Panoramic Photos From The Apollo Missions

Ant writes "This link lets you experience the moon just as the Apollo missions' astronauts did -- almost as you were there -- with QuickTime panorama views. Less known is that during all the missions they made image sequences which with todays computer technics can be stitched together into 360-degree interactive panoramas giving you the possibility to view the moon almost as you were there. Many of these panoramas have been published before, but in low resolution and displayed in small sizes. During the last year the original films have been rescanned in large resolution and the Apollo 11 images were released the week before the 35 year anniversary."

Comments

Conspiracy Theories

[JediLow]

But we never really did make it to the moon! As we all know it was all in hollywood!

Re:Conspiracy Theories

[dingfelder]

mod parent up...

this is funny :)

Re:Conspiracy Theories

[Alan Partridge]

Fuck you.

These are the finest images I've ever seen displayed on a computer screen, absolutely breathtaking. Thank you NASA - let's send high quality panoramic cameras to every body in the solar system!

Next stop, Europa.

Re:Conspiracy Theories

[Anonymous Coward]

some retard modded this as offtopic.

HOW STUPID.

the following post that had the same subject was rated as (Score:5, Funny) yet this first post on the topic is Score:0 , 50% troll, 50% funny.

Morons

Re:Conspiracy Theories

[lemonk]

All these worlds are yours except Europa.

Attempt no landings there.

Re:Conspiracy Theories

[kehren77]

Hey at least this time they almost got the lighting correct. All of the shadows point the same way, except the photographer/camera doesn't cast a shadow. Did Susan Richards take the photo or what?

Now I wonder

[Quasar1999]

How they got panoramic shots of the fake moon set without getting any of the lights or equipment in the shots... ;)

Let the conspiracy theorists loose... this should be fun... ;)

Re:Now I wonder

[PepsiProgrammer]

they simply lit it with spotlights from above where the panorama shows, or even simpler, they moved the cameras as they took the panarama shots. /conspiracy

I actually do believe we landed on the moon of course.

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

You've obviously never used photoshop.

Re:Now I wonder

[PepsiProgrammer]

The real mystery is why it took NASA only 7 years after jfk's speach in 62 to make it to the moon. But they estimate it will take 15 years here in 2005 to go again. I bet we could get up there in four years if we thought there was oil.

Re:Now I wonder

[EnronHaliburton2004]

I bet we could get up there in four years if we thought there was oil.

See the craters? I think we've already been there...

Re:Now I wonder

[Peyna]

The only way we will ever convince the skeptics is to load them all up in a rocket and send them their. In fact, that sounds like a real good idea.

Re:Now I wonder

[Peyna]

*there

bah.

Re:Now I wonder

[fm6]

Since the whole "back to the moon" thing is pure political flimflam, Bush has to say 15 years. If he said, 7 years, he'd have to make real progress while he's still President. This way he can just order a few bogus studies and projects, and claim to be the new JFK.

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet the slashdot crowd could get up there in four years if we thought there were females.

Re:Now I wonder

[xbmodder]

HAHAHAH, prolly, but only really hot females that are gauranteed to give us some ass.

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you mean, "if" there were oil. There IS oil. Black gold. Texas tea. PETROL-EUM. From the ancient fossilized moon palm trees the devil planted in the moon to make us believe in evolution. Oodles and oodles of it. There's oil everywhere - it just stands in pools on the moon. [If we all start saying it, maybe they'll believe it.]

Oh, and dolphins. In the maria. And they're endangered!!! And they talk!!! [Might as well get the idiots of both parties on our side . . . ]

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet we could get up there in four years if we thought there was oil.

Or WMD, or Osama, or some other magic evil entity. Hell, I bet the Chinese will start another space race with the U.S. because they are evil communists and have nukes.

Re:Now I wonder

[Uhlek]

The Apollo missions, like most of our early space program, were largely a kludge, and, in some opinions, a huge waste of time and resources.

New technologies and PR aside, the Apollo program accomplished very little except getting some footprints on the moon. We'd focused all our energy on sending people to the moon, once that was accomplished, we were ten years behind in establishing a support base upon which to implement constant space exploration, and lack of motivation kept us slipping past that. We never really recovered, and today we aren't much further along than we were in 1962, except in terms of technology. The shuttle is of limited use, and the space station itself is nearly useless as an orbital base (thanks to its orbit and lack of any crew transfer mechanism except the oversized, over-expensive shuttle). Can't recall where I'd heard it, but there's a comparison to using the shuttle to get to the space station like using a semi to get to work. It's impractical, we need a small commuter car, and maybe an SUV for the mid-sized jobs as well.

That's not to say that nothing good came out of the Apollo program. But, we spent so much money on it that once we got there, the "now what" train of thought kicked in, and other programs that were less exciting (space lab, etc) received less funding.

Instead of rushing to the Moon, if we'd focused first on establishing a permanent orbital presense along with a small suite of multipurpose reusable spacecraft (large cargo units like the Shuttle, along with small crewboats for crew transfers), and *then* gone to the moon, we'd be a lot further along now than we are.

Hopefully, NASA is looking further ahead than the next "big thing". Slow and steady wins the race, and planting feet on Mars will be meaningless if we don't follow it up with a continuious presence, a goal we abandoned following Apollo.

Re:Now I wonder

[Hawthorne01]

All I know is, I can't even look at the fake panoramic shots of a fake moon mission because of the /. effect, so it really maybe it IS all a fake.

Or is there some kind of double-negative rule kicks in here, and they're real, but I am not?

Re:Now I wonder

[moosesocks]

Errrm. I'm pretty sure it's bad karma to claim to be related to the Kennedys.

Re:Now I wonder

[uberdave]

No, the Slashdot crowd would be content with sending robotic cameras.

Re:Now I wonder

[mboverload]

No you idiot, they sent Gundam 01 to take the shots.

Re:Now I wonder

[Mononoke]

The only way we will ever convince the skeptics is to load them all up in a rocket and send them their. In fact, that sounds like a real good idea.

Yes. We can put them in the B-Ark with all of the hairdressers and telephone-sanitizers.

Re:Now I wonder

[SteveXE]

If there was oil it wouldnt take 7 years...hell i dont think it would take 7 days. Think about it, Oil+Bush+nobody to kill=quick easy profit, 3 days tops.

Re:Now I wonder

[el-spectre]

and the answer for $200....

Because we don't want to spend several percent of the GNP to do it.

Re:Now I wonder

[laughingcoyote]

Great idea!

I'm a skeptic! Can I go? Please?

Erm...I mean, prove it to me, you lying bastards.

Re:Now I wonder

[iocat]

What about Tang! And that foam they make those expensive matresses out of! And that pen that writes upside down!

Frankly, I am quite pleased with the civilian dividends of the Apollo Program.

Re:Now I wonder

[Skippy_kangaroo]

Actually that won't convince them either.

They will no doubt report that they were shot full of hallucinogenic drugs and put into a cheap amusement park ride in an effort to convince them.

You can not convince someone who has already made up their mind.

Re:Now I wonder

[Skippy_kangaroo]

It's quite simple - 7 years there, 7 years back and 1 for sightseeing. Kind of like a trip to Australia only a little longer.

Re:Now I wonder

[strelitsa]

Only if you're a passenger in Teddy's car. And then only if you don't have gills.

Re:Now I wonder

[FuzzyBad-Mofo]

And religious fundamentalists. [tt]

Re:Now I wonder

[FuzzyBad-Mofo]

Let the conspiracy theorists loose

Did anybody else get thrown by the correct usage of "loose"? I've been reading Slashdot too long..

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

Is invading Iraq more or less boneheaded than threatening nuclear war over Cuba? I guess history will be the judge...

Re:Now I wonder

[cooley]

Good thing I've already been collecting leaves!!

ha-ha!

Re:Now I wonder

[soldeed]

The real mystery is why it took NASA only 7 years after jfk's speach in 62 to make it to the moon.

Let me spell it out for you;

Money, Moolah, greenbacks, bread, dough, dead presidents, cash, lettuce. The spigot was open, the blank check was written, all that was needed was allocated, and then some. And then we did it. and then the bank was closed. During the 1960's, NASA's budget was 5% of the American Federal Budget. In 2003, it had fallen to less than 0.7% - nearly a factor of 10 times smaller!!! Throw enough money at an mere engineering challenge and you can do just about anything!

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

Methinks you underestimate how huge those "new technologies" that came from the Apollo project were. Without Apollo computers would in all likelihood not be nearly as far along as there are today. And thats just one of the major things that Apollo gave us.

Re:Now I wonder

[soldeed]

New technologies and PR aside, the Apollo program accomplished very little except getting some footprints on the moon. HOGWASH! Please read this article aboutLunar Rock Science.We learned a great deal about the moon including the presently accepted theory about it's origins.

Re:Now I wonder

[KingArthur10]

Although I don't really know one way or another, I think a good way to finalize my belief would be if I could use a telescope to physically see what was left on the moon. Personally, I feel that if the skeptics don't take steps to prove themselves wrong, then they are just people who don't want to be like everyone else. lol.

Re:Now I wonder

[soldeed]

Oops! Okay, let me try that again, HEREis the article about Lunar rock science.

Re:Now I wonder

[mark-t]

actually, a _REAL_ skeptic would probably choose to think that the experience was part of a controlled drug-induced hallucination rather than fact, and afterwards all he'd tell you is that you were able to, for a time, deceive all of his senses, but his mental faculties were aware that it was illusion the entire time.

Re:Now I wonder

[Michael_Burton]

I'm a skeptic! Can I go? Please?

Read the fine print, or you might overlook a crucial fact about the "Proof" mission: it's a one-way ride.

The Moon is a fascinating place, but it gets progressively less interesting as your oxygen runs out.

Re:Now I wonder

[Alien Venom]

There sure seems like an absence of stars. It must be fake.

Re:Now I wonder

[FleaPlus]

The real mystery is why it took NASA only 7 years after jfk's speach in 62 to make it to the moon. But they estimate it will take 15 years here in 2005 to go again.

(copies old post)

Here are some good reasons for why it'll take longer this time:

1. They had pretty much all the funding they could possibly want during the space race. This time they don't have that luxury.

2. Much greater safety paranoia now. When the crew of Apollo 1 was killed, NASA fixed the problem and moved on with the program. They didn't paralyze their manned spaceflight program, go into a period of national mourning, and launch congressional investigation committees.

3. Von Braun and the other German rocket geniuses who essentially designed and built the rockets they used are just about all dead. Granted, there's some folks around who trained under them, but there's no one with their sheer amount of experience.

4. NASA is much more diversified now than it used to be. Back then, landing on the moon was their one and only goal, and they were able to focus all their resources towards achieving that goal. Nowadays, it's almost impossible to cancel old programs and refocus on something else, because some constituency is going to have NASA's head on a platter.

5. The last time around, all they cared about was getting on the moon. This time, we want to not only land a brief mission on the moon, but we want to create a permanent, self-sustaining settlement there. We want to be sure that the systems we develop are not just going to be suitable for a one-shot quick landing, but that they'll also be useful for a permanent moon settlement.

Re:Now I wonder

[PyroMosh]

Yes, that had everything to do with Cuba, and absolutely nothing to do wiht SRBMS being within easy disance of the entire Eastern Seaboard of the U.S.

Re:Now I wonder

[Bega]

The Moon is a fascinating place, but it gets progressively less interesting as your oxygen runs out.

On the contrary, as you're running out of oxygen, moon dust becomes largely interesting during your last breath.

Re:Now I wonder

[Feztaa]

Your joke is of course funny, but you overlook the fact that this planet already IS the B-Ark... :(

Re:Now I wonder

[rhuntley12]

I can think of worse ways to die, very few that would be more desirable. That saying you have to die. Now give me about 30 more years of life and I might be willing;)

Re:Now I wonder

[Kjella]

Can't recall where I'd heard it, but there's a comparison to using the shuttle to get to the space station like using a semi to get to work. It's impractical, we need a small commuter car

In other words, the ESA and whatever the asians have are the world's greatest hope. I've seen the Small commUter Vechicles USA has.

Re:Now I wonder

[KontinMonet]

Hah! Yes, I had to read it a couple of times too...

Re:Now I wonder

[geeber]

Send them their *what*? Now you have me wondering. Send them their shoes? Send them their garden hoses?

The mind boggles.

Re:Now I wonder

[Peyna]

If you bothered to read my other reply to my comment you would realize that I corrected the spelling error ASAP after posting.

Re:Now I wonder

[fm6]

Enough with the standard Teddy-bashing quips. I've been listening to them for a couple of decades, and I don't recall them ever adding anything to a real discussion. All they prove is that the speaker is a smartass with nothing to say.

Re:Now I wonder

[UseTheSource]

The Moon is a fascinating place, but it gets progressively less interesting as your oxygen runs out.

I beg to differ... I would think things would become far _more_ interesting. Comfortable is a different thing altogether, though. ;)

Re:Now I wonder

[adeyadey]

Instead of rushing to the Moon, if we'd focused first on establishing a permanent orbital presense along with a small suite of multipurpose reusable spacecraft (large cargo units like the Shuttle, along with small crewboats for crew transfers), and *then* gone to the moon, we'd be a lot further along now than we are.

That was what they tried to do, sort of. The problem was and is expense - Ulitimately X-Prize-style enterprises are the way to get cheap access to orbit (& later moon), not massive boondongles like the Shuttle & ISS.

Sure, Apollo was expensive, but at least it delivered a definate objective - and excellent science to boot..

Zubrin is also good on this - by focusing on a goal like the moon NASA did far more in the 60's than it did after, with much the same budget..

Re:Now I wonder

[another_henry]

Although I don't really know one way or another

You fucking idiot. Do five minutes of research. This is a fairly important thing to not have made up your mind about.

Re:Now I wonder

[KingArthur10]

Excuse me, that's a pretty petty attitude. One can research to his or her heart's content, but it doesn't change the fact that they haven't seen it with their own two eyes or other senses. I don't know if I believe in god or not. I'm an agnostic. Can't see, can't sense, makes it a lot harder to believe. Like I said, I believe it is a skeptic's job to try and prove theirselves wrong, but alas, five minutes of reasearch doesn't make up for the fact that there are many factors to keeping an astronaught alive beyond the ionisphere (as I have researched). And although I love to believe what everybody else says, if that were the case, I'd believe the US is the greatest country in the world, the solviets landed on venus, god is vengeful yet kind and likes to drown people, my life is predestined, and of course, we landed on the moon. Like I said, not that I don't believe they didn't, I just don't know based on the information I've researched. Maybe you should try being accepting of other people's views, "you fucking idiot" :-P

Re:Now I wonder

[WormholeFiend]

isn't there some kind of law, a la Godwin, that states that whenever there's a discussion involving the Kennedys, any mention of Ted Kennedy's car accident signals the end of the discussion?

Re:Now I wonder

[another_henry]

If you have indeed done five minutes of research and still have doubt in your mind, you are a fucking idiot.

To deny the Apollo landings is a terrible insult to the tens of thousands of people who worked on what is arguably mankind's greatest achievement.

To take an agnostic position in the face of obvious historical record and no credible opposing evidence is nearly as bad, because it is giving credence to those who would deny it.

I say this as a subscriber to Skeptical Inquirer magazine.

"Maybe you should try being accepting of other people's views..."

"Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out."

Re:Now I wonder

[strelitsa]

Well, how about a new Teddy-bashing quip then? I have to admit that whistling up a taxpayer-funded helicopter ride home to the tune of $2490.00 on the taxpayer's dime is better from a public safety standpoint than letting that fat old drunk sit behind the wheel of a car.

Re:Now I wonder

[strelitsa]

The Moon is a fascinating place, but it gets progressively less interesting as your oxygen runs out.

I don't know about that. With all that Helium-3 supposedly up there, you would at least get to sound like Donald Duck right up to the end.

Re:Now I wonder

[fm6]

Whatever. I simply don't care. I'm simply tired of having Teddy's escapades injected in every political conversation, regardless of relevance. All it proves is that you have nothing to contribute to the conversation, except your own mindless self-righteousness.

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

What, because you feel sorry for a drunken murderer?

Re:Now I wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you say something, or have you been eating beans again?

Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[theparanoidcynic]

By the time I reboot into XP or start my Mac that site will be toast.

Instant death to all links!

[Anonymous Coward]

The slashdot cometh! Run for urlives!

Almost as I was 'there'?

[muntumbomoklik]

I've got a beer in my hand and three slices of pizza on a plate in front of me. I can also breathe without a helmet and can't bounce around.

So unless my version of Quicktime is missing a few extra plugins.....

Re:Almost as I was 'there'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah yes, earth humor. Very nice.

Beer and pizza... wonder why you didn't make the space program, anyway?

Re:Almost as I was 'there'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut the fuck up Mork!

Re:Almost as I was 'there'?

[ikkonoishi]

You must not have the gravity control peripheral.

It comes with the beta version of Duke Nukem Forever.

Pretty cool, but really doesn't live up to the hype.

Re:Almost as I was 'there'?

[shadowbearer]

Yeah, where's the smell-o-vision plugin?

I'm visualizing stale sweat, Catastrophic Ancient Body Odor, lubricant smells, the wonderful odor of ozone from electronics (just to add some spice :), and that oh-so-subtle "Somebody's Lived In This Suit Before" odor, which, of course, defies description unless you've experienced it. It can be catastrophically mind-altering :)

Ditto on the beer, but instead I have a 12" Quiznos TBG sub in front of me :) Pizza, meh :) /begin_flamewar Quiznos rules :)

Cheers,
SB

Re:Almost as I was 'there'?

[Anonymous Coward]

and that oh-so-subtle "Somebody's Lived In This Suit Before" odor

Be thankful it's not the "Somebody's Died In This Suit Before" smell.

Re:Almost as I was 'there'?

[Stephen Samuel]

I've got a beer in my hand and three slices of pizza on a plate in front of me. I can also breathe without a helmet and can't bounce around.

Yeah... That's pretty much what it was like for the astronaut inbetween takes. (You do believe this guy, don't you?)

Oh, the Moon...

[Rhsqueak]

I thought these were screenshots of Myst VII.

Re:Oh, the Moon...

[sploo22]

Sorry, Myst 5 will be the last in the series according to Cyan Worlds. A shame, but I guess all good things must come to an end. It would be even worse to draw the franchise out (a la Star Trek).

/.ed

[mrwoody]

This link lets you experience the moon just as the Apollo missions' for the moment, it just make me experience a /.ed website... any other website, anyone?

Better Make Sure...

[dcigary]

....they don't violate The IPIX Patent

Re:Obligatory conspiracy theorist comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Well there is more intellegent life on the moon than in Hollywood.

NYUD Links

[bucklesl]

Already slow...

http://www.panoramas.dk.nyud.net:8090/fullscreen3/ f29.html

Re:NYUD Links

[goofyheadedpunk]

Every coral cache link someone puts up always returns "Connection refused when connecting to..." Is there something I'm missing?

uh ..

[btnheazy03]

does this mean the moon really isn't made out of cheese? blasphemy!

These are great

[Anonymous Coward]

oh my god.. these are great

Wait! Something's missing!

[FrankieBoy]

Where are all the cameras and lighting equipment and the film crew? Wasn't this filmed in Hoboken NJ? At least show me some tiny flaw that I can sink my conspiracy-theory teeth into.

Toast

[JhohannaVH]

*Feh* At least I got to see the buggy! The site was so trending blazo.
Those were some awesome pix. Better than the Gigapixel ones I was browsing earlier today. That's some amazing shite too... It's good to be able to now see the beauty and the detail that the government has had for years!

Re:Toast

[grammar fascist]

Amazing...no kidding. Look at the "Apollo 11 First Man" panorama. My first thought was, "You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought..."

Re:Toast

[Iron Sun]

Better believe it. I've read the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal where one of the astronauts mentions that the skin of the lander was so thin that when they decompressed it to commence an EVA it would make popping noises like a jerry can. That's not much protection between you and vacuum.

Re:Toast

[Doc Ruby]

Nice snaps. Do they have any megapixel or bigger renditions of their gigapixel captures? All I see in their gallery is hirez zooms. I want to fill my UXGA screen with CA images :).

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[gvc]

Using Linux? Mplayer plugin supports quicktime and much more:

video/quicktime Quicktime mov Yes
video/x-quicktime Quicktime mov Yes
image/x-quicktime Quicktime mov Yes
video/quicktime Quicktime mp4 Yes
video/quicktime Quicktime - Session Description Protocol sdp Yes
application/x-quicktimeplayer Quicktime mov Yes
video/x-ms-asf-plugin Windows Media asf,asx Yes
video/x-msvideo AVI avi Yes
video/msvideo AVI avi Yes
application/x-mplayer2 WMV wmv Yes
video/x-ms-wm MSNBCPlayer asf Yes
video/x-ms-asf Windows Media asf,asx Yes
video/x-ms-wmv Windows Media wmv Yes
video/x-ms-wmp Windows Media wmp Yes
video/x-ms-wvx Windows Media wvx Yes
audio/x-ms-wax Windows Media wax Yes
audio/x-ms-wma Windows Media wma Yes
application/x-drm-v2 Windows Media asx Yes
audio/wav Microsoft wave file wav Yes
audio/x-wav Microsoft wave file wav Yes
video/mpeg MPEG mpg,mpeg Yes
audio/mpeg MPEG mpg,mpeg Yes
video/x-mpeg MPEG mpg,mpeg Yes
video/x-mpeg2 MPEG2 mpv2,mp2ve Yes
audio/mpeg MPEG mpg,mpeg Yes
audio/x-mpeg MPEG mpg,mpeg Yes
audio/mpeg2 MPEG audio mp2 Yes
audio/x-mpeg2 MPEG audio mp2 Yes
audio/mpeg3 MPEG audio mp3 Yes
audio/x-mpeg3 MPEG audio mp3 Yes
audio/mp3 MPEG audio mp3 Yes
video/mp4 MPEG 4 Video mp4 Yes
video/fli FLI animation fli,flc Yes
video/x-fli FLI animation fli,flc Yes
video/vnd.vivo VivoActive viv,vivo Yes

really neat

[Legodude522]

Really neat. See a new perspective of the moon than those shitty video camera's slow already, hopefully it will still work tomorrow cause i think I'll show it in afjrotc tomorrow.

Re:really neat

[mboverload]

Damn you 1960 video cameras! D A M N Y O U!

Re:really neat

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember: You can't spell "Crotch Rot" without ROTC.

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[JudgeFurious]

(Doing my best Scotty voice)

"It's dead already!"

Plus if you do manage to open the website you'll flood the whole compartment.

With what? Hell if I know but it killed that server!

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[sploo22]

By the time I reboot into XP or start my Mac that site will be toast.

I believe the future tense is uncalled for in this situation.

Very nice ...

[Fookin]

Ahhh ... watching the moon while listening to some Pink Floyd. How trippy! :D

Re:Very nice ...

[Tackhead]

> Ahhh ... watching the moon while listening to some Pink Floyd. How trippy! :D

And if the colo breaks down gigabytes too soon,
And if you cannot foot the bandwith bill,
And if your site explodes, slashdot the cached one too,
We'll see you on the dark side of the moon!

(I can't think of anything to say except... PWN3D! *snork*)

Re:Very nice ...

[Anonymous Coward]

"There is no dark side of Slashdot, really. As a matter of fact it's all dark..."

fading heartbeat...

Re:Very nice ...

[loom]

Another nice record to listen to while watching these pictures is this one :

Songs of Distant Earth by Mike Oldfield

Re:Very nice ...

[OnlineAlias]

Light side of the moon...just doesn't sound right..

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Anonymous Coward]

MPlayer is great, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't work for QTVR.

Software to print panoramas under Linux?

[freelunch]

Cool.

Any recs for Linux software to create BIG prints (panoramas or posters) using regular 8.5x11" paper printers?

Re:Software to print panoramas under Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://arje.net/rasterbator/
Open source. Says it might work in Linux (not tested)

Re:Software to print panoramas under Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks interesting. Thanks for the link!

Someone got the dept. mixed up

[bwcarty]

from the monty-have-you-heard-about-this-one dept

Timothy,
You're mixing two songs from R.E.M.'s Automatic for the People. The line from Man on the Moon is, "Andy, did you hear about this one?"

Monty is from track 7 (Monty Got a Raw Deal)...my personal favorite on the album.

Oh great...

[Anonymous Coward]

*glances out the window* We've slashdotted the moon.

We like the moon

[hedley]

http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song/

Neil Armstrong said it best...

[Samrobb]

"That's one small click for a man, and a giant slashdotting for a completely unprepared webserver."

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[theparanoidcynic]

Overrated? Probably fair, but Flamebait? Which of Slashdot's crackpot factions did I piss off now?

Crosshairs

[superultra]

This link lets you experience the moon just as the Apollo missions' astronauts did -- almost as you were there

The moon blows. Who wants to see crosshairs everywhere?

The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)

Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Fookin]

Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched.

*Sigh*

I know ... I know ... I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I just can't help it, I'm bored outta my skull.

Here are but a few examples from a relatively historical document: The Bible

Genesis 37:9 - And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.

2 Kings 23:5 - And he put down the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense in the high places in the cities of Judah, and in the places round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.

Isaiah 30:26 - Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in the day that the LORD bindeth up the breach of his people, and healeth the stroke of their wound.

That's just 3 references ... per my lookin around, there's 62 references to the moon in both new and old testaments.

But why? Why would I waste my time looking up something as stupid as this? Because I've been at work for 6 1/2 hours and have taken two calls. I'm friggin bored. And I need a smoke ...

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

So you respond to a troll with anothe troll. Well done.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not a troll. He's +3 Funny!

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, showed *him*.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[AJWM]

Oh yeah? Just when was your copy of the Bible published, eh?

Damn clever, these revisionists.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[rob_squared]

That was incredibly STUPID.
But if you *really* wanted to prove the moon existed a long time ago, how about the fossils that prove the earth's day was less than 12 hours long and that only the moon could explain the gradual decrease in rotational speed.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Fitascious]

2 Kings 23:5 - And he put down the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense in the high places in the cities of Judah, and in the places round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.

Wait a minute... how did they know about the other planets back then?

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

What I find funniest about this is that people get worked up about "disproving" it, each and every time in comes up on slashdot. It's up there with the 18 meg file in terms of needless reaction.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Fookin]

Hey man ... don't blame me, I just went to Bible.com and looked up "moon". I'm not out to prove anything to anyone about the bible, I was just pointing out references in a known, historical document - that's all. /not a jesus freak, just bored.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Bad D.N.A.]

mod Parent UP!!!!!! This was one of the funniest posts I've read in a long time. Anonymous Coward rocks...

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Planet mean wanderer. Ancient star-gazers noticed that a few stars didn't follow the path of the other stars.

These were, of course, the planets in our solar system. Because we can actually see the relative position changes of them (as opposed to the stars where it's mostly only the Earth's own movement) they appeared to "wander the sky".

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

They used their eyes and looked up at the sky and saw planets. Obviously. I mean, what were you thinking? That it takes some kind of special equipment to see Venus? It's only the second brightest object in the night sky for Christs sake.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

what 18 meg file?

i need troll food plz

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Check every second story on macslash.org... although I thought it was a 17MB file.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

thanks!

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Start printing those stickers:
"The moon is only a *theory*."

LOL!

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

"Truth and words are unrelated. Truth can be compared to the moon," said Hui Neng, pointing to the moon with his finger, "And words can be compared to a finger. I can use my finger to point out the moon, but my finger is not the moon, and you don't need my finger in order to be able to see the moon." Hui Neng, Sixth Patriarch of Zen

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

everybody knows that bible.com is run by dope-smoking communists.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[CmdrGravy]

Fossils ? You are aware that they have been discredited numerous times, there is no mention of fossils in the bible and now - as usual - science is simply confirming the lords word.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[firew0lfz]

Amazing how this post has always made it into any thread talking about the moon.

Search slashdot to see the same post in almost every thread discussing the moon or space.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Doc Ruby]

Clearly a liberal lie to bolster a liberal media campaign. Liberals aren't that competent. That's why Lord Bush will be the first to actually land a man on thie moon, after decades of hoax.

Re:The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Though it wasn't until the first millenium bc that they realized that the evening star and the morning star with both the same planet.

Is there a big CHA on it?

[Beebos]

Is there a big CHA on it?

SPOOOOOOOONNNN!!!!!!!!

Re:Is there a big CHA on it?

[dknight]

damn that chairface chippendale!

does his villainy know no bounds?

But how

[dmccarty]

Amazing! How did they make them in that warehouse?

Just as the Apollo missions' astronauts?

[Ctrl-Z]

"This link lets you experience the moon just as the Apollo missions' astronauts did..."

I didn't realize that accessing the moon was such a slow process. Kudos to the Apollo astronauts for putting up with the /. effect so effortlessly.

Re:Just as the Apollo missions' astronauts?

[TexVex]

Well, the minimum round-trip ping to Luna is a bit over 2000 ms. Set your TTL accordingly. :)

Here is the google cache version....

[Anonymous Coward]

MOooooooooON

Re:Here is the google cache version....

[Justin205]

Oh, come on... You're not karma whoring right.

You need to make it funny AND informative, like this:

MOooooooooON

Moon was delayed

[jmichaelg]

When I was in high school, Neil Armstrong took the first steps on the moon. In my youthful ignorance, I thought the delay between Houston asking him a question and his response was due to the moon being so far away. Now 35 years later, as I experience the delays again, I realize it's just that the link to the moon had been slashdotted.

Re:Moon was delayed

[shadowbearer]

Yeah, a billion simultaneous viewers would do that :)

SB

Another few years...

[Striker770S]

just another 15 or so years and we will be getting realtime footage of the moon... again, except this time we can prolly view through 1st person...

Re:Another few years...

[TekMonkey]

It's interesting how President Bush says he wants us to go back to the moon and to Mars, then he cuts NASA's budget.

Re:Another few years...

[Anonymous Coward]

um... NASA's budget went up... Not by much but it did go up

Re:Another few years...

[TekMonkey]

I remember reading a couple articles in Popular Science about NASA's budget being cut by the Bush Administration. Maybe they've raised it some since then?

Re:Another few years...

[greypilgrim]

Budget request for 2006 is up 2.4% from this year, and this year is up 6% from 2004.

Re:Another few years...

[Bad D.N.A.]

2.4 % is the number that I had as well

Re:Another few years...

[Augie De Blieck Jr.]

I don't know if this holds true with NASA, specifically, but people often claim "budget cuts" when the increase in spending is limited. It's called Baseline Budgeting. Every line item has an assumed C.O.L.A. increase, basically, and if you don't increase spending by that much, it's considered a cut.

The best example of this is the school lunch program c. 1996. Congress proposed increasing spending by 1.6%, which was less than the 2% raise the program had had in previous years. The Congressional leaders were branded as (bascially) child-starvers for "cutting the program." They did no such thing. More money chanelled into it, but it was less than otherwise forecast.

Re:Another few years...

[Anonymous Coward]

this is how people lie.

they claim their budget was cut, because the increase of their budget is less than previous.

the money is more, but not as much more as they previousley had recieved.

the teachers union have been playing that game in wisconsin for a few years now.

basically it is a lie, the rate of increase was cut (but yet still positive).

Re:Another few years...

[InfallibleLies]

I still find it amazing that it costs $whatever billion dollars just to launch a shuttle into orbit, yet I can fly across the country for 99 bucks.

Re:Another few years...

[Striker770S]

if Bush's head wasnt in his ass and thinking of only Iraq, he could put like $25b (only quarter of Iraq's cost in war) and we would be there in less than a decade, most likely in about 5 years. But thats what we get, a religious conservitive republican...

How to save?

[Free_Trial_Thinking]

How do I download this quicktime (file?) to my computer. I want to show it to my family in a few months and who knows if the site will still be around?

Any ideas?

Re:How to save?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have Quicktime and the page seems to be sufficienty Slashdotted, so I don't know if this is it, http://www.panoramas.dk/../movies3/apollo_17b.mov, but looking at the HTML I bet it is.

Re:How to save?

[Anonymous Coward]

Try:
http://www.panoramas.dk/movies3/Apollo11b.mo v

Re:How to save?

[kipling]

Providing you are using a standard linux (or other *ix such as MacOSX) you can:

wget http://www.panoramas.dk/movies3/Apollo11b.mov
wge t http://www.panoramas.dk/movies3/Apollo12.mov
wget http://www.panoramas.dk/movies3/apollo_17b.mov

Re:How to save?

[Anonymous Coward]

I will be around believe me.

Hans Nyberg
panoramas.dk

Re:How to save?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, that's what we thought too.

Mikhail Gorbachev

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Stephen Samuel]

(... Flaimbait ... GUH!)

It does bring me to the obvious question: what is there to view this under Linux? mplayer works for some things Apple, but does it work for this???

I'd really like to know the answer to that question before I contribute to the slashdotting of their server.

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Trogre]

This worked for me:

apt-get install mplayer w32codec

Warp drive and vulcans

[canuck57]

What we really need is warp drive so we can meet real cute vulcans that can't be discontinued!

Re:Warp drive and vulcans

[ari_j]

Why do I get the impression that T'Pol wouldn't appreciate a hardcore slashdotting?

Primitive NASA technology...

[dameron]

I know NASA used some pretty primitive technology to get to the moon, but c'mon, Quicktime?

You think someone with deep pockets would have spotted them a copy of Windows Media encoder or something.

No wonder the footage is so bad and the audio so full of pops and hisses.

-dameorn

35 years

[russint]

Did it really take 35 years to edit out the studio equipment from the pictures?

What I saw...

[shawn(at)fsu]

All I saw was a green 8bit retro game charagcter flipping me the bird.

"Some would say the Earth is our Moon, but that would belittle the Moon"

Re:What I saw...

[hobbes580]

Or rather, "Some would say the Earth is our Moon, but that would belittle the name of our Moon...which is the Moon."

All these slashdot guys should know that on the Moon, nerds get their pants pulled down and they are spanked with moon rocks!

Re:What I saw...

[shawn(at)fsu]

Thats what happens when you try to go by memory and your memory sucks.

How about. "Point is: we're at the center, not you."

Stars?

[TekMonkey]

Why are there no stars or other cellestial bodies (other than the glaring Sun) in any of the photographs?

I don't know very much about this type of thing, so please excuse me if the answer is an obvious one.

Re:Stars?

[BlacKat]

Here is a link that explains this phenomenon, which is often used to try and claim the moon landings were faked:

http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae3 23 .cfm

Essentially, you can see some stars when on the moon when facing away from the Sun and/or Earth. However, since the Earth reflects so much sunlight the stars do not have enough exposure on the film to become visible and are only faintly visible with the naked eye. :)

Re:Stars?

[Anonymous Coward]

The sun is very very bright

The sunlit moonscape is bright

Stars are very very dim

Do you know anything about photography?

Re:Stars?

[ikkonoishi]

Glare.

When the sun is up you have to turn down the contrast so you can see anything.

Re:Stars?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's DAYTIME.

Because the moon's surface is quite bright during lunar 'day', they had to use a fast shutter speed.

The stars are too faint to show up on the film in such a short time.

If you were on the moon you could see the stars, but you'd have to shield your eyes from the surface, the earth, and the sun, and wait for your eyes to adjust to the relative gloom.

Re:Stars?

[uberdave]

Exposure. You can't have really bright objects and really dim objects show up on the same photo.
...Unless you're taking a photo of Bush shaking hands with Stephen Hawking :-)

Re:Stars?

[harmanjd]

That is funniest Bush comment I've seen on slashdot.

Re:Stars?

[Kafka_Canada]

Stephen Hawking might talk funny, but he's not dumb.

Re:Stars?

[uberdave]

Yes, he does talk funny. His speech synthesizer gives him an American accent.

Re:Stars?

[Darth_brooks]

To get a decent picture of "stars", you need an exposure that runs between 10 and 15 seconds. Any longer and the stars start "trailing" (the rotation of the earth / moon / extrasolar planet turns the tiny points into streaks.) Any shorter and you don't really end up with stars, just really really faint specks that are indistinguishable from grain in the film.

You also need to use a tripod, and having a cable release shutter helps, since the vibrations from holding the camera and opening the shutter can ruin the picture.

For reference, a standard 35mm (or digital) point and shoot camera will do an exposure of around 1/60th to 1/250th of a second depending on lighting conditions by default. Around 1/15th - 1/8th of a second is the longest exposure you can take with a hand-held (or in this case body mounted, since the camera pack was attached to the front of the Apollo astronauts space suits) camera, lest you end up with a blurry picture.

Re:Stars?

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like the landings were faked after all. The evidence here is quite convincing:
http://www.ews.uiuc.edu/~akapadia/moon.html

mirror of the Apollo 11 qtvr

[Anonymous Coward]

managed to grab a copy of the Apollo 11 QTVR before the site went down. Didn't get to see anything else though.

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Trogre]

Oh, quicktime VR.

Never mind

(crawls back under rock)

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Cool_reasoner]

"It's dead already!"

Its not dead. Its merely resting.

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[ikkonoishi]

Congradulations Slashdot. You've destroyed the moon.

From my desktop...

[racecarj]

"giving you the possibility to view the moon almost as you were there" Wow... it's better than I ever imagined!

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Vodka-in-a-can]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_b elt#The_Van_Allen_Belt.27s_Impact_on_Space_Travel Im more inclined to believe wikipedia then you.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

wikipedia = a website that any moron can edit with any ridiculous content they want.
wikipedia's are about as stupid as their readers.

Shutter Speed.

[Boinger69]

In a nutshell, the amount of light coming from the sun/earth/moon overwhelms the stars, to expose the film long enough to capture stars would cause everything else to be way overexposed.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot: A site where all morons do comment.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

So basically Wikipedia = a website that any moron can edit, but Anonymous Coward on Slashdot = definitive source?

it's down

[Anonymous Coward]

the link to the moon is down ... hope to get it back asap

Re:it's down

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, it really is

Re:Obligatory conspiracy theorist comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't laugh, they are making a 3D IMAX movie based on uprezed panoramas and topographical terrain maps.

The Apollo missions will live.... again!

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Search google and see what you come up with, then put your physics knowledge to work on the results.

Or are you just pissed to find out that what you knew was wrong?

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[WolfWithoutAClause]

* How did the astronauts get thru the Van Allen radiation belt without being toasted? With the amount of radiation present in the belt, it matters not at what speed you're traveling.

The Van Allen belts are actually mostly located over the equator- or atleast that's where they are strongest. By carefully choosing their trajectory, NASA were able to avoid the worst of the belts. However the astronauts still got about 1% of the dose necessary to get radiation poisoning.

* One movie shows the astronauts blasting off from the moon on their way home and the camera, which was on the moon, tilted up to follow the space craft. Who was left behind so they could tilt the camera up to follow the space craft?

It's an automated camera. Amazing what technology they had in those days! Lucky that, otherwise they would have had to leave a cameraman behind to die :-)

* The engine that was used to slow the Lunar Module down, so it didn't crash into the moon surface, puts out thousands of pounds of thrust. Where is the crater under this engine on the moon's surface? The surface dust wasn't even disturbed.

Look, gravity is only 1/6 of that on the earth. A helicopter flies by throwing its own weight in air downwards every second, which is similar to what the lander does; but the helicopter applies about 6x *more* force on the ground than the Lunar Module does with its landing rocket. Why doesn't the ground blow away when a helicopter lands?

* Supposedly, the temperature on the moon's surface is -200 degrees in the shade and over 200 degrees in the light. This means, since there is no atmosphere, there is nothing to hold the heat onto the surface.

Wrong! The surface itself holds the heat. And don't forget- it's in a vacuum, so it loses heat more slowly... just like a thermosflask.

So, when I am facing the light (sun), the front of my suit would be over 200 degrees and the back of my suit (shade) would be -200 degrees. My front would be toast and my back would be ice, instantly, since there is no atmosphere.

No, the heat of the sun is much the same on the moon since the moon is very nearly the same distance from the sun as the earth is. Actually you get reflection of the sun off the ground around you on the moon too, so it isn't so clearcut. The suits actually had airconditioning system in the backpack to keep the astronauts cool (it boiled water to the vacuum to take their heat away, and that of the sun- again because it's hard to cool down in a vacuum.)

* The surface of the moon is covered with dust. This dust was easily "kicked up", as shown by the astronauts. Why isn't there any dust settled on the space craft after the landing?

Actually that's pretty cool. If you look at the dust kicked up it goes in a tiny parabola away from the boot and then lands. It looks very different from what happens on earth due to the lack of air to hold it up. Any dust kicked up from the space craft would fly in a parabola and land directly away from the spacecraft. There's no easy way for it to come back towards the spacecraft, unless it bounced off a rock or something.

So...

[SteveXE]

Some guy on the moon spun around with the camera to take this perfect 360 shot just in case someday in the future we could look at it in quicktime...omfg conspiracy!

Re:So...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

Actually, I expect they *planned* to generate a panorama the old fashioned way- laying it out on a flat table, in carefully chosen positions so it looks about right.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Helicopters don't put out thousands of pounds of ultra-high temperature thrust.

You must work for the team that tried (and failed) to cover this whole faked moon landing thing up. Typical government types.

dead already, of course

[sootman]

Did someone mention "linking to space panoramas on slashdot" under the "Most Common Ways to Kill a PC" story?

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[eingram]

You're probably just a troll, but you bring up some of the most common and worst arguments against the Apollo missions.

For those interested, Bad Astronomy has some good explanations and links. Not that it matters, because if you believe we didn't land on the Moon, then hard facts arn't going to change your mind. :)

Also, if the missions were faked, the Russians would have called us out since they were our biggest (and only) competition to the Moon.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Peyna]

Just because you see it on TV doesn't make it true.

And just because you typed "fake apollo missions" in Google and it returned results full of (false) information doesn't make it true either.

404'd!!

[Anti_Climax]

"Ow, My Server!"

--Strong Bad

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[WolfWithoutAClause]

Helicopters don't put out thousands of pounds of ultra-high temperature thrust.

Neither did the Lunar Lander. Don't forget it only had to put out it's own weight on earth, divided by 6. Rocket engines are about 30x lighter than gas turbines, as used in helicopters, and the lander's fuel tank was practically empty by the time it touched down.

Typical government types.

LOL. I'm in the UK, where I was born, and I was 3 when it landed, and I have never worked for *any* government. :-)

RE: Moon

[Anonymous Coward]

The light is coming (from what seems so) from the near top, yet the shadows are so long?

I like the Moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Because it is close to us.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Helicopters don't put out thousands of pounds of ultra-high temperature thrust.

You've never stood behind the exhaust pipe of a Bell 407 have you?

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not dead, it's pining -- pining for the fjords.

Re:OT, but the Saudi Arabs...

[SupaKoopa]

we should land a woman in a g-string with mcdonalds hamburgers on the moon while playing britney spears music and waving the stars and stripes. god bless america.:D

RedHat.com is down 21h30 MST

[Anonymous Coward]

RedHat.com is down at 21h30 MST

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[cy_a253]

You want direct evidence?

Sent a powerful laser beam to the moon, aimed at the landing sites of either Apollo 11, 14 or 15.

It will be reflected back.

http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/Apoll oLaser.html
http://ilrs.gsfc.nasa.gov/satellite_missions/list_ of_satellites/lunar.html
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/Apollo15/A15_Exper iments_LRRR.html

Re:OT, but the Saudi Arabs...

[Ivop]

You forgot waving a bible in front of the camera. Fundamentalists are everywhere in all shapes and sizes. Coughbushcough.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

No but I got shot through one once, never could quite form a coherent though since then...

Oh and Happy New Year China.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

So, tell me, how does it feel to be brainwashed by the biggest bully of all the world's countries?

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, of course .gov sites are going to try their best to uphold government lies. And, some educators aren't as 'educated" as they would like us to believe, since they are brainwashed themselves. They'd have to be brainwashed after going so far thru big brother's education system (ie, colleges, universities,etc.).

Blame Canada!

[Morris Schneiderman]

"it took NASA only 7 years" because they hired many of the engineers and middle managers that had been fired by Avrow in Toronto when the new Canadian government cancelled production of the Avrow Arrow jet fighter.

Those guys had considerable experience pushing aerospace technology. In 1949 (yes, you read that correctly) they completed construction and successfully flew a 40 passenger jet airplane with a range of 1400 miles and an air speed of 427 mph.

The Avro Arrow jet fighter first flew in July, 1952 (yes, you read that right, too). It was a fully armoured, mach 2.0 fighter jet.

Other projects COMPLETED by their engineering department included:

1955 Small subsonic jet transport (business jet) 1955 VTOL fighter project 1956 Long range jet transport 1957 P-13 anti-missile missile 1958 Monorail 1958 Supersonic cheap interceptor missile 1958 Ballistic drag re-entry vehicle 1958 Space threshold vehicle 1959 Supersonic trans-atlantic transport studies

Now you know why "it took NASA only 7 years" - and why they could not do it again today.

Re:Blame Canada!

[sekzscripting]

Well it sucks for Canada, maybe they shoulda stuck with their dudes -- they could've been known for something other than America's neighbors.

Re:Blame Canada!

[isaacwith2as]

It also had the first fly-by-wire system, and the next plane to have similar performance was a Soviet interceptor from the 80's. Way ahead of it's time.

Re:Blame Canada!

[Colonel Angus]

*sigh*

Yes, destoryed by Diefenbaker two weeks before they were to test a new Iroquois engine which were very likely going to break the world speed record.

Re:Blame Canada!

[michaelwigle]

That would have been nice but it wasn't going to happen. Read up on the Avro Arrow http://www.avroarrow.org/Cancellation.htm to see what happens when Canada competes with the U.S. But, at least the technologies went forward and the talents were put to use, if not for Canada then at least for our Southern Neighbor. I, like those very talented people who made the Avro have also moved South where it is far more advantageous to be smart than my home country (Canada). Sad, but true. Maybe the US government needs to import a few more of us into the military again... ;)

Re:Blame Canada!

[Darby]

they could've been known for something other than America's neighbors.

Awwwwwww, come on, dude.
Don't forget living in igloos and being eaten by polar bears.

Re:Blame Canada!

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course exactly the same thing happened seven years later to the British aerospace industry with the cancellation of TSR2.

And once again the result was a flood of aerospace engineers to the US, where they were needed for Apollo, the SST program and Vietnam.

With friends like these...

Re:Blame Canada!

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a book about them called "Arrows to the Moon".

IIRC there were c. 32 ex-Arrow engineers, compared with c. 108 ex-Peenemunde. Apparently there was occasional friction between the two sides over their opposing roles in WW2!!!

Anyway, that was the miracle of Apollo. Germans running the launcher program, ex-Arrow Britons and Canadians running much of the spacecraft program and the Americans providing the money :-)

torrent

[lemist]

I made a torrent through exeem, exeem://47/8a75d11fba5c29e351dd4046b45de1bcfd62c55 a/Apollo11.zip
Sorry about it not being a link, something wasn't working right with it, so just copy and paste.

Retarded Mods.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think he was serious.

Would shoving them out the lock

[Joseph_Daniel_Zukige]

convince them?

Not that it would help convince the ones left behind, of course.

waving a bible while

[Joseph_Daniel_Zukige]

dressed in a g-string.

Sure. I know that cult.

Re:waving a bible while

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to see George W. Bush himself in a G string (waving a bible).

Bust.

[sekzscripting]

We can send astronauts to the moon, but we can't keep servers from crashing via the slashdot effect, go figure.

Re:Bust.

[grozzie2]

Actually, our forefathers, 2 generations past, could send astronauts to the moon. _We_ cant even send them to low orbit. Some would call it 'progress'.

You mean Homer listening to

[Anonymous Coward]

Yummy Yummy Yummy I've got bugs in my tummy.

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[eingram]

You could print a shot out, cut it out, tape the ends together to form a ring, and mount it around your head at eye level. Same thing, sorta. :)

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

It's an automated camera. Amazing what technology they had in those days! Lucky that, otherwise they would have had to leave a cameraman behind to die :-)

Actually, it wasn't automated. It was manipulated manually by an operator at mission control on earth. It was not an easy job because he had to account for the signal transmission delay. This was noted in the excellent series "From the Earth to the Moon."

Houston, we have a problem..

[opusman]

Unfortunately the websever has decided to let us relive Apollo 13...

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that just proves that we put a reflector on the moon.

Actually, if you want to get really paranoid, I can't send a really powerful laser beam to the moon because the government won't let me have one. So I have to trust that the government guys who tell me that they sent a really powerful laser beam and it reflected back.

Catch-22. Very clever, our evil government is...

(No, I believe we landed on the moon. I just love a good conspiracy theory, though.)

Apollo 17 The Last Man on the Moon

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess his name was Hannibal.

heck with the moon, check out the terrestrial mtns

[binarybum]

from the panoramas.dk viewer window go to the Mardis Gras link in the pull-down menu. the goods were in the last frame of the qtvr rendering - but I just knew they had to be coming as the qtvr began to load.

a quick google for qtvr porn didn't produce much, anyone know if there is a niche for this?

Apollo Science discoveries

[soldeed]

Some Claim we got nothing from the apollo program. For them I direct your attention to theTop 10 Apollo scientific discoveries

Re:Apollo Science discoveries

[couch_warrior]

If nothing else, Apollo gave us "Tang" and "Space Food Sticks" (am I the only person on earth that liked them?)

Utah never looked so good...

[quarkscat]

and vast improvements in CG technology
since the 1970's has made these "flybys"
a "reality".

I, for one, welcome our new Pixar masters!

Video cameras?

[soldeed]

These were made with Hasselblad 70mm still cameras

Apollo Cameras

The astronaut would stand in one spot, take a picture, turn a little, take another, and so on for a full 360 degrees.

Re:Video cameras?

[Legodude522]

I know, what i meant is that the still photos are a lot better than the video camera they used. PS: Also people say that the video camera had bad quality cause it was a hoax, which is not true. They were using the smallest and lightest video camera at the time.

Hubcap?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is there a hubcap in the Apollo 12 one? Just to the right of the flag.

poor man's QTVR by way of X

[Anonymous Coward]

for those of you too unmotivated or too principled to chase down quicktime, this worked for me... well sort of.

1. edit xorg.conf, add to Modes "375x165"
2. ctrl+alt+backspace
3. center jpeg in browser
4. ctrl+alt+numpad-plus
5. move mouse left and right

(consider it a stationary fixed-feet panorama)

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a help page. Read it
http://www.panoramas.dk/help.html
Hans

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[grozzie2]

Wait a second, isn't shining lasers at stuff evil these days ?

aggggggghhhhhh

[Joseph_Daniel_Zukige]

gggghhhhh

splutter

No way. Save me.

Any Player for Linux?

[giggls]

Hi there,

mplayer as well as xine choked on the file apollo_17b.mov. Is there any suitable player for Linux?

Re:Any Player for Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

Read help

Hans Nyberg
panoramas.dk

Roll your own ..

[busman]

http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html

Some great photos.
Make your own panoramic ;-)

Moon Cheese

[BlackHawk-666]

Bugger the oil, I want them to bring me back some of those moon women and moon cheese, in that order.

Re:Moon Cheese

[torpor]

yo, then you can be all "bugger you moon-bitch, where my cheese at?!"

and then bugger her ye shall!

Sam and Max

[BlackHawk-666]

All we need to know abou the moon has already been discovered by Sam and Max, Freelance Detectives. Giant cockroaches! Who would have thought. I especially love their "budget conscious space gear" they took with them AKA a paper bag filled with air tied around their heads.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[bairy]

Because one of the funniest arguments was that the shuttle took off and just orbited for a few days. Ya think Russia, or any other country for that matter, wouldn't have noticed it going around every 90 mins for several days? Maybe America brainwashed the entire planet.

It is unfortunate that most of you people who believe we didn't go have watched some half arsed documentry (from Fox networks - I mean come on the clue is in the name) and taken it as gospel, and you've decided that no matter how much real science is thrown at you, you don't believe it. If you can't stay open minded during a debate, then that invalidates your opinion and crushes you credibility.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[grozzie2]

And if you think they used a shuttle for the moon program, that invalidates your opinion, and crushes your credibility. As far as brainwashing the entire planet, well, i see they have done a pretty good job on the home population in america, but, the rest of us wont fall for it quite so easily.

In reality, it's all academic. The america of 40 years ago had the vision, and guts, to actually mount a mission to the moon. The america of today is so busy trying to find a terrorist in every shadow, they dont have the time or money to do anything else. they cant even mount a manned mission to low orbit these days, so it's no wonder they crack out the 35 year old pictures of apollo, to reminisce about the 'good old days' when america was actually a world leader.

Quicktime...

[arose]

...because giving us jpegs would be much harder...

Don't be so coarse...

[Kjella]

...I'm sure we can call them the B-Ark of the B-Ark. Which are useful and not is in the eyes of the beholder.

Physical evidence for conspiracy theorists

[LeGarcia]

Is there a (public) telescope powerful enough to do an optical confirmation in the moon-landing sites?

I mean, the evidence could be that there is nothing there.

What about those satellites with cameras that may pick in the image your car parked outside your house... is it possible to turn around the camera to the outer space?

Any way to just get a big JPG?

[jridley]

I'd love to print this in mural size. Also, I hate quicktime. I didn't see any way to DL just the image itself. Has anyone else stitched the images into a large image?

moon picture quality versus Titan pictures

[ti-coune]

These pictures were taken more than 30 years ago and look at the quality compared to the latest Titan pictures. Those who said the bandwidth was not enough to transmit the pictures if they had been larger in size, well, I'm sorry, but with a simple .jpg compression and eventually taking a little less than 700 pictures we would have had better quality from Titan. What we got is plain lousy.

Re:moon picture quality versus Titan pictures

[Anonymous Coward]

The images were taken from scanned negatives which were brought back to earth from the moon.

Titan, the Mars Rovers, the Viking programs, etc.. all use digital equipment which is digitally transmitted back to earth using low power methods. I really don't see what you have to question here.

Re:moon picture quality versus Titan pictures

[pedroloco]

Most of the Apollo pictures of the moon were taken with *film* cameras, not digital cameras. As a general rule, properly exposed film tends to produce higher resolution images than most consumer digital cameras.

As far as the Huygens images go, those images *were* compressed before they were transmitted.

They know what they're about.

[Dougie Cool]

From TFA (well, the site with TFA on it)

IMPORTANT INFORMATION:

This site is currently SLASHDOTTED and you will experience slow download. If you can not wait please bookmark and return later.

Oh, you guys.

Looking at the moon with the VLT

[mindpixel]

The most amazing sight I have ever seen I saw standing on the nazimuth platform of one of the VLT unit telescopes. There was no instrument for that particular focus, so the Paranal opticians made a ground glass plate more than a meter in diameter and mounted on the telescope as a projection screen. When pointed at the full moon, the 8.2 meter primary mirror projected the moon about a meter in diameter at infinite resolution. To see the moon a meter in diameter, without this system, one would have to be in a lunar insertion orbit...

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[alfal]

- It's an automated camera. Amazing what technology they had in those days! Lucky that, otherwise they would have had to leave a cameraman behind to die :-)

Actually, that camera shot was controlled remotely from earth. They only did that once, during the Apollo 17 mission. From what I have read, that poor guy was just a little nervous :).

Space station

[Goonie]

I am aware that the ISS is very far from an optimal design for a space station designed to support beyond-LEO exploration. However, it's not clear that such a station is a necessary or even desirable step in further space exploration.

Given that there's not a huge amount of interest for people at LEO anyway, we should be working on the best plan to explore the Moon (arguably), Mars, and the asteroids (the next logical destination for manned exploration, given the resources available in convenient low gravity) and only then build the infrastructure to do so.

your homepage (OT)

[nounderscores]

Hey pyromosh, I've navigated to your images directory and seen the furry photos. where's the m16 you were talking about in your sig?

The real comparison is Bay of Pigs

[ianscot]

Iraq and the Bay of Pigs: both cases in which a President, supposedly trying to forestall the threat of WMDs being used against us, bought the spoon-fed intelligence of exile organizations that really had no idea what was going on back home. The exiles told us it'd be a cakewalk -- "The (bad guy) regime will topple like a house of cards" and so on. Does this sound familiar at all? When you look at the Kennedy cabinet before Bay of Pigs, it plays a lot like W. Bush's -- blindered by its rigid ideological view of the cold war, and unable to take in contrary viewpoints.

Bay of Pigs partly led to the missile crisis. The consequences of that sort of blindered, reckless behavior come down the road. And patriotic US citizens, having no apparent historical memory, laud Kennedy for defusing the situation he'd helped to create. At least by then he'd learned to have Bobby Kennedy playing Devil's advocate, which prevented the "bomb the missile sites" military advice from taking hold and saved our butts. (We see no signs of a similar realization from W. Bush, who still apparently considers loyalty the only real virtue in an advisor.)

Re:The real comparison is Bay of Pigs

[Doc Ruby]

Even better: Chalabi was this generation's Castro, fronting for Iran. He was competent enough to get away with the massive US invasion, which even Eisenhower wouldn't hand to Castro, without being competent enough to keep fooling us. The Iranians, however, seem to have pulled off the inside job that the Russians failed at, at our expense.

apollo 1

[nounderscores]

One thing about apollo 1. They were officially a test mission - their job was to sit in the capsule and flick all the switches as if they were going through a pre-flight check... specifically for the purpose of finding out if they were going to burn to death durning the normal operation of the capsule (they were).

The crew was re-designated apollo 1 posthumously in honor of their sacrifice.

We could get there in 2 years!

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet we could get there in 2 years if Ted Kennedy thought there was booze or women on the moon.

But then Kerry would flip-flop and not want us to go.

But then he'd flip-flop again, and want to go if they could somehow raise money by taxing the ever-loving SHIT out of everyone watching it on TV . Then, spend the proceeds on pork barrel projects, and welfare programs that do nothing but keep the poor people poor. I love it when liberals think they're doing something, but really they're just throwing money at a problem that will never be solved by their inept little brains. And then the liberals get to say, "At least we did something."

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[gwayne]

Here's an alternative site with similar info:
LPI Lunar Resources
Low-tech slide show: Apollo Image Atlas

Re:heck with the moon, check out the terrestrial m

[Anonymous Coward]

there are other examples of this type of QTVR c.f.

http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/oxfordtour/transitofvenus /node2a.html

Only 'cause the man himself doesn't post here

[ianscot]

funniest Bush comment I've seen on slashdot

The White House has several hilarious excerpts from his current Social Security tour, if you want to laugh and cry at the same time. Hey, W., how will your program help to make Social Security fiscally sound, again?

"Because the -- all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be -- or closer delivered to what has been promised.

"Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the -- like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate -- the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those -- if that growth is affected, it will help on the red.

"Okay, better? I'll keep working on it."

Not firefox friendly

[JustNiz]

Needs quicktime.
I wish web designers wouldn't just assume that everyome in the world runs winblows and Internet Exploder.

Re:Not firefox friendly

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry but my site works perfect in Firefox on Windows.
Even my Mac Virtual PC equivalent to a 300mhz PC loads all fullscreen movies perfect.

If you are on Mac you will have some problem with Quicktime and all Mozilla browsers but thats a BUG I can do nothing about. It has been reported already 4 years ago and those stupid guys do nothing.

Hans Nyberg
panoramas.dk

Earthrise???

[bat2k]

Since the moon rotates once for every time it orbits the Earth, the same face of the moon is always pointing to Earth. Hence the inappropriately named 'dark side of the moon'. This dark side actually has sun cast on it (as in a new moon), dark should mean the fact that Earth never sees this side. Anyways, while on the moon, the Earth never rises or sets, rather it sits in the same part of the sky and goes through it's phase changes (new, first quarter, half, third quarter, full, etc...) So the question arises, why would NASA refer to the Earth as rising. Unless, of course, they are on the lunar obiter just coming into view of the Earth.

Re:Earthrise???

[Anonymous Coward]

..."Unless, of course, they are on the lunar obiter just coming into view of the Earth."

Exactly.

Nice heading on their website

[IamTheExpert]

It appears they have been SLASHDOTTED and their site may be slow.
http://www.doyousnap.com/portal/albums/46/3.aspx/
I have posted a few still shots for those who don't want to wait for the slow download or do not want quicktime spyware on their box.
http://www.doyousnap.com/portal/albums/46.aspx/

hmmmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Lunar Lander = never tested

6 weeks b4 the apollo mission NASA couldn't keep a bunch of frogs alive in space but can suddenly keep humans alive.....

very curious...

Re:Damn you Quicktime! Damn yoooooouuuu!

[Anonymous Coward]

It works perfectly with Crossover Office and Quicktime VR plugin. Though I hate it - everytime the plugin loads the PCM volume goes to 97, whick sucks.

That's not what the NASA people think

[SuperKendall]

If you watch NASA TV you'd realize that the change in direction has a very real, and pervasive, effect at NASA. It subtly alters what all of the programs do... and a more immediate result from the shift is something to replace the shuttle in a few years. But then I doubt you really care anything at all about the space program, you just want to vent about the president.

You have only to look at the story on letting Hubble go to see some effect.

Too bad your blind hatred of Bush has made you loose sight of how the pace program is actually moving in an exciting direction again. How young do you have to be anyway to deserve be labled "Crotchety"? Be careful, it tends to stick.

Re:That's not what the NASA people think

[fm6]

You consider NASA's PR arm to be an object description of the state of the space program? You actually believe somebody is working on a replacement for the shuttle, when they can barely find the money to keep the lights on at NASA? Whatever.

It isn't "blind hatred" to point out that Bush had made a lot of noise about plans that he won't be around to implement. If you have more trust in his honesty than I do, fine. But don't dismiss people who disagree with you with BS about their motives.

Re:That's not what the NASA people think

[adeyadey]

You have only to look at the story on letting Hubble go to see some effect.

Letting Hubble go was the right choice, Moon or no Moon directive. Hubbles been good, but $2 billion is too much..

Also time to say goodbye to the Shuttle, too.

Re:That's not what the NASA people think

[Anonymous Coward]

Somebody had better inform Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrup Grumman, and Bert Rutan! They are obviously wasting their time on designs!

Re:That's not what the NASA people think

[richie2000]

a more immediate result from the shift

Am I the only one who first read that as "a more immediate result from the shaft"?

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[Anonymous Coward]

what does canada have to do with this?

oh you just want to feel smart for not believing the "man"

idiot, please dont have children, or do have children, they will weed themselves out by drinking drano or some crap cause they will be retarded, like their parents.

Re:Wait! Something's missing!

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are the stars?

apollo mission?

[Anonymous Coward]

wasn't apollo mission just a hoax?

tits on the moon...

[sjs132]

Better yet, if you look at the panaramic, and in the upper left, you'll see a selection box... Select the Mardi Gras selection for a nice set of red headed tits... Sweet, I love VR tech... I can almost feel them...dkls#$%#$^Ddfh%$#&^gFDGH55$%SDFG

...carrier lost...

Alien Bases

[couch_warrior]

Maybe this will put to rest the conspiracy theory that the moon shots were faked. Although I have always like the second half of that theory, namely that even though we never went to the moon, *when we got there* we found alien bases, and that's why we didn't go back. So I assume those bases are air-brushed out of the NASA photos???

Ali G to Buzz Aldrin:

[Anonymous Coward]

"What wuz it like to walk on the surface of the Sun?"

Apollo 204 Review Board

[jwriney]

I mostly agree with you, but there was most definitely both a period of national mourning and an extensive (some would say overzealous) Congressional investigation after the 204 fire.

http://history.nasa.gov/Apollo204/inv.html

--riney

Re:Apollo 204 Review Board

[FleaPlus]

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. I stand corrected.

We like da moon..

[adeyadey]

but not as much as a spoon..

http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song/

Proof conclusive.

Conspiracy !

[BasilBibi]

See! The shadows all point in different directions!

Wait... panoranic? oh.

NASA TV not PR arm

[SuperKendall]

On NASA TV you get to watch the head of NASA and various division chiefs speak as to what they are doing, and ways they are changing what they are doing.

I know you would prefer to believe otherwise but real changes are taking place in direction - some good and some bad, but there are changes. On the whole I like the changes as I prefer to see a future with humans in space and beyond.

Agree to both

[SuperKendall]

I agree, I like the Hubble but there are better ways to spend $2 billion - and I agree 100% that it's time for something else far better than the shuttle. That's the best part of the shift as it seems to have pushed up the timetable on a shuttle replacement becoming reality.

Spinning

[Tablizer]

I got dizzy. I just barfed on a virtual moon. That's one small chunk...

or perhaps

[geekoid]

a life?
Plenty of cute women here on earth.

Please make an ttempt to understand science

[geekoid]

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

I recently heard the single most stupid 'proof'

[geekoid]

that we didn't go to the moon.

This guy said:
"we couldn't have gone to the moon, becasue it doesn't spin. Which means it would have no gravity."

I shit thee not.

Re:But, we never went to the moon

[geekoid]

Since I personally watched men triangulate the movement of Apollo based on timing radio signals I can guarantee you it happened.

Re:It all looks like green cheese !

[papercut2a]

No, it really is made of green cheese.

You can see the expiration date inside one of the craters in this photo: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020401.html/

Russians and Americans

[phliar]

And that pen that writes upside down!

As the old joke goes, the American space programs made the effort to solve the hard technical challenges like designing (and making) a pen that will work in zero gravity, while the Russians just used pencils.

Re:Russians and Americans

[hcdejong]

You're right, that's joke.
The graphite dust you create by using a pencil is a good enough conductor to cause electrical problems.