just watched a documentary examining evidence that the Apollo moon landings were a 40 billion dollar US government hoax..... 
The case for the prosecution is compelling......
Japan intends to send a probe up to the moon to take the first close up 'photos of the claimed landing sites....
I wait with bated breath....
The case for the prosecution is compelling......
Japan intends to send a probe up to the moon to take the first close up 'photos of the claimed landing sites....
I wait with bated breath....
I have absolutely no idea what kind of fantastical drugs you or the producers have been smoking, but anyone with a good power telescope or laser can spot the lander, flag or reflector planted there. (Well, I don't know about visual observation, but I've seen LIDAR performed before.)
Sounds like those (geez, more words I can't say) who think Rosevelt let (or purposely caused) Pearl Harbor happen, or likewise Bush and 9/11.... sigh...
Tim
Sounds like those (geez, more words I can't say) who think Rosevelt let (or purposely caused) Pearl Harbor happen, or likewise Bush and 9/11.... sigh...
Tim
They put a mirror on it, you can bounce a laser off of it with the right equipment. I can't believe anyone would think this!? Do you believe everything you watch on Channel 5!?
Anyway this approaches each one of the programs 'points' and suggests how ridiculous they are. Anyway there is a squillion more reasons to believe we did go to the moon than not!
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
Ed
Anyway this approaches each one of the programs 'points' and suggests how ridiculous they are. Anyway there is a squillion more reasons to believe we did go to the moon than not!
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
Ed
And what equiptment might that be? If japan is sending up a probe to veiw the landing sites, wouldnt it be a waste of money if they could just use a $10 laser pointer on a computer guided equateral mount?
Lets see, if i park my car in the drive way, better yet plant a flag, go to the moon and get my scope out, do you honestly think i would realy see it? I take it you have owned a telescope before and know all about resolution and the earths atmospheric effects on the resolution, also what size lenses you would need to be able to even think about such an adventure. Why do you think they built the hubbel space telescope?
LIDAR is used for calibrating satelites so they maintain their orbit, it will be future used in a new space telescope (that i dont have the name of) that will be able to see far distant planets, not the same system but similar.
Ive watched this documentory before, its been played world wide, its actually a couple of years old, do you want my opinion? Well realy i dont doubt that nasa did land on the moon, i beleive they did, until proven wrong, (which ofcourse i guess one day the truth will be proven), ill beleive so.
Trev
couldn't they check landing sights with the hubble space telescope,or too much to ask for?
i can understand the evidence of it being a hoax (solar radiation would fry us without the magnetic belts of the planet to protect us) could we measure the radiation given off by the test equipment left there?
i can understand the evidence of it being a hoax (solar radiation would fry us without the magnetic belts of the planet to protect us) could we measure the radiation given off by the test equipment left there?
ace3000_1 said:
The equipment I saw on the program segment showed a rather powerful green argon laser, beaming a generous diameter moonwards. Sensitive detectors return the faint reflection, timing the round trip and calculating distance. In this way we know the moon is getting farther by two inches per year I think?
More than likely, Japan is going up because they can. Cold war aside, that's why we did. ("Not because it is easy, but because it is hard!") Cold war just got us there a number of decades sooner.
I mean geez, come on! Wouldn't you like to say you've been in (or at least sent a probe to) interplanetary space?
Yeah, so viewing individual objects on another planet is pretty far off. You might need Hubble or the Keck to see it, but it's there. I don't know what resolution each has at moon distances. Hmm, I should calculate that. What is Keck's resolution anyway...
/Googling....
Tim
Ok, the infrared camera reads 0.02 arc-seconds, per pixel I guess. A website quotes distance to moon as 384,000 km. .02 seconds is .02 * 1/60 * 1/60 degrees, or 5.56 x 10^-6. The sine of this multiplied by distance equals the smallest feature that can be viewed: namely, about 37 meters. Concievably, a feature sqrt(2) of that can easily be seen, or 26 meters across. So it's not really possible with current visual viewing devices. Mind you that was the infrared device, I didn't look too hard to see if there was a visible spectrum spec.
