• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you for the explanation, Pat. In the spirit of full disclosure, I must tell you that I believe the Apollo landings did in fact take place as reported, and I feel I have a lot of unchallengable reasons for believing this. Further (and I doubt this will be much of a surprise to you), I do not believe the reasons you list for believing Apollo was faked to be very persuasive -- instead, I think they are simply a result of the normal confusion and variability endemic to 1969 science and technology. Let's look:

Patrick1000 said:
One of the main ideas I presented so far stella has to do with FIDO David Reed's account of what happened on the morning of 07/21/1969. He was set to determine the LM trajectory and was surprised to find as it turned out that they did not know within roughly 5 miles of where the LM was. Moreover, all of the methods for determining where the LM was were at great variance, the numbers for the coordinates as determined by the PNGS, AGS, maps, telemetry didn't agree, according to him, "not even close". So he discounted all of those numbers and found the LM using the rendezvous radar "in reverse".

I say, how can the Apollo 11 story as told be real if the above is true AND many hours before Reed even arrived on duty at Mission Control, the scientists at Lick Observatory targeting the LRRR were told the coordinates of Tranquility Base were 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east? The precise coordinates of Tranquility Base as it would turn out. If Apollo is real, why didn't anyone think to tell Reed the coordinates? The astronauts lives were on the line. So they tell Lick Observatory and not the FIDO. It has to be fake.
Click to expand...

I don't really follow your reasoning here. Perhaps someone was remiss in informing Dr. Reed about the coordinates. Perhaps Dr. Reed is a bit blurry on his recollections. Perhaps all sorts of things. But do you really think the most likely explanation is that the landings were fake, and that this evidence is so strong that it overwhelms all the other evidence that indicates Apollo did in fact go to the moon and come back safely? I suspect you're reading way too much into what seems to be little more than a garden-variety snafu, the kind endemic to all government agencies.

Also, if you look at the Mission report, all of the coordinates there are consistent, and with the exception of the north coordinate as determined by the AOT, they are all close to 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east. So either David Reed is making up his story about the coordinates being at great variance and not even close, or NASA is. Reed has no reason to lie. He is not psychotic, so NASA iOS lying. There is no middle ground solution.

Apollo must be fraudulent.
Click to expand...

Again, I think this is a very big leap, because I see a very logical explanation: Dr. Reed is a bit confused as to the precise details of events that happened 40+ years ago. Or maybe NASA is engaging in a bit of CYA and is loathe to admit even to this day how seat-of-the-pants the whole operation was. (It wouldn't mesh with the aura of invincibility they attempted to foster, up to Challenger.)

Ultimately, where you see "smoking gun" I see "minor, easily explained discrepancy." So given all the other evidence supporting the reality of the Apollo lunar missions, I'd need a lot more than this to change my mind.
 
Last edited:
Stella, he is very much not confused. You should purchase the book so referenced. The tale is legendary in the annals of Mission Control. Reed walks in and asks SELECT, "Where are they". SELECT says, "no one knows, all the methods for finding them gave different results". Paraphrasing of course.

Not as famous as Bales "GO" call, but certainly as important was Reed's finding the LM with the rendezvous radar. Read Reed's account for yourself.

May I ask you this Stella. If they knew where the LM was, why would they be looking for it on "crude maps" as Michael called them, of the lunar surface?

Again, Reed's exploits that day are legendary. There is no confusion. NASA TELLS THE STORY THIS WAY! they just never tell you also Lick observatory was notified.

Consider this Stella. Why does NASA tell the story 2 ways. The way just like Reed tells it, and then also the fib way, like they present it in the MISSION Report. Why does NASA have 2 stories? The lost bird for the masses, and the contrived found bird for relevant parties like the LICK Observatory staff?
 
Last edited:
Last point Stella, not sure if you are aware of who the FIDO is. HE is the person that determines, calculates and puts into effect, the launch trajectory. He is responsible for putting the LM up to find the CM. He works with SELECT, the person who selects the best tracking option and DYNAMICS, the trajectory computer officer, who by the way is said to have suggested rendezvous radar as the "solution". In other words, the FIDO is the highest authority for this task. Reed would have to have dementia to have forgotten what happened on arguably the most important and dramatic day of his life.
 
Last edited:
Stella , check my posts at 28, 37,48, 64, 74. That will orient you generally to the details. They are compelling.
 
Patrick1000 said:
About Gemini sts,

What is the story with that Michael Collins "spacewalking" photo that Ralph Rene' always claimed was fake. Has that ever been debunked?...
Click to expand...

Repeatedly, and the whole silly thing had to do with the way a photo was used for effect in a popular account. Of course, hunting through popular accounts to trump "inconsistencies" instead of dealing with primary sources and technical data is a hallmark of the dishonest and incompetent, as I'm sure you'll agree.

Patrick1000 said:
...Anyway, that is what I know about Gemini hoax stuff, the Collins photo, and really do not have an opinion on it.
Click to expand...

Then please explain why you do not dismiss Gemini as you do Apollo, and if this also means you do not dismiss missions such as Apollo 9, which was conducted in Earth orbit; and similarly for the other programs listed above. Why exactly are some manned missions rejected outright, and not others?

Patrick1000 said:
I never took the time to study it. I am a late comer to Apollo studies.
Click to expand...

Yes, earlier you mentioned that you'd only been at it this year only, which is puzzling, because writing as "fattydash" over on AH you said (thread: "Re: Can We Get Along?", 7 Jul 2011, 10:38am)

I have been consistant in my position as regards the astronuats for years. They lied and participated in a fraud,...

Odd, that.

Please answer the rest of the questions so we can understand your claims better.
 
fattydash/Patrick1000/etc., for your convenience, I've placed my questions all together here for you.

But of course, if one pauses, internal incoherence is precisely what one would expect from a bogus telling of an Apollo moon landing. Such would be a bogus telling's hallmark...

and

The narrative is inconsistent, internally incoherent and therefore necessarily untrue...

and so on.

1. Given the numerous contradictions in your claims across three different message boards now, e.g.
My claim as to why the lander could not perform a guided ascent is we have no evidence that Aldrin was able to determine lander coordinates for the Eagle

...I do not believe there was an ascent as I do not believe there was a landing.
-------------------
They did not have a LM that could land on the moon.

If one looks at the facts and concedes the lander works, and I do imagine the builders constructed the thing well. I am not trying to play games. I grant the lander works, fine.
-------------------
Yes we know there was most definitely no telemetric transmission of the coordinates.

This makes sense given the general features of Apollo guidance. It is for the most part telemetric.

what does that say about your story?

The only way one ever makes headway in coming to terms with any of this is to look at the narrative itself. Study the story.

I have studied various aspects of the story, and considered it as a whole, from the perspective of a practicing space engineer with an educational background in space physics. I also have spaceflight operations experience.

2. How many missions have you personally worked?

That said, retroreflector present or not, the exposure of of Apollo's fraudulence by LUNA's camera was nevertheless a major concern, retroreflector already "planted" at Tranquility Base or not. There were no astronauts for LUNA to photograph.

3. Exactly what evidence do you have for a retroreflector planted at the Apollo 11 landing site by anything other than the Apollo 11 crew?

4. Please describe, in reasonable detail, the ability of Luna 15 to conclusively image the A11 landing site from orbit. This includes the type of camera, its resolution, and the targeting/tracking capability while in orbit. As Luna 15 landed a considerable fraction of the Moon's circumeference away from A11, we know it did not image the site in proximity.

5. Given your repeated criticisms of NASA and the astronauts and engineers for allegedly lying, what does it say about you that you have repeatedly lied in agreeing to the TOSs for various boards in order to register sock-puppets?

5a. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that your "fattydash" story was actually true. What does it say about the honesty of you and this supposed group of people - lying in agreeing to the TOS in order to post content disguised as being from one person?

6. fattydash/Patrick1000/etc., you have previously said, if I recall correctly, that you believe all the Apollo missions were faked. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Does this mean only missions to/around the Moon, or does it include Earth orbit missions as well?

