Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[Laton]

I'm not entirely clear how that works. Wouldn't you have to do that from multiple points? Is getting a single datum useful?

Not that much, but multiple laser stations spread across the Soviet Union would certainly help.

Given that any important targets would have had a spread of multiple warheads to look forwards to I don't think it would have made that much difference. A nuclear warhead isn't exactly a precision weapon.

I agree, but the point was that having a laser reflector on the moon would be part of establishing a better datum and make for more accurate targetting of missiles (both launch site and targets). A lot comes down to how accurate your model is and what your targeting, a miss of 100 yards on somthing like an enemy missile silo may not make much of a difference but a miss of, say, a mile or more may not be enough to knock out hardened structure.

 

[abaddon]

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!

The whole corner cube reflector dealy seems to escape the CT bunch.

 

[abaddon]

Well, the ultimate conspiracy theory includes everyone but the theorist.

Yes, and that is being amply demonstrated.

 

[nomuse]

Actually, it's a conspiracy that only one person is in on. Patrick himself.

 

[Multivac]

I feel as though I have come a long way in my understanding of the Apollo fraud.

Then you haven't understood enough. Apollo 11 was not a fraud.

 

[Multivac]

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.

Why would the Russinas keep quiet? They were in a space race with the USA, for national prestige. If the Russians had proof that Apollo was faked they would have shouted about it to anyone that would listen!

 

[Multivac]

My Claims

1) The Apollo Program was a military program

No.

2) The Apollo 11 Mission was fraudulent

No.

3) The Apollo 11 Mission appears as it does with the astronauts being afflicted by "star phobia" and with this unrealistic "losing of the Eagle",

No.

4) The Eagle and astronauts cannot be too lost,

They were not lost.

5) The presence of LUNA 15 may have encouraged the Eagle hiding all the more.

No.

6) The LRRR's were brought to the surface of the moon by unmanned craft. (Given 2 above, NOT SPECULATIVE, confirmed.)

No, point 2 is rubbish.

7) The LRRR's may have been brought to the moon under the guise of the Apollo Mission Saturn V launches with the Apollo 11 LRRR leaving for the moon on 07/16/1969. (Speculative)

No. You scored 0 out of 7, but thankyou for playing.

 

[dafydd]

No. You scored 0 out of 7, but thankyou for playing.

Next delusionaut please!

 

[excaza]

IIR my cartography classes, it would actually be of some use. By bouncing a laser off the moon it would allow a more accurate geodetic datum to be calculated and so allow the Soviets to make their coordinate systems more accurate. When it comes to tossing nukes around I'm not sure how much more accuracy is needed to hit a city than what they already had, hitting individual bases or US launch silos, maybe. It doesn't make Patrick1000's opinions any more connected to reality though.

To generate a better datum more than just the moon would be needed though, hitting a series of satellites is much better. wiki link on geodesy

Thanks for the info, I was furiously googling for something along these lines, but came up short

 

[Kiwi9]

2) The Apollo 11 Mission was fraudulent as demonstrated by the irreconcilable inconsistencies between the testimony of Flight Dynamics Officer David Reed and the account of the lunar module launch scenario as presented in the Apollo 11 Mission Report... (This claim is NOT SPECULATIVE.)

In post 1545 I asked Patrick1000 to tell me where he had posted the coordinates that Reed was given and that he (Reed) said were out by at least 25,000 feet.

...you go on and on and on and on about the coordinates Reed was given differing by a large amount from the official version in the Mission Report, yet I don't ever recall you stating exactly what those figures are. Please do forgive me if I have simply missed them in your ridiculously wordy posts, and point out where they are, but if I haven't missed them, then please post them so we can actually say something about them, because until you give them to us, we can't say anything and we can't even judge if what you say about Reed is accurate or not.

There is plenty of evidence that the coordinates in the Mission Report are accurate, and that is why they are there. Reed appears to be the only one who disagrees, but you don't appear to have given us the figures he was given. Please do.

In post 1550, Patrick said that he quoted them in post 1178, page 30.

The coordinates were posted long agoo Kiwi9, in post #1178

I spent considerable time searching his ridiculously wordy post 1178 and found they are not there at all. In fact, Patrick1000 says, "We do not know what those numbers were, as Reed does not say in his account..."

So he lied, again, or at least made another grave mistake as he has a habit of doing.

All we have is Reed's say-so that the closest coordinate was not within 25,000 feet of the actual position of the LM, whereas information from Mike Collins in the CM, from the geologists, and from more than one source in the LM, gives us very strong evidence that the coordinates were as close as the mission report says. Patrick1000 confirms this himself, in post 1178.

So either Reed made a simple mistake, or he is referring to something other than what we think he means.

Yet Patrick1000 clings to Reed's "25,000 foot error" statement and insists that because of it, all other coordinates are fraudulent, contrary to what the recent LRO photos tell us and contrary to the fact that Lick, McDonald and other places have got returns from the LRRR which is close to the most of the real-time coordinates in the mission report.

But the one big thing that Patrick1000 seems to miss among his many claims that the Eagle never even made it across cislunar space, is this:

For Reed to have found coordinates he did, there had to be a lunar module on the moon at the position Reed found, there had to be someone inside it to hear the request from Mission Control to turn on the rendezvous radar and to do so, and there had to be a command module orbiting the moon to give the LM's rendezvous radar a return.

So if Apollo 11 was faked, Reed could not have found the coordinates he says he found, yet Patrick1000 relies on him doing so, and I strongly doubt that Patrick1000 can see that glaring and highly-amusing inconsistency in his own argument.

Funny, that.

Patrick 1000: "There was never a manned lunar module on the moon, nor a command module orbiting it, and the manned lunar module that was on the moon and the command module that was orbiting it proved it."

Did Patrick1000 pay any attention at all to any lectures about logical fallacies when he studied for the multiple degrees he says he has?

 

[Kiwi9]

If the Russians had proof that Apollo was faked they would have shouted about it to anyone that would listen!

In fact, the Russians congratulated the U.S. on its success:

The West Australian, Friday 18 July 1969, page 16
Russians hail Apollo
The Soviet news agency Tass yesterday put out an 800-word story outlining America's moon programme and hailing the three Apollo 11 astronauts.
Tass described the three men as "those courageous people entrusted with the most responsible task of landing on the moon."
Pravda, the Soviet Communist Party newspaper, wished the astronauts bon voyage. It said: "Let us wish its courageous crew a happy voyage and full success."...


The West Australian, Wednesday 23 July 1969, page 8
Congratulations from Kosygin
Moscow, Tuesday
Soviet Prime Minister Alexei Kosygin sent congratulations to the Apollo 11 astronauts and President Nixon yesterday through former vice-president Humphrey, who is visiting Moscow.
Mr Humphrey was called to Mr Kosygin's office in the Kremlin after the moon walk.
Mr Humphrey quoted Mr Kosygin as saying: "I want you to tell the President and the American people that the Soviet Union desires to work with the U.S. in the cause of peace."
Prompt reports
The Russian radio reported the landing of the astronauts within ten minutes of touch-down and announced the ascent from the moon even more promptly. Moscow television showed the moon walk yesterday.
A first screening was edited to blank out the American commentary and the voices of the astronauts. It ended just before the astronauts raised the U.S. flag on the moon's surface.
About two hours later, in another TV broadcast, the sound and the flag raising had been restored.
In Peking, the official newspapers, TV and radio totally ignored Apollo 11, but some Chinese people may have heard of the landing by courtesy of Radio Moscow. A half-hour Chinese-language news broadcast from Moscow gave 30 seconds to the landing.
In London, a man who almost arranged the death of Saturn rocket designer Wernher von Braun sent him a cable of congratulations — and relief.
Politician Duncan Sandys, who planned a raid designed to kill Nazi Germany's major rocket scientists at Peenemunde (one of them Dr von Braun), said: "I am thankful that your illustrious career was not cut short in the bombing raid at Peenemunde 26 years ago."


Manawatu Evening Standard, Friday 25 July 1969, page 1
Soviet praise
From Moscow, the Soviet President, Mr N. Podgorny, today congratulated President Nixon on "the successful completion of the outstanding flight of the spaceship Apollo-XI, the moon landing and the safe return to earth of the American cosmonauts."
The Soviet President's telegram said: "Please convey our congratulations and best wishes to the courageous space pilots Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin and Michael Collins."
Russian television viewers saw their first live transmission from the epic Apollo-XI flight, as the moon-walking astronauts landed on the Hornet.

 

[Oji]

In fact, the Russians congratulated the U.S. on its success:

I am betting that The Doctor will claim that is proof they were in on it.

