Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[Jack by the hedge]

PS I would still like your medical opinion on how long you would expect an astronaut to incubate a salmonella infection.

 

[Patrick1000]

http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/doc/Bender.pdf

There is the real deal if you are able to read and understand.

Still waiting for your explanation as to why Lick did not find the LRRR until 1st August.

What about margarine abaddon, can I slather you with that?

Oh well, back to the coordinates. Your challenge abaddon. Well of course I can do that. My favorite Apollo subject as you well know.Yes I can do that abaddon, I believe I have done that multiple times already. I shall refresh your memory abaddon and use the quote I previously had suggested as an excellent reference for this matter. But first, let's take a look at this quote from Donald Beattie, one of the Apollo Lunar Scientists. This comes from Beattie's excellent book, TAKING SCIENCE TO THE MOON. Beattie writes;

"The samples, which had arrived before the astronauts, were carefully opened in the LRL, inventoried, and briefly described. In the meantime we were monitoring the signals sent back by the passive seismic experiment and attempting to find the LRRR that the astronauts had left behind. This latter operation was not as easy as we expected, since the exact location of the landing site was not immediately known. Mike Collins had attempted unsuccessfully to locate the LM from orbit using the command module sextant. After analyzing the flight data and the returned photographs, we passed our best estimate to the LRRR PIs, and the LRRR was found on August 1, 1969, by the Lick Observatory in California."

Donald A. Beattie. Taking Science to the Moon: Lunar Experiments and the Apollo Program (ebook Locations 2912-2915).


Oh my, what do we have there? Why it's the discovery of another big fat humongous NASA lie. And here we thought we had it all figured out, at least the first part. Figured out because we know for an absolute fact that the Lick Observatory staff was given the coordinates 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east on the night of 07/20/1969. But here we have a fabulous primary source, one of the Apollo Lunar Scientists himself, Donald Beattie, telling us NO! not true!, Michael Collins unsuccessfully attempted to locate the LM, and as a matter of fact, it wasn't until the Apollo scientists, Donald Beattie included, had passed on their best estimate of the LM location based on flight data and RETURNED!!!! photographs to the Lick Observatory staff, that the staff was able to successfully target the LRRR and in so doing determine its coordinates to be 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east on 08/01/1969.

My oh my oh my oh my, who is lying here? Well it certainly is not Donald Beattie. He is not making this story up. So we can conclude that NASA principals informed the Apollo Lunar scientists that the Eagle's coordinates had never been obtained that evening and that these scientists were to analyze photographic and flight data to help Lick Observatory find the LRRR and in so doing , find the Eagle.

Now we know the Lick Observatory Staff received the coordinates of the LRRR already on the night of the landing. They are not lying, so NASA is the only shady suspect left. NASA it would seem pretended they did not know where the Eagle was on the night of 07/20/1969. What other conclusion can one possibly draw? Just as with the case with Reed who wasn't told the landing coordinates when at least one NASA principal had them all along, so too, Beattie and his colleagues were denied the coordinate information, and very much like Reed, Beattie and colleagues were instructed by NASA to go on a hunt for a bird that was lost, when truth be told, some snakes in the grass, had the coordinates all along.

So what really happened back at Lick Observatory? Well in the very Remington Stone article we have been using as a reference we read that the Lick Laser Staff had their timing off due to the Jet Propulsion Lab's erroneous programming. This is from the Remington Stone article;

"But it should have been enough to ensure the return pulse was detected within the few millionths of a second time window during which that return pulse was expected. After all, the Solar System experts from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory had provided an ephemeris for the anticipated separations between the 3m telescope and the retroreflector on the moon which included the carefully calculated influences of every known variable.
Finally Lloyd Robinson suggested that, despite our assurance that we were looking for the return pulse at the right time, since we were unable to pinpoint any other source of difficulty we should try moving the small window of time within which we were looking for a return signal. That idea soon produced a result, and we were able to center up on a good signal with the expected strength, and began to accumulate data.
It remained to explain the unexpected discrepancy in timing. Every detail of the experiment was examined carefully. It took weeks to finally locate the source of the error within the computer program JPL had used to generate the expected timing for the return signal. They quite reasonably had assumed that Lick Observatory (LO) was where the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac (predecessor of the Astronomical Almanac) said it was, which in turn and equally reasonably listed the observatory location as given by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey (USCGS). USCGS thought LO was where their Lick Observatory benchmark was placed. Their benchmark was in the parking lot west of the Main Building, 1700 feet from the 3m telescope.
Thus, the first result of this very sophisticated Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment was to accurately measure the distance between the 3m telescope and the Main Building parking lot - via a retroreflector on the moon!
The first scientific paper which resulted from this experiment improved the previous best measurements of distance to the Moon by a factor of 100. This activity is still being conducted from McDonald Observatory. Using the much shorter laser pulses and faster electronics now feasible, distances to the Moon are routinely measured to within about one centimeter per night!"

