<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PopSci does the Moon Hoax</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/</link>
	<description>I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:30:08 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Avgas</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/comment-page-2/#comment-143020</link>
		<dc:creator>Avgas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 08:43:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/#comment-143020</guid>
		<description>Why is the Earth so small in the pic?  should it be bigger..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is the Earth so small in the pic?  should it be bigger..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg in Austin</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/comment-page-2/#comment-122854</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg in Austin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:41:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/#comment-122854</guid>
		<description>@Radwaste,

&lt;i&gt;&quot;Segue to the Challenger explosion: based on my experience, there should be detailed pictures of the death of Challenger somewhere. I wonder where.&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

Are you talking about the 1986 Challenger that exploded during launch? Because there are numerous photos and videos of the launch, explosion, and debris. Click my name for details.

@Charles,

Same question. Also, what do you mean, &quot;oath of secrecy?&quot;

8)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Radwaste,</p>
<p><i>&#8220;Segue to the Challenger explosion: based on my experience, there should be detailed pictures of the death of Challenger somewhere. I wonder where.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Are you talking about the 1986 Challenger that exploded during launch? Because there are numerous photos and videos of the launch, explosion, and debris. Click my name for details.</p>
<p>@Charles,</p>
<p>Same question. Also, what do you mean, &#8220;oath of secrecy?&#8221;</p>
<p> <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif' alt='8)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ND</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/comment-page-2/#comment-122632</link>
		<dc:creator>ND</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:01:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/#comment-122632</guid>
		<description>Nigel Depledge

I&#039;ve done my share of astrophotography. I was joking :) They would indeed need to setup the camera on a tripod of sorts to take any long exposure shots. It would have been cool tho, no atmospheric turbulence.

But they did take pictures of earth. That&#039;s astrophotography no? :)

As for taking pictures of the moon from earth, the exposures can be quite short. If using a decent telephoto lens, a fraction of a second say 1/125 for 200 speed film should show some surface details. Similarly shots of the planets could be short exposures as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nigel Depledge</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve done my share of astrophotography. I was joking <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  They would indeed need to setup the camera on a tripod of sorts to take any long exposure shots. It would have been cool tho, no atmospheric turbulence.</p>
<p>But they did take pictures of earth. That&#8217;s astrophotography no? <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>As for taking pictures of the moon from earth, the exposures can be quite short. If using a decent telephoto lens, a fraction of a second say 1/125 for 200 speed film should show some surface details. Similarly shots of the planets could be short exposures as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Boyer</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/comment-page-2/#comment-122622</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Boyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 12:48:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/#comment-122622</guid>
		<description>Oh, an radwaste: we lived in Cocoa Beach, then just off of River Road.  I went to St. Mary&#039;s school between Cocoa and Rockledge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, an radwaste: we lived in Cocoa Beach, then just off of River Road.  I went to St. Mary&#8217;s school between Cocoa and Rockledge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Boyer</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/comment-page-2/#comment-122621</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Boyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 12:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/#comment-122621</guid>
		<description>Radwaste has a &lt;i&gt;very&lt;/i&gt; good point about the Challenger disaster.

We&#039;ve never seen the highest resolution film/video that there is.

Nor, out of respect to the families, have we heard the post-breakup audio.  It exists and I know it exists because an immediate family member &lt;i&gt;has&lt;/i&gt; heard it.  It is not like that faked transcript that circulated and is on snopes.com, and that is all he will tell me -- again, out of respect and also because of his oaths of secrecy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Radwaste has a <i>very</i> good point about the Challenger disaster.</p>
<p>We&#8217;ve never seen the highest resolution film/video that there is.</p>
<p>Nor, out of respect to the families, have we heard the post-breakup audio.  It exists and I know it exists because an immediate family member <i>has</i> heard it.  It is not like that faked transcript that circulated and is on snopes.com, and that is all he will tell me &#8212; again, out of respect and also because of his oaths of secrecy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/comment-page-2/#comment-122617</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:47:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/#comment-122617</guid>
		<description>ND said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;Doesn’t any photography on the moon automatically fall under astrophotography?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Not so, my initial-sharing friend.  If you are on the moon, then the moon is no longer a celestial object from your frame of reference.  Besides, astrophotography generally requires large apertures and long exposures to collect enough light, and all of the photos taken on the moon&#039;s surface were exposed for bright sunshine, i.e. small apertures and short exposures.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ND said:</p>
<blockquote><p>Doesn’t any photography on the moon automatically fall under astrophotography?</p></blockquote>
<p>Not so, my initial-sharing friend.  If you are on the moon, then the moon is no longer a celestial object from your frame of reference.  Besides, astrophotography generally requires large apertures and long exposures to collect enough light, and all of the photos taken on the moon&#8217;s surface were exposed for bright sunshine, i.e. small apertures and short exposures.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ND</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/comment-page-2/#comment-122563</link>
		<dc:creator>ND</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:25:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/09/30/popsci-does-the-moon-hoax/#comment-122563</guid>
		<description>Johnny Vector,

Thanks for pointing out the sun would be brighter too, but I did reference that in my post :)

As for astrophotography from the moon, that would have been really cool. Anyone know of any such pics? Doesn&#039;t any photography on the moon automatically fall under astrophotography? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Johnny Vector,</p>
<p>Thanks for pointing out the sun would be brighter too, but I did reference that in my post <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>As for astrophotography from the moon, that would have been really cool. Anyone know of any such pics? Doesn&#8217;t any photography on the moon automatically fall under astrophotography? <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
