i think that we should answer the moon hoax question once and for all. we should get every powerful telescope on this plannet and point it at the moon.

find a landing spot and nasa wins.

no landing spot then nasa cant be trusted.

i think hubble could do it as well.
i think we should modify hubble so it can look at ground targets and we could point it at russia [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

there, now we can live in peace again [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

_________________
the guy that has come from mars, for no reason

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Martian Jim on 2002-04-15 06:08 ]</font>

Great idea Jim, but there's just one small flaw in it. We can't do it.

It's been pointed out here several times that no telescope currently on or around earth, even the Hubble, has the resolution to see things that small. I think the current limit on resolution was mentioned to be about 80 meters.

It would take a powerful telescope in lunar orbit to see anything as small as the landers on the surface. Maybe someday. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Also, as has also been pointed out before, no amount of evidence is going to convince some believers. They will just claim the images were falsified.

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

ho hum, at least it was a good idea.

i heard they were gonna send a satilite to the moon to see if it was their. that will answer the question [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]


i still think that they should modify hubble so they can point it at Russia [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]



_________________
the guy that has come from mars, for no reason

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Martian Jim on 2002-04-15 07:50 ]</font>

A few problems with using the Hubble for that, not the least among them pointing a sensitive telescope at a highly reflective surface. Of course, there are the KH-11 and -12 satellites, which are basically Hubble telescopes aimed at the Earth.


-Adam

WHAT I DONT UNDERSTAND IS IF WE HAVE SATELLITES IN EARTH ORBIT THAT ARE STRONG ENOUGH TO READ THE LICENSE PLATES OF A CAR.......THEN WHY CANT WE SEND A SIMILAR TYPE OF SATELLITE INTO LUNAR ORBIT???? AND SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS, ALL THE COMPUTERS AT MY JOB ARE KEPT IN CAPS!!!!

Well, we could, but why would we? Who are we going to spy on up there?

The moon right now is a low priority for sending up something so powerful and expensive, if its only purpose is looking at a surface we already have a lot of info on.

But even so, some countries are planning further missions there, the Japanese for one, and some of them might have scopes big enough for the job.

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

There are probably no satellites that can read license plates from orbit.

The military/intellegence agencies probably have the capability of a resolution (smallest object clearly "seen") of 10 centimeters or so - maybe a bit better, but you need a resolution of a centimeter or two to really ready a plate number.... IF !!IF!! the plate is at nadir (that is, DIRECTLY below the satellite).

To read a plate, you have to be looking sideways, which means that the distance between the satellite and the plate is much longer, hence the resolution is much less.

You would need a satellite with near millimeter resolution to see a plate number. Sorry, even the NSA doesn't have that.

CJSF

__________________
Two years ago moved from my town
I was looking up past the city lights
But the city lights got in my way

See the constellation ride across the sky
No cigar, no lady on his arm
Just a guy made of dots and lines

-from "See The Constellation"
by They Might Be Giants

And I thought the reason they didn't use that license number reading satellite technology is because the Rovers don't HAVE license plates!

There wouldn't be anything easier to falsify than a satellite photo of a landing site, so I'm with David Hall on this one. The HBs would just argue that the images were fake. Just wait until Japan's Selene mission delivers Apollo landing site images and see how many hard core HBs get converted.

The Keyhole satellites and the HST derive from the same basic design. The Keyholes cannot read license plates, but they can recognize individual people in many cases.

While there is interest in mapping the moon and looking for useful or interesting substances there, Keyhole resolution is not required for this task. That kind of resolution does not come in a small package. We have boosters that can put a Keyhole satellite in low earth orbit, but not one that could send it to the moon.

The best satellite phots I've seen can make out cars and stripes in a parking lot. Still not enough for license plates (but then this is civilian technology).

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Correction, there are no scopes that can read license plates from Earth orbit. Where the distance is great and there's a lot of that nasty air stuff to get in the way of the resolution. I think one in lunar orbit could, first of all, orbit at a lower attitude, and second, have a nice interference-free view. So maybe such a resolution is possible.

But then again, what is it going to read up there? The lettering on the doorways of the moon-castles Hoagland says are there?

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

David,

My reply was specifically to the comment that there are satellites orbiting Earth that can "see" license plate numbers.

CJSF

__________________
Two years ago moved from my town
I was looking up past the city lights
But the city lights got in my way

See the constellation ride across the sky
No cigar, no lady on his arm
Just a guy made of dots and lines

-from "See The Constellation"
by They Might Be Giants

Let me get this straight.

There are people who want to send a spy satellite to the Moon to take photos of the Apollo landing sites, SOLELY to prove that the landings took place.

And just who's gonna pay for the satellite, booster and mission control?

Pizza Hut? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

I'll pay that one... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Not solely to take photos of the landing sites but also to photograph the crystal fortresses of the aliens. I'm not making this up.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

I just got a message from these guys

http://www.transorbital.com

Apparently they're serious and preparing to launch late in 2002 or early 2003.

{yuck}
http://www.dailyemerald.com
if you study INTEL's actions
you can determin its not the Pictures
that are going to be { explative deleted }
its the Audio. Listen tell me just why
all these many years later theres no audio
from the moon? I speak to you mostly of
Seismic sounds, but just maybe there could
be the sounds of the solar winds on the moon2

The Planetary Society sent a microphone to Mars, but it was lost along with the Polar Lander.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

I remember that, and how disappointed I was that the probe was lost. Of course I remember thinking that, other than static and other noise, the mike would probably pick up something like "Look, sir. Droids."


-Adam

Now there's a practical joke.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

I still love the cartoon of whimsical Martians holding up a sign in front of the Viking cameras reading, "Mars needs women".