- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
-Removed-Well, of course it's a conspiracy! You don't think the moon really is large enough for people to walk on, do you? I mean, look at it. You can cover it with your thumb at arm's length! Even at the horizon it's hardly larger than a tall tower - probably smaller than the Vehicle Assembly Building itself. So how could a Saturn possibly land on it?
And anyway, it doesn't even look like a proper planet. It's more like a wad of dirty cardboard, or a half-eaten tub of cream cheese.
So yeah, of course this so-called "moon" "landing" is a hoax. Never mind getting there through a vacuum, never mind the cost. It much closer than They want you to believe, we could get there easily. What we can't do is land there.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 04
- Moves
- 213582
Originally posted by @shallow-blueOnce they get there they'll just expropriate it from "The Moonies" anyway.
Well, of course it's a conspiracy! You don't think the moon really is large enough for people to walk on, do you? I mean, look at it. You can cover it with your thumb at arm's length! Even at the horizon it's hardly larger than a tall tower - probably smaller than the Vehicle Assembly Building itself. So how could a Saturn possibly land on it?
And any ...[text shortened]... closer than They want you to believe, we could get there easily. What we can't do is land there.
Originally posted by @shallow-blueApparently the full moon is just big enough.
You don't think the moon really is large enough for people to walk on, do you?
Originally posted by @ashiitakaIs this a joke or do you really believe this?
You can literally SEE the footprints on the surface with a telescope.
1 edit
Originally posted by @ashiitaka
You can literally SEE the footprints on the surface with a telescope.
Originally posted by @wolfgang59
Is this a joke or do you really believe this?
the hyperbole "literally" is a difficult one because of its own meaning.
It should be clear by a simple estimate that the optical resolution does not allow to distinguish such small features on that distance...
2 edits
Originally posted by @ponderableAs soon as I find the photo again, I'll post a link.Originally posted by @ashiitaka
You can literally SEE the footprints on the surface with a telescope.
Originally posted by @wolfgang59
Is this a joke or do you really believe this?
the hyperbole "literally" is a difficult one because of its own meaning.
It should be clear by a simple estimate that the optical resolution does not allow to distinguish such small features on that distance...
What you CAN see is a trail of footprints on the lunar surface around a landing site on the moon going to the rover and to sites a distance away where there are science instruments set up. The trail is, of course, bigger than the individual footprints.
EDIT: Here is the page on the NASA website, showing three Apollo landing sites.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/apollo-sites.html
It turns out that these photos are from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter from an altitude of 31 km above the lunar surface. Judging from the size of the craters, it's possible we could see similar from our best telescopes, but I'm not sure of the resolution difference.
But still, photos like these should help put to rest whether we went to the moon or not.
EDIT2: Since these photos compare the 2011 photos with earlier photos, be sure to click on the links to "Show Only the Left" to see the newest, more clear, pictures.
1 edit
I recently watched a Horison program called; Tim Peak - How to be an Astronaut.
It was absolutely fascinating and I’m filled with admiration with for those who have contributed to the advances in space travel. Peak’s training took 6 years whereby he and his family had to live between the Russian and American space centre complexes. He said that one of the hardest parts of the training was that he had to learn to speak Russian because all of the rocket and space centre instructions are in that language.
Originally posted by @suzianneI don't believe that either.
What you CAN see is a trail of footprints on the lunar surface around a landing site on the moon going to the rover and to sites a distance away where there are science instruments set up.
But I will be happy to be proved wrong.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
Originally posted by @suzianneOh, come on, Suzianne, surely you cannot believe that? If it were 31 km from the surface, you'd be able to see the entire moon in one shot! Don't fall for this "Giant Moon" fraud, it's just not true. You can't walk on the moon, it's too small.
It turns out that these photos are from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter from an altitude of 31 km above the lunar surface.
That photo is clearly a fake. Probably CGI. NASA and the NSA have had realistic CGI for far longer than Hollywood, but of course they kept it hidden because it's such a great tool for deceiving the public. Don't be a sheeple! You cannot walk on the moon.