E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNASA releases new high-resolution views of three Apollo moon landing sites, sent back by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. NBC's Brian Williams reports.
NASA today released the sharpest views of three Apollo moon landing sites ever sent back by its Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.
"We all like to obsess and look at the Apollo landing site images because it's fun," said Arizona State University's Mark Robinson, principal investigator for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera, or LROC. "People actually used to be able to go to the moon. People used to explore the moon. Hopefully, sometime in the near future, that will continue again. But LROC is looking at the whole moon."
LRO's high-resolution camera has been looking at the whole moon, including all six of the Apollo landing sites, for the past two years. But these particular images are special because they were taken from the closest vantage point the orbiter will ever have during its $504 million mission. Because of adjustments in the car-sized probe's orbit, lately it's been flying as low as 14 miles (22 kilometers) above the lunar surface.
That means the resolution for these three landing sites — Apollo 12 in 1969, Apollo 14 in 1971 and Apollo 17 in 1972 — is twice as sharp as that seen in the previous images. Each pixel covers just 10 inches (25 centimeters), as opposed to 20 inches per pixel previously. "When I first took a look at these images, my jaw flopped to the ground," Noah Petro, a member of the LRO research team from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center said in a video featuring the new imagery.
NASA / GSFC / ASU
This image from NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter shows the tracks and the trash left behind by the Apollo 17 mission in 1972.
The picture of the Apollo 17 site in the moon's Taurus-Littrow valley is sharp enough to show the tracks of the astronauts and their lunar rover in unprecedented detail. You can make out the lunar module's descent stage (dubbed "Challenger"), as well as the module's experimental pallet, the ladder leading down to the lunar surface (it's a bright prominence at the 9 o'clock point on the inset enlargement of Challenger) and the life-support backpacks that Gene Cernan and Harrison "Jack" Schmitt threw out of the ascent module just before they took off (labeled as PLSS ... portable life support system ... in the picture above).
Robinson said the new imagery initially raised questions about the debris that was scattered around the descent stage. "There seemed to be too much 'stuff' on the ground," he told reporters. Later, the scientists figured out that the excess "stuff" was actually packing material for the instruments, as well as insulation that was blown off the descent stage during the Apollo 17 astronauts' takeoff.
Off to the right of the frame, Apollo 17's lunar rover (labeled as LRV) shows up in such detail that "if you squint really hard, you can begin to resolve the seats and the fact that the wheels were left turned slightly to the left," Robinson said.
Robinson said he had to check with Schmitt to confirm some of the features he thought he saw in the latest imagery. Schmitt was suitably impressed. "Jack's comment was, 'We need to image the whole valley at this resolution.' I agree with him," Robinson reported. Check out this video for a guided tour of the Apollo 17 site based on the new views.
Apollo 14 and Apollo 12
The pictures show traces of the experiments left behind by the moon missions — giving the lie to claims that humans never traveled to the moon. The experimental retroreflectors left behind several Apollo missions are still used to calibrate laser-ranging devices on Earth and even LRO's instruments in lunar orbit.
Apollo 14's experimental package, known as ALSEP, is visible as a bright spot on the new LRO image below. You can also see a detailed image of the Antares lunar module's descent stage near the Fra Mauro crater, and the tracks left by the astronauts and their rickshaw-style cart as they moved around the surface:
NASA via AFP - Getty Images
This picture from NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter shows tracks left behind by Apollo 14 astronauts Alan Shepard and Edgar Mitchell as they roved around the lunar surface.
Unfortunately, not even the latest imagery is sharp enough to show the golf balls that Apollo 14 astronaut Alan Shepard said he sent flying for "miles and miles and miles" on the moon in 1971. "Those are too small to be resolved," Robinson said.
The Apollo 12 picture shows the tracks left by Pete Conrad and Alan Bean after NASA's second moon landing in 1969. Scientists say the two bright streaks forming an "L" shape around the ALSEP experimental station are reflective cables leading to two of the scientific instruments left behind. The astronauts also paid visits to small craters surrounding the landing site, as well as the place where the unmanned Surveyor 3 probe landed two years earlier:
NASA / GSFC / ASU
This LRO image shows the areas visited by Apollo 12 astronauts in 1969.
What lies ahead?
What about the other Apollo landing sites? "It wasn't possible to image easily all six sites," said Richard Vondrak, LRO project scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. For example, the lighting conditions during the times when the probe flew over the Apollo 11 landing site weren't optimal for producing higher-resolution pictures, he said.
Robinson said the Apollo pictures made up just a small fraction of the 1,500 narrow-angle images taken during the orbiter's super-close-up series of orbits. Now the spacecraft is now in the process of moving into a wider orbit for the mission's next phase of scientific observations. "These are the sharpest images that we plan for this mission," Vondrak said.
Vondrak said the amount of data returned by the LRO mission so far amounts to 245 terabytes, which is equivalent to the amount of data contained in a stack of 52,000 DVDs. "If you took this stack and put it on the ground floor of the Capitol Building in Washington, it would reach to the top of the Capitol Dome," he said.
LRO could keep going for several more years, and we'll continue to see lower-resolution pictures of the Apollo landing sites as the mission proceeds. Beyond the fun factor, the LRO team uses the Apollo pictures to study how the sites look under different lighting conditions, as well as reference points for determining precise locations in other lunar imagery, Robinson said.
The pictures also will come in handy for planning future missions to the moon, said Jim Green, director of the Planetary Science Division at NASA Headquarters in Washington. The next lunar mission, known as Grail, is due for launch this week.
LRO "really provides a rich opportunity to map the moon and allow us to contemplate additional sites where samples of a special nature could be determined, and then future missions could potentially be planned," Green said.
"Relative to exploration," Green continued, "indeed, LRO has been used extensively to be able to provide the exploration people [with] the kind of altimeter and high-resolution maps for them to be able to plan potential future sites that humans may want to go to on the moon, as plans emerge."
When do you think humans will follow robotic spacecraft to the moon? Or will the robots do such a good job that we won't need to send humans? Feel free to weigh in with your comments below.
Short video showing the new images and identifying important features of the Apollo missions.
Update for 5:10 p.m. ET: Will the tracks and the trash from the Apollo missions be visible forever?
"Forever is a long time," Robinson said, "so the answer is no, they won't be there forever."
Robinson noted that the moon is constantly being bombarded by cosmic debris, ranging from bits of grit to giant asteroids.
"Slowly, over time, first, the tracks will disappear," he said. "They'll be all ground into, mixed into the soil. Then the smaller pieces of equipment will disappear. Eventually, the descent stages will get probably blasted with a larger asteroid. From Apollo rocks and other analyses that were done, we know that a rock erodes at something like the rate of 1 millimeter per million years. It's very slow. So in human terms it may seem like forever. But in geologic terms probably there will be no traces of Apollo exploration, oh, let's say in 10 [million] to 100 million years."
More about moon missions:
- NASA set to launch twin moon probes
- Apollo 18 in fiction and fact
- No hoax: Moon landing was NASA's finest hour
- 'Moon Next' considered as exploration option
Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter or adding me to your Google+ circle. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for other worlds.
Leave a Comment:
Kind of gives a big middle finger to those who said the landing was a hoax by the government.
Nope they'll just claim these pictures are proof that there is a on going conspiracy or blame it on Obama being a Socialist/ Muslim.
They'll just say the photos are "PhotoShopped". It'll never end.
The tree huggers will complain about the trash we left behind.
Actually I worry about the extra weight we've added to the moon with all that space junk. Over time, that could affect its orbit around the earth - at least that's the plot of my disaster movie idea. I think it starts to happen this winter, with the moon crashing into the earth, oh, say December 2012. See, the Mayans didn't just run out of rock. They were right!
Randy, this tree hugger completely understands the need to leave behind dead weight on such missions (to compensate for the weight of the lunar samples being returned, etc.)
I'm sure that some day in the future when payload margins are less of a factor, we'll be more responsible with our "trash" :)
It's obvious that they took these pictures with the iPhone 5's 8 megapixel camera from the rafters in the warehouse where the landing was originally staged. This just proves that the set was never demolished.
Bam, that's some sweet conspiracy theory to spread around the net!
Since there are no photos (high res photos) of Apollo 11, they will say the first landing was a hoax and the rest were real.
Amazing. I love how you can see the trails left by the astronauts as they moved from one objective to the next... kind or eerie actually. This should help put some of the conspiracy theories to bed, but I'm sure some will persist no matter what evidence is presented.
Of what use is this...?
Beyond the fact that it's really fun to see these pictures, the scientists behind this effort say that repeated imaging of the Apollo sites provide a location check (to calibrate the orbiter's other observations) and provide insights into the photometry of the lunar surface (how changes to the surface affect its brightness). These are just some of the 1500 images taken at the equivalent of 25-cm (10-inch) resolution during a particularly close-in orbital sequence, from an altitude as low as 22 km (14 miles). Stay tuned for more details in the update I'm just about to do.
We shouldn't have to explain the value of science to you. The full scope of the LRO's mission can be found on any number of websites. Wikipedia is often a good starting point if not out of date. It sounds like Alan might be adding further info to the above article as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Reconnaissance_Orbiter
I'm going to take a slightly different approach from some of the others arguing with you and say that 'use' is beside the point. Maybe we will or will not develop new 'useful' technologies out of this program. But to my mind, greater knowledge about the universe we live in is valuable for its own sake. It need have no other purpose than to further our knowledge.
When you really think about it, what is life about? Is it simply surviving as easily as possible? Or is there more to it? I suppose from a technical viewpoint you might say life is simply about survival and only things that help us to do that matter.
But to be frank I don't think that's enough for me. Maybe it is for you, in which case I'm not sure whether to pity you or think you lucky for being content with so little. Me? I think we're capable of greater things than simply looking down always at our feet, never wondering about where we are. Curiosity is one of humanity's greatest traits.
It drives us to ask questions that go beyond our immediate survival. It drives us to look to the stars and wonder.
To turn your back on it, in my opinion, is to turn your back on what makes us human. On what makes life worth living. To turn your back on it, to close your eyes to things that don't have immediate use, might be easier.
But easier is not better.
AX2300: I'm not sure you have a perspective on the size of the universe. We have enough resources in our oceans to feed the planet, but while Somali's starve on the horn of Africa you encourage trillions of dollars to be spent investigating a worthless cause, while we kill our plankton off. (And I'm sure I'll be branded a tree hugger.)
I can understand if we discovered something obtainable like alternate fuels on the moon, but their is no legitimate hope to space travel except to exacerbate our problems on earth.
We have however learned through the rocket program to send a missile to somebodys city and destroy it. That's what we got from a space program.
We need to learn how to dig in and use our own planet and it's resources wisely, we need to learn about how to improve solar energy, wind energy. We need to find water and cherish it like we do gold, as the loss of it will be the end of mankind. (Yes we can do without oil, but we can't do without water.)
We are not going to be beaming you up anytime soon, and their are no such thing as Class M planets around these parts. You need to learn to be still.
Other than the unique scientific knowledge that can be gained from our study of the moon then applied to other 'useful' endeavors - I would say the exploration and discovery are pretty big motivators.
You want to put the cart before the horse. There is so much "usefulness" that has come out of science 'accidently' or through pure exploration, that to list them all would fill volumes. It's the utilitarian 'bottom-line' only thinkers, like you, that hamper real breakthroughs - because "if there aren't any dollar signs in the short-term, it's not worth the effort!"
Time and again, scientific discovery and exploration has proven itself incredibly useful to humanity - even though it may not be immediately apparent to your bank account.
Don't you think space exploration could assist us in understanding how to best use solar energy? Don't you think that space, perhaps, would be an excellent location for a solar array if we could figure out how to do it effeciently? Don't you know that the moon has one of the richest sources of He-3, which only a small fraction could power the earth for decades if we could figure out how to effeciently mine it and use it?
Hi TC,
Just want to respond on a couple points...
This is a common misconception. Fact is that NASA has cost a total of roughly $413 billion in ALL of it's existence (from 1958 - present day). That is less than what our military spends in a single year.
At a mere 0.5% of the federal budget (roughly $18 billion in 2010 and 2011), the space program does not preclude solving any of the problems you mentioned in your post, and is actually a big part of doing so:
You mentioned world hunger - just enter "NASA" and "Agriculture" into Google, and you will get a sense of how many ways NASA observes and benefits global farming practices and engineering, oceanography, and other areas of Earth science that impact the food supply, etc.
You mentioned solar power (energy) - The connection here should be obvious. NASA is a major driver of ever more advanced, efficient, and light weight solar cell technology. NASA was and is also a major driver of battery technology, and fission/fusion research.
You mentioned finding and cherishing water - this ties back to agriculture, NASA monitors water usage and the effects of irrigation, weather, and solar activity on the global water supply every day.
You mentioned gold (precious metals) - we know of NEO (near earth objects) that contain literally Trillions of dollars worth of platinum, gold, nickel, and other valuable minerals. It is within our technological ability to mine these minerals. The space program could pay for itself many times over! For example see: asteroid (6178) 1986 DA
You claimed that "there is no such thing as Class M planets around these parts" - We do not know this yet. We are only just at the very dawn of our ability to detect extrasolar planets anywhere near as small as earth. NASA's proposed TPF and/or SIM missions would be required to answer that question.
NASA is not just about launching people into space... that's just the stuff that gets the general public's attention. Not to downplay the positive technological impact that manned missions have also brought, but NASA does a heck of lot more than that... and at 0.5% of the federal budget, NASA is a bargain.
They would be even more efficient if congress would stop micromanaging (read: screwing up) the manned program (see: Constellation, SLS). They mandate these huge launchers then refuse to adequately fund them. There is a happy medium for heavy lift (cost vs. capability) that I hope congress will soon realize.
Right-on cjsk...
I was about to make a comment about solar energy. It's funny because NASA frontlines the development of better solar tech because guess what sort of programs depend heavily on light, efficient, and advanced solar energy? --- that's right, space programs.
...isn't it ironic? :)
cjsks said it much better than I.
TC-2619978 when you say "dig in" the rest of us, with just a bit of intrest in the wonders around us, read "bury our heads in the sand". I for one chose not to do so.
TC-2619978
First the Apollo program didn't cost trillions in absolute dollars (now the F35 program, that is going to cost more than a trillion), but second, if you went back in time and killed NASA, you would still have people starving in Somalia. That is a political problem, not a problem caused by NASA.
All good rebuttals.
Part of it isn't so much "of what use is it" It's also just human nature. Exploration has always been part of what makes us human. From exploring the seas looking for new land, to Lewis and Clark heading west, to exploring beyond our planet.
As an intelligent species, we almost can't STOP exploring.
Don't forget to mention the enormous return on investment that the space program has given us. The technologies developed for NASA have made their way in just about everything. And it helped to foster an entire generation of scientists, engineers back in the 60's that formed a huge knowledge base used by corporate America to create products of all types. No other government program other than the GI Bill, has had a greater positive impact in education.
Really?
Really.... they are cool pics but how do these pics justify the cost? Is science advanced? Has something new been discovered is this a new technology that benefits mankind. Not trying to rain on the party, I'm serious. I don't see a cost/benefit.
arcticfire
Part of our current national zeitgeist seems to be that everything has to have an immediate, practical purpose. Scientific exploration that may produce benefits in ten years or so is dismissed. I would suspect that the development of the LRO mission produced "spin-offs" and refinements in propulsion, communications, sensors and imaging, but, no, it hasn't given us a new television, car, washing machine, or any of the toys we so dearly love.
@ arcticfire
Ok good. You at least justified your comment, so that's a start.
But here's the thing, the orbiter is already there, orbiting. Taking high res pics of the entire moon. How much extra does it cost to take these high res pics of the moon when it's mission is to do just that? The big money has already been spent, should we just turn it off now, or just avoid taking pictures of things that interest people?
Why take high res pics of the moon? Might find something interesting or something that was missed previously. You might as well say, well why do geological surveys? Its all just dirt. Nothing new will ever be found so stop looking.
Tell me, how much of a cost/benefit is social security? $700 Billion each year, of which i will never see any of. If you add the entire nasa budget to SS guess what the grand total is? $716 Billion. That means that if you add the whole of nasa to ss, you get a 2% increase. Which is less than inflation.
Or, we can talk in terms of federal buy out of toxic debt. $1.5 Trillion to pay for 8 different investment banks bribing ratings agencies for terrible assets. Guess how many nasa programs that bail out adds up to? Almost 100. You could buy 100 annual space programs, or you could buy a bunch of fraudulent mortgages which are worth less than half of what they paid for. You could probably fund 1,000 of these lunar missions with that many dollars.
I am not in favor of toxic debt bail outs or the current abuse/misuse of the SS system. So, at least I am consistent. :)
Point is.. not all science is worthwhile simply because someone deemed it to be "science". We spend tons of money on many things that are of no benefit. As was pointed out in the example of social security (some might think that is beneficial) and Wall Street bailouts. Isn't it just as big a waste of money to fund SETI listening for Aliens, or space telescopes that view events that occurred 100's of millions of years in the past or look at galaxies that are millions of light years away?
SETI has found no Aliens (they did right "WOW" on a print out) and no one can travel to another galaxy. Yet we continue to fund the "non-useful sciences".
*sigh* I hope he doesn't breed.....
I appreciate the civil discourse and opened minded comments youl have for someone with a differing opinion.
Seems that some can only offer insults. Perhaps it is you who should not breed. I am at least civil in my comments.
I hope time and life experiences provides you your needed education.
I gather that Arcticfire is really asking about more than just the latest pictures of Apollo landing sites. I often hear questions about the value of the space effort, and a few years ago I drew up a list of "Five E's" that are provided as rationales for space science and exploration. In the past, we've benefited hugely from the space effort. You literally could not survive without the satellite communication and control systems that have been developed over the past 50 years (which is in itself a scary thought). But what about priming the pump for future innovation? Here's what I wrote on the Five E's and other subjects related to justifying the space effort four years ago:
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2007/10/04/4349705-the-next-space-age
I didn't realize until just a minute ago that Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter imagery was specifically mentioned as a component of one of the five E's. Weird...
I agree that we have benefited from the space effort. However that does not mean that every aspect of space exploration is beneficial. I don't expect anyone here to agree with me. I am a man who forms his own opinions and I am use to people not agreeing with me. That does not change my opinion and I will continue to offer it in oublic forums no matter how unpopular it might be or how rude some peoples response to it is.
I often have these same sort of conversations with my brother who is the Dean of the local college (formerly the Dean of the Math and Science depts.) Our conversation is always civil.
Thank you Alan for the article and the additional information you posted.
