Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

Status
Not open for further replies.
nomuse said:
Unlike a certain poster, I am actually traveling and may not be back to this thread for a couple of weeks. I say this just in case a certain poster decides to declare he has "run me off" and proclaims victory with each day that goes by without a new reply.

May get one or two more posts in before the flight. Which does have an actual gate time.
Click to expand...

When you get back you can tell young Pat all about catching a plane. It will be a new experience for him.
 
Patrick1000 said:
The Eagle's descent trajectory and landing site analysis can be found in the APOLLO MISSION 11, TRAJECTORY RECONSTRUCTION AND POSTFLIGHT ANALYSIS VOLUME 1, March 16 1970. Emil Scheisser was the mathematician/trajectory analyst primarily responsible for the work that appears here.

On page 7-64(page 75 overall of the report) we read that the 16mm photographic film analysis of the LM trajectory gave the analysts what they thought was the best estimate(BET) of the landing site coordinates. These coordinate numbers; 0.647 N and 23.505 E, were not available in real-time(07/20/1969), not available to NASA/Houston/Apollo Program personal until well after the astronauts returned from their "journey". Specifically, Scheisser and colleagues did not determine these to be the landing site best estimate/BET until days after the "Apollo 11 capsule splashdown", July 24 1969.

Here are the lines from the trajectory report in which Scheisser and colleagues endorse these coordinates as the best Eagle landing site coordinate estimate, page 7-64(page 75 overall);

"Note that both the BET #3 and the Onboard/MSFN H-S estimates are very close to the 16mm photo graphic estimate (accepted as the best estimate).
Since the data type being examined is a velocity measurement, it is most important that the reference trajectory be virtually free of velocity errors in the data arc. The onboard/MSFN H-S trajectory contains a large velocity error at landing where the BET #3 was constructed in such a manner that the velocities were zero at landing. Therefore, the BET #3 was chosen as the basic reference upon which to base the analysis of landing radar velocity residuals."




(The onboard/MSFN H-S coordinates listed in the Trajectory analysis Coordinate Table 7.11 are 0.655 N and 23.515 E)

The BET coordinates discussed in this section of the Trajectory Analysis Report were presented in an earlier NASA document, the Apollo 11 Mission Report, this published in November of 1969. As in the later published Trajectory Analysis Report of March 1970, the non-real-time photography determined/16mm film analysis coordinates of the November 1969 Apollo 11 Mission Report are listed in table 5-IV as 0.647 and 23.505. just as they appear in the Trajectory Report document.
As per the Mission Report, when these coordinates, expressed in the minutes/seconds of arc format, 00 38' 49" is the minutes/seconds of arc equivalent to 0.647 degrees, and 23 30' 18" is the minutes/seconds of arc equivalent to 23.505 degrees, are corrected per footnote "a)" of the Mission Report Table(quote of all 3 footnotes so appearing);

"a) Following the Apollo 10 mission, a difference was noted (from the landmark tracking results) between the trajectory coordinate system and the coordinate system on the reference map. In order to reference trajectory values to the l:100 000 scale Lunar Map ORB-II-6 (lO0), dated December 1967, correction factors of plus 2'25" in latitude and minus 4'17" in longitude must be applied to the trajectory values.

b)All latitude values are corrected for the estimated out-of-plane position error at powered descent initiation.

c) These coordinate values are referenced to the map and include the correction factors."



those corrections, as per footnote "a)" yield a 16mm postflight best landing site estimate of 00 41' 14" north and 23 26" 01' east.


The Apollo 11 Mission Report lists 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east as the trajectory to map correction adjusted postflight best estimate Eagle landing coordinates. We may view these solutions as equivalent for the case/matter at hand. 00 41' 15" and 00 41' 14" differ by 27 feet. From 240,000 miles away, they are an exact match. Likewise for the east coordinates 23 26' 01" and 23 26' 00".

