Tired of banging head against wall wrote:
Waiting Patient wrote:
Are these picture(s?) you speak of taken recently (in the 21st Century). Please do not insult my intelligence by referring to the risible black and white dot images.
We'll, the LRO was launched in 2009 and photos of the Apollo sites were released in 2011, so yes taken in this century. This info is really easy to find.
Post a recent picture of the landing site.
Generation jpeg wrote:
Generation Jpeg wrote:
I don't want to know about weird alien stuff or government conspiracies. I desperately need a recent picture of the moon landing site, and I need it this week for a space tourism assignment.
Any pictures taken during this century will work for me. When I search online, I get Mars landers and pictures of dots with arrows saying "landing site" , but that's not what I need here.
I got nothing for my space tourism paper. All I wanted was a single recent frikkin' image of the apollo landing site, but nooooo, you cant have it because we don't have it. Thanks for nothing. In the end I used a still from the Space 1999 show. What a joke!
I already told you that I wouldn’t help because I wanted you to fail. Apparently you have poor reading skills in addition to poor research skills.
Ground Control to Major Tom wrote:
The absence of pictures might be difficult to explain, if indeed detailed pictures from lunar orbiters were absent. Here is one high resolution image from a lunar orbiting satellite of Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 landing sites from 2015 providing "an unprecedented look at the moon’s surface":
https://prd-wret.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/fig4.pngWaiting Patient wrote:
The landing site(s) should already have been photographed in detail by any number of existing lunar-orbitting satellites. The absence of pictures from these lunar orbiters is very difficult to explain. Especially since the Mars surface has been spectrally-analysed in such detail, to a depth of some metres. Seems like the moon is off-limits to investigation.
Thanks. I will respectfully accept this submission.
Spacer rex wrote:
Generation jpeg wrote:
I got nothing for my space tourism paper. All I wanted was a single recent frikkin' image of the apollo landing site, but nooooo, you cant have it because we don't have it. Thanks for nothing. In the end I used a still from the Space 1999 show. What a joke!
I don't know if I failed yet. But my classmates were laughing at my moon pictures from a tv show because that was all i got.
I already told you that I wouldn’t help because I wanted you to fail. Apparently you have poor reading skills in addition to poor research skills.
Nah.. impersonation is all you have.. black and white pictures in 2011??
Waiting Patient wrote:
Tired of banging head against wall wrote:
We'll, the LRO was launched in 2009 and photos of the Apollo sites were released in 2011, so yes taken in this century. This info is really easy to find.
Post a recent picture of the landing site.
Look on page 22 of this thread. LRO pictures already posted. Good bye. Enjoy your trolling.
I once got into a discussion with a conspiracy nut and turned the tables on him by asking him to prove the U.S.A. existed. I argued it is still a British colony and the President, Congress etc are just actors paid by the British Government. Any argument he put forward I just dismissed as false and fabricated by the British Government to delude the colonialists . I even went so far as to tell him that U.S. passports are printed in Cheltenham and 25% of the taxes he pays goes straight to Britain.
It was an amusing half hour. The scary thing is by the end he was starting to believe me.
Tired of banging head against wall wrote:
Waiting Patient wrote:
Post a recent picture of the landing site.
Look on page 22 of this thread. LRO pictures already posted. Good bye. Enjoy your trolling.
Not acceptable. Nothing is acceptable. Whatever you post, I will ask for more or something else. You cannot satiate me.
Damn. And that's from 34 million miles away. The moon is only 240,000 miles away!!
Can somebody sum up this thread ?
French Kiss by the Sea wrote:
Can somebody sum up this thread ?
Can give you the status:
- Request for clear unambiguous pictures of the Apollo landing site(s)
- None available presently, still waiting..
Waiting Patient wrote:
French Kiss by the Sea wrote:
Can somebody sum up this thread ?
Can give you the status:
- Request for clear unambiguous pictures of the Apollo landing site(s)
- None available presently, still waiting..
Liar. There are picture in this thread, but like a good troll, you know that new people that stumble into this thread are not going to read the whole thing, so you ask the same questions that was already answer pages ago.
You lie wrote:
Waiting Patient wrote:
Can give you the status:
- Request for clear unambiguous pictures of the Apollo landing site(s)
- None available presently, still waiting..
Liar. There are picture in this thread, but like a good troll, you know that new people that stumble into this thread are not going to read the whole thing, so you ask the same questions that was already answer pages ago.
So you have a recent image? A recent image would have been acquired with a CCD sensor that has RGB data (like all cameras in the last 30 years). So this means, it will be in colour not black and white! The resolution of a recent image taken from an altitude of 30 miles above the Moon's surface (that has no atmosphere) would allow an unambiguous detailing of landing sites. So why haven none been taken, ever?
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/584640main_apollo17-right-670.jpgWaiting Patient wrote:
French Kiss by the Sea wrote:
Can somebody sum up this thread ?
Can give you the status:
- Request for clear unambiguous pictures of the Apollo landing site(s)
- None available presently, still waiting..
Look at gallery in here for pictures of the Apollo landing sites. This also tells what instruments and cameras the LRO is equipped with.
Waiting Patient wrote:
So you have a recent image? A recent image would have been acquired with a CCD sensor that has RGB data (like all cameras in the last 30 years). So this means, it will be in colour not black and white!
That picture above is in full RGB. It's not NASA'a fault the moon is gray.
Waiting Patient wrote:
You lie wrote:
Liar. There are picture in this thread, but like a good troll, you know that new people that stumble into this thread are not going to read the whole thing, so you ask the same questions that was already answer pages ago.
So you have a recent image? A recent image would have been acquired with a CCD sensor that has RGB data (like all cameras in the last 30 years). So this means, it will be in colour not black and white! The resolution of a recent image taken from an altitude of 30 miles above the Moon's surface (that has no atmosphere) would allow an unambiguous detailing of landing sites. So why haven none been taken, ever?
And if you do have this, I'll ask for something else/better.
Read what I posted again.
"A recent image would have been acquired with a CCD sensor that has RGB data (like all cameras in the last 30 years). So this means, it will be in colour not black and white! The resolution of a recent image taken from an altitude of 30 miles above the Moon's surface (that has no atmosphere) would allow an unambiguous detailing of landing sites. So why haven none been taken, ever?"
And for your education, CCD cameras in 1994 on a lunar mission:
