• 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.
Patrick1000 said:
Get it! We!!!!!! were using the LRRRs to obtain ranging data to help us target Russian cities, ICBM sites, naval installations and so forth. That is what one gleans from Professor Millers' statement above. The LRRR data could help one range objects here on earth and that is just for starters. We do not know everything about what they were "doing" up there.
Click to expand...

Now you are quoting yourself. What's up with that?
 
Patrick1000 said:
Same to you abaddon. Take it up with Miller. Looks scary to me.

"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."
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure by now, that you are a kid fooling about on the interwebs.

Go ahead, feel free to demonstrate your foolishness in public.
 
Russians are doing the same to us.

abaddon said:
Why didn't they spill the beans on your so-called hoax then?
Click to expand...

Well they are doing the same to us. Why is it we never found out about the subs until now, meaning well post cold war? The business with the Howard Hughes Glomar Explorer? The so called "Red Rogue"? All of that crazy stuff with the cable in the Pacific? The cat and mouse madness? One of the Soviet sub captains wrote quite lucidly, no question this was a fact, that he had a nuclear torpedo ready to use AT HIS DISCRETION against an American Carrier Group during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I imagine our intelligence found out about that, or if not that, other stuff just as scary , where we were threatened in our own backyard. They shut up about this stuff to some degree so they can keep doing it themselves. The Russians and Americans were doing in outer space just what they were doing in the great oceans.

Professor Millers' point there is sobering and true. What might one conclude from that? First of all, that being the case, the LRRRs cannot be passive and accessible to all, at least not initially as the Soviets would have used our own LRRRs to target American cities. So we know right off the bat the Apollo Missions are not peaceful. Can't possibly be , or the Soviets would get a crack at the mirror too. Which they don't. What does that mean? We are using the mirrors to target their cities.

This is why Apollo is clandestine. You couldn't park a part of a weapons system up there with our own people flipping out.

That is my read abaddon and it may not be 100% on target, but it is very very close.

Armstrong and the others were military people, of course they are going to do this, and I support them in it. Not that I am militaristic, but they were young, even at 38 and 39, time of the mission still young. They are going to tend to go for this kind of thing, super talented fighter pilot types. It is utterly understandable and combinable give what they knew they would return to. Especially Armstrong.
 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
This is what I understand nomuse(quote below). If you disagree with this perspective, you may want to touch base with professor Miller and read up on the subject. Frankly, it is a bit scary to realize we lived through this.


From one of the Lick Observatory articles already quoted;

"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."


I rest my case.
Click to expand...

You rest what? That was a bigger waffle than a billboard ad for IHoP.

How does a corner reflector on the Moon allow a laser in the US know anything about a town in the USSR?

How does any measurement of the distance from an observatory outside of San Jose to the Moon tell you the distance from San Jose to a missile silo outside of Moscow?

No quotes. They don't say what you seem to think they do anyhow. Explain it yourself.
 
I suggest you attempt to debunk professor Millers' statement if you think it funny

drewid said:
this is just getting funnier.
Click to expand...

i suggest you attempt to debunk professor Millers' statement if you find this so funny and amusing drewid.
 
Last edited:
I have been studying up on the subject and i understand the point

nomuse said:
You rest what? That was a bigger waffle than a billboard ad for IHoP.

How does a corner reflector on the Moon allow a laser in the US know anything about a town in the USSR?

How does any measurement of the distance from an observatory outside of San Jose to the Moon tell you the distance from San Jose to a missile silo outside of Moscow?

No quotes. They don't say what you seem to think they do anyhow. Explain it yourself.
Click to expand...

I HAVE BEEN STUDYING UP ON THE SUBJECT AND I UNDERSTAND THE POINT. KEEP AT IT NOMUSE IT GETS SCARIER BY THE MINUTE. Think of satellite laser ranging, the moon is just another "satellite".
 
Why was access to the LRRR selective

drewid said:
This is just getting funnier.
Click to expand...


Here is proof positive this is serious stuff. "Access" to the Apollo LRRRs was not open. The Russians did not target it successfully, nor the Chinese, nor any other adversary. Why is that drewid?

It was a part of a weapons system with restricted access.
 
LRRRs were part of a ranging system targeting Russian cities, ICBM sites and so forth

And what were we doing with our access? Not just "ranging the moon". LRRRs were part of a ranging system providing for improved strategic targeting of Russian cities, ICBM sites and so forth. If it were not, we'd have let others, adversaries access it. After all, if it really were passive, that would have been the case. It wasn't, and we may confidently conclude that the LRRRs are an integral part of a weapons system. And there is nothing wrong with that, though it does scare me some to be honest.
 
