Say, what’s that reddish banner looking thing doing on the other side… :eek:
I don’t think any terrestrial telescope is capable of resolving this.
A vacuum chamber big enough to drive a Moon Rover around in? That’d be a pretty big structure, I venture to guess. You’d need multiple football fields’ circumference at minimum, and all vacuum-pressurized. Conspiracywise, I suspect it’d be about as easily concealed as the Great Wall of Canada.
Not if it has been secretly been built underground out in the desert. I mean isn’t that were the gov’t hide all their stuff?
And yet the great wall of canada remains hidden to this very day !
No doubt a “big ass” structure is hard to hide.
But, IMHO, making a big vacuum chamber where the vacuum was “good enough” wasnt even remotely technologically hard back in those days.
Hide it? hard…keep all the workers quite?..unlikely…can’t make it at all?..baloney, we could have done it in the world war 2 era (imo)…or even before
Obviously, if you’re astronomically inclined and wealthy enough to afford such a telescope, you’re part of the conspiracy and not to be trusted.
That is, it is obvious if you are a raving lunatic.
Presumably the gov’t uses the matter-disintegrators from the Roswell saucer to secretly excavate these giant underground structures.
Conspiracy science has also developed air-conditioning technology that shunts waste heat directly into the 5th dimension.
But somehow, it all makes more sense than sending a big rocket with 3 guys in it to the Moon.
Uhhh…why do we need AC?
Much less than shunting the heat to the 5th dimension
Folks who believe the moon landing was a hoax are either naive and gullible, mentally slow, or else suffer from a mild paranoia that causes them to believe in grand conspiracies.
You will not be successful in changing their personality, raising their IQ or curing their mental disorder.
Let it go.
You mean like the kind my $200 video camera does when I change the playback speed? Look, Ma, dust falling too fast! Look, Ma, dust falling way too fast! Look, Ma, dust falling slow! Look, Ma…
Naah, can’t be done.
I dunno, I’m sure that someone with technical knowledge in this area will chime in soon enough (if they even look at ‘did we go to the moon’ threads, that is). But if I recall my scuba class aright, one atmosphere of pressure is about equal to thirty feet of water. So building a vacuum-secure structure under normal Earth pressure should be roughly analogous to building an airtight structure under 30 feet of water. It’s fairly simple to reinforce smallish structures in shallow water, but I think it becomes much more difficult the more surface area is involved. Try to put an unpressurized, shopping mall-sized open air enclosure under a lake, and leaks would likely ensue.
I wonder how many engineering principles I just mangled. At this point I should probably confess that I failed scuba class. Twice.
If for no other reason, air conditioning technology would be essential to conceal the enormous heat signature of these underground government installations from sticking out like a sore thumb to Soviet spy satellites, and giving the whole game away.
The whole point of this exercise in fraud was national prestige. If the Commies suddenly detected the world’s all-time biggest vacuum chamber hidden under the surface of the Nevada desert… well, they’d probably have laughed their asses off before continuing on with their own, infinitely cheaper, legitimate space program.
But also, you’d need good AC because it gets hot in Nevada. Sweaty, stinky armies of subterranean conspirators are cranky, unreliable armies of subterranean conspirators.
Shhhh, eh?
For a sphere, I plugged 150 ft (radius) into an online calculator and got 14,137,167 cubic feet. The first several calculators couldn’t handle it. Anyway, that sounds like an awful lot.
This one comes pretty close.
So, mystery solved. Tell your friend, OP person. The truth is finally out. :eek:
I’m so proud!
Not the same. That would just show different gravities. In a vacuum the dust would not billow as it does in an atmosphere. It would just fall.
Something that sold me was the still photographs. They are insanely clear. Looking at them I realized that our atmosphere is not perfectly transparent. Even at close distances there is some degradation.
Oh, and keepsakeequine? Feel free to ignore the ribbing and jokes. After a while here you’ll start doing it, too. Welcome!
Oh, a newbie! I didn’t notice.
Welcome, keepsakeequine.
I’m the treasurer here. That’ll be $20/month. Cash. 
How big is the flag? The VLT in Chile can resolve the lunar surface to 1 meter.
Double post
I personally saw Apollo XVII liftoff. Ask them why we’d spend all that money for seven expensive flights if it were a hoax.
Better yet, get some friends with IQs higher than a dandelion.
Is that one meter to a pixel? If so, it’d be about one pixel big.
The rovers are still up there, and of course, all the tracks they made (not sure if the tracks would be brighter, darker, or the same color/albedo than the undisturbed regolith?). I’d think those might be a better bet if trying to resolve visual evidence of the lunar expeditions. But, of course, if you simply showed the CTs any modern photography, they’d cry Photoshop. Damn their stubbornness.