Calling all Moon Hoaxers Hubble is staring at the Moon!

reply to post by alfa1


Are you positive?? I could swear that I heard that, but I'm not for sure. Maybe it was a spy plane though not a satellite. I never claimed to be an expert and was kinda joking hence the

Originally posted by Renegade2283

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by epsilon69

 

So Nasa points Hubble to the moon... and that would give us an opportunity to prove them as liars by studying if the landing sites are there?

You really think they are that dumb? Any pictures released of those areas would of course first be altered in an appropriate way before release.

But i doubt we are even allowed to study those areas in detail, as the photoshop experts among us would probably be able to detect these alterations, so don´t be surprised if they have conveniently pointed the telescope "somewhere else", unable to be maneuvered or zoomed in at our command.

Short version: Don´t get your hopes up.

So what your pretty much saying is that no matter what new information comes to light, you will never be swayed in your opinion. It seems to me your being a bit ignorant.

I dont mean to insult I am not saying you are an ignorant person. I am just saying your are acting ignorant

edit on 7-5-2012 by Renegade2283 because: (no reason given)

I wouldn´t call information from someone that is proven to lie and even has a guideline to withhold certain information to the public, "new information".

The source is the problem here. Had it been the chinese or the Russian pointing THEIR telescope at the moon, i would be thrilled if we got access. But of course all their launches have "mysteriously failed" someway or the other lately... even their Mars probes. Hmm wonder why? Maybe we are doomed to rely on these liars for our info, thus keeping us in the dark...

reply to post by Renegade2283


A link? I can do that and better:

Just the initial images, from LROC....July, 2009

www.nasa.gov...


As the LRO orbits, more images are received, and better refinements possible.

2011:

www.nasa.gov...


In early 2012, the LRO was temporarily lowered in altitude, on orbit.....:

LROC Apollo 16, 23 April 2012


One of my favorites is a video, of stills, that were compiled by someone at the Arizona State University (ASU), which actually is acting as the clearing house for the LROC images, on behalf of NASA. This, of the Apollo 11 site (He put more effort into that site, I suppose, because of the historical significance):



The video description is worth reading, in order to understand the process he used, to sharpen the images, especially as he "zooms" in....as you know, merely zooming in, electronically, will not enhance image quality, as a pixel is a pixel is a pixel. But, there are certain mathematical algorithms that can be used to remove distortions.

"Photo resolution, expressed in either feet or meters per pixel in my video merely is the photo's image scale when my video is viewed at 1280x720 HD resolution and is not the inherent maximum resolution of the deconvolved LRO photos. The maximum inherent resolution achieved so far in any of my deconvolved and enhanced LRO photos is approximately 0.35 meters per pixel. Horizontal and vertical surface coverage for any photo can be calculated by multiplying 1280 or 720 by the stated resolution. Thus 0.5 feet per pixel, when multiplied by 1280 and 720, yields photo coverage of 640 feet horizontally by 360 feet vertically."

reply to post by pianopraze


Hubble could always image the Moon!!:

there seems to be no end of reason why hubble couldn't photograph the moon...

The issue is about the resolution available, in terms of the "smallest" objects it can resolve.

And, it IS designed for deep-space viewing. Using Hubble to photograph the Moon is (bit of exaggeration, but for a point)n like using binoculars at the breakfast table to read your morning newspaper.

ill save you all the time, no need to wait to see what the images will look like. there maybe a slight exageration in colour, sorry about that. i dint know how to make it black and white



hmm i think i could get a job as an image manipulator at nasa

Originally posted by pianopraze
So they've been lying all these years when they said hubble couldn't photograph the moon for technical reasons?

Or is this some new technology added to hubble?

As far as I know they can't take clear photos of the moon as the moon is not far enough away. This has to do with optics and focus. Hubble has a static lens designed to take clear images of points million lightyears away. As an example out of real life: You can't take a spyglass and look at something just an inch away.

But NASA didn't state that they will take any clear photos. They just state that they take spectrographic data from the moon. So they will get a very very blurred picture but there is still all the spectrographic data included in this picture. It just doesn't look like a picture

So in my opinion these pictures can't be used to proof/disproof the moon landing. Personally I don't believe that the material broadcasted 1969 originated from the moon. But I'm still not sure if they really made it to the moon (than or later) as I haven't seen real/clear proof for it. And after years of lies from those at the top I will not believe what any textbook, doctor or whoever tell me if they can't proof it. They told too many lies over the years just to take more of our money. And all the 'proof' the pro landing group presents can easily be explained without having a person on the moon. Maybe they made it to the moon but can't establish a video link back to earth? The video material contains too many unexplained effects in my opinion to be original material from the moon. But who knows, maybe the physical laws on the moon are so strange that it just look that way there

pics and it still didn't happen?

if we had proof that we went to the moon would that lend credibility to NASA? or anything? would it really change anything? no - No it would not. So whats the point?

Thats why no ones looking for proof that we went to the moon, they're looking for proof that we didn't. Because that would be proof of something at least, that they lied, and that would lend credibility to a zillion other conspiracy theories.

I personally don't care if they went or not. More of a morbid curiosity brings me to the thread, to see the fighting back and forth about it. In reality we don't need to know the truth because even if we did, they're still liars. They lie all the time.



reply to post by Whateva69


LOL I like your renditions, star for effort! but if you can't figure out greyscale I think your resume will be shredded - no offense intended

Originally posted by Renegade2283
reply to post by epsilon69

 

Really?? Hubble doesn't have high enough resolution? I remember hearing once that American satellite could "pick the date off a dime". There is no freaking way that Hubble doesnt have high enough resolution. With a super powerful telescope and a damn nice camera I bet you could almost see them for yourself

edit on 7-5-2012 by Renegade2283 because: (no reason given)

WRONG thats what all the internet wack job fruit cake the government is after you idiots want you to believe!!!

More info here a long way to go yet!!

www.fas.org...

The russian unmanned probe luna 15 was orbiting the moon exactly at the time of apollo 11 landings.
The russian space agency should be able to cnfirm the apollo 11 landings

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
The russian unmanned probe luna 15 was orbiting the moon exactly at the time of apollo 11 landings.
The russian space agency should be able to cnfirm the apollo 11 landings

They have.
Russia has even declared that they tracked Apollo to and from the moon. People seem to ignore it. It was described in detail in an article by E. Molotova in Russia's "Novosti-Kosmonavtiki" (News of Astronautics)

It was also tracked by many independent observatories in other countries, and amateurs alike.

Third party evidence for Apollo moon landings

reply to post by NeoVain


By new information I meant if NASA gave us some new images of the launch site. Which as someone pointed out is not possible anyways.

I am totally with you on the mysterious failure of most foreign attempts at space exploration, especially both Phobos missions. However, even if there was some type of sabotage taking place, it doesnt neccesarilly mean that it has anything to do with the moon landing hoax.

It could be that all this confusion with the Apollo missions was because there was a secret reason for their mission. I am sure someone has stated this before. Whether it be alien related, or just something a long the lines of our domination over oil, only on the moon . This could also explain the supposed sabotage.

I read a thread once that pointed to the fact that the astronauts on Apollo 11 had scripted lines. This would leave most to believe that the moon landings were a hoax. But I believe;if this was true, that it was because they had to put on a show for the public to hide their real motives for going to the moon.

reply to post by wmd_2008


Whao calm down there. Was only joking. Does nobody understand the purpose of the anymore.

Also I was incorrect about the satellite being able to pick a date off a dime. It was the U2 spy plane.

Originally posted by Renegade2283
reply to post by NeoVain

 

By new information I meant if NASA gave us some new images of the launch site. Which as someone pointed out is not possible anyways.

I am totally with you on the mysterious failure of most foreign attempts at space exploration, especially both Phobos missions. However, even if there was some type of sabotage taking place, it doesnt neccesarilly mean that it has anything to do with the moon landing hoax.

It could be that all this confusion with the Apollo missions was because there was a secret reason for their mission. I am sure someone has stated this before. Whether it be alien related, or just something a long the lines of our domination over oil, only on the moon

. This could also explain the supposed sabotage.