 

[excaza]

I am betting that The Doctor will claim that is proof they were in on it.

Please don't insult Dr. Who.

 

[Kiwi9]

Where's my picture of the laser from Aldrin?

Poor Patrick1000, he's never going to get that photo of the "laser" Armstrong and Aldrin saw after they lifted off from the moon, as reported in the Flight Journal...

151:36:58 McCandless: Roger. And the next question from our panel is for Buzz. We recall that he reported seeing a laser upon AOS of the Earth the first time after - the first Rev after ascent, and we're wondering what color the beam was and if he could determine at the approximate location with respect to the Earth. Over.
151:37:25 Aldrin: It was mostly white, perhaps a tinge of yellowish color to it. And it seemed to be - as I recall it, the terminator of the Earth was toward the horizon and seemed to be about a quarter to a third of the way down from - down towards the terminator of the Earth - from the opposite horizon. That's a third to a quarter Earth radii. Over.
151:38:10 McCandless: Roger. And that puts it in the light side? Over.
151:38:18 Aldrin: Roger. Yes, it was in the light side. The Earth was about - a two-thirds lit Earth, with the terminator down toward the horizon. And now coming from the opposite limb of the Earth, the sunlight limb, coming down about one-quarter to one-third of a radius in from the limb. Generally, centrally located with respect to a line drawn perpendicular to the terminator that goes through the center. Over.
151:38:58 McCandless: Roger, Buzz. We copy.
151:39:02 Aldrin: And I got pictures of that. I'm sure that'll show up.
151:39:07 Armstrong: And I saw that, too. It was a very bright spot of light and I confirm Buzz's observation of its position.

...because it proved to not be a laser at all, as reported in the technical debrief.

The Apollo 11 Technical Crew Debriefing July 31st 1969
21.5 Lunar Orbit
Aldrin
In lunar orbit, following ascent, we did note and mention to the ground that approaching CDH when the Earth came up above the lunar horizon, I observed what appeared to be a fairly bright light source which we tentatively ascribed to a possible laser. That seemed to be the best possible explanation until we were coming back in the command module approaching the Earth and were able to observe something that gave about the same appearance. When putting the monocular on the light source, it appeared as though it was the reflection of the Sun from a relatively smooth body of water such as a lake. I think we've revised our initial conclusion as to what the source of that light was that we saw coming from the Earth. If no one owns up to having beamed the laser toward the Moon at that time, it was more probably a reflection off a lake. I still think it's an unusual phenomenon, at that distance, to see so bright a source of light. In the film, it didn't appear as though this was going to show up at all. The Earth was too bright.

 

[abaddon]

The Apollo 11 Technical Crew Debriefing July 31st 1969

That's funny, according to P1k, Neil and Buzz should have been on the lunar surface the next day, photographing inbound lasers.

 

[Erock]

For Reed to have found coordinates he did, there had to be a lunar module on the moon at the position Reed found, there had to be someone inside it to hear the request from Mission Control to turn on the rendezvous radar and to do so, and there had to be a command module orbiting the moon to give the LM's rendezvous radar a return.

So if Apollo 11 was faked, Reed could not have found the coordinates he says he found, yet Patrick1000 relies on him doing so, and I strongly doubt that Patrick1000 can see that glaring and highly-amusing inconsistency in his own argument.

Funny, that.

Patrick 1000: "There was never a manned lunar module on the moon, nor a command module orbiting it, and the manned lunar module that was on the moon and the command module that was orbiting it proved it."

Did Patrick1000 pay any attention at all to any lectures about logical fallacies when he studied for the multiple degrees he says he has?

He continually says Reed was not 'in on it', because it fits his story. Watch for him to move the goalposts again.

I actually had to PM him to get him to reply to my comment, so may be worth doing it with your post too.

 

[Oji]

Please don't insult Dr. Who.

Hard to know whose stories are more fantastical, though...

 

[dafydd]

Hard to know whose stories are more fantastical, though...

Doctor Who is more believable,and a real doctor.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Hard to know whose stories are more fantastical, though...

The Dr. Who stories have all the internal consistency Dr. Sox's flailing failfest lacks.

 

[abaddon]

The Dr. Who stories have all the internal consistency Dr. Sox's flailing failfest lacks.

I will be in no way surprised, after a period of absence, Dr. Sox returns and pretends none of this thread ever happened.