To the moon, Alice!

[Stan4dSteph]

Originally Posted by lashbear

Not in schools (far as I can tell) but I've always wondered why none of that fine dust at the base of the lunar lander blew around on landing or takeoff ?

It's because there's no air on the moon, so things don't move like we expect them to on Earth. Here's a link for you to the website Alex referenced.

[Alex]

Thanks Steph, I was just coming back to add that after forgetting.

Here's similar information from Michael Shermer (reprinted illegally, I'm sure).

[Moonliner]

It sure seems to me that the number of individuals who see a conspiracy about the moon landings is directly proportional to the popularity of the United States worldwide.

Needless to say there is currently a definite uptick in conspiracy theorists worldwide.

[Alex]

Also, I watched the Mythbusters episode and am generally pleased with it.

However, while I agree with the outcome of their slowed-video experiments I thought they did a horrible job of explaining it and the interpretation of the results. I think this is primarily because they didn't have time for everything they crammed into the show.

Also, I wish they had acknowledged that while the reflector proves there is something man made on the moon it doesn't necessarily prove that humans have been on the moon (and in fact most of the hoaxers say that the reflectors were put there by the unmanned satellites they admit did orbit the moon).

[RStar]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Will you take a dime into outer space for me?

A dime of what? Wouldn't that be intergalactic smuggling??

I enjoyed the show as well.

But I've got one stupid question. I've seen some pretty detailed pictures of the moon. Why isn't it possible to just take a picture of the lunar lander to or Apollo 15 landing site showing the things left behind to prove we landed there? Or would people just think those phtos were faked as well? Or is it that the angle is never right to get it?

[Alex]

From Earth? Because those things are small and we're far away.

How small? The biggest things left behind by the Apollo missions were abour 20 feet wide. When we point Hubble at the moon it has a resolution of about 100 feet per pixel.

Europe's SMART-1 satellite took pictures from orbit around the moon and I think it never had a resolution better than 50ft per pixel or so.

Keep in mind that all those really high resolution photographs in Google Earth are taken from airplanes only a half dozen miles away at most.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by RStar

Why isn't it possible to just take a picture of the lunar lander to or Apollo 15 landing site showing the things left behind to prove we landed there?

You mean like this?

[RStar]

Originally Posted by Alex

From Earth? Because those things are small and we're far away.

How small? The biggest things left behind by the Apollo missions were abour 20 feet wide. When we point Hubble at the moon it has a resolution of about 100 feet per pixel.

Europe's SMART-1 satellite took pictures from orbit around the moon and I think it never had a resolution better than 50ft per pixel or so.

Keep in mind that all those really high resolution photographs in Google Earth are taken from airplanes only a half dozen miles away at most.

That's what I thought, but I was thinking that if Hubble can take pictures of things light years away, why not a twenty foot size item on the moon? But what I forgot is that the things Hubble is taking pictures of light years away are huge galaxys; and they are emitting their own light.

Originally Posted by Moonliner

You mean like this?

Cool! Thanks! But the problem with those pictures are 1) that they are only spots, and 2) what's the proof that they are the Apollo 15 landing site? It's good enough for me (not that I ever doubted we landed, of course), but the skeptics may not be convenced.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by RStar

Cool! Thanks! But the problem with those pictures are 1) that they are only spots, and 2) what's the proof that they are the Apollo 15 landing site? It's good enough for me (not that I ever doubted we landed, of course), but the skeptics may not be convenced.

The skeptics are not looking for truth. They have a separate agenda.

Perhaps they just like to question stuff
Perhaps they don't like the US
Perhaps they just like to piss people off by arguing absurd points.

Whatever it is, they will never be convinced by something as trivial as facts.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Whatever it is, they will never be convinced by something as trivial as facts.

No, the ones creating and perpetuating the conspiracy theories will never be convinced. All you can hope to do is put enough factual information out there so that otherwise uninformed people will be exposed to it rather than the idiocy.