Patrick1000 said:
I HAVE BEEN STUDYING UP ON THE SUBJECT AND I UNDERSTAND THE POINT. KEEP AT IT NOMUSE IT GETS SCARIER BY THE MINUTE. Think of satellite laser ranging, the moon is just another "satellite".
Click to expand...

The Moon is a very poor satellite for that application. It is very far away, and it doesn't take instructions. Laser Ranging is performed by satellites in close orbit. They bound a laser off the ground and watch for the return.

To attempt this from the ground via the Moon would be ludicrous (even if the LRRR were not the entirely wrong tool for it). You commit to sending a laser the Earth-Moon distance not once, not twice, but FOUR times. Even if you manage to detect the return, your accuracy is somewhat shy of ten miles radius.

Even if you assume some completely undocumented laser system installed on the Moon, it will vastly underperform a cheaper, easier to maintain, and more navigable spysat placed in an ordinary Earth orbit. The Moon is simply too distant to make this worthwhile.

Plus the same problem you identified would exist; half of Moscow would be up at night wondering what the flashing light on the dark side of the Moon was.
 
Patrick1000 said:
Here is proof positive this is serious stuff. "Access" to the Apollo LRRRs was not open. The Russians did not target it successfully, nor the Chinese, nor any other adversary. Why is that drewid?

It was a part of a weapons system with restricted access.
Click to expand...

It's a fricken' mirror!

The French had no trouble acquiring them. Nor did the Germans.

As for the Soviets...I'd like a cite showing they never acquired the Apollo-deployed LRRR's. Not that it matters, particularly -- they had their own!
 
Any moment now Patrick is going to explain how the LRRR is actually the steerable target mirror for the HARP-based laser superweapon that caused Hurricane Katrina and brought down buildings 1 and 2 of the World Trade Center.
 
Why are you arguing the point with me

nomuse said:
Any moment now Patrick is going to explain how the LRRR is actually the steerable target mirror for the HARP-based laser superweapon that caused Hurricane Katrina and brought down buildings 1 and 2 of the World Trade Center.
Click to expand...

I find it rather strange that I make a serious point by quoting a full professor of Astronomy, Joseph Miller, who participated directly in the LRRR experiments and informs us that successful LRRR targeting could and would be used by the Russians to better locate our own cities and other targets, and you criticize ME.

If you can show me Miller is WRONG nomuse, fine. I will accept the point. So far, you have not been able to do that. AND, I do not believe you can.

that said, I know you are capable, perhaps Miller was wrong. For the time being, I ask you for once, to leave me personally out of this and simply look at the man's argument, Miller's argument, and show me where his logic breaks down. I had to spend a fair amount of time looking into this to see what it was all about.

Think about it nomuse. Why did the Russians never successfully target, back then anyway, our LRRR? If it was passive, they would have.

Try and debunk this, plain and simple. Argue the point and leave me out of it. Miller vs you, let's see what you have got.
 
Patrick1000 said:
Well they are doing the same to us. Why is it we never found out about the subs until now, meaning well post cold war? The business with the Howard Hughes Glomar Explorer?
Click to expand...
You realise that the business with the Glomar Explorer became public knowledge in Feb 75 when it was published in newspapers. Not a very good example of keeping a secret if you ask me.
 
Details not published in 1975

mercatormac said:
You realise that the business with the Glomar Explorer became public knowledge in Feb 75 when it was published in newspapers. Not a very good example of keeping a secret if you ask me.
Click to expand...

Details regarding the Russian sub and WHAT IT WAS UP TO! to did not come out in 1975, was long long long after.
 
Patrick1000 said:
I find it rather strange that I make a serious point by quoting a full professor of Astronomy, Joseph Miller, who participated directly in the LRRR experiments and informs us that successful LRRR targeting could and would be used by the Russians to better locate our own cities and other targets, and you criticize ME.

If you can show me Miller is WRONG nomuse, fine. I will accept the point. So far, you have not been able to do that. AND, I do not believe you can.

that said, I know you are capable, perhaps Miller was wrong. For the time being, I ask you for once, to leave me personally out of this and simply look at the man's argument, Miller's argument, and show me where his logic breaks down. I had to spend a fair amount of time looking into this to see what it was all about.

Think about it nomuse. Why did the Russians never successfully target, back then anyway, our LRRR? If it was passive, they would have.

Try and debunk this, plain and simple. Argue the point and leave me out of it. Miller vs you, let's see what you have got.
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof that the Russians didn't ?
Didn't think so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom