Chinese Moon Photo Doctored, Crater Moved

mytrip writes "A controversy over last week's photo of the lunar surface, allegedly from China's lunar spacecraft Chang'e, appears to be resolved. It's real but it isn't. An expert says the photo's resolution shows that it is of recent origin. However, for some inexplicable reason, someone on Earth edited the photo and moved a crater to a different location. 'In the week since the picture was released amid much fanfare in Beijing, there have been widespread rumors that the photo was a fake, copied from an old picture collected by a U.S. space probe. The photo from China's Chang'e 1 orbiter is clearly a higher-resolution view, with sunlight streaming from the northwest rather than the north. The mission's chief scientist, Ouyang Ziyuan, told the Beijing News that a new crater had been spotted on the Chang'e imagery — a crater that didn't appear on the US imagery. Lakdawalla determined that the crater in question wasn't exactly new — instead, it appeared to be a crater that had been moved from one spot on the picture to another spot slightly south.'"

Comments

That's not a moon

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a space station.

Re:That's not a moon

[Anonymous Coward]

I find your lack of original conversation disturbing.

Coverup!

[spun]

They moved it to cover up the obelisk!

Re:Coverup!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it was moved to cover up the "Made in Taiwan" sticker.

Re: Coverup!

[Jeremy_Bee]

On the same topic ... all these trips to the moon by other nations could settle the "UFO watched Apollo 11 Astronauts" theory once and for all.

There is a particularly nutty conspiracy theory that says there was a landed UFO parked off to one side of the Apollo 11 landing site, and that the astronauts were being "watched" the whole time.

Given that Luna has no air to speak of, the big round dent it presumably would have left in the moondust should still be visible if Japan/China/India wants to fly over that way and take some hi-res snaps. :-D

Well, now...

[xENoLocO]

... who on earth would do such a thing?

Re:Well, now...

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's say you were born in China. You're an only child. You have two parents and four grandparents doting on you. Sometimes they even call you a spoiled little emperor.

They instill in you the legacy of Confucianism, especially the values of hierarchy and hard work. They send you off to school. You learn that it takes phenomenal feats of memorization to learn the Chinese characters. You become shaped by China's intense human capital policies.

You quickly understand what a visitor understands after dozens of conversations: that today's China is a society obsessed with talent, and that the Chinese ruling elite recruits talent the way the N.B.A. does -- rigorously, ruthless, in a completely elitist manner.

As you rise in school, you see that to get into an elite university, you need to ace the exams given at the end of your senior year. Chinese students have been taking exams like this for more than 1,000 years.

The exams don't reward all mental skills. They reward the ability to work hard and memorize things. Your adolescence is oriented around those exams -- the cram seminars, the hours of preparation.

Roughly nine million students take the tests each year. The top 1 percent will go to the elite universities. Some of the others will go to second-tier schools, at best. These unfortunates will find that, while their career prospects aren't permanently foreclosed, the odds of great success are diminished. Suicide rates at these schools are high, as students come to feel they have failed their parents.

But you succeed. You ace the exams and get into Peking University. You treat your professors like gods and know that if you earn good grades you can join the Communist Party. Westerners think the Communist Party still has something to do with political ideology. You know there is no political philosophy in China except prosperity. The Communist Party is basically a gigantic Skull and Bones. It is one of the social networks its members use to build wealth together.

You are truly a golden child, because you succeed in university as well. You have a number of opportunities. You could get a job at an American multinational, learn capitalist skills and then come back and become an entrepreneur. But you decide to enter government service, which is less risky and gives you chances to get rich (under the table) and serve the nation.

In one sense, your choice doesn't matter. Whether you are in business or government, you will be members of the same corpocracy. In the West, there are tensions between government and business elites. In China, these elites are part of the same social web, cooperating for mutual enrichment.

Your life is governed by the rules of the corpocracy. Teamwork is highly valued. There are no real ideological rivalries, but different social networks compete for power and wealth. And the system does reward talent. The wonderfully named Organization Department selects people who have proven their administrative competence. You work hard. You help administer provinces. You serve as an executive at state-owned enterprises in steel and communications. You rise quickly.

When you talk to Americans, you find that they have all these weird notions about Chinese communism. You try to tell them that China isn't a communist country anymore. It's got a different system: meritocratic paternalism. You joke: Imagine the Ivy League taking over the shell of the Communist Party and deciding not to change the name. Imagine the Harvard Alumni Association with an army.

This is a government of talents, you tell your American friends. It rules society the way a wise father rules the family. There is some consultation with citizens, but mostly members of the guardian class decide for themselves what will serve the greater good.

The meritocratic corpocracy absorbs rival power bases. Once it seemed that economic growth would create an independent middle class, but now it is clear that the affluent parts of society have been assimilated into the state/enterprise

Re:Well, now...

[Loke the Dog]

Yes, an intersting article by David Brooks. But what was your point?

spoiler alert

[gEvil (beta)]

SPOILER: It was a poor stitch/blend job.

Re:spoiler alert

[MozeeToby]

Maybe someone could explain to me the implication in the article that the data is scientifically useless. If it's just a bad stitch job done back here on Earth it would seem they would still have the original data and could reperform the stitch no? Even if they don't all the data between the stitches is still good which I would imagine is probably what the real researchers use anyway.

Re:spoiler alert

[gEvil (beta)]

The image as currently released by China is scientifically useless, since there are known errors within it. If a new image were to be released that was known to be done correctly, then it could potentially be scientifically useful.

Re:spoiler alert

[Rei]

They do, and they've announced intent to release it. This was just an image for public consumption -- and really, the standard for releasing images for public consumption is to blend the seams. For scientific images, you leave the seams unblended.

The only problem here was that one of their own scientists mistook a stitching error in their public product for an actual feature without consulting the raw data. That's all there is to this story. Everyone wants to turn it into another chance to bash China, though.

Feng Shui

[stoolpigeon]

probably a feng shui thing.

Re:Feng Shui

[stoolpigeon]

Here's the issue - your sense of humor is broken. Retardation is not funny - but my joke is.

Let's hit wikipedia real quick: Today's Feng Shui schools teach that it is the ancient Chinese practice of placement and arrangement of space to achieve harmony with the environment. Fen Shui originated in China. The picture came from China. See the connection? That my statement is absurd is what makes it funny. That Feng Shui would be banned by the Chinese government makes the joke that much funnier. This does not 'diss' (why do you diss english with this lame slang?) Taiwanese culture in the least. Taiwan doesn't even enter the picture - unless you are running around with some kind of chip on your shoulder.

Oh and as far as our supporting Taiwan - I personally took part in operations like this that have been a part of Taiwan remaining free from Chinese control. But I'm wandering now - the issue is your inability to get a joke. Pointing fingers at Christians and laughing at Allah could be funny too in the right context.

Re:Feng Shui

[arodland]

I'm not sure whether the grandparent is a troll or a garden-variety idiot (the only difference being whether it's intentional) but the bit that maybe you missed about it is that it stems from "confusion" of feng shui and Falun Gong. Not that the latter is evil, either, but it certainly qualifies as persecuted.

See?

[$RANDOMLUSER]

They should have used the original movie set in New Mexico.

maybe just a watermark

[seanadams.com]

Haven't cartographers been known to put little errors like this in on purpose so they can tell if someone has copied their map? Still seems pretty silly to do it with such scientific data, but we know that China has no qualms manipulating any other kind of information.

Re:maybe just a watermark

[prelelat]

If it isn't an obvious photoshop who's to say that the US didn't manipulate their original so that they would know if someone else was using their pictures instead of making their own. I could see the U.S. doing this to see if a government said they had technology that they did not.

Re:maybe just a watermark

[HungWeiLo]

jiyuu-shikan.org is a well-known Japanese history revisionist website. No better than Holocaust deniers.

The best evidence they could come up with for the baby picture was "the photographer laughed" and "the guy carrying some baby walked towards the rail tracks".

Re:maybe just a watermark

[DavidRawling]

I doubt it - the moon rotates on its axis precisely once per revolution of the earth, so the part of the moon facing the earth always changes. As a result, we can take see just over 50% of the moon's surface [ref: http://www.nineplanets.org/luna.html] from Earth. Pictures of the far side must be taken by a lunar satellite.

Re:maybe just a watermark

[DavidRawling]

Oh for goodness sake. Previewed the darn thing twice and STILL missed it:

The part of the moon facing the earth NEVER changes.

