Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[SUSpilot]

Are you building an osmotic bomb?

It would be nice if we had old Harry Purvis here to dismember Patrick, a la "What Goes Up".

 

[Patrick1000]

Good example below mrbusdriver

Patrick...a question if I may...

This argon laser which was "shining" on Neil and Buzz...how long did it shine on the site? A few seconds? 20 seconds? A minute?
Your answer would be appreciated.

Good example above mrbusdriver. It is a cislunar space example, but they had good optics, 28 power sextant. That even might be dangerous eye safety wise, were the thing real. Pretty dumb to look right at a laser with a 28 power optic don't ya' think mrbusdriver? I do!. Anyway, from the Voice transcript at 01 11 25 49, you might be able to get an idea how long they were doing this. I'll check it out too, but no time now. Should be straight forward though. That example anyway.

 

[Patrick1000]

Problem is not just with Apollo 11 but 12, 13 ,14 .....

Patrick...a question if I may...

This argon laser which was "shining" on Neil and Buzz...how long did it shine on the site? A few seconds? 20 seconds? A minute?
Your answer would be appreciated.

And remember mrbusdriver, the problem is not just with Apollo 11 but with 12, 13 ,14 ..... and so on.

If Neil Armstrong comes back and says he saw stars, saw lasers, then the scientists are going to want Alan Bean to take a picture of them, take a picture of the laser light from El Paso, the next time up. Only makes sense.

So you have to deny this stuff from the get go, so no one gets any funny ideas and asks Alan to take a pic. Just to be sure, just for insurance, Alan breaks the Apollo 12 tv camera as soon as he steps out onto the lunar surface. That way, no one can hold him accountable for what he should have seen and perhaps imaged, including laser light.

Also, there are other reasons why the astronauts deny stars. The laser issue is but one. It is a good one , but there are other reasons as well.

 

[mrbusdriver]

Why take pictures of the laser while on the Moon? And were they even looking for stars while on the Moon? It would have taken time and a concerted effort, considering the bright surface reflections.

I don't see a problem. They had a relatively brief stay on the surface, each minute carefully choreographed for mission tasks. That they didn't have time to dark adapt, then look for stars doesn't surprise me in the least. They were the first frikkin humans on the Moon, and on a very tight schedule! "Stars, schmars...we're on the MOON!!! I can see stars when I get home!!"

Meanwhile, how long were those laser pulses while they were on the surface? Not other missions...the Apollo 11 shots while they were on the surface. Hint...you've been given the answer, many, many pages ago...

 

[Patrick1000]

They were lost were they not? Take a picture to find them!

Why take pictures of the laser while on the Moon? And were they even looking for stars while on the Moon? It would have taken time and a concerted effort, considering the bright surface reflections.

I don't see a problem. They had a relatively brief stay on the surface, each minute carefully choreographed for mission tasks. That they didn't have time to dark adapt, then look for stars doesn't surprise me in the least. They were the first frikkin humans on the Moon, and on a very tight schedule! "Stars, schmars...we're on the MOON!!! I can see stars when I get home!!"

Meanwhile, how long were those laser pulses while they were on the surface? Not other missions...the Apollo 11 shots while they were on the surface. Hint...you've been given the answer, many, many pages ago...

The astronauts were said to be lost, were they not mrbusdriver? If you shine an argon laser at coordinates 00 41 15 north and 23 26 00 east and Armstrong says, "yes I see it!", or people back on earth see the laser light in the Apollo 11 lunar surface camera tv image, well then you have found them, and have found the LRRR for targeting with the Lick Observatory ruby red laser as well.

So, mrbusdriver, consider this, the Lick Observatory Staff are trying to find the LRRR and Tranquility Base. David Reed is trying to find Tranquility Base. A successful Eagle launch from the lunar surface depends on Reed's at least understanding/determining where the LM is in relation to the CSM. Reed wrote in his first person account of the Mission Control goings on the morning of 07/21/1969 that the launch solution would be a "piece of cake really", if only he had the Eagle's coordinates.

So why not at least try and find the Eagle , find Armstrong with the McDonald Observatory/El Paso light? If Neil sees it, BINGO!!! If it turns up on the tv picture when the camera is pointed a the earth, BINGO!!!!!

By the way, why didn't they ever point the camera at the earth from the surface of the moon? Betcha' it had everything to do with just what we are talking about here.

Diagnosis; Tranquility Truancy

Punishment; Three cracks across the fanny apiece for Armstrong/Aldrin/Collins with a wooden slide rule no less, from Sister Mary Super Nova upon the astronuats' simulated return to earth.

