[Split]Moon hoaxes - split from: Mars Voyage too Soon?

[Corsair 115]

Simple question: how did the ALSEP packages get onto the Moon if not by the Apollo astronauts?

 

[Belz...]

Belz - your last post responding to my last post misses some points made by me and shows some misunderstandings of what I've written. I see little merit, however, in taking our little side debate any further, but I'd be happy to clarify any points further if you're not satisfied with what I've written. Let me know if that's the case please.

Sure thing, Wind. Why would you want to adress any of those misunderstandings, anyway...

 

[Southwind17]

Simple question: how did the ALSEP packages get onto the Moon if not by the Apollo astronauts?

I think you might have asked this before. I'm not familiar with ALSEP, and I haven't had chance to look into this yet, but the key questions I'll be asking myself when I do are:

1. What, exactly, are the ALSEP packages?
2. Is there conclusive proof that they're actually on the Moon?
3. Is it possible for them to get onto the moon remotely, i.e. in the absence of an astronaut also being on the Moon.

If the answers to 2 and 3 are 'yes' and 'no' respectively, I suppose I'd find it very difficult then justifying my scepticism.

Do you know the answers? I'd be interested to learn your views.

Thanks

 

[Southwind17]

Why would you want to adress any of those misunderstandings, anyway...

Well, I don't like to think that I've simply brow-beaten somebody into accepting my view, or saying they accept it. I like to know that they understand and appreciate my views and opinions. I genuinely see the Forum as a vehicle for learning, and I'd like to think that most other participants do too.

 

[Corsair 115]

Do you know the answers? I'd be interested to learn your views.

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I have at least some knowledge of it, plus I can always dig up relevant info from books I have on hand or from internet sources.

I suggest you read up on the subject yourself and then post your analysis for myself and others to critique.

 

[VonNeumann]

I think you might have asked this before. I'm not familiar with ALSEP, and I haven't had chance to look into this yet, but the key questions I'll be asking myself when I do are:

1. What, exactly, are the ALSEP packages?
2. Is there conclusive proof that they're actually on the Moon?
3. Is it possible for them to get onto the moon remotely, i.e. in the absence of an astronaut also being on the Moon.

If the answers to 2 and 3 are 'yes' and 'no' respectively, I suppose I'd find it very difficult then justifying my scepticism.

Do you know the answers? I'd be interested to learn your views.

Thanks

Maybe you missed my post #144 above. I'll add on to it here:

I worked at NASA (Houston) in the 1972 to 1975 timeframe. I was at a party (a sort of reunion) with some NASA people a few weeks ago. I had not seen most of them in more than 25 years. I worked with them in Houston during the end of the Apollo program. Why don't you go Google ALSEP. I actually talked to one of my friends at the party who worked on ALSEP. ALSEP was left on the moon to allow experiments to be run for years afterward. It is nuclear powered and may still be functioning now! I think the money ran out more than a decade ago to assign personnel to it though-- I think my friend told me but I forgot already.

So to me it is funny to see CTs running around who believe we didn't send people to the moon. Do you think we had such high level secret clearances (the thousands of us?) and we are all lying about it to this day? ...or do you think we could have been fooled by a handful of insiders?

The community of engineers, mathematicians (most programmers in those days majored in math, not computer science), and scientists were/are ordinary people. We worked, we raised families, and we partied ... we lived ordinary lives. Many of us had ordinary clearances as it would have been cost prohibitive to have given high level secret clearances to everyone.

Not only did I have access to the secondary MOCR (mission operation control room) during missions, I had access to the data distribution and computing equipment during some of the missions. Under the primary and secondary MOCR, is the RTCC (real time computer complex) in which were three IBM 360/75 mainframes and two Cyber 73 mainframes. Originally the 3 IBM360s were supposed to run triple redundancy but after a few missions, we ran one in real-time, one in shadow and the 3rd was running batch jobs. I remember seeing ALSEP data being a regular batch job run in the RTCC way after the Apollo mission that put it up there. I knew some of the people who were involved with the ALSEP data. What do you think they were doing? Faking what they did? Or you think some insiders were making up data and feeding it to the people I knew, in order to dupe them? Later I worked as a contractor to the Air Force, involved in the design, testing and deployment of the communications multiplexer that is inside a hollowed-out mountain in Colorado. I saw data streaming through there from all over the place. To my knowledge, every bit of mission data, any data from space, came through that switch before it got sent elsewhere. There were BMEWS (ballistic missle early warning system) data and ALSEP data and I could see where it was coming from. I knew people who worked all over the world on the downlink communications systems, like Goldstone, etc.

There is no way that there could have been some small core of insiders who were faking out the rest of us. Impossible. Ludicrous!

But, I've read a bit of the CT stuff on the internet and I've read the NASA rebuttal. If you lack the scientific common sense to see that the CT claims are idiotic, then at least the NASA rebuttal should help you. You may not often come across some old fart who actually worked for NASA during the Apollo program, so if it helps you.... Dude! Wake up! We put people on the moon!

 

[Thabiguy]

Some accept evolution by natural selection and recognize ID as nonsense, but question the authenticity of Apollo space program. Some accept the fact of manned lunar missions and dismiss moon hoax accusations as ludicrous, yet reject the theory of evolution by natural selection in favor of intelligent design. And everyone is the hardcore skeptic.

The mind boggles.

How's the Groves analysis coming, Southwind17?

 

[Southwind17]

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I have at least some knowledge of it, plus I can always dig up relevant info from books I have on hand or from internet sources.

I suggest you read up on the subject yourself and then post your analysis for myself and others to critique.

Hang on a second Corsair. You've asked a very leading question (which I've responded to, albeit indirectly for the reason given therein), to which I can only assume you believe you know the answer. As such, it seems not unreasonable to me that you should provide that answer, which should, if conclusive, clear up in an instant this whole matter of your wishing to dispel my skepticism. I don't quite follow your thinking that I should research the subject so that I may then post my analysis for you and others to critique. If the information that you're suggesting I should discover constitutes conclusive evidence that man walked on the moon, why on Earth(!) would you, and others, wish to critique it. Do you remain doubtful yourself?!

If you're intention is simply to play cat & mouse then I'm afraid you'll just have to look for a more willing feline. What's it to be Corsair?

 

[Belz...]

Well, I don't like to think that I've simply brow-beaten somebody into accepting my view, or saying they accept it. I like to know that they understand and appreciate my views and opinions. I genuinely see the Forum as a vehicle for learning, and I'd like to think that most other participants do too.

Way to not answer...

 

[Southwind17]

Maybe you missed my post #144 above. I'll add on to it here:

I worked at NASA (Houston) in the 1972 to 1975 timeframe. I was at a party (a sort of reunion) with some NASA people a few weeks ago. I had not seen most of them in more than 25 years. I worked with them in Houston during the end of the Apollo program. Why don't you go Google ALSEP. I actually talked to one of my friends at the party who worked on ALSEP. ALSEP was left on the moon to allow experiments to be run for years afterward. It is nuclear powered and may still be functioning now! I think the money ran out more than a decade ago to assign personnel to it though-- I think my friend told me but I forgot already.

So to me it is funny to see CTs running around who believe we didn't send people to the moon. Do you think we had such high level secret clearances (the thousands of us?) and we are all lying about it to this day? ...or do you think we could have been fooled by a handful of insiders?

The community of engineers, mathematicians (most programmers in those days majored in math, not computer science), and scientists were/are ordinary people. We worked, we raised families, and we partied ... we lived ordinary lives. Many of us had ordinary clearances as it would have been cost prohibitive to have given high level secret clearances to everyone.

Not only did I have access to the secondary MOCR (mission operation control room) during missions, I had access to the data distribution and computing equipment during some of the missions. Under the primary and secondary MOCR, is the RTCC (real time computer complex) in which were three IBM 360/75 mainframes and two Cyber 73 mainframes. Originally the 3 IBM360s were supposed to run triple redundancy but after a few missions, we ran one in real-time, one in shadow and the 3rd was running batch jobs. I remember seeing ALSEP data being a regular batch job run in the RTCC way after the Apollo mission that put it up there. I knew some of the people who were involved with the ALSEP data. What do you think they were doing? Faking what they did? Or you think some insiders were making up data and feeding it to the people I knew, in order to dupe them? Later I worked as a contractor to the Air Force, involved in the design, testing and deployment of the communications multiplexer that is inside a hollowed-out mountain in Colorado. I saw data streaming through there from all over the place. To my knowledge, every bit of mission data, any data from space, came through that switch before it got sent elsewhere. There were BMEWS (ballistic missle early warning system) data and ALSEP data and I could see where it was coming from. I knew people who worked all over the world on the downlink communications systems, like Goldstone, etc.

There is no way that there could have been some small core of insiders who were faking out the rest of us. Impossible. Ludicrous!

But, I've read a bit of the CT stuff on the internet and I've read the NASA rebuttal. If you lack the scientific common sense to see that the CT claims are idiotic, then at least the NASA rebuttal should help you. You may not often come across some old fart who actually worked for NASA during the Apollo program, so if it helps you.... Dude! Wake up! We put people on the moon!

With great respect, I hope you will understand when I say that what you've written here, and in your Post #144, offers absolutely no proof, certainly to a lay-person, that man has actually walked on the Moon, UNLESS, of course, it can be shown without any doubt that the ALSEP packages could only be transmitting data from the surface of the Moon or that there are indeed redundant ALSEP packages sitting on the surface of the Moon, AND that it would be impossible to deploy the ALSEP packages from an un-manned mission. Can those all be shown, without any doubt, to be the case?

Reverting to your Post #144, I find your comment regarding heavy nuclei bombardment very interesting:

On this OP, I think one thing I didn't see mentioned that is important w.r.t. a trip to Mars is the potential of heavy nuclei bombarding the astronauts at near light speed. Just how many holes can you stand to have in your brain and body before you go nuts or get cancer? The few years round trip allows a lot of time for severe damage and the nuclei may already render the astronauts useless before they get to Mars.

This phenomenon (or general radiation, if different) was certainly cited in Dark Moon as: "one of the biggest show stoppers in mankind's exploration of the Universe" (as apparently quoted by an 'expert' at the Defence and Research Agency, UK). I'd be interested to hear your take on the implications of his phenomenon, not in relation to a potential manned mission to Mars, but in relation to the Apollo lunar landings.

 

[Southwind17]

Way to not answer...

I'm sorry Belz. Are you suggesting that you would like me to address your misunderstandings, whether that's because you feel there's some mileage in my doing that or not? If so, and it means so much to you, I'd be more than happy to do so. I'm just not quite sure what your comment above is intended to infer.

 

[Southwind17]

Some accept evolution by natural selection and recognize ID as nonsense, but question the authenticity of Apollo space program. Some accept the fact of manned lunar missions and dismiss moon hoax accusations as ludicrous, yet reject the theory of evolution by natural selection in favor of intelligent design. And everyone is the hardcore skeptic.

The mind boggles.

How's the Groves analysis coming, Southwind17?

I'm not sure it's appropriate to contrast one's differing beliefs in two totally unrelated matters and suggest that that indicates some sort of contradiction. I think that one's belief, or doubt, in something should be derived from the evidence available, preferably scientific, which, obviously, can vary considerably between different, unrelated subjects. I firmly believe that ID is nonsense, and that some small doubt remains over the authenticity of the Apollo Moon landings, and my mind doesn't boggle at all

Unfortunately, Darat has advised that my desired posting of the Groves analysis 'seem to be against Rule 4'. Given the inconclusivity of that response I'm minded to post it, as my interpretation of Rule 4 leads me to think that it isn't in breach. It's just over three pages of an appendix to the book. What do you think?

 

[Thabiguy]

Unfortunately, Darat has advised that my desired posting of the Groves analysis 'seem to be against Rule 4'. Given the inconclusivity of that response I'm minded to post it, as my interpretation of Rule 4 leads me to think that it isn't in breach. It's just over three pages of an appendix to the book. What do you think?

I cannot recommend that you break forum rules or go against the advice of forum administrators. You are responsible for your own actions. In light of Darat's response, I will not hold it against you if you decide not to post it and I will agree that you were prevented from doing so through no fault of your own.

If you're just interested in my opinion on the analysis, I guess you could also share it with me privately, thus avoiding any potential conflict with the forum rules. Obviously that has its drawbacks, but there's nothing I can do to help that; even if I had the book, there would be the very same drawbacks.

Other than that, and possibly rewriting Groves' analysis in your own words, I can't think of anything.

 

[Belz...]

With great respect, I hope you will understand when I say that what you've written here, and in your Post #144, offers absolutely no proof, certainly to a lay-person, that man has actually walked on the Moon, UNLESS, of course, it can be shown without any doubt that the ALSEP packages could only be transmitting data from the surface of the Moon or that there are indeed redundant ALSEP packages sitting on the surface of the Moon, AND that it would be impossible to deploy the ALSEP packages from an un-manned mission. Can those all be shown, without any doubt, to be the case?

Probably not to your satisfation. Ever.

I don't think you're unconvinced, at all.

 

[VonNeumann]

With great respect, I hope you will understand when I say that what you've written here, and in your Post #144, offers absolutely no proof, certainly to a lay-person, that man has actually walked on the Moon, UNLESS, of course, it can be shown without any doubt that the ALSEP packages could only be transmitting data from the surface of the Moon or that there are indeed redundant ALSEP packages sitting on the surface of the Moon, AND that it would be impossible to deploy the ALSEP packages from an un-manned mission. Can those all be shown, without any doubt, to be the case?

Reverting to your Post #144, I find your comment regarding heavy nuclei bombardment very interesting:


This phenomenon (or general radiation, if different) was certainly cited in Dark Moon as: "one of the biggest show stoppers in mankind's exploration of the Universe" (as apparently quoted by an 'expert' at the Defence and Research Agency, UK). I'd be interested to hear your take on the implications of his phenomenon, not in relation to a potential manned mission to Mars, but in relation to the Apollo lunar landings.

Proof? You just had the fortunate opportunity to hear from someone who was there when it was happening so you're doubting could be taken by me to be an insult to my sincerity or to my sanity. However, you are well mannered so I do not take you wrongly.

Where do you get gasoline for your car? It comes from oil, right? Oil comes from the ground, right? I've stood right next where oil was being drilled and watched gases come out of the ground and be detected electronically. I've seen gas and oil be produced out of the ground. But just because I was there, I have to tell you I have absolutely no proof that there was no conspiracy to fake me out. There could have been a pipe fed in to the system from below the ground. Some people could have gone to great expense to have made me think that oil comes from the ground. I might actually be a big-time sucker ... a real fool. I believe oil comes from the ground yet I have no proof!

But I have no reason to believe otherwise. I realize it would cost more money to fake me out than to just drill for the oil and get it -- unless oil really comes from somewhere else. Maybe gasoline is really made by fusing CH4 that evaporates from trees! It could happen! ..... NOT!

If you cannot evaluate the scientific argument already available on the internet, you are not sufficiently savvy to come to your own conclusion. Therefore, you will have to rely on experts and witnesses. That's your only choice when you are not endowed with the required resources to determine for yourself (...pure fact and I regret it may come across as insulting).

One thing I think I remember about ALSEP though from thirty plus years ago, was that we shined a laser from earth to the moon and got back a signal from ALSEP. That is proof it is there to those who worked on ALSEP project. You might believe that ALSEP (which is a fairly small box) was dropped from moon orbit or jettisoned from Earth and it softly landed somehow on the moon, if you don't believe it was carefully put in place by US astronauts -- I don't know what you need for proof.

But I imagine it has been a waste of my time to have presented you with a little bit here. You will believe what you wish. Have you ever visited the USA? Perhaps you need proof that the USA exists!

 

[uruk]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'initial numbers', but hopefully I can post the analysis tomorrow and we can take it from there. I'm as keen as anybody to hear what people have to say about the analysis.

As far as I can tell you said Groves used the angle of a shadow. How can he be sure of the angle? Wasn't the landing site on a incline? What was he using as a refrence point to determine the angle?

I am also asuming he is making a guess on the distance between the Buzz and Neil. You can never tell the distance in a photograph because you don't know if the picture was croped and knowing that the focus was set to infinity doesn't help much. There is very little depth perception in a two dimensional picture.

The more unsure of the numbers you are using to base you calculation the more inaccurate the results of the calculation will be.
There is a saying:" garbage in, garbage out".

