Moon Photos

shechaiyah · Post by **shechaiyah** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:05 am

Do we have any Moon photos off the Hubble? I have never seen any.

The moon is so close to us, one would think that we would have as detailed photos of the moon, as we have of Mars.

Or, have I simply missed something?

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:23 am

here are some taken over the years
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archiv ... /29/image/

shechaiyah · Post by **shechaiyah** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:36 am

Fascinating. They only have two areas photographed.

The Archistarchus crater and the Apollo 17 landing site.

That's IT. Nothing else. Ooookay.

One would think they would have the whole backside mapped, including the water that Fred Steckling's 1981 book detailed.

That's what I was hoping to see some evidence of.

Water on the Moon? Why did we stop going there?

:shrug:

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:23 pm

I believe that they attempted to image the Appollo 17 landing site to show that the observatory isn't able to image to the level of seeing details like the landers etc. As for the back side, the telescope orbits earth and therefore sees only the same side visible from the surface.

shechaiyah · Post by **shechaiyah** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:33 pm

You're saying to me that we can get square-meter-by-square-meter photos of Mars, but we can't get close-up's of the moon, even with ground-based academic telescopes? Oh?

Okay, here's a photo off the Apollo17 trip.

And here's a recent video of some guys confronting the astronauts, in a rather rude manner. But I think their responses are informative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hkNnltFfR4

I mean, the information that is available ABOUT OUR MOON is not "regular," not methodically and scientifically produced. It's coming at me from "secret" files.

That is not appropriate for scientific work. Why is this so?

Here. A frame from a huge moonbase photo.

I mean, who's fooling whom, and why?

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:11 am

Yes we can get sq meter images from Mars because the satalites that are responsible for their production are only 120 miles away from the surface.
If we were to place an imaging satalite into lunar orbit (like the MGS or such is) and it were only 100 miles above the surface, we could see similar Lunar images.
As to why we heven't done so???
It could be that the moon is so close that we don't feel the expence is warranted for an extensive lunar mapping mission. Or it could be that the hubble isn't capable of imaging anything so close to us at a resolution capable of devining anything smaller than 50' per pixel.

Or it could be that we are cooperating with aliens and allowing them (we wouldn't be able to stop them) to have bases on the far side of the moon.

shechaiyah · Post by **shechaiyah** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:01 am

Insofar as the third option goes, I understand the Van Allen radiation belts extent from 1000 miles from earth outward.

Wouldn't those belts preclude ANY traffic?

I have heard or read that ETs approach our planet at the poles, to avoid the magnetosphere, but nobody's talking about (least of all our NASA scientists) what is involved in protecting passengers from Van Allen radiation, out there and how that affected or affects moon missions.

We have sufficient samples of UFO reports to realize we're being visited; however, our governments are so invested in secrecy, practically nobody would even venture a guess, what's really going on.

Another thing that puzzles me is why more people aren't asking questions about the NASA satellite photos of the moon that show massive photoshop brushing out features. When are we going to start to insist on being informed about what is actually true? I get so tired of this.

The most beautiful Mars photos I've ever seen are on KeithLaney.com; but I see his site's down. He's been out of circulation.

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:09 am

check out aichip's site for similarly interesting images from Mars. He also has some good lunar stuff

shechaiyah · Post by **shechaiyah** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:51 pm

aichip?

He doesn't seem to be listed among the members.

Yes, indeed, I would like to see his site. Please clarify.

Thanks.

Shechaiyah

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:24 pm

http://xenotechresearch.com/fossilguide.htm
http://xenotechresearch.com/Chapter_10proofed.doc
http://xenotechresearch.com/Chapter_11.doc

He is a large contributer to this thread which has some Moon links too (somewhere in it) http://asterisk.apod.com/vie ... 76&start=0

shechaiyah · Post by **shechaiyah** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:33 am

Cool! I can spend a lot of time window shopping there. I guess, I'm more interested in the technical artifacts than the shells.

This looks like a machined hunk of metal -- too many right angels and perfect holes to be a natural thing.

Thank you for the links!

But I still wonder, with all the satellites we've got wandering around, why there's no photos of the moon's backside, to speak of.

Doggone it, I couldn't get the docs to open: I have open office, and not MSword .

:shrug:

Chai

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:32 am

shechaiyah wrote:Insofar as the third option goes, I understand the Van Allen radiation belts extent from 1000 miles from earth outward.

Wouldn't those belts preclude ANY traffic?

See this excerpt from WIKI
Energetic electrons form two distinct radiation belts, while protons form a single belt. Within these belts are particles capable of penetrating about 1 g/cm2 [2] of shielding (e.g., 1 millimetre of lead).

So if a space faring vehicle has lead shielding equal to about 1/4 inch of lead, all inside would be protected from this radiation.