Tim
Tim
Hey Professor......
Aren't there enough websites and newsgroups for guys like you who have too much time on your hands (and probably too much weed/acid/whatever and hatred of America) to exchange crap like this???
Do us all a favour........and take it somewhere else that is appropriate.
Jocko
Aren't there enough websites and newsgroups for guys like you who have too much time on your hands (and probably too much weed/acid/whatever and hatred of America) to exchange crap like this???
Do us all a favour........and take it somewhere else that is appropriate.
Jocko
Re: Hey Professor......
Lighten up Jocko. You're calling the kettle black. You took the time to read and respond.
Maybe this is the first time the guy saw that kind of thing.
Didn't you believe in the Bermuda triangle when you were young?
I was kind of interested in what the audio geeks had to say about this. I've watched my share of shows on this and I wouldn't mind hearing what others opinions are as well.
Cheers
Cal
Jocko Homo said:
Lighten up Jocko. You're calling the kettle black. You took the time to read and respond.
Maybe this is the first time the guy saw that kind of thing.
Didn't you believe in the Bermuda triangle when you were young?
I was kind of interested in what the audio geeks had to say about this. I've watched my share of shows on this and I wouldn't mind hearing what others opinions are as well.
Cheers
Cal
Thats right, but it aint faint, it comes back down through a casigrain telescope with a sensor and with the laser in the middle, its the exact same way they calibrate sats, and i dont beleive it can be done with the moon cos for 1, the moon isnt flat,( ok doesnt have to be but think in the mirror being perfectly alighned), 2 you need to reflect that beam exactly perfectly back to its source, trying to do that from somthing as far away as the moon is just about impossible. Trying to line up a 1/2 inch beam into a 1/2inch round hole perfectly so far away with both sources moving wouldnt be fun imo and the chances of getting that right is about the same chances as ET coming back to earth on his bike and giving u an ice cream. 3, both planets move and i can tell ya, FAST!
The way they mainly measure the distance with things is radar, time , and historical orbits, and yess the moon is coming closer or further, ( cant rember either!) and the sun is defininatley coming closer, hence why we are heating up not only from the ozone. We have about 4 billion years left on earth before the sun enlarges and engufs us, probally by the 2 billion mark or even before we are all toast and thats if we dont get eaten by a black hole beforhand!
Hubbel seeing the landing site? not sure, i dont think its got an imager with a high enough resolution, most of the images are colour enhanced or false colour radar images that they manipulate to become pictures, that and data converted into images.
I dont know if any of you guys are into direct reception of weather sats like noaa 12-17 poes sats but i am, and not even one of those could pick up a flag being only 400miles above the earth. If you guys are interested in receiving live images of the earth from sats let me know and maybe ill start a thread on it. You can place a mirror on your roof and see a starburst in the image though that only works on the sats that use radar, (sich).
Not having a dig here at anyone, just thought id mention that, all in good fun lol
Trev
Re: Re: Hey Professor......
Well from what ive read on the Burmuda Triangle, the mysterious ships that went missing got caught up in bubbles or somthing in the ocean due to tectonic plate movment, the bubbling overturned the ships, that and whirlpools. Dont laugh cos this was a recent study by leading scientists, maybe the same studying the moon?
Trev
Cal Weldon said:
Didn't you believe in the Bermuda triangle when you were young?
I was kind of interested in what the audio geeks had to say about this. I've watched my share of shows on this and I wouldn't mind hearing what others opinions are as well.
Cheers
Cal
Well from what ive read on the Burmuda Triangle, the mysterious ships that went missing got caught up in bubbles or somthing in the ocean due to tectonic plate movment, the bubbling overturned the ships, that and whirlpools. Dont laugh cos this was a recent study by leading scientists, maybe the same studying the moon?
Trev
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.