And Stone's account is corroborated by C.O.Alley in his landmark article appearing in the journal SCIENCE from 30 January 1970. Here is a quote from that article about this from the LRRR Experiment's principal investigator;

"A first "geodetic result" from the acquisition observations at Lick (9) was the discovery, from the drift of the residual round-trip travel time with respect the JPL lunar ephemeris 16 (LE16)predictions, that the coordinates for the 120-inch telescope are not those given for Mt. Hamilton (Lick Observatory)in the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac(9a). The Lick Observatory participated in the acquisition phase of the experiment to increase the probability of getting early returns. The weather and seeing are generally excellent there in the summer. Laser ranging activities ceased at Lick in August."

I believe we would all agree the testimonies here as provided by Remington Stone, Donald Beattie and C.O. Alley are more than dependable. Nothing is being made up on their parts. As such, we may conclude that someone operating within the Apollo program gave the LRRR coordinates to the Lick Observatory staff on the evening of 07/20/1969. Those coordinates were obtained outside the activities of the acknowledged public faces operating within Mission Control including the FIDO David Reed. Donald Beattie indicates specifically per his quote above that Collins never located the LM and indeed Beattie was under the impression that it was his work along with that of his colleagues that helped to find the LM after the astronauts returned to earth. Beattie and colleagues LM hunt included the analysis of RETURNED! photos. We know of course the Lick staff had the coordinates of Tranquility Base well before David Reed, the Mission control FIDO, and Beattie and his colleagues were sent on wild goose chases of a sort, searching for coordinates already known.

We conclude with metaphysical certainty that principals within NASA knew the coordinates of Tranquility Base independent of its acknowledged determination. This foreknowledge proves the coordinates of Tranquility Base were known prior to the Eagle's landing there and consequently the Apollo 11 Mission is now once and for all proven to be fraudulent.

The LRRR was successfully targeted after a timing problem was ironed out on 08/01/1969. We may also conclude from the above with absolute metaphysical certainty that the LRRR was not placed at 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 wast by the Apollo astronauts as its location was known before the astronauts ever touched down.

Is THAT the information you were looking for abaddon?

 

[Patrick1000]

It's important to keep in mind when I say "NASA" is lying, such as I do in the above response to my colleague abaddon, I do not mean this is NASA at large lying. Rather, a few bad apples, moles in a sense on the inside, privy to the hoax and directing it. Essentially everyone, Beattie, Reed and so forth buy in, think it is real.

 

[Patrick1000]

Why Are They Doing All of This Nutty Stuff?

Why are the perpetrators of the Hoax pretending they do not know the pretend location of the pretend Eagle? I am not positive, but I presume they feared the Russian unmanned craft, LUNA 15, might be so bold as to photograph 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east. Had they done so, they would have found an LRRR and no astronauts. Other explanations are possible, but that is best.

 

[Patrick1000]

http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/doc/Bender.pdf

There is the real deal if you are able to read and understand.

Still waiting for your explanation as to why Lick did not find the LRRR until 1st August.

Thanks for the laser article reference abaddon. I had already read it several times, but was nice of you to have been thoughtful that way.

 

[Patrick1000]

Running in terror, eh? Falling like a house of cards? Wildly searching for anything to prop up their beliefs? Why, if I had a nickle for every hoax believer who thought they were accomplishing that, I wouldn't be busy replacing the mobo on an aging computer right now.

I wonder where this illusion comes from. Projection seems too simple. Wishful thinking doesn't seem adequate to create that level of delusion. Do they really think their silly ideas, based on a poor understanding of the Apollo Program, cause anyone actual worry?

Hey nomuse, you outta' head over to that other thread where none of you guys are hangin' out any more and read my last response to abaddon. Its a bogus space adventure show stopper. Plus, I was hoping you'd give the coordinate challenge thing a try. Better than discussing Mackay's thing about the poop in the space ship intake ya' know.

