Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no one could find the original video recordings of the July 20, 1969, landing.</div></div>

Am I supposed to believe that? </div></div>

<span style="font-size: 14pt">First Look At The Apollo Landing Sites</span>



he Apollo 14 lunar module (LM Antares) and the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiment Package are visible in this image (note the astronaut tracks between the two artifacts). At the current altitude and lighting the descent stage is clearly visible with its angular shadow (right) and shadow cast by leg (near arrow tip). The LROC NAC image data has not been calibrated, the faint vertical stripes are a natural part of the image and will be removed later after the full suite of calibration data is collected during the commissioning phase. (Credit: NASA/GSFC/Arizona State university)

The whole story at ScienceDaily

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

Those people who have not been convinced for this long will not be convinced at all. It is just life.

[Derek]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no one could find the original video recordings of the July 20, 1969, landing.</div></div>

Am I supposed to believe that? </div></div>

<span style="font-size: 14pt">First Look At The Apollo Landing Sites</span>



he Apollo 14 lunar module (LM Antares) and the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiment Package are visible in this image (note the astronaut tracks between the two artifacts). At the current altitude and lighting the descent stage is clearly visible with its angular shadow (right) and shadow cast by leg (near arrow tip). The LROC NAC image data has not been calibrated, the faint vertical stripes are a natural part of the image and will be removed later after the full suite of calibration data is collected during the commissioning phase. (Credit: NASA/GSFC/Arizona State university)

The whole story at ScienceDaily
</div></div>
I don't see ANYTHING there that looks like an Apollo landing site.
The powerful Hubble telescope that can see billions and billions of miles into space. Why don't they train that onto the moon's surface and we will clearly be able to see the landing gear etc?

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The powerful Hubble telescope that can see billions and billions of miles into space. Why don't they train that onto the moon's surface and we will clearly be able to see the landing gear etc?</div></div>

The Apollo descent stages left on the lunar surface are too small to be seen by Hubble, which can see objects as small as 60-75 yards, about three-quarters the length of a soccer field. The left-behind descent stages are only about the size of a small truck.

The moon is a difficult target for Hubble because it moves across the sky faster than Hubble can track it and is very dim in ultraviolet light. The observations required steady, precise, as well as long exposures to search for the resources. In spite of these challenges, Hubble was able to image all of its targets, and early results show that Hubble can detect ilmenite at the Apollo 17 site from 248,000 miles (400,000 km) away.

Thanks to the eyes of Hubble, the vision of 21st Century pioneers on the moon is getting a little clearer.

http://ims.ivv.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/hubble_moon.html

..................

The Hubble telescope is normally meant to look at objects light years away, and researchers found focusing Hubble on the moon -- a mere 250,000 miles away -- was more challenging than expected.

BACKGROUND: For years, the Hubble Space Telescope has given scientists spectacular photographs of the farthest reaches of space, but recently the telescope turned its attention a bit closer to home, taking images of the moon. These images -- the first taken with ultraviolet light -- reveal new information about the composition of the moon, with implications for future lunar exploration.

HOW HUBBLE WORKS: Hubble has a long tube that is open at one end, with mirrors to gather and focus light to its &quot;eyes&quot; -- various instruments that enable it to detect different types of light, such as ultraviolet and infrared. Light enters the telescope through the opening and bounces off a primary mirror to a secondary mirror, which reflects the light through a hole in the center of the primary mirror to a focal point behind the primary mirror.

Smaller mirrors distribute the light to the various scientific instruments, which analyze the different wavelengths. Each instrument uses the same kind of array of diodes that are used in digital cameras to capture light. The captured light is stored in on-board computers and relayed to Earth as digital signals, and this data is then transformed into images.

WHAT WE CAN LEARN: Astronomers can glean a lot of useful scientific information from these images. The colors, or spectrum, of light coming from a celestial object form a chemical fingerprint of that object, indicating which elements are present, while the intensity of each color tells us how much of that element is present. The spectrum can also tell astronomers how fast a celestial object is moving away or towards us through an effect called the Doppler shift. Light emitted by a moving object is perceived to increase in frequency (a blue shift) if it is moving toward the observer; if the object is moving away from us, it will be shifted toward the red end of the spectrum.

NEW INSIGHTS: Thanks to Hubble's high resolution and sensitivity to ultraviolet light, astronomers are able to search for minerals in the lunar crust that may be critical for establishing a sustained human presence on the moon. These include titanium and iron oxides, both of which are sources of oxygen. Since the moon lacks a breathable atmosphere (as well as water), the presence of such minerals is critical. This new data, along with other measurements will help NASA scientists identify the most promising sites for future robotic and human missions.

[Derek]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Apollo descent stages left on the lunar surface are too small to be seen by Hubble</div></div>

<span style="font-size: 14pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">How can it be too small to be seen by Hubble, when the moon is around a quarter of a million miles away, and Hubble can see galaxies in sharp focus that are billions and billions of miles away?</span></span>

[Derek]

Will somebody kindly explain this strange sentence to me?

<span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">Mars must be the new goal, Aldrin says</span></span>
Published: July 18, 2009, 22:55
Forty years ago this week, Neil Armstrong, Mike Collins and Buzz Aldrin began their quarter-million-mile journey through the blackness of space to reach the moon.

<span style="font-size: 17pt">Yet today, no nation - <span style="font-weight: bold">including America</span> - is capable of sending anyone beyond Earth's orbit, much less deeper into space.</span>

http://www.gulfnews.com/world/U.S.A/10332758.html

Correct me if I'm wrong or stupid, but I conclude from that sentence: they could get to the moon 40 years ago using primitive technology, but can't get there today with ultra-modern technology?

Where's the kissteet smiley?

[f0rTyLeGz]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

ummm well that is how things work. It's not a trick Derek, what can I tell you. The explanation is above there. It's a matter of porportions.

One of the interesting things about people who believe in conspiracy theories is that never have any new information to offer up. What they get do is attack the information they are given.

There was seven trips to the moon. Do you really think that all that money was spent, all those people worked at NASA, and huge rockets were blasted off from Cape Canaveral, and it was a hoax?

[Derek]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

Do you believe NASA would lose something as vital and historic the original video recordings of July 20, 1969?

Can you answer my question about that strange sentence, please?

[Derek]

E-mail from a guy I trust

On 19/07/2009, at 8:49 PM, Derek wrote:
Did Man land on the moon?

On 7/19/09 3:23 PM, wrote:
Not 1969-72

On 19/07/2009, at 11:26 PM, Derek wrote:
Any idea when?

On 7/19/09 3:23 PM, wrote:
1980s

[halfwaytree]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magix_de_PM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">See the restored version..
yahso
</div></div>

[neutral]

Re: E-mail from a guy I trust

Derek,I dont believe they landed on the moon either,...I believe the whole thing was a fake in order to get one up on the russians.

[halfwaytree]

Re: E-mail from a guy I trust

I remember reading a while back that a single car back in the 90s (pre GPS etc...) had more computing power than was available to NASA back n the late sixties. Yet it was enough for them to successfully reach the moon an return back to earth.

[Derek]

Re: E-mail from a guy I trust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: neutral</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Derek,I dont believe they landed on the moon either,...I believe the whole thing was a fake in order to get one up on the russians. </div></div>

Me too.
After the Russians were first to orbit the Earth; first animal in space, first man in space, first woman in space.

How do you top that?

[WitchyOoman]

Re: E-mail from a guy I trust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Curmudgeon_Milo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I remember reading a while back that a single car back in the 90s (pre GPS etc...) had more computing power than was available to NASA back n the late sixties. Yet it was enough for them to successfully reach the moon an return back to earth. </div></div>
Except... I worked with the same technology, after it was declassified, back in the mid-late 1970s. (1976-1979)

It was powerful enough to achieve a moon landing, but not in the 'comfort' of modern (today's) space ventures.

When I was in high school at Northeast High - the magnet school, Project SPARC - had already been given one of the old Mercury units to work with.
Yes - you read that right: We worked with one of the later Mercury space units, given us by NASA.

When I was... think I was a sophmore, that year... we completed a simulation that put 3 of the boys (a junior and 2 seniors) into orbit for... think it was 3 days IIRC.
This was all recorded by the news media, at the time. We all were on televison, in the newspapers, and, IIRC, magazines. <span style="text-decoration: underline">Time</span> may have been one.

[evanovitch]

Re: Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits

With just a few days to go to the fortieth anniversary of Apollo 11, here are some fun facts to impress your friends with:


Buzz Aldrin, a Presbyterian, had communion on the Moon but it was kept secret from the public as Nasa was fighting a lawsuit by atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair who objected to the Apollo 8 crew reading from the Book of Genesis. Aldrin's communion kit was prepared by the pastor of his church.

The first and last--so far--”com-moon-ion.”

Neil Armstrong took the first steps on the Moon but Buzz Aldrin was the first to pee there.  “That’s one small squirt for man, one giant leak for mankind.” 

Buzz, Neil and Michael suffered from excessive and 'fragrant' flatulence caused by hydrogen bubbles in their water.  (The Daily Mail)

Thank God they were all wearing spacesuits.  Let’s hope their air hoses weren’t connected.