Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Images of Apollo Landing Sites Soon Available

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the that'll-show-'em dept.

Moon 263

eric.brasseur writes "The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has entered lunar orbit in perfect shape. From a height of 50 km, it will image the Moon in high resolution. The hardware left by the Apollo missions will be clearly visible. The Soviet automatic probes will also be photographed. Previous best images were made by the Japanese probe Kaguya and showed a white patch where the dust had been blown away by the blast of the LM engine."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

God dammit (3, Insightful)

Niris (1443675) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549637)

Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of "Moon landing never happened!" posts that are on the way

Re:God dammit (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549669)

Don't forget the "That's no moon!" or "we welcome our lunar overlords" or "sharks with moons on their head" etc etc.

Re:God dammit (2, Funny)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550165)

I, for one, welcome our sharks with things that are no moons on their heads who are our overlords... on the moon!

Re:God dammit (3, Funny)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550281)

Do they run Linux?
If so, imagine a Beowulf cluster of those.

Someone else will have to throw in the bad car analogy.

Re:God dammit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550349)

In Soviet Russia, car analogies throw someone else!

Re:God dammit (1)

elfprince13 (1521333) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550713)

but the real question....is will they run Crysis?

Re:God dammit (1)

Gat0r30y (957941) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550305)

You also forgot: Were whalers on the moon, we carry a harpoon.

Re:God dammit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550939)

Were-whalers? You mean they turn into "whalers" and carry harpoons when they see the full moon?

What is this, bizarro-world?

Re:God dammit (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549709)

Moon landing never happened!

In not like we have some guy in there taking that photos, so we can interview him back on earth. I want to believe!

Re:God dammit (-1, Redundant)

FlyingSquidStudios (1031284) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549967)

Oh, come on. Everyone knows that the Moon landings were filmed in a movie studio... on Mars.

Re:God dammit (5, Insightful)

Alsee (515537) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550195)

One way or the other, we will finally have proof.

Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof it never happened, or they will release photos showing landing hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof of an on going NASA conspiracy to manufacture a moon landing fraud.

Yes, one way or the other we will finally have proof.

-

Re:God dammit (2, Insightful)

Paul server guy (1128251) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550447)

Oh Gawd, where are my mod points when I need them!!!!

Re:God dammit (1)

millennial (830897) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550495)

Unfortunately, the nuts will just say the photos are doctored, of course.

Re:God dammit (1)

dotgain (630123) | more than 5 years ago | (#28551127)

Well done, you got it!

Re:God dammit (1)

Narishma (822073) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550665)

What makes you think the deniers will accept pictures as proof? They'll just cry that they are photoshopped.

Re:God dammit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550835)

Read the post that you're replying to. Pictures will be proof of an ongoing conspiracy.

Stupid moderators marked Alsee's post as insightful instead of funny. *sigh* Now people have to explain the joke which makes it less funny.

Re:God dammit (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550699)

Oh no it will be there.....

NASA bought several copies of Photoshop recently to get ready for faking the photos.

I got my inside information from stanley that works with dave who is a manager at staples near the cape when a guy wearing sunglasses and a dark blue shirt cam in to buy 4 copies. It's solid proof!

Re:God dammit (5, Informative)

Fred Ferrigno (122319) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550743)

We've had proof for a long time. The nutjobs just don't want to believe it. For one thing, they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals. Mythbusters even did it. [youtube.com]

I'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.

Re:God dammit (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550869)

This just in: 4 out of 5 Slashdot posters lack reading comprehension skills (congrats "Paul server guy" for being the stand-out).

Re:God dammit (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#28551147)

Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof it never happened...

Or that they don't know how to point the camera where they want to.

Re:God dammit (0, Redundant)

Niris (1443675) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550345)

Hell, if I was going to be marked redundant, I shoulda gone for my first "OMGZ FIRST POST!" :p

Re:God dammit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550687)

Remember, only those with an IQ below 80 and severe head trauma as a child believe the moon landings never happened.

you have to be incredibly stupid to believe any of their "evidence". Children in 6th grade can poke holes in their arguments and "proof".

Re:God dammit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28551173)

Man, it feels a little wintry in here... *shiver*

Protip: The word "summary" is a small bit of text that attempts to highlight all the important parts of a larger article. The word "summery" means something pertains to or is about summer.

