Did NASA land men on the Moon?

[Sarva gattah]

Did NASA land men on the Moon? Why not? Because, it could have been faked? Because we cannot believe the government? Because some idiot says they didn't do it. Because Lee Harvey Oswald couldn't hit the broad side of a barn? Oops sorry, wrong conspiracy.

 

OK, it could have been faked. They certainly make movies more realistic than that. Although, they did launch a bunch of humongous rockets. They didn't fake that. Oh, you were not there, and so they could have faked that? What, only people who were in on the scam lived near Cape Canaveral? There were hundreds of thousands of witnesses. [i'm sure that nobody doubts that we launched huge rockets, by the way]

 

Well, you do not trust the government? I lean that way, myself. They are a bunch of jerks. But they are not always lying. There were a lot of scientists, engineers, and astronauts working on sending men to the Moon. They all kept quiet? Yeah, right. People (even in government) do not keep secrets.

 

They put stuff on the Moon. Scientists are still bouncing laser beams off mirrors left on the Sea of Tranquility, thanks to the Apollo 11 mission. The physics is right. The rockets were big enough to send three men and all that life support (air, water, food, protection from cosmic rays) to the Moon and back. Radio messages would seem to have come from the Moon. There were witnesses listening in.

 

Let's pretend that they faked it. Then they spent more money to fake it than it would have cost to actually go to the Moon and back. Why would they bother? I say that it would cost more, because not only did they have to go to the expense to do this (build rockets...), they had to buy everybody's silence.

 

NASA put men on the Moon. What is the problem with that?

[Kulapavana]

 

NASA put men on the Moon. What is the problem with that?

 

It is not a problem for me. I think they did put men on the Moon, but the mirror array you are talking about could have been put on the Moon by an unmanned mission too.

 

The only "problem" might be for devotees who believe that Prabhupada was right when he said that Moon is further away from Earth then Sun.

[Beggar]

The Sun And The Moon

Q & A with Swami B. V. Tripurari

"Prabhupada wanted to undermine faith in the religion of modern science and to that end he ridiculed science and sought to expose the shallowness of the scientific community's own arguments against the existence of God."

Q. I have found that many devotees are fixated on saying that the moon missions were a hoax. They maintain this is so partly because Srila Prabhupada expressed doubts about the moon landings ever occurring. What is your opinion about the moon missions? Do all devotees fall in the "conspiracy theory" category?

A. Srila Prabhupada expressed doubts about the moon mission in the spirit of doubting science in general in terms of its being a comprehensive means of knowing. He was concerned with breaking our faith in imperfect means of arriving at conclusive truth as to the nature of reality. To this end he often engaged in science-bashing and encouraged his disciples to question authority. After all, in the modern era beginning with the industrial and scientific revolutions science was thought to be a metanarrative competent to answer all the questions of life. Understandably, Prabhupada strongly disagreed with this premise.

One of his repeated arguments against the idea that man had indeed gone to the moon underscores his underlying purpose in making his argument against the moon landing:

"You materialistic people say that 'We have not seen God, therefore we don't believe.' Therefore I say, 'I have not gone with you to the moon, I don't believe.' That's all. Finished. How can I believe? You say that you have gone. But I have not gone with you. So how can I believe? That's all. That is my argument. You did not take me with you. How can I believe? When you take then I shall believe."

Prabhupada wanted to undermine faith in the religion of modern science and to that end he ridiculed science and sought to expose the shallowness of the scientific community's own arguments against the existence of God. Just as God hovers above all, shining brightly on his devotees while agnostics deny his existence altogether, Prabhupada denied that which was obvious to the scientific community--the moon landing appearing in the sky for all to see (on television).

Prabhupada cited other arguments as well. He suggested that perhaps the mission landed in the Arizona desert or the Vedic planet Rahu, indicating both his lack of faith in the integrity of the government and his own uncertainty as to where the space shuttle did land. Overall, it seems that he personally did not believe that man landed on the moon for a number of different reasons. However, neither was he presented with overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It is also clear from the written record that had Prabhupada been presented with such evidence, he would have simply argued further as to the value of such a mission in the first place--an argument that many are making after the recent shuttle disaster. For example, he once said, "They have gone to the moon, but for all their labor they have simply taken away some dust and rocks."

While Prabhupada often stated that man did not go to the moon, he also indicated that he was not entirely sure about the whole affair. In spite of writing that man did not go to the moon, he later said, "Those who have claimed to have gone to the moon have not gone there or else their imperfect vision cannot actually perceive the particular type of living entities there." On another occasion he said, "First of all, find out whether they have gone to the moon. I am not so sure." Later still when he heard from his disciples that astronaut Edgar Mitchell of the Apollo moon landing stated that upon setting foot upon the moon he had a religious experience, Prabhupada replied, "That's nice. He is good," indicating that had this been the unanimous experience of the astronauts, he might not have questioned the landing to the same extent, after all the moon is considered heavenly in the Vedic literature.

Aside from Prabhupada's statements, in my opinion the various conspiracy theories that question the moon landing do not hold up under scrutiny against the evidence that supports the landing. Furthermore, it is not necessary to believe that man never landed on the moon in order to advance in spiritual life or to be a faithful follower of Srila Prabhupada and the Gaudiya tradition. Overall, it is better to believe in the message of Srila Prabhupada--the gift of Sri Caitanya--in spite of the fact that he sometimes said things in the context of preaching that defied scientific evidence to the contrary. This is more important than to burden our faith in his divinity with the necessity of believing such statements at face value.

Q. Devotees sometimes cite the Bhagavatam version that the moon is farther away from the earth than the sun (contradicting a fact known to the Greeks almost 2,500 years ago). I have found that this unscientific nonsense turns away many people and have warned devotees without a thorough scientific background not to embarrass us with such irrational statements. What is your opinion on this issue, and is there an allegorical way to view the descriptions of the universe presented in Srimad-Bhagavatam and other Vedic literatures?

A. The Srimad-Bhagavatam's description of cosmology is according to the vision of Sukadeva. It may be taken either that the world was shown to Sukadeva to be as it is described in the Bhagavatam--a particular angle of vision, a subjective reality--or that he is merely recounting what the prominent understanding of the time was.

With regard to the latter opinion, the text of the Bhagavatam itself lends credence to this outlook. When asked by Pariksit about the nature of the material world--the glory of Visnu maya--Sukadeva replied that essentially this world is a transformation of the three gunas, nothing more--bhagavato maya-guna-vibhuteh. He goes on to say that no one can describe this world perfectly, vacasa vadhigantum alam vibhudhayusapi purusas. As the sage continues his explanation, he describes it as being based on the estimations of learned persons of that period, pramana-laksanato vyakhyatah.

Pujyapada Sridhara Maharaja suggested the following way of relating to the Bhagavatam's description of the sun being closer to the earth than the moon. He said, "Politically speaking, Russia is closer to India than America or Pakistan. Its nearness is calculated in terms of the friendly relations, or influence. So I like to say we may take in that way. Not in physical distance. Sun's influence over the earth is first, next that of moon, next that of Mars. In this way perhaps we may proceed. I got some hint in that direction. If we are challenged we may take this course. But my ultimate basis of argument is that it is subjective. It is like a hypnotizer ... what the Lord showed Sukadeva at that time, it is described like that. It is in his hands, subjective control. Not that the objective will control us to see a thing. But the subject as he likes can make a show like a hypnotizer. That is my view. So everything can be explained. The higher seer is controlling our capacity to see anything. What one man sees another man won't see. Subjective control. The Visvarupa darsana in Bhagavad-gita, what is it? Krsna says, 'Arjuna, you see this. I am so and so.' And Arjuna is seeing that. It's not that the object is controlling the experience of the subject. But the super-subject (Krsna) is controlling the experience of the lower subject (the jiva soul). That is my understanding. Everything is controlled by the higher. The root (consciousness) is above, not the fossil (matter). 'The fossil (matter) will control my vision,' no such mean law I am ready to accept."

