Can't one totally prove that man landed on the moon by looking through a telescope?

Question

I mean if there is a moon landing site one should be able to see it outant one?

Whoa dudes and dudettes, they left a whole bunch of other stuff there too and mirrors can be put on the moon without a human being having to do it

Answer 1

Looking through a telescope from the surface of the earth would be impossible because the Earth's atmosphere would distort any visual clarity. Now, looking through a telescope that is orbiting the Earth is possible, but it costs lots of $$$ to develope the technology to do that - something that isn't practical for what the Earth-orbiting telescopes are being designed for.

Now, if they were to put the technology currently on the Earth-orbiting telescopes onto Moon-orbiting satellites, then they could easily return proof of the landings, assuming one would believe that the pictures were real or that we even have satellites orbiting the moon in the first place!

Answer 2

Identifying details that would produce nice pictures is currently beyond the ability of telescopes, in large part because of problems from distortion from the Earth's atmosphere.

Even if we could get those pictures, though, it would hardly make a difference. There is already sufficient evidence of the moon landings being real. The amount of evidence goes WAY beyond any "reasonable doubt." In fact, I think we should coin a new phrase that there is sufficient evidence the moon landings occurred to "prove beyond unmeasurable stupidity."

I don't believe in making fun of people who are mentally retarded or have a mental disability, but I CAN make fun of people who believe in conspiracy theories, because in general they are people with an average or even above average intellectual ability. Unfortunately, they have taken it upon themselves to be professional morons.

National Geographic Channel showed a documentary today depicting some of the moon landing myth arguments, and why they are incorrect. No amount of proof or reason, however, will convince the professional morons out there, so why bother?

Answer 3

The largest items left on the Moon are the lunar module descent stages, and even these are well below the resolution limit of any ground based telescopes. A telescope array, which uses several small telescopes to provide the equivalent light gathering power of one large one, was recently calculated to have just enough resolution to detect those descent stages, but this was the optimal resolution that was theoretically possible and in practice it turned out to not quite have that power.

But even if it had, the problem is not one of seeing but of identifying. You need much greater resolution than it is currently possible to build into any telescope in order to be able to identify the hardware left behind. The resolving power of the telescope is a function of the size of the telescope, and a telescope that could not only see the landers but clearly identify them as landers from here would be a few kilometres in size, so not practical to build.

So no, telescopes are no good for verifying the Moon landings. Even if they could be used that way, those who think it was faked already disregard tens of thousands of pictures, hours of film and video, millions of pages of documentation, personal testimonies from thousands of individuals, 800lb of lunar rock and soil samples, and even claim whole branches of science are subverted to the cause of faking the moon landings. How are a few extra pictures going to help?

P.S. Yes, they could have left stuff up there with unmanned craft, but there is no evidence that any such craft existed, whereas there is lots of evidence that they sent men there.

Answer 4

they all landed on the side of the moon facing the earth for communication purposes.

no telescope that currently exists has a high enough resolution to see what we left on the moon. even hubble could only see objects as small as 300 meters on the moon's surface, the largest things we left on the moon were only a few meters across.

Answer 5

No you could not see the boot prints or tire tracks not enough resolution. But they left some mirrors on the moon that we shine lasers at all the time. This is one of many arguments against the conspiracy theory.

Answer 6

Most sane people are not disputing that man landed on the moon anyways, and you're right, visual evidence on the moon is certainly a feasible solution to the debate.

Answer 7

I'm not absolutely sure, but I would think they would have tried to land on the far side of the moon. That was something they couldn't see from Earth, so they would want more information about it. The so-called "dark side of the moon" was a bit of a mystery I believe.

Answer 8

Yes, and I can see bacteria from 10 miles away with my naked eye.

Answer 9

nope the telesopes arn't that powerful.

Answer 10

No. I don't think you could see footprints from earth.