The Russians Are Going To Verify That The Moon Landing Was Real

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

The fact is that China, Japan and India have all photographed the Apollo landing sites

Ah yes Japan and China, Japan the one country that is also still being militarily controlled by the American gov and Militarily yeah

of course Japan would follow their official narrative of the moon landing to and China sure lets believe the communist state that is a literally finical backbone to the American Economy

There are plenty of photos proving it, you have just decided that you don't believe them.

And Majority of all of those photos still have no stars showing on the moon.
Yet they faked easily on the lame Moon movie where they showed stars.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Sorry have to correct you.
A fast Aperture speed let's in LESS light, the Aperture speed is the time the lens has the shutter out of the way of the film.
Also of importance is the speed of the film itself and it's ISO rating.

Actually pal you are the one making some damned idiotic claim's you cant even get the aperture information correct for goodness sake and have the audacity to criticize the grown up's.

As for the Hubble and it's replacement let's correct you once again.
The entire point of a long duration exposure is to gather as many photon's from the most distant object's as possible and then to image them by combining those photon's into a picture.
As light travel's over distance it also travel's outward in all direction's from these object's so space wise the further you are away the less photon's from an object there are in a cubic meter of space (you do know the concept of attenuation over distance I hope given your often grandiose claim's and opinion's of other's opinions as if you have the high ground when in fact you most certainly do not).
So a long duration exposure - or in the case of a digital system compiled capture of photon's become's a necessity to actually be able to image those distant object's.
But not all objects are so distant and a very short exposure is all it would require to capture stars even a couple of hundred light years away.
But that is not what they are trying to image - the planet hunter generation shall do so however - they are trying and succeeding in imaging objects BILLIONS of light years away and in the past, the few scant photon's that they can capture and focus onto the detector from these distant object's could not create an image unless they exposed for a very long time which is why the Hubble need's that long exposure interval and in some cases it would be preferable to have week's of exposure if the apparatus could be kept on station without obstruction long enough though due to the nature of digital detection it is also possible to stitch together multiple images of the same region and that way create a composite long exposure image of it.

Your not an idiot just very rude and need to go back to school.

In your defense it's Sunday morning and very early, have you been drinking perhaps, if so you merely made an error and we have all done that now have we not eh!.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
I believe the hero astronauts remained in Earth orbit, and a disposable team make the trip to the Moon. In case anything went wrong, cut the feed and the hero astronauts still pop out of the hatch.

However, if you look at the transcripts from the actual Earth orbit missions and compare that with the lunar ones, you'll see that they had to change tracking stations every 10-15 minutes, compared with hours at a time from cislunar space and the moon.

Furthermore, you can't get photos of the entire Earth from Low Earth Orbit - you have to be much further out. The Earth photos they did take all match exactly what the weather satellites of the time show.

Believing in NASA is like believing the Government official narrative on 9/11. Or that Saddam had WMDs to.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Interesting final paragraph.

Earlier in November, Mr Rogozin revealed plans to start building a base on the moon after 2025, with the project exceeding the US Apollo programme of the 1960s and 1970s in terms of scale. The programme will put its first humans on the moon by 2030 or 2031.

And i highly doubt Men will go to the moon, because they are hiding something.

originally posted by: AtlasHawk
Believing in NASA is like believing the Government official narrative on 9/11. Or that Saddam had WMDs to.

Absolute garbage. You can't dismiss something that is demonstrably provable and verifiable because of your political bias about other matters.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: AtlasHawk
Believing in NASA is like believing the Government official narrative on 9/11. Or that Saddam had WMDs to.

Absolute garbage. You can't dismiss something that is demonstrably provable and verifiable because of your political bias about other matters.

I think social media has proven otherwise lol. People can, and do, dismiss anything at all for whatever reasons suit them. Some people are so detached from reality they can't accept science and technology despite being immersed in...science and technology.

Take ATS for example? 1000s of posts using the high technology of the web, national grid infrastructures, GPS, satellites, microchips etc etc. In amongst them are a few members who believe we live in some Victorian limbo where technology is a hoax even though they're using it to tell us it doesn't exist.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Point taken

You indeed dismiss logically deduced and scientifically verifiable evidence based purely on the basis of ill-informed knee-jerk contrarianism and prejudice

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Yes indeed. I worry we in the West are living in one of the most anti-intellectual time periods since the 16th Century. Some behave like they think Pol Pot and Mao had the right idea. They want to restrict education, render medical science as 'opinion' and measure the value of science in general based on how they feel in the moment.*

I worry even more that it'll get worse before it gets better.

ETA - * and partisan expediency

a reply to: ParasuvO

Sorry, lots of pictures to verify. You just say you don't believe them.

a reply to: ParasuvO

I already posted photos of the stars taken from the moon so what are you talking about again?

a reply to: AtlasHawk

The real question is why would anyone land a person on the moon when the costs are prohibitive and you are less capable with a manned mission.

a reply to: AtlasHawk

China and India too, puppet states of America. Russia too. Even you are probably a puppet since apparently everyone is.

People who think the US never landed on the moons are barking mad. There would have been so many people in the conspiracy. It would have been impossible to control the conspiracy for so long.

The Russian's were probably doing something they rarely do - unless they're standing over a dead body. They were joking. This has then been spun by the Russian propaganda media, as per the OPs reference to RT.com. What is does is keep the narrative going, because some people only have a warped narrative of the past and a belief that the world is flat, the moon is cheese and (er) the American's never landed on the moon.

originally posted by: paraphi
The Russian's were probably doing something they rarely do - unless they're standing over a dead body. They were joking.

In space related facebook groups that I've seen discussing this alleged proposal, the person making the proposal is widely regarded as barking mad and the USSR equivalent of Trump.

It's also worth pointing out that often translation from the original Russian can make statements seem a lot different to their original intent.

a reply to: LABTECH767

...Now to my mind those star's should be brighter than laser pointer's at least those that are relatively near to us

Sorry, but that's crazy-talk; I enjoy looking at the stars, but I wouldn't enjoy looking at my lasers - they'd punch holes through the backs of my eyes, lol

originally posted by: CharlesT
www.space.com...
NASA Unveils New Detailed Photos of Apollo Moon Landing Sites

I must have looked at this picture one hundred times, but I just noticed something I never noticed before...

Why are there no footprints from the LRV over to the descent stage?

And why are there no LRV tracks to where it sits? There's LRV tracks everywhere else.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

You need to zoom in a little more closely. What you see is disturbed ground, the more disturbance the more obvious the shading is. They only drove once to the VIP parking spot, and you can actually see that track - see below. I've adjusted the levels and sharpened it a bit.



Cernan's final walk back did not disturb the ground enough to make enough of an impression for the LRO to see it, but you can make out the disturbed area around the LM.

they are sun's some much brighter than your own, there is no Atmosphere to get in the way and attenuate there light and for camera images the argument has always been that the reflection from the moon was so bright that the camera aperture speed had to be very fast which does not cut it either since even a fast aperture speed would not block out those bright objects.

Magnitude and apparent magnitude.

There are brighter stars but they are nowhere near a close as the sun. Now you might understand why day time on Earth is much brighter then night time. By the way, night time is when the Earth is turned away from the sun and we can actually see the fainter light from he stars. Just in case - the Moon is fairly close to Earth in the distance scale compared to stars.

Wouldn't a flat Moon explain the stars away...