With keyhole satellites and huge telescopes, shouldn't they have evidence of our landings by now?
2007-09-13 12:00:03 · 11 answers · asked by calpr 5 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Lookup the resolution of those instruments and do the math; I think you'll find that most of those objects are far too small to be resolved as anything more than a shadow, which could easily be disputed.
2007-09-13 12:08:26 · answer #1 · answered by HyperDog 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Keyhole satellites? Right, we have spy satellites around the moon!!! Never know what them Russians might be doing up there!!
Considering your lack of satellite knowledge, one could hardly be surprised that you are so unaware that even the most powerful telescopes we have still can't resolve a buggy sitting on the moon. And, in fact, we now have higher resolution images of Mars now than we do of the moon. But, yeah, if we were to put the Mars Reconaissance Orbiter's HiRISE camera aboard a lunar orbiter, then, yes, we could then photograph some of the paraphenalia left behind by the VERY REAL Apollo moon landings.
FYI, the fact that you need a current satellite photo as "evidence" of the moon landings really is just complete nonsense. All the hoax believers would say is that the photo was manipulated and, voila, you *still* don't have the proof to satisfy such willfully ignorant people.
2007-09-13 12:16:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
Go grab your binoculars and tell me what an ant looks like from ten miles away.
Think about this- even if such photos WERE produced- wouldn't you then say that they were doctored and NASA just drew a flag and dunebuggy on the images?
If you need telescopic evidence to prove the lunar landings to you, then forget all about it and continue living in your youtube world. Science will not stop simply because you refuse to believe in it.
It is wise to question truths to a certain extent. When one goes beyond that, he only looks like a fool.
2007-09-13 12:14:32 · answer #3 · answered by Troasa 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
First, you'd need a mirror the size of a football field to for that kind of resolution.
Second... why would you trust a fuzzy, grainy, barely-discernible image from a telescope, and NOT the clear photos taken by the astronauts ON the moon???
Third...... especially when the fuzzy, grainy photos are delivered by the same agency that SENT the astronauts there in the first place....?
People. Please. THINK before posting. It's not difficult.
2007-09-13 13:35:51 · answer #4 · answered by quantumclaustrophobe 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are pictures of the moon buggies, not taken from earth.
All the objects left on the moon are too small to be seen from the earth with any telescope. However, the astronauts left special mirrors on the moon which lasers on the earth can target. They are used to measure the distance to the moon.
2007-09-13 17:06:36 · answer #5 · answered by steve b 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Firstly, the reasons given above are true.
Secondly, even if they could take pictures of it, why would they want to? They know they were there, so they don't need to prove to themselves that the equipment hasn't been stolen. And as for the rest of us, it's not like the whole world is clamouring in disbelief to be shown that it happened.
2007-09-13 13:24:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Try finding a grain of rice on a beach. It is too small to see with telescopes.
2007-09-13 13:47:06 · answer #7 · answered by Mr. Smith 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are no Earth-based telescopes that powerful. See link.
2007-09-13 12:25:02 · answer #8 · answered by gebobs 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The resolution of the equipment is not great enough. To see such detail there would need to be a satelite within the moons orbit to show such detail.
2007-09-13 12:19:11 · answer #9 · answered by Tony 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
they do. make an appointment at your local university observatory. they will show you that stuff
2007-09-15 08:06:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