6a. What about Mercury and Gemini?

6b. What about Shuttle missions?

6c. What about Skylab, Salyut, Mir, and ISS?

6d. What about other Soviet/Russian and Chinese manned orbital missions?

7. You have already accepted the ability to fly vehicles to the Moon and soft-land them. What exactly prevented Apollo from going to the Moon as recorded? No handwaving, please.

7a. What exactly is different between Apollo lunar missions (and any other manned missions you may reject), and the manned missions cited above you accept (if any), which allows the latter to succeed but not the former?

--------------
So far, you've answered part of 6a (basically, that you don't have an opinion on Gemini). Looking forward to specific answers to the rest, thanks!
 
Patrick1000 said:
Stella, he is very much not confused. You should purchase the book so referenced. The tale is legendary in the annals of Mission Control. Reed walks in and asks SELECT, "Where are they". SELECT says, "no one knows, all the methods for finding them gave different results". Paraphrasing of course.
Click to expand...

Why paraphrase? I'd like to see the actual quote. Can you manage that without copying the entire book?


Patrick1000 said:
Not as famous as Bales "GO" call, but certainly as important was Reed's finding the LM with the rendezvous radar. Read Reed's account for yourself.

May I ask you this Stella. If they knew where the LM was, why would they be looking for it on "crude maps" as Michael called them, of the lunar surface?

Again, Reed's exploits that day are legendary. There is no confusion. NASA TELLS THE STORY THIS WAY! they just never tell you also Lick observatory was notified.

Consider this Stella. Why does NASA tell the story 2 ways. The way just like Reed tells it, and then also the fib way, like they present it in the MISSION Report. Why does NASA have 2 stories? The lost bird for the masses, and the contrived found bird for relevant parties like the LICK Observatory staff?
Click to expand...

Knowing where the LM is, is not the same as knowing where the MOON is. Imagine you and a friend are walking around Paris. You get lost. Your friend walks 100 meters away to try to read a street sign. Where are you? You don't know. Where is he? He doesn't know. But where is your friend? Why, he is 100 meters away in that direction.

The LM was tasked to rendezvous with the CSM. Not with another location on the Moon. Where it lies in reference to the orbital parameters, or even with the lunar geode, has nothing to do with where the craters and other surface features are.

Let me try another tack. Take a Sharpy and put a dot on a basketball. Now hold a baseball behind the basketball. Where is the baseball? Behind the basketball. Where is it in relation to the ink mark? Who knows?!

There is no Greenwich/Paris/Lisbon on the Moon. There have been multiple coordinate systems, and of the most common and modernly accepted one, at least one major revision to the geode; which is to say, the mathematical relationship of features on the surface to numerical coordinates. Saying "I am at the center of Crater Aristarchus" is NOT the same thing as saying "I am at 4h31m12sec E..." You have to define the coordinate system in use. And neither are the same as "I am in the flight path of the CSM and it will be passing over my zenith in exactly 233 seconds."
 
ApolloG, Carrying the Fire first edition has a photo of Collins spacewalking that Rene' claims was fake because , according to Rene, it looks identical to a zero G simulation photo. The pic is not in the later editions of Carrying the Fire adding suspicion for some that the pic is fake. It is a very old hoax point.
 
nomuse, see the posts for Stella, the exact quotes of Reed are there. I have already posted them in this thread. Check them out.
 
Read David Reed's account nomuse if you have not. It does not seem you have. You'll need to come at me a different way. You'll see. the account is compelling, impossible to discount and utterly at odds with reason given the people at Lick Observatory had the coordinates hours before, coordinates that Reed struggled to get just before LM lift off.
 
Last edited:
sts, I know little about mercury, Gemini. Apollo 11 I know well, very well. The other Apollo shots so so, most not well. I like Feynman's writing on the Challenger investigation. I know little of Shuttle, ISS, Russian Space, Chinese Space Programs. Very limited background.
 
Last edited:
This is oversimplifying grotesquely, but it is a way to look at the problem. The LM has a maneuver margin. At LEAST the same maneuver margin is available on the ascent system as was on the descent system. Therefore, there is no position within the flight path of the descent stage that is beyond the point of no return for the ascent stage.

The only thing the LM needs to know is where the CSM is, and it only has to know that within the error of the combined margin of ascent engine, RCS, and the CSM's own maneuver margin. (In fact, this was one scenario; complete failure of the LM RCS and electronics, requiring the CSM to do all the heavy lifting of radar acquisition and maneuver to rendezvous).

Of course NASA was not, at the time, the kind of organization to have only one metric of an ongoing mission. So they also want to know the LM's position in as many different ways as they can, and will continue to refine the accuracy as they proceed.
 
(I overstated a bit in reaching for clarity; by "knowing where the CSM is" I meant knowing it's orbital parameters in relation to the same abstracted Moon -- aka spheroid and mascons -- the LM is resting on.)
 
Grr. Writing in haste, during breaks in a 12-hour shift. Geoid, not "Geode." Nobody is mapping a crystalline void here!
 
Nomuse, say for the sake of argument i agree with every word you just wrote. Why do the Lick Observatory scientists have the LM coordinates many hours before Reed calculates them? These are not any coordinates. they prove to be exact coordinates when the LRRR is finally targeted 08/01/1969. How can the Lick Observatory staff have coordinates that no one has calculated, unless they had them before hand. And of course, this is the only explanation which fits the facts. I challenge you nomuse to present another.

Reed calculated LM coordinates, lets say for the sake of argument precise coordinates, after breakfast on 07/21/1969. According to Reed, no one was within five mile of those coordinates with respect to their determination by trajectory, PNGS, AOT, maps, AGS.
In other words, Mission Control does not have LM coordinates for launch until after breakfast.

But Lick Observatory gets pretty much the same coordinates as Reed. Not 5 mile away from Reed , right there. Actually the exact coordinates as it turns out of Tranquility Base.
Who gave those coordinates to Lick Observatory nomuse? It was not a wild guess because they are spot on exact, perfect. Reed did not have them until after breakfast so it was not him. Reed tells us PNGS, AGS, AOT, maps, trajectory were no closer than 5 miles from the coordinates he determined, per my previous post you can see Reed's coordinate are close enough to 00 41 15/23 26 00. no need to quibble here.

So Reed did not inform Lick. Mission Control had no numbers within 5 miles of those give to LICK until Reed did his slick thing so Mission Control did not provide LICK the numbers. Who did nomuse?
 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
sts, I know little about mercury, Gemini. Apollo 11 I know well, very well. The other Apollo shots so so, most not well. I like Feynman's writing on the Challenger investigation. I know little of Shuttle, ISS, Russian Space, Chinese Space Programs. Very limited background.
Click to expand...

That's OK, but I'm a little confused now since you has said previously that you disbelieved the rest of the Apollo missions, but now you say you know them "not well".

Anyway, what about the Apollo missions that stayed in Earth orbit?

Also, looking forward to your answers to the rest of the questions.
 
By the way nomuse you are correct. If you read what Reed writes, he would like to have the coordinates, and even sort of expects SELECT to have them upon his arrival. But he emphasizes in a sense the LM, CM dynamics are what is important, the relationship between the two. As it turns out, running rendezvous in reverse gives coordinates, so they do get them and they are found in the Mission report. I typed them out in post 28 along with the other coordinates obtained by the other methods, not as listed by Reed, but as given in the Mission Report.
 
I think if Apollo 11 is fake it is all fake. I know 8 is fake because Borman pooped all over the space ship and no one really cared enough about it to convince me any of it could possibly be real. Let's all inhale infected feces in a zero G environment, yum! Who thunk that one up. Wouldn't hire that script writer again. For this reason I think Charles Berry may be in on the con, not 100%, but more likely than not.
 
Think of it this way sts. If Boorman makes fake poopies in cislunar space, then they did not know how to pass through cislunar space to begin with. If 8 is fake the rest have to be. I am telling ya' that space diarrhea card should have been played much later in this con. Blows the whole thing from the get go you know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom