Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

Status
Not open for further replies.
matt.tansy said:
The only thing you have detailed in this entire thread is your lack of proper and thorough research. You have not even attempted to identify the man in Houston who passed the coordinates to Lick.
Click to expand...

Or indeed, when.
 
Patrick1000 said:
This analysis also provides one key to understanding how the flight dynamics people and the astronomers were fooled.
Click to expand...

Yes...because these highly trained scientists are so easily fooled....MORE CRAP.


Address the images, coward.
 
nomuse said:
Wait a minute. You are saying that flight officers and people who were working daily throughout the Apollo process with coordinates would be CONFUSED by conversion from dec to radian, or presentation of a coordinate plus an adjustment as versus a coordinate with the adjustment applied?

You mean, seriously, you think that the navigational specialists, some of the best spacecraft navigation people in the world at that time, couldn't do addition if it wasn't done for them?

Seriously?
Click to expand...

Since Patrick doesn't have a clue as to how these things are calculated, he expects everyone else to be as ignorant as himself.
 
It's like there is a syndrome beyond Dunning-Kruger where certain people believe that anything they can possibly imagine must be true. Reality just has to fitted around these obvious facts...

"There are 500 foot, pink and blue land crabs on the far side of the moon. This is proof that the LRO images have been tampered with. If they can remove these giant crabs then it is easy to fake the Apollo stuff."
"How do you know these crabs are there?"
"Well, duh, they wouldn't have to remove them from the LRO images if they weren't. Sheesh, you guys are so dumb."
 
That is exactly what I am saying.

nomuse said:
Wait a minute. You are saying that flight officers and people who were working daily throughout the Apollo process with coordinates would be CONFUSED by conversion from dec to radian, or presentation of a coordinate plus an adjustment as versus a coordinate with the adjustment applied?

You mean, seriously, you think that the navigational specialists, some of the best spacecraft navigation people in the world at that time, couldn't do addition if it wasn't done for them?

Seriously?


By the by, no matter how large your wall of text grows, it still rests a very shaky foundation; the unsubstantiated claim that Wampler had a certain set of arbitrary coordinates prior to the time you believe anyone else could have calculated them.

If you were actually interested in constructing an argument, as opposed to attempting to throwing up wads of convincing-looking but ultimately meaningless text in hopes of swaying your audience, you would show exactly WHEN Wampler got his information, and what it was, and demonstrate that you can show that from verifiable sources.
Click to expand...


The point being, it is a simple fact that the correction factors being added or subtrated is not discussed. Look at the records for yourself nomuse.

Do you see the correction factors discussed anywhere at all, even in the Trajectory Report, published March 16 1970? No, one does not find such a discussion anywhere.

One never reads in the first hand accounts given by flight people, the astronomers, the lunar scientists like Beattie, one never reads anywhere about this stuff. Just a tiny footnote in the Mission Report and most would miss it.

So, yes nomuse, that is exactly what I mean. Reed wasn't working with correction factors, nor the others. I see no evidence for that anywhere and I have read everything they have written publicly.

So if a flight officer is not told correction factors are or are not being used, he will think "2 different numbers" are truly different numbers, when in reality, such is not the case. They are the same numbers, simply with 2' 25' added north and 4' 17 " subtracted east. If the correction factors are not being openly discussed, then they are unknowns being added/subtracted "ad lib", when/as convienient. This is obviously what is going on, a prominent feature of the coordinate confusion scam.

What some of them were doing privately is obviously another matter. At least one person "effectively", perhaps not literally as there was foreknowledge and the numbers were known, added/subtrated the correction factors on to the flight officers' calculations to feed Wampler 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east.

Clearly some of the trajectory people are involved in the fraud. As we look at this more closely, the perpetrators will declare themselves through their inconsistencies as our friends the astronauts already have.

The story's internal incoherence provides our clues in terms of understanding the real "plot" and identifying some of the perps, albethey low level operators.
 
Last edited:
Because the correction factors are applied to working with one particular map.
Lunar coordinates change as mapping and photography improves.
 
AND the correction factors did apply in the case of the fraudulent Apollo 11 Mission.

drewid said:
Because the correction factors are applied to working with one particular map.
Lunar coordinates change as mapping and photography improves.
Click to expand...

AND the correction factors did apply in the case of the fraudulent Apollo 11 Mission.

So in the most important NASA/Apollo 11 document with respect to landing site concerns, the Apollo Mission 11 Trajectory Report of March 16 1970, the landing site best estimate is given as the post flight 16 mm film analysis. Those coordinates are given in the Trajectory Analysis as 0.647 north and 23.505 east.

Those coordinates are indeed for all intents and purposes 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east. But one would never know it. Not a breath about adding 2' 25" or the decimal equivalent 0.04 degrees and subtracting 4' 17" or the decimal equivalent 0.07 degrees. Just calculated silence with respect to this shuck and number jive.

A scam as transparent as real cislunar space should be to real starlight. But we are floating in the nonsense of Apollo fraudulent space-time, where people write 0.647 N and 23.505 E with the intention of hiding to the degree possible, the numbers being also the very 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east given to Joseph Wampler and the Lick Observatory team 11 days before NASA trajectory analysts "discovered" those very landing coordinates as their 0.647 N and 23.505 E exact landing site determination alias.
 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
AND the correction factors did apply in the case of the fraudulent Apollo 11 Mission.

So in the most important NASA/Apollo 11 document with respect to landing site concerns, the Apollo Mission 11 Trajectory Report of March 16 1970, the landing site best estimate is given as the post flight 16 mm film analysis. Those coordinates are given in the Trajectory Analysis as 0.647 north and 23.505 east.

Those coordinates are indeed for all intents and purposes 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east. But one would never know it. Not a breath about adding 2' 25" or the decimal equivalent 0.04 degrees and subtracting 4' 17" or the decimal equivalent 0.07 degrees. Just calculated silence with respect to this shuck and number jive.

A scam as transparent as real cislunar space should be to real starlight. But we are floating in the nonsense of Apollo fraudulent space-time, where people write 0.647 N and 23.505 E with the intention of hiding to the degree possible, the numbers being also the very 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east given to Joseph Wampler and the Lick Observatory team 11 days before NASA trajectory analysts "discovered" those very landing coordinates as their 0.647 N and 23.505 E exact landing site determination alias.
Click to expand...

[citation needed]
 
Patrick1000 said:
The point being, it is a simple fact that the correction factors being added or subtrated is not discussed. Look at the records for yourself nomuse.

Do you see the correction factors discussed anywhere at all, even in the Trajectory Report, published March 16 1970? No, one does not find such a discussion anywhere.

One never reads in the first hand accounts given by flight people, the astronomers, the lunar scientists like Beattie, one never reads anywhere about this stuff. Just a tiny footnote in the Mission Report and most would miss it.
So, yes nomuse, that is exactly what I mean. Reed wasn't working with correction factors, nor the others. I see no evidence for that anywhere and I have read everything they have written publicly.

So if a flight officer is not told correction factors are or are not being used, he will think "2 different numbers" are truly different numbers, when in reality, such is not the case. They are the same numbers, simply with 2' 25' added north and 4' 17 " subtracted east. If the correction factors are not being openly discussed, then they are unknowns being added/subtracted "ad lib", when/as convienient. This is obviously what is going on, a prominent feature of the coordinate confusion scam.

What some of them were doing privately is obviously another matter. At least one person "effectively", perhaps not literally as there was foreknowledge and the numbers were known, added/subtrated the correction factors on to the flight officers' calculations to feed Wampler 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east.

Clearly some of the trajectory people are involved in the fraud. As we look at this more closely, the perpetrators will declare themselves through their inconsistencies as our friends the astronauts already have.

The story's internal incoherence provides our clues in terms of understanding the real "plot" and identifying some of the perps, albethey low level operators.
Click to expand...

???
 
twinstead said:
Seriously. A broken record about how one of the highest achievements and most documented projects in human history was all just a clever fake.

Moon hoaxers are tantamount to watching paint dry.
Click to expand...

Worse, paint will eventually dry.
 
Just for fun, imagine for a moment Patrick had really uncovered a vast conspiracy. First you need to suspend your disbelief: imagine that all the things Patrick doesn't know about Apollo aren't known by anyone else either. Well, try, at least.

What a tragedy that the only person to stumble on the amazing truth turns out to be incapable of expressing his evidence in a sufficiently coherent manner, so nobody can see the brilliance of his discovery and consequently nobody believes him. So the fraudsters get away with it, until decades from now another mission discovers a whole bunch of retro-style sooper seekrit spy equipment instead of the LM descent stage etc at one of the "Apollo" landing sites.

Tragic story, bro.
 
well hasn't this thread progressed well?

I've learned a bucketload more about Apollo 11 from the posts here - the diversity of careers and experience in this forum is frankly amazing. Thanks to all who contributed.

Alas, the OP continues to post misdirection and lies, judging from the responses. At least with him on "ignore" I don't have to wade through it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom