Apollo Hardware Spotted!

why don't they use hubbel to photograph the moon up close, or is it too bright for its sensors...

Originally posted by werk71
why don't they use hubbel to photograph the moon up close, or is it too bright for its sensors...

I don't think Hubble can focus on such a short distance - Try holding your finger up close to your eye (1 inch) and see if you can focus on your fingerprint.

The resolution isn't enough for seeing the hardware on the moon. I've repeated this something like 4 times in 24h

Angular resolution
Hubble's angular resolution is 0.05 arcsecond. This is the "sharpness" of Hubble's vision. If you could see as well as Hubble, you could stand in New York City and distinguish two fireflies, 1 m (3.3 feet) apart, in San Francisco.

Well, not too impressed.. I hope we get something much better on the next available pass.

All those years, all that 'tech' and we get something from a 1920's Charlie Chaplin movie.

Anyway....
Apollo 11
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0239614ab5fb.png[/atsimg]
Apollo 14
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cb70ea18f36a.png[/atsimg]
Apollo 17
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a924913812d3.png[/atsimg]

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by dampnickers
they can use said telescopes to release photos of far off galaxies in amazing detail. Even boast about how they can make out objects on nearby planets... so ask yourself why they don't release the photos.

You do understand that those "far off galaxies" are huge and photo's show only their mass and almost zero detail. Don't you

Rather than mix apples and oranges you are mixing a tiny lunar lander with things hundreds even thousands of light years across.

[edit on 7/17/2009 by Blaine91555]

Did you miss the second part of my sentence there?

I tend not to write with cognitive dissociation, but you are clearly conditioned by it. Just for your benefit I'll re-iterate...

"even boast about making out objects on nearby planets"

The astronomers have been photgraphing the moon from earth for a long long time, and have telescopes that are so powerful that they can resolve small objects sitting on the moon... Do the research and learn. Deny ignorance, you'll find it quite enlightening.

why is it so difficult to get nice images of the moon??..i mean we have plenty a bunch of mars..we have brilliant galaxies pictures...we have plenty of Earth's pictures from Space...why NASA cant do this with the moon??...Google Earth is much better lol and it has photos of all the Earth Surface

My self..i was 100% beleiver men went on the moon but for me after seeing this attempt from NASA i dont beleive any more..this photos are rubbish even the LRO Live feed pass on the moon was rubbish

Was it Nixon president at the time Apollo 11?..then yes it might be a hoax

[edit on 18-7-2009 by heineken]

Hi all, This is my first post here but I have been lurking for a long time.

For the skeptics. Dont know if this was mentioned before...

There were mirrors that were left behind from the Apollo missions that astronomers can hit with a laser since the position is known. This for me is more than enough proof of the moon landings Here is a link detailing the mirrors.

Link about mirrors

Originally posted by PsykoOps
The resolution isn't enough for seeing the hardware on the moon. I've repeated this something like 4 times in 24h

Why do you even try then?? thats our point...if you want to proof something why dont you go with the right equipment?...Imagine this..Champion League Final and you see the referees going out with tennis balls ...we are feeeling the same

Amazing photos, to achieve landing on the moon so long ago is just awesome, sad we haven't seen any real breakthrough yet in space travel.

Originally posted by zorgon

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

Could this image be of "moon fountains"?

It sure does look like sunbeams passing through an atmosphere containing particulates.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4eae7b832a12.jpg[/atsimg]


Here is some moon fountains from Apollo 17:




Sunset Rays sketched by Apollo 17 Astronaut (image uploaded by Zorgon)




[edit on 18-7-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by Silk
This might throw a spanner in the moon hoax proponents

ahh but they will claim they are fake - don't want to lose those book sales do we......

IF there are doubts about photo authenticity, then you lot who swallow exactly what you are told from NASA, will know exactly how the UFO and 'doctored Apollo record' folks have been feeling for decades!

The shoe is on the other foot now, isn't it!

Ah yes..."They will claim they are fake"...that old chesnut..
So, whenever a UFO or something else contraversial is photographed, it is probably a fake...but when it is something the pro NASA crowd feel will help their 'cause', it's genuine, and woe betide anyone who dares to suggest otherwise.

Can you say hipocracy?

What a joke.

Total rubbish.

I thought I saw a face. The twin of the Martian face, looking towards Mars and possibly having a conversation with the Face On Mars.

Or maybe Bart Simpson.

Those photos suck.

These images might not even be from the LRO - but instead could be from the Defense Intelligence Agency and their Apollo Simulation Program also known as 'ASP':

ASP is an acronym for "Apollo Simulation Project", which was created in 1961 and operated by the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) to "help" NASA with their technical problems by establishing a totally simulated moon mission.

ASP was a total secrecy project along the same lines as the Manhattan Project of World War II. The Manhattan Project ultimately employed some 300,000 people and hardly a word was leaked out.

The ASP base was constructed on land controlled by the (then) Atomic Energy Commission and surrounded by other military bases. Scattered throughout these arid Moon-like properties near Mercury, Nevada are super-secret site after secret site. Top level management was provided by CIA spooks. Interface personnel were hired as needed and paid top dollar and then released as necessary (with the required "never tell" NASA warnings backed by the muscle of the CIA).

And then there is CUSS - a part of ASP:

"Also installed at the "Cuss" base was the true master control center of which the so-called Mission Control and the Spacecraft Center at Houston were merely satellites or slaves.

The master control of Cuss (MASCONCULL) collected all data, programmed it into a computer which then coordinated the entire moon landing simulation. Since all releases were by well-edited tape, there was no chance of a blooper. Again, the total control of news by the American corporate state set an effective precedent for the totally controlled output of MASCONCULL. From prelaunch countdown to the final descent to the ocean, all sound and video transmissions emanated from the flawless and mechanistic heart of a speciallymodified IBM 370-C computer."

Ralph Rene Said this about ASP:

"The next time the ASP strikes it will be to take us to Mars via digitized graphics and computer enhancements, and no one will be able to prove it's not real."

....and he may be right.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by obilesk
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

I agree. It's obvious we aren't that interested in exploring space with the technology we posses. I think it is more important to work on our problems down here first, despite my fascination with space. But it's just sad that we spend anything at all if we can't spend what needs to be spent. And yet, we can't fix our problems down here - that much is certain.

Well there are actually some very important reasons to explore space
1. The earth can remain healthy with a population of approx. 3 billion. Our current population is over 6 billion.
2. Natural resources on earth are not infinite. As example, the moon has mass amounts of Helium 3 and the first country to start mining on the moon will get the best spots.

reply to post by havok


Max magnification of Hubble is about 5000x so moon still looks about 49 miles away and an object such as a lander is about 15ft wide you do the maths!

reply to post by Exuberant1




Like I have said before xuby even if someone took you to the Moon you would claim they faked your trip!!!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

Like I have said before xuby even if someone took you to the Moon you would claim they faked your trip!!!

Now you are just guessing.

If someone took me to the moon, I'd keep it a secret and make no claims.

I am suspicious of computer graphic simulation.

All these years later and they show the Apollo 14 footpath! The freaking footpath is still visible from such a long distance away after all these years!!!! Come on.

For the people questioning whether or not the Apollo 11 flag is still standing, according to Buzz Aldrin, it was blown over as they took off.

science.ksc.nasa.gov...

There was no lime to sightsee. I was concentrating on the computers, and Neil was studying the attitude indicator, but I looked up long enough to see the flag fall ove

Maybe we will see it with the pictures to be taken in August...

[edit on 18-7-2009 by Mukatsuku]