Indian satellite confirmed US moon landing: scientist

Originally posted by aleon1018
I thought somone already had a post with one picture of a lander. The shadow seems much taller than it really should be for something so small. This is about as good as most questionable UFO shots.

Funny you should mention, I recently saw a picture showing the simulated shadow of the descent stage of one of the apollo missions compared to the new LRO image; it was the same size and shape given that time of lunar day. It's easy to underestimate shadow length at very low sun elevations. I just wish I had bookmarked that image. I could recreate it from the same simulator, but not on the phone I'm posting from.

It would be one thing if the only thing we had to go on was the LEM, but in the higher res A12 and A14 images we see the footprint trails as well. More importantly, the crater formations surrounding the landing sites perfectly match the images taken by each apollo comand module of each site; these were previously the highest res sources of images of each site, and had they been faked, we wouldn't see such overlap of the smallest craters that had never been seen before or since apollo.

[edit on 7-9-2009 by ngchunter]

reply to post by ngchunter


I really don't know what to expect. The size of the lander? and the size of the crater next to it...etc. I understand how lighting levels might make something look taller, but the one picture still seemed wrong.
Any details of these sizes. I wonder if this could also be recreated.

[edit on 7-9-2009 by aleon1018]

My own opinion is that the landings happened, but that many of the photos were faked, simply because NASA phucked up. The stills cameras on the suits in particular were Hasselblad medium format (120) jobs with no viewfinder, mounted on the chest, as I understand it, and they were totally unshielded from solar radiation. NASA simply didn't know about it, for the first mission anyway. The film would have been fogged inside the camera by energetic particles moving through the camera body that are normally filtered out by the Earth's ozone layer and magnetic field.

This doesn't apply to the moving images, as they were beamed back to Earth live.

They came back with no pics, so recreated the landings back here, making the mistake of going for more spectacular images than they would have got. Supplementary light sources and fill-in flash are definitely noticeable on many of the stills of the astronauts and the lander.

I suppose they felt they had to give something to the public to justify the money spent.