• 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.
Edited by LashL: 
Edited for civility.

If your integrity matched your arrogance you'd be an interesting poster.

You are wrong.

I would have thought you would be used to that condition by now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not wrong, I am ruthless and you are having trouble dealing with it.

If your integrity matched your arrogance you'd be an interesting poster.

You are wrong.

I would have thought you would be used to that condition by now.

I am not wrong, I am ruthless and you are having trouble dealing with it. Ruthlessness is what is called for here.

Your side charges me with hand waving, yet time and again, it is I that post objectively as in the case with the maps here.

I called your bogus bluff Laton, don't charge me with a lack of integrity because I embarrassed you AS YOU SHOULD FEEL EMBARRASSED. Every one of you has underestimated me and now it's curtain time for your phony little Apollo gang.

Look at the Apollo 10 map dated May 1969, see how 00 41' 15" north 23 26' 00" east lies over "Tranquility Base"? Yes it does! Look at Collins' flown map. 23 29' 49" east overlies "Tranquility Base". The latter map is a phony, intentionally labeled wrong and do not tell me that it was not.

Get a clue map expert.

I have plenty of integrity and that is what is bugging you.

You guys are like the German 6th army in Stalingrad now, a veritble rattenkrieg for you, is it not? Rats running, scrambling, diving for cover, refusing to acknowledge the inevitable though it stares you all in the face.

Be off with you Laton.
 
Last edited:
I am not wrong, I am ruthless and you are having trouble dealing with it. Ruthlessness is what is called for here.

Your side charges me with hand waving, yet time and again, it is I that post objectively as in the case with the maps here.

I called your bogus bluff Laton, don't charge me with a lack of integrity because I embarrassed you AS YOU SHOULD FEEL EMBARRASSED. Every one of you has underestimated me and now it's curtain time for your phony little Apollo gang.

Look at the Apollo 10 map dated May 1969, see how 00 41' 15" north 23 26' 00" east lies over "Tranquility Base"? Yes it does! Look at Collins' flown map. 23 29' 49" east overlies "Tranquility Base". The latter map is a phony, intentionally labeled wrong and do not tell me that it was not.

Get a clue map expert.

I have plenty of integrity and that is what is bugging you.

You guys are like the German 6th army in Stalingrad now, a veritble rattenkrieg for you, is it not? Rats running, scrambling, diving for cover, refusing to acknowledge the inevitable though it stares you all in the face.

Be off with you Laton.


You didn't even understand the coordinate system until it was painfully explained to you in this very thread, using words of less than three syllables.


Tell us again about the "julian system" of RA and Dec.

Shall I quote your embarrassing faux pas for all to see, AGAIN?
 
Last edited:
I am not wrong, I am ruthless and you are having trouble dealing with it. Ruthlessness is what is called for here.

We are laughing at you Patrick.

Your side charges me with hand waving, yet time and again, it is I that post objectively as in the case with the maps here.

Duning-Krueger all over.

I called your bogus bluff Laton, don't charge me with a lack of integrity because I embarrassed you AS YOU SHOULD FEEL EMBARRASSED. Every one of you has underestimated me and now it's curtain time for your phony little Apollo gang.
Nope, facts are stubborn things. You have demonstrated your utter ineptitude with coordinate geometry of various sorts in this thread alone sufficiently to discredit any further wild claims you may make.

Look at the Apollo 10 map dated May 1969, see how 00 41' 15" north 23 26' 00" east lies over "Tranquility Base"? Yes it does! Look at Collins' flown map. 23 29' 49" east overlies "Tranquility Base". The latter map is a phony, intentionally labeled wrong and do not tell me that it was not.
Is that in radians, RA/Dec or furlongs? You have no clue.


Get a clue map expert.
And so begins the usual descent of the hoax believer into ad-hom.
Fine, get an education, fake doctor.

I have plenty of integrity and that is what is bugging you.

You have none. I know it, and you know it.

You guys are like the German 6th army in Stalingrad now, a veritble rattenkrieg for you, is it not? Rats running, scrambling, diving for cover, refusing to acknowledge the inevitable though it stares you all in the face.

Godwin. You lose.

Be off with you Laton.
Happily, you don't have the authority to banish any poster.
 
I would recommend not doing that.

A laugh is good for the soul, and Patrick provides plenty.

Well Battlefield 3 Beta is out. I have more interesting things to do than spar with someone as out of contact with reality as this guy.
 
A blue dot which may not have been purposefully drawn at K .2 and / longitude 5.6.

As above, I pointed out that with the LAM 2 Apollo 11 flown map of Michael Collins, if one looks for 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east given the map's labeling and scaling, one finds those coordinates according to my estimation/calculation at K .2 and LAM 2 map longitude line 5.549.

Then I found this, completely independent of my own work. From the Apollo 11 multimedia site;

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html#Maps

Text by Eric Jones and Ken Glover with regard to the LAM 2 flown map. Pay special attention to the very last sentence. Eric Jones and Ken Glover;

"Flown CMP Map LAM-2 ( 2.7 Mb or 0.3 Mb )

Mike Collins used this map to mark the estimated LM locations given to him by Houston. Compare with the sextant locations plotted in Figure 5-14 (below) from the Mission Report. The grid spacing is 1 km and the actual landing site is near J.65 and 7.52. Scan courtesy Bob Craddock and Allan Needell, National Air and Space Museum. The landing ellipse is centered at map coordinates L.0/14.0 and extends north and south 2.4 km from that point and 9.4 km east and west. Mike Collins marked a number of locations with combinations of lines, arrows, circles, and one ellipse using either pencil or a felt-tipped pen. Most of these are associated with estimated LM locations that were given to him at various times during his solo operations in lunar orbit.

Beginning at the upper left, there is a penciled ellipse labeled 'Auto Optics' and including craters at N.7/7.2 and M.0/6.7 that Mike mentions at 106:43:08. Owen Garriott gave Mike settings for Auto Optics operation of the sextant at 105:19:59; and, at 106:11:49, about 35 minutes before Mike's next pass over the landing site, Bruce McCandless told him "We'd like you to let the Auto optics take care of the tracking and devote your energies to trying to pick out the LM (visually) on the lunar surface."

The 'Auto Optics' ellipse also contains a small circle at L.7/6.6 and attached arrow from the southwest drawn with a felt-tipped pen. I have not been able to associate this circle with anything in the transcript or in Figure 5-14 (below) from the Apollo 11 Mission Report.

Immediately to the right of the upper end of the 'Auto Optics' ellipse, Mike has drawn circle, probably around the 'tiny crater' at M.7/8.0 that he mentions at 104:42:48.

Below the 'Auto Optics' ellipse, a penciled arrow leads to a circle drawn at K.8/6.3. At 112:22:20, Mike requested an estimated LM position for his pass over the landing site at 112:31:52. Bruce McCandless gave him K.9/6.3 and, as can be seen in Figure 5-14 (below), the actual landing site is just outside the sextant field-of-view for this location.

Below and to the right, an arrow drawn with a felt-tipped pen and labeled 'Last Bst Pos Prior L/O' leads to a dark spot at J.5/7.7, which is the estimated location Ron Evans gave Mike at 123:55:23, about a half hour before LM lift off. This location is only about 230 meters from the actual landing site at J.65/7.52. Farther down the map, Mike circled craters at E.3/7.6 and E.8/7.7 and to the left of the E.3/7.6 crater wrote 'SW Rim'. These two craters are in the area he examined during the pass over the landing site at 110:33:40 using the sextant in automatic mode and a set of coordinates Bruce McCandless gave him at 110:18:39. Mike reported the negative results at 110:36:58 but mentioned a "suspiciously-small, white object" on the southwest rim of the E.3/7.6 crater.

Finally, there is a small, blue dot at about K.2/5.6, which may not have been purposefully drawn."

Well knowing what we all know now, it would appear we have something to tell Eric Jones and Ken Glover now do we not? The small blue dot at K .2/5.6 represents "Tranquility Base" at 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east. Not an accident at all is it now?

So just as I said, this phony map does not feature unique coordinate sets. As J .65 and longitude 7.52 were declared to be "Tranquility Base" with latitude 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00 " east, despite at the same time 23 30' 00" east being found at longitude line 7.6, this created a situation in which we would find a
"second Tranquility Base". This one, this second Eagle landing site, not based on a seeming declaration as was the position at J .65 and longitude 7.52, but rather, as based on my measurements, yours, or anybody's. Given the way the grid was set up, any one of us would find/will find "Tranquility Base", 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east, right there at K .2 / 5.6(or for me, 5.549 to be exact). No surprises there really, that is the way the grid is set up. That is how the grid hangs ove the lunar surface, with 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east right on top of K .2 and longitude 5.6.

And lookie there, we see someone did mark K .2 and longitude 5.6 with a blue dot. Any one of you want to give Eric Jones an email and let him know what's up? Eric there, the editor of the famous Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, thinks K .2 / 5.6 may well not have been marked purposefully. Guess we better tell him what we know guys, about the grid being skewed, the fake map, the fact that given the skewing, the fakery, 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east is right on top of K .2 and longitude 5.6, and so that is Tranquility Base too! Just like J .65/7.52 is the Eagle's landing site, so too is K .2/5.6. Coordinate confusion? Heck yeah!!!!

I of course will have much to say about this "questionably purposeful" blue dot at K .2 / 5.6 in upcoming posts.

Phony map? YOU BETCHA"!!!!!
 
Last edited:
<snip>... in particular with the "Apollo 11 landing site" at 00 41' 15" and 23 26' 00" east.

These Apollo 10 grids were dated May 1969. They cover the same territory AND THE GRIDS ARE NOT SHIFTED AS IN THE APOLLO 11 FLOWN MAP. THIS PROVES THE APOLLO 11 MAP TO HAVE A SHIFTED GRID AND TO BE FRAUDULENT.

Edited by LashL: 
Edited for civility.

No matter how I do it, using the lat/long witness marks on the LAM-2 map as the datums, and plotting the point, it comes out to the same location as the two other images. I don't know why you're making this so difficult. BTW, it's a different grid not a shifted one.
<snip>
The thing is obviously a fake, and so it is better to cut our losses. Perpetuating this, hurts us all, in principle. Telling children there is no starlight visible in space when riding in space ships, telling children there are no stars visible from the surface of the moon, telling geologists that rocks from the moon were obtained in such and such a way when they were not, pretending something as historic as a moon landing occurred when it did not, this is all very harmful , now in this day and age.

Once upon a "cold war", it was defensible and I imagine appropriate, though the fallout was not well thought through. The repercussions of the moon fraud becoming public knowledge, and the moon fraud will eventually become public knowledge, will be astronomical.

I just said the public cares not, but only in the context of a debate. When the Apollo fraud all comes to the fore in some general publically acknowledged sense, the embarrassment will be catastrophic.

<snip>

And why is that? How will it be catastrophic?

Finally, you called me "your friend" in another post in this series. Not to be uncivil, but please don't ever do that again.
 
Sorry But no Cigar. Check this out, from the Apollo 10 Mission. The map is labeled correctly, 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east overlies "Tranquility Base" on the May 1969 Apollo 10 map. This proves the Apollo 11 map to have been labeled inappropriately, or equivalently, fraudulently.

Go to this site for Apollo 11 multimedia;

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html

Scroll down to the section; "Landing Site Maps and Images"


"Apollo Landing Site 2:

Flown Apollo 10 Map ( 140k )

This flown map shows the proposed landing ellipse and has three hand-drawn, rough ovals in the southwestern quadrant, possibly areas examined by the

Apollo 10 crew in one or more passes over the site. Ulli Lotzmann provides a version with the actual Apollo 11 landing site marked ( 90k )."

Click on the 140K and 90 K Apollo 10 flown "landing site map(s)". You will see first of all that the maps were dated May 1969, this scaling and labeling was not done after the fact. You will see unlike the Michael Collins flown map, these maps of the identical area with pretty much the same surfboard pattern and with the 90 K map including Tranquility Base(that one mark made "after the fact), that these maps indeed square with the landing ellipse and in particular with the "Apollo 11 landing site" at 00 41' 15" and 23 26' 00" east.

These Apollo 10 grids were dated May 1969. They cover the same territory AND THE GRIDS ARE NOT SHIFTED AS IN THE APOLLO 11 FLOWN MAP. THIS PROVES THE APOLLO 11 MAP TO HAVE A SHIFTED GRID AND TO BE FRAUDULENT.

Edited by LashL: 
Edited for civility.



This is from a quote that you yourself posted, You may recognise it, it's one of the footnotes to the table 5-IV in the Apollo 11 mission report

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 1:100 000 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.

So they hid it by publishing it for everyone to see.
 
Last edited:
I had to Google that reference. You may be right.
She was quite a big thing in the UK for a while. Had her own TV show as Dr Gillian Makeith, till a newspaper discovered that she'd bought her degree on the internet and had no relevant qualifications.

That's why she practices as a 'nutritionist', it's not a recognised profession as such, so needs no qualifications.

Pat, are you a nutritionist?
 
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 1:100 000 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.

Devastating.. this thing known as Reality! :)
 
Last edited:
Well Battlefield 3 Beta is out. I have more interesting things to do than spar with someone as out of contact with reality as this guy.

Nice one. I've got to work today unfortunately, but seeing as work at the moment partly consists of processing and converting greenscreen tracking shots of Ana Ivanovic working up a light sweat I guess I'll just have to put up with it.

It's a tough job but someone has to do it.
 
Last edited:
I am not wrong, I am ruthless and you are having trouble dealing with it.

No...you're allowing your irrationality to surface...no one here really cares what you think, because we have considered the source, and found it irrational.


You're doing "it" to yourself...your "ruthlessness" is laughable.

Grow up petulant child.
 
You think you are telling me something?

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 1:100 000 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.

Devastating.. this thing known as Reality! :)

You think you are telling me something? This is footnote "a" of the Apollo 11 Simulated Mission Report Table 5-IV. Michael Cook, everybody has only been citing this and dealing with its ramifications for the last 3000 posts.

Are you paying attention?

Please see the Apollo 10 flown maps dated May 1969 as referenced above.

http://next.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html

"Apollo Landing Site 2: Flown Apollo 10 Map ( 140k )
This flown map shows the proposed landing ellipse and has three hand-drawn, rough ovals in the southwestern quadrant, possibly areas examined by the Apollo 10 crew in one or more passes over the site. Ulli Lotzmann provides a version with the actual Apollo 11 landing site marked ( 90k ).

Note the map is labeled and scaled correctly , unlike the Apollo 11 map. In other words Michael Cook, if the correction factors account for the discrepancy in coordinate position with respect to the Apollo 11 map, they purposely did not correct it because obviously they knew how to do this back in May 1969. The Apollo 10 map is perfect, 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east lie over Tranquility Base."

Do you get it Michael Cook?! If they could make a proper map in May that took into account the correction factor issue, why send Michael Collins into outer space with an inaccurate map?, unless of course you are trying to scam someone, or additionally Michael Collins is not actually going into outer space?!

Diagnosis; Not paying attention!!!! Footnote "a" of the Apollo 11 Simulated Misson Report is something we all have been familiar with for literally thousands of posts. Michael Cook needs to pay better attention. And it was demonstrated many posts back that this argument, Michael Cook's argument that the discrepancy would/could/should be accounted for by the correction factors, DOESN'T HOLD AS THE APOLLO 10 FLOWN MAP OF MAY 1969 SHOWS PERFECTLY GOOD NUMBERS, COORDINATES JUST WHERE THEY SHOULD BE, NO PROBLEMS, NO DISCREPANCY.

Punishment. Michael Cook must read over the entire thread three times and not post again until having done so. We do not need Miochael Cook repeating material already well covered. We are all busy enough already. Also Michael Cook must knock off the inappropriate use of the smiling face icons. It is very annoying to us all when the face is so very much a non sequitur.
 
Last edited:
Note the map is labeled and scaled correctly , unlike the Apollo 11 map. In other words Michael Cook, if the correction factors account for the discrepancy in coordinate position with respect to the Apollo 11 map, they purposely did not correct it because obviously they knew how to do this back in May. The Apollo 10 map is perfect, 00 41' 15" north and 23 26' 00" east lies over Tranquility Base."

Do you not actually understand what you are writing?
 
Nope. He's still an idiot. All maps must have the same grid, all maps use the same coordinate system, all maps use the same coordinate base, and similar misconceptions.

He's learning, but his ignorance of basic cartography is just too deep for him to be able to swim out of it quickly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom