And in case Patrick wants to try & talk lasers, I am currently working on a 1W 532nm green laser with a 1.5mrad beam divergence here on my workbench, so just letting him know that I actually work with lasers, and all his frantic hand waving & arguments about the Lick Observatory & beam visibility is making everyone in the shop laugh
Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga
- Thread starter Patrick1000
- Start date
- Status
You want to talk credentials? You have been making a lot of academic claims with zero evidence...Let's see some verifiable evidence of your claims first. I'm pretty sure I've said more than enough in my previous post to give you a clue that you may be in over your head when it comes to optics & lasers (in fact observant readers may already be aware of where I'm at)
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
What does that have to do with the points I have made?
What does that have to do with the points I have made?
I could not care less about your job. Show me how, why, where I am wrong. Again, I post the details, never to be countered meaningfully. Those times i have been wrong, in error, I admitted it as soon as I realized my mistakes.
But your side does nothing substantive Ravenwood. It is a joke dude!
What does that have to do with the points I have made?
I could not care less about your job. Show me how, why, where I am wrong. Again, I post the details, never to be countered meaningfully. Those times i have been wrong, in error, I admitted it as soon as I realized my mistakes.
But your side does nothing substantive Ravenwood. It is a joke dude!
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
So you know more about laser visibility than C.O. Alley?
So you know more about laser visibility than C.O. Alley?
So you know more about laser visibility than C.O. Alley?
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
Here ya' go big shot!
Keep in mind Ravenwood, Alley said the laser light imaged by Surveyor VII was brighter than the brightest star in the sky, Sirius. Alley made no claim that the astronauts would definitely see the light. It was surmised if one could see Sirius, then one could see the lasers. My point is the astronauts deny the stars so that they can deny the possibility of laser visibility. Yes the argon lasers would be visible, it is true. But the point with regard to the Apollo debate specifically is more subtle, AND MORE CERTAIN. If one can see stars, then one can see lasers. This is the meat of the issue, not absolutes about the conditions of laser visibility.
Ravenwood, I guess you not only know more about lasers than C.O. Alley, but you know more than Charles Townes himself. He only won a Nobel Prize, worked on the Apollo program himself and practically invented the laser no less. From his book, How The Laser Happened;
"THE LIGHT THAT SHINES STRAIGHT
On July 21, 1969, astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin set up an array of small reflectors on the moon and faced them toward Earth. At the same time, two teams of astrophysicists on Earth—240,000 miles away—at the University of California’s Lick Observatory and at the University of Texas’s McDonald Observatory, prepared small instruments on two big telescopes. They took careful note of the location of that first manned landing on the moon. About ten days later, the Lick team pointed the telescope at that precise location and sent a small pulse of power into the tiny piece of hardware they had added to the telescope. A few days later, after the west Texas skies had cleared, the McDonald team went through the same steps. In the heart of each telescope, a narrow beam of extraordinarily pure red light emerged from a crystal of synthetic ruby, pierced the sky, and entered the near vacuum of space. The rays were still only about 1,000 yards wide after traveling the 240,000 miles to illuminate the astronauts’ reflectors. Slightly more than a second after light hit the reflectors, the crews in California and in Texas each detected the faint reflection of its beam. The interval between launch of the pulse of light and its return permitted calculation of the distance to the moon within an inch, a measurement of unprecedented precision. The ruby for each source of light was the heart of a laser, a type of device first demonstrated in 1960, just nine years earlier. Even before man reached the moon, an unmanned spacecraft had landed on the moon in January, 1968, with a television camera that detected a laser beam shot from near Los Angeles by the California Institute of Technology’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. That beam radiated only about one watt. But from the moon, all the other lights in the Los Angeles basin, drawing thousands of megawatts, were not bright enough to be seen. Their light spread and diffused into relative indetectability while that single beam, with the power of a pocket penlight, sent a twinkling signal to the lunar surface.
Townes, Charles H. (1999-03-17). How the Laser Happened : Adventures of a Scientist (pp. 3-4). Oxford University Press, USA.
Again the point is not necessarily about absolutes, though the visibility issue can be argued, and that argument won. More significantly, and with absolute certainty, if the Surveyor VII camera imaged the argon laser, so too would have Armstrong's.
Keep in mind Ravenwood, Alley said the laser light imaged by Surveyor VII was brighter than the brightest star in the sky, Sirius. Alley made no claim that the astronauts would definitely see the light. It was surmised if one could see Sirius, then one could see the lasers. My point is the astronauts deny the stars so that they can deny the possibility of laser visibility. Yes the argon lasers would be visible, it is true. But the point with regard to the Apollo debate specifically is more subtle, AND MORE CERTAIN. If one can see stars, then one can see lasers. This is the meat of the issue, not absolutes about the conditions of laser visibility.
Ravenwood, I guess you not only know more about lasers than C.O. Alley, but you know more than Charles Townes himself. He only won a Nobel Prize, worked on the Apollo program himself and practically invented the laser no less. From his book, How The Laser Happened;
"THE LIGHT THAT SHINES STRAIGHT
On July 21, 1969, astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin set up an array of small reflectors on the moon and faced them toward Earth. At the same time, two teams of astrophysicists on Earth—240,000 miles away—at the University of California’s Lick Observatory and at the University of Texas’s McDonald Observatory, prepared small instruments on two big telescopes. They took careful note of the location of that first manned landing on the moon. About ten days later, the Lick team pointed the telescope at that precise location and sent a small pulse of power into the tiny piece of hardware they had added to the telescope. A few days later, after the west Texas skies had cleared, the McDonald team went through the same steps. In the heart of each telescope, a narrow beam of extraordinarily pure red light emerged from a crystal of synthetic ruby, pierced the sky, and entered the near vacuum of space. The rays were still only about 1,000 yards wide after traveling the 240,000 miles to illuminate the astronauts’ reflectors. Slightly more than a second after light hit the reflectors, the crews in California and in Texas each detected the faint reflection of its beam. The interval between launch of the pulse of light and its return permitted calculation of the distance to the moon within an inch, a measurement of unprecedented precision. The ruby for each source of light was the heart of a laser, a type of device first demonstrated in 1960, just nine years earlier. Even before man reached the moon, an unmanned spacecraft had landed on the moon in January, 1968, with a television camera that detected a laser beam shot from near Los Angeles by the California Institute of Technology’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. That beam radiated only about one watt. But from the moon, all the other lights in the Los Angeles basin, drawing thousands of megawatts, were not bright enough to be seen. Their light spread and diffused into relative indetectability while that single beam, with the power of a pocket penlight, sent a twinkling signal to the lunar surface.
Townes, Charles H. (1999-03-17). How the Laser Happened : Adventures of a Scientist (pp. 3-4). Oxford University Press, USA.
Again the point is not necessarily about absolutes, though the visibility issue can be argued, and that argument won. More significantly, and with absolute certainty, if the Surveyor VII camera imaged the argon laser, so too would have Armstrong's.
Last edited:
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
Every major point I make is backed by well referenced support as my post just above.
Every major point I make is backed by well referenced support as my post just above.
Again my friend, it is your side that is unscientific, your side with the vacuous claims. How did I lie above? I only showed you what Alley and Townes know to be true.
You all are scrambling.
Stalingrad, RATTENKRIEG
Apollo in its death throes, all of you running for your lives.
Every major point I make is backed by well referenced support as my post just above.
Again my friend, it is your side that is unscientific, your side with the vacuous claims. How did I lie above? I only showed you what Alley and Townes know to be true.
You all are scrambling.
Stalingrad, RATTENKRIEG
Apollo in its death throes, all of you running for your lives.
Patrick, you have been caught in multiple lies & sock puppetry over several boards, and have been banned for multiple offenses. You have zero credibility & no one here believes you. No one, I repeat No one believes any of your claims. If you want anyone to ever take you seriously, I suggest you start with an actual honest attempt at debate and come clean on all the lies, not that you will you have proven that. You are incapable of telling the truth, thus relegating you the role of a monkey on a leash that people occasionally jab with a stick for amusement. You really have no idea of what a buffoon you have become...
Last edited:
What "well researched support" are you speaking of?...all I see is unsubstantiated bullcrap.
Guess you're just not smart "enough" to answer this question, Patrick...
...or else you realize the answer proves you wrong.
So which is it?
Oh, and I'm not going to stop asking this same question until you answer...and each time it is asked and is left unanswered, it only demonstrates what an ignoramus you are.
cheers...
"We" know nothing of the sort....why do you persist in doing this???
Have difficulty understanding English?...because as I and others have told you at least a couple of dozen times...
NO ONE HERE AGREES WITH YOU.
Ya know, I'm beginning to believe that this isn't an "act"....that you realLy are THAT STUPID.
I'd ask that you prove me wrong, but you seem incapable of proving anything.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Asking you to back up your claims to expertise is not prying into your personal life. You use this same tired objection every time someone asks you to put up or shut up.
Your entire tenure at these various forums is a thick layer of lies and deceptions.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
No. Every point you make is supported by nothing more than your ignorant say-so. You are asked to supply evidence of relevant qualifications, experience, or training and you retreat behind claims of "common sense."
Then I'll ask again: Why do you think all suitably educated people believe Apollo was real? You know you're in the minority. In fact you revel in it; you claim you're the only one ever to see certain things, to put together the pieces of the puzzle. So why are you in the minority? If everything about Apollo is so unscientific as you claim, why do all the appropriately qualified people in the world still believe in it?
Last edited:
TO THE VIDICON ON THE SPACECRAFT. This is why we don't trust you about what you think your sources say, Patrick. At best, you leave out important parts of what they say. The qualification above occurs in the very same sentence you are paraphrasing! To leave it out smacks of, at the very least, of a failure to understand basic optics. A less charitable view is that you left it out intentionally.
The passive voice is your accomplice here, isn't it? WHO surmised this, Patrick? As far as I can tell, it was you, and you alone. It does NOT come out of the work you quote.
You still haven't shown that. Did the entire discussion of beam duration slip your mind?
Rephrased, obfuscated, and still wrong. The visibility of one does not automatically imply the visibility of the other.
No; he understands what C.O. Alley and Charles Townes wrote. Which you have not demonstrated. Your failure to understand the material does not imply that any other poster is contradicting it.
Can you show that the type of camera, its chromatic sensitivity, the exposure settings, the timing of when it was pointed in such a way as to allow capture of the laser, and so forth are actually similar?
Other posters have demonstrated they are not. I do not, nor does anyone else on this thread, accept your opinion that since one laser was seen by one camera, a different laser could be seen by a different camera, or by human eyes. You need to do the work to demonstrate this. I might suggest actually learning a little photometrics and doing the math. You might also do a simple probability study to ask just how often any imagining device (organic or otherwise) was pointing at the sky during exploration of the MOON. Compare this to the beam duration -- you may find the answer illuminating.
Massive cut-and-paste quotes are not helping you here. This as much as anything convinces me you have no experience in the sciences, or in engineering (as some of your socks have claimed). You seem to be helpless to try any other method other than searching about for any scrap of text that when quoted appears to support your point of view. This is why science and engineering use math. Histories and anecdotes and public release statements are nothing but adjectives, and one could grow very old fighting the battle of whether "tremendous" is bigger than "gigantic." Assign actual numbers, however, and you can make a true comparison.
Ahh just can't let that particular cow pat drop unremarked
Self proclaImed Accomplished Scientist / radar technician / Writer for the U.N / world's greatest Apollo researcher
But :
AH Noun76 - fail
AH LM didn't land / did land - fail
BAUT Radar Technology knowledge - fail
Only 5% of the rock samples have been studied -fail
$5000 magic writing programme - fail
Telescope power/aperture mixup - fail
Direct abort timing - fail
CSM "Bootlegger turn" - fail
post #1178 Orbits - Radial = lateral - fail
post #1178 Residual velocity error - fail
computer monitor with 15+ magnitude - fail
"starry night" developers in on it - fail
Doesn't see stuff in LRO images - fail
ICBM flying through bent spacetime - fail
Basic triangulation - fail
Julian numbers