Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

curiosity re lunar landings.

andyidle

By andyidle
in Welcome

Recommended Posts

andyidle

andyidle

Posted
Posted

hello.. before i start i must say that i'm not repeat not a lunar landing hoaxer.. just thatbi'm a space enthuiast. ( regretably my only viewing equip is 10 x 50 bionocs ) i'm just curious with the hi tec indian , chinese and the latest us observers of the moon that we have,nt seen any detail of previous lunar missions. i was not ever expecting to see Eagle platorm but surely if we can image spirit and oppoutunity on mars surely we could see the tracks of thr rovers by Apollo 15 ,16 and 17

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted
i was not ever expecting to see Eagle platorm but surely if we can image spirit and oppoutunity on mars surely we could see the tracks of thr rovers by Apollo 15 ,16 and 17

You need to look first. The recent lunar missions just haven't been looking in the right places with enough optical power. The priorities are otherwise .... rightly in my view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astro_Baby

Astro_Baby

Posted
Posted

Off topic slightly - on the conspiracy theory of the whole lunar landing by the USA (I'm sure you have all heard 1001 reasons why it was shot in a studio etc) its weird that the conspiracy theorists have locked onto the lunar landings and, as far as I know, never on Gagarins first space flight. After all in a closed society like Gagarins era Russia, no neutral observers and only some very grainy pics from inside the capsule which would be easy to fake it would seem to me the more natural one to lodge a conspiracy theory against. Gagarin didn't come back to earth in the capsule making it even easier to fake. ie burn the capsule a bit, lob it off the back of a transport plane and 10 minutes later lob Yuri out the back door on a parachute.

Personally I was alive and interested when the moon missions took place. While it would be easy (easier at least) to fake it today the technology to run a decent fake wouldnt have been around back then. Besides why run to the enormous cost of faking it when your already spending billions building huge buildings, spacecraft, launch pads. control centres etc.

Its a bit daft really - when we do get pics of the lunar landers I wonder what the conspiracy theorists will say then - doubtless that the footage from the cams is rigged. A kind of russion doll thinking where when one theory collapses it can resurrected by sunply adding another layer of conspiracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted
After all in a closed society like Gagarins era Russia, no neutral observers and only some very grainy pics from inside the capsule which would be easy to fake it would seem to me the more natural one to lodge a conspiracy theory against.

Yeah, but everyone trusted the Russians - after all, they may have been operating in secrecy, but once they had a "success" they were all too keen for the world to know - they used amateur "ham" radio frequencies for the signals from Sputnik I & there was no faking the Doppler shift; and there was a dependence on Western tracking stations for their lunar & planetary missions which extended well into the 60s. The conspiracy theories about the Russian manned space program were rather the other way - that they'd launched someone prior to Gagarin but had an accident of some sort; some people claimed landed in China (who were very close to war with the USSR at the time); some people claimed that he came back OK but was discovered to be mentally unhinged by the experience....

The Apollo "landing hoax conspiracy", like the more wacko variants of the Kennedy assassination conspiracy, date from the time when one Richard Milhouse Nixon was trying desperately to distract attention away from his dirty dealings. 'Nuff said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andyidle

andyidle

Posted
  • Author
Posted

thanks for the comments re my lunar queery... just want to through another question out ther... are we looking for life in the wrong place ie Mars?? with exremophiles croping up in some weird places here on earth why aren't we looking at Venus??? it has admitably very toxic atmosphere byt bacterium hae been found thriving in nuclear reactors as well as suriving the journey to the moon on the survayor craft..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted
are we looking for life in the wrong place ie Mars??

No. Because it looks more hopeful on Mars, and because if there was life on Venus (presumably in the upper cloud layer) we'd be hard pressed to recognise it even if found.

Europa is a better bet than Mars but actually getting to any living organisms there is a much trickier mission - maybe beyond current technology - though once we're exploring Lake Vostok (in Antarctica) we'll be in a better position to plan something.

IMHO we shouldn't be risking future research by blundering about before we're ready. There are lots of other missions that need to be flown to discover basic physical parameters of the outer planets & their satellite systems before we need to worry about finding life. If life does exist out there, it's not going to go away - unless we kill it - and it is quite clear that we have nothing to fear from it. So there is no need for rapid developments.

The bigger & more immediate question is, if we do find primitive micro-organisms hanging on to existence on Mars (surely nothing else could), do we deliberately refrain from contaminating it by human exploration & exploitation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.