Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
Run silent, run deep space
I feel as though I have come a long way in my understanding of the Apollo fraud. Reading up on the subject of lasers recently has helped me to see the hoax as very reasonable, something that as best I can tell from my present point of view, I would agree with.
If you read up on the subject of lasers, one learns it was their potential for military applications, recognized first in the fifties, that lead to their development.
In an informative book by Major General Bengt Anolerberg and Dr. Myron L. Wolbarsht entitled "Laser Weapons, the Dawn of a New Military Age"(Plenum Press , 1992) the authors write with regard to the laser's development;
"much of the industrial and academic work was financed through military budgets and directed by military officials".
Early on, military people thought lasers might be employable in a direct offensive capacity, like a gun, only shooting light that directly damages a target. But such thinking with regard to HIGH ENERGY LASER BEAMS as direct offensive weapons apparently faded fairly quickly. Though my sense is that it was recognized fairly early on that people could be blinded with lasers, and recognizing this, some international military codes explicitly were written with language directly forbidding such use.
But lasers did find a home in the military early on. In 1961 a range finder was made by the Hughes Aircraft Corporation. High energy pulsing with the recording of the light "echo" was employed in that first device as the same principle is employed today in modern day military range finding applications. As a matter of fact, ruby red lasers were first used in this capacity and still are used today by military personal in ranging operations/measurements of various types. However, today it is more common to find Nd-YAG or Nd-Glass lasers being utilized in this way, as ranging devices. These lasers operate at 1064 nm instead of the 694.3 nm wavelength of the ruby red laser.
Remember what the scientists from Lick Observatory told us in the 40th anniversary commemorative piece written in the University of Santa Cruz News letter, 07/27/2009, by staff writer Jennifer McNulty. Here is a quote from the article, first the journalist, then Professor emeritus Joseph Miller with his comment;
"Miller was busy fielding questions from television and newspaper reporters who'd gathered at the observatory for the historic moon landing. Ironically, he was not allowed to answer the question on every reporter's mind because of national security concerns.
"The Russians knew very accurately the distance between Russian cities and between cities within the United States, but they didn't know the distance between the U.S. and Russia," explained Joe Wampler, professor emeritus of astronomy, who coordinated the experiment for the observatory. "Having an accurate measure of the distance to the moon at a moment in time would've given them that information. I was kind of upset about that, because we went into this as a scientific experiment. We weren't doing it for national security."
And then astronomer Lloyd Robinson followed with;
"NASA wanted to be sure they weren't scooped by the Russians or the French, because the Russians had bigger telescopes, and the French had better lasers," recalled Robinson. "They came to Lick and said, 'Can you help us?' There was considerable monetary support. Anything I asked for, I got. That turned out to be the only time in my career that was the case."
So obviously a lot was going on in those days. One might imagine the "Apollo 11 LRRR" placed there on the moon was not passive, but active, active in the sense that we, the Americans, could selectively access it, turn it off and on via a "window" or angling of some sort. We could use the LRRR and our technology to range Russian cities, Russian Satellites, Russian ICBMS and so forth.
By the way, when one ranges an irregularly shaped target with reflective properties that are difficult to get a hold of, difficult to define and quantify, a non mirror if you will, something like a satellite say , or missile, or tree for that matter, military people call this an "uncooperative target". An LRRR is quite literally a mirror and so very "cooperative". But I imagine mirrors like our LRRRs could be set up so as they may be turned off and on.
I imagine the Russians and US may have been going at it in space with this cat and mouse stuff, just like they did with the subs in the great oceans. you know, a la "BLIND MAN"S BLUFF". So this is why the Russians don't talk about it because they are doing the same thing. Remember when they figured out we were tapping their communication cable in the Pacific? They didn't tell us , tell the world they knew. They pumped the cable full of bad information. At least I think that is what they did. Read the book BLIND MAN'S BLUFF, about the US/Soviet sub cat and mouse games and you will begin to understand Apollo in a sense. Deep ocean cat and mouse vs deep space cat and mouse. Same thing in a broad general sense.
So the Russians must have been playing with ranging and other laser stuff too. More likely than not, they knew Apollo fraudulent, but just like the sub stuff, no one talked about it openly.
Learning of this, it seems so reasonable to me that they faked the Apollo missions. Perhaps the mission goals were to plant LRRRs on the surface of the moon with unmanned satellites for military use, the targeting of Russian cities and so forth as Professor Miller mentions above.
In light of this, Armstrong strikes me as EXTREMELY PATRIOTIC AND BRAVE. That said, now that this is so obvious to so many of us, keeping it "secret", is counterproductive, especially given the fact that it has mislead scientists about such important things such as where the moon rocks really came from and under what circumstances. Best to tell all, like both sides pretty much have done with the submarine business. Run silent and run DEEP SPACE, you know. Now I understand Neil!
I feel as though I have come a long way in my understanding of the Apollo fraud. Reading up on the subject of lasers recently has helped me to see the hoax as very reasonable, something that as best I can tell from my present point of view, I would agree with.
If you read up on the subject of lasers, one learns it was their potential for military applications, recognized first in the fifties, that lead to their development.
In an informative book by Major General Bengt Anolerberg and Dr. Myron L. Wolbarsht entitled "Laser Weapons, the Dawn of a New Military Age"(Plenum Press , 1992) the authors write with regard to the laser's development;
"much of the industrial and academic work was financed through military budgets and directed by military officials".
Early on, military people thought lasers might be employable in a direct offensive capacity, like a gun, only shooting light that directly damages a target. But such thinking with regard to HIGH ENERGY LASER BEAMS as direct offensive weapons apparently faded fairly quickly. Though my sense is that it was recognized fairly early on that people could be blinded with lasers, and recognizing this, some international military codes explicitly were written with language directly forbidding such use.
But lasers did find a home in the military early on. In 1961 a range finder was made by the Hughes Aircraft Corporation. High energy pulsing with the recording of the light "echo" was employed in that first device as the same principle is employed today in modern day military range finding applications. As a matter of fact, ruby red lasers were first used in this capacity and still are used today by military personal in ranging operations/measurements of various types. However, today it is more common to find Nd-YAG or Nd-Glass lasers being utilized in this way, as ranging devices. These lasers operate at 1064 nm instead of the 694.3 nm wavelength of the ruby red laser.
Remember what the scientists from Lick Observatory told us in the 40th anniversary commemorative piece written in the University of Santa Cruz News letter, 07/27/2009, by staff writer Jennifer McNulty. Here is a quote from the article, first the journalist, then Professor emeritus Joseph Miller with his comment;
"Miller was busy fielding questions from television and newspaper reporters who'd gathered at the observatory for the historic moon landing. Ironically, he was not allowed to answer the question on every reporter's mind because of national security concerns.
"The Russians knew very accurately the distance between Russian cities and between cities within the United States, but they didn't know the distance between the U.S. and Russia," explained Joe Wampler, professor emeritus of astronomy, who coordinated the experiment for the observatory. "Having an accurate measure of the distance to the moon at a moment in time would've given them that information. I was kind of upset about that, because we went into this as a scientific experiment. We weren't doing it for national security."
And then astronomer Lloyd Robinson followed with;
"NASA wanted to be sure they weren't scooped by the Russians or the French, because the Russians had bigger telescopes, and the French had better lasers," recalled Robinson. "They came to Lick and said, 'Can you help us?' There was considerable monetary support. Anything I asked for, I got. That turned out to be the only time in my career that was the case."
So obviously a lot was going on in those days. One might imagine the "Apollo 11 LRRR" placed there on the moon was not passive, but active, active in the sense that we, the Americans, could selectively access it, turn it off and on via a "window" or angling of some sort. We could use the LRRR and our technology to range Russian cities, Russian Satellites, Russian ICBMS and so forth.
By the way, when one ranges an irregularly shaped target with reflective properties that are difficult to get a hold of, difficult to define and quantify, a non mirror if you will, something like a satellite say , or missile, or tree for that matter, military people call this an "uncooperative target". An LRRR is quite literally a mirror and so very "cooperative". But I imagine mirrors like our LRRRs could be set up so as they may be turned off and on.
I imagine the Russians and US may have been going at it in space with this cat and mouse stuff, just like they did with the subs in the great oceans. you know, a la "BLIND MAN"S BLUFF". So this is why the Russians don't talk about it because they are doing the same thing. Remember when they figured out we were tapping their communication cable in the Pacific? They didn't tell us , tell the world they knew. They pumped the cable full of bad information. At least I think that is what they did. Read the book BLIND MAN'S BLUFF, about the US/Soviet sub cat and mouse games and you will begin to understand Apollo in a sense. Deep ocean cat and mouse vs deep space cat and mouse. Same thing in a broad general sense.
So the Russians must have been playing with ranging and other laser stuff too. More likely than not, they knew Apollo fraudulent, but just like the sub stuff, no one talked about it openly.
Learning of this, it seems so reasonable to me that they faked the Apollo missions. Perhaps the mission goals were to plant LRRRs on the surface of the moon with unmanned satellites for military use, the targeting of Russian cities and so forth as Professor Miller mentions above.
In light of this, Armstrong strikes me as EXTREMELY PATRIOTIC AND BRAVE. That said, now that this is so obvious to so many of us, keeping it "secret", is counterproductive, especially given the fact that it has mislead scientists about such important things such as where the moon rocks really came from and under what circumstances. Best to tell all, like both sides pretty much have done with the submarine business. Run silent and run DEEP SPACE, you know. Now I understand Neil!
Last edited:
