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.

 

Analyzing AS11-44-6552

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2010 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Let me say right off that I am not a "Moon Landing Hoax" believer. I don't go out of my way to find evidence that the landing was faked. That being said, I'd like some help understanding some discrepancies I found in one of the Apollo 11 photographs.

Most of us have seen the iconoclastic image of the earth rising above the moon's horizon taken by the Apollo 11 spacecraft on July 16, 1969. The image is designated as AS11-44-6552 by NASA's Johnson Space Center.



This view of the Earth rising over the Moon's horizon was taken from the Apollo 11 spacecraft. The lunar terrain pictured is in the area of Smuth's Sea on the nearside. Coordinates of the center of the terrain are 85 degrees east longitude and 3 degrees north latitude.


As a child, I remember laying on the grass in my backyard staring at the moon thinking there were people up there looking down at me. I remember the moon was full or nearly full but according to lunar calendars it was only waxing toward the first quarter. Funny what time can do to memories.

Anyway, I noticed the earth in the photo was about half illuminated as viewed from the moon. I figured that the moon would also appear about half full as viewed from the earth at this same moment. Here's my reasoning: The sun must be directly above the earth (as orientated in the photo) and therefore must also be directly above the moon. The sun is far enough away that the amount of illumination would be virtually identical on both bodies. If the moon was full (as I remember it), that would put the earth between the sun and the moon. In this case, the earth would appear as "new" from the moon. The opposite should also be true – a new moon as viewed from earth would show a full earth as viewed from the moon. In any case, the moon was neither full nor half on July 16, 1969.

This conundrum got me thinking that maybe the photo was not as it appeared to be. I decided to dig into it a little bit deeper. First I enlarged the earth portion of the photo to get a better idea of what it showed. Most of the earth is covered with clouds but there does seem to be a little piece of landmass located in the upper left. I wanted to find out what it was. The JSC website states the center of the terrain (of the earth) is 85 degrees east and 3 degrees north.



I loaded up Google Earth and put a pushpin place mark at those coordinates.



I then cropped and enlarged the earth image, determined the center and superimposed it over a snapshot of the Google Earth image.



Try as I might, I could not get the landmass to correlate to the part of the earth the map indicates it should be. At that general location is Syria and Turkey (or possibly northern Saudi Arabia – see "A").

I tried to line up the weather patterns over the Himalaya Mountain range ("B") but that didn't work. And a real mystery was that the apparent low-pressure system ("C") shows a counter-clockwise motion (as indicated by the wider bands on the left - see this image). But a weather system located in the southern hemisphere would circulate in a clock-wise direction (due to the Coriolis effect).




posted on May, 5 2010 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Am I just missing something obvious here?

If you'd like to download all these images to make you own analysis, they can be found on my ATS public photo album "AS11-44-6552".



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Notice that the shadow on the Earth is at the bottom and not on the side. The Sun moves from east to west, not from top to bottom.

I think the problem is that you need to rotate the image of the Earth 90 degrees in order for the land mass to correlate.

From the position the picture was taken from North is not up. They are on the side of the Moon so Noth isn't "up". Instead west (or maybe east) is facing the top of the picture.


jra

posted on May, 5 2010 @ 10:57 PM
link   
The land mass in the upper left looks like Australia to me, with western half pointing up. I swear I can see the Gulf of Carpentaria.

I was using this highres image (2340 × 2327 +500kb) I know it's not the same one you posted, but it was taken just a few minutes later.

[edit on 5-5-2010 by jra]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   
I was thinking Australia at first myself. But if I rotated the earth as suggested by fieryjaguarpaw, it puts the landmass either in China (were the contours don't match up) or somewhere in the Indian Ocean.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadoefax
 


The lunar terrain pictured is in the area of Smuth's Sea on the nearside. Coordinates of the center of the terrain are 85 degrees east longitude and 3 degrees north latitude.


Are you sure those aren't the coordinates of the lunar terrain?




[edit on 5/5/2010 by Phage]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Google Earth (in Moon mode) puts those coordinates on the far side of the moon.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadoefax
 

The northwest corner of Mare Smythii.


Mare Smythii (Latin for "Sea of Smyth") is a lunar mare located along the equator on the easternmost edge of the lunar near side.

en.wikipedia.org...

Thus...Earthrise.


[edit on 5/5/2010 by Phage]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   
The distance of the Earth to the MOon is all wrong as well.

If they did indeed landed and took that picture, the photo would look like something like this:

www.youtube.com...

taken from the Kaguya satellite. The earth seems a wee bit large in the NASA photo.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 

It sort of depends on the level of zoom.




[edit on 5/5/2010 by Phage]



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by dragnet53
 

It sort of depends on the level of zoom.




[edit on 5/5/2010 by Phage]


I can agree with that, but then there is the shadow's on the Earth and the moon that would hinder the photo.



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 04:42 AM
link   


I noticed the earth in the photo was about half illuminated as viewed from the moon. I figured that the moon would also appear about half full as viewed from the earth at this same moment.

You may be wrong. You aren't taking distance modifier to what you see.
Just look at some pictures of, i dont know, Jupiter, or Saturn where it's moons are visible too.
Shadows may look awkward, but it is just distances and perspective that makes it weird.
Planets are not 1cm balls lightened by table lamp viewed from armchair(slightly different perspective).



The distance of the Earth to the MOon is all wrong as well.

...please..


[edit on 6-5-2010 by potential_problem]



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by potential_problem
 

Agreed. Light and shadows can play tricks on our eyes (e.g., the "face on mars"), but would the difference be that much? If my "inverse moon phase" theory is valid (new moon = full earth, quarter moon = 3/4 earth, etc.) then the earth should have appeared as over 3/4 full.

The moon phases from July, 1969 were: wise-obs.tau.ac.il...


1969 7 6 13:18.0 Last Quarter 0 2440409.05
1969 7 14 14:12.1 New Moon 1 2440417.09
1969 7 22 12:10.5 First Quarter 2 2440425.01
1969 7 29 2:45.9 Full Moon 2 2440431.62


July 16, 1969 would put the moon phase as just two days out of a new moon, or just a small sliver of the first quarter. I would think the earth would appear as gibbous full.



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Australia does look like a fair match:


(click to open player in new window)


Edit: Message says "Media has been removed"? Don't know why it says that, it's still there: media.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 5/6/2010 by Shadoefax]



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join