Doofus!

(I'd have posted this sooner if I didn't have to wait a few hours between comments ...)

Someone didn't read the NIE

[postbigbang]

You know those crazy craters, getting legs and all. Happens all the time.

Bad Astonomy

[jawtheshark]

Bad Astonomy readers are already up to date. It's an error in composition of the picture. Nothing less, nothing more.

Re:Bad Astonomy

[Kelson]

Except it doesn't appear to be a correct analysis. I can easily see the difference in the lighting and composition, but there still appears to be an extra/moved crater in the Chinese photo.

Two issues:

1. Is it copied?
2. What's up with the new crater?

The analysis concluded that it's not copied, and concluded that the moved crater can be explained by a mistake stitching the components together. If you look at that article, you'll note that the new image is missing a small crater in one place, and has an extra small crater a little ways away, and there's an odd indentation around it. She figured out where the seam probably was, shifted the parts a bit, and they line up perfectly.

Trouble with the Chinese moon missions

[wcrowe]

The main difference between Chinese and American moon missions: 30 minutes after the Chinese have explored the moon, they feel like exploring it again.

Chinese knockoffs

[Zouden]

The US version looks way more realistic.

TFA

[sporkme]

Lakdawalla found that a mistake was apparently made in stitching together the 19 strips of imagery to produce the finished picture - and that Chinese officials unknowingly pointed out that mistake as they defended the photo's veracity.

Not a fake, not an intentional edit, and a moronic blunder in trying to prove authenticity.

Bad summary

[EmbeddedJanitor]

"Doctored" suggests deliberate fiddling with the data to mislead.

It seems here that this is actually just a result of a vanilla screw-up.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Though instead of "stupidity" I'd substitute "error".

Re:Bad summary

[gardyloo]

You'll have to talk to your parents about that one.

Re:Bad summary

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Like forgetting to put on a condom?

Sure, even the most diligent scientists can forget correct procedure when caught up in euphoria or other pressures.

Re:Bad summary

[Kelson]

Exactly how can you accidentally open up Photoshop and move a crater from one place to another?

By taking 2 -- or in this case 19 -- photos that cover different parts of an area, stitching them together to make one big photo, and making a mistake with the positioning on one of the pieces.

You did read the actual article before rebutting to a comment that told you the summary was inaccurate, right?

Re:Bad summary

[Tim C]

I'm not sure wtf is wrong with /. editors

Read the FAQ - the editors specifically deny any attempts at fact checking. Slashdot exists to post interesting stuff fast, not accurately.

Re:Bad summary

[OriginalArlen]

this story is baloney.

Re:Bad summary

[rbanffy]

"You did read the actual article before rebutting to a comment that told you the summary was inaccurate, right?"

Of course not. Besides this being Slashdot and RTFAing being discouraged, it would ruin my opportunity to be wildly inaccurate.

I read it later.

Re:Bad summary

[bheekling]

Indeed, it's frustrating how /. authors seem to like generating spin and controversy. Pure hits and revenue game.
If I didn't know /. was really just a blog, I would have said it's bad journalism at its best.

Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://xkcd.com/331/

Re:Can the small crater be from a recent collision

[Alsee]

Couldn't the additional small crater seen in the Chinese photo be from an asteroid collision that occurred after the Clementine picture was taken?

Yep, that is exactly what happened. The asteroid hit a rectangle of terrain from another spot in the old photograph and blasted it up in the air.... well of course the moon has no air but you know what I mean... and this rectangle of terrain landed intact at the new location. Quite simple and obvious really.

-

Misleading summary - it's not intentional

[iamacat]

As per the TFA, a mistake was made stitching together 19 separate photographs to produce image of a large area of the moon that the probe could not have captured in one shot. Since each picture is taken at slightly different angle and distance from the surface, some retouching is unavoidable. Otherwise some craters will look like a weird set of arcs with different radius rather than circles. Such stretching got to slightly move some depicted object from their exact position. In fact, it is not possible to produce a flat picture of a 3D object without distortions. Just compare the size and shape of Alaska on your globe as compared to your map.

I would assume that you can request the original mission data for serious research use instead of having to rely on newspaper clippings for science. If those images are also doctored, then we have a genuine controversy.

Doctored my ass

[cats2ndlife]

The original article says and suggests nothing about the photo being "doctored", it's simply a mistake that scientists make all the time. When can we expect a better moderated Slashdot or people who can read?

Re:Doctored my ass

[mihalis]

When can we expect a better moderated Slashdot or people who can read?

That's going to be an in-game feature of Duke Nukem Forever.

For crying out loud, include the rationale!

[DRJlaw]

The summary almost criminally neglects to include the reported reason for doing this, which is entirely legitimate:

Often, surface features that show up on two strips of data have to be manually corrected to produce the finished image, due to subtle changes in perspective.

"You know that there should have been seams in that image, and I just did not look for them carefully at the time," Lakdawalla told me today.

If you've ever viewed satellite imagery, you'll recognize that the source images are not nice, ultrahigh resolution wide arc views, but instead low resolution wide arc views or high resolution narrow arc views. The 'recognizable' product that is released to a nontechnical public, such as the images used in Google Earth, are the result of post-processing including image registration, tone correction, etc. See this article on mosaicing multi-sensor images, for example.

Surprise. Some technician made a mistake. No cookie.

People, RTFA, read the spoiler posts...PLEASE.

[Radon360]

I realize that it goes against the general Slashdot commenting procedure, but read just a little before commenting on this one, please.

1. Two photos were poorly stitched together, repeating an image of a crater on the combined photo (the crater was photographed twice).
2. Chinese scientists miss the poor stitch job and proclaim they found a new crater.
3. Someone else takes a close look at this "discovery" and points out the error in the stitch job.

The crater wasn't intentionally added, it's a result of trying to align two photos, each taken from a different perspective in which the edges won't completely line up exactly.

Re:People, RTFA, read the spoiler posts...PLEASE.

[gnuman99]

They not only stitched it wrong, they also retouched the merge lines making the resulting image *useless* scientifically. It is just a nice picture now that one may as well have drawn. You can't do any measurements with it as all relative information is basically lost through their effort to make it prettier.

Re:It's a shop

[zsouthboy]

http://xkcd.com/331/

huh?

[apodyopsis]

..and what happens if they actually do find anything new? hello! Boy who cried wolf syndrome....

pffffft. that was the sound of their credability dying a death.

its sad really, somewhere in China there are some *very* capable engineers holding their heads in their hands.

Supports not nullifies

[benhocking]

That supports the article; it doesn't nullify it. In fact, Bad Astronomy gave them credit for figuring it out. (The summary could have explained this a little better, but what's new?)

Re:ON the topic of it being a fake

[aicrules]

Use of the chinese version of photoshop would be easy to test for, it has the lead-based paint bucket in place of the regular one...

Re:Who will pay the ultimate price?

[wattrlz]

Seppuku a.k.a. "Hari Kari" is a japanese tradition.

Re:Who will pay the ultimate price?

[rbanffy]

Maybe, but the sword will be billed on his family.

Quick!

[urcreepyneighbor]

Someone call Richard C. Hoagland!

China is fascist, not communist

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is why China is a mature fascist country as opposed to a communist country.

see http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=105001682

Snippet:
China is not, as is invariably said, in transition from communism to a freer and more democratic state. It is, instead, something we have never seen before: a maturing fascist regime. This new phenomenon is hard to recognize, both because Chinese leaders continue to call themselves communists, and also because the fascist states of the first half of the 20th century were young, governed by charismatic and revolutionary leaders, and destroyed in World War II. China is anything but young, and it is governed by a third or fourth generation of leaders who are anything but charismatic.

The current and past generations of Chinese leaders, from Deng Xiaoping to Jiang Zemin, may have scrapped the communist economic system, but they have not embraced capitalism. To be sure, the state no longer owns "the means of production." There is now private property, and, early last June, businessmen were formally admitted to the Communist Party. Profit is no longer taboo; it is actively encouraged at all levels of Chinese society, in public and private sectors. And the state is fully engaged in business enterprise, from the vast corporations owned wholly or in part by the armed forces, to others with top management and large shareholders simultaneously holding government jobs.

This is neither socialism nor capitalism; it is the infamous "third way" of the corporate state, first institutionalized in the 1920s by the founder of fascism, Benito Mussolini, then copied by other fascists in Europe.

Re:Who will pay the ultimate price?

[sound vision]

It's actually "Hara-Kiri".

All scientific photos are doctored

[kindbud]

It's called post-processing. You should go to the STSCI site and download some raw Hubble frames if you want to see some sources images that were "doctored" in the extreme to create those iconic images that adorn your calendars and desktops. The unprocessed frames are barely recognizable and contain huge amounts of visible noise from cosmic ray hits and all sorts of instrument artifacts.

The Chinese screwed up mosaicking their imagery. Big deal. Now that they know how far up their ass the scientific community will be looking, I am sure they will strive for more rigor. Their desire to be a contributing member of the scientific community appears genuine to me.

More jokes....

[DrYak]

...That's because they didn't use the same original sound stage as NASA's faking of the moon, but soom cheap Chinese Z-movie knock-off. With Philipino actors.

...Yeah, but moving the crater a little bit further south made whole moon a lot more Feng Shui. Letting the Qi flow freely.

Re:More jokes....

[focoma]

It's either Filipino or Philippine. And yes, our actors do suck. I suddenly feel so sad about my country... Chinese photo of the moon showing a moving crater: evidence that the Copernicus Center has been built, and Kai-Fu Lee is the Earth-bound Chief Lunar Operations Manager.

Re:More jokes....

[Rei]

The thing is, they *didn't* move it. Slashdot horribly botched and distorted the reporting of the original article by Emily Lackdawalla in its header. Slashdot calls it "doctored". Emily calls it nothing of the sort.

What happens is that the spacecraft are moving around the moon and capturing long strips of images beneath them along their orbit. In this case, there were 19 strips. To make a single coherent image out of them, you have to stitch them back together. Anyone who's ever used a panorama stitching tool like Hugin is familiar with this: you pick keypoints, and the software rotates and distorts all of the component images to try and get them to match up. The problem is that the spacecraft is moving, and they don't know all of the topographic data below, so you're inherently going to get what are called "parallax errors". This results in what is commonly called a "misstitch" or "stitching error" -- effects such as a crater being duplicated. An extreme example of parallax error in ordinary photographic stitching can be found here.

Now, there are two different standards for image releases. The standard, for scientific releases, is to not blend the seams between the strips, so that it's easier to see what was a single source image. The standard for public releases is to blend the seams so that everything looks prettier. Blending is not a big deal; it's not like someone goes in with an airbrush and adds whatever the heck they want. It happens automatically in modern stitching tools; all you typically need to do is check a checkbox. Well, this being a public release, they blended the seams.

The only thing that Emily faults them for is for their scientist mistaking a stitching error for an actual feature. It's a silly little mistake, but it's certainly not "doctoring". Emily then expresses hope that they'll release the raw data, and apparently, it looks like they're planning to do just that.

It's a major insult to take a large number of people's hard work and accuse them of faking it. You don't get much more serious of a charge in the scientific community than that. There's a lot of justified indignation at people who accuse the moon landings of being faked. The people who worked on the Apollo program deserve an apology from the CTs for slandering their work. They'll never get it, but they deserve it.

The Chang'e team likewise deserves an apology from Slashdot for doing the exact same thing.

Re:Who will pay the ultimate price?

[gotonull]

Harry Caray: Hey! Let me ask, what's your favorite planet? Jeff Goldblum: Well... I, uh, don't have a favorite. I find them all fascinating. They're all part of a ... Harry Caray: [interrupting] Mine's the Sun. Always has been. I like it because it's like, the King of Planets. Jeff Goldblum: Well, actually Harry, it's not a planet. It's a star. Harry Caray: Well, planet or star, when that thing burns out, we're all gonna be dead. Jeff Goldblum: Well, that's true. But it's not gonna burn out for a very long time. Harry Caray: [crossing fingers] I hope not. [pause] Hey! Doctor, have you ever seen an eclipse? Jeff Goldblum: Uh, yeah, I've seen many. Harry Caray: You know, if you stare at it head on, it'll burn your eyes out. Jeff Goldblum: [breaking character and smiling] Well, it's best not to stare at the sun during an eclipse. Harry Caray: But it's hard not to. I once took a pair of binoculars and stared at the sun for over an hour. Harry Caray: Hey! Now Ken, We all know that the moon is not made of green cheese. Jeff Goldblum: [cracking up] Yes, that's true, Harry. Harry Caray: But what if it were made of barbecue spare ribs. Would you eat it then? Jeff Goldblum: [confused] What? Harry Caray: I know I would. Heck, I'd have seconds. Then polish it off with a tall, cool Budweiser. Jeff Goldblum: [blank stare] Harry Caray: I would do it. Jeff Goldblum: [just playing along] Yeah. Harry Caray: Would you? Jeff Goldblum: [cracking up and looking at the audience] I'm confused. Harry Caray: It's a simple question, doctor. Would ya eat the moon if it were made of ribs? Jeff Goldblum: I, uh... I don't... I don't know how to answer that, Harry. Harry Caray: It's not rocket science. Just say yes and we'll move on. Harry Caray: Hey! What about this Mad Cow Disease? Jeff Goldblum: [completely cracking up] What about it? Harry Caray: Well, it was here for a while, then it went away. Your thoughts? Jeff Goldblum: Yes, yes, it was in the news for a while and then it disappeared from the news. Harry Caray: Good point! [pause] Gee, I hope I never get it. [long pause] Hey! What about this? If you could choose between being the top scientist in your field, or getting Mad Cow Disease, what would it be? Jeff Goldblum: [pretending to think about it] Well, of course I would choose to be the top scientist in my field. Harry Caray: [grasping his hand] Oh good! I was worried you would choose Mad Cow!

Re:It's a shop

[mfnickster]

http://xkcd.com/202/

Crater pics from NASA...

[WallaceAndGromit]

Speaking of photographs of craters, this is a neat one.

Development of the Mars global surveyor: $148 million
Launching it into space: $52.6 million
Getting it into orbit: $46.4 million
Seeing what the martins really think of us: Priceless.

Re:Who will pay the ultimate price?

[davidsyes]

Hari Kiri.. Only uninformed or deceived Westerners refer to "Hari Kari"

http://home.no.net/harakiri/

-------------

http://www.parida.com/seppuku.html

---------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seppuku

"Vocabulary and Etymology

Seppuku is also known as hara-kiri (, "cutting the belly") and is written with the same kanji as seppuku but in reverse order with an okurigana. In Japanese, hara-kiri is a colloquialism, seppuku being the more formal term. Samurai (and modern adherents of bushido) would use seppuku, whereas ordinary Japanese (who in feudal times as well as today looked askance at the practice) would use hara-kiri. Hara-kiri is the more common term in English, where it is often mistakenly rendered "hari-kari.""

---------

http://www.answers.com/topic/seppuku-1

---------

(Probably the blame can be squarely laid at the feet of hollywood and any servicepersons and tourists from the West who "just didn't get it" or who just didn't give a damn...)

But, it is carried out with a "tanto":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanto

If you want to see it performed in a film (quite messy in real life and somewhat in the film), see:

Brother,

Starring and produced/directed by Kitano Takeshi (of "Beat"...) and starring Omar Epps

http://www.combustiblecelluloid.com/2001/brother01.shtml

http://www.moviesunlimited.com/musite/product.asp?sku=D27123

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0222851/

http://global.yesasia.com/en/artIdxDept.aspx/section-videos/code-j/aid-30742/

and,

http://www.heroic-cinema.com/reviews/brother

"this film sure is one violent sonofabitch. If you're not down for that, then maybe you should check to see if you can get into a session of Harry Potter instead. Some of the harshest violence in it is self-inflicted (that brother thing again, but taken to an illogical and hella messy degree). And all of it is LOUD. Handguns are like cannons. Kicks are like wrecking balls. Punches are like car crashes. Car crashes are like - well, like car crashes. I think the punches are louder."

----

Anyway, I will always respect Kitano-san for how he ended the film, something rarely permitted in many western films. You have to see it for yourself...

Photo that shows the Apollo 17 LEM on the moon

[xmark]

You can even see its shadow.
http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~durda/Apollo/ls_17_5aa.html

Better yet, go to the root page, and explore the sites of each of the lunar missions. You can "tunnel" down to photos only a few hundred meters wide.
http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~durda/Apollo/landing_sites.html