Chandrayaan Maps Apollo Missions 86
maheshc writes "Chandrayaan has mapped 6 Apollo landing sites on the Moon (Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17). More at the Times of India. Perhaps time to retire all the conspiracy theories ..."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Chandrayaan Maps Apollo Missions
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.
Uh Huh (Score:5, Funny)
Pics or it didn't happen.
Re: (Score:1)
And even if we have pics. They're obviously part of the conspiracy !
It isn't because you're paranoid that they aren't out to get you.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you meant: w00t?
-dZ.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
C'mon, it's a Wallace and Gromit reference, mods.
Of course they found the Apollo sites.. (Score:1)
Soundstage on Mars (Score:1)
No, no - the Apollo 11 site is a soundstage on Mars [xkcd.com].
Darn, where's the three musketeers (Odyssey, Express, Reconnaissance) when you need them?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Because even experts took 15 to 30 seconds to reload after firing their musket, and back then the bayonet fit -into- the barrel, not over it.
Please... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps time to retire all the conspiracy theories ...
Oh come on, you know how this is going to go. The conspiracy theorists will claim any photos are real terrain photos with CGI Apollo artifacts added. Or maybe CGI terrain photos with CGI Apollo artifacts added.
I fully believe that there exist people whose belief in their conspiracies is so unshakeable that you could load them onto a rocket, fly their worthless ass to the moon, land them at the Apollo sites, let them see the items firsthand, and they would STILL deny that we went there 40-ish years ago.
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
I fully believe that there exist people whose belief in their conspiracies is so unshakeable that you could load them onto a rocket, fly their worthless ass to the moon, land them at the Apollo sites, let them see the items firsthand, and they would STILL deny that we went there 40-ish years ago.
That's when you crack their visors open. Win-win for everyone involved.
Re: (Score:1)
For conspiracy theorists this is obvious... Sreekumar didn't quit his job in the US... he was sent to work on the Indian moon team to make sure they properly "found" and "mapped" the sites.
I'm no conspiracy theorist but I sure would like to see pictures. The discussion about why nobody has sent a mission to the moon that was able to do just this came up at work last week and when I saw this article I thought we'd be able to close the topic at work and move on to better things.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But, you can be placed on a centerfuge and give a acceleration that is indeed correct, but imply you're being launched...
You can give a _locally_Euclidean_ acceleration which is correct, but not a _non_locally_Euclidean_ acceleration which is correct (in other words, tidal forces will be very significant, especially for any centrifuge which is smaller than the entire earth. Someone simply dropping two objects separated by a meter or so can easily detect if they're in a gravity well---or in a centrifuge---or being accelerated more linearly, as to the moon).
Re:Please... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
A good crackpot cares about facts but with a reality inversion field:
"Because they try to discredit us, we must be getting close to the truth"
"Because they manufacture all this evidence, we must be getting close to the truth"
"Because they fake all these witnesses, we must be getting close to the truth"
A true conspiracy theorists will use any contradicting evidence as proof he's right. In fact, the more intensely anyone tries to prove them otherwise, the more convinced they become that they're right. If peop
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Newton was in on it too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Either that or they'd say, "Sure, NOW we have the technology to land on the moon-- which is why you put all that stuff here last week!"
Re: (Score:2)
let them see the items firsthand, and they would STILL deny that we went there 40-ish years ago.
I ain't buying into your charade! Clearly you are willing to fly me to a landing site that you have staged to cover up the fact that you didn't go there forty years ago! omg! omg! The truth is out there! Fox Mulder forever! omg!
Re: (Score:1)
There is, sadly, a lot of truth to the statement that conservatives are more likely to fall for conspiracy theories. There is iron-clad proof that Obama's birth certificate is real [politifact.com]; despite this, conservative news sites still continue to believe "Obama's birth certificate is fake" conspiracy theories [wnd.com].
Re: (Score:2)
In other news, I for one welcome our new alien overlords!
Re: (Score:1)
I don't mind well-formed conservative arguments; John Ringo [johnringo.com], for example, is a writer who is quite conservative but who I greatly enjoy reading.
My issue is that a pretty mainstream conservative site is giving us "OMG, Obama wasn't really born in Hawaii" nonsense. Or, likewise, the mainstream conservative news network (Fox news, or s
It's a waste of time trying to convince them. (Score:3, Insightful)
There will be no way you can convince the conspiracy fans. This includes all of the conspiracy theories, you just can't satisfy these people. They will simply say that NASA and the Indian space agency are in cahoots and they will dismiss it.
Re:It's a waste of time trying to convince them. (Score:4, Interesting)
They will simply say that NASA and the Indian space agency are in cahoots and they will dismiss it.
That's the way it works.
The basic thought pattern also suggests that they believe the Soviets and the US were in cahoots too, either that or they haven't thought the objections through. Maybe they don't say it outright, but that's the logical conclusion of their arguments because if the Soviets had any reason to believe it was all faked, they could have said so very loudly, and I don't recall stumbling across anything like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Offshore (Score:5, Funny)
What?! Now they're out-sourcing the conspiracies to foreign workers?! This is a travesty! America deserves a Government who will maintain an American workforce to craft it's most inner secrets and public deceptions.
Re: (Score:2)
Dont worry, the self-important nutters have moved on to 9/11 "inside job" theories. Apollo denial is out of fashion.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you kidding? That conspiracy was farmed out to the Israelies. No wonder America is in such a dire economic situation.
Calm down, Chandrayaan is safe in Area 51 (Score:4, Funny)
The Indian Space Agency is just receiving data that it *thinks* is coming from the moon, and not from a desert in Nevada.
The space shuttle caught Chandrayaan on its last mission, and brought it back to Earth. The space shuttle carried a giant baseball shortstop's glove fitted to the shuttle's robot arm to perform the catch. The Philadelphia Phillies advised on the project, and were paid in Jim's cheese steaks, as not to leave a financial paper trail.
Once in Area 51, sinister scientists there had no problem to electronically feed it with bogus data, so Chandrayaan thinks that it has really reached to moon.
Including, of course, photos of sites on the moon where the fake Apollo landings supposedly took place.
It all seems pretty logical to me.
Re: (Score:1)
Pictures? (Score:1, Redundant)
Where are the pictures?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, you're supposed to say "GIFS or it didn't happen!"
Six? (Score:5, Interesting)
"Chandrayaan has mapped 6 Apollo landing sites on the Moon (Apollo 11, 12, 14 15 and 17)"
I count that as five. So the Apollo 16 landing (only) was faked?
Mod Parent up -- Good catch! (Score:4, Informative)
Apollo 11, 1969, Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Michael Collins
Apollo 12, 1969, Charles (Pete) Conrad, , Alan Bean, Richard Francis Gordon
Apollo 14, 1971, Alan Shepard, Edgar Mitchell, Stuart Roosa
Apollo 15, 1971, David Scott, James Irwin, Alfred Worden
Apollo 16, 1972, John Young, Charles Duke, Thomas Mattingly
Apollo 17, 1972, Eugene Cernan, Harrison Schmitt, Ronald Evans
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
(whoosh)
Apollo 13 never landed on the Moon, so there's no 13 landing site. There should be an Apollo 16 landing site on that list.
Proof of Alien Apollo Missions (Score:2)
Well, this all seems pretty obvious to me. Chandrayaan found the landing sites of 6 Apollo missions, but only 5 of them came from the Earth (Apollo 11, 12, 14 15 and 17). So when they find the site of Apollo 16, that will leave them with a total of 7. But the NASA only did 6 missions to the moon! So who did the seventh?
Obviously, aliens. We are not alone. And they have been *real* near us; on the Moon.
Watch the sky tonight, and all nights from now on.
You have been warned.
Re: (Score:2)
So who did the seventh?
Ron Howard [imdb.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So when they find the site of Apollo 16, that will leave them with a total of 7. But the NASA only did 6 missions to the moon! So who did the seventh?
The CIA, with leftover Apollo hardware, to check out an apparent Soviet landing. (That's actually the plot of my recent NaNoWriMo novel, still in progress.)
Can never prove complete idiots wrong. (Score:1)
The Nuts Vote (Score:2)
Ignoring the nuts would be nice, but these people vote. They vote against "wasting" tax payers' money on "$3 million overhead projectors". They vote to end "needless subsidies to study the genetics of fruit flys, the effects of global warming", etc.
Re:"All the conspiracy theories" ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Proof: I hate that word.
Intellectuals don't seek proof, they seek evidence. We sought it, and we received plenty. Sure, the footage could conceivably have been faked, but the mirrors, which are still testable today, could not have been unless they were already there, or they placed them there later. There are countless other pieces of evidence, making it hard to reach any other conclusion. The only alternative hypotheses that are supported by all of the evidence are so far fetched that the question becomes a no-brainer.
Conspiracy theorists seek proof because there is no such thing. They don't want to come to the logical conclusion, so they ignore the evidence, and require this thing you call "proof". You can't "prove" to someone that you exist (you might just be a figment of their imagination); all you can do is provide evidence, and let them decide on the strength of that evidence. If you can't prove something as obvious as your existence, then what hope do you have of proving something happened yesterday, or 40 years ago?
Even mathematical proof is meaningless in the absence of axioms, so can we please stop using that word?
Bollywood and Disney Conspiracy!!! (Score:4, Funny)
Can't you see this is just more proof the moon landings didn't happen!? It's all part of a massive deal between Disney studios that shot the original moon landings and Bollywood. In exchange for their support Bollywood have the rights for Highschool Musical 4: Summer in Mumbai in which the kids all get summer jobs in an Indian call center but struggle to fit in because their names don't need to be westernized. Disney will also be outsourcing the next lunar landings to a Bollywood studio to cut costs. Expect to see moon rocks in the shape of traditional Indian cusine some time early next decade.
Outsourcing (Score:3, Funny)
From what I understood is that NASA is now outsourcing its Conspiracy Coverup Unit (CCU) to India. Next thing you'll hear would be how some scientist in Bangalore had discovered previously unseen 1080i footage of JFK assassination.
Re: (Score:2)
The beauty of conspiracy theories... (Score:3, Insightful)
..is that anything that doesn't fit your theory can be explained away as part of the conspiracy. The nutters will continue to be nutty.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
you know there ARE real conspiracies. here's a great example [chomsky.info]:
The Fate of an Honest Intellectual
Noam Chomsky
[Excerpted from Understanding Power, The New Press, 2002, pp. 244-248]
I'll tell you another, last case-and there are many others like this. Here's a story which is really tragic. How many of you know about Joan Peters, the book by Joan Peters? There was this best-seller a few years ago [in 1984], it went through about ten printings, by a woman named Joan Peters-or at least, signed by Joan Peters-calle
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That source code modification was no accident. No one "accidentally" does conscientous enough work to get the type of status that allows them to make that modification, then makes a specific, "underhanded" change that makes the algorithm handshake to one of 100,000 keypairs (not one of a very few, or always the same one -- one of 100,000, so that even if people actually looked at some of the keys they would assume each one was random), while getting the change approved.
that statement is pretty much entire
Nah, just let them swear on the bible... (Score:2)
...that it's not a hoax.
Worked last time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU&NR=1 [youtube.com]
Sort-of.
Maybe I missed something... (Score:2)
Its all about the resolution (Score:3, Informative)
Chandrayaan's camera [wikipedia.org] only has a resolution of 5M - a LEM descent stage barely fills a pixel. One more anonymous dot among many, neither ammunition for or against conspiracy nutters.
Anyhow, if you bother to read TFA you'll find they had a much more prosaic purpose - to compare the readings from their instruments to the known regolith and rock at the landing sites in order to check their calibration.
Of course, the real question is (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> have they found the secret moon base that ppl claim we have? :)
That was the Nazis that you are thinking of (unless your "we" *is* the National Socialist German Workers' party, of course).
Or SHADO, I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
A few years back I was handed a cassette with an Art Bell interview of Ingo Swann. Swann had appeared on Bell's show in support of his then-recently released book, Penetration: The question of human and extraterrestrial telepathy. At one point Art Bell asked, "What's on the moon, Ingo?" Fascinating interview - I bet you could find a torrent, or buy the mp3 at coast2coastam.com [coasttocoastam.com].
The book is very interesting. I wonder if it's true that there is no high-resolution imagery of the moon available to the public...
WTF (Score:2)
Apollo is easy... (Score:2)
...did they find TMA-1?
I mean, we *know* where the Apollo sites are supposed to be.
What, again? (Score:2)
The Apollo sites have all been (re)mapped many times. The sites for Apollo 11, 14 and 15 (sites for Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment reflectors) have been mapped to an accuracy of a few meters, from Earth (a distance of 400,000 km), and that's been going on since Apollos were still going there. Since Chandrayaan is only 100 km from the moon, its ability to replicate the oft replicated deserves a resounding "I should hope so". Now when the Terrain (you use aposelene and periselene for orbital components but st
I wish they'd map the two Russian robotic probes (Score:2)
My wife bounces a laser off the moon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Point_Observatory_Lunar_Laser-ranging_Operation, as featured on Mythbusters) and one of the two Russian probes can no longer be hit by laser. It was reachable initially, something happened. Theories are: the position was not actually accurately known, or that perhaps the bracket that supported the mirror failed. My personal theory is that the moon men picked up the rover and moved it a few hundred meters just to screw with us.
Re: (Score:1)