out: This can't be bigger than Apollo

Bro if we was playin Tennis in da Hood yall be sayin "OH SNAP YO! YOU GOT SERVED!"

Great point. I am anxious to see the debate regarding this!

reply to post by atzmaz

Give it time. The best is yet to come. Your image:

At this distance the image scale is 27 cm/pixel (with 1 x 1 binning) so objects ~81 cm across are resolved.

hiroc.lpl.arizona.edu...



LRO will have it beat (matched at least, we'll see) when it hits its stride.

The best is yet to come! Once LRO finishes commissioning operations and enters its 50-km x 50-km mapping orbit, a maneuver currently scheduled for mid-August, the LROC NAC will take images over 8% of the Moon at 50-cm/pixel.

Source
Patience padawan.

[edit on 7/17/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Cool! That would mean we MIGHT POSSIBLY be able to see the American Flag? Is it possible is all I am asking? See some Stars and Bars?

Originally posted by daggyz
I think all the conspiritor theory people are fakes. They are logged on by real moon landing believers just to create some good debate and interest in the moon landings.
By the way do you realise that if you look hard and hold your head at 37.5 degree angle to the sun you can see an image of Elvis' face at the Apollo 14 landing site!

How dare you! I have been making

Originally posted by kiwifoot
reply to post by nataylor

 

Like I said above, it would have to be some damn close up images.

I thought this probe was looking to scout possible landing sites for manned missions in 2020/ Wouldn't they have the ability to take better images (more close up and detailed).

Sorry NASA, this proves nothing to me.

believe me, I would LOVE for NASA to debunk the moon landing hoax theory, but your right, these pics just dont do it for me... could be anything, including ET technology if you believe in that stuff.
I truly hope that one day NASA can prove beyond a reasonable doubt we went and landed on the moon. I think they should.
Its the fool that believes anything they are told, the wise that question everything.

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers


I seriously doubt that after 40 years of unfiltered ultraviolet radiation there will be anything left of the nylon.

reply to post by Phage


Well would it actually fall since there is no wind to blow on it? Only the vibrations of the rocks banging into the moon to disturb it. I mean Technically couldn't you build a house of cards on the moon and since there is no atmosphere it would not get blown over? I understand there is gravity but is the Solar Wind an Actual "Wind" that blows stuff?

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers


The solar wind actually does blow stuff away from the Moon. But the disintegrating flags would lightly sprinkle to the regolith. Perhaps forming a small mound retaining a bit of its former colorful glory. (how very poignant).

Thank you for the for the posts. Most interesting.

Some of these pictures are plus 50 years old. At -20 degrees lunar apogee with 30 degrees of aperture there should be 3/18X12,000 or 2,000 stars visible in the hi rez lander picture. There are none visible, inexplicably.

Illogical! Darn...

reply to post by lazimodo

What does -20º lunar apogee mean?
What does 30º of aperture mean?

Apogee is the highest part of an Earth orbit and is expressed in units of distance (kilometers, miles).

Aperture is the opening of the iris of the camera and is expressed as an f-stop value (f/1.8)

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers I mean Technically couldn't you build a house of cards on the moon and since there is no atmosphere it would not get blown over?

NASA says...

December 7, 2005: Every lunar morning, when the sun first peeks over the dusty soil of the moon after two weeks of frigid lunar night, a strange storm stirs the surface.

The next time you see the moon, trace your finger along the terminator, the dividing line between lunar night and day. That's where the storm is. It's a long and skinny dust storm, stretching all the way from the north pole to the south pole, swirling across the surface, following the terminator as sunrise ceaselessly sweeps around the moon.

Moon Storms

science.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Phage


I refuse to believe that an American Flag can be disintegrated by some Commie Pinko Radiation! No Sun of mine is going to be Un-American!

Oh well that sucks. We need to plant a new flag up there that is indestructible!

reply to post by zorgon


That is pretty cool. I have never heard of Moon Storms before.

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
That is pretty cool. I have never heard of Moon Storms before.

Wait till you hear about the sunrise and sunset rays on the moon... a little secret NASA knew since surveyor

They call them Moon Fountains and were sketched by the Astronauts, though I wonder why they didn't just take a photo

Originally posted by lazimodo
Thank you for the for the posts. Most interesting.

Some of these pictures are plus 50 years old. At -20 degrees lunar apogee with 30 degrees of aperture there should be 3/18X12,000 or 2,000 stars visible in the hi rez lander picture. There are none visible, inexplicably.

Illogical! Darn...

Guy go pick up your camera manual and read it. If your trying to say the aperture size it would be in millimeters not degrees.If your talking f stop 30 is incredibly small aperture fstop the lower the number the more light is allowed through.In order to catch back ground id say f stop of over 3 is useless.This works the same as your iris in your eye the wider it opens the more light it allows in thats why when you look at a bright light your iris closes or all you would see would be a whit dot look at the sun.

As far as no stars do you see stars during the day? Ever wonder why simple its to bright same problem on the moon the surface light doesn't allow are eyes or cameras to adjust to see low level light. This is why you wait until dark to see stars this is also why if you live in a big city with all the lights at night its hard to see the stars!

Ps in order to show the stars in the apollo moon photos sun would have to be low on horizon or they would end up with overexposure of the surface which would be pointless to take the picture then!

[edit on 7/18/09 by dragonridr]

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

Ok, but why would an unmanned lander be parked at Apollo's landing sites? With the notable exception of apollo 12, that shouldn't be the case.

its not an unmanned probe its the decent stage that they leave behind.

OP, starred and flagged.

Now that I've seen the images, I don't think this will be "debunking" anything. I was hoping for a little more detail in the images, see something a little more interesting.



Peace,
FK

It really doesn't matter. Those who disbelieve will never change their mind. You could show them pictures from 10 feet away, and they will find ways to explain them off, every time, even if it is as lame as "They could have faked it." Unless they go there themselves and see them with their own eyes, it really doesn't matter what you say.

The thought that we didn't land is ludicrous in the extreme. We went there, we gathered data, that's it. There will always be those who are so heavily conspiracy-minded and of the belief that NASA is the supreme evil entity, that you could place them on the moon in front of a lander, and they'd declare it was a model. No win situation here.

LOL we have spy satellites that can read newsprint from orbit and this is the best they can do? I was hoping this would lay the hoax to rest but they have only thrown fuel on the fire with this rubbish!