Keepin' it real fake: lunar evidence edition

Not content with just KIRF'n popular gadgets, our favorite reversers of engineering are back and this time, doing it up in space. Notice any difference between the 1994 Pentagon photo (on left) of the moon and that taken by China's Chang 1 last week in almost exactly the same location? Hint: look in the yellow circle. Right, what appears to be a new crater on the geologically dead hellscape we call the moon. Well, since the image was released under great fanfare in China, it's been heavily shouted down as a fake by flat-Earthers in the West. It's not, at least not in the traditional sense. According to Emily Lakdawalla of The Planetary Society, the image is real (and likely original) but the "new" crater is just an artifact from the process of stitching and blending 19 image strips taken on different orbits. The correctly stitched image (achieved by sliding the left-most crater up, and the right-most down) is presented in the yellow box above. Unfortunately, the chief scientist of the Chinese lunar exploration program, Ouyang Ziyuan, said that the emergence of the crater was proof that their photograph was original. Sorry Charlie, the crater is not new, only the lighting angle and resolution is... we think.

[Via MSNBC]

[scott @ Dec 6th 2007 5:00AM]

And uh, couldn't there have been a recent impact as well? Why must the moon be static and unchanging?

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Dec 6th 2007 6:56AM]

The other photograph is 30+ years old, plenty of asteroids have had time to alter the surface of the moon.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Dec 6th 2007 7:04AM]

Typo Correction: 10+ years not 30+.

[Simon @ Dec 6th 2007 7:19AM]

it's not that there couldn't have been any impacts, but in this image there is no new impact crater. only the right part of the image is shifted a bit upwards. if you compare the other features relative position to each other it is easily visible.

[SR_G@m3r @ Dec 6th 2007 10:32AM]

I always thought that the moon always had the same revolution as Earth. Meaning that the same point always pointed towards Earth. If that was the case, how could anything from space come up and hit it unless it curved or came somewhat close to Earth first?

[SuperQ @ Dec 6th 2007 12:41PM]

Because the moon isn't that close to earth. Both objects are tiny specs on the scale of the distances between them. Google image search for "Earth from moon" and you will see that the earth only covers 3-4 degrees of the moon's sky. That's not anywhere close to enough to protect the entire earth-facing surface of the moon.

[lolec @ Dec 6th 2007 1:15PM]

you are right, moon always face earth, but its also far far away, an object could come from behind earth and directly to the moon with a litle of inclination.

diagram. lol.

( ) o
>>>>

[RJM @ Dec 6th 2007 5:13AM]

How is it that these scientist (both sides) have missed the fact that this crater forms a perfect equilateral triangle with the two in the photo, and thus definitive proof that our moon has been visited by aliens with a VERY big spaceship? You can even see the mark in the middle where they let down their ladder to go for a stroll. Too bad the cameras weren't rolling then... ;-)

[RC @ Dec 6th 2007 5:22AM]

Why is it that the pentagon keeps photo records of this stuff? Don't they have better things to do? Like control the US military or something?

[jms @ Dec 6th 2007 6:44AM]

So when we go to war with the moon 300 years from now we'll have an accurate assessment of the terrain.

[hemmy @ Dec 6th 2007 12:53PM]

@jms

There's oil on the moon?

[Paris @ Dec 6th 2007 5:46AM]

Who is Charlie?

[Fruition @ Dec 6th 2007 6:41AM]

Well, Charlie was the name used to describe the enemy during the Vietnam War (possibly other wars too but I only know this from watching Major Payne). It's probably not what they're referring to here, but I felt compelled to offer my $0.02.

"Killin' is my business, ladies, and business is good."

[Ryan Trevisol @ Dec 6th 2007 10:13AM]

Lol@referencing military history facts from "Major Payne" . . .
It was a mostly non-derogatory term, short for Victor Charlie, Viet Cong, the guerrilla Vietnamese resistance.

[Kennyb123 @ Dec 6th 2007 10:51AM]

In the spirit of "Keepin' it real fake:" ...

Charlie Ross (born 1870) was a child in Germantown, Philadelphia, when he was kidnapped on July 1, 1874. The story was a media sensation of its time. The abductors mailed the Ross family twenty-three ransom letters over the course of the first four months of Charlie's absence, but despite a willingness to meet the demands of the abductors, the Ross family never saw their son again. In November 1874 two men were shot while burglarizing a house on Long Island. Although both men died that night, one confessed to police that he and his partner were responsible for kidnapping Charlie Ross. He claimed that only his partner knew the boy's whereabouts. A third man, later picked up, was charged and tried with being an accomplice and sentenced to seven years in jail. For years following the incident people turned up either claiming to know something about Charlie or of actually being Charlie Ross, but the boy was never found.



Also, Sorry Charlie is just a common phrase. There doesn't have to be a REAL Charlie, and I'm 99.999% sure Mr. Ricker wasn't reference the Viet Cong in this post...

[Kennyb123 @ Dec 6th 2007 10:54AM]

Never mind. I just read a little further and saw Mr. Ricker's rebuttal. DOH.

[Randomness @ Dec 6th 2007 5:47AM]

So they screwed up in stitching the photos together, what's the big deal? Well, besides the fact that their chief scientist made a stupid comment before even looking at the picture correctly stitched together :/

[Andrew @ Dec 6th 2007 5:50AM]

Uh, they have photographs of the moon. I don't think they'll be chucking them out tomorrow because they ran out of disk space.

[Tired_ @ Dec 6th 2007 5:59AM]

Awesome! For KIRF 100, the Chinese faked the freakin moon!

[mdky @ Dec 6th 2007 6:04AM]

"Sorry Charlie, the crater is not new, only the lighting angle and resolution is... we think."
Dose the author (Thomas Ricker) have any idea "Charlie" is a derogatory and downright insulting/racist slang for Asians?

[slojohn @ Dec 6th 2007 6:35AM]

Sorry mdky, but charlie is the spokesfish for starkist tuna in the 80's. You can say that any word is some derogatory term for someone, but that's just making up stories

[charles @ Dec 6th 2007 7:10AM]

Agreed.

From Wikipedia:

"The advertisements depicted Charlie (voiced by actor Herschel Bernardi) as a hipster wearing a beret and glasses, whose goal is to be caught by the StarKist company. Charlie believes that he is so hip and cultured that he has "good taste," and is thus the perfect tuna for StarKist. Charlie is always rejected in the form of a note attached to a fish hook that said "Sorry, Charlie." The reason given by the narrator (voiced by Danny Dark) for the rejection was that StarKist wasn't looking for tuna with good taste, but rather for tuna that tasted good.

"Sorry, Charlie" became closely associated with StarKist and was also a popular American catchphrase. Charlie appeared in more than 80 advertisements for StarKist until the 1980s, when the campaign was retired."

CharlesJR

[LondonConsultant @ Dec 6th 2007 7:13AM]

Actually, I was also a little surprised to see "Charlie" used in this context - as it clearly refers to oriental Asians. Naughty Engadget...

[Andir3.0 @ Dec 6th 2007 7:25AM]

Wow, people can read into anything...

[Thomas Ricker @ Dec 6th 2007 8:41AM]

Holy sh!t, you guys are out of control.

"Sorry Charlie" is the tuna reference, and nothing more.

Thomas Ricker

[TrentD @ Dec 6th 2007 10:27AM]

Is there no end to the things people will whine about?

[Ken @ Dec 6th 2007 10:40AM]

I disagree witht he whole Starkist Tuna reference. The inclination derived from "Sorry Charlie" has change since then. Nowadays, the phrase bears more relevance to a person who regrets the tiger-stripe tattoos he had paid for.

[Ken @ Dec 6th 2007 10:40AM]

I disagree with the whole Starkist Tuna reference. The inclination derived from "Sorry Charlie" has change since then. Nowadays, the phrase bears more relevance to a person who regrets the tiger-stripe tattoos he had paid for.

[LondonConsultant @ Dec 6th 2007 5:38PM]

I just saw the author's reply. Apologies for my misinterpretation - that tuna advert didn't appear in the UK...

[nxtiak @ Dec 6th 2007 6:45AM]

Uhh can someone put up a picture with some Arrows and a bubble showing wtf we're suppose to look at?
I can't tell the friggin' difference.
Which is the "new" crater and etc..?
BTW, the chinese photograph has much more detail, so it could be new.

[T-Bone @ Dec 6th 2007 9:13AM]

That isn't the best comparison. The one I saw actually looked different.

[Jamie Marsden @ Dec 6th 2007 7:51AM]

Contrary to the slightly sarky comment from Engadget, I would suggest that the the apparent new crater from the stitching error is indicative of new photographs and a new attempt at stitching - unless it can be shown that the original images from the area were also cut into strips along exactly the same lines as the chinese ones.

[David Clark @ Dec 6th 2007 7:53AM]

The chinese used our same movie studio? ;-)

[opus @ Dec 6th 2007 7:54AM]

I just think it is hysterical that the Chi-Coms are all pumped up over crossing a line in the technological sand that the US crossed over 20 years ago. Wooptie Freakin' Doo

[James Barnes @ Dec 6th 2007 8:03AM]

Oh yeah fine opus, let's not bother with space anymore because teh americans went there in the 60s and decided it was boring.

I've heard that line before and it stank then

I say, big up to the chinese even if their p-shopping skills leave a little to be desired

... to MARS!

[KO @ Dec 6th 2007 8:22AM]

The problem is that we have been sitting on our asses space wise for those same 20 years.

[Kizorblade @ Dec 6th 2007 8:39AM]

Who the hell wants to go to Mars? Satellites have been there - Boring

Alpha Centauri here we come!

[Richard @ Dec 6th 2007 9:39AM]

No Kizorblade! No! Think of the mindworm boils... the MINDWORMS!!

[mushrooshi @ Dec 6th 2007 8:41AM]

'Damn Commies! We must defeat the sov... err... Chinese'

[Philster @ Dec 6th 2007 8:45AM]

"Sorry, Charlie"?!


Very nice.

[Fred @ Dec 6th 2007 8:47AM]

So the Chinese couldn't even get a "free" copy of Photoshop PS3?

A little File > Automate > Photomerge... goes a long way.

[Slant-eyed chink @ Dec 6th 2007 8:57AM]

Also from Wikipedia:

Charlie
(U.S.) A generally non-pejorative slang term used by American troops during the Vietnam War as a short-hand term for Vietnamese guerrillas: it was shortened from "Victor Charlie", the radio code designation for Viet Cong, or VC.[25]

[Secret Squirrel @ Dec 6th 2007 9:00AM]

I wonder if any lead paint was used to retouch the photo?! With a crater as small as that it's probably also a choking hazzard for children under 3 as well...

[joe23521 @ Dec 6th 2007 10:05AM]

You win The Worst Attempt at Humor Award in the lead paint category, which stopped being funny a couple months ago to begin with.

[Secret Squirrel @ Dec 6th 2007 10:42AM]

Sorry, i must have missed the lead paint joke meme train. It was funny to me for the first time just recently. Where is your funny or otherwise insightful comment? If you rehash something older than a week i won't bust your chops, promise! ;)

[Richard Ford @ Dec 6th 2007 9:08AM]

Engagdet. You are a pack of losers. "It's not the critic that counts." I think it was your president that said that, no?

Here's an idea for you Mr Lounge Chair commentators; come back when you personally have done something real in the world as opposed to writing about other people's activities?

You really are a bunch of insecure pricks. Sad really.

[Hax Or @ Dec 6th 2007 10:04AM]

Calm down Emo Kid

[Jonathan Bergeron @ Dec 6th 2007 11:39AM]

I wiped my ass this morning. Does that count as "doing something real"?

[Richard Ford @ Dec 6th 2007 7:38PM]

You wiped your donkey this morning? Great!

[Hax Or @ Dec 6th 2007 9:46AM]

Just fly over the moon and check.

Oh right. Haven't quite mastered that yet.

NOOBS!! :P