Take THAT, moon conspiracy theorists...

[bartman (Bart)]

Originally Posted by ngcles

Hi Chris & All,

Well here's another opportunity Bart Sibrel and Bill Kaysing (and others) to swallow their pride and finally apologise for "A funny thing happened on the way to the Moon" and creating/promoting the Moon Hoax theories and silly hooplah that goes with them. (I think a personal apology to Buzz Aldrin from Bart is called for too)

Bart has indicated in the past that if photographic proof has forthcoming he would withdraw his claims and apologise, so ... how about it Bart?

I'm waiting (though I'm not holding my breath).


Best,

Les D

No no twasnt me.......
twas Bart Sibrel........
who the ....is Bart Sibrel?
Google here I come.....
Ah all clear now
Thanks Les
BARTMAN

[bojan]

Originally Posted by avandonk

Bah you think that 31km is low flying! I would have got better pictures in my Cesnna at 500ft!
There are no stars in the pictures.
The shadows are all wrong for that latitude.
Where are the footprints from the astronaut after he abandoned the LRV.
Makes you think does it not!

This is the sort of tripe the that the idiots will come up with.

Bert

yeah..
You can't beat them can you
Perhaps we should just leave them live in their little imagined world.. hardly worth the trouble attempting to "straighten the meandering river" (rough translation of proverb from where I am originally from).

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by bojan

yeah..
You can't beat them can you
Perhaps we should just leave them live in their little imagined world.. hardly worth the trouble attempting to "straighten the meandering river" (rough translation of proverb from where I am originally from).

You can beat them, actually. It's just that you may end up on assault charges!!!!

[Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)]

I was a annoyed by the Leader on 'Yahoo' - "Satellite photograhs trash left behind on moon" or similar.
Article goes on in this vein making it sound like they left a bunch of beer bottles and KFC buckets lying around.
I'm getting weapons-grade bored of 'news' services slagging-off everything humans do in space as contamination or speciesistic-imperialism. I'm even more bored of people swallowing it.
We have every right, even obligation to explore other worlds.
A couple of tons of sterile metal and glass isn't going to make a dent in any one of them.
OK.
Rant finished.

[Omaroo (Chris Malikoff)]

Originally Posted by Waxing_Gibbous

I was a annoyed by the Leader on 'Yahoo' - "Satellite photograhs trash left behind on moon" or similar.
Article goes on in this vein making it sound like they left a bunch of beer bottles and KFC buckets lying around.
I'm getting weapons-grade bored of 'news' services slagging-off everything humans do in space as contamination or speciesistic-imperialism. I'm even more bored of people swallowing it.
We have every right, even obligation to explore other worlds.
A couple of tons of sterile metal and glass isn't going to make a dent in any one of them.
OK.
Rant finished.

I'm entirely with you Peter. It was said on 10 News tonight as well - the word "junk". Well, that'd be the most valuable and purposeful "junk" in human history.

[Jen]

Originally Posted by erick

Try to convince them to walk in straight lines?

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Originally Posted by alistairsam

but I keep getting asked the question "if this image was taken by a satellite from 14 miles above the moon, why isn't it as clear as say images in google maps where you can see cars easily and the scale is 10metres".

I'm not sure which satellite is used by google maps or what the altitude is, but is this to do with differences in cameras used and/or altitude?
I presume the apollo descent module is the same size as a car.

I have no doubts that we did go, but wanted to understand the imaging bit.

Alistair, the long distance shots are by satellites, but only down to a certain altitude, then aerial photography takes over.
The lower altitude images are from planes only a few thousand feet up.

[renormalised (Carl)]

but I keep getting asked the question "if this image was taken by a satellite from 14 miles above the moon, why isn't it as clear as say images in google maps where you can see cars easily and the scale is 10metres".

Take it from someone who has a fair bit of experience with this sort of stuff, at 10 metres resolution, you will not see a car. You'll be flat out seeing most houses. To see a house with any sort of clarity, you need at least 1-2 metre resolution on the detectors. That also goes for cars. 5 metre resolution, which is quite common on many satellites, will only show most cars as a pixel...and that's for a large car. A house will cover 2-3 pixels for most houses. Most commercial and governmental run environmental monitoring platforms, such as Landsat and Spot, have a series of detectors which range in resolution from 1-2 metres for the high res detectors to 5-10 metres for the medium res detectors.

Most of those shots you see in Google Earth were taken from planes flying anywhere between 20000 and 40000 feet. The only orbiting platforms which have the capability to view houses, cars and even people at such high resolutions are the US Keyhole and LaCrosse satellites and the Russian Persona satellites. The Persona's have a resolution of 33cm, which is less than the LaCrosse satellites which can track and identify targets the size of a tennis ball from 700km. So, the chances you'd get of seeing any of these images from such satellites appearing at all in Google are even less than nothing. They're purely top secret military imaging satellites.

[netwolf]

Track a tennis ball from 700km wow, that is some resolution. What is more amazing is how much money the world spends on spying on each other.
I dont doubt we went to the moon, but I am open to debate.