After decades of moon landing hoax claims, no apology now?

The photo clearly shows 2 sets of tracks made, now if they werent made by our astronauts in 69, then this story is bigger than ever, because aliens must have made them.

Crap, did i just start a conspiracy theory?
 
You provide blurry photos that look like they were taken in 1960. That were given to NASA 10 months ago by India.

Apollo landing sites mapped by Chandrayaan - Pune - City - The Times of India

You believe it would be a "waste of time" to point the Hubble at the moon. It's going to be gone in a few years anyway bub. We're not repairing it anymore, it's going the way of skylab and it can't point at the moon for a couple of days?

You failed to read the thread, to see that I'm not a moon conspiracy buff. I merely want better then blurry fucking lo-res images from some Indian satellite. Where's the ones from OUR orbiters.

Quit trying to pretend as though you dont believe the moon landing wasa hoax. You arent fooling anyone.
Idiot. I have argued with the conspiracy buffs ad-nauseum in other moon threads. My track record in this matter is spotless.
For the record, the image i provided is VERY clear, as it shows the fucking foot print trail made by the astronauts clearly.

Youve been wrong about everything youve said. You fail. Try again next time.
The images are blurry. They could be anything. Be honest and demand better from NASA.

You're disagreeing with Godboy, therefore you must be a conspiracy theorist. That's as far as his thought process goes.

He just left me a visitor message saying I should feel stupid for thanking you for a post about the story being a year old, when in fact it is (he claims) a week old. :lol:

I think he's been smoking the drapes.
 
Quit trying to pretend as though you dont believe the moon landing wasa hoax. You arent fooling anyone.
Idiot. I have argued with the conspiracy buffs ad-nauseum in other moon threads. My track record in this matter is spotless.
For the record, the image i provided is VERY clear, as it shows the fucking foot print trail made by the astronauts clearly.

Youve been wrong about everything youve said. You fail. Try again next time.
The images are blurry. They could be anything. Be honest and demand better from NASA.

You're disagreeing with Godboy, therefore you must be a conspiracy theorist. That's as far as his thought process goes.

He just left me a visitor message saying I should feel stupid for thanking you for a post about the story being a year old, when in fact it is (he claims) a week old. :lol:

I think he's been smoking the drapes.

Wow, and you were dumb enough to make the same mistake AGAIN! This story is not old. The satellite just got to the moon a few weeks ago dip shit. The story at the start of the thread was dated Sept. 2, 2009. You are VERY stupid for continuing to think this story is a year old. Ive given you every opportunity to check for yourself, yet here you are making dumb ass claims about it being old. I challenge you to find one story about India debunking the moon hoax theory, dated before September, 2009.

Ive easily shown this story is new, while you havent done jack shit. Suck it biatch.
 
By the way, notice the silence from Terral? Hes the biggest moon hoax theorist of them all, yet weve heard nothing from him. What a coward. Own up to your crappy judgement Terral. Admit you were wrong and save a little face, or pretend this story never happened look like a complete douche, youre call.
 
Besides isn't the hubble a LONG range telescope. Why don't you look at the moon with a microscope.

Did any of you ever actually spend time looking through a telescope?
Cold is right - Hubble is not designed for focus on something as small in cosmic terms as the Moon. While it can be pointed at the Moon and focused on it, its optics are designed for deep space and astronomical bodies - not items a few meters (or much less) in size.
Aerospaceweb.org | Ask Us - Imaging Apollo Landing Sites
 
The Apollo landing sites are too small to be seen by Earth-based telescopes as well. And believe me, I've tried with some nice equipment. :lol:
It's a question of optics. Optical telescopes are made to do two things: gather light to make faint, dim objects more apparent, and to magnify - preferably with minimal distortion. Secondary qualities are field of vision, color, and other qualities. But they're not made to focus on tiny details, why would they be? We're not spying on the universe, we're trying to learn about it. And the stuff out there is usually really, really big.
The fantastic images we see from Hubble of vivd color, (semingly) incredibly detailed deep sky objects are long-term exposures computer enhanced to reflect data gathered outside the range of visible light. The objects are also generally ranging from the thousands to millions of kilometers across, not a few meters or less. Do you really want computer-manipulated images as "proof"?
If anyone expects to look into a scope on a nice evening and see brilliant Hubble quality images, they're bound to be disappointed. A good pair of binoculars can reveal, for example, a Galilean moon transit across the face of Jupiter - as a dot of a shadow, in mostly black and white. Our technology is amazing, but not unlimited.
 
I'm a huge Hubble fan myself. The pure knowledge we've gained from it is priceless, not to mention the incredible images. I'll be sad to see it go when it's time.
But like all machines, it was built for a purpose. Scoping out the Apollo sites was not that purpose. /shrug
 
Idiot. I have argued with the conspiracy buffs ad-nauseum in other moon threads. My track record in this matter is spotless.The images are blurry. They could be anything. Be honest and demand better from NASA.

You're disagreeing with Godboy, therefore you must be a conspiracy theorist. That's as far as his thought process goes.

He just left me a visitor message saying I should feel stupid for thanking you for a post about the story being a year old, when in fact it is (he claims) a week old. :lol:

I think he's been smoking the drapes.

Wow, and you were dumb enough to make the same mistake AGAIN! This story is not old. The satellite just got to the moon a few weeks ago dip shit. The story at the start of the thread was dated Sept. 2, 2009. You are VERY stupid for continuing to think this story is a year old. Ive given you every opportunity to check for yourself, yet here you are making dumb ass claims about it being old. I challenge you to find one story about India debunking the moon hoax theory, dated before September, 2009.

Ive easily shown this story is new, while you havent done jack shit. Suck it biatch.

Dude, who gives a crap about the date of this story???

I don't care whether or not it is from last week, last year, or the stone age. My point was that the moon landings hoax theory was not debunked by this story. It has been debunked for years. Anyone who still needs proof of that is an idiot, as is anyone who still feels they need to prove it. It's a complete waste of time.

I'm gonna unsubscribe now and leave you to discuss this crap with someone who gives a fuck.
 
I'm a huge Hubble fan myself. The pure knowledge we've gained from it is priceless, not to mention the incredible images. I'll be sad to see it go when it's time.
But like all machines, it was built for a purpose. Scoping out the Apollo sites was not that purpose. /shrug



Dude BILLIONS of Galaxys......BILLIONS. I bet you know who Carl Sagan was. Just THINK about what that # means. Our galaxy is huge and you start thinking about BILLIONS upon BILLIONS og Galaxys. What a mind freak THAT is. You don't need to be religious to thing of mind blowing ideas.
 
I'm a huge Hubble fan myself. The pure knowledge we've gained from it is priceless, not to mention the incredible images. I'll be sad to see it go when it's time.
But like all machines, it was built for a purpose. Scoping out the Apollo sites was not that purpose. /shrug



Dude BILLIONS of Galaxys......BILLIONS. I bet you know who Carl Sagan was. Just THINK about what that # means. Our galaxy is huge and you start thinking about BILLIONS upon BILLIONS og Galaxys. What a mind freak THAT is. You don't need to be religious to thing of mind blowing ideas.

I know EXACTLY what you mean. The human mind isn't even capable of remotely comprehending the kind of possibilities that exist out there. And here are people arguing over whether we took a tiny little baby step - no, more like fluttering an eyelash - by wandering around for a total of a few days within our own Earth/Moon system.
Kind of puts things in pespective, doesn't it?
 
I'm a huge Hubble fan myself. The pure knowledge we've gained from it is priceless, not to mention the incredible images. I'll be sad to see it go when it's time.
But like all machines, it was built for a purpose. Scoping out the Apollo sites was not that purpose. /shrug



Dude BILLIONS of Galaxys......BILLIONS. I bet you know who Carl Sagan was. Just THINK about what that # means. Our galaxy is huge and you start thinking about BILLIONS upon BILLIONS og Galaxys. What a mind freak THAT is. You don't need to be religious to thing of mind blowing ideas.

I know EXACTLY what you mean. The human mind isn't even capable of remotely comprehending the kind of possibilities that exist out there. And here are people arguing over whether we took a tiny little baby step - no, more like fluttering an eyelash - by wandering around for a total of a few days within our own Earth/Moon system.
Kind of puts things in pespective, doesn't it?

That number goes crazy when you consider how many solar systems are within each galaxy.
 
Just imagine...every one of these, even the smallest of tiny dots, is a whole new galaxy:

hubblepic.jpg


And that's only the small portion of the night sky the Hubble can take in.
 
Just imagine...every one of these, even the smallest of tiny dots, is a whole new galaxy:

hubblepic.jpg


And that's only the small portion of the night sky the Hubble can take in.

Four hundred billion TRILLION stars and then God "rested"? I would have thought she was just getting warmed up?
 

Forum List

Back
Top