Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[nomuse]

So what did Armstrong and Aldrin see when just after AOS upon first reaching lunar orbit after the "landing" they said they saw a laser? Was it a laser? I thought Aldrin said it was?

I don't know, you haven't provided a cite that I recall.

By the by, even the Surveyor experiment had to;

A) compare against a map
B) Have the lasers blink on and off

to make sure they were actually seeing the lasers and not just some coincidental noise.

 

[nomuse]

You do not need to get so fancy nomuse. Look at the post where I listed all of the "laser" entries found in the voice transcript. Do you see there, when they ask the astronauts if they could see the laser from cislunar space and , the astronauts said no they could not? What that means is the McDonald Observatory was pointing their laser right at where the astronauts were pretending to be in the Apollo 11 astronauts' pretend Columbia space ship. When the thrice Emmy Nominated thespian trio deny seeing the laser, that means they are not in cislunar space. So these are honest astronauts. They are telling the truth. They cannot see the laser coming from McDonald Observatory, but not because of any real signaling problems, its just the guys are not up there, up there in cislunar space. When the astronauts say they don't see the laser, that is equilvalent to admitting the whole thing is a fraud. It has just taken us a while to figure it out.

I claim that I can find a spaceship fairly easily in cislunar space now, pretty accurately with my own little telescope, sighting stars/sun/moon/AND getting that bonus laser sighting confirmed. It is easy nomuse. You should really try it

The first successful experiment targeting a moving spacecraft with a laser was the Galileo experiment, performed in I seem to recall 1976.

As for Apollo -- why didn't they lie? On the side of a hoax, it would have been simple for them to claim they saw it. On the side of reality, there are a number of good reasons not to see it. You have not attempted to rule out even one of the latter.

Whatever "it" was. Perhaps you should provide that link to your cite again.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

The beauty of narrative analysis is that no matter how many photos , rocks, reels of tape, whatever someone presents as "proof" positive of Apollo' authenticity, if a researcher can show a fatal contradiction as I have, all that stuff is junk.

That is not only wrong, but, quite frankly, immensely stupid.

 

[abaddon]

Look at the post where I listed all of the "laser" entries found in the voice transcript. Do you see there, when they ask the astronauts if they could see the laser from cislunar space and , the astronauts said no they could not?

Read the Aldrin quote again nomuse. the man said he saw a laser and Armstrong corroborated the sighting. Aldrin said he took a picture and then didn't produce said shot.

<snigger> Can't even agree with yourself, can you?

You have contradicted yourself, and therefore, by your own logic, you are a fraud.

 

[abaddon]

That is not only wrong, but, quite frankly, immensely stupid.

Agree.

It seems tall tales > hard physical evidence in patrick's strange universe

 

[nomuse]

I just found and read the two "laser" incidents Patrick cites, plus a couple other mentions, in the ALSJ.

I do not see any confirmed sighting of a laser, or confirmed acquisition of the LRRR, documented in those transcripts. The bright spot Armstrong describes disagrees in numerous details with what the Lick Observatory laser would have looked like. I do not have at hand the specs on what other lasers may have also been attempting to acquire the LRRR at the time, but the geometry here is suspect. I think it extremely unlikely it was a laser they saw.

As a point of reference to Patrick, he should read the transcript of the approach and docking following ascent from the Moon. Once sunlight fell on the front of the craft, they found it nearly impossible to see a large, shiny spacecraft with lights on it bare hundreds of meters away.

 

[drewid]

Patrick. perhaps you should ask the mods to split off the stars thing to a separate topic. You still have unanswered questions regarding coordinates and timings that you've been avoiding.

 

[Kiwi9]

Read the Aldrin quote again nomuse. the man said he saw a laser and Armstrong corroborated the sighting. Aldrin said he took a picture and then didn't produce said shot.

Patrick1000: I have given you a list of 231 photos taken of earth during the Apollo 11 mission, and no-one has to be Einstein or Ansel Adams to work out which ones were taken from the vicinity of the moon and which ones were taken by a lunar surface Hasselblad or a CM Hasselblad. One only needs a little knowledge of Apollo photography.

You are entirely free to examine those pictures and find the laser beam. Have you attempted to do so, or have you just whined that Aldrin never produced the shot?

Perhaps you should first find out whether Aldrin quickly grabbed the photo with the wide-angle or standard lens on the Hasselblad, or whether he had time to attach the telephoto lens to get a closer view.

What actual proof do you have that Aldrin never produced the shot? This is just one more of many things that you have simply made up, isn't it? You seem to think that merely speculating that something happened is "proof" that it did indeed happen. Is that really what you think?

And for the umpteenth time, Patrick1000, would you please answer my question about the coordinates used by Lick at least up until publication of the Preliminary Science Report. I am definitely tiring of your avoidance of this issue. Please have the courtesy to respond, or are you phobic about it?

It is you who does the Gish-gallop around here, so don't complain about 20-odd Apollo-believers asking you questions. If you had the intelligence and decency to answer them one by one, they would never mount up like they do.

 

[Patrick1000]

So fine, Armstrong did see stars

Harder still when you bring up twenty different claims at once.



If they were set (and capable of being set) to the same exposure setting. Read the description of the experiment again. The Surveyor camera was set to that the DARK side of the Earth was already at 50% vidicon saturation. This is completely outside any setting that would permit a visual record of the astronaut activities on the surface of the Moon.



Unless he knew he'd be talking to amateur and professional astronomers, astrophotographers, and even cinematographers who already knew and understood from experience that seeing stars under the conditions of lunar surface EVA would be non-trivial.



You haven't provided documentation of that yet.

Assuming this is real and not some figment of your misreading, what of it? The conditions are different. After three forums, a dozen sock puppets, and who knows how many posts, you still can't seem to grasp that conditions matter.

Also, under the best possible conditions we are talking about an object no brighter than the brighter stars, which is only on for a brief time. The film and video record of Apollo are already filled with transient dots of about the right qualities -- transients caused by dust on the lens, cosmic ray strikes, dust during the development, etc., etc.




Like I said, you don't get it. You don't understand the difference between different viewing conditions. You don't understand the difference between "can see stars by making a conscious effort" and "can see stars just while walking around." You don't understand the difference between "can see the brighter stars" (aka under ten) and "can see stars" (aka the unsaid assumption of a rich star field). You don't understand the difference between the human eye, a camera, and a 1960's video camera.

The "contradiction" here only exists within your own mind, and is an artifact of trying to ignore all applicable variables and boil down every single report to a single-value "true" or "false."

So fine then nomuse, Armstrong did see stars, and very bright lasers too, just after the AOS situation as described. Where's my picture of the laser from Aldrin?

 

[Patrick1000]

No, what I have shown is David Reed says one thing and the Mission Report another

Wrong.
1) all you've shown is that you either do not or will not understand evidence.

2) At any rate, if you going to claim any contradiction renders the whole thing fake, then you have, by your own posts committed fraud!

You claimed to be leaving on a trip that would prevent you from posting for a month. Said same trip would be taking you to India via Europe. Wound up in Hong Kong. Then Shanghai!

Tsk,tsk.

Oh, on top of that all evidence STILL points toward Apollo 11 landing on the moon.

No, Redtail what I have shown is David Reed, Michael Collins, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin say one thing, and the Mission Report, quite another altogether.

How would you care to explain the "evidence"? Reed says he walked on duty and all of the real-time coordinate solutions were at great variance from one another, "not even close" to one another. The Mission Report says not only were they close to one another, but very close to Tranquility Base and close to Reed's own numbers as well. Furthermore, Michael Collins himself said he did not know where his friends were. Michael Collins himself said one cannot "find" anyone on the surface of the moon except by way of the examination of "crude maps". That is what he said, right there in CARRYING THE FIRE, and not a very hot fire I might add. And not a very difficult one to find I might add. I don't believe Prometheus would be impressed.

So what say you Redtail, Michael Collins and David Reed AND NEIL ARMSTRONG THE COMMANDER HIMSELF all agree the Eagle was not well located on the morning of 07/21/1969, yet the Mission Report, contradicting the Apollo 11's commander in a major way says this was not the case. The real-time solutions with the exception of the AOT solution all agreed well, all were near Tranquility Base and Reed's own calculation, while Reed said, along with Armstrong and Collins AND ALDRIN! that they did not have a good idea as to where they were.

How would you care to explain the evidence Redtail? I WELCOME YOUR INTERPRETATION EAGERLY.

 

[Patrick1000]

Star Phobia, Laser Phobia is the motivation for coordinate confusion and Bird hiding

Patrick. perhaps you should ask the mods to split off the stars thing to a separate topic. You still have unanswered questions regarding coordinates and timings that you've been avoiding.

Star Phobia, Laser Phobia is the motivation for coordinate confusion and Bird hiding. Your suggestion is ridiculous.

 

[Patrick1000]

I want my photo of the laser

Patrick1000: I have given you a list of 231 photos taken of earth during the Apollo 11 mission, and no-one has to be Einstein or Ansel Adams to work out which ones were taken from the vicinity of the moon and which ones were taken by a lunar surface Hasselblad or a CM Hasselblad. One only needs a little knowledge of Apollo photography.

You are entirely free to examine those pictures and find the laser beam. Have you attempted to do so, or have you just whined that Aldrin never produced the shot?

Perhaps you should first find out whether Aldrin quickly grabbed the photo with the wide-angle or standard lens on the Hasselblad, or whether he had time to attach the telephoto lens to get a closer view.

What actual proof do you have that Aldrin never produced the shot? This is just one more of many things that you have simply made up, isn't it? You seem to think that merely speculating that something happened is "proof" that it did indeed happen. Is that really what you think?

And for the umpteenth time, Patrick1000, would you please answer my question about the coordinates used by Lick at least up until publication of the Preliminary Science Report. I am definitely tiring of your avoidance of this issue. Please have the courtesy to respond, or are you phobic about it?

It is you who does the Gish-gallop around here, so don't complain about 20-odd Apollo-believers asking you questions. If you had the intelligence and decency to answer them one by one, they would never mount up like they do.

I want my photo of the laser, just like Captain Rendezvous with the bogus MIT degree said he had. Don't care about the others, just the one that would suggest I might be wrong. The other photos do NOTHING to counter my claim(s).

 

[Patrick1000]

By the way, while we're at it ,the reporter's "false scoop" is totally bogus!

Patrick1000: I have given you a list of 231 photos taken of earth during the Apollo 11 mission, and no-one has to be Einstein or Ansel Adams to work out which ones were taken from the vicinity of the moon and which ones were taken by a lunar surface Hasselblad or a CM Hasselblad. One only needs a little knowledge of Apollo photography.

You are entirely free to examine those pictures and find the laser beam. Have you attempted to do so, or have you just whined that Aldrin never produced the shot?

Perhaps you should first find out whether Aldrin quickly grabbed the photo with the wide-angle or standard lens on the Hasselblad, or whether he had time to attach the telephoto lens to get a closer view.

What actual proof do you have that Aldrin never produced the shot? This is just one more of many things that you have simply made up, isn't it? You seem to think that merely speculating that something happened is "proof" that it did indeed happen. Is that really what you think?

And for the umpteenth time, Patrick1000, would you please answer my question about the coordinates used by Lick at least up until publication of the Preliminary Science Report. I am definitely tiring of your avoidance of this issue. Please have the courtesy to respond, or are you phobic about it?

It is you who does the Gish-gallop around here, so don't complain about 20-odd Apollo-believers asking you questions. If you had the intelligence and decency to answer them one by one, they would never mount up like they do.

By the way, while we're at it , the reporter's "false scoop" of the LRRR "hit" is so bogus it hardly merits a line, but I'll give you a few!

First of all, WHO WAS THE GUY? Secondly, how utterly absurd to think this guy is going to take pictures of this flashing stuff, a video no less, put the film on a plane, have the film arrive in NYC, have them put the film on national news, with no fact checking while all the other reporters have a completely different take. Remember hours go by between when this film leaves this anonymous reporter's hands and the time of its arrival in NYC, what 6 hours. Hadn't he, the FAKE REPORTER, figured out by then he was off target? Oh maybe not because he wasn't a real reporter.

The fact that you you could read that bogus account and buy it, speaks volumes Kiwi9. AND it wasn't even my point.

I clearly said , even if the LRRR thing hadn't worked , and it was a false report, people, Michael Collins included, should have been asking to employ the technique to find the astronauts. He said crude maps were the only way to find his colleagues, what about targeting them with an argon laser and seeing if they could see it, or simply reading off the solutions from the PNGS or AGS or powered flight processor? The latter was withing .64 miles of Tranquility Base at 00 41 14 north and 23 26 00 East, cannot do better than that.

So you are incorrect either way Kiwi9. That reporter story was absurd to begin with. Cannot be true, and even if it was, it doesn't address my point of the LRRR having been successfully targeted. So what if the first report was a "mistake". And you guys criticize me for not reading your posts and understanding what you are saying!

 

[Agatha]

"your" photo of the laser? Do at least try to write like an adult.

The radio transmissions picked up by amateur operators all around the world as coming from the moon renders all of your objections moot. Handwaving this away is merely destroying your arguments further.

 

[Patrick1000]

Also shows how people make up stories which simply are not credible to cover for this

By the way, while we're at it , the reporter's "false scoop" of the LRRR "hit" is so bogus it hardly merits a line, but I'll give you a few!

First of all, WHO WAS THE GUY? Secondly, how utterly absurd to think this guy is going to take pictures of this flashing stuff, a video no less, put the film on a plane, have the film arrive in NYC, have them put the film on national news, with no fact checking while all the other reporters have a completely different take. Remember hours go by between when this film leaves this anonymous reporter's hands and the time of its arrival in NYC, what 6 hours. Hadn't he, the FAKE REPORTER, figured out by then he was off target? Oh maybe not because he wasn't a real reporter.

The fact that you you could read that bogus account and buy it, speaks volumes Kiwi9. AND it wasn't even my point.

I clearly said , even if the LRRR thing hadn't worked , and it was a false report, people, Michael Collins included, should have been asking to employ the technique to find the astronauts. He said crude maps were the only way to find his colleagues, what about targeting them with an argon laser and seeing if they could see it, or simply reading off the solutions from the PNGS or AGS or powered flight processor? The latter was withing .64 miles of Tranquility Base at 00 41 14 north and 23 26 00 East, cannot do better than that.

So you are incorrect either way Kiwi9. That reporter story was absurd to begin with. Cannot be true, and even if it was, it doesn't address my point of the LRRR having been successfully targeted. So what if the first report was a "mistake". And you guys criticize me for not reading your posts and understanding what you are saying!

Also kiwi9, shows how people make up stories which simply are not credible to cover for this bull. So where did that flashing film jive REALLY come from that they put on the air? Sure as shoot couldn't have been from a reporter 3,000 miles and 6 HOURS AWAY, SOME SCOOP THAT WAS Kiwi9!!!!!!!!! Who made that film Kiwi9? what is the reporters NAME! I would like to know who made that obviously FAKE video. Reporter's name please!

 

[Patrick1000]

the telemetry is fake

"your" photo of the laser? Do at least try to write like an adult.

The radio transmissions picked up by amateur operators all around the world as coming from the moon renders all of your objections moot. Handwaving this away is merely destroying your arguments further.

Take a look at my post #1178 where I prove the telemetry that H. David Reed and the other fight officers were fed" was FAKE. Show me where my logic, my reasoning ,my facts break down. If you cannot, I shall continue to call the signals, ALL OF THEM picked up by the amateurs FAKE, as the telemetry with reference to the landing site coordinates certainly were. and that my friend is not hand waving. shall we take a look at you numbers. Mine are there in post #1178. I would like to see your math.

 

[Patrick1000]

And if you cannot , THAT IS HAND WAVING MY FRIEND

Take a look at my post #1178 where I prove the telemetry that H. David Reed and the other fight officers were fed" was FAKE. Show me where my logic, my reasoning ,my facts break down. If you cannot, I shall continue to call the signals, ALL OF THEM picked up by the amateurs FAKE, as the telemetry with reference to the landing site coordinates certainly were. and that my friend is not hand waving. shall we take a look at you numbers. Mine are there in post #1178. I would like to see your math.

And if you cannot show me where I am wrong, I will say to you, THAT IS HAND WAVING MY FRIEND. LET ME SEE HOW YOU DO THE MATH!

 

[Patrick1000]

Of course it is not the Lick laser!

I just found and read the two "laser" incidents Patrick cites, plus a couple other mentions, in the ALSJ.

I do not see any confirmed sighting of a laser, or confirmed acquisition of the LRRR, documented in those transcripts. The bright spot Armstrong describes disagrees in numerous details with what the Lick Observatory laser would have looked like. I do not have at hand the specs on what other lasers may have also been attempting to acquire the LRRR at the time, but the geometry here is suspect. I think it extremely unlikely it was a laser they saw.

As a point of reference to Patrick, he should read the transcript of the approach and docking following ascent from the Moon. Once sunlight fell on the front of the craft, they found it nearly impossible to see a large, shiny spacecraft with lights on it bare hundreds of meters away.

of course it is NOT the Lick laser nomuse. that is the whole point ANYONE WITH ANY LASER CAN TARGET YOU. And you say I do not read your posts. I have said over and over and over in many didfferent ways, ANY LASER, friendly, unfriendly, ruby, argon, pink, ANY laser!!!!!

 

[Agatha]

I am not your friend; kindly keep your juvenile patronising to yourself. If you want people to believe you are a graduate in your fifties, do try to use age-appropriate language and sentence structure.

Your claim is that the radio transmissions were faked, it is up to you to support that claim.

 

[little grey rabbit]

"your" photo of the laser? Do at least try to write like an adult.

The radio transmissions picked up by amateur operators all around the world as coming from the moon renders all of your objections moot. Handwaving this away is merely destroying your arguments further.

I did make a suggestion previously that the radio transmissions may have bounced off the ironosphere.

It did get a rather gratifying response, as I recall.