Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[JesseCuster]

BTW, Vixen, what’s a “geopositioned satellite”?

 

[LondonJohn]

And what's "lower Earth orbit", Vixen?

 

[Mojo]

This is sounding dangerously close to eugenics regarding intelligence.

She probably learned about it from her studies of Galton.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

Yeah, my dad was certified down to 50 feet - they sometimes used to fly under power lines. And this was all unaided hand-flying. Unfortunately I remember the station (two Buccaneer squadrons) lost at least three aircraft and crew, and there were a few more ejections and aircraft losses as well.

It used to be A Thing that RAF bods from North Yorkshire who came up here would line up Coquet Island lighthouse on one side, the old Alcan and Lynemouth power station chimneys on the other and then come through our village (inland from the middle of Druridge Bay) so low you could tell if the pilot had shaved that morning...They don't do this any more.

As for buzzing Alnwick Castle...Well, my office for several years was very close by...And as for flying over Berwick...

 

[SpitfireIX]

And Charles Lindbergh maintained a friendship with the Apollo 11 crew for many years.

Orville Wright's last flight was in a Lockheed Constellation, and he flew the plane for several minutes.

 

[JayUtah]

A big round of applause for the triple-niner, please.

 

[Mojo]

My post #4192

"Artemis is not comparing like for like. For example, we have the ISS in place for refuelling and docking. We have digital technology, computer and sateliite systems a million times more advanced and developed than in 1969. The entire Houston computer servers of 1969 are equivalent to the entire technology you now have in your smart phone. Calculators were as thick as a brick. President Nixon claimed to have rung up the astronauts on the Moon direct from his White House telephone because he was too dim to realise there were no telephone wires on the Moon. Telephone all used to be by wires, remember. So a story had to be conjured up that er, his 'direct line to Apollo 11' went via bouncing around various radio stations instead. Well, it has plausible deniability."

So not wrong at all. Sorry to disappoint you. AGAIN.

Odd that you didn't link to it so the context for your reply could be seen. Here's the post you were replying to:

The VARB is weakest at the poles, and NASA chose an exit trajectory that entered the VARB in a high latitude, no one but hoaxers claim that the trajectory was over the pole. Review the original data given to anybody that covered the mission, and then look at the recent mission of Artemis, similar to the Apollo trajectory. Are you saying that was faked also?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Don't be even more stupid.

Whether that is possible has been the ongoing topic of this thread.

 

[Mojo]

I didn't say it was impossible.

It was a bit stupid for you to quote it, and give the post #, if you were then going to claim that you didn't say it. Not the sort of error anyone would expect from someone even a couple of steps ahead.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

A big round of applause for the triple-niner, please.

"Well, there is a nine in it"- Queeg 500

 

[catsmate]

So, where are we at now?

More of you pathetic strawmannery.

 

[catsmate]

If you kept up with the news as I do you'd know the plans for ISS.

I do. I *understand* those plans as well, unlike you.

 

[Smock]

Under no plan is the ISS meant to serve as an orbital refueling station.

Except in the plot for Armageddon. Not listing the most probable origin of @Vixen's ramblings would be very dishonest.

 

[Mojo]

So, where are we at now?

Debunkers' claims:

1. It was quite normal for Nixon to ring 'the surface of the Moon' from the Oval on live black and white TV, 1969.
2. Tom Kelly is an absolute legend. Dare anyone blaspheme Apollo 11?
3. Was Tom Kelly fooled?
4. Was Tom Kelly lying?
5. Was his whole career nothing but the mediocre effects of "mean standard deviation?"

<fx stunned silence, outbreaks of sobs, hubbub, murmurs, the audience is on its feet with thunderous applause>

So there we have the Appeal to the Crowd.

Yes, but unfortunately the crowd isn't with you.

 

[Mojo]

Maybe you need more standard deviations.

We're already getting plenty of repetition and hesitation.

 

[Mojo]

You still don't realise how meaningless and ignorant the term "mean sd" is, do you?

Maybe she's finally realised why it was funny, six steps behind everyone else.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Many years ago, before he died, I bought my father a Corgi die-cast model of the Buccaneer as a Christmas present. Not only was the aircraft carrying his squadron's number and livery (15 Squadron), but the attention to detail was so good that the serial number also matched one of 15 Sqdn's aircraft. My dad was able to get out his old logbooks and show us the many times when he'd flown that exact aircraft. In addition, he flew the Buccaneer that's on display in the RAF Museum, and also flew the Canberra in the Museum.

My cousin Carol is married to a former Buccaneer navigator.
He ended up as a Wing Commander commanding 13 Squadron at Waddington when they were reformed in 2012 to operate Reaper Drones.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Yeah, my dad was certified down to 50 feet - they sometimes used to fly under power lines. And this was all unaided hand-flying. Unfortunately I remember the station (two Buccaneer squadrons and a Jaguar squadron) lost at least three aircraft and crew, and there were a few more ejections and aircraft losses as well.

They were designed to fly very low under the radar before popping up to attack.
They trained to fly in tight formation to hide their numbers from enemy radar.
The 50ft minimum was a peacetime safety limit only.

Cheesy recruitment film

 

[Thermal]

"Well, there is a nine in it"- Queeg 500

Fun fact: 999 is US police code for 'officer down'.

I fully expect it will become international skeptic code for 'humiliate me senpai'

 

[Vixen]

Agreed. tl;dr = the experiment on the ISS is mounted on the outside, where it will be exposed to the space environment but also operate in microgravity. It involves testing methods of transferring cryogenic propellants from one connectible tank to another, both on the ISS.

Once suitably understood, this will be incorporated into the tanker designs currently being prepared by the Artemis contractors. One tanker is based on the Northrop Grumman Cygnus expendable cargo spacecraft, which is already a mature design. The other will be based on SpaceX Starship, which aims to reduce costs through reuse. Neither of these tankers needs a permanent orbital station. They fuel their respective landers directly. Under no plan is the ISS meant to serve as an orbital refueling station.

I obviously meant SpaceX not ISS.

Starship Propellant Transfer Demonstration - Wikipedia https://share.google/0DqILP8EAohT0ZYvq