you asked for it, you got it...

astronaut footprints on the moon

www.nasa.gov...

[edit on 26-8-2009 by Researcher]

As much as I appreciate your research in this... I can't help but say that shows me nothing of consequence.

There have been countless pictures on mars where there was a random out of place object, casting a long shadow, with some marks in the dirt that I could call an astronaut footprint.

On that note, if they could show me a much higher resolution pic that shows a bit of detail, I may be impressed... but despite being a believer in the moon landing, this isn't the concrete proof to pacify the skeptics.

Originally posted by judgiebegoode
As much as I appreciate your research in this... I can't help but say that shows me nothing of consequence.

There have been countless pictures on mars where there was a random out of place object, casting a long shadow, with some marks in the dirt that I could call an astronaut footprint.

On that note, if they could show me a much higher resolution pic that shows a bit of detail, I may be impressed... but despite being a believer in the moon landing, this isn't the concrete proof to pacify the skeptics.

I agree these pictures do not show anything that is conclusive the quality is pretty poor.

Also I think these are pictures of Lunar landers not actual astronaut footprints.

This may prove that we landed on the moon but it could have been an unmanned craft. I do believe we landed on the moon with man craft just putting that out there.

i believe we went there, we just lied our heads off after we landed and found little green men mining ore

This has already been posted.

Several times, I believe.

We're all waiting for the more high resolution ones that are supposed to be coming out.

Originally posted by TV_Nation

Also I think these are pictures of Lunar landers not actual astronaut footprints.

Sorry, I meant to say footpath, and I couldn't figure out how to edit my post.

reply to post by judgiebegoode


I'm not even convinced that the objects in the photo are actually there. I could easily create this in photoshop with the brush tool.

Nothing convincing to me here. Just some blurry "tracks" and some white dots with black shadows.


reply to post by mf_luder


Yeah, so they can photoshop in/out what they need to. I just wish there was more transparency when it comes to this stuff.

EVERYTHING we get is so doctored that it's hard to tell what's even original to the photo.

I think we went with rolling rock tracts at one time.
That means things have not changed much.
And I don't think the Moon surface is dusty or sandy in any way.
The Moon surface should be a Sun baked hard crust and all the
remote rover data should be looked at.

This does prove one thing though:

NASA has already provided reams of evidence that the moon landings occurred as advertised. There are hundreds of photographs, hours of film, massive amounts of telemetered data and audio, some of which was independently recorded by amateurs and governments all around the world. Oh and the hundreds of pounds of lunar return samples, and the testimony of all of the people involved in the design, testing, and execution. When subjected to rigorous scrutiny, all of it tells a cohesive, complex story that would be insanely difficult to manufacture. The Apollo program was one of the most open and publicized government undertakings in history.

The people who go to great lengths to discredit and ignore all of the evidence in favor of a massive conspiracy will never be convinced. You could send them there in their own private spacecraft and they'd find the hardware we left and claim that somehow NASA sent it up recently and made it look like it had sat on the lunar surface for 40+ years.

There's no way to convince a *true believer* that his beliefs are ill-founded. This is why often the most helpful question to ask before starting a discussion about Apollo with a hoax theorist is: is there any evidence that, if produced and verified, would convince you of the veracity of the Apollo program? Most often, their answer to this question makes it clear that there's no point in even continuing the conversation.