ok....let me start off by saying, that i am newer to astronomy, got about a year under my belt BUT!...............

did we land on the moon or not?

i know a lot of you have larger telescopes then i do , and probably know way better how to work them , so don't tell me you never pointed it at the moon and didnt think the same thing, or tried to look at the landing sites, and for yourself confirm or deny the landings.

i know it may be far fetched, but i saw photos taken of the trails the mars rover left from the sattelites mapping mars now..they keep track of them...

so why isnt there any proof, except what we were shown and told 30+years ago?

you mean to tell me that NASA, or the ESA or anyone else that has sattelites mapping the lunar surface for future landings dosent have any pictures of the landing sites?...or NASA hasnt "checked up" on them on over 30 years, as they plan a new mission "back"?

dosnet that sound a bit strange?

 i find this all hard to believe as i blow up pictures of the sea of tranquility

 thoughts??

I will answer the question, but will lock this thread if it degenerates into yet another conspiracy theory discussion.

There are three basic reasons we don't use telescopes to look for "evidence" of Apollo landings on the lunar surface:

1. No telescope, on Earth or in space, currently has the resolution to see the landers or rovers that were left on the lunar surface.
2. Seeing limits the resolution of even the best telescopes to the point where even if they had the resolution we wouldn't be able to see these artifacts from Earth.
3. Telescope time is too valuable to "waste" ... and, yes, it is a waste of such time to be making forensic photographs of the Apollo landings.

Wait, there's a 4th: If we built a telescope to find the artifacts, and published photographs of them, conspiracy theorists and their woo followers would just say, "Well, you doctored the photographs!" or "You dropped those props up there with a remote lander."

then why can i see pictures from nasa that posted pictures of the opprotunity, and oddesy's tire tracks from Mars orbit?

the technology exhists.....and if were going back to the moon, you mean to tell me in 30 years we never thought of checking up on it?

come on!

its not a conspiricay theory.....and im not making trouble....but be real....

ps........its never a waste of time to look at what you want in astronomy....no matter what the target, its what you make of it, and how you spend your time doing so, as long as your doing it....

if we can do this, then how not on the moon....?

Chip, if only for a laugh I'd read all or at least some of the conspiracy thingies and they really are fantastically off the wall aren't they?, one thing I am curious about though, yes we did land on the moon that I do believe that, but the rather annoying thing that crops up, blimey! even with those conspriacy twits sites, and they really do go on,! but what I want to possibly from you please, and no I'm not conspiracy aficionado by any any stretch of the imagination, but is it even remotely in anyway shape size or form that due to technical difficulties that some the of recordings that were shown 'live' were actually done in a studio, no this is not a wind up and not conspiracy rubbish either, it's having seen, sadly I'm of an age I DID see the first trasmission way back, and even then to me, something didn't gell with me.

SirZeusor:

then why can i see pictures from nasa that posted pictures of the opprotunity, and oddesy's tire tracks from Mars orbit?

Because it is new technology (software, primarily) that is usable on the instruments orbiting Mars. Those spacecraft are very much nearer the surface of Mars than telescopes on Earth or in Earth orbit are to the surface of the Moon. Furthermore, the atmosphere of Mars is very thin compared to that of Earth, so "seeing" doesn't have as much of an effect on views of Mars' surface.

the technology exhists.....and if were going back to the moon, you mean to tell me in 30 years we never thought of checking up on it?

come on!

I'm not a policymaker, so I don't know whether this came up in mission-planning decisions. But, if it had come up, someone would have asked why it was important? What effect would it have on mission planning? Is there some problem (other than quieting conspiracy theorists) it would solve? I think the answer would have been a resounding No. We know more about the characteristics of the lunar surface from the data brought back by Apollo than we could learn from higher-res photos taken from a distance. By the way, there are actually other lunar surface-mapping missions going on, and planned. They do not feature (because they do not require) photography of the resolution needed to acquire Apollo artifacts. However, they will include the software that allows for resolution-enhancement in much the same manner as is done by the Mars reconnaisance missions.

