• 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.
Suit yourself, bury your head in the sand RAF. But... seriously, you should look.

R.A.F. said:
Sorry, but I don't take ignorant troll opinions seriously.

...and no...you can't read a map...

...and "chicken"?...really?...I'd be insulted if anyone here (including myself) actually took anything you said, seriously...
Click to expand...

Suit yourself, bury your head in the sand RAF, if you so choose. But......... seriously, you should look. It is important now for everybody to look. This is the heart of the scam. It is now open before us all. I thought it would take me a week once I came across the map stuff, but more obvious than any of us would ever know, ever have imagined. They are not as good at this stuff as I thought they might be.

You need to look at this stuff RAF, seriously. Do not be afraid.
 
Last edited:
It is apparent LAM-2 is not the same datum used in the Apollo 10 map. And applying the ORB-II-6-trajectory corrections does not bring the craters into alignment. Obviously the Apollo 10 map is in a datum different than the one used for LAM-2.
 
Patrick1000 said:
You need to look at this stuff RAF, seriously.
Click to expand...

Ignorant assumption that I haven't...what a surprise.

Do not be afraid.
Click to expand...

Really tiring of you telling me how "afraid" I am. It takes no courage to anonymously post such garbage.

Why not do something really "brave" and admit you are just trolling this board, because no one is so ignorant as to believe the things you claim to...no one.
 
The point is Matt, the craters are all labeled correctly on the Apollo 10 map

matt.tansy said:
It is apparent LAM-2 is not the same datum used in the Apollo 10 map. And applying the ORB-II-6-trajectory corrections does not bring the craters into alignment. Obviously the Apollo 10 map is in a datum different than the one used for LAM-2.
Click to expand...

You are wrong Matt. Check for yourself. i will do it for you guys, but seems silly, it is so simple. THE CRATERS ON THE APOLLO 10 MAP ALL HAVE THE CORRECT COORDINATES ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. THE MAP IS ACCURATE. THE APOLLO 11 MAP HAS INCORRECT COORDINATES ASSOCIATED WITH ITS CRATERS.

Sorry Matt, this jig is up. Each crater has a unique location. they got them correct, within the limits of the accuracy of the times, for the Apollo 10 map, not so for the other. Mislabeled crater coordiantes means fraud.

It's over dude.
 
check the crater locations RAF

R.A.F. said:
Ignorant assumption that I haven't...what a surprise.



Really tiring of you telling me how "afraid" I am. It takes no courage to anonymously post such garbage.

Why not do something really "brave" and admit you are just trolling this board, because no one is so ignorant as to believe the things you claim to...no one.
Click to expand...

Check the crater locations RAF on the two maps. They are correctly located on the Apollo 10 map with coordinates appropriate to their known positions. not so with the Apollo 11 map.

The Apollo ruse just done hit a brick wall my friend.
 
matt.tansy said:
It's supposed to be a lame portmanteau for innumerate and Illuminati.

This from the guy who claims to have a math degree and constantly refers to degree-minute-seconds format as "radians".
Click to expand...

And wiki's up the calculations for K and AU, but manages to get them the wrong way round.

and thinks that radial means lateral, so messes up a whole slew of calculations based on that assumption.

and that residual instrumentation errors are real velocity, when that clearly doesn't make sense in the particular context.
 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
So, what is going on here? The Apollo 10 map is labeled correctly? Yes indeed it is. So what Schiesser, presumably the head "number fixer", does is make the claim this correction factor is needed. Adding 2'25" to the north coordinates and subtracting 4'17" from the east.

We can see that is not true, but who will argue with him? He is the boss. Presumably it is Schiesser. I am not absolutely opositive it is Schiesser playing the HEAD INNUMERATI ROLE, but close to positive. He sees all these numbers. The others don't, so it must be him, perhaps with help.

So now, with this claim about the need for a map correction, they label the Apollo 11 map differently. Who is going to notice but some guy scrutinizing this garbage 42 years down the road.

BUSTED!
Click to expand...

And this achieves WHAT for the grand conspiracy now? What with both maps being made widely public, and with thousands of professionals and amateurs alike scrutinizing lunar maps and sticking pins in where they believed the Apollo 11 LM to be?

How EXACTLY does your misinterpretation of the real difference between these two maps turn into something that is advantageous to a conspiracy?

