On Feb 25, 9:31 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal skrev:



On Feb 25, 11:18 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
caliber wrote:
On Feb 24, 3:51 am, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 6:07 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:58 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:54 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:31 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:08 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 10:57 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 1:59 pm, caliber wrote:
many years thay been able to send satellites
orbiting tha moon very closely
tha not close enuff
giv me a break,
you can see cars and shoes from space
throo google earth,
No you can't, not from space.
are you saying that tha earth we see from
google is not pictures taken from space?
Not if it is showing "cars and shoes".
if you say you cant see cars and walking
people thro google earth you are a blind
man or a liar
and if you register, they give you even higher
resolution
but anyhow, they pretend getting images
of objects on earth from satelites with
cm resolution
Where do they pretend that? Can you link me to
an image with cm resolution, that claims it is
from space?
you can link yourself many places, they say not me
No they don't.
There, that was easy to disprove.
Guess how you could prove me wrong?
fine, tell me than what are thay doing in space
all years long if not watching earth or somthin
also, what is tha highest resolution do you
think they can get
Commercially? A meter perhaps. I was reading a web
page today that offered resolution down to 3 inches
(7.5 cm) but that was from aircraft.
- Randy
you are even more wrong now than you been before
thanks
they imposibly can have so many aircrafts to
so many walking people
now, if you clearly can see a car from space,
than a lunar base station from a satellite orbiting
tha moon will have even higher resolution
becus tha satellites orbit tha moon closer to
tha moon than they orbit tha earth
tha moon has lower gravity fool
so tha moon resolution should be 10 times higher
http://tinyurl.com/2c4eofhttp://www....unches/mission...

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

finally a nice answer, thanks

but still im not confinced,

tha image is at best 400x300 pixels, and easy to fake

even my litle sister has a camera with better resolution

Any image can be faked.
If you are one of those cranks who believe NASA is faking its images,
nothing can convince you about the opposite.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

contrarily i am not an anbuliver

i am just wondering, that all they have after all these
years, a single 400x300x 8bit gray scale resolution

this is too easy

impossible that they dont have more many

tantal skrev:
On Feb 25, 9:31 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal skrev:



On Feb 25, 11:18 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
caliber wrote:
On Feb 24, 3:51 am, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 6:07 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:58 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:54 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:31 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:08 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 10:57 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 1:59 pm, caliber wrote:
many years thay been able to send satellites
orbiting tha moon very closely
tha not close enuff
giv me a break,
you can see cars and shoes from space
throo google earth,
No you can't, not from space.
are you saying that tha earth we see from
google is not pictures taken from space?
Not if it is showing "cars and shoes".
if you say you cant see cars and walking
people thro google earth you are a blind
man or a liar
and if you register, they give you even higher
resolution
but anyhow, they pretend getting images
of objects on earth from satelites with
cm resolution
Where do they pretend that? Can you link me to
an image with cm resolution, that claims it is
from space?
you can link yourself many places, they say not me
No they don't.
There, that was easy to disprove.
Guess how you could prove me wrong?
fine, tell me than what are thay doing in space
all years long if not watching earth or somthin
also, what is tha highest resolution do you
think they can get
Commercially? A meter perhaps. I was reading a web
page today that offered resolution down to 3 inches
(7.5 cm) but that was from aircraft.
- Randy
you are even more wrong now than you been before
thanks
they imposibly can have so many aircrafts to
so many walking people
now, if you clearly can see a car from space,
than a lunar base station from a satellite orbiting
tha moon will have even higher resolution
becus tha satellites orbit tha moon closer to
tha moon than they orbit tha earth
tha moon has lower gravity fool
so tha moon resolution should be 10 times higher
http://tinyurl.com/2c4eofhttp://www....unches/mission...
--
Paul
http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/
finally a nice answer, thanks
but still im not confinced,
tha image is at best 400x300 pixels, and easy to fake
even my litle sister has a camera with better resolution
Any image can be faked.
If you are one of those cranks who believe NASA is faking its images,
nothing can convince you about the opposite.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

contrarily i am not an anbuliver

So why are you anbuliving that the picture shows what it says?

i am just wondering, that all they have after all these
years, a single 400x300x 8bit gray scale resolution

this is too easy

impossible that they dont have more many

Of course they have many images of the landing sites.
http://www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/clementine/clib/
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunar_orbiter/
You will find all the landing sites in these pictures.
But what do you expect you should see?
Footsteps? :-)


--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

On Feb 25, 10:24 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal skrev:



On Feb 25, 9:31 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal skrev:

On Feb 25, 11:18 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
caliber wrote:
On Feb 24, 3:51 am, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 6:07 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:58 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:54 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:31 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:08 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 10:57 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 1:59 pm, caliber wrote:
many years thay been able to send satellites
orbiting tha moon very closely
tha not close enuff
giv me a break,
you can see cars and shoes from space
throo google earth,
No you can't, not from space.
are you saying that tha earth we see from
google is not pictures taken from space?
Not if it is showing "cars and shoes".
if you say you cant see cars and walking
people thro google earth you are a blind
man or a liar
and if you register, they give you even higher
resolution
but anyhow, they pretend getting images
of objects on earth from satelites with
cm resolution
Where do they pretend that? Can you link me to
an image with cm resolution, that claims it is
from space?
you can link yourself many places, they say not me
No they don't.
There, that was easy to disprove.
Guess how you could prove me wrong?
fine, tell me than what are thay doing in space
all years long if not watching earth or somthin
also, what is tha highest resolution do you
think they can get
Commercially? A meter perhaps. I was reading a web
page today that offered resolution down to 3 inches
(7.5 cm) but that was from aircraft.
- Randy
you are even more wrong now than you been before
thanks
they imposibly can have so many aircrafts to
so many walking people
now, if you clearly can see a car from space,
than a lunar base station from a satellite orbiting
tha moon will have even higher resolution
becus tha satellites orbit tha moon closer to
tha moon than they orbit tha earth
tha moon has lower gravity fool
so tha moon resolution should be 10 times higher
http://tinyurl.com/2c4eofhttp://www....unches/mission...
--
Paul
http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/
finally a nice answer, thanks
but still im not confinced,
tha image is at best 400x300 pixels, and easy to fake
even my litle sister has a camera with better resolution
Any image can be faked.
If you are one of those cranks who believe NASA is faking its images,
nothing can convince you about the opposite.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

contrarily i am not an anbuliver

So why are you anbuliving that the picture shows what it says?

i am just wondering, that all they have after all these
years, a single 400x300x 8bit gray scale resolution

this is too easy

impossible that they dont have more many

Of course they have many images of the landing

except landing bases?

sites.http://www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/clementine/clib/http://
www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunar_orbiter/
You will find all the landing sites in these pictures.
But what do you expect you should see?
Footsteps? :-)

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

On Feb 25, 10:24 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal skrev:



On Feb 25, 9:31 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal skrev:

On Feb 25, 11:18 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
caliber wrote:
On Feb 24, 3:51 am, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 6:07 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:58 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:54 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 11:31 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:08 pm, caliber wrote:
On Feb 23, 10:57 pm, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 23, 1:59 pm, caliber wrote:
many years thay been able to send satellites
orbiting tha moon very closely
tha not close enuff
giv me a break,
you can see cars and shoes from space
throo google earth,
No you can't, not from space.
are you saying that tha earth we see from
google is not pictures taken from space?
Not if it is showing "cars and shoes".
if you say you cant see cars and walking
people thro google earth you are a blind
man or a liar
and if you register, they give you even higher
resolution
but anyhow, they pretend getting images
of objects on earth from satelites with
cm resolution
Where do they pretend that? Can you link me to
an image with cm resolution, that claims it is
from space?
you can link yourself many places, they say not me
No they don't.
There, that was easy to disprove.
Guess how you could prove me wrong?
fine, tell me than what are thay doing in space
all years long if not watching earth or somthin
also, what is tha highest resolution do you
think they can get
Commercially? A meter perhaps. I was reading a web
page today that offered resolution down to 3 inches
(7.5 cm) but that was from aircraft.
- Randy
you are even more wrong now than you been before
thanks
they imposibly can have so many aircrafts to
so many walking people
now, if you clearly can see a car from space,
than a lunar base station from a satellite orbiting
tha moon will have even higher resolution
becus tha satellites orbit tha moon closer to
tha moon than they orbit tha earth
tha moon has lower gravity fool
so tha moon resolution should be 10 times higher
http://tinyurl.com/2c4eofhttp://www....unches/mission...
--
Paul
http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/
finally a nice answer, thanks
but still im not confinced,
tha image is at best 400x300 pixels, and easy to fake
even my litle sister has a camera with better resolution
Any image can be faked.
If you are one of those cranks who believe NASA is faking its images,
nothing can convince you about the opposite.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

contrarily i am not an anbuliver

So why are you anbuliving that the picture shows what it says?

i am just wondering, that all they have after all these
years, a single 400x300x 8bit gray scale resolution

this is too easy

impossible that they dont have more many

Of course they have many images of the landing sites.http://www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/clementi...lunar_orbiter/
You will find all the landing sites in these pictures.
But what do you expect you should see?
Footsteps? :-)

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

can you somthin strange in this picture?
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-49-7213HR.jpg

On Feb 25, 1:24 pm, "Paul B. Andersen" wrote:

Of course they have many images of the landing sites.
http://www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/clementine/clib/
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunar_orbiter/

You will find all the landing sites in these pictures.
But what do you expect you should see?
Footsteps? :-)

With a stunt like that, don't tell me you are ready to sell the
Brooklyn Bridge to the highest bidder. :-)

On Feb 25, 8:26 am, Randy Poe wrote:
On Feb 25, 1:10 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:

Well, Mr. Poe, after you have been checkmated by the radiation
analysis from the solar wind that the deep space radiation beyond the
Van Allen Belts is actually very deadly indeed, you still resort to
blindly believe in that manned moon-landing hoax.

As I recall, this "analysis" is that because 10-year
deep-space missions are rad-hardened to X rads, then
1-week missions must also experience X rads, right?
Since 10 years and 1 week are the same thing.

Well, we did address deeper than that. Apparently, your recollection
is far from perfect. Well, your excuse can be 'nobody is perfect'.
shrug

This shows your *faith* in *believe in* the Apollo manned moon-landing
crap. After all, it is supposed to be a scientific exploration. It
ends up being a religion. shrug

tantal wrote:

can you somthin strange in this picture?
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-49-7213HR.jpg

No.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

On Feb 26, 2:15 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal wrote:

can you somthin strange in this picture?
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-49-7213HR.jpg

No.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

im still not quite sure that is nothing wrong
in that pictures

why not hundreds of high resolution pictures
of that area of interest

everybody children would have interest to
see that area

tantal skrev:
On Feb 26, 2:15 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal wrote:

can you somthin strange in this picture?
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-49-7213HR.jpg
No.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

im still not quite sure that is nothing wrong
in that pictures

why not hundreds of high resolution pictures
of that area of interest

everybody children would have interest to
see that area

There are hundreds of high resolution pictures of the landing areas.
http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

On Feb 26, 9:07 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal skrev:



On Feb 26, 2:15 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:
tantal wrote:

can you somthin strange in this picture?
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-49-7213HR.jpg
No.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

im still not quite sure that is nothing wrong
in that pictures

why not hundreds of high resolution pictures
of that area of interest

everybody children would have interest to
see that area

There are hundreds of high resolution pictures of the landing areas.http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html

and why no any high res pictures of landing bases they left,
taken from lunar orbiting satellites?


--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/