If you believe they put a man on the moon (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549657)

Jews are a shitty race, and a shitty people.

Re:If you believe they put a man on the moon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550415)

Jews are a religion dummy. Why you ask? Because I can convert to Judaism.

Re:If you believe they put a man on the moon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28551025)

Why would you convert to the religion of thieves and hook nosed kikes?

If Jews aren't a race of gutter rats, why did heroic Germans exterminate them in gas chambers?

eh (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549665)

I prefer pictures of a freshly shaved asian teen pussy, but whatever float your boat, weirdos.

Re:eh (5, Funny)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549827)

...freshly shaved Asian...pussy...

You haven't seen very much Asian porn, have you? You're in for a big surprise once Mommy and Daddy uninstall NetNanny.

The coverup will continue (2, Funny)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549681)

We all know that the photos will all be doctored by NASA before they will be released to the public.

Re:The coverup will continue (2, Insightful)

macdaddy357 (582412) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549741)

Seriously or sarcastically, I knew someone would say something like that. No matter how many experts say these photos are genuine, tinfoil hatters who want to believe they are photoshops still will.

Re:The coverup will continue (1)

JAZ (13084) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549891)

I'll believe men have landed on the moon when it's me standing there!

But, even if you make it to the surface... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549993)

...of the Moon, nobody really considers you to be a man, JAZ... despite having a Slashdot ID in the 10K's.

Re:The coverup will continue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550105)

I'll believe in a so-called "Australia" when I'm standing there! None of this "airplane" nonsense, either; I'm not falling for any of your flight attendant and pilot actors while you run movies of clouds out of the "windows"! Only when I've swum to this mythical place myself without any of you "helping" me will I believe in this worldwide fraud you all subscribe to! Damned sheep.

Re:The coverup will continue (2, Interesting)

Paul server guy (1128251) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550465)

Then join us, maybe you'll get to go...

Re:The coverup will continue (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549893)

Some experts [youtube.com] go a little further than "saying"...

On a less comedic note, expert testimony is pretty much useless against entrenched occupants of a conspiracy position. For true believers, "expert"="embedded in the conspiracy".

Re:The coverup will continue (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550151)

Wow did that guy get what he deserved!

Re:The coverup will continue (2, Insightful)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550329)

The perfection of the self-confirming delusion:

If you agree, obviously I'm correct.
If you disagree, you're part of the conspiracy to suppress my correctness.

Re:The coverup will continue (1)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550645)

-1, Troll??

Ok, so I forgot the <Sarcasm> tags. Actually they will not believe it even after they are standing on the surface and looking at the old sites. They will then say that they were the first since all those before were just faked.

pics and it still didn't happen (5, Insightful)

RoverDaddy (869116) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549699)

[sarcasm off] For the record, I believe 100% that the landings were real, but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact. Maybe not even that.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (5, Funny)

allawalla (1030240) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549739)

Not a bad idea - dragging the conspiracy nuts to the moon...

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (5, Funny)

Bazman (4849) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549803)

Preferably without suits. They won't mind, because they think they're just heading to a big warehouse in Arizona.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (4, Funny)

Ecuador (740021) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550637)

Suits won't make a difference. Even in expensive cashmere suits they will still look like a bunch of nuts suffocating on the lunar surface.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (4, Funny)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549809)

Not a bad idea - dragging the conspiracy nuts to the moon...

Better: send them to the landing site for the first manned mission to the sun (but don't tell them they'll be the first ones to land there).

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (5, Funny)

Griim (8798) | more than 5 years ago | (#28551179)

Bah. This is easily remedied by going at night.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (2, Funny)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550675)

Could we put them all on the 'B' Ark.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549789)

NO THEY WERE NOT! I know that fer sure, because my mother's uncle's niece knew someone who worked in the studio where they staged the whole thing.

Besides, I can tell that the pictures from the Lunar whatever are doctored even before seeing them. You can see it if you look at the pixels. Anyone who has used photoshop will know that.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

JAZ (13084) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549907)

where can I sign up?

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

Paul server guy (1128251) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550555)

http://www.openluna.org/wiki/index.php/People_needed [openluna.org] Announce what you can do, then dig in and start doing it...