I also discussed this issue in a previous Sanga called The Relativity of Scripture.

Therein I wrote:

"Many subjects are discussed throughout the Bhagavatam that shed light on its principal topic (satyam param) either directly or indirectly (anvayad itaratah). Topics such as psychology and astronomy, while discussed in the Bhagavatam, are not the primary focus of the text. These topics are introduced for reasons other than making definitive statements on the topics themselves. The Bhagavata discusses the structure of the universe for the purpose of stressing that the material manifestation is a fathomless, endless transformation of the gunas (maya-guna-vibhuteh) and thus glorious as the sakti of God appearing as his mystical, venerable Visvarupa. Sukadeva Goswami does not make the claim that his description of the universe is definitive. Indeed, he says the opposite: kastham manasa vacasa vadhigantum alam vibudhayusapi purusa, "No one can possibly explain or perfectly conceive of the nature of the material universe even in a lifetime of Lord Brahma." (SB. 5.16.4)

Bhaktivinoda Thakura's Sri Krsna-samhita explains the relativity of scripture, the difference between scriptural topics that are subject to human logic and those that are not. Psychology and astronomy fall into the former category.

Krsna dasa once asked Prabhupada why there is a discrepancy between the views of Bhagavatam and modern scientists regarding the moon and other planets. To this Srila Prabhupada replied, "These things are not very important, we may not waste our time with these insignificant questions. There are sometimes allegorical explanations [in the Bhagavatam]. So there are many things which do not corroborate with the so-called modern science, because they are explained in that way. But where is the guarantee that modern science is also correct? So we are concerned with Krsna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavata, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam." (Letter 72-11-07)

Here Prabhupada explains that literally accepting the explanation of the material universe found in the Bhagavatam is not essential to one's spiritual life. Indeed, the entire explanation is nonessential.

[Sarva gattah]

Thanks for that mature understanding, it is absolutely incorrect to claim in the 21st century that the moon is further away than the sun. I even remember how Amoga dasa in 1977 gave class claiming that actually the world is flat. One devotee Somendrinoth dasa, who studied science at university, convienced himself that, yes, the world is flat, then Amoga gave another class saying no actually its round. Somendrinoth was so annoyed because he had convienced himself that the world was flat - within a week this expert book distributor left the movement.

 

My point of this adventure has been answered by Tripurari Maharaj, thank you.

[Kulapavana]

 

One devotee Somendrinoth dasa, who studied science at university, convienced himself that, yes, the world is flat, then Amoga gave another class saying no actually its round. Somendrinoth was so annoyed because he had convienced himself that the world was flat - within a week this expert book distributor left the movement.

 

 

That irrationality and blind adherence to poorly understood concepts is still a big problem in our movement. Not just when it comes to the Moon issue, but in many other areas as well. Devotees still leave because all of a sudden they realize that things are not really they way we learned about them in the movement. They often feel cheated and taken for a ride.

[theist]

 

Thanks for that mature understanding, it is absolutely incorrect to claim in the 21st century that the moon is further away than the sun. I even remember how Amoga dasa in 1977 gave class claiming that actually the world is flat. One devotee Somendrinoth dasa, who studied science at university, convienced himself that, yes, the world is flat, then Amoga gave another class saying no actually its round. Somendrinoth was so annoyed because he had convienced himself that the world was flat - within a week this expert book distributor left the movement.

 

And here is the fruit of placing importance on such things. Cosmology is not a spiritual consideration just because it is talked about in the SB.

[Kulapavana]

 

And here is the fruit of placing importance on such things. Cosmology is not a spiritual consideration just because it is talked about in the SB.

 

I dont buy that argument. Prabhupada insisted on accepting his authority in this matter as well. There was no room for a discussion, nor was the alternative understanding an acceptable option in his movement. He would often express his opinion as if it was an absolute truth and this is the way his disciples took it - at least the ones who stayed, because a lot of devotees left the movement due to the Moon controversy - it was an important issue at the time.

 

Even today Iskcon has no official position on the Moon issue, despite the fact that devotees are working on the Vedic Planetarium project! This is about as absurd as it gets, but nobody in GBC has the guts to address it. This ostrich mentality and blind adherence to everything Prabhupada said is still there, at least officially and on the record. Privately, many GBCs know very well that some of the things Prabhupada said are simply not true.

[BhaktiK]

Yes Kulapavana.

[gHari]

Men went to the moon, and men have gone to Vrindavana, India. But they need eyes to see what is there. Without eyes we see a sand trap and monkeys. The man whose lotus feet felt the foot dust of Radha and Krsna and the cowherd boys remains puzzled by those who can see only monkeys and sand. I fear our Prabhupada lived far from our world of gunas and darkness, not really knowing just how dull we really are.

 

http://geocities.com/caitanyamahaprabhu/moonthing1.htm

[theist]

 

I dont buy that argument. Prabhupada insisted on accepting his authority in this matter as well. There was no room for a discussion, nor was the alternative understanding an acceptable option in his movement.

 

I am not selling this arguement. I am just repeating what Srila Prabhupada said in his letter to Krsna das as quoted above by Tripurari.

 

 

Krsna dasa once asked Prabhupada why there is a discrepancy between the views of Bhagavatam and modern scientists regarding the moon and other planets. To this Srila Prabhupada replied, "These things are not very important, we may not waste our time with these insignificant questions. There are sometimes allegorical explanations [in the Bhagavatam]. So there are many things which do not corroborate with the so-called modern science, because they are explained in that way. But where is the guarantee that modern science is also correct? So we are concerned with Krsna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavata, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam." (Letter 72-11-07)

The essence of Srimad Bhagavatam is spiritual.

[Sarva gattah]

 

Men went to the moon, and men have gone to Vrindavana, India. But they need eyes to see what is there. Without eyes we see a sand trap and monkeys. The man whose lotus feet felt the foot dust of Radha and Krsna and the cowherd boys remains puzzled by those who can see only monkeys and sand. I fear our Prabhupada lived far from our world of gunas and darkness, not really knowing just how dull we really are.

 

http://geocities.com/caitanyamahaprabhu/moonthing1.htm

[Sarva gattah]

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>

So we are concerned with Krsna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavata, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam." (Letter 72-11-07)

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

 

The essence of Srimad Bhagavatam is spiritual.

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Hey Beggar!! Can you post a link to that article by Sripad Tripurari Maharaja (and, in general, when you post something from somewhere else)? I think I'd like to post a link on another site I frequent.

[suchandra]

 

I dont buy that argument. Prabhupada insisted on accepting his authority in this matter as well. There was no room for a discussion, nor was the alternative understanding an acceptable option in his movement.

When seeing just how much they're still struggling to bring a Space Shuttle safely down to earth without combusting in the atmosphere, how they could possibly have mastered all these details of a Moon landing and return? Just doesn't make sense.

 

 

 

 

 

[HerServant]

Did man land on the moon, or did a man inside a spacesuit land on the moon?

 

Can a man live on the moon?

[Kulapavana]

 

When seeing just how much they're still struggling to bring a Space Shuttle safely down to earth without combusting in the atmosphere, how they could possibly have mastered all these details of a Moon landing and return? Just doesn't make sense.

 

Moon does not have the atmosphere and the gravity there is only about 1/6 of that on Earth - that helps tremendously. Still, it is an enormous technological challenge to bring people back from the Moon. Just landing there is much easier. Perhaps that is how they placed the mirror array on Moon's surface - with an unmanned mission.

[suchandra]

 

Did man land on the moon, or did a man inside a spacesuit land on the moon?

 

Can a man live on the moon?

 

The night cools the surface of the Moon to -150 C and -230 C.

In the day, the temperature of the Moon averages 107 C, although it can rise as high as 130 C.

[HerServant]

 

The night cools the surface of the Moon to -150 C and -230 C.

In the day, the temperature of the Moon averages 107 C, although it can rise as high as 130 C.

 

exactly. So man cannot know an existence on the moon but rather only an existence inside a spacesuit on the moon. Is that reaching the moon and partaking in "moon life" ?

[Svarupa]

 

Did man land on the moon, or did a man inside a spacesuit land on the moon?

 

Can a man live on the moon?

 

When we look at the sky at night do we see the moon or some other planet like Rahu? I have a lot of trouble explaining and understanding the whole lunar controversy. I am willing to accept that the lunar mission landed elsewhere other than the moon. I just feel like a stubborn idiot when trying to defend Srila Prabhupada's comments on the matter by using the theory that the whole landing was filmed in some fake stage. The hard bit is to accept that the lunar mission traveled towards the moon that we see in the night sky, but didn’t get there.

Srila Prabhupada, based on his firm conviction in the Vedic truth, challenged the lunar-mission on two accounts: (1) it is not possible to reach the heavenly moon by mechanical means; (2) the moon is not a barren desert devoid of life.

According to Vedic evidence, the moon is counted among the heavenly planets and is inhabited by heavenly denizens who live for 10,000 years and is presided by the Deity Candra; only those with much pious credits can enter the moon, and that only after attaining a suitable body fit to live there. Even if humans made the effort for mechanical travel towards the moon, we are dependent on the authority of Candra to actually reach there. Therefore, Srila Prabhupada was convinced that man could not have landed on the moon.

One explanation offered by Prabhupada was perhaps they were deluded and diverted by higher authorities to the invisible planet Rahu (incidentally, Rahu is connected to the ascending node of the moon, astronomically.) He also offered other possible explanations, including one that the whole thing might have been faked (which, by the way, is a prominent proposal by several modern writers).

In any case, the basic principle that Prabhupada wanted us to understand is the unreliability of empirical methods which are always open to question. At present, we do not have sufficient empiric facts to prove either way, while based on Vedic assertions, to the contrary, he urged us to think and question rather than blindly accept the claim of man landing on the moon and finding it lifeless.

One of the scientist-disciples of Prabhupada, Sadaputa dasa, who has done much work in laying the scientific framework for understanding the cosmological materials from Bhagavatam, explores this subject from a higher-dimensional perspective: A higher dimensional realm may have a 3-dimensional location, just as a three-dimensional object has its location in two-dimensional space. For example, if one needs to reach a certain office in Manhattan, one could move up, down and across the grid of streets and arrive at the right address, and yet may not be able to perceive the office one is looking for; to reach the actual destination, they may have to further move 50 stories in the vertical dimension, and a being whose sense-perception is restricted to two-dimensions only cannot access this region. ( Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy by Sadaputa Dasa, Ch 3)

 

This is a crude example but by way of drawing a parallel, even supposing that astronauts might have reached the phenomenal moon which the event itself is not beyond question even so, they still could not have made the higher-dimensional travel necessary to perceive the moon's heavenly inhabitants and surroundings. Being restricted in the gross realm, they would have had to return with the impressions of a lifeless planet.

[HerServant]

http://chandrayaan.wordpress.com/8/11/

 

look at this! A Moon-craft!

[HerServant]

If the information below is true, then it should be possible to take a telescopic photo of the lunar reflector array reflections while being "pinged" by laser pulses. I can find no such photo. This should be easy enough for the scientific community to produce without excuses.

 

 

 

What Neil & Buzz Left on the Moon

 

by Dr. Tony Phillips

 

A cutting-edge science experiment left behind in the Sea of Tranquility by Apollo 11 astronauts is still running today.

 

July 20, 2004: The most famous thing Neil Armstrong left on the moon 35 years ago is a footprint, a boot-shaped depression in the gray moondust. Millions of people have seen pictures of it, and one day, years from now, lunar tourists will flock to the Sea of Tranquility to see it in person. Peering over the rails ... "Hey, mom, is that the first one?"

 

Will anyone notice, 100 feet away, something else Armstrong left behind?

 

 

The Apollo 11 lunar laser ranging retro-reflector array.

 

Ringed by footprints, sitting in the moondust, lies a 2-foot wide panel studded with 100 mirrors pointing at Earth: the "lunar laser ranging retro-reflector array." Apollo 11 astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong put it there on July 21, 1969, about an hour before the end of their final moonwalk. Thirty-five years later, it's the only Apollo science experiment still running.

 

University of Maryland physics professor Carroll Alley was the project's principal investigator during the Apollo years, and he follows its progress today. "Using these mirrors," explains Alley, "we can 'ping' the moon with laser pulses and measure the Earth-moon distance very precisely. This is a wonderful way to learn about the moon's orbit and to test theories of gravity."

 

Here's how it works: A laser pulse shoots out of a telescope on Earth, crosses the Earth-moon divide, and hits the array. Because the mirrors are "corner-cube reflectors," they send the pulse straight back where it came from. "It's like hitting a ball into the corner of a squash court," explains Alley. Back on Earth, telescopes intercept the returning pulse--"usually just a single photon," he marvels.

 

The round-trip travel time pinpoints the moon's distance with staggering precision: better than a few centimeters out of 385,000 km, typically.

 

Targeting the mirrors and catching their faint reflections is a challenge, but astronomers have been doing it for 35 years. A key observing site is the McDonald Observatory in Texas where a 0.7 meter telescope regularly pings reflectors in the Sea of Tranquility (Apollo 11), at Fra Mauro (Apollo 14) and Hadley Rille (Apollo 15), and, sometimes, in the Sea of Serenity. There's a set of mirrors there onboard the parked Soviet Lunokhud 2 moon rover--maybe the coolest-looking robot ever built.

[HerServant]

 

When we look at the sky at night do we see the moon or some other planet like Rahu? I have a lot of trouble explaining and understanding the whole lunar controversy. I am willing to accept that the lunar mission landed elsewhere other than the moon. I just feel like a stubborn idiot when trying to defend Srila Prabhupada's comments on the matter by using the theory that the whole landing was filmed in some fake stage. The hard bit is to accept that the lunar mission traveled towards the moon that we see in the night sky, but didn’t get there.

Srila Prabhupada, based on his firm conviction in the Vedic truth, challenged the lunar-mission on two accounts: (1) it is not possible to reach the heavenly moon by mechanical means; (2) the moon is not a barren desert devoid of life.

According to Vedic evidence, the moon is counted among the heavenly planets and is inhabited by heavenly denizens who live for 10,000 years and is presided by the Deity Candra; only those with much pious credits can enter the moon, and that only after attaining a suitable body fit to live there. Even if humans made the effort for mechanical travel towards the moon, we are dependent on the authority of Candra to actually reach there. Therefore, Srila Prabhupada was convinced that man could not have landed on the moon.

One explanation offered by Prabhupada was perhaps they were deluded and diverted by higher authorities to the invisible planet Rahu (incidentally, Rahu is connected to the ascending node of the moon, astronomically.) He also offered other possible explanations, including one that the whole thing might have been faked (which, by the way, is a prominent proposal by several modern writers).

In any case, the basic principle that Prabhupada wanted us to understand is the unreliability of empirical methods which are always open to question. At present, we do not have sufficient empiric facts to prove either way, while based on Vedic assertions, to the contrary, he urged us to think and question rather than blindly accept the claim of man landing on the moon and finding it lifeless.

One of the scientist-disciples of Prabhupada, Sadaputa dasa, who has done much work in laying the scientific framework for understanding the cosmological materials from Bhagavatam, explores this subject from a higher-dimensional perspective: A higher dimensional realm may have a 3-dimensional location, just as a three-dimensional object has its location in two-dimensional space. For example, if one needs to reach a certain office in Manhattan, one could move up, down and across the grid of streets and arrive at the right address, and yet may not be able to perceive the office one is looking for; to reach the actual destination, they may have to further move 50 stories in the vertical dimension, and a being whose sense-perception is restricted to two-dimensions only cannot access this region. ( Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy by Sadaputa Dasa, Ch 3)

 

This is a crude example but by way of drawing a parallel, even supposing that astronauts might have reached the phenomenal moon which the event itself is not beyond question even so, they still could not have made the higher-dimensional travel necessary to perceive the moon's heavenly inhabitants and surroundings. Being restricted in the gross realm, they would have had to return with the impressions of a lifeless planet.

 

 

I understand your position and reasoning fully.

We must ask, "To be a bonafide Acharya, Does Srila Prabhupada have to be an authority on every topic or only be an authority on Bhakti Yoga?"

 

We cannot reach the moon in a human body. Can we by mechanical means? I've always believed this is possible.

 

What we would actually observe on the moon, with its gravity, and atmosphere, etc., is subjective (to our senses).

 

We can ask is it possible if invisible beings exist here? The devotees would say yes. This is possible. There are demons or ghosts here. Then we can ask: Is it possible that invisible beings exist on the moon?

 

If an invisible person can exist, then why not an invisible tree?

 

HS and yours.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

If the information below is true, then it should be possible to take a telescopic photo of the lunar reflector array reflections while being "pinged" by laser pulses. I can find no such photo. This should be easy enough for the scientific community to produce without excuses.

 

Well, no doubt, these will sound like excuses, but these pulses may be very very brief (especially if it's a higher-power laser)--on the order of nanoseconds, which would be hard to catch on film. Also, they may not use *visible* light.

 

What I find amazing (almost hard to believe) is that the lasers could aim at (and track since both bodies (the moon and the earth) are in motion) such a small target over such a large distance.

[Guruvani]

Considering that modern astronomers have identified 129 moons around the six planets of modern astronomy, I am now questioning which Moon the Bhagavatam is referring to.

I am convinced it is not the Moon of the Earth.

It must be the Moon of some more important planet.

 

The idea that the Earth is the center of the universe has been debunked since Copernicus and Galileo.

 

The one Moon concept is also an ancient myth.

There are many Moons, probably thousands or millions throughout the Galaxy.

[HerServant]

 

Well, no doubt, these will sound like excuses, but these pulses may be very very brief (especially if it's a higher-power laser)--on the order of nanoseconds, which would be hard to catch on film. Also, they may not use *visible* light.

 

What I find amazing (almost hard to believe) is that the lasers could aim at (and track since both bodies (the moon and the earth) are in motion) such a small target over such a large distance.

 

You don't have to catch on film but rather digitally. Also you can "time ensemble average" since pulses can be fired periodically. So techniques like Time Delay Spectroscopy may be used to create/render images from an average of signals of known spectrum.

 

For example, the speed of light, being known, the pulse width, the time interval between pulses is known. So if you continually pulse a laser at the moon, and capture a digital image of the moons surface at time intervals equal to the pulse period + the calculated delay of round trip speed of light, then over time, all noise will average out and only the reflected signal light will be captured.

 

The light does not have to be in the visible spectrum (it could be infrared for example).

 

Even if a high energy laser not producing pulses in the infrared or visible, one could employ Infrared Heterodyne Spectrometry:

 

 

The IRHS works on the same principle as the heterodyne radio receiver. Infrared light from the telescope is mixed with an infrared laser on a HgCdTe detector chip. What is retrieved is the difference frequency between the laser and the incoming signal, which is in the radio regime. An RF filter bank is used to analyze the resulting double-sideband (folded) spectrum. Since IRHS is such a high-resolution instrument, individual spectral line shapes in a planet's spectrum can be fully resolved. This is very important in the retrieval of altitude (pressure) information in the atmospheres of the planets. It is also important for the measurement of doppler shifting of lines due to winds present in other planetary atmospheres.

see: http://www-lep.gsfc.nasa.gov/code693/irhs/irhs.html

 

(note: IRHS was the topic of my senior thesis)

 

Now between TDS measurements and IRHS if necessary, one could produce a "time lapsed" average of the signal coming from the reflective surface, and even shift it into the visible spectrum for viewing purposes.

 

IF the signal could not be detected, then neither could the claimed distance measurements signals which are measuring the moon's distance and movement.

 

So any observatory should be able to independently determine if these mirrors are on the moon.

 

So there is the challenge to anyone claiming or not claiming moon mirrors left by the Apollo missions team actually exist.

 

Produce the image.