raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Jan 31, 2012 11:45:23 GMT -4
Incidentally, besides an easier thermal load, landmark navigation is why Apollo landed in the lunar morning, so that features would stand out better thanks to longer shadows to make navigation easier on the largely monochromatic Moon.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Feb 1, 2012 4:40:48 GMT -4
Incidentally, besides an easier thermal load, landmark navigation is why Apollo landed in the lunar morning, so that features would stand out better thanks to longer shadows to make navigation easier on the largely monochromatic Moon. Pah, more budget cuts. We demand the moon in full colour.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Feb 1, 2012 15:35:25 GMT -4
You aren't supporting colorization, are you? Heathen!
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Feb 1, 2012 16:17:17 GMT -4
I've heard it claimed. Specifically, that NASA filmed in black and white in a desert in Utah, then went back and colorized a few random bits and pieces like the American Flag to make people think these were color pictures taken of a black-and-white landscape... Ignoring the whole "but it isn't black and white, you nimnods...there's lots of subtle color variation in the landscape" this mostly reminds me of the great, great Calvin and Hobbes strip where Calvin's dad is explaining color photography: runt-of-the-web.com/post/1514224572/calvins-dad-the-original-troll-scientist
|
|
|
Post by forthethrillofital on Feb 2, 2012 19:02:28 GMT -4
As already explained the site was deliberately selected so that it would provide as few difficulties as possible, but we also know that Armstrong had to overfly West Crater and its boulder field. So there are few identifying features in the first lunar surface photos taken by man, but have you examined the Apollo 11 landing film and related the craters, mountains, and rilles in it to maps and photographs? I could give you quite a long list of indentifiable features all the way down from Rimae Secchi at 1 degree north, 44 degrees east, to the boulder field on the northern side of West Crater, and East (or Little West) Crater, to which Neil Armstrong ran and photographed. There are plenty of landmarks if you know what to look for and where. Here's a map of the landing site used by astronaut Collins while in lunar orbit. It looks to have plenty of identifying features on it to me. history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/LAM2_CMP-flown.jpgIt would seem to me that the map is not detailed enough. they say the map experts could not decide between 14 different spots all within 5 miles of one another. Of all the things that convince me Apollo was hoaxed it is this and the astronauts' comportment. They never behave like guys that went to the moon. Now that I look at it in the light of evidence uncovered by others I see that this must be true.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Feb 2, 2012 19:53:00 GMT -4
Explain why the astronauts should behave according to your personal expectations. That seems awfully unreasonable.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Feb 2, 2012 20:17:34 GMT -4
They never behave like guys that went to the moon. How could you possibly know what guys that went to the moon would behave like, if you claim that nobody has actually been there?
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Feb 2, 2012 21:02:06 GMT -4
It would seem to me that the map is not detailed enough. Why should I let what you think bother me?
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Feb 2, 2012 23:43:02 GMT -4
It would seem to me that the map is not detailed enough. Do please tell us about your experience in lunar cartography as it relates to space flight!!! Enquiring minds want to know
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Feb 3, 2012 1:18:26 GMT -4
I cannot find a single photo taken from the surface of the moon during the Apollo 11 moon walk with a landmark identiying the site as unique. Generic nothing if you ask me. Perhaps I'd rather not ask you. I'd rather look at the pictures myself. And when I compare the 16mm movie of the Apollo 11 landing with new photography of the site from LRO, guess what? Every tiny crater, boulder, depression, hill, what have you, is a perfect match! Mind you, in the last minute or two before landing these features were far too small to have been seen from lunar orbit with the technology of the 1960s. Not until the development of the modern CCD imaging technology now carried in LRO could objects this small be seen from orbit, and in fact they still look better in the Apollo 11 film. And the Apollo 11 landing film ends with blowing dust at the precise spot where LRO now sees the descent stage parked on the lunar surface. So there's simply no escaping the fact that the Apollo 11 landing movie was indeed made by a spacecraft landing on the moon in that location. A spacecraft that looked just like the Apollo LM, which was designed to carry humans. So is it that hard to accept that humans were in fact flying it when it landed? And let's not forget that there were five more landings, each making their own landing films that also match the LRO imagery, and some occurring in lunar locations much less "boring" than the Apollo 11 site is to you.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Feb 3, 2012 11:16:26 GMT -4
They never behave like guys that went to the moon. And how should they behave, exactly?
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 3, 2012 12:10:45 GMT -4
...Of all the things that convince me Apollo was hoaxed it is this and the astronauts' comportment. They never behave like guys that went to the moon. Now that I look at it in the light of evidence uncovered by others I see that this must be true. I disagree, and I have personally worked with a number of astronauts. Please explain exactly what qualifies you to judge the significance of the Apollo astronauts' comportment, and why I should give any weight at all to your uninformed opinion.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 3, 2012 13:01:46 GMT -4
They never behave like guys that went to the moon. I always think it's cute when conspiracy theorists know so much about how people who go to the Moon ought to behave. It's even cuter when you finally get them to say what they think the correct behavior should be, and it's different for each conspiracy theorist.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Feb 3, 2012 13:02:44 GMT -4
Divert away from the image issue?
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Feb 3, 2012 14:57:44 GMT -4
How many details do you need to identify a unique location? When I was doing compass training, two distinctive features was all I needed. Although it helped to have one more distinctive feature I could be standing on and thus confirm I'd taken a good azimuth.
|
|