Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

How long would a footprint stay visible on the surface of the moon?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by wewillnotcomply666
reply to post by CX
 


My thoughts exactly. i wish someone else would land there and take some pictures and prove us all right or wrong once and for all !


With telescopes powerful enough to see as far away as Jupiter I'm surprised we can see the junk we left on the moon.




posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by wewillnotcomply666
, and if they aren't protected, they will be lost forever.



Kind of like how they "lost" the moon landing footage? If they can't keep a film on earth safe how will they protect a footprint on the moon?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by wewillnotcomply666
 

The footprint would stay there, forever, until an impact of something close enough to disturb it.

NASA wants to protect those sites as they are historic sites for all of humanity, and if they aren't protected, they will be lost forever.

Think about it, if you could go to the moon, where are you going? The landing sites, the flag, you are gonna walk all over the place and probably try to take a souvenir, this is why they are asking people not to go there.

I think the smartest move would be to have some protective domes places around these sites, that protect from visitors but still allow people to visit and experience the sites for themselves.


“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.” -- Albert Einstein



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by wewillnotcomply666
 


Technically it should last forever considering there is no wind or erosion factors on the moon. However if there is a meteor strike or something that disrupts the surface around the area of the footprint then that of course would affect the footprint.

But in a nutshell without some outside force affecting the surface near the footprint it may just outlast our race....



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


It all comes down to the lenses and type of scope or camera imaging used and just because we can see galaxies or nearby planets it doesnt mean we can see a footprint or landing site from a telescope.

With a telescope can we make out fine detail on a distant planet or is a distant galaxy or system.. no. The resolution is not high enough. You would need a surface resolution of 20-30cm or less to make out the footprint... The LRO doesnt have that resolution on the Moon and neither does the MRO on Mars. The resolution is good but not that good!



edit on 28-5-2012 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Our next space race is going to be started by either a private space companies or some sort of crisis that forces countries to unite and advance into space together.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
I seem to be the only person that has flagged so far....

Some questions are so whacked that they need to be flagged for other people asking those questions in the future!

To the OP, instead of asking this Q on ATS you could have easily googled this... it's common knowledge, well I thought it was!

If High School science didn't cover these topics for then your teacher deserves a slap!



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Lord Jules
 


They didn't lose the footage... what are talking about!

Did you see my last thread about Armstrong and his visit and interview this month. He does a step by step narrative of the landing with the original footage from the lander - this is side by side with recent Lunar mapping footage. He does it to explain the situation but to also try and dispell conspiracy theories.

This interview was this year, a very rare a long interview.... maybe his last interview...

The clip in question is part 4(below link) parts 1-3 are also on the same page.


An audience with Neil Armstrong

CPA AUSTRALIA PRESENTS;

An Audience with Neil Armstrong -


In this four part series the first man to walk on the moon, gives a personal commentary on Apollo 11’s historic lunar landing, his thoughts on leadership and taking risks to innovate for the future.

Part 4 - Presidential Pride




In the first 3-4 mnutes of part 4 they have lander footage - the 3-4 minutes whilst coming in to land on the surface, it goes side by side with recent mapping footage.

Neil narrates and discusses his thought process whilst trying to land step by step...


ATS Thread - Neil Armstrong Interview 2012


edit on 28-5-2012 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   

How long would a footprint stay visible on the surface of the moon?,

Until the aliens who live on the dark side decide to go and sweep them away.
Seriously though .. I imagine that the lunar quakes would shake them down or when meteors hit the shaking would shake them down. The moon is like a giant bell, so it shakes really a bunch at the slightest impact.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 


As this is predominantly a conspiracy site I think he was asking a somewhat rhetorical question from a conspiratorial angle - if there is a private manned mission to the moon then they could verify if the bootprints and equipment from the previous landings were still indeed there as they should be - this would in turn answer a lot of the questions and doubts that still remain about the Apollo landings.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


If it was rhetorical than that is fine but the OP should be more clear on that.. It may be a conspiracy website but not all conspiracy is fact.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThePeopleParty
Hasn't america made the apollo landing site a no fly zone? Your not going to find out once and for all. We all die never knowing for a fact what went on.


NASA wants future missions to stay 75 meters away from the Apollo sites in order to preserve the historically significant artifacts of those sites -- such as the astronaut footprints.

A future mission that attempted to send a robotic rover to the Apollo 11 site in order to take pictures (of, say, Neil Armstrong's first footprints) may end up accidentally destroying those footprints, such as by running over them with a robotic rover.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by Havick007
 


As this is predominantly a conspiracy site I think he was asking a somewhat rhetorical question from a conspiratorial angle - if there is a private manned mission to the moon then they could verify if the bootprints and equipment from the previous landings were still indeed there as they should be - this would in turn answer a lot of the questions and doubts that still remain about the Apollo landings.


People would find reasons to doubt the truthfulness of that private group's findings. The only way many of the Moon Hoax believers would ever believe the Apollo missions actually went to the Moon is if they were taken there themselves and shown first hand.

...Now that I think about it, there would probably be a few left who STILL wouldn't believe it, even if they were taken there and shown the sites. They would say they were drugged/hypnotized into believing they were taken to the moon to see the Apollo sites.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by wewillnotcomply666
 


How would that be proof? The photos we already have are not good enough proof why would new ones be more acceptable?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Enforcing a "no fly" zone on the moon sure sounds silly.
But, demanding that future missions do not disrupt those historic sites sounds reasonable IMO.
I hope we will be respectful enough to allow future generations to enjoy those historical sites.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


what makes you think the moon has "quakes". It's not tectonic and its not volcanic. What shakes and shimmies?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Since its only a handful of lunitics ( pun intended) who doubt this, I dont see the sense in confirming this for them.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
they are there for anyone with an open mind to see








posted on May, 28 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


what makes you think the moon has "quakes". It's not tectonic and its not volcanic. What shakes and shimmies?


The reasons are still unknown yet :


Why are there so many moonquakes? A recent reanalysis of seismometers left on the moon by the Apollo moon landings has revealed a surprising number of moonquakes occurring within 30 kilometers of the surface. In fact, 28 moonquakes were detected in data recorded between 1972 and 1977. These moonquakes were not only strong enough to move furniture but the stiff rock of the moon continued vibrating for many minutes, significantly longer than the soft rock earthquakes on Earth. The cause of the moonquakes remains unknown, with one hypothesis holding that landslides in craters cause the vibrations...


Source (NASA)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 




.......It may be a conspiracy website but not all conspiracy is fact.


Never have truer words been spoken, just as I have stated with increasingly regularity.

Far too many seem to see conspiracies behind absolutely everything - it achieves nothing but discrediting and deflecting from genuine conspiracies.

Personally I think if private missions are to land on the moon I see no reason why some sort of independantly monitored and regulated visit of one or more of the Apollo landing sites etc could be visited to verify their authenticity - I am certain with the resources available such a thing could be planned whilst maintining the integrity of the sites - although I don't know what practical good maintaining their current status is if no-one is to visit or view them?

With an opportunity to at least disprove some of the more 'out there' theories about the moon programme you would have thought NASA and the USA government would actively encourage this - is it any surprise that some conspiracy theorists have reacted with immediate suspicion?
edit on 28/5/12 by Freeborn because: spelling





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join