Just a simple question.......

Greetings ATS,

Most of you old guard know my feelings but lately, I have found myself just asking myself simple questions and expecting simple answers. I haven't got them. That being the case, I'll kick the ball to you and tell me the answers!

The question I have is this........ How do we have multiple rovers on Mars capable of Hi rez pics and yet we still use a photo of Earth from multiple decades ago? When the people who put these photos together are asked about why they are fake, which they are, they say they need to be. Earth photos are a composite because we can't get high enough to photograph the Earth? What?

Every photo of Earth on Google is the same photo or some CGI creation, why is that? The exact question I would like answered is why can we have multiple rovers on Mars and this should make a lot of sense to everyone NOT AN HD CAMERA ON THE MOON taking 24/7 footage of the Earth?

Think there could be some benefit to that? Bad weather, Hurricanes? So, we have HD pictures of Mars but can't photograph the Earth because we don't have a camera on the moon yeah?

Does anyone else see how ridiculous and absurd that is?

Are all the discoveries, real or faked, out there in the universe, as wondrous as they are, meant to distract us from what is going on, on our own planet?

a reply to: Helious

I’m sure the military has had high res satellite images for decades now. If I go on google earth I can see the changes to a garden I helped landscape recently. So it’s not cgi or the same pic or whatever is it? As for rovers on mars we have ramblers on earth taking far more high res pics of earth than there are of mars. So I fail to see your point.

a reply to: surfer_soul

Nah man, you failed to understand the entire post, that is why you don't see my point........ Smh.

Every picture we have of Earth is either the only picture EVER claimed to be taken from the moon in 1969 or a CGI composite from multiple satellites cause Earth is just toooooooooooooooo big to photograph from low Earth orbit.

The question is..... How do we have multiple rovers on fing Mars with HD cams and we do not have a HD camera on the moon that is videoing Earth 24/7.

Think about it, I mean, really think about it.

a reply to: Helious

If a picture is worth a thousand words, a video is worth a whole lot more.

Time lapse of earth from ISS


Here is a live feed of earth from the ISS


You're not a flat earther, are you?

a reply to: Helious

Because there are numerous satellites orbiting the planet constantly taking photographs at super-high resolution. Those images pasted together give you a much higher resolution view of the surface than any single image taken from the moon would.

Given that what you're talking about it essentially being accomplished with those satellites, the cost and effort of putting a camera on the moon just to take photographs of the planet - a task that is already being essentially accomplished by satellites - would be redundant and therefore cost prohibitive.

Justifying the expense of such a project would be impossible. Nobody would want to fund it.

a reply to: MDDoxs

Nope, not doing that dance.........

I asked a question, that is the point of the thread. Wow, video from the ISS, sweet! Now, tell me why there isn't a stationary high res camera on the moon that videos the Earth 24/7. Don't tell me we can't do it cause I'll show you HD footage from Mars, much further away. Don't tell me that there is no reason, I can list over a dozen.

Don't reply with ISS footage, answer the question.....

originally posted by: incoserv
a reply to: Helious

Because there are numerous satellites orbiting the planet constantly taking photographs at super-high resolution. Those images pasted together give you a much higher resolution view of the surface than any single image taken from the moon would.

Given that what you're talking about it essentially being accomplished with those satellites, the cost and effort of putting a camera on the moon just to take photographs of the planet - a task that is already being essentially accomplished by satellites - would be redundant and therefore cost prohibitive.

Justifying the expense of such a project would be impossible. Nobody would want to fund it.

Everything you just said is ludicris. The number one return on investment for NASA would be to launch a rover with a HD cam that could surveil the Earth 24/7. Period.

a reply to: Helious

Now, tell me why there isn't a stationary high res camera on the moon that videos the Earth 24/7.

Money? Lack of interest? Lack of value? To frustrate and confuse you...?

originally posted by: Helious
The number one return on investment for NASA would be to launch a rover with a HD cam that could surveil the Earth 24/7. Period.

There are high res spy satellites in high orbit that do that just fine now. Why would a lone rover on the moon outperform them?

a reply to: Helious

The number one return on investment for NASA would be to launch a rover with a HD cam that could surveil the Earth 24/7. Period.

This IS very interesting. Would you please educate me on the revenue generating opportunities that NASA or a government could access by having a permanent and fixed camera point at earth on the moon? Oh, also if you could tell us how it would be better than orbiting satellites that would be also great......

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Who are you people? You think you can justify this somehow but just on the face, it's patently absurd. You have how many rovers on MARS, on MARS with hi rez video and cameras but we just can't justify the cost of a camera on the Moon?

Do you even understand how ridiculous that sounds?

a reply to: Helious

What’s the need to have a camera on the moon looking at the the earth?

originally posted by: MDDoxs
a reply to: Helious

The number one return on investment for NASA would be to launch a rover with a HD cam that could surveil the Earth 24/7. Period.

This IS very interesting. Would you please educate me on the revenue generating opportunities that NASA or a government could access by having a permanent and fixed camera point at earth on the moon? Oh, also if you could tell us how it would be better than orbiting satellites that would be also great......

Sure, ever heard of "Only fans" or maybe like TikTok? I think a constant stream of the Earth from the fing Moon may bring in some viewers from time to time.

Your welcome.

a reply to: Helious

Sure, ever heard of "Only fans" or maybe like TikTok? I think a constant stream of the Earth from the fing Moon may bring in some viewers from time to time.

Your welcome.

Ohhhh yeah, I know OnlyFans. Hehehe.

You did not answer the second part of MY question. Why would this be better than live feeds from satellites?

I think I could get my rocks off by watching the ISS OnlyFans...I mean live feed.

originally posted by: MDDoxs
a reply to: Helious

Sure, ever heard of "Only fans" or maybe like TikTok? I think a constant stream of the Earth from the fing Moon may bring in some viewers from time to time.

Your welcome.

Ohhhh yeah, I know OnlyFans. Hehehe.

You did not answer the second part of MY question. Why would this be better than live feeds from satellites?

I think I could get my rocks off by watching the ISS OnlyFans...I mean live feed.

Show me the Earth in real time, as it is naturally from any of your satellite feeds. You won't be able to and I already know that. There is no substitute from a stationary camera on the moon focused on Earth.

a reply to: Helious

The ISS doesnt count?

If not, I am going to need a few minutes to plug into my spy satellite that the US government lets me use from time to time.

originally posted by: Helious
Do you even understand how ridiculous that sounds?

I agree, you do sound very ridiculous thinking that a single camera 268,000 miles away is better at imagery than a constellation of satellites orbiting at 1,000 miles.

It would be a neat novelty for sure, but as others are asking you Helious, what would it show us other than entertainment value that satellites are not currently?

As for why we dont have one, I'd imagine it to be most likely due to the cost/benefit ratio.
Once travel to the moon gets cheaper and more commonplace I've no doubt you'll get your "earth cam".