And about the efficacy of my proving Apollo bogus, ain't seen anyone lay a phony space glove on my argument yet. get outta' the poop here nomuse and over to the real action!

 

[Kid Eager]

Hey nomuse, you outta' head over to that other thread where none of you guys are hangin' out any more and read my last response to abaddon. Its a bogus space adventure show stopper. Plus, I was hoping you'd give the coordinate challenge thing a try. Better than discussing Mackay's thing about the poop in the space ship intake ya' know.

And about the efficacy of my proving Apollo bogus, ain't seen anyone lay a phony space glove on my argument yet. get outta' the poop here nomuse and over to the real action!

Translation: waaaah...

 

[Patrick1000]

you too kid, you're a smart guy. did you see how I showed in the other thread how they knew where the LRRR was before they even set it down, before the Eagle landed? It's pretty cool, really is. You are conspicuously absent my friend. why don't you give my challenge questions a shot.

 

[Stellafane]

Since your response below is the most recent, this will be the one to which I reply:

In a sense Stella, this thread itself is an experiment. If no one makes a further move from the AB side, my position advances, quite a bit as a matter of fact, especially as I show the answers to the questions myself and thereby demonstrate exactly what it is the other side is running from, or perhaps better said, hiding from. If an AB type answers the 4 questions above and then goes toe to toe with me in debating the matter, perhaps, depending on that debate's outcome, your view as outlined above will be the one realized as "true'/valid.

I'm afraid I'm not sure why you think this is so. It's possible, I suppose, that some posters "fear" your questions as you imply elsewhere in this thread (although I wouldn't know why, since there's very little that's "scary" in them). However, I think it's more likely that they, like me, don't consider your questions particularly relevant (for the reasons I explained earlier) and thus do not have sufficient interest in them to sustain a prolonged discussion about them. Were I writing a book about Apollo, these questions may be important to me. But as indication one way or another than Apollo was a hoax, not so much.

At the risk of repeating myself, I'll offer an alternative question: "Could the position of the astronauts be determined with enough precision to make the Lick experiment successful?" This would be important -- especially if you can provide evidence that there's a good chance the answer is no. Then you'd be onto something, a point that couldn't be dismissed as mere trivia. Then you'd have a lively, engaged discussion, one that potentially changes minds.

But the four questions you've offered, in my view, do not possess that magnitude of relevance -- especially if, as you admit, you already know the answers. Thus there isn't even an educational value in responding. Why should I answer a question that I don't care about, and you already know the answer to? It seems rather pointless.

Personally, I do think that there is a point to this thread, but it involves an underlying dynamic that may or may not be on topic. It concerns basing beliefs not by considering all the many relevant facts and devising a story that is most consistent with them, but rather by picking out a few pixels of ambiguity from the overall picture, and then attempting to connect the dots while ignoring everything else. I doubt you'd agree that this is what you're actually doing. But if not, what value is there in focusing on trivia such as your four questions, when there's a whole ocean of vastly more relevant facts to consider?

 

[Patrick1000]

A New Apollo "Reality"

Before moving on into this new era, not of Apollo debate, but of Apollo's new reality, a new reality of Apollo as script, not science, let's try to define that new reality. What has changed in this one evening? Why is Apollo now and forever more best viewed as embarrassment and not a source of pride?

We have shown here that Tranquility Base coordinates 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east come from a script and not a real time determination, not from a real life moon mission where the coordinates were derived from genuine mission activity. Why do we say this? Because 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east, the very coordinates of "the first lunar landing", were known with great precision before the phantom Eagle ever landed at that mythical post, Tranquility Base. We have confirmed the numbers as script and along with them, Apollo itself as script. And we hadn't even needed to lift up and examine a single moon rock, or look at one phony picture.

The burden of proof now falls to the other side, but what has changed forever, is the fact it has fallen to that side forever more. The internal incoherence of the Apollo narrative can never be remedied. Once a fake, always a phony, we sadly all see this now.

 

[abaddon]

What about margarine abaddon, can I slather you with that?

Oh well, back to the coordinates. Your challenge abaddon. Well of course I can do that. My favorite Apollo subject as you well know.Yes I can do that abaddon, I believe I have done that multiple times already. I shall refresh your memory abaddon and use the quote I previously had suggested as an excellent reference for this matter. But first, let's take a look at this quote from Donald Beattie, one of the Apollo Lunar Scientists. This comes from Beattie's excellent book, TAKING SCIENCE TO THE MOON. Beattie writes;

Two paragraphs, zero content.

"The samples, which had arrived before the astronauts, were carefully opened in the LRL, inventoried, and briefly described. In the meantime we were monitoring the signals sent back by the passive seismic experiment and attempting to find the LRRR that the astronauts had left behind. This latter operation was not as easy as we expected, since the exact location of the landing site was not immediately known. Mike Collins had attempted unsuccessfully to locate the LM from orbit using the command module sextant. After analyzing the flight data and the returned photographs, we passed our best estimate to the LRRR PIs, and the LRRR was found on August 1, 1969, by the Lick Observatory in California."

Donald A. Beattie. Taking Science to the Moon: Lunar Experiments and the Apollo Program (ebook Locations 2912-2915).

So what? It's a quote from a book and appears accurate but does not support your hypothesis.

Oh my, what do we have there? Why it's the discovery of another big fat humongous NASA lie. And here we thought we had it all figured out, at least the first part.

Wrong.

Figured out because we know for an absolute fact that the Lick Observatory staff was given the coordinates 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east on the night of 07/20/1969.

Please cite the exact coordinates given by whom, to whom.

But here we have a fabulous primary source, one of the Apollo Lunar Scientists himself, Donald Beattie, telling us NO! not true!, Michael Collins unsuccessfully attempted to locate the LM, and as a matter of fact, it wasn't until the Apollo scientists, Donald Beattie included, had passed on their best estimate of the LM location based on flight data and RETURNED!!!! photographs to the Lick Observatory staff, that the staff was able to successfully target the LRRR and in so doing determine its coordinates to be 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east on 08/01/1969.

There is nothing inconsistent in this.

My oh my oh my oh my, who is lying here? Well it certainly is not Donald Beattie. He is not making this story up.

That would be you and your fantasy.

So we can conclude that NASA principals informed the Apollo Lunar scientists that the Eagle's coordinates had never been obtained that evening and that these scientists were to analyze photographic and flight data to help Lick Observatory find the LRRR and in so doing , find the Eagle.

What NASA principals? How did they pre-ordain the coordinates and then make sure that this was what was later verified by science?

Now we know the Lick Observatory Staff received the coordinates of the LRRR already on the night of the landing. They are not lying, so NASA is the only shady suspect left. NASA it would seem pretended they did not know where the Eagle was on the night of 07/20/1969.

They received an estimate, no more no less.

What other conclusion can one possibly draw?

Two more.
1. There were discrepencies in the metrics leading to some uncertainty in the landing location, and
2. You are simply trying to bend the facts to fit your ill thought out conspiracy.

Just as with the case with Reed who wasn't told the landing coordinates when at least one NASA principal had them all along, so too, Beattie and his colleagues were denied the coordinate information, and very much like Reed, Beattie and colleagues were instructed by NASA to go on a hunt for a bird that was lost, when truth be told, some snakes in the grass, had the coordinates all along.

Which NASA principal? How did he/she get them?

So what really happened back at Lick Observatory? Well in the very Remington Stone article we have been using as a reference we read that the Lick Laser Staff had their timing off due to the Jet Propulsion Lab's erroneous programming. This is from the Remington Stone article;

"But it should have been enough to ensure the return pulse was detected within the few millionths of a second time window during which that return pulse was expected. After all, the Solar System experts from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory had provided an ephemeris for the anticipated separations between the 3m telescope and the retroreflector on the moon which included the carefully calculated influences of every known variable.
Finally Lloyd Robinson suggested that, despite our assurance that we were looking for the return pulse at the right time, since we were unable to pinpoint any other source of difficulty we should try moving the small window of time within which we were looking for a return signal. That idea soon produced a result, and we were able to center up on a good signal with the expected strength, and began to accumulate data.
It remained to explain the unexpected discrepancy in timing. Every detail of the experiment was examined carefully. It took weeks to finally locate the source of the error within the computer program JPL had used to generate the expected timing for the return signal. They quite reasonably had assumed that Lick Observatory (LO) was where the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac (predecessor of the Astronomical Almanac) said it was, which in turn and equally reasonably listed the observatory location as given by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey (USCGS). USCGS thought LO was where their Lick Observatory benchmark was placed. Their benchmark was in the parking lot west of the Main Building, 1700 feet from the 3m telescope.
Thus, the first result of this very sophisticated Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment was to accurately measure the distance between the 3m telescope and the Main Building parking lot - via a retroreflector on the moon!
The first scientific paper which resulted from this experiment improved the previous best measurements of distance to the Moon by a factor of 100. This activity is still being conducted from McDonald Observatory. Using the much shorter laser pulses and faster electronics now feasible, distances to the Moon are routinely measured to within about one centimeter per night!"

And Stone's account is corroborated by C.O.Alley in his landmark article appearing in the journal SCIENCE from 30 January 1970. Here is a quote from that article about this from the LRRR Experiment's principal investigator;

"A first "geodetic result" from the acquisition observations at Lick (9) was the discovery, from the drift of the residual round-trip travel time with respect the JPL lunar ephemeris 16 (LE16)predictions, that the coordinates for the 120-inch telescope are not those given for Mt. Hamilton (Lick Observatory)in the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac(9a). The Lick Observatory participated in the acquisition phase of the experiment to increase the probability of getting early returns. The weather and seeing are generally excellent there in the summer. Laser ranging activities ceased at Lick in August."

There is nothing in all of that which lends anything to your hypothesis, it is in fact evidence against your notion.

I believe we would all agree the testimonies here as provided by Remington Stone, Donald Beattie and C.O. Alley are more than dependable. Nothing is being made up on their parts. As such, we may conclude that someone operating within the Apollo program gave the LRRR coordinates to the Lick Observatory staff on the evening of 07/20/1969. Those coordinates were obtained outside the activities of the acknowledged public faces operating within Mission Control including the FIDO David Reed. Donald Beattie indicates specifically per his quote above that Collins never located the LM and indeed Beattie was under the impression that it was his work along with that of his colleagues that helped to find the LM after the astronauts returned to earth. Beattie and colleagues LM hunt included the analysis of RETURNED! photos. We know of course the Lick staff had the coordinates of Tranquility Base well before David Reed, the Mission control FIDO, and Beattie and his colleagues were sent on wild goose chases of a sort, searching for coordinates already known.

Already known to whom? How did this entity garner this data?

We conclude with metaphysical certainty that principals within NASA knew the coordinates of Tranquility Base independent of its acknowledged determination. This foreknowledge proves the coordinates of Tranquility Base were known prior to the Eagle's landing there and consequently the Apollo 11 Mission is now once and for all proven to be fraudulent.

Not "WE" just "YOU". It must be lonely for you out there in the cold dark wilderness of ignorance.

The LRRR was successfully targeted after a timing problem was ironed out on 08/01/1969. We may also conclude from the above with absolute metaphysical certainty that the LRRR was not placed at 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 wast by the Apollo astronauts as its location was known before the astronauts ever touched down.

Is THAT the information you were looking for abaddon?

No you simply provided some quotes which provide no support for your hypothesis, and proceeded to draw wild unsubstantiated conclusions from them, including unnamed NASA principals that you invented out of thin air.

 

[abaddon]

It's important to keep in mind when I say "NASA" is lying, such as I do in the above response to my colleague abaddon, I do not mean this is NASA at large lying. Rather, a few bad apples, moles in a sense on the inside, privy to the hoax and directing it. Essentially everyone, Beattie, Reed and so forth buy in, think it is real.

I am not your colleague.

It is not possible for a few at the top to perpetrate the hoax. A few moments thought should make that glaringly obvious.

If that were true, then for example, Grumman were not in on it and would have designed and built a fully operational LM.

And that applies to all the other contractors.

So you end up with a fully functional spacecraft capable of a trip to the Moon, but the refuse to use it?

Do you not see the flaw in that line of reasoning?

 

[Patrick1000]

Stella

Last point Stella to help you perhaps. If Apollo is real, they do not know 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east until after the Eagle has landed and sophisticated measurements are made, correct? Remember, those are not just any coordinates, the LRRR is sitting on them. So, what does it mean if those coordinates are given to the Lick Observatory staff before those sophisticated measurements are made? think of it in those terms and let me know what you think. I suggest it can ONLY mean fraud.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

May we hear your medical opinion of how likely you believe it is that one of the astronauts could have been incubating a salmonella infection for such a long time before falling ill?