I agree, but I suspect, given that Aldrin and Armstrong were the only two astronauts allegedly on the moon at that time taking photos, that no other photos exist that can be used to help corroborate the photo under question. Groves' analysis is rather thorough, though.

There was a film camera mounted in the cockpit of the lunar lander that was aimed downward toward the EVA site. It took one frame every second.
There was a video camera mounted on the decent stage equipment bay door that swung open and amied at the ladder so the we got the video coverage of Neil taking his first step.
There was also a video camera that neil mounted on a tripod (of sorts) a short distance away from the EVA site and amied toward the Lunar Lander.

So there was at least three other cameras from which to gain information. Do you know if Groves used those or just that one photograph to corroberate his calculations?

I'm not getting upset in the slightest. Whilst you'd now like it to be seen that you're 'just questioning his assumptions', your earlier wording does, clearly, infer an absence of sincerety, which I consider disingenuous given that you have yet to set eyes on the analysis:

Sorry if I missinterpreted your statement as frustration. I admit that my response was a bit flippant. I am just wondering exactly how thourogh his investigation was.

Just using the photograph alone when there are other sources of information available seems a bit disingenuous to me.

 

[Southwind17]

Probably not to your satisfation. Ever.

I make no apologies for not being as gullible as you. But never say never (or is that never say 'ever'?!).

I don't think you're unconvinced, at all.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.

 

[Southwind17]

Hypothetically speaking, if I were to PM the Groves analysis to people, who would be interested in seeing it?

 

[uruk]

Hypothetically speaking, if I were to PM the Groves analysis to people, who would be interested in seeing it?

If the Mods have no objection, I wouldn't mind.

 

[Southwind17]

Proof? You just had the fortunate opportunity to hear from someone who was there when it was happening so you're doubting could be taken by me to be an insult to my sincerity or to my sanity. However, you are well mannered so I do not take you wrongly.

Again, with great respect, what part if 'it' did you actually witness? Were you standing on the Moon witnessing the critical part?

Where do you get gasoline for your car? It comes from oil, right? Oil comes from the ground, right? I've stood right next where oil was being drilled and watched gases come out of the ground and be detected electronically. I've seen gas and oil be produced out of the ground. But just because I was there, I have to tell you I have absolutely no proof that there was no conspiracy to fake me out. There could have been a pipe fed in to the system from below the ground. Some people could have gone to great expense to have made me think that oil comes from the ground. I might actually be a big-time sucker ... a real fool. I believe oil comes from the ground yet I have no proof!

But I have no reason to believe otherwise. I realize it would cost more money to fake me out than to just drill for the oil and get it -- unless oil really comes from somewhere else. Maybe gasoline is really made by fusing CH4 that evaporates from trees! It could happen! ..... NOT!

I don't recall anybody suggesting that oil comes from anywhere other than the ground, and having presented evidence to back up their claims. Do you?

If you cannot evaluate the scientific argument already available on the internet, you are not sufficiently savvy to come to your own conclusion. Therefore, you will have to rely on experts and witnesses. That's your only choice when you are not endowed with the required resources to determine for yourself (...pure fact and I regret it may come across as insulting).

I have reached my own conclusion, for the time being (which I expressed earlier). It's just different from your own. Don't worry, I don't feel insulted in the slightest.

One thing I think I remember about ALSEP though from thirty plus years ago, was that we shined a laser from earth to the moon and got back a signal from ALSEP. That is proof it is there to those who worked on ALSEP project. You might believe that ALSEP (which is a fairly small box) was dropped from moon orbit or jettisoned from Earth and it softly landed somehow on the moon, if you don't believe it was carefully put in place by US astronauts -- I don't know what you need for proof.

Well if a lunar module can land 'softly' I'm sure an ALSEP package can!

But I imagine it has been a waste of my time to have presented you with a little bit here. You will believe what you wish. Have you ever visited the USA? Perhaps you need proof that the USA exists!

It's not a waste of time at all, but what you've posted here isn't sufficient to sway me any. Actually, I haven't visited the USA, but I do believe it exists. Put it this way, I haven't noticed anybody presenting any evidence to suggest otherwise, have you?!