LOIRP and LRO Confirm That Humans Walked on the Moon

LOIRP and LRO Confirm That Humans Walked on the Moon

www.moonviews.com

August 20, 2009.Yesterday the LRO team released a new image of the Apollo 14 landing site. You can clearly make out the paths that the crew walked as well as the location of the Apollo 14 Antares Lunar Module Descent Stage.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.moonviews.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Some LRO pics on space.com

There's not much more information so check out the picture.

Here's a response to the non-believers that Man walked on the Moon.

These photos from the Lunar orbiter image restoration team confirms to everyone that MAN HAS LANDED AND WALKED ON THE MOON!
The photos taken before and after the Apollo-14 mission are the nail in the coffin to any who have believed that this was somehow staged. These photos and the voices of 400,000 men and women who led us in the Apollo landings can no longer be ignored.
Their legacies are assured.

Now we need to go back...for them and our future!

J M Busby
Aerospace Legacy Foundation,
Downey, CA
"Where Apollo was built"

Still not close enough

Zelong.


www.moonviews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Obviously photoshoped.



No, seriously.



[/sarcasm]

[edit on 21/8/2009 by C0bzz]

While I am not a proponent of the theory that man has never visited the moon, I do not doubt the probability that some levels of truth have been withheld regarding the event(s).

I find myself more than slightly amused that if the UFO or non-human moon-base proponents were to have submitted these photos of evidence of their own views, debunkers and skeptics would have swarmed to the thread to decry the lameness of the pictures of nondescript spots of lights and shadow as most obviously inadequate proof of anything.

While it is unlikely that the imagery masters at NASA/JPL/etc. would attempt to doctor images in this case, what has been offered seems far from useful and conclusive evidence to all but those already predisposed to accept it.

[edit on 21-8-2009 by Maxmars]

Its still not close enough or detailed for me....
Where are the tracks?...I don't see them.

And where is the flag?

I am waiting for better images than these...these prove absolutely nothing to me!

They are a joke!

this is complete bull poo... you cannot make out anything the only thing i seen was something that could have looked like foot prints but with that size of the pic and quality who knows.. honeslty give us better proof then this.. i could spooge and look at it and see the same proof...

reply to post by Jools

Its still not close enough or detailed for me....
Where are the tracks?...I don't see them.

Maybe you should build something better and send it up yourself then(not being sarcastic, really do it ). Also keep in mind that the resolution is not nearly good enough to see details like footprints and such. The LROs maximum resolution is 1.6 feet (.5 meters) so the small things simply can not be seen.

And where is the flag?

Probably not there anymore from the constant bombardment of solar radiation.




[edit on 8/21/2009 by jkrog08]

reply to post by Zelong


Thanks for sharing, here is a close-up of the imaged area, clearly showing the lander and tracks:



Courtesy:images.spaceref.com...

I can't believe that even when proof is staring someone in the face they kind accept it. True Believer Syndrome at its best.

Originally posted by Jools
Its still not close enough or detailed for me....
Where are the tracks?...I don't see them.

And where is the flag?

Jools, do yourself (and us) a favor, and go to Google Maps, put in the Washington Monument.

Then, go to 'satellite' view. NOW....the Washington Monument is surrounded by flags, on poles. ALL much, much larger, of course, than the roughly three-foot long flags that were taken to the Moon.

Of course, the Google images are WAY, WAY better...especially in the "satellite" close-ups, because THOSE were taken by cameras on airplanes!!!

But, for comparison't sake, try to zoom out a bit, comparable to what the LROC can resolve on the Moon. OK? Got it? Now, let's play Spot the Flag!!!

So, what we have, on Google --- better cameras, since they are DESIGNED to make pretty pictures of the Earth, combined with the added bonus of the airplane pictures, PLUS the 'Street View' to show from a Human's perspective....and STILL hard to see the flags, from straight above looking down, isn't it???

Are you understanding, now?

AND, BTW, as mentioned already --- those light weight synthetic materials likely haven't lasted for forty years of exposure to the harsh environment.

They are a joke!

No, they aren't the joke, here......
______________________________________________________

[edit on 21 August 2009 by weedwhacker]

Not to date myself, but I grew up down the street from JSC during the Apollo years (off of Hwy 3 and just few miles north of Ellington field). I was very young during the first landing, but I remember the whole street having an enormous party after they returned safely.

Our neighborhood was filled with technicians, scientists, etc. working on the Apollo missions. The neighborhood was electric with ‘new’ items coming out by the hundreds developed for the space program.

My mother worked there as a nurse, my father-in-law (Yes, I married my HS sweetheart); was one of many computer programmers for the Lunar Lander which was all extremely cutting edge technology at the time. I went to so many frigg’in BBQ’s as a kid with hundreds of NASA employees and their kids. Unfortunately, I didn’t realize the significance until much later in life.

I saw ‘super glue’ (then an Eastman product) when it was in testing for surgical purposes, Velcro when it had no purposes other than for NASA, tape programmable software breaking away from punched cards, fire retardant cloths the list is to long to mention but; even just the simple technologies gained from ‘then’ that we now take for granted. Entire industries blossomed from these early missions and still do today.

Is/was there some fabrication of some events? I’m sure, it was a propaganda coup and we were in the midst of the cold war.

Were all the people I knew in on some grand hoax? No…would they have seen through if it was indeed a grand hoax? In a split second.

Did we go? You bet we did….

MG

Originally posted by missed_gear

Not to date myself, but I grew up down the street from JSC during the Apollo years (off of Hwy 3 and just few miles north of Ellington field). I was very young during the first landing, but I remember the whole street having an enormous party after they returned safely.

Our neighborhood was filled with technicians, scientists, etc. working on the Apollo missions. The neighborhood was electric with ‘new’ items coming out by the hundreds developed for the space program.

MG

Great insight missed_gear,I can imagine all the excitement with your writings .It's a day stuck in my memory
Your school would of had some handy gadgets flouting around the play ground

What I was doing at the time: 8ys at school my Brother(Sixth grade) and a girl down the road came and got me out of class took my down to the school library TV room turned on the TV and we sat down and watched the footage I remember clearly me thinking and looking around an empty room thinking Why are we the only ones here and How did my Brother and Lauren(girl) do this.I knew this was a Big Event.

That was a good read and I'm keeping it.


Zelong.

[edit on 21/8/09 by Zelong]

Originally posted by missed_gear

would they have seen through if it was indeed a grand hoax?

No.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ead4a457aab5.jpg[/atsimg]

how can you possibly think we havnt walked on the moon? we have obviously been to the moon imo. just mybe not during that time period. who has a powerful telescope or access to one ill help you check it out.

There's an italian song that says

You are nice and get stoned ♪
You are not nice and get stoned ♪
Whatever you'll do ♪
Wherever you'll go ♪
You will get stoned anyway ... ♪♪♪

NOW:
they don't show the images of landing sites and people scream that we've never been on the Moon
they DO show submetric resolution images of the landing site and people say that "the images arent clear enough yet"
the only solution in order to convince some people would be to land them there, but i guess that it would be some extremely expensive solution, so the conspiracy that we have never been on the Moon will NEVER die.


[edit on 22/8/2009 by internos]

Originally posted by internos

they don't show the images of landing sites and people scream that we've never been on the Moon
they DO show submetric resolution images of the landing site and people say that "the images arent clear enough yet"
the only solution in order to convince some people would be to land them there, but i guess that it would be some extremely expensive solution, so the conspiracy that we have never been on the Moon will NEVER die.

You also forget 'Fake!'

People will say the tracks and landers are nothing more than the products of image manipulation.

Some will go as far to say say that the tracks could have been made using lasers.

Afterall, lasers could be used to make roads or even launchpads on the moon:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/88feeec33875.jpg[/atsimg]


*Maybe NASA just found some choice boulders and lased tracks around them. WhiteSands did receive these images (and we all know about the lasers at white Sands)

reply to post by Zelong


I have no doubt we have been to the moon...but some of the photos, and videos and possibly radio transmission I believe could have been faked..

there are a multitude of reasons.

for example:

1)If the mission had not succeeded, and they had died up there, it could have been covered up to a certain degree...Like maybe they would have made it look like they died on reentry..or whatever.

2) they found things that were not supposed to be there

3) We wanted everything to go perfectly, and who knows about all the things that could have gone wrong...we didnt want the Russians to think for a second that we couldnt get the job done...

so anyway, in my opinion there are lies and coverups within the moon landings, but I know we were there... way to many things would have to be covered up...wouldnt have made sense... Also, Russia would have called hoax also if they thought for a second we didnt in fact go...they knew we went...because you can bet they had spies watching us the whole time...

reply to post by Exuberant1


Ummmmm......Exubie, some people might cry "Fake!" and say it was done with lasers? You mean, like YOU did, in this post???

"nuf said!!!

(Except....perhaps you should re-read your excerpt just above. Making a smooth "glassy" surface with an orbiting Lunar laser isn't quite the same as "faking" footpaths kicked up by Astronauts. Stop insulting our intelligence!)

reply to post by Exuberant1


LOL!

LASERS DID IT.

The "footpath' could have been created using a probe with pulse-detonation engine or even a Dynamic Pulse Detonation unit mounted on a conventionally powered probe.

or lasers?

LOL

I'm in tears!! (and I can tell that you are not "current" if anyone knows what that means...).

Seriously, where does it end? In 20 years when we go back, are the images of the Apollo mission remains fake?

What you're stating is a joke. Seriously.

[edit on 22/8/2009 by C0bzz]

reply to post by C0bzz


Are you familiar with Dynamic Pulse Detonation technology?

Peruse NASA's site, you will find numerous papers and studies on the subject.

A short but intense laser pulse creates a ball of plasma, and a second laser pulse generates a supersonic shockwave with the plasma to generate a bright flash and a loud bang.

www.newscientisttech.com...

Whilst lasers could be used to create smooth glassy surfaces for use as roads and launch pads, lasers could also be configured to create pulse detonations that would disturb the lunar regolith adjacent to or under the detonation.

The tracks from the Apollo missions could have been simulated using this technology.

But it obvious that we went to the moon and only a fool would argue with someone who believes otherwise.





[edit on 22-8-2009 by Exuberant1]