He does seem curiously reluctant to provide his professional assessment of the situation.

 

[abaddon]

Why are the perpetrators of the Hoax pretending they do not know the pretend location of the pretend Eagle? I am not positive, but I presume they feared the Russian unmanned craft, LUNA 15, might be so bold as to photograph 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east. Had they done so, they would have found an LRRR and no astronauts. Other explanations are possible, but that is best.

Sure, until you actually check the specs and find that Luna was not able to resolve the LM or anything remotely close to that size.

So why would they fear Luna when it was not capable of such resolution?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

<unhelpfully verbose stuff snipped>

...We may also conclude from the above with absolute metaphysical certainty that the LRRR was not placed at 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 wast by the Apollo astronauts as its location was known before the astronauts ever touched down.

I guess metaphysical certainty must be a different kind of certainty from the usual, logical type, as it does not follow from the wall of text I snipped.

 

[abaddon]

Hey nomuse, you outta' head over to that other thread where none of you guys are hangin' out any more and read my last response to abaddon. Its a bogus space adventure show stopper. Plus, I was hoping you'd give the coordinate challenge thing a try. Better than discussing Mackay's thing about the poop in the space ship intake ya' know.

And about the efficacy of my proving Apollo bogus, ain't seen anyone lay a phony space glove on my argument yet. get outta' the poop here nomuse and over to the real action!

No, you started the other thread so that you could run away from the unanswered questions in this one.

 

[drewid]

No of course not abaddon, the poop thing is too good. but come on now, have you ever in all your years of doing things seen so many super smart Apollo Program Believers , Apollo Program Apologists seem ever so backed into a corner and crazy with panic as to how they are going to find their way back to anything that remotely resembles a reasonable degree of confidence? X ran for cover pretty fast. where the heck is sts? you'd think he'd want a piece of this. He must be studying the same materials I have been for the last 4 months, looking for a way out. Tell sts I'll shoot him a script for xanax if he gets too stressed out over this one.

No abaddon, I won't abandon the poop thread, but I am just LOVING the other one. I feel almost as though I have achieved a state of grace. And you guys thought I couldn't write.

You achieved the same state of grace over at AH over the NOUN76 OMG LAT and LONG coordinates, just before your comedy meltdown hissyfit.

You remember NOUN 76 the numbers you said were Latitude and Longitude, but were actually desired velocities in the ascent pad? I'm sure you do.

 

[X]

<snip> X ran for cover pretty fast. where the heck is sts? you'd think he'd want a piece of this. He must be studying the same materials I have been for the last 4 months, looking for a way out. Tell sts I'll shoot him a script for xanax if he gets too stressed out over this one.

I have asked you twice now (in the other thread) not to speculate on my motivations. As SezMe puts it:

I am really damned sick and tired of your denigration of those who disagree with you.

Goodbye, Patrick. Know that it is your poor attitude, and not your arguments, that has now driven me away.


-----

Boy, for a while I really had lost perspective. I was hanging out over at that other thread I had opened where basically nothing more was going on than seeing the entire edifice of the bogus Apollo monolith come tumbling down in half an evening's time, when I should have been here all along on my original thread studying this mother of all non sequiturs by Mackay.

As everyone knows, we had been discussing abort options in the context of the Borman poop fest. I really did wonder initially what the pogo had to do with poop. Then it dawned on me that what Mackay was getting at was that the pogo phenomenon occurred when poop got sucked into the rocket's fuel inject system and created a mixture far too rich for the ship to handle.

Chatting about this with a friend of mine who is an aerospace engineer, he corrected me after first complimenting me on a good guess. He said actually You would use the Borman poop to toss into the fuel mixture, kind of like a grenade, to defuse the pogo effect.

And here I thought this thread was a waist of time and Mackay's post was some kind of psychotic non sequitur. Why would I have ever wanted to have for a minute thought about starting that other more focused and productive thread?

Proving that you are a troll, and not worth my time anyway. So it's not big loss to you that I'm leaving.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

He does seem curiously reluctant to provide his professional assessment of the situation.

Perhaps he expects to get paid for medical advice.

Then again, if it's advice from the kind of doctor who immediately suspects salmonella in someone who's been symptom-free in a completely controlled environment for 18 hours (and presumably for a considerable time before that) then I doubt it's advice worth paying for. Wikipedia is free and gives you an answer in a minute, compared to, umm, never.