Artic fire, you never heard of, cell phones, GPS, laptops, satellite weather forcast etc etc etc. All electronics we have today are a DIRECT result of the space program. They did most of it with sliderules. Ever hear of or remember sliderules? The computers on Apollo had less computing power than a cell phone today.
Arcticfire - Hey, I commend you on keeping a civil tone and using reason and logic in your comments, even whilst disagreeing with the majority opinion. In a more direct answer to your question, the LRO does provide a few very specific scientific returns, the big ones that jump out at me:
Characterization of deep space radiation in lunar orbit.
The lunar polar regions, including possible water ice deposits and the lighting environment. The lunar polar regions experience temperatures of −223 °C (−369.4 °F) and may be able to hold water ice.[17]
High-resolution mapping (max 0.5 metres (1.6 ft)) to assist in the selection and characterization of future landing sites.
Getting a good feel for how high the radiation can get in deep space is very essential to future manned flights beyond Earth's orbit. Knowing how much water on the moon, obviously beneficial for any future permanent bases we may decide upon, which also goes along with the last item there.
While it may seem odd to people that NASA and other scientists put money towards things like interstellar flight, you have to start somewhere. It may take 50 years of serious research to nail down a technology that can get us to new stars, but I'd fully support every penny spent in that effort.
arcticfire, For someone who continually insists that they offer up only civil conversation you do manage to get your own little digs in when you can, albeit masked by your enormous civility. Sure you were responding to disrespectful comments but you did offer up your own amount of disrespect. I just wanted to keep you honest and make note that you can turn to the dark sides when people push your buttons. It happens to us all. I can get fairly bitter pretty quickly. None of us are perfect and none of us are entirely civil 100% of the time. So, the moral of the story is "if you have to tell people you are, then you probably aren't. And if you have to tell people you aren't, then you probably are." I'm not saying that you are not civil, I'm just saying that you could probably get by with mentioning it less.
About your question: "Isn't it just as big a waste of money to fund SETI listening for Aliens, or space telescopes that view events that occurred 100's of millions of years in the past or look at galaxies that are millions of light years away?"
No, The space telescopes are not a big waste of money, and it's certainly not on par with the bank bailouts. And perhaps someone more familiar with SETI institute can fill us all in on how they get their money, but they are a not for profit organization and you can donate money to their cause. The worlds space telescope are some of the most important and valuable inventions the world has ever known. How you can thing they are a waste of money is beyond me. You may never go to the Andromeda galaxy but because of these space telescopes we know much MUCH more about these galaxies beyond our own. It's like knowing that Rome existed before you had the ability to travel there. Say you lived somewhere in South America and some one invented a device that could show you all the cities of the world but this invention existed before you had the ability to travel to any city on the planet. Would you say it was a waste of money? You might, given your comments, but I certainly wouldn't. Just because we can't get there now doesn't mean we won't ever be able to. And there are many other reasons to study the stars beyond simply desiring to go to them. Understanding the universe is essentially in understanding our place in it.
ArcticFire - SETI is privately funded, so it doesn't really matter whether or not we think it is a waste of money.
Apparently most of the World does not think the science provided by SETI is useful. The were Federally Funded but since the loss of that funding it is being mothballed. Certainly if this was good science the thinking public would step up to the plate and prevent the mothballing of a useful science.
Its was Federally funded. Since the loss of federal funding it is being mothballed. Information week reported that the 42-array antenna is being shutdown (mothballed) while it seeks other terrestrial forms of funding.
I think most of you misunderstand or simply don't care for my opinion. I am very aware of the technologies and advancements made possible by space explorations. My point is that the advancements brought about by some areas of space exploration do not justify the federal funding of all areas of science or space exploration. If it truly is useful why wouldn't private industry fund it (i.e. Sir Richard Branson, IBM, Intel, etc..). Everyone "should" explore and be interested in science. However, no one else should be "required" to fund your interest or desire to explore without a justification of the cost.
I'm done :) Flying to the Arctic in the morning. Thank you for the conversation and for the insults. It proves that educated people are not above calling people names simply because they disagree with them.
(sigh) What use? It's not merely about the Apollo sites. This tells you something about the degree of detail with which we can survey the rest of the Lunar surface for basic knowledge and potential resources...
And no, private entities generally don't do basic research. There's no obvious 'commercial value' in knowing the Cosmic Microwave Background, for example. That kind of research, IMHO, the government does have a role in. (and sometimes something 'useful' does unexpectedly fall out of it, but you can't know until you do it) Even 'directed' research to a specific application can have a price tag that's too high for the private sector, but potentially a high payoff. (like controlled nuclear fusion...it's not done just for basic plasma physics)
So the question is, is it worth it to you to publicly fund research and knowledge purely for its own sake?
I believe this is one of the things that a civilization worth the name, does.
"I am very aware of the technologies and advancements made possible by space explorations. My point is that the advancements brought about by some areas of space exploration do not justify the federal funding of all areas of science or space exploration."
Then you do not understand science. Before ever success or innovation, there are hundreds or thousands of failures. To you, they would all have been nothing but wastes of time and money. You ask why people are "required" to help foot the bill for national or global scientific endeavours without justification, and the answer is because most people are equally ignorant about such matters and incapable of seeing past their owwn wallets.
Hey I got an idea: Let's start burning all the paintings. They have no purpose. No use. Books too - anything that's fiction... burn the useless crap. Art? Statues? Movies? All a waste of time unless, of course, they support the nation-state. Science? Only should be applied to the war-machine and what feeds the war-machine, and anything that may immediately benefit the nation - otherwise it's pointless and serves no purpose. If it does not serve an immediate purpose that I deem useful and worthy, it must be destroyed. ***
Fascists are back in vogue it seems.
Wow, this is one long thread. Relating to SETI, the report about the mothballing of the SETI Institute's search for signals is out of date. The search is being revived because donations have been coming in from everyday folks:
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/08/08/7309356-donations-revive-seti-quest
I guess the follow-on issue is whether some endeavors, ranging from national defense to the space effort and the SETI search, are deserving of public support. I would argue that they are, because they advance public goods. That's certainly a subject worthy of debate.
Sometimes I wonder why we try to explain this at all.
Mapping the moon is important to the ultimate goal of going there and setting up stations. What else needs to be said? There are and will be commercial opportunities for space travel and colonization. We already see the rocket and ship building industry moving forward, soon we will see exploration itself outsourced. Follow that up with mining operations and construction. These tasks may take centuries to complete and at times may be stalled because of funding or poor economies, but they will continue to move forward.
Remember it took centuries just to cross the Atlantic in an economically feasible way. It took centuries to explore and realize profits. It took centuries to establish vibrant nations. And although all of it occurred in cycles of spending cuts, wars, hunger, disease, and although there were many failures along the way, no one ever questioned the value of it all. Or if they did, certainly no one remembers their names.
Science is exploration. We know there are rewards to exploration. But just because every single day doesn't bring them that is no reason to quit.
radagast, I liked your post so much, that I'm adding it to my favorites. The last two paragraphs are infinitely quote-able.
Some people are explorers and some people are content in never leaving their hometown.
Some people like to learn, others just want to get a paycheck.
Some people like to ask the BIG questions, others just like to ask, "You want fries with that?"
To each his own, I suppose.
So, I'm no conspiracy guy but where are the high res pictures of the Apollo 11 site? It seems odd to not include those.
The scientists wanted to get sharper images of the Apollo 11 site, but the lighting conditions weren't optimal during the opportunities for LRO fly-overs. "It wasn't possible to image easily all six sites," Rich Vondrak said during the news briefing.
Thank you Alan.
You folks haven't gauged the real insanity of the conspiracy nuts. To them, none of this is proof of anything. They figure that these photos are all faked, that the LRO people are all "in" on the conspiracy, etc., etc., ad nauseam. For a true conspiracy believer, there is no evidence that would shake his faith. It's a religion, not a rational conclusion drawn from evidence.
Right, the implication is that all the scientists, not only in the Apollo generation but in the succeeding generation as well, somehow take a pledge not to let the truth get out. Or else NASA is so all-powerful that they can send a fake data stream good enough to fool the scientists from outside the fraternity ... scientists who participated in building the equipment. There are also still people who say they believe the earth is flat.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/
You mean it ain't?
Alan - wow... i'm floored there are people out there that still believe in that.
EarlyOut.
I think the funniest 'conversation' I have had with a conspiracy theorist was that he didn't think that they happened because he wanted to 'take the piss out' of americans and america, and that even if he was personally flown to one of the Apollo sites, he would still believe that the US didn't land on the moon.
(He was english so the language is more appropriate for an english person).
That just goes to show the extent that some of them will go.
*from the flat Earth society .org website...
"...held that the earth is a flat disk centered at the North Pole and bounded along its southern edge by a wall of ice, with the sun, moon, planets, and stars only a few hundred miles above the surface of the earth."
Astounding.
Alan I think you are getting that confused with the catholic Church (or insert another religion's ruling order)
Oddly enough, I haven't seen any conspiracy rants yet.
Maybe they all converted to truthers or birthers? Because having more than 1 tinfoil hat on at a time would be ridiculous.
Another sad aspect of the conspiracy theory people is the sheer number of their size. I've heard various percentages quoted for people who don't believe we went to the moon, all the way up to 50%. But even if just 10% of Americans believe it was a conspiracy, that's still a huge slap in the face to all the men and women that worked so hard to get us there. And thanks to the Fox Network (a few years back) for airing that ridiculous "documentary" claiming the whole thing was a hoax. That just added a whole bunch of fuel to the fire.
There are a lot of things that governments, big business and the ultra rich do that we don't know about, that is deliberately kept hidden from us, but fortunately the moon landing hoax conspiracy is not one of them.
Why do humans insist on leaving a mess where ever they go? I hope this puts to rest the conspiracy nuts claim that the moon landings were faked, morons.
Conspiracy theorists are the kind of people who fire up my imagination. They wouldn't believe there was ever any kind of moon landing or that there is even a space station in orbit if you took them up there and left them on the moon for a week, or in orbit tethered to the space station in orbit. They would insist it's all hypnotic suggestion and drugs. Seriously!
I like these images, but Snappa is right -- why do we leave junk everywhere we go?
Ideally, we ought to follow the back-packers credo: Pack it in, pack it out... However due to the extreme costs and fuel limitations of the return modules this just wasn't possible.
It's probably more comparable to the scenario on Everest where packing out the spent oxygen bottles as well as the trash is just too much trouble for some hikers and over the years they've left a heckuva mess.
Actually, "everywhere we go" does not refer solely to the lunar landing sites. We have done this kind of thing -- pack it in, use it and leave it behind -- all over this planet. Those dump sites go back thousands of years and provide a valuable archaeological record, but I still don't understand why we have this need to leave our trash everywhere we go.
I'll just check back in a couple of hours, to read all the "conspiracy" rants. should be fun!!LOL Cool shots, Thank you Alan.
If we never landed on the moon, whose trash is this? I think it should be checked out for a return address.
I do have some flat or nearly flat earth on my property, actually it tends to run down hill, a somewhat scary thought.
I do have some flat or nearly flat earth on my property, actually it tends to run down hill, a somewhat scary thought.
That second comment was an accident. Evidently overly excited.
What is this, your attempt at some sort of cover up? heh heh
Kudos to above commenter(s) who are no doubt very wise when stating that the ""conpiracy nuts" would still believe it was some "gov't" -made TV movie. I have a Princeton Ph.d. grad neighbor who states it was a TV movie, and also that the Sept 11th attacks were planned & carried out by the "gov't". Which govt I wonder and ask. He also claims he knows it bc he is , after all, a "scientist". Still can't believe above comment re the "flat earth society" schematic. Will wonders never cease.
Well... I'm not a conpiracy (sic) nut, but I still believe that Osama is captured and not killed (most likely being questioned), and that flight 93 was shot down by our own military to prevent it from carrying out its terrorist act.
The conspiracy theorists also believe that the Stargate is real and the military is hiding it somewhere.
Are you authorized to say that? Col. O'Neil will be over at your house in a few minutes.
naw, that would be col. maibourne's job.
Nothing would make me happier than to find out that it's true.
Actually, I live within a few miles of that location and am told that there is indeed a door at NORAD that does indeed have a sign on it that reads Stargate Command. I'm also told that it leads to a broom closet.
Also, NORAD lets you call them once a year if you like. It appears that NORAD tracks Santa Clause across the world and will give details on his location. I don't have the number with me though, you'll have to Google it and try it yourself next Christmas.
"That's O'Neill with two L's" - Jack O'Neill's subtle way of giving the finger while holding up three fingers.
one of the most interesting stories on MSNBC in months...
thanks Brian Williams & Alan Boyle
I agree. I keep checking in and I get tired of phone, gaming and other tripe as 'science' news'
This was interesting to see as I am irritated by the conspiracy nutters.
The category you are reading this story in is called "Tech & Science", phones and gaming are tech. Tech stemming from the space program no less.
MSNBC isn't' exactly catering to the MIT crowd and unless a science piece is going to appeal to the masses it probably won't be published here. This story is interesting enough to appeal to a lot of different people and also well written so it engages those of higher intelligence as witnessed by a lot of the comments here.
I'm going to go heat up my coffee in the microwave, one of the best devices to come from the space program.
That's a lot of trash that won't go away.
I do not agree that the Apollo landings were of "benefit to all of us." Personally, I would be more than happy to trade them for a subway system in Milwaukee. Now that's something that would really be of benefit to many, but we don't have it and probably never will. Why? Because our government wasted our hard earned tax dollars on the expensive propaganda project called Apollo.
I think fewer people would benefit from a subway system in Milwaukee than did from the Apollo program.
Not if the transport was from the brewery to the bar. Keep those cars off the streets of barley and hops land.
LOL. If you want a stinkin' subway in Wilwaukee then it's up to Milwaukee to fund it from their local taxes. That is not something that should be federally funded.
Mob, sshhhh. We'll have to fund a return to the Moon with Lunar taxes.
Nice pics....I do hope they WILL be of use to FUTURE landing parties....I suppose if nothing else it will help some later acheologists in some distant century find some proof of an american landing party(s) on the moon which will help dispel what may by then be a roaring ascertion that "early" man, us, never got boots on the ground outside of terra firma. Hope it does not come to that, I do remain optimistic but about all we got left is sarcastic pessimism to counter the same....bad way to push our (my) enthusiastic manned space exploration agenda. I am more than convinced that a moon base is an essential component of man's reach for space, In fact I am proof positive of it's necessity. Of use to me are pictures like this that give me pause wheter future lunar explorations will find value in revisting these places...(please leave the trash, it's now part of history, else let me or whomever salvage it for whatever value it may be to the new mission). From my standpoint, I would focus on very specific natural resources that at the moment do not seem likely to be found at some of these locations (ok, admittedly one or two MIGHT, I say boy, JUST MIGHT, have what the science foundry would be seeking). Anyways, I think the mountains are a bevy of bounty and would personally be focused there...in fact I do scan recon of those areas when I get the chance...in that light, I too would ask what use are these pics?...is this just some sort of PR or, as alan suggests, is not the aging process not a viable factor for future lunar missions (ok, he does not mention future missions above). I want more detailed photos of the areas that have the elements and compounds I (or perhaps the ones other mission planner would prioritize) think are essential to MY plan. Taking the devils advocate for private space ventures, I am. What use are these?...I will know more if I get the chance to correlate these photos with data from the upcoming gravity mappers...I am sure there are government space scientists getting big money with the same theory in mind...in that respect maybe the photos are useless, or, maybe they are as golden as platinum (hint,hint). Personally I think one of those spots will be the site of a component of a very large apeture baseline optical telescope...but you did not hear that from me.....I'm voting for myself cause I don't want the money, I want the knowledge the science will provide.....and for gods sake, if you want something done right, ya gotta do it yourself....
I hope that these new amazing photos that document an important part of human history both inspire future space missions and deter conspiracy theorists.
POLL: With new photos of Apollo landing sites, will conspiracy theorists ever accept that the United States landed men on the moon?Vote:
Who cares, we were there, it is an observable fact. If there are people who cannot accept that, then that is their problem.
Why is Nasa still trying to convince some people, that they went to the moon?
That wasn't the LRO's primary mission, just an added bonus.
Nasa isn't trying to convince anyone of anything. This article was written by one Alan Boyle, Science Editor at msn. He thought the pics were cool, so do I, and a lot of others. that's all. This Isn't a "grand Cover-up" This is science geeks way of having fun. You remember fun?
You mean the Stargate is not real ? And the next thing you'll say is that there's no Aliens. If the Government
Admitted it then it would coz mass hysteria. Sure the US landed on the moon, they were probably looking
back at the Earth and saying, There never going to believe this.
The desert of Arizona (or is it New Mexico? Or is it a movie studio somewhere?) never looked so good....
Actually ever since Apollo 11 I've wondered what our "footprint" on the moon looked like, now I know. Also, I appreciate the posts explaining the likely scientific value of these kinds of missions. Not the end in itself, but the opportunity to fine tune instruments for other potential uses.
Iagree, what is the purpose of the moon being examined and other planets also. The funding should be cut for these projects and put to things that really are important....You know like Social Security ,Medicare, taking care of our own that are homeless, starving children.Stop dealing with other countries that take away jobs . Why should we deal with those bums.God help us all !
Seriously do us all a favor and look up spin offs as a result of space exploration. Do you know the small budget Nasa has gotten since its inception?
According to the Office of Management and Budget and the Air Force Almanac, when measured in real terms (adjusted for inflation), the figure is $790.0 billion, or an average of $15.818 billion dollars per year over its fifty year history (NASA's 2011 budget is on a continuing resolution of the 2010 budget at $18.724 billion)
So in otherowrds it hasnt yet even approched 1 trillion dollars, if you want to bitch about wasted money how about you bitch about the 1.5 Trillion poured into the economy to try to stimulate it. Instead you make unintelligent comments based on your personal opinion and no actual facts or knowledge at how much our society has benefited as a result of space exploration.
People like you need to stay in school and get some education because if the world thought as you do thru history we would all still be stuck on one continent. Next time research a subject before you make uninformed statements.
Oh and by the way it isnt other countries that are taking American jobs away it is American companies outsourcing them to other countries to save money so please place the blame where it deserves to be placed. American Companies are helping to destroy our economy by outsourcing it isnt other countries that are doing it.
Pirate:
The problem with the stimulus wasn't the stimulus, but that only about 150 billion of the 800 billion dollar stimulus bill was actually stimulus. Almost half of it was a one time tax break to people that really didn't need it.
Geez, we can send men to the moon, but we still can find out what brand Alan Shepard's golf ball is.