Sometimes, just sometimes, they’re merely uneducated. I had a friend approach me with this moon hoax bullshit, and after I got done with all the mandatory despaired sighing and stuff, I listened to his points lifted from some hoaxer website, refuted them as best I could, and added some points of evidence for the moon landing, convincing him that whatever evidence might seem inconsistent at first look is far outweighed by the evidence in favour of the moon landing.
Sometimes, even moon hoax level ignorance can be fought.
You know who I miss? That guy that claimed all the moon photos were faked…because they were really pictures of huge alien structures taken from far away. Now that was a bizarre conspiracy theory.
I am, he says hastily, a believer, but one argument that I’ve never seen used to prove the landing is that surely someone - or more likely - many people took photos of Apollo’s journey to the moon. Didn’t people track it on radar or something? Are there telescopes that can detect objects on the moon?
Didn’t the Australians track Apollo when the US was pointing in the wrong direction? Were they in the conspiracy, too?
Probably on that scale. But, the ESO VLTI can’t actually resolve objects ON the lunar surface for two reasons: 1) the Moon is way too bright and would overwhelm the CCD, since the interferometer is designed as an astronomical telescope, not a planetary one, and 2) since it is an interferometer and not a conventional telescope, it needs a nearby pointlike light source for calibration, something you can’t really find on the lunar surface. A star would do for this purpose, but any star near enough would no longer appear pointlike.
Even if the above weren’t true, with a one-meter resolution at the distance of the Moon, objects which are close to that minimal size would appear indistinct and any details (which would naturally be less than one meter on an object which is, itself, one meter) would be unresolved. The very best we could say is that it’s not lunar in origin, perhaps, but clearly identifying it would be impossible.
In regards to any telescope seeing something the size of a flag on the Moon (BTW, according to many experts the flag has disintigrated from sun exposure by now) I would have them look of the term ‘Dawes’ Limit’.
I guess he was sucked by the “great wash” (I could not figure out exactly what he meant by that.)
It was more that 7 years ago that on that thread he predicted that school children will read in 5 years that the Apollo missions were fakes.
[del]The moon[/del] Time is a harsh mistress.
The fact remains that he never bothered to get a hold of the NASA negatives, never realized the uselessness of blowing up low res computer images and stinks at prediction.
Apollo was constantly tracked on radar. That’s how they got their trajectory data and could figure out how and when to do midcourse correction burns. The ships’ Inertial Guidance System was really just a high-tech version of the old navigation method of de’d reckoning, and subject to the same limitations (i.e., garbage in, garbage out; and even the tiniest errors will eventually pile up enough to turn everything to worms.)
Jim Lovell, in Lost Moon, talks about a group that followed the Apollo flights with a telescope. While the third stage of the Saturn V was large enough to see, the CSM wasn’t - until the crew did a urine dump: the resulting ice cloud was visible. And these folks had a really good look at the cloud produced when 13’s O[sub]2[/sub] Tank Two blew.
Didn’t someone recently launch a lunar satellite with cameras good enough to image the junk we left on the moon? Not, of course, that such photos would convince the True Unbelievers. . . .
To the best of my knowledge, there is no object on the Apollo left on the moon that can be seen with any Earth based technology. However, there is a laser reflector that was left on the surface that is still used to track the changes in distance between the earth and the moon. And the only way that got up there is if either a) the Apollo missions really happened, or b) we sent unmanned ships with advanced robotics that did not exist at the time instead.
What was suspected as being seen was some shadows from the Lander, which were much longer than the Lander itself. This was never fully confirmed as being the case.
Have a listen to the Bad Astronomer debating Bart Sibrel on a radio show. Bart claimed that nobody photographed the Apollo Rockets on their way to the Moon depsite all the telescopes.
B.A. said he found such images with a simple Google image search.
