• 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.
It is a big issue godless dave because it is a risky lie

Why is that a huge issue? Maybe he didn't read that part of the book.Maybe you're mis-remembering what you read.



I would imagine it would depend on which direction they were looking and the angle of the sun at the time they were looking. Keep in mind Armstrong and Shepard were on different missions with different landing sites. I still don't understand why it's relevant to anything.

It is a big issue godless dave because it is a risky lie. To say one cannot see stars from cislunar space or the surface of the moon is of course absurd. A huge lie, preposterous. So it is a huge issue because to take such a risk, to throw out there something that is so obviously untrue, is to tip one's hand and acknowledge that this huge lie must be covering an equally huge truth, a truth about the Apollo mission fraud.. Such a huge risk means there was tremendous motivation. This big lie is indeed a big clue, a big clue, if we are smart enough to follow it well.

Think about it godless dave, the Apollo 11 astronauts flew almost 3 whole days, 200,000 miles, through cislunar space and claimed to have never seen stars until here, at 02 23 56 35 of the voice transcript as quoted below. They are claiming to be on top of a moon which is now eclipsing the sun, 200,000 miles from home? The Apollo 11 Voice Transcript;

Time: 02 23 56 35

"CC: Roger. Understand that you can see the corona approximately 200 solar diameters out along the ecliptic, and the bright light extends out approximately one-eighth to one-quarter lunar radius. Over.

CDR: That's two lunar - two lunar diameters along the ecliptic in the bright part, right; a quarter to an eighth of a lunar radius out, and that's perpendicular to the ecliptic line on the South Pole.

CC: Roger.

CDR: Houston, it's been a real change for us. Now we are able to see stars again and recognize constellations for the first time on the trip. It's the sky is full of stars. Just like the nightside of Earth. But all the way here, we have only been able to see stars occasionally and perhaps through the monocular, but not recognize any star patterns.

CC: I guess it has turned into night up there really, hasn't it?

CDR: Really has."

Has it really Neil???? Can't say I buy it.

So apart from sighting stars through their optics for navigation/platform alignment, they don't see stars, none, until 3 days in as above.

Why tell such a big lie? And we know it is a big lie godless dave because back in 1969 , 1970 and the early Apollo days, they were ever so adamant about this point, NO STARS! Then when some time passed and the coast was sorta' clear, they changed their story, turned around and said they could see stars after all, a la' the MOON SHOT book jive, just as discussed above.

To try and maintain that lie in this day and age wouldn't wash, even little kids, literally, little kids know this stuff, know that observers would be able to see stars from the surface of the moon, and even better than an observer could see them from our own earth.

From NASA's own web site, LUNAR SCIENCE FOR KIDS




So it turns out the Apollo 11 astronauts pretended not to be able to see stars because if they could see stars, well then they could see laser light as well, and as I have pointed out above, admitting to their being able to see laser light would have meant big trouble for the not so very Eagle scouts, and the exposure of all Apollo Missions as fraudulent.

Neil Armstrong's ophthalmologic evaluation showed vision to be better than 20/20.

Diagnosis; No star claims bogus. Mission fraudulent!
 
Last edited:
Patrick, you haven't even established that anyone lied. Nobody claimed astronauts could not see stars from the moon's surface in every possible circumstance.
 
Think about it...

That's the point...we HAVE thought about it, and find that you are almost criminally ignorant.

Why don't you go to a board where the "standards" are lower...like godlikeproductions.

You'd be right at home there.
 
What an ass that guy was...:)
Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.
 
It is a huge issue. Neil Armstrong said in 1969 that he did not see stars from the surface of the moon, but then he turned around and strongly endorsed a book written 25 years later wherein his bosses claimed it was easy for all of the astronauts to see stars.

Armstrong didn't see them, at least one other astronaut did. Since Armstrong never said it was impossible where's the dichotomy?
 
Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.

Can't you guess? He started making cracks about the LRO imaging 'Armstrong's dirty diapers' and was immediately unmasked. He just can't break his scatalogical obsession.
 
Sure it's proven

Patrick, you haven't even established that anyone lied. Nobody claimed astronauts could not see stars from the moon's surface in every possible circumstance.

Armstrong's statement is historic, etched in phony lunar stone, he said AT NO TIME did he or the other Apollo 11 astronaut(s) see stars from the surface of the moon. Maybe he did not "lie", but the astronauts collectively sure did change their minds. Just ask the astronauts' friend, Jay Barbree, the "reputable Apollo journalist of 50 years". He wrote that the astronauts told him they could EASILY see stars afterall. Wrote the astronauts could see stars at least twice. Neil Armstrong said that AT NO TIME did he or Aldrin see stars from the surface of the moon. Doesn't sound so EASY to me, what Neil Armstrong said. Maybe it is not a "lie", but let's not nit pick, it's sufficiently incriminating to celebrate proof of fraud.
 
Last edited:
Satrs or no stars RAF

Only because you have this compulsion to make a fool of yourself...other than that, no...you're not important at all...

What do you think R.A.F., stars or no stars? Is Neil correct or Alan Shepard?
 
Last edited:
stars or no stars

Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.

Is Neil correct drewid , or Alan Shepard? By the way, has Charles Berry got back to you on your aerosolized poop in his house proposal? Get back to us all here as soon as you can with your report, we certainly don't want anyone thinking Berry is incompetent.
 
Last edited:
What do you thin R.A.F., stars or no stars? Is Neil correct or Alan Shepard?

You realize asking that question over and over won't change the answer you've been given before right? Oh and condolences on Highgain but let's be honest everyone knew you wouldn't be able to rein in the stupidity forever so it was just a matter of time.
 
Armstrong didn't see them, at least one other astronaut did. Since Armstrong never said it was impossible where's the dichotomy?

Not only Armstrong , Colins and Aldrin said no stars too. BUT Alan Shepard says stars are EASY to see , EASY to see just like the scientists say stars would be EASY to see from the surface of the moon, the REAL NASA scientists that maintain the Lunar Science for Kids website.

 
Last edited:
What answer would that be Neil Armstrong's or Alan Shepard's or their lap dog Jay's

You realize asking that question over and over won't change the answer you've been given before right? Oh and condolences on Highgain but let's be honest everyone knew you wouldn't be able to rein in the stupidity forever so it was just a matter of time.

What answer would that be Garrison? Since there are several answers given by the astronauts to the same question, I am confused. Neil Armstrong's answer, "no stars"? Alan Shepard's answer, "see stars EASILY"? or Jay Barbree the Apollo lap dog's answer? Which one , which answer should I pick Garrison? I am still confused. Wish the astronauts and their lap dogs would stick with one, one answer, shouldn't be hard, you think???????.........
 
Last edited:
Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.

You can try here if you need a chuckle. Patrick1000/fattydash/HighGain/DoctorTea/BFischer/BSpassky/mvinson/piersquared/maryb/sicilian/etc. rather incontinently reverted to his obsession with eliminatory functions (who knows? perhaps his toilet training went badly? or perhaps is a work in progress?) and was banned for sock-puppetry.

He's a prolific liar, but due to his immaturity, ego, and general incompetence, not a very good one; in addition to serial lying to register yet another sock-puppet, he claimed to have little interest in Apollo, and not long before had said he'd "attended a small ad hoc symposium on Quantum Cosmology". I guess that's what you call chatting with the other workers at McDonald's while waiting for the deep fryer to do its thing.
 
Did the Apollo 11 astronauts see, or did they not see, stars from the surface of the moon?

Geez.. is Poopapalooza over?? I'd guess that Neil and Buzz had a MISSION to complete in a short time.. therefore, they didn't have the time to gawk skyward in their bulky suits and try to see stars.. they used stars for mechanical alignment and reference anyways with the AOT.. they probably had enough of stars anyways and were focused on the lunar surface and their duties. What's so difficult to comprehend about that?
 
Nothing is difficult, so why change your story?

Geez.. is Poopapalooza over?? I'd guess that Neil and Buzz had a MISSION to complete in a short time.. therefore, they didn't have the time to gawk skyward in their bulky suits and try to see stars.. they used stars for mechanical alignment and reference anyways with the AOT.. they probably had enough of stars anyways and were focused on the lunar surface and their duties. What's so difficult to comprehend about that?


Nothing is difficult, so why change your story? Collins made a big point about why it is/was that one cannot see stars from cislunar space. Why say that, why tell that lie unless there is something huge behind it?

Children know Collins is wrong. So why would the pilot of the Columbia simulator lead kids astray like that? Of course they have the Lunar Science for Kids Web site now, a web site run by reputable NASA scientists, but back in the day, back in the day when Collins wrote his book CARRYING THE FIRE, about the epic mission of the Apollo 11 simulator "Columbinot", children did not have such good resources. They might actually believe that an observer could not dark adapt and look out the windows, maybe even when trying to crack a window to escape the simulated stench, and not see stars.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom