Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[tsig]

Keep studying. You're about 40 years behind some of us.

OK, you made a big claim there. Tell us why ranging the moon would help the pentagon boys target Moscow. Show me up. Here is your chance. you said it. You are 40 years ahead of me, and you said it with respect to this very difficult issue. so lets see what you have got hot shot.

Do you always see words that aren't there?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Not one single device from the ALSEP package of any Apollo mission remains in service -- except for the corner-cube reflectors. They're the longest running scientific experiment from the space program.

The only way for them to remain in service this long is for them to have zero moving parts and zero power usage. The only failure modes are: dust on the cover glass if a meteor were to impact near enough, or destruction if a meteor actually hit one.

The way to "turn on and off" the LRRR corner cubes would be mechanical -- a lid, louvers, shutters, a way of de-tuning the corner cube alignment -- any of those things would eventually fail due to mechanical stresses of thermocycling or loss of power.

The LRRR's were basically nothing more than a suitcase full of glass blocks. Really expensive glass blocks, installed in very precision holders. No batteries, no solar panels, no motors, no extension cords, nothin'. Just an aluminum framework with some glass.

This "not passive" idea is the mega-dumb. Someone else stundie it, I'm tired of this pubeless nitwit.

 

[Patrick1000]

Since you were so patient will answer this now.

Oh really!?

But you said........





















Your theory is completely busted.

Its whole premise was that the Eagle final coordinates were passed to LICK before REED calculated them. The science report indicates exactly what was told to you numerous times!

The coordinates were given on the 21st (incorrectly with Texas drawl) and corrected morning of the 22nd. You were asked dozens of times to show where you your proof was of what coordinates were given, and you continually ignored the questions. You kept referring to an interview, chopped up by questions and ASSUMED he meant the coordinates on the 20th and the misheard 15/50 bit was done on the 20th.

WRONG.

Now, you move the goalposts to stars and lasers viewed ON THE MOON.

NEXT.

Erock, you missed the point long ago. I was sort of "devious" with the Remington Stone thing. It was obvious, certainly to nomuse it was, that Stone would not have, may well not have anyway, a clue as to what the actual coordinates were given to Wampler. They just filled them in with 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east.

I had played the Remington Stone "exact coordinate card" until nomuse called me on it, and then i showed that it did not matter what the coordinates were. this is what I had intended all along. doing the Stone thing got me there fast.

We knew the coordinates Stone and Wampler got had to be within two miles of Tranquility Base because they were used to target the LRRR successfully, but it didn't matter, doesn't matter, exactly what they were. Unlikely 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east, even with the story about 15/50 confusion which supports Stone's version in the article.

So, the Remington Stone story was irrelevant. It was my way to push my own agenda to show it didn't matter what the coordinates were. Whatever was given to Wampler, turned out to be good enough , and we know from Reed, the coordinates given to Wampler were much better than the ones he got. The ones Reed was given on the morning of 07/21/1969 were no closer than 4.5 miles to Tranquility Base.

Under these circumstances, where we are dealing with subtle but important differences, 2.0 vs 4.5 miles is a big deal. The coordinates given to Wampler within 2 miles of Tranquility Base were better coordinates than anyone had in Mission control according to Reed. This is where the foreknowledge comes in. Wampler has coordinates Reed does not have. Wampler and Stone in other words have better coordinates than the Mission Control guys themselves!

I can't post again Erock for a while. Appreciate your patience last time. If you answer back, I'll respond , but again, I have things to do. Won't be for a while, Pat

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

I had played the Remington Stone "exact coordinate card" until nomuse called me on it, and then i showed that it did not matter what the coordinates were. this is what I had intended all along. doing the Stone thing got there fast.

Being wrong and getting caught is not "playing a card." It's called being wrong and not having the stones to admit it, or being a flat-out liar.

Which is it?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

OK, you made a big claim there. Tell us why ranging the moon would help the pentagon boys target Moscow. Show me up. Here is your chance. you said it. You are 40 years ahead of me, and you said it with respect to this very difficult issue. so lets see what you have got hot shot.

You claim to be a grown up and a math guy. Sure. If you pass algebra this year, next year take geometry and the year after that take trig. Then maybe you'll understand.

When you get to college, take some formal logic. Might do ya some good.

And stop lying about being a mathematician doctor sextoy married guy world traveler grown up. Nobody believes you and it wastes time.

 

[Patrick1000]

No , you are wrong

Being wrong and getting caught is not "playing a card." It's called being wrong and not having the stones to admit it, or being a flat-out liar.

Which is it?

Check my message to nomuse. I conceded the point, but I could have pressed it and so I will press it with you big shot. If the coordinates given to Remington Stone were not 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east, why did Stone tell the little story about Wampler confusing hearing the number 15 with the number 50? That story hardly makes ANY! sense unless at all unless the north coordinate really was 00 41 15 . AND Stone says in the article that they called the Houston guy back the next day and he confirmed 00 41 15 north, this time they figured out the problem.


So I was not wrong big shot, and now it is your turn to explain your way out of it. Who told Joe Wampler the coordinates were 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east when David reed says the Houston guys had nothing within five miles of that when they called the Lick Observatory?

