• 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 HARD EVIDENCE...

The map itself is hard evidence. But the case you've built on it is not hard evidence, but rather it is ignorant interpretation. Just because the map is an objective physical artifact doesn't mean that the hysterical handwaving you've piled on top of it inherits that same rigor.

How is this any different from any of the other points you raised, styled as "irrefutable" proof, and then walked away from after it was determined that you simply didn't know what you were talking about? Haven't you learned by now? You aren't a very good judge of what's refutable and irrefutable, except through denial.
 
Oh my! Isn't this interesting, JayUtah, the "Sword of Apollo Truth" on the run!

The map itself is hard evidence. But the case you've built on it is not hard evidence, but rather it is ignorant interpretation. Just because the map is an objective physical artifact doesn't mean that the hysterical handwaving you've piled on top of it inherits that same rigor.

How is this any different from any of the other points you raised, styled as "irrefutable" proof, and then walked away from after it was determined that you simply didn't know what you were talking about? Haven't you learned by now? You aren't a very good judge of what's refutable and irrefutable, except through denial.

Oh my! Isn't this interesting, JayUtah, the "Sword of Apollo Truth" on the run!

Have we ever seen such a sight in our lives!? Nothing, zero, nadda' with regard to an objective response from Jay. Not a thing!

Now how now brown cow may I ask, who is doing the hand waving here? Why it is none other than the "Sword of Apollo Truth" himself, JayUtah.

I'd suggest you get on the phone with Emil Schiesser right now Jay, if you have that kind of pull. You guys are goin' down my friend.

Joy to the world! The moon is not unspoiled in the sense that it is indeed instrumented, but still, the orb remains proud and retains some self respect, for we know Armstrong never set a real boot down upon that mark there at LAM 2 map site J .65 / 7.52 .

Edited to remove breaches.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Patrick, when somebody who doesn't know what they are talking about refuses to listen to those who do, "you don't know what you're talking about, now go away" is all that is left to say. It's what one says to a petulant child who insists that the moon is made of cheese, and will not listen to reason.

The Apollo missions are a fact. Nothing you can say will change that, no matter WHAT you think. That fact does not rely on your belief.
 
Last edited:
Patrick, when somebody who doesn't know what they are talking about refuses to listen to those who do, "you don't know what you're talking about, now go away" is all that is left to say. It's what one says to a petulant child who insists that the moon is made of cheese, and will not listen to reason.

The Apollo missions are a fact. Nothing you can say will change that, no matter WHAT you think. That fact does not rely on your belief.

This last series of posts have just been a childish tantrum on Patrick's part, he really has lost it, or maybe it's just his weekend personality.
 
This is some strange new definition of "on the run" that I haven't previously encountered.

I think you're on the run patrick, which is why you won't answer one simple question.

What is the difference between the two coordinate systems?
Time to wheel you genius for maths out into the daylight.

Remember though, Degrees-Minutes-Seconds != radians. Just so you remember, mr math

Oh and here's a hint, if you rescale the linked image of LAM2 to 3156 x 2565 pixels (altering the aspect ratio very slightly) you get a map where 1 pixel= 1" arc in both directions.
 
Last edited:
Oh my! Isn't this interesting, JayUtah, the "Sword of Apollo Truth" on the run!

Have we ever seen such a sight in our lives!? Nothing, zero, nadda' with regard to an objective response from Jay. Not a thing!

Now how now brown cow may I ask, who is doing the hand waving here? Why it is none other than the "Sword of Apollo Truth" himself, JayUtah.

I'd suggest you get on the phone with Emil Schiesser right now Jay, if you have that kind of pull. You guys are goin' down my friend.

Joy to the world! The moon is not unspoiled in the sense that it is indeed instrumented, but still, the orb remains proud and retains some self respect, for we know Armstrong never set a real boot down upon that mark there at LAM 2 map site J .65 / 7.52 .

Edited by LashL: 
Removed quote of moderated content.

If you would just go back & check your work you'd see where you went wrong.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting, Pat has strayed from "merely annoying" to "mildly offensive."

Perhaps he could remember to address the argument and not the arguer?
 
SUSpilot,

Your ipads, yours, Matt's and Steve Jobs', they're worthless. Get a ruler, a sharp pencil, a protractor, and some eye glasses for God sake. Take that ipad back to the Apple Store and tell Stevie you'd like your money back because it didn't save the dumb astronauts.

You can do this in your head dude. NASA says Tranquility Base is at longitude 23 26' 00" east correct? NASA says that on their LAM 2 Map Tranquility Base is located at longitude line 7.52 correct? The map as marked at the top indicates 23 30' 00" is at LAM 2 map longitude line 7.6 or 7.7 , correct? To make this as favorable for your interpretation as possible, I'll use 7.7, even though 7.6 looks to be a better estimate.

So according to NASA's own map, which they labeled and scaled themselves, Tranquility Base is at east coordinate 23 26' 00" and this is longitude line 7.52 on the LAM 2 map. According to NASA's map as marked, 0.18 map units to the east of 7.52 we have 7.7 which they have clearly marked as longitude line 23 30' 00" correct? But to go from 23 26' 00" to 23 30' 00" is a distance of 4 minutes of arc. According to this map, each longitude line, numbered 1 through 27 across the bottom of the page covers roughly 1.95 minutes of arc. So if 7.52 really were 23 26' 00" east, then given this map's scale, 23 30' 00" would be located 4 minutes of arc divided by 1.95 minutes of arc per LAM 2 longitude line or 2.05 longitude lines to the east of 7.52. That is at LAM 2 Map longitude line 9.57.

But NASA has already labeled LAM 2 map longitude line 7.7 as 23 30' 00" east. According to the LAM 2 map as labeled, longitude line 9.57 then MUST BE 23 33' 39" and very much not 23 30' 00". It cannot have two numbers associated with it. The map would be worthless in that case. It is worthless anyway in a sense, but that is an altogether different story.

So if NASA or anyone else wants to claim that Tranquility Base is located on the LAM 2 Map at longitude line 7.52 which must also be 23 26' 00", the radian measure east coordinate of Tranquility Base, then the map as labeled
shows longitude line 9.57 as BOTH 23 30' 00" AND 23 33' 39". AND EVERY OTHER POINT ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE ON THE ENTIRE MAP WILL LIKEWISE HAVE NOT ONE UNIQUE, BUT RATHER INSTEAD, TWO LONGITUDE VALUES.

Of course this is nonsense. The map as originally labeled shows LAM 2 longitude line 7.6 or 7.7 to be 23 30' 00". Look at the top of the map for yourself SUSpilot. SEE IT THERE IN FRONT OF YOUR EYEBALLS! Skewing the numbers as much to favor a best result for you, I'll use 7.7 . 7.52 is 0.18 map units to the west 0f 7.7 . Each of the 27 map longitude lines, 1 through 27 as numbered and scaled by NASA, are separated one from the other by roughly 1.95 minutes of arc. 1.95 X 0.18 gives 0.351 minutes of arc or 21 seconds.

So if NASA wants to label their map with 23 30' 00" at LAM 2 longitude line 7.7 and scale it with each small box roughly 1.95 minutes of arc on a side AS THEY CLEARLY HAVE, then LAM 2 longitude line 7.52 MUST BE 23 29' 49" and NOT NOT NOT 23 26' 00". NASA cannot have it both ways, a phony map and real astronauts. We see if they correct the map to make it real, so each longitude line is associated with a UNIQUE number and each latitude line the same, then in that case, the astronauts POOOF! become phony themselves.

Diagnosis; Worthless ipads

Treatment; SUSpilot, meet Matt out in front of the Apple store. Give your ipads to homeless guys panhandling out in front. They can sell them to the next wave of way way way off base pro Apollo researchers for lunch money and use the meal money balance to party tonight.
What are you babbling about? It is a simple exercise in matching scales and plotting. Sorry, the chart itself provides the scale by using the datums provided: I used the 30" of latitude and longitude provided as my base and simply measured it off. And I was wearing my glasses, which correct to better than 20/20 (and whatever the near vision correction is, per my doctor - something about wanting to see clearly when I fly).

OK, I'm going to ask again: why do you so desperately want this to be fake?

Also, when someone has a simple rebuttal to your claims, why do you get nasty and sarcastic? Feeling a bit defensive, or what?
 
Forbid the appeal to reason

Nice try Boy Scout. Enough with your Apollo is true by virtue of an appeal to reason jive line Jay. Your bogus astronauts are flat out busted here dude. The map is fake and you know it. Give me some numbers! Prove me wrong! I see none and know you cannot!

IT IS HARD EVIDENCE, THE MAP FRAUD JUST DEMONSTRATED, AND YOU KNOW IT SO QUIT TRYING TO DENY IT. IT MAKES A MAN OF YOUR REPUTATION/STATURE LOOK PATHETIC, KIND OF LIKE ARMSTRONG.

I'll have much to say about why map accuracy is ever so relevant. For starters, you'll recall that identifying "Little West Crater" ON A MAP! at J / 7-8 was one of the ways "Tranquility Base's location" was first identified.

My oh my oh my, watch them scramble! scramble! scramble!

Edited by LashL: 
Edited for civility.

Appealing to reason is jive?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Appealing to reason is jive?

Yeah, and this from someone who claims that nonsensical logical nonconnections make the rocks and photos irrelevant. Anyone else think this is inconsistent?
 
<snip irrelevant bluster>

Still waiting for your explanation of the "Julian system" of RA and Dec.

Still waiting for your explanation for why, with all your claimed qualifications, you didn't know Juliet represents J in the phonetic alphabet.

Still waiting for your explanation why you have no understanding of Cartesian coordinates.

Still waiting for your explanation of wht you don't know why "i" and "o" would be omitted.

Still waiting for your explanation of why "13" should be omitted.
 
23 26' 00", the radian measure east coordinate of Tranquility Base,

Actually I'm going back to this to savour it a bit. Good catch Matt.

Tell us oh maths genius, Where in the mission report are the landing coordinates given in radians?

Page number please.

I'm going to have to stundie that I think
 
Last edited:
Units? Units? We don't need no steenkin' units! I'm sure Doctor Socks was happy to use CC, CU, liter....whatever came in handy. And put the decimal place where-ever it looked good.

Let's all please hope that his practice was confined to homeopathy.
 
Actually I'm going back to this to savour it a bit. Good catch Matt.

Tell us oh maths genius, Where in the mission report are the landing coordinates given in radians?

Page number please.

I'm going to have to stundie that I think


I nominated his "appeal to reason" so it's only fair you get to nominate this. Be sure to mention he claimed to have a degree in math.
 

Oh my! Isn't this interesting, JayUtah, the "Sword of Apollo Truth" on the run!

Exactly how am I "on the run?"

Your claim is based on your interpretation of the map, not the map itself. That's why you want people to examine your computations (i.e., your interpretation), not the map. If you would kindly stop crowing and patting yourself on the back for just a moment, you would see that I'm not admitting you were right about the map; I'm explaining how you can be wrong about the map, yet the map still remain an objective piece of evidence.

It's yet another common beginner's mistake to believe that since he works with original sources, he cannot err in his judgment or analysis of them. You are responsible for reading the map correctly, and it is abundantly clear to everyone that you don't know how. The map is hard evidence in the sense that it exists for you just as readily as it exists for me, and we can both have equal access to it. That doesn't mean that what you extrapolate from that hard evidence will itself remain hard evidence. The minute you start computing, interpolating, assigning meaning, and so forth, you embark on an intellectual exercise for which you alone are responsible. The objective existence and appearance of the evidence you include in your argument does not guarantee that your argument succeeds.

Is this clear now, or must I explain it a third time?

Again, why do you think it is that all suitably educated people believe that Apollo was real?
 
Oh and here's a hint, if you rescale the linked image of LAM2 to 3156 x 2565 pixels (altering the aspect ratio very slightly) you get a map where 1 pixel= 1" arc in both directions.

Here's another, the LAM 2 comes from the ORB-II-6 map , so maybe just maybe the correction should be applied as mentioned in the mission report?

Now run along pattycake and come back when you have worked out why your gollum victory dance is a bit silly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom