http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/24/1037697982142.html <font size=5>Telescope to challenge moon doubters</font> By Robert Matthews in London November 25 2002 Conspiracy theorists, you have a problem. In an effort to silence claims that the Apollo moon landings were faked, European scientists are to use the world's newest and largest telescope to see whether the spacecraft are still on the lunar surface. For years, doubters have claimed that NASA, the United States space agency, spent billions of dollars faking the landings to convince the world that it had beaten the Soviet Union to the moon. Evidence cited has ranged from the absence of stars on any photographs taken by the astronauts to the way that the Stars and Stripes they planted seemed to flutter in a vacuum. This month NASA tried to put an end to the controversy by commissioning a definitive account of the evidence for the landings. Days later it dropped the idea after criticism that it was wasting money by taking on the lunatic fringe: naturally, this only boosted claims that the agency was trying to hide something. Now astronomers hope to kill off the conspiracy theory forever by using the Very Large Telescope (VLT) - by far the most powerful telescope in the world - to spot the Apollo lunar landers. Operated by European astronomers in the Chilean Andes, the VLT has four mirrors eight metres across linked by optical fibres. It can see a single human hair from 16 kilometres away. Trained on the moon, such astonishing resolution should enable it to see the base of one or more of the six lunar modules that NASA insists landed on the moon between 1969 and 1972. Supporters of the conspiracy theory welcomed the news that astronomers were to photograph the landing sites. But Marcus Allen, the British publisher of Nexus magazine and a long-time advocate of the theory, said photographs of the lander would not prove that the US put men on the moon. "Getting to the moon really isn't much of a problem - the Russians did that in 1959," he said. "The big problem is getting people there." According to Mr Allen, NASA was forced to send robots to the moon and faked the manned missions because radiation levels in space were lethal to humans.
"I hate when somebody asks, 'Does that dog bite?'" my friend said. "What do they mean does the dog bite? All dogs bite. How do you think they eat?" -ESPN... Haha I like your sig..I walk my dog at a park near my house..She is really pretty,kind of looks like a german shepard but smaller and white..So people always seem to want to pet her and they usually ask "does the dog bite?" but usually they are already petting or reaching towards her ... I get some funny reactions when I say, "yea, been known to" or "she might"
Hehehehe. I think Bill Simmons wrote that. It's been a while though and my memory isn't that great...
Believe it or not, they are planning a couple of new telescopes using the same stupid naming convention. The "Extremely Large Telescope" will be as large as a football field. And the "overwhelmingly large telescope" will be about half the size of the eiffel (sp) tower. I'm not kidding.
While I wouldn't call myself a conspiracy theorist on this, I have read that there is a belt of radiation between the earth and the moon that would require special shielding to prevent radiation poisoning. I assume there is an explanation for the fact that the astronauts did not get sick despite the fact that there was no such protection, but I haven't seen it.
Reminds me of the bit from one of the old Pink Panther movies where Inspector Clouseau asks the old man if his dog bites and the old man says, "No." So, Clouseau reaches down to pet the dog and the dog immediately bites him. Clouseau: I thought you said your dog does not bite. Old Man: That is not my dog.