I read a thread once that pointed to the fact that the astronauts on Apollo 11 had scripted lines. This would leave most to believe that the moon landings were a hoax. But I believe;if this was true, that it was because they had to put on a show for the public to hide their real motives for going to the moon.

edit on 8-5-2012 by Renegade2283 because: (no reason given)

Hi ren
Unfortunately this is as silly as going to the moon for water.
There is unlimited oil here on earth and there is no feasibility to go to the moon for any other commodity.
I can just imagine the Moon Ship Valdez crashing on the craters of the Sea of Tranquility.
???ljb

reply to post by longjohnbritches


Oh sorry I ddint state that very well. I didnt literally mean oil. I meant that the purpose could be similar to that of the United States quest for oil. Not oil in reality but maybe some resource that the moon offers, that the United States wants all to itself. Im mostly just thinking aloud

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
The russian unmanned probe luna 15 was orbiting the moon exactly at the time of apollo 11 landings.
The russian space agency should be able to cnfirm the apollo 11 landings

They have.
Russia has even declared that they tracked Apollo to and from the moon. People seem to ignore it. It was described in detail in an article by E. Molotova in Russia's "Novosti-Kosmonavtiki" (News of Astronautics)

It was also tracked by many independent observatories in other countries, and amateurs alike.

Third party evidence for Apollo moon landings

edit on 5-8-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)

You can't be serious. THIRD PARTY that's hearsay.
Please, please, please explain exactly how an Amateur could POSSIBLY track a moon mission in 1969???
If this is true then every government in the known world should have all the data TOO. Well at least China, Korea, Germany . France, England, Australia oh the Aussie's have something different. lol
ljb

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
The russian unmanned probe luna 15 was orbiting the moon exactly at the time of apollo 11 landings.
The russian space agency should be able to cnfirm the apollo 11 landings

They have.
Russia has even declared that they tracked Apollo to and from the moon. People seem to ignore it. It was described in detail in an article by E. Molotova in Russia's "Novosti-Kosmonavtiki" (News of Astronautics)

It was also tracked by many independent observatories in other countries, and amateurs alike.

Third party evidence for Apollo moon landings

edit on 5-8-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)

You can't be serious. THIRD PARTY that's hearsay.
Please, please, please explain exactly how an Amateur could POSSIBLY track a moon mission in 1969???
If this is true then every government in the known world should have all the data TOO. Well at least China, Korea, Germany . France, England, Australia oh the Aussie's have something different. lol
ljb

Heresy?? Heresy from what, religion, or science. Because why could it not be confirmed by third parties. I know that you could have listened to the Sputnik missions if you had a radio.

Originally posted by epsilon69
reply to post by pianopraze

 

In this article Phi Plait claims that Hubble doesn't have the resolution power to see the landing sites on the moon. This maybe true, but then how does the Hubble pick up the traces of light coming off Venus during its transit across the Sun?

Well the standard line from skeptics who want to feel better about themselves by mocking anyone who questions anything is that Hubble can't resolve anything less than 4m in diameter - the landing craters themselves are over 30m in diameter - so the argument that it simply can't see 'the landing' - whether you believe it's a hoax or not that explanation just doesn't make sense either way.

www.howtogeek.com...

www.squidoo.com...

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
The russian unmanned probe luna 15 was orbiting the moon exactly at the time of apollo 11 landings.
The russian space agency should be able to cnfirm the apollo 11 landings

If you are infering that Luna 15 could track the activities of any part of the Apollo mission, you are incorrect.

But the Russians did track Apollo tothe Moon and did listen in on the communications.

reply to post by ProudBird


So let me get this straight.....we got sattelites orbiting the Earth that can read newsprint all to watch over us or whatever you want to speculate that they do with it. However, we can only build a .5 meter per pixel telescope for viewing the surface of the moon or other potentially useful scientific research. Out F'ing Standing!

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

You can't be serious. THIRD PARTY that's hearsay.
Please, please, please explain exactly how an Amateur could POSSIBLY track a moon mission in 1969???
If this is true then every government in the known world should have all the data TOO. Well at least China, Korea, Germany . France, England, Australia oh the Aussie's have something different. lol
ljb

Well England did Jodrell Bank tracked the Apollo 11 to the Moon.