Please Debunk The Moon Landing Hoax For Me...

Click here for more information.

reply to post by GrassyKnoll

I can see cars very cleary from google earth on maximum zoom why not the moon?"
The Google satelite is 300 miles or so from earth and about 250,000 miles from the moon. Look up the pictures taken from the Japanese orbital. It shows the landing sites clearly enough to see the LEM, rover, and flag.
Take a trip to one of the aeorspace museums and look for the Saturn V. Tell me it isn't big enough to put the service module and capsule into orbit. From earth orbit, the moon is easy. The computations are in the public domain. Work through them. You will see that it is not only possible, but very handily met with the hardware on display.
I can assure you, astronauts do believe they went to the moon. I had breakfast with Frank Borman; and, he said the worst part about all of that is it now difficult to find excitement with the mundane things of life. All of those guys can describe the trip in extreme detail, and with overflowing enthusiasm.

Get a grip. We landed on the moon.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by GrassyKnoll

 

The ONUS is on NASA to prove their story not the other way around.

NASAs mission is to provide information about the Earth and space to both scientists and the general public. It is up to the people using this information to assess its value. No scientist has ever complained about the data provided by the Apollo missions.

The issue at hand here is whether 12 astronauts actually set foot on the moon's surface. They have to prove their alleged exploits.

No human had ever claimed to have walked on the moon before the Apollo 12. The ONUS is on the Apollo 12 to prove they actually did.

Originally posted by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by GrassyKnoll

 

I can see cars very cleary from google earth on maximum zoom why not the moon?"
The Google satelite is 300 miles or so from earth

When a satellite is placed 300 miles or so from the moon's surface let everyone on this thread know...

reply to post by GrassyKnoll

The LRO is about 50 km above the Moon's surface.

The images on Google Earth in which you can see cars are aerial photographs, from airplanes not satellites. Here's a thread I started a while back comparing LROC images to Earth satellite images.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by GrassyKnoll

 

The LRO is about 50 km above the Moon's surface.

The images on Google Earth in which you can see cars are aerial photographs, from airplanes not satellites. Here's a thread I started a while back comparing LROC images to Earth satellite images.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 9/5/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Your images are inconclusive and I am being very generous with my description. Hmmm 10 times closer to the moon's surface than google earth's satellite is to the earth's; yet all I can see are "specks" which are supposed to be something...real convincing.

Can't wait until the new photos are released by NASA...

reply to post by Kitilani

Good for you. Where did you get all those records and how many of those known facts have you confirmed first hand?

Here you go... let's start with something easy:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm sorry if I sound condescending, but please try to imagine how you sound to others.

It's easy enough to fake evidence of a fictional event at a fictional representation of a setting if the only flow of said evidence and material for comparison is handled by you. I do however wonder how we have higher resolution pictures of places many light years away than of a place 60's technology, as crude as it was, could reach so much closer to home.
I honestly would imagine that by this point we'd have publicly accessible observatories that demonstrate the landing sites for educational purposes. If atomic time is easily maintained, then a honed focus on the sites at the right time of the month shouldn't be out of the question.

That aside however, something that's always been a point to ponder for myself is the speed of propagation of the radio waves sent from the moon. The footage shows there's little to know buffer time between Houston and Apollo conversing at such distances. Although space provides little interference on its own, I'd always imagined the earths atmosphere, the Van Allen Radiation Belt and electronic conversion of the conversation would be apparent.

www.youtube.com... : The link to a youtube clip - Sorry can't manage to embed it properly 'malformed video ID' :S

See the comment between Armstrong and Mission Control about beauty for an example of what I'm talking about. (Please note I've no idea of whether this videos audio has been spliced - just putting it out there.)

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by GrassyKnoll

 

The LRO is about 50 km above the Moon's surface.

The images on Google Earth in which you can see cars are aerial photographs, from airplanes not satellites. Here's a thread I started a while back comparing LROC images to Earth satellite images.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 9/5/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Its high resolution satellite images come from DigitalGlobe (which also supplies images for NASA), but they have a number of other sources (e.g. GeoEye, EarthSat). Google also collects images by plane, hot air balloons, and kites. You can find the specific provider of an image by looking at the copyright information at the bottom of the Google Earth window. From here.

reply to post by GrassyKnoll

Hmmm 10 times closer to the moon's surface than google earth's satellite is to the earth's;

Google doesn't have a satellite. Yet. Distant views are from Landsat, closer views are from airplanes or even trucks on the ground. Please, please, do some research before you form an opinion.

reply to post by superman2012

Yes, I know.
And the imagery in which cars are clearly identifiable is aerial imagery. The DOD does not allow satellite imagery of greater than 0.5m to be released.

Only military sources, however, have access to images captured at the satellite's maximum ground resolution of 0.41 meters; Commercial clients' images are re-sampled at a 0.5-meter resolution.

hothardware.com...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by GrassyKnoll

 

The LRO is about 50 km above the Moon's surface.

The images on Google Earth in which you can see cars are aerial photographs, from airplanes not satellites. Here's a thread I started a while back comparing LROC images to Earth satellite images.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 9/5/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Most of google earth's images are satellite images not aerial images. The aerial images are the street view level.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by GrassyKnoll

 

Hmmm 10 times closer to the moon's surface than google earth's satellite is to the earth's;

Google doesn't have a satellite.

Google may not own the satellite but google earth provides satellite imagery...sorry dude do some basic research before you post.

The simple fact you can see the American flag with a cheap $100 telescope on the moon from your back yard is enough for me that we went to the moon.

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Also as to the idea posted by OP: Pictures taken by what? Do they have multimillion dollar spy satellites and planes in orbit around the moon? That's what they use for Google Earth etc.

Why not have high tech, high resolution spy satellites around the moon. Aren't humans by nature explorers?

It would put to rest the conspiracy theory.

I have yet to see conclusive proof. A high resolution satellite picture is worth a thousand words.

I'm still waiting...

That is a lot of money to spend on something that has been explored if not thoroughly.

reply to post by GrassyKnoll

No human had ever claimed to have walked on the moon before the Apollo 12. The ONUS is on the Apollo 12 to prove they actually did.

No human claimed to have flown across the Atlantic Ocean before Lindbergh. You are welcome to believe he did, or believe it was some sort of magic trick. Same for Apollo. You can believe all the evidence or not. If you do not believe the evidence, you are welcome to refute it. That puts the onus on you.

Originally posted by ShiningBeneath
www.youtube.com...

Thank you for posting this video. This video raises many questions for me:

#1 Why would NASA use a low resolution BLACK and WHITE video camera to capture arguably the greatest event in human history?

Surely they could afford a colour one.

#2 Armstong's first step the first word's on the moon's surface. There is absolutely no joy, excitement or euphoria in his voice. If you were the first human to set foot on the moon wouldn't you show more excitement??

#3 Armstrong remarks how the surface of the moon is similar in topography to "much of the high desert of the United States".....hmmm did he make a Freudian slip? Was the moon landing faked in the "US high desert"...Area 51 perhaps?


The more I seem to examine NASA's evidence the more questions I have.

reply to post by GrassyKnoll


You are not entirely accurate in that statement. Have you never seen the google cars driving down the road photographing everything at street level? It would be rather difficult for even a small plane to fly down roadways filming you at street level.

en.wikipedia.org...://www.massgeneral.org/cancer/services/treatmentprograms.aspx?id=1428_View

reply to post by GrassyKnoll

Here is a satellite image at 0.5m/pixel (the highest resolution allowed for commercial use by the DOD).
geoeyemediaportal.s3.amazonaws.com...

Here is an LROC image of the Apollo 14 landing site at 0.5m/pixel.
www.lroc.asu.edu...

Considering that the descent stage is about 13 feet across
upload.wikimedia.org...

A Chevy Blazer is 14 feet long, what is it that you would expect to see?

reply to post by GrassyKnoll

Google may not own the satellite but google earth provides satellite imagery...sorry dude do some basic research before you post.

Finally we can agree on something: Google does not yet own a satellite. (They are working on it.) I will also congratulate you on acknowledging that they do provide satellite imagery. The problem is: you know those pictures where you can see your car in the driveway? They weren't taken by a satellite.