 

[dafydd]

Actually nomuse hasn't returned since I gave him the challenge. i imagine he is hard at work on it. Let's see what he comes up with. the jury is out.

The way you glorify your nonsense with the term 'challenge' is very amusing. The only challenge is trying to understand why you believe the garbage that you post. There is no jury.

 

[dafydd]

We? You got a mouse in your pocket or is that the royal we?

Teenage boys often keep mice as pets.

 

[Almo]

blah blah blah

Googling for the first paragraph reveals 5 other posts with this identical text on the JREF forum.

 

[Tolls]

Under these circumstances, where we are dealing with subtle but important differences, 2.0 vs 4.5 miles is a big deal. The coordinates given to Wampler within 2 miles of Tranquility Base were better coordinates than anyone had in Mission control according to Reed.

Maybe someone else can correct me (damned if I'm trawling back through this thread to find it), but I thought it had been shown that 20000 feet of that 4.5 miles was the amount the CSM was off by? Meaning the amount on the ground was significantly less than 4.5 miles. That 4.5 miles was the combined "off" for both the lander and the module?

 

[frenat]

No, it's a moronic theory that makes absolutely no sense. I could probably aim a salvo of nuclear missiles well enough with the aid of an abacus to take out NYC. Why on earth would I need to use something on the Moon? Not to mention that the logistics and calculations needed to put a freaking mirror on the Moon far exceed what is required to aim an ICBM.

Exactly. This is the most moronic moon hoax idea I've seen to date. Are we sure this guy isn't a plant to make hoaxers look bad?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I won't be back for a while.

You keep saying this and it keeps not being true...

 

[Buckaroo]

We'll get back to the Borman diarrhea soon enough!

Interesting that when given another opportunity to answer the simple question I posed to you multiple times earlier in the thread, you choose to make a smart-ass remark instead. It's quite telling.

 

[excaza]

To be honest, I am wondering how the Soviets knowing the distance from Moscow (or wherever) to the Moon helps them aim their payloads. Miller's statement was that the Soviets knew inter-city distances, but not the distance from the USSR to the US. Not only does this have absolutely no relevance to the validity of the moon landing, it also strikes me as a profoundly odd statement. What would knowing the Moon distance change?

Can someone (preferably sane) enlighten me?

 

[Erock]

If the coordinates given to Remington Stone were not 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east, why did Stone tell the little story about Wampler confusing hearing the number 15 with the number 50? That story hardly makes ANY! sense unless at all unless the north coordinate really was 00 41 15 . AND Stone says in the article that they called the Houston guy back the next day and he confirmed 00 41 15 north, this time they figured out the problem.

You are doing a great job of playing dumb here

Wampler made the call on the morning of the 22nd, not the 21st. The reference was to coordinates given on the 21st not the 20th. The Moon was hardly in the Californian sky long enough to target after the LRRR had been placed there and the astronauts had gone back in the LM.

I repeat, that interview is very ambiguous in the way it presents the coordinates issue. The science report for Apollo is not.

Getting caught out being wrong, then flanneling more BS shows exactly how full of it you are




P.s. Perhaps someone with good stellarium skills(or similar) could do a quick check exactly where the Moon is and for how long on the 20th for Mount Hamilton California.

 

[frenat]

To be honest, I am wondering how the Soviets knowing the distance from Moscow (or wherever) to the Moon helps them aim their payloads. Miller's statement was that the Soviets knew inter-city distances, but not the distance from the USSR to the US. Not only does this have absolutely no relevance to the validity of the moon landing, it also strikes me as a profoundly odd statement. What would knowing the Moon distance change?

Can someone (preferably sane) enlighten me?

It wouldn't change anything. Especially since one can find the distance to the Moon with a reasonable margin of error using two observers and trigonometry and parallax. And also especially since the distance to the Moon chages by more than that margin of error every month. But most importantly, they could just walk to the nearest store and buy a globe or an atlas.

 

[nomuse]

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.

I don't have to show Miller wrong, since you haven't demonstrated that Miller is saying what you claim.

You can't explain how it might be possible with the actual equipment flown to the Moon, can you? Until you can, whatever Miller may have said, no matter how scientifically plausible it may be, remains a flight of fantasy.

This isn't a battle of competing authorities here. This is ME asking YOU to explain what sounds on the surface like a stupid idea.

 

[nomuse]

Would not make sense to put a passive device up there if Wampler is correct. I believe we are going to find the LRRR was not passive and anyone at all COULD NOT ACCESS IT.

And with a bound, Patrick's conspiracy grows once again to include every observatory that has used any one of the 5 target-able LRRR's on the Moon.

 

[R.A.F.]

You are doing a great job of playing dumb here.

I don't automatically assume that he is "playing"...it is quite possible that he is dumb.

 

[nomuse]

A very specialised one.

Even more specifically, a corner reflector. Meaning a secret laser sent up from CIA headquarters........would bounce right back to CIA headquarters. Not going to do real good getting the relative altitude of the SE corner of the Kremlin that way!