Oh, and you have to believe we can go and have gone, because most of our present condition data requires that... (Unless you like one way trips to the unknown.)

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (3, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549951)

I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact. Maybe not even that.

How many such people actually exist? With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings, there is a great uproar about these heretics. I'm sure they exist, but I've never met one, nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot. It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (5, Interesting)

gujo-odori (473191) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550071)

More than you might think. I lived for a period of time in a communist country in Asia, and not only did I find there were a number of people who thought that the United States did not land people on the moon, but that those people also typically believed that the Soviet Union had.

Why did they think so? They "learned" it in school :p

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

Fred Ferrigno (122319) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550801)

a communist country in Asia

C'mon, there's like three and one of them is North Korea. Why not say which one?

I know one (1)

wurp (51446) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550207)

Oddly, he is not an idiot.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (2, Interesting)

vlm (69642) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550213)

How many such people actually exist?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_conspiracy_theories [wikipedia.org]

About 6% of the population, as of 1999. Not bad, compared to the percentages believing in religion, intelligent design, etc.

Honestly, I think about 6% of the population is high or drunk at any given moment, so I'm not sure its a relevant figure.

It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.

Well, sometimes its hard to interpret "get under skin" vs "laughing my * off"

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

Alsee (515537) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550337)

How many such people actually exist?

Well, as a point of comparison:
Out of about 250,000 degreed scientists across all of the earth and life sciences, there are about 700 who think that evolution-denialist "Creation Science" has any legitimacy.

Estimating the number of Moon Landing Denialists is left as an exercise for the reader.

-

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550945)

It's a surprising amount of peple.
They get under my skin becasue they try to spread these lies as truths to children and ignorant, and they have no argument. SO they say 'it's a conspiracy' as if that's some sort of good argument.

And with all self deluding lies, there is a price for everyone.

http://whatstheharm.net/ [whatstheharm.net]
Granted, the moon hoax isn't very harmful, yet. Wait until the start trying to force schools to teach their 'alternate "Theory"'

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

grumbel (592662) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550065)

It might not convince the weirdos, but it debunks the most plausible part of their story. I always found the whole situation with having having landed men on the moon, 40 years ago, to be rather uneasy when today we don't even have tech to make a picture of the landing site. There are of course perfectly good reasons for it, but being used to having technology advance, a 40 year not-been-to-the-moon gap just doesn't sound right, especially when we have perfectly fine pictures of Mars and the stuff we landed there.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550265)

There are a lot of reasons outside of conspiracy theories why we aren't currently on the moon.

A) Lack of funding, the government doesn't want NASA to relearn stuff. We already "learned" about the moon back when we landed there (remember, this post is assuming the conspiracy theories are incorrect). While other planets we know a lot less about them.

B) No evidence of life. Unlike a lot of investigated planets, we pretty much can tell that there is no liquid water on the moon without having to do much to prove the lack of it.

C) Overcomplicating technology, the machines that took us to the moon were simple, simplicity allows you to work out a bunch of bugs and simplicity allows for more accurate human override.

D) The space shuttle, most of the US flights recently have been on the space shuttle, which, cannot land on the moon safely.

E) Space travel is seen as a risk with no real benefits. In the period before Challenger, space flight was considered routine, Challenger's destruction made people skeptical of why we should be putting people in space. Then space flight was considered routine until the destruction of Columbia. Today, it is considered more routine, but still lacks the "this is totally normal" that airplane flights have.

F) The current economy has made it hard for space tourism to get off the ground. Sure, private companies have come leaps and bounds over what they previously had, but as for getting a private company to carry manned missions to the moon? Not quite yet.

G) Space travel is looked at as needless by the average person. Sure, they would like to travel to space, but they don't think it has any benefit to them so they don't really care about it and similarly don't express concern.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550149)

[sarcasm off] For the record, I believe 100% that the landings were real, but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact. Maybe not even that.

Lies! You have simply kidnapped me and whisked away to an entirely convincing sound stage. And I weigh about 1/6th as much as I normally do. This is simply conclusive proof that you have invented antigravity. Will you not stop at any length to perpetuate this vile lie?!

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550433)

That's the beauty of a conspiracy. Anything that disproves it is just more proof that the infamous They is still hiding the real truth (because obviously this latest piece of damning evidence was fabricated).

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

Supergibbs (786716) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550627)

Myth Busters did a special on the moon conspiracy [mythbustersresults.com] . They busted all the conspiracy nut's "evidence". I never doubted it, but the episode was well done

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

MaunaLoa (774516) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550661)

The problem is that they still could claim the stuff has "been put there later". Really, there is no stopping these people.

Re:pics and it still didn't happen (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550911)

That won't and the conspiracy is already evolving. Now they say they did land, just later and we put the stuff there at that time.

That's cool and all (4, Insightful)

Idiot with a gun (1081749) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549759)

But let's not pretend for a second that it'll stop the theorists. They want to disbelieve, so nothing will prevent them. As was mentioned on the Conspiracy Theories episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit, when someone says "You can't convince me," those aren't the words of a skeptic, merely of a jerk. That being said, they should be some neat photos.

Re:That's cool and all (1)

ocularDeathRay (760450) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550023)

well, to be fair its not as if you can't fake images these days....

Re:That's cool and all (1, Informative)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550811)

But P&T's Bullshit is also a program that doubts Global Warming/Climate Change, so it must be ignored.

This post modded down in 3, 2, 1...

Well duh. (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549833)

I mean, of COURSE they'll be visible...The Illuminati have had decades to fake up an accurate-looking landing site. They might have actually used their mind powers to put a man on the moon at the time, but they were too busy killing Kennedy.

//Conspiracy theorists will never buy it.

Google moon? (2, Funny)

davidwr (791652) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549887)

Can I have street view?

Re:Google moon? (1)

Abalamahalamatandra (639919) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550551)

You laugh, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if Google did this as part of Google Earth.

And I for one would spend quite a bit of time using it!

Re:Google moon? (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550599)

actually yes, Google will be integrating the LRO data into Google Moon in realtime.

Re:Google moon? (1)

synthparadox (770735) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550705)

Thats not hard. All you need is a lot of close-up pictures of cheese.

Re:Google moon? (1)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550703)

Remember when you could zoom in on the Moon and see the Swiss Cheese.

Actornauts (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549889)

I'd be very surprised if we actually get a clear image of the lander and camp at the Sea of Tranquility.

Don't get me wrong. I think that the US government very sincerely tried to make the deadline, but freaking out the Soviets was way more important

I'm pretty sure we'll find a laser reflector and a robot ship with a tape deck and ham radio, run off a clockwork (think Man from U.N.C.L.E. technology).

If you look closely at the picture of the orbiter (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549895)

You can plainly see that only a few feet of the orbiter are devoted to the camera, with the rest being a perfect-size capsule for a single astronaut with a copy of photoshop.

Explain that.

Re:If you look closely at the picture of the orbit (1, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550103)

It's quite simple really...the moon landing sites, due to insufficient resolution images of the surface available at the time, turned out to be in some pretty bad neighborhoods. The lunar rovers are probably up on blocks by now, completely stripped by Moon hooligans, and most of the other equipment has likely been stolen. Since NASA wants to send men back there, they're going to need to doctor those photos. Nobody will want to go to the moon if it's revealed what a ghetto it is.

Re:If you look closely at the picture of the orbit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550297)

It's quite simple really...the moon landing sites, due to insufficient resolution images of the surface available at the time, turned out to be in some pretty bad neighborhoods. The lunar rovers are probably up on blocks by now, completely stripped by Moon hooligans, and most of the other equipment has likely been stolen. Since NASA wants to send men back there, they're going to need to doctor those photos. Nobody will want to go to the moon if it's revealed what a ghetto it is.

You mean, even if you go to the friggin' MOON you still can't get away from niggers? Shit.

Obligatory Cheese Reference (5, Funny)

spireite (810930) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549915)

It's Wensleydale, Grommit!!

tourism? (1, Funny)

convolvatron (176505) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549919)

so....the primary focus of this mission is checking out the trash we left 40 years ago?

Re:tourism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28549971)

Not the primary purpose. More like an interesting side benefit.

Lunakhod 1 (4, Interesting)

mbone (558574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549933)

Lunakhod 1 carried a French retroreflector array for Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) [iers.org] but unfortunately, contact was lost and no one knows where it is. There are good returns for Lunakhod 2, so I (and others) want Lunakhod 1 back !

Finding this would be a great help for Lunar science (assuming it didn't get crushed in a landslide or something). I know that this is on their list, so good luck !

Re:Lunakhod 1 (2, Informative)

vlm (69642) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550367)

Lunakhod 1 carried a French retroreflector array for Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) but unfortunately, contact was lost and no one knows where it is.

I checked the wikipedia and there is no mention, but I thought it was "generally known" that because it worked for a year or so and then "suddenly failed" it was because the optics cracked due to thermal stresses. An earth year is about 12 lunar days, and the hot/cold cycles are pretty intense. A cracked retroreflector isn't going to work.

Given realistic spot diameter on the moon vs possible landing area position error, and the difference in cost between having grad students blast away randomly (virtually free) vs the cost of launching another mission, I don't think its just "unknown location".

Re:Lunakhod 1 (1)

mbone (558574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28551091)

The Apollo LLR site [ucsd.edu] has looked for Lunakhod 1, but without success so far. These LLR retroreflectors are arrays, and would work if a few corner cubes were cracked.

It's approximate position is of course known, but not well compared to the spot size. Searches can be made to go faster by defocusing the laser, thus making the spot larger, but that lowers the return (the larger spot has fewer photons per square meter). If the retroreflector isn't oriented towards Earth, that will cut down on the return, and it might not be possible to see it with a defocused laser. So, if LRO can see it, the Apollo LLR site will look for a return from the exact spot.

My prediction, FWIW, is that they will find it.

Re:Lunakhod 1 (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550943)

So...what...you'll be able to tell how far away the moon is, then?

Sorry, if this is the cutting edge of lunar science, then we're all doomed. Who cares about some junky old probe?

Lunar ruins (2, Funny)

Nonillion (266505) | more than 5 years ago | (#28549999)

"Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of "Moon landing never happened!" posts that are on the way"

As for me, I think we did go to the moon. However I feel that these so called images will be doctored to remove evidence of the alleged "ruins" that are littered across its surface..

Re:Lunar ruins (2, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550331)

"Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of "Moon landing never happened!" posts that are on the way"

As for me, I think we did go to the moon. However I feel that these so called images will be doctored to remove evidence of the alleged "ruins" that are littered across its surface..

I don't think the problem is whether or not we went to the moon. The problem is that we have a government which has no problem lying to us. You really want to shut up the conspiracy theorists? Restore the honor and decency and respect for the citizens that the government of the USA once had. The way I see it, that's what this whole deal is really about.

It's amazing (5, Funny)

Bromskloss (750445) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550109)

What a long way we've come since the sixties and seventies. Now we can even photograph the landing sites they used back then. :-/

Re:It's amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550401)

just think - with the way technology moves - maybe someday we'll even be able to record moving pictures of the orbiter going over the landing sites!

Re:It's amazing (2, Insightful)

Ecuador (740021) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550669)

Why is something so sad modded as funny?

Re:It's amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550777)

we're crying on the inside

The "moon" - a ridiculous liberal myth (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550233)

It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)

Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.

They'll believe what they want to believe (2, Insightful)

Temujin_12 (832986) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550355)

In my experience, people who are adamant about the moon landing being a conspiracy seem to act that way merely because it gets them attention. They seem to feed off of the conflict. Since claiming these pictures are also a fake will continue to give them attention, this type of people will continue to hold onto their beliefs.

If people want to believe that the moon landing was a hoax, that's their prerogative. But when they become combative towards anyone who thinks otherwise, that's when they've stepped over the line. It's called basic tolerance and respect. The same applies to other subjects which are debated--science/religion, windows/mac/linux, music, sports, etc. You're entitled to your opinion and the defense of it, but you are not entitled (or at least you're credibility is not entitled) to disrespect or belittle people merely for having different opinions or beliefs.

People who feel the need to constantly attack or belittle different opinions/beliefs merely show how insecure they in their own anyways.

Sounds like competition (1)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550375)

I bet we'll soon see Bing roll out GoogleMoon to show up Google's GoogleEarth.

Re:Sounds like competition (2, Informative)

the phantom (107624) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550549)

You mean, something like this [google.com] ? And, before you ask, this one [google.com] is pretty nifty, too.

mod UP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28550569)

for el3ction, i [goat.cx]

And What If... (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550609)

And what if it doesn't find anything? Did we not do it, or did the aliens steal it afterwards for recycling?

The funniest result of this would be if they found it, but not where the astronauts actually thought they landed.

And while it's up there mapping, can it find that B-17 on the Moon that I saw the pictures of decades ago?

For the Fans! (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550765)

Forget the conspiracy theorists. Those guys are haters. As a giggling space cadet I'm looking forward to "first light" from LRO because these images are going to be the best ever. This will happen sometime this month, or early next month. In regards to Apollo, the LM was 4.27m in diameter.. so that's just over 4 pixels.. I don't know how great that is gunna look :)

How about open-sourcing the transmission instead, (1)

amn108 (1231606) | more than 5 years ago | (#28550997)

To give skeptics a harder time being skeptics about this? I am not one of the hoax believers, even though I am naturally skeptical to all things space and military we are told about, given the rich history of fuckups and coverups of these fuckups, but you have got to admit that in this age where its getting hard to tell in the movies what has been cg-enerated and what was in fact real, a bunch of pictures supposedly from the Moon will not proove ANYTHING to either hoax believers or those who believe we landed there. If anything, more scrutiny will be asked for with regard to photo material, to which bizarre rules will or will not apply ("no, you cannot have original data!" -NASA)

For this reason, I would say the only way the public would actually accept "public" photograph data as real deal, is if NASA "open-sourced" spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies, protocol, encoding, where to set up a dish, size of dish required - so that whoever actually doubts the authencity of such photos, may instead doubt whether NASA is faking a signal from the Moon that carries digital image data. After all, if the information is pubic, it is public. Nothing in the transmission is really secret or falls under NDA anyway? It involves radio waves, some archaic encoding scheme of some color channels and a wrapping protocol for transmission. The open-sourcing of the transmission would force the hoax game onto a whole new level of complexity, where it would not be so easy for the skeptics to cry fake.

From the movie "Contact":

KITZ
Oh, I do think you may have suffered some kind of episode, yeah. I do. Doctor, I'd like to propose an alternate hypothesis, if I may, and I'd like you to bring your considerable scientific expertise to bear on it. To fake a signal from Vega, what would you need?
ELLIE
You would need a satellite to transmit the signal, but it would be impossible to simulate something...
KITZ ...you would need a satellite, and you would need launch capabilities to put the satellite into orbit. And of course the message itself. To put something like this together, so complex, drawing on so many different disciplines...
ELLIE ... would be impossible.
KITZ
Impossible? Impossible? Is there anyone who might have been up to the challenge? Someone with extraordinary technical expertise. Enormous financial resources. Someone perverse enough, eccentric enough to have come up with the idea in the first place?
ELLIE
Hadden?
KITZ
S. R. Hadden.
ELLIE
You're implying that this was all some kind of a hoax, that he engineered this...

Not Soon (2, Informative)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28551099)

The commissioning phase will end approximately 60 days after launch, when LRO will use its engines to transition to its primary mission orbit. [spaceflightnews.net]
LRO is now in a commissioning orbit! - June 27 [asu.edu]

So we're at least 56 days from "first light" and the mapping program will go for 1 year, and as there's nothing to suggest that the Apollo landing sites will be first or last imaged, a good estimate is 8 months or so from now.

If that's "soon" to you, then I guess you're older than I am :)

By 2080, nobody alive will have witnessed it (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28551191)

BY 2080, nobody alive will have seen first-hand the media coverage of the Apollo landings. Heck, I was born in 1970 and I don't remember them even though they happened when I was alive.

Anyway, there will come a time when nobody will have first hand memories of the event. The only memories will be those gleaned from videos, reading about it, etc. At some point, the fact that it happened will change from a fact into just something people have read about or heard about.

Eventually many of the people alive will doubt it ever happened at all because the story of the moon landings will have become indistinguishable from a fable.

Think about the war of 1812, or Columbus "discovering" America. We have a pretty good idea these things happened. But all we know about them is stuff we have read or heard. We have also heard many works of fiction from those same times. At some level, it's all similar.

This ignores the concept of revisiting the moon, which may or may not ever happen. I have my doubts about NASA on this. But if we ever do go back and build a city, then those people will doubt it was ever such a big deal.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?