It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In fairness, however, it would only be four times wider, which is what CHARLZ is talking about.
They drilled 10 feet into solid volcanic rock?
How long did that that[sic]??
What does moisture have to do with anything? Under the thin layer of dust, the Moon is solid volcanic rock. The tube slid into the pre-drilled hole due to gravity!
2009: India's first lunar mission has captured images of the landing site of the Apollo 15 craft, debunking theories that the US mission was a hoax, the country's state-run space agency said Wednesday.www.physorg.com...
"The space telescope photographed the landing sites of Apollo 15 and 17." AAP Oct 19, 2005.
ottawa.ctv.ca...
2002: World's biggest telescope to prove Americans really walked on Moon
www.telegraph.co.uk...
"Conspiracy theorists, you have a problem. In an effort to silence claims that the Apollo Moon landings were faked, European scientists are to use the world's newest and largest telescope to see whether remains of the spacecraft are still on the lunar surface."
2005: Spacecraft to check out Apollo Moon sites
www.usatoday.com...
2009: Proof! Probe photos of Apollo landing sites reveal to doubters that man DID walk on the Moon
www.dailymail.co.uk...
2009: India's first lunar mission has captured images of the landing site of the Apollo 15 craft, debunking theories that the US mission was a hoax
www.physorg.com...
Originally posted by DJW001
The media aren't making promises, they're over-hyping telescopes.
I've added this to the list of unsubstantiated claims by newspapers the world over.
We are yet to see one clear and undeniable photo of the 6 lunar landers, 3 rovers etc.
What we do see however are pixels.
Originally posted by DJW001
The media aren't making promises, they're over-hyping telescopes.
Really, you think? Why do you think they might do that ?
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by manmental
Dear manmental, I have a question for you. In another Forum on this Board, different thread topic (but related, in a way) you wrote:
Originally posted by manmental
You have no idea about special effects.
The theory is idiotic.
>[edit for brevity, byWW]
Originally posted by ppk55
Hello,
It's yet another article claiming proof of the landings, and another article that actually shows nothing.
"The space telescope photographed the landing sites of Apollo 15 and 17." AAP Oct 19, 2005.
ottawa.ctv.ca...
Studying the moon can be tricky, because the moon is too bright to be photographed with large, highly sensitive telescopes on the ground or with the Hubble Space Telescope. The moon's brightness can potentially damage such sensitive optical instruments. Less sensitive telescopes on the ground and on satellites, however, have given us some stunning images of the full moon. The moon can also be photographed using different light wavelengths, such as ultraviolet.
Nevermind, it had to do something with resolution...
Can Hubble see the Apollo landing sites on the Moon?
No, Hubble cannot take photos of the Apollo landing sites.
An object on the Moon 4 meters (4.37 yards) across, viewed from HST, would be about 0.002 arcsec in size. The highest resolution instrument currently on HST is the Advanced Camera for Surveys at 0.03 arcsec. So anything we left on the Moon cannot be resolved in any HST image. It would just appear as a dot.
Here is a picture that Hubble took of the Moon:
hubblesite.org...
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by ppk55
Lets see ppk55 we have pictures taken on the Moon by the astronauts, we have documentation that gives details relatve to craters etc etc AND the LRO images have objects at recorded locations!
Originally posted by backinblack
Now, do you deny the earth is 16 times bigger.???
A silly example..
Say mum gives you a bowl of ice-cream...
They drilled 10 feet into solid volcanic rock?
How long did that that[sic]??
Was in reply to this post by DJW...
What does moisture have to do with anything? Under the thin layer of dust, the Moon is solid volcanic rock. The tube slid into the pre-drilled hole due to gravity!
So your issue is.????????
Originally posted by DJW001
Still no comment on my expose of Jarrah's Gemini X lie?
edit on 2-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct formatting.
Smple. YOU DIDN'T ACKNOWLEDGE that your incredulity was both unwarranted and wrong. You just let the statement stand, so others could quote it later and help to promote the lost cause.
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by ppk55
Lets see ppk55 we have pictures taken on the Moon by the astronauts, we have documentation that gives details relatve to craters etc etc AND the LRO images have objects at recorded locations!
Photos by the astronauts are not evidence.
And I have demonstrated fakery in their archives.
What PPK is getting at is, why has only NASA been able to take photos of NASA moon landings?
There has been promises by various other sources, but they never pan out. Its getting ridiculous actually.
Originally posted by wmd_2008
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by ppk55
Lets see ppk55 we have pictures taken on the Moon by the astronauts, we have documentation that gives details relatve to craters etc etc AND the LRO images have objects at recorded locations!
Photos by the astronauts are not evidence.
And I have demonstrated fakery in their archives.
What PPK is getting at is, why has only NASA been able to take photos of NASA moon landings?
There has been promises by various other sources, but they never pan out. Its getting ridiculous actually.
No YOU THINK you have demostrated fakery BUT come on when the reason for no stars in pictures was beyond YOU do you honestly think you have!
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by DJW001
Still no comment on my expose of Jarrah's Gemini X lie?
edit on 2-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct formatting.
I dont see the "lie"
I see that JW was describing a pattern.
But what I was waiting for was your analysis on the other "re-used" materials.
You only focused on Gemini, what about Apollo?
I know I demonstrated fakery.
Thats what I just said.
I dont see the "lie"
I see that JW was describing a pattern.
But what I was waiting for was your analysis on the other "re-used" materials.
You only focused on Gemini, what about Apollo?