• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Moon landings question

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
searcher

searcher

Paranormal Novice
Hi there

I am new around here but i am a big fan of the paracast.
I know the "we did not land on the moon" conspiracy theory doesnt hold much water around here and probably for good reason. I have been reading/watching about it. Have to say I do find it strange we have not returned to the moon since.
Anyway I am here to ask a question that maybe you guys could answer for me. I have always wondered.

To answer wether we landed on the moon or not can we not just look at the moon using all our super powerful telescopes and see the moon buggy and other stuff we supposedly left there ?

Is there a simple answer to this or am I just showing my lack of knowledge ?

Thanks
 
Short answer: No, the technology isn't there.

From http://www.tass-survey.org/richmond/answers/lunar_lander.html:


"This question comes up frequently. It's clearly impossible for an optical telescope on the Earth to resolve any of the Apollo hardware on the Moon, since the best systems, using adaptive optics in the near-infrared, can resolve details of maybe 0.02 arcsec. A lunar lander of width 5 meters, at a distance of 382,000 km, subtends an angle of 0.003 arcsec. The Hubble Space Telescope isn't appreciably closer the Moon, and its best resolution is about 0.03 arcsec in the near-UV. Not good enough.
<BLOCKQYUOTE>[SIZE=-1]Update Aug 17, 2002
An infrared image taken by one of the the European Very Large Telescopes in Chile, which has 8.2-meter mirror, shows some of the finest detail observed from the Earth. At the ESO Press Release page , you can see images with an angular resolution of about 0.07 arcsec; they show details as small as 130 meters across. Still a lot larger than the lunar lander.... [/SIZE]
Is it possible that a lunar lander might cast a shadow long enough to be detected from the Earth? Well, possibly -- but I doubt it very much. We do have pictures of the shadows cast by lunar landers, taken by several spacecraft which were all in orbit around the Moon -- the Apollo command and service module (CSM), the Clementine probe, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). as it orbited the Moon. You can see for yourself that the shadows are very inconspicuous. In order for a ground-based telescope to see the shadows, it would have to be able to take pictures showing details as small as those visible in these pictures taken from lunar orbit. I don't know of any such Earth-based pictures."
 
Not completely true. A recent NASA satellite (not one in earth orbit but one that orbited the moon) did indeed photgraph several of the landing sites and the left behind equipment, includng the bottom parts of the LEM and several of the moon buggies. Also, there are still signals that can be picked up by the equipment left behind from the manned missions. We haven't gone back because no one wants to spend the money to go look at dirt, dust, and rocks. Maybe the discovery of water will re-ignite interest.
 
The detail may not be great, but at least it shows the actual landing sites and the stuff leftover. That, in itself, should be enough to prove we were there. That is if the moon conspiracists accept this evidence as proof. Sadly, I'm sure there are still people who deny it. Conspiracy theorists tend to ignore some things, ... like the truth.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html

The only reasonable conclusion is that we were there. Now, is there anything else there of interest other than the ensemble of chemicals, water-ice, and rocks?? That, I don't know. Seems like the back side of the moon would be a great place to keep out out view.
 
Awesome ! thank you for the interesting and detailed reply's

I guess there are photo's showing the stuff left behind and the conspiracy theorist will say that they come from NASA and they are just doing more cover up. ..lol
I actually think we went but all it takes is one or two points and it gets you thinking ..lol

Once again, thanks :D
 
ARGHHHH NO MORE MOON HOAX THREADS PLEEEEEEEEAAAASEE :p

Seriously though, if you want proof of us going to the moon, look no further than the fact that when they went up there, they set up a big laser array thing for us to bounce a laser off from earth.
We have bounced a laser off the damn thing every day since and are still doing it to this day (we use it to map the exact distance of the moon)
 
Hoffmeister said:
ARGHHHH NO MORE MOON HOAX THREADS PLEEEEEEEEAAAASEE :p

Seriously though, if you want proof of us going to the moon, look no further than the fact that when they went up there, they set up a big laser array thing for us to bounce a laser off from earth.
We have bounced a laser off the damn thing every day since and are still doing it to this day (we use it to map the exact distance of the moon)
Click to expand...

I did not know this. Thanks :D
 
I was going to mention that as well, but just decided to go with the big guns (the pictures from the LRO) on the moon landing stuff. Anyway you are quite correct.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/21jul_llr.htm
A11_LRRRfull.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top