 

[Patrick1000]

Star phobia and laser fright

I'm looking out of my window now and I can't see any stars, I guess the Earth must be a big fake.

But there were times in the simulated cislunar journey when they canned the lights for sleep, or stopped the PTC for star sightings and so forth. Times when the "navigator", the command module pilot, would want to be dark adapted to sight stars through the scanning scope.

Never stars, never, drewid? That is what Neil Armstrong said. He said "AT NO TIME" did they see stars form the surface of the moon.... Funny that is not what professional astronomers say.

David Kornreich then of Cornell, now at Humbolt;




NASA's own Eric Christian;





Deke Slayton and Alan Shepard say observers, "MOONWALKERS" no less, EASILY see stars drewid.

So who is correct? Neil no stars? or Kornreich, Christian, Slayton, Shepard, yes stars, and even EASILY seen?

What do you think drewid?

 

[Patrick1000]

I like it too tsig!

Ridiculous rocks!

I like it too tsig!

 

[Patrick1000]

How about the 240,000 mile ride across cislunar space?

Using the onboard optics, sure - P57 requires aligning the platform using star sightings. Buzz performed this with the window shades up to prevent stray light from ruining his night vision.




(Aldrin performs another P57 alignment before takeoff)

There is no mention of the stars in the EVA transcript. Not surprising, given the lighting conditions and that they kept their visors down for the most part. Besides, they were busy looking at the moon.

How about the 240,000 mile ride across cislunar space?

 

[Patrick1000]

When light are on, no stars, when out for a while, stars.

Did you see, or did you not see, stars from your living room when you turned on all the lights and looked out of the window?

When light are on, no stars, when out for a while, stars. there were many times during the simulated cislunar journey when the lights were canned and the windows shuttered. Specifically when the astronauts were sleeping. times when the star sighting navigator woul;d want to get dark adapted and stop the PTC. They never once saw a star constellation with their naked eyes the whole way across cislunar space until 3 days in and they tried to photograph the solar corona.

They never saw stars from the surface of the moon Jack by the hedge. that is not what they told Jay Barbree. He wrote the MOONWALKING astronauts told him that it was easy to see stars. Is he wrong Jack by the hedge? Is Jay Barbree lying? Did the astronauts really not tell him that they saw stars?

What do you think?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

When light are on, no stars, when out for a while, stars.

Then you have your answer. All a great big fuss about nothing. I guess you feel pretty foolish now. That's OK - I'm sure it hasn't changed anyone's opinion of you.

 

[SUSpilot]

WE ARE NOT GOING TO LET YOU SQUIRM OUT OF THIS DREWID.

Who's "we"? I'm not a moderator, but as far as I can determine, there is only one person arguing in favor of a hoax in this thread, Patrick, unless you're tacitly admitting that you're more than one person.

Don't be presumptive: I, for one, find that far more annoying than someone using a synonym for "donkey".

 

[Patrick1000]

We is me and my fellow hoax enthusiasts SUSpilot.

Who's "we"? I'm not a moderator, but as far as I can determine, there is only one person arguing in favor of a hoax in this thread, Patrick, unless you're tacitly admitting that you're more than one person.

Don't be presumptive: I, for one, find that far more annoying than someone using a synonym for "donkey".

We is me and my fellow hoax enthusiasts SUSpilot. Of course I know you think other than as I do.

 

[Patrick1000]

No, my point is there is a contradiction

Then you have your answer. All a great big fuss about nothing. I guess you feel pretty foolish now. That's OK - I'm sure it hasn't changed anyone's opinion of you.

Neil Armstrong says no stars, Shepard says yes stars.

Neil Armstrong says no stars. Professional astronomers say yes stars.

I throw my lot in with the professional astronomers like David Kornreich of Cornell/Humbolt and Eric Christian of NASA. I agree with them, yes one would be able to see stars in cislunar space and from the surface of the moon once appropriately dark adapted. And see argon lasers for that matter, assuming the laser was operating continuously and sufficiently powerful. Stars and lasers go together and I say yes to both.

I think Neil Armstrong lied about the stars, lied about not being able to see them. It was a funny lie because he was never there, never there on the surface of the moon, never there in cislunar space, never in those places to actually deny seeing stars in a meaningful way.

Armstrong was truant, Tranquility Truant.

So that is what I think Jack by the hedge.

 

[drewid]

What do you think drewid?

I think that either myself, or someone else, will go back and find the original texts you're hacking those quotes from and put them up here.

I think that at that point everyone will see that you are quote-mining, misquoting, taking things out of context, mistaken or just plain wrong.

Based on your previous behaviour I think that at that point you will either
a) move the goalposts, B) change the subject, c) throw a hissy fit or D) some combination of those.

I think you're just another HB, and as significant as all other HB's, that is to say not at all.

I think you ought to spend less time looking at this and more time looking at your homework assignments, or mom will be disappointed with your grades.

I think that this, like all your other posts, is a tale, told by yourself, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

and right now I think I'll go and have a cup of tea and crack on with some work.

 

[godless dave]

It sounds like Neil Armstrong didn't see stars from the surface, while astronauts on later missions did.

So What?

 

[Mouldy Cheeses]

Hmmm

Recent news items showing pictures of the lunar landing sites ... taken by craft circling the moon... have been shown on several news sites... with links to hi res versions of the pictures.

So if this is the evidence man DID land on the moon ...isn't this thread now irrelevant..???

Of course... they are photoshop images...... that will be the arguement now. (yawn)...

 

[twinstead]

Hmmm

Recent news items showing pictures of the lunar landing sites ... taken by craft circling the moon... have been shown on several news sites... with links to hi res versions of the pictures.

So if this is the evidence man DID land on the moon ...isn't this thread now irrelevant..???

Of course... they are photoshop images...... that will be the arguement now. (yawn)...

You could physically strap people like Patrick in a spacecraft, travel to the moon, land at any of the landing sites and allow him to suit up and walk out and actually touch the equipment that was left behind, and he still wouldn't believe you. He'd say the equipment was planted afterwards, or he was drugged with a substance that makes one hallucinate moon landings.

 

[Patrick1000]

Armstrong and the stars

I think that either myself, or someone else, will go back and find the original texts you're hacking those quotes from and put them up here.

I think that at that point everyone will see that you are quote-mining, misquoting, taking things out of context, mistaken or just plain wrong.

Based on your previous behaviour I think that at that point you will either
a) move the goalposts, B) change the subject, c) throw a hissy fit or D) some combination of those.

I think you're just another HB, and as significant as all other HB's, that is to say not at all.

I think you ought to spend less time looking at this and more time looking at your homework assignments, or mom will be disappointed with your grades.

I think that this, like all your other posts, is a tale, told by yourself, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

and right now I think I'll go and have a cup of tea and crack on with some work.

The Armstrong quotes are legendary. They are already in this thread. Would give you a link, but can't now. Google video search or Youtube search; "Neil Armstrong, interview, Patrick Moore BBC, 1970". Also search Apollo 11 post flight press conference. The Armstrong statement, "WE AT NO TIME...." is 40 some odd minutes into the thing.

This is pretty mainstream stuff drewid. You are going to have a hard time convincing your own peers, your own official story apologist colleagues, that Armstrong does anything but endorse the didn't see stars view.

The Patrick Moore interview from 1970 is particularly revealing. Armstrong really comes across as making an unqualified statement. cislunar space is black and one only sees the earth, the sun and the moon floating in it.

It is at the heart of the fraud, this issue.

 

[Garrison]

The Armstrong quotes are legendary. They are already in this thread. Would give you a link, but can't now. Google video search or Youtube search; "Neil Armstrong, interview, Patrick Moore BBC, 1970". Also search Apollo 11 post flight press conference. The Armstrong statement, "WE AT NO TIME...." is 40 some odd minutes into the thing.

This is pretty mainstream stuff drewid. You are going to have a hard time convincing your own peers, your own official story apologist colleagues, that Armstrong does anything but endorse the didn't see stars view.

The Patrick Moore interview from 1970 is particularly revealing. Armstrong really comes across as making an unqualified statement. cislunar space is black and one only sees the earth, the sun and the moon floating in it.

It is at the heart of the fraud, this issue.

This is pathetic, Armstong doesn't see stars, almost as if his attention were entirely on some other activity, later Astronauts with more mission time and inclination did. You can stamp your feet all you want Patrick/DoctorTea/Highgain/Fattydash. there's no mystery here, no contradiction, just you repeating the same comedy routine far too often.

 

[Patrick1000]

Alan Bean didn't see stars

It sounds like Neil Armstrong didn't see stars from the surface, while astronauts on later missions did.

So What?

Alan Bean didn't see stars.

So what? It is simply not true. One would be able to see stars from the surface of the moon.

So what? Well, the response to the "what" is that people do not tell huge lies like this unless they are cornered or there is a huge payoff or both. Too easy to get caught, and they did get caught.

So what? We use our realization that with such a big lie come big motivation to understand the nature of the fraud, the logistics, the fraud's features.

No stars means no lasers. That is the motivation, no lasers. So now we know what this was about in part, lasers.

The lie serves as a clue to the fraud's dynamic, the no laser dynamic.