• 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.
LRRR Scientists' Explanation of Lunar Ranging and Military Applications

I wrote to several of the scientists by way of email that were involved in the LRRR experiments early on. All contacted responded to me with the same answer. A quote from one of the professors;

"Very good maps and distances of Europe and the Americas existed, but the distance across the oceans were uncertain. The Lunar ranging tied the old and new continents together. Similarly, the map of Great Britain was tied to the map of Europe at the end of WW II by radar ranging across the English Channel."

I imagine that all but settles it. The LRRRs were part of a weapons system for targeting Russian objectives, at least when the "straight scientists" were not using them for non nefarious/non military reasons. These reflectors most certainly were not "passive", not passive in more ways than one.

You are welcome to contact the LRRR experimental scientists yourselves. Their names are in the SCIENCE articles I have already cited as references.
 
Last edited:
Rationale for the Russian Silence

Now, the rationale for Russian silence becomes all too obvious. They would be trying to do the same thing, and of course they did place reflectors by satellite. "Calling us" on this would only further emphasize their vulnerabilities and American superiority. Apollo provided a peaceful cover for an unmanned military operation.
 
Patrick1000 said:
I wrote to several of the scientists by way of email that were involved in the LRRR experiments early on. All contacted responded to me with the same answer. A quote from one of the professors;

"Very good maps and distances of Europe and the Americas existed, but the distance across the oceans were uncertain. The Lunar ranging tied the old and new continents together. Similarly, the map of Great Britten was tied to the map of Europe at the end of WW II by radar ranging across the English Channel."

I imagine that all but settles it. The LRRRs were part of a weapons system for targeting Russian objectives, at least when the "straight scientists" were not using them for non nefarious/non military reasons. These reflectors most certainly were not "passive", not passive in more ways than one.

You are welcome to contact the LRRR experimental scientists yourselves. Their names are in the SCIENCE articles I have already cited as references.
Click to expand...

How exactly does this change the huge quantity of evidence that the missions happened as advertised? That huge amount of evidence basically means that there MUST be some other explanation for your "anomalies", because they CANNOT mean the missions were faked.
 
Patrick1000 said:
Now, the rationale for Russian silence becomes all too obvious. They would be trying to do the same thing, and of course they did place reflectors by satellite. "Calling us" on this would only further emphasize their vulnerabilities and American superiority. Apollo provided a peaceful cover for an unmanned military operation.
Click to expand...

Because we know for a fact that the missions happened as advertised, these points are irrelevant.

(see what I did? This is what you do. You base ALL you assumptions on the fact you think the missions were hoaxed and somehow it's been proven. I am doing the same thing, so based on the FACT that the missions happened as advertised, nothing you have brought up is relevant. Beautiful, isn't it?)
 
Little else to say

mercatormac said:
A Professor that can't spell Britain, really?
Click to expand...

I have little else to say. As you might imagine, 40 years out, the professors speak rather openly about this now, and shared more than just this with me. No big deal now, except for those who believe in Apollo's truth and non military intentions.

Contact the LRRR professors if/as you like. I for one will welcome it. Please, by all means confirm what I have learned. You are welcome to change their spelling or mine as you please. However, you will not be welcome to change their answers.
 
The missions did not happen as advertised

twinstead said:
Because we know for a fact that the missions happened as advertised, these points are irrelevant.

(see what I did? This is what you do. You base ALL you assumptions on the fact you think the missions were hoaxed and somehow it's been proven. I am doing the same thing, so based on the FACT that the missions happened as advertised, nothing you have brought up is relevant. Beautiful, isn't it?)
Click to expand...

The missions were said to be peaceful. We place an LRRR on the surface of the moon that allowed us to target Russian cities with ICBMs more effectively than the Russians could target our cities.

Whether the missions were "hoaxed" or not, you now have to swallow the reality of LRRR military applications. So we did not go in Peace. And ironically, it would seem that I of all people am the one most comfortable with this. You all cannot stand the notion you were lied to about what they were doing, whether Neil Armstrong placed the LRRR, Joe Blow placed it , or a machine did it.

No matter twinstead, Apollo was military, at least in part, so live with it.
 
Maybe you should start a new thread about the military aspects of the Apollo, because this thread is about the missions being hoaxed, and we all know it is a FACT that they were not hoaxed.
 
Patrick1000 said:
I have little else to say. As you might imagine, 40 years out, the professors speak rather openly about this now, and shared more than just this with me. No big deal now, except for those who believe in Apollo's truth and non military intentions.

Contact the LRRR professors if/as you like. I for one will welcome it. Please, by all means confirm what I have learned. You are welcome to change their spelling or mine as you please. However, you will not be welcome to change their answers.
Click to expand...

Who did you contact?
 
Do you honestly think the Russians did not know what we were up to long before?

Do you honestly think the Russians did not know what we were up to long before?

Kennedy moon speech spring of 1961. Cuban missile crisis October 1962. Almost all laser and rocket science funded by the military. Lloyd Robinson at Lick Observatory said the LRRR experiment was the one and only time money was no object.

Moon race! You betcha'! Lot's at stake, and looks like it had to do with a little more than bragging rights.
 
Figure it out for yourself

phunk said:
Who did you contact?
Click to expand...

I will not disclose the name of one person whom I contacted. For obvious reasons. I would like to carry on my communications with all of them. You are free to do the same. As implied above, you'll get the same answers I did, I am sure. So have at it.
 
How interesting!

abaddon said:
Yup, apparently so. How sad.
Click to expand...

How interesting abaddon! That is the best you have, criticizing a spelling error. I suggest you get busy contacting a few astronomers about this issue. No matter, you will learn the same as I have, but this will allow you to bow out gracefully.

Over and out for a while. As I said to twinstead who is so enamored with the FACT of Apollo, what ever the FACTS, it was in part about blowing people up. so live with it abaddon. If I can, so can you.

Ciao!
 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
The missions were said to be peaceful. We place an LRRR on the surface of the moon that allowed us to target Russian cities with ICBMs more effectively than the Russians could target our cities.

Whether the missions were "hoaxed" or not, you now have to swallow the reality of LRRR military applications. So we did not go in Peace. And ironically, it would seem that I of all people am the one most comfortable with this. You all cannot stand the notion you were lied to about what they were doing, whether Neil Armstrong placed the LRRR, Joe Blow placed it , or a machine did it.

No matter twinstead, Apollo was military, at least in part, so live with it.
Click to expand...
Well you got a problem here. On the one hand you claim fake, but on the other hand you claim it was a covert military operation.

Do us all a favour and stick to one claim.
 
Patrick1000 said:
I have little else to say. As you might imagine, 40 years out, the professors speak rather openly about this now, and shared more than just this with me. No big deal now, except for those who believe in Apollo's truth and non military intentions.

Contact the LRRR professors if/as you like. I for one will welcome it. Please, by all means confirm what I have learned. You are welcome to change their spelling or mine as you please. However, you will not be welcome to change their answers.
Click to expand...

Utter bovine excrement
 
Debunk the professors

abaddon said:
They placed reflectors by satellite?

Credibility meet toilet, again.
Click to expand...

Let's start small abaddon. Why don't you begin by debunking the professors. They, the professors say, not PAtrick, the professors say, Apollo had military applications. And they say this for the explicit reason given above.

Prove them wrong, and leave me out of it big shot. If Apollo was other than you and NASA says, "utterly peaceful", then we on the HB side will be entitled to question the official story all the more and all the more and all the more.

So if you please abaddon, let's start small. Can you show the professors to be wrong? Can you prove to us all this was all peaceful as everyone at NASA and all of you say. Come on big shot, prove to me this wasn't about dropping a missile on the Kremlin. Have at it!

Why don't you give the public relations people at NASA a call for starters. I imagine they will be quite helpful when you inform them that a kooky person is writing that the Apollo 11 mission featured the placement of a weapons system piece upon the moon's surface and the kook claims a handful of astronomy professors who worked on the Apollo 11 LRRR project support his claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom