Could the Hubble Space Telescope Photograph Lunar Footprints?

I still think that there was no moon landing... Its just hard to believe it.
Lets say they did it. Why not send someone again now? Technology is better and they have more experience and money for it...

- DiGGY

The moonlanding was a PR stunt to send a message to the Soviets and the American public during the Cold War. Pretty much the only use we have for the moon is as a launch pad to the rest of the solar system. A launch from the moon would require much less fuel than one from here on Earth due to it's much weaker gravitational field, roughly 1/6 the strength of our. There's no real incentive to go back until we're ready to establish a Moonbase.

Remember that commercial that said that we discovered the moon wasn't cheese and we haven't been back since? Rick R. has it right. We have no use for the moon for now. We have similar rocks here.

NASA does have plans to return, as do many other nations. NASA's Constellation program is meant to replace the shuttle program within the next 3-5 years. I believe they will be running test launches of the new Ares rocket next year. The new program uses a capsule similar but larger than the older models we are familiar with. The plan is ot return to the moon within the next decade and then move on to Mars before 2030.
Digmeh, as for funding, I may be wrong, but it seems like with such low interest in space travel/exploration (this is truly sad), funding is actually not as great as you think. Thus the aged shuttle program and systems such as Hubble are preferred to be repaired rather than replaced.

There are many reasons why we haven't returned to the moon. The main one, however, is the lack in funding needed for such missions. During the height of the space race when the Apollo missions were lifting off, NASA was being allotted approximately 33 billion dollars in 2007 dollars. When compared with the 18 billion allotted for 2008 part of the answer to your question is quite clear. I hope that helps.

The Moon's surface contains helium-3 at concentrations on the order of 0.01 ppm.[29][30] A number of people, starting with Gerald Kulcinski in 1986,[31] have proposed to explore the moon, mine lunar regolith and using the helium-3 for fusion. Because of the low concentrations of helium-3, any mining equipment would need to process large amounts of regolith,[32] and some proposals have suggested that helium-3 extraction be piggybacked onto a larger mining and development operation.

Cosmochemist and geochemist Ouyang Ziyuan from the Chinese Academy of Sciences who is now in charge of the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program has already stated on many occasions that one of the main goals of the program would be the mining of helium-3, from which operation "each year three space shuttle missions could bring enough fuel for all human beings across the world."[33]

In January 2006 the Russian space company RKK Energiya announced that it considers lunar helium-3 a potential economic resource to be mined by 2020,[34] if funding can be found.[35][36]

Mining gas giants for helium-3 has also been proposed.[37]

straight from wikipedia :)

Any other questions or comments?

Well, with that being said, I guess that the cances of us seeing the golf balls hit are out of the question. Too bad. At least you can see it and the lunar rover here: http://www.ootwo.com/moon.asp . I always wondered if we made it to the moon, but I guess we may never know.

what happened to the flag that was planted

you need proof , just take a picture of it , or video ...
i mean ...seems logical enough

The recon satellites have enough resolution to read a license plate on a car.

So have the recon sats sent to the moon.

Give us a break please.

It is not the foot prints that are being covered-up.

We are not that stupid.
Very Soon, the story will break anyway, so what's the hold up?

Agreed, it's easier to believe in Witches and Shadow Men and other peoples "opinions" than to think for yourself.

1. Reality check:
The Russians had the most to gain in disproving the Moon mission. The Russians tracked the moon mission to the moon and back. The Jodrell Bank Observatory in England did the same (do a quick google search if you don't believe).

2. Reality check:
Both Armstrong and Aldrin placed a mirror on the moon, which is still used today to measure the distance between the moon and earth (via laser from Earth). So we had satellites and robots sophisticated enough to precisely place mirrors but we could not send men to the moon?

3. What single person has come forward to say he has proof he was involved in the "hoax," out of hundreds that would have been required to create such an elaborate hoax?

4. There are lots of 3rd party proofs regarding our landing on the moon.
Really, it's not that hard to find scientific proof the USA did land on the moon, certainly a lot more than a bunch of "opinions" from people who have little or no personal experience in commenting the USA did not land on the moon.

5. Don't even get me going about the 382 kilograms of moon rocks returned to Earth much of which have been independently corroborated as being from the moon. The Soviet Luna 16, 20, and 24 robotic sample return missions only obtained 326 grams combined (that is, more than 1000 times less). I'll let this last bit work on your brain bit. We would have had to send a hell of a lot of successful "robots" to the moon to accomplish this don't' ya think...

I could keep going and going like the energizer bunny on this one. Look for the facts and let the "O"pinions remain what they are folks.

Enough said,
Jim

I think it would be more interesting to point hubble at the plains of caldonea on mars. Is the focal distance right for that?

I think it would be more interesting to point hubble at the plains of caldonea on mars. Is the focal distance right for that?

DiGMEH
from Montreal, Quebec
Article Rating: 1234507/11/08 at 1:03 pm
I still think that there was no moon landing... Its just hard to believe it.
Lets say they did it. Why not send someone again now? Technology is better and they have more experience and money for it...

- DiGGY

It was not hard to believe if you watched every Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo mission. It was a step by step process, and completely "convincing". There is a spacecraft being developed now that can return to the moon, called Ares. There is info about it on the NASA web site. If you believe ther was no moon landing, you are uninformed.

Sure thing! Let's spend a few megabillion for a moon landing - just so you can 'believe'. Except, something still won't seem right to you, and maybe another trip will convince you...
Perhaps recreating the Holocaust is in order, like how could that have ever happen??? There have been so many in our history, what's another. Any volunteers? Remember to bring your family and their families with you. (and the storks that brought them)
What is so hard to understand about a moon landing? Hard, yes. Complex, check. The country fell asleep after the first few. If they were faked, do you think they would go to the bother of continuing with the ruse when no one cared?

Why would anyone fake going on the Moon?

I cant believe some people "still" question the moon landing lol! My b/f, when I first met him didnt think it was real either till i showed him around, he has no doubt now.

Time for some people to touch down with reality. The moon landing is just the beginning and nothing compared to whats really been going on. So if you still find it hard to believe man really did land on the moon, when you have all the proof to look at, then youll be in for a major shock soon enough when you find out the rest of the truth.

Does anybody have any proof that NASA faked the moon landing? The only thing that I've read are skeptic's opinions. I believe that they really did land on the moon, and will until someone shows me some real, solid proof.

Moon landing was a hoax....do some reasearch

The proof that they faked the moon landings is crushing. Here's a link to some of it.

politicalforum (dot) com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio (dot) html