Moon hoax?

[epp_b]

Ummm...

disproving theories that the moon landing was faked is somehow... tasteless?

Oh, I'm sorry, the first post wasn't entirely clear. I thought Mythbusters was joining in on the conspiracy theories. My bad.

I still don't watch much TV, though

 

[astrostu]

Okay, I'm going to actually address the original question. It's a simple matter of optics - you can't have an Earth-bound telescope take optical pictures of the moon at sufficient resolution to view objects less than a meter wide. Since I address this quite thoroughly in my blog, I will direct you to this post: "The Apollo Moon Hoax: Why Haven’t Any Pictures Been Taken of the Landing Sites?"

In addition, with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter finally in its mapping phase, we actually DO HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE APOLLO LANDING SITES. Even proponents of the conspiracy have started to shy away from the claim of "no photographs of the landing sites" because we have the photos now. Again, I'll direct you to this post on my blog: "The Apollo Moon Hoax: Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Images Apollo Landing Sites"

 

[itznfb]

lol. Was this supposed to be serious?

 

[DennyCrane]

Conspiracy theorists are here for our amusement. Just point, laugh, and go on about your day.

 

[gl600]

Okay, I'm going to actually address the original question. It's a simple matter of optics - you can't have an Earth-bound telescope take optical pictures of the moon at sufficient resolution to view objects less than a meter wide. Since I address this quite thoroughly in my blog, I will direct you to this post: "The Apollo Moon Hoax: Why Haven’t Any Pictures Been Taken of the Landing Sites?"

In addition, with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter finally in its mapping phase, we actually DO HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE APOLLO LANDING SITES. Even proponents of the conspiracy have started to shy away from the claim of "no photographs of the landing sites" because we have the photos now. Again, I'll direct you to this post on my blog: "The Apollo Moon Hoax: Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Images Apollo Landing Sites"

Thanks
That's what I was looking for. :mrgreen:

 

[manaheim]

This is fun.

 

[Casshew]

If they can put a man on the moon, why can't they put them all there?

 

[matfoster]

you're ALL just shilling for 'the man' .
..everyone (who isn't totally brainwashed) knows the moon is made of cheese and that both Neil Amstrong and Buzz Aldrin are lactose intolerant anyhow...

 

[nemopaice]

If they can put a man on the moon, why can't they put them all there?

Ouch! Maybe because our egos are so big that we won't all fit?

Seriously though, Conspiracy theories are the one and only thing on this planet that I cannot stand. Yes we landed there, no it's not hollow, no we haven't been communicating with and getting our tech. from aliens we keep in contact with, yes I think aliens are a real thing, with a tredecillion + stars and understanding that even if only 1/10000 of them had planets, and of them 1/10000 had the capabilities for life, then at least some of them could have intelligent life. Bush didn't have a role in 9/11, there was no man in the grassy knoll, I've seen the footage and have been there, unless he was on a ladder he wasn't there, and finally, January 1, 2013 we will still be here.

Sorry for the rant. I needed that

 

[DennyCrane]

Me, I love conspiracy theorists. It's some of the best amateur fiction out there. The fact they actually buy into the crap they're selling makes it even more hilarious. Never argue with them, just step aside and let their craziness flow.

 

[burnws6]

I was there that day. I was part of the lighting crew. It was fun. Here's some behind the scenes stuff:

 

[DennyCrane]

The HARD part was using CGI in 1969 to fake the reflections in the helmets!

 

[burnws6]

The HARD part was using CGI in 1969 to fake the reflections in the helmets!

 

[manaheim]

I was there that day. I was part of the lighting crew. It was fun. Here's some behind the scenes stuff:

bahahhaha...

Inspired by this discussion I just went and watched the mythbusters epsiode. They pretty clearly showed how these things could have happened the way they claimed they did. Interesting stuff.

 

[Overread]

Pfft the reflections in the helmits are easily explained - they are not reflections. Infact what they did was to use shorter actors inside the suit. There was then a metalic skeleton inside that helped to support a TV set inside the helmit - with a special dome shaped front screen.
This is why their movements are slightly slower and odd compared to real life - the suit was heavy and slow to move (wires were of course used for the higher motions and jumping parts).

It was not easy to get the image as it should be reflected and took a lot of time and dedication on the part of the film crew and many of the shots had to be redone over and over to get that perfect reflection and to then put all the parts together for the final production.