 

its not a conspiricay theory.....and im not making trouble....but be real....

ps........its never a waste of time to look at what you want in astronomy....no matter what the target, its what you make of it, and how you spend your time doing so, as long as your doing it....

It is totally a waste of time trying to mollify the woos ... it simply doesn't work, no matter how much time and energy you spend in the attempt. By "waste", I mean in the mission sense: you have only so much money and resources to do your primary science (and, by the way, that budget is continually being slashed away) ... why would you want to do something non-scientific with it? On the other hand, if you can think of a reason to do some science that provides the artifact evidence as a side-benefit, then that's another matter (see the Mars missions as an example ... the resources used to make those photos were not put there specifically to image the Rovers, but since they could, they did).

steelclaw32:

Chip, if only for a laugh I'd read all or at least some of the conspiracy thingies and they really are fantastically off the wall aren't they?, one thing I am curious about though, yes we did land on the moon that I do believe that, but the rather annoying thing that crops up, blimey! even with those conspriacy twits sites, and they really do go on,! but what I want to possibly from you please, and no I'm not conspiracy aficionado by any any stretch of the imagination, but is it even remotely in anyway shape size or form that due to technical difficulties that some the of recordings that were shown 'live' were actually done in a studio ...

The special-effects technology to do that in such a way as to stand up to forensic examination with the technology we have today did not exist at the time. Still, that's beside the point. If they had been faked, there is no real possibility it could have been kept secret so well, by so many people, for so long.

Many thanks Chip. fair play to you.

I cannot believe we are once again hearing from a Moon hoax conspiracist. Telescopes cannot see something as small and distant as artifacts on the Moon.  Research budgets are tight and individual astronomers are allowed limited precious time on large telescopes.  It would be wasteful in the extreme to develop instruments that could take such pictures simply to shut up the unbelievers.  Astronauts did place a device on the Moon for bouncing back laser signals that have determined the precise distance to the Moon. 

I thought this silliness died down quite awhile back after that shoddy 2001 Fox TV show was thoroughly debunked.  Seven years ago astronomer Phil Plat of badastronomy.com did a fine job pointing out all of the flaws in the arguments made by the producers of that disreputable show.  Here’s a link:  http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html .  There’s always someone who is only too happy to make a buck feeding nonsense to credulous woos, especially the kind that eat up conspiracy theories.

If it were a hoax, then at some time during the 39 years since the first manned Moon landing it would have been leaked by at least one of the thousands of individuals involved.  Millions of dollars could have been made selling books that revealed such a monumental hoax.  Certainly the Soviets were monitoring the missions, and they would have gleefully revealed a fraud.

Here’s a link to a photograph taken recently by the Japanese lunar orbiter.  It reveals the marks made by the engine blast from the Apollo 11 lunar module.

SirZeusor:

then why can i see pictures from nasa that posted pictures of the opprotunity, and oddesy's tire tracks from Mars orbit?

Taking pics of rover tire tracks on mars might actually have some scientific benefit: Mars has an athmosphere and it is - we know that - very windy there. So, by taking pics of tracks now and in many years to come, it might give us some idea on dust transportation in Mars' athmosphere. We might see the tracks slowly disappear. That's just my humble guess...

The only scientific reason for chasing up on junk metal on the moon woulds probably be a mission to collect bits and pieces of the landers/equipment, to see what impact space radiation and micrometeorites had during those many years. So far, and Chip was very clear, no one in NASA has a single cent for such a mission... unless we find some superrich silly industrial tycoon who wants the Apollo 11 US flag in his office in Texas

ngc2438:

The only scientific reason for chasing up on junk metal on the moon woulds probably be a mission to collect bits and pieces of the landers/equipment, to see what impact space radiation and micrometeorites had during those many years.

Yep, in fact that's happened. Apollo 12 fetched back the video camera and its support arm from an unmanned lander (Surveyor III ) that had been sitting on the lunar surface for two and a half years.

So far, and Chip was very clear, no one in NASA has a single cent for such a mission... unless we find some superrich silly industrial tycoon who wants the Apollo 11 US flag in his office in Texas

Lordy, that's scarily close to "possible", given what I know about Texas tycoons!

 Recently I watched a documentry called 'In the Shadow of the Moon.' It was interviews about the Astronaughts different experiences. I suggest that everybody watches it. It was brilliant. At the end one says when asked about Hoax's: 'We did it 6 times, Why fake it 6 times?'

Aggg! Not another conspiracy theory.

First of all, YES! We did land on the moon. Do I "personally" remember the event? No. I was not born yet. However, I was not around during the Korean War or WW2 either. But that doesn't mean that they never really happened.

During our mission to land on the moon, we were in a space race with Russia. This was at the very height of the Cold War. If we had "hoaxed" the whole thing, don't you think Russia would have been the first to point it out? Why did Russia never come forward to prove us wrong. Most likely because they monitored the rocket from their own military stations and saw it's intended path (which seems to me like they knew we actually made it...)

Second, why do people who question if we truly landed on the moon always seem so quick to point out (what they believe to be) inadequecies with the accounts of what happened? No matter what proof is bought forward to them, they still feel that there is some sort of cover up. They are never appeased.

Here's a question for you. Can you prove that we did not land on the moon? If so, how? All evidence points to the fact that the world (or most countries with sophisticated military radar) knows that we did thus there have been no objections with our claims. Then, decades later, someone comes up with the bright idea that it was all a hoax and they claim that NASA should spend billions of dollars to settle a personal belief that we were never there. All the conspiracy theorists are always part of the problem, but never the solution.

I have a better idea. Why don't all you Nay-sayers fork up the billions of dollars, build a lunar orbiter with a super hi-res camera, purchase the fuel to launch it and then take pics of the site when you are up there.

Seriously. If you are waiting for NASA or some other Space Administration to do it, don't hold your breathe.

 Well said Starwolf!

Please refer to the first comments in the first reply by chipdatajeffb. 
These replies are beginning to resemble another conspiracy theory hoax vs no hoax discussion. 

The original questions have been answered thoroughly enough. Let's see if we can allow this to quietly end.
  

Have A Nice __________

I got to see only the last fifteen to twenty minutes of "In the Shadow of the Moon".  I hope they re-air it soon.  As I was reading all the posts in this thread, I was thinking of exactly what Oliver Tunnah referred to.  The astronaut asked the question of why NASA would fake it so many times and also said that if the landings were faked, how did the thousands of people that were part of the missions keep it quiet for all these years.

Man, we've became a skeptical lot.  Sometimes skepticism is a good thing, but, come on!

Sorry tkerr, had to jump in there.

I believe that the most reputable evidence of the moon landings are indeed the reflecting mirrors positioned on the moon during the early Apollo missions. The mirror device is known as the "laser ranging retroreflector array" and was included in the missions for 2 reasons. Firstly, to provide an accurate measurement of the distance from earth to the moon, as well as to confirm that the moon is infact moving away from us by more than an inch per year. And secondly, as yet another confirmation of Einstein's theory of relativity.

These mirrors are the only instruments left on the moon which are still in operation today.

I guess some conspiracy theorists could argue that they were placed there by remote operated vehicles (ROV), but my argument is simple; What would be so hard about putting a man on the moon? If we can land an ROV on mars, using a retro rocket to decend, why couldn't we do it with people on the moon? The moon is just a skip and a jump away from earth in astronomical terms. It only takes about 3 days or less to get there. Mars is a much more difficult project to complete because of the amount of time it takes to reach the planet, the planet's higher gravity than the moon, along with many other complications.

And finally, if the technology existed at the time to make videos in a Hollywood basement that are as accurate and true-to-life as those shown from the Apollo missions, than why did George Lucas have to keep updating and re-releasing Star Wars?

Astromaster,

Thank you Thank you Thank you...I am such a fool. I completely and utterly forgot about the mirrors that were put on the moon. They show us that the moon is indeed moving away from the earth at a rate of 1.5 inches per year.

Hmmmmm, funny thing though...I wonder how they got there. Oh well, I guess it's just a matter of time before another conspiracy theory comes about...