And if you wave a hand and say "It's all the lost bird business, as I explained in a post long ago" I will smack you. You never managed to explain your lost bird before, and since then your rationale has gotten both thinner and more contradictory.
 
No just trying to get you to look at the maps, the craters and the coordinates.

R.A.F. said:
Still trying to get a "rise" out of me? Not the brightest tool in the box, are you...
Click to expand...

No just trying to get you to look at the maps, the craters and the coordinates. I don't think you are flapable.
 
Last edited:
Why are the maps labeled differently nomuse?

nomuse said:
And this achieves WHAT for the grand conspiracy now? What with both maps being made widely public, and with thousands of professionals and amateurs alike scrutinizing lunar maps and sticking pins in where they believed the Apollo 11 LM to be?

How EXACTLY does your misinterpretation of the real difference between these two maps turn into something that is advantageous to a conspiracy?

And if you wave a hand and say "It's all the lost bird business, as I explained in a post long ago" I will smack you. You never managed to explain your lost bird before, and since then your rationale has gotten both thinner and more contradictory.
Click to expand...

Why are the maps labeled differently nomuse? The Apollo 10 map is accurate, the Apollo 11 map is not. So if it is a mistake, tell me how so? Especially since they got it spot on with the Apollo 10 map.

It is OVER dude.
 
Patrick1000 said:
So, what is going on here? The Apollo 10 map is labeled correctly? Yes indeed it is. So what Schiesser, presumably the head "number fixer", does is make the claim this correction factor is needed. Adding 2'25" to the north coordinates and subtracting 4'17" from the east.

We can see that is not true, but who will argue with him? He is the boss. Presumably it is Schiesser. I am not absolutely opositive it is Schiesser playing the HEAD INNUMERATI ROLE, but close to positive. He sees all these numbers. The others don't, so it must be him, perhaps with help.

So now, with this claim about the need for a map correction, they label the Apollo 11 map differently. Who is going to notice but some guy scrutinizing this garbage 42 years down the road.

BUSTED!
Click to expand...

Oh, yes. Only Soctor Socks the fake world-traveling physician and radar expert (and hero of his own comic book) would ever bother to look at this map. It isn't like Apollo memorabilia is worth anything. It isn't as if anyone has made an effort to locate the Apollo hardware in modern photographic surveys.

What; next you'll be trying to convince me that some random people out on the internet would be so utterly crazy over Apollo, so into the tiniest of minutia, they'd build an AGC from scratch as well as make available an emulator to run the original software!
 
I am just saying what Collins is saying.

nomuse said:
Oh, yes. Only Soctor Socks the fake world-traveling physician and radar expert (and hero of his own comic book) would ever bother to look at this map. It isn't like Apollo memorabilia is worth anything. It isn't as if anyone has made an effort to locate the Apollo hardware in modern photographic surveys.

What; next you'll be trying to convince me that some random people out on the internet would be so utterly crazy over Apollo, so into the tiniest of minutia, they'd build an AGC from scratch as well as make available an emulator to run the original software!
Click to expand...

I am just saying what Collins is saying, nothing more, nothing less.

From the Apollo 11 Mission Technical Debrifing, Michael Collins;

"On each pass, I could do a decent job of
scanning one or two grid squares on the expanded map.
That map is the 1:lOO 000 map called LAM 2. The ground
was giving me coordinates in the grid square coordinate
system that were as much as 10 squares apart. This
told me they didn't really have much of a handle at all
on where the LM had landed."


That's not much of a handle for the whole time Collins was orbiting looking for them. Pretty simple, pretty plain, pretty direct, from Collins himself. They did not know where the space ship was. I call that "lost". You may use whatever euphemism you care to.
 
Last edited:
Patrick1000 said:
You are wrong Matt. Check for yourself. i will do it for you guys, but seems silly, it is so simple. THE CRATERS ON THE APOLLO 10 MAP ALL HAVE THE CORRECT COORDINATES ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. THE MAP IS ACCURATE. THE APOLLO 11 MAP HAS INCORRECT COORDINATES ASSOCIATED WITH ITS CRATERS.
Click to expand...


That's what a different datum will do, Einstein. There is no such thing as "correct" or "incorrect coordinates"; only a different datum.

For those not afraid to learn the truth I recommend this Wikipedia article:Geodetic system
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom