Moon landing pictures question

aln · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:05

Being smaller, any distance between two points would be more curved, thus the distance you can see before the horizon dips below a viewable level would be shorter. This means in theory, you're right, you actually can't see as far.

Alternatively the type of camera used to shoot, the height its taken from, and the consistency of the pictures probably play more of a part. In the moon picture, we can't really judge how far we're able to see based on not knowing how big those craters should be, whilst in the field, we can judge the distances based on knowing roughly how big the crops are.

Another suggestion is that the moon landing is fake, but before we go down that route, maybe we want to compare the moon landing picture with something that is actually flat. Or am I the only one who things that theres a hill on the other side of the road?

Craig321 · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:06

It's because the moon is flat.

anything I don't mind · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:07

It is cause all the images of the moon are fake. Proven without a doubt.

Nasa produced rockets and to think that man went to moon on jet fuel and batteries is not only hilarious but it is also an evil lie that tricked the world.

terrible i know.

sigma · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:09

I thought the moon was hollow? Maybe the opening is behind him?

Marine Iguana · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:10

groen said:
It is cause all the images of the moon are fake. Proven without a doubt.

Nasa produced rockets and to think that man went to moon on jet fuel and batteries is not only hilarious but it is also an evil lie that tricked the world.

terrible i know.

Yes and Pokémon are real :rolleyes:

The Funktopus · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:11

I'd seriously recommend putting your "ZOMGZ the moon landings were faked!!1!1!!11!" comments to Buzz Aldrin personally. Even at his age, he will end you.

I don't think you become a fighter ace by being a coward brah, as you just found to your cost.

alex24 · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:11

groen said:
It is cause all the images of the moon are fake. Proven without a doubt.

Nasa produced rockets and to think that man went to moon on jet fuel and batteries is not only hilarious but it is also an evil lie that tricked the world.

terrible i know.

I would like to hear more of your theories.

stulid · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:14

Todge said:
got a decent res image for me to see that?

"andy" · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:14

try looking for our horizon in the dark

Murray · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:14

its because they got hungry and took a bite of the cheese

anything I don't mind · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:15

There are just soo many problems with the moon missions from the 60s and 70s that is unbelievable that sensible people can still possibly hang on to the lie.

How did they power the craft 240 000kms and then how did they get back 240 000kms
how did they power the suits and the air conditioning in them, how did the million dollar rover get power ? car batteries ? yep!!! LOL!!!

You hear that, all we need to go to the moon is a big rocket and some car batteries.

my coffee machine has more advanced chips then they had in 1969 mate. lol!!!

sigma · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:16

Well yeah, the technology they used was pretty basic so it wouldn't need much power at all.

You can still have electronics without microchips....

I guess the space station is fake too? What is it, a weather balloon?

BigglesPiP · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:16

The moon being 6 times smaller, the horizon is closer. If the astronaut was also 6 times smaller it would look the same.

Marine Iguana · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:18

groen said:
my coffee machine has more advanced chips then they had in 1969 mate. lol!!!

No sense this makes :confused:

Tefal · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:21

what you've got to remember is groen believes you need the constant thrust of a rocket as powerful as a Saturn 5 to even move in space or you'll stop...

MOOGLEYS · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:21

The moon landings were tracked on Radar by a few countries inc the Uk, Russia and Australia. Nasa released info on where the craft would be at points so it could be tracked.

Marine Iguana · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:22

Tefal said:
what you've got to remember is groen believes you need the constant thrust of a rocket as powerful as a Saturn 5 to even move in space or you'll stop...

Oh forgot about the friction in a vacuum

sigma · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:23

MOOGLEYS said:
The moon landings were tracked on Radar by a few countries inc the Uk, Russia and Australia. Nasa released info on where the craft would be at points so it could be tracked.

Yeah but they sent up a slice of cheese, not a space craft.

MOOGLEYS · 17 Jan 2011 at 18:23

sigma said:
Yeah but they set up a slice of cheese, not a space craft.

lol...