Professor Wampler and the Lick Observatory Staff were given 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east on the very night of the landing, just shortly after the LRRR was set down. Yet the trajectory specialists, Emil Scheisser and colleagues, determining the landing site BET/best estimate did not have these numbers, by way of 16mm trajectory analysis until well after 07/24/1969. None of the real-time estimates discussed/listed in the Mission Report and Trajectory Analysis Report are similarly close to these numbers.

Lick Observatory had the numbers on the evening of 07/20, yet NASA claims the numbers were not known until after 07/24 when the Eagle trajectory 16mm film could be studied. We conclude, the Eagle's landing site was known before the Eagle even landed, as there was foreknowledge of the landing coordinates.

We conclude, someone inside of "NASA" but outside the formally acknowledged Apollo Program group, knew the landing site coordinates on the evening of the landing many days before they were said to have been determined by photo analysis, and so, this person was party to the Apollo 11 fraud. Based on this alone, we recognize the Apollo 11 trajectory data as fraudulent and the Mission fraudulent.

We shall quibble about rocks and pictures/photos later. Given the telemetry fraudulence and therefore Apollo 11 Mission fraudulence, we know the rocks were not brought back to the earth from the moon by astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin, though conceivably they are moon rocks. We also know given the fraudulence of the telemetry data and therefore the Apollo 11 Mission in general, all of the photography from the lunar surface is fraudulent. It was not taken by genuine moon walkers.
Our analysis of the coordinate data allows us to say these things with supreme confidence. They are in no way points of contention. They are not matters/issues in dispute.
Click to expand...

Can you get verbal Imodium for verbal diarrhoea?
 
If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with ********.

That doesn’t work here P1K.
 
Well it was fun while it lasted but it appears the Black Knight has run out of daft ideas and declared a draw. Condescention may well be the last shot in his locker.

Welcome to the real world, Patrick. Take a look around; it's fascinating. It's so much cooler than a fantasy land where grand adventures like Apollo don't happen.
 
"Well Mr President, we need to get a LRRR mirror on the moon so we can target our missiles , and we need to do it before those damn Ruskies"

"But we can already target our missiles "

"Yes Sir, but we can target them better"

"Well ok, I guess, So you have a proposal for this?"

"Yes sir , we're going to build a heavy lift vehicle, over ten year programme, that can carry a crew of three and a whole bunch of kit to the moon"

"So it's a manned mission"

"No sir, but we need all the guys building the equipment to think so"

"Why? since it will be capable of taking a crew, why don't we send a crew?"

"So it'll be a secret"

"So we're going to put a bunch of experiments out so we can sneak in the mirror without telling anyone, Then the Ruskies won't be able to find it."

"Well we figured we'd tell the whole world, and broadcast the coordinates
live"

"How does that make any sense?"

"..."
 
Last edited:
Moon as Military Satellite, A little Insincerity Never Hurt

Look, even before Project Diana, military people had been talking about about bouncing electromagnetic rays off the moon. An actual moon relay system "COMMUNICATION MOON RELAY" was regularly employed to send messages from Washington D.C. to Hawaii/Pearl Harbor until 1960 or so, probably later. There is no secret with regard to this stuff.

People think that just because artificial satellites became available in the 60s, the military would give up on using the moon. No way, its got way way way way too many advantages as a military platform.

So the Russians and Americans park stuff up there for ranging, locating, communication purposes, and they sign a no weapons in space treaty in 1967 to pretend like nothing is going on.

This is all so obvious, it strains credulity that anyone would doubt it now.



You have got to be sneaky to survive, especially in a Cold War. Nothing like a little measured insincerity, calculated breaking of no weapons in space treaties, can go an awful long way toward protecting us. Especially when the Russians are doing it, and did it first.

"A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal"






 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
So the Russians and Americans park stuff up there for ranging, locating, communication purposes, and they sign a no weapons in space treaty in 1967 to pretend like nothing is going on.
Click to expand...

For whom are they pretending? Is it simply to keep the Duchy of Grand Fenwick in the dark?
 
So how'd "they" keep it secret so well and so long? And, to quote Peter Sellers' character in Dr. Strange love:

"Deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of the enemy... the FEAR to attack.... So why did you keep it a secret, why didn't you tell the WORLD, eh?!"
 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
You have got to be sneaky to survive, especially in a Cold War. Nothing like a little measured insincerity, calculated breaking of no weapons in space treaties, can go an awful long way toward protecting us. Especially when the Russians are doing it, and did it first.
Click to expand...

So they told the Russians they were going to put a LRRR up there rather than not mentioning it.

Very sneaky.
 
"Nations have their ego, just like individuals"





And, nations can well be embarrassed, to their detriment, just like individuals.

Weapons in space was/is a no no. Congress did not approve and would not approve, as they would not openly approve today. This is not rocket science, and neither was Apollo at its most fundamental level.

How many people do you think would feel comfortable knowing weapons system components are parked on the moon?

Of course they are going to try and keep this hush hush.
 
Last edited:
Made sense once upon a time , now counter productive

SUSpilot said:
Who is "they"?
Click to expand...


"Half of the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don't mean to do harm. But the harm does not interest them."




Same guys that didn't tell you about the sub cat and mouse until that was over, "sorta", probably not over really. But we do know at least a tad about that one now.

Look, I would do the same if I was a military person. Park the stuff on the moon and shut up about it. It makes perfect sense to me. I see nothing wrong with it.

Sorta' dumb to try and keep it a secret now though , given how obvious it is to us all. Sorta' counterproductive wouldn't ya' say?
 
Last edited:
Um, I don't think putting passive mirrors on the Moon, even if they are used to refine targeting, counts as weaponizing space, any more than GPS satellites do (originally used for the Trident system).

Keep throwing spaghetti at the wall, kiddo.

Btw, it's about midnight in New Delhi. You should try to get some sleep...
 
Cat and mouse game between Soviet and US submarine forces was a well known fact back when I was in high school (1969-1973) Details weren't described, of course, but it was known.

Try again.
 
Awwwwwwh comm'on now SusPilot, don't you think they were fibbing??

SUSpilot said:
Um, I don't think putting passive mirrors on the Moon, even if they are used to refine targeting, counts as weaponizing space, any more than GPS satellites do (originally used for the Trident system).

Keep throwing spaghetti at the wall, kiddo.

Btw, it's about midnight in New Delhi. You should try to get some sleep...
Click to expand...

"Lies are essential to humanity. They are perhaps as important as the pursuit of pleasure and moreover are dictated by that pursuit."



Awwwwwwh comm'on now SusPilot, don't you think they were fibbing?? Do you honestly think they flew that great big fat Saturn V into the air just to park a teensy weensy little ol' mirror on the moon? Don't ya' think they parked something a little bigger and fatter than that?

Bet they got more up there than you ever dreamed of. Those were pretty big rockets they used. Could launch a pretty big satellite, something as big as a LM even.

We don't know half of what went on with the subs, or goes on with them today. We are an uniformed public and not because we are not interested.
 
Last edited:
It is interesting to me that, Pattydash's world, he's gone from seeing some sort of evil cabal to a benign military that is protecting us, but keeping it secret for our own good.

I only have a BA in psychology, so I'll let someone make a guess as to what kind of behavior or syndrome this might be.
 
The sort of world where it makes sense to put secret hardware somewhere then tell everyone about it.

Stupidworld.
 
I wonder if Patrick could tie some of the stuff left on the moon in with the beam weapon hitting WTC?
 
Well in that last one he's suggesting that some sort of "proper" weapon was placed instead of an LM.

Perhaps the Judy Woods beam weapon, or a pink unicorn gun, very dangerous.

That's what is so amusing about Pat, occasionally he posts something that might actually form the basis of an argument, then rather than consolidating he runs off, head down, feet pumping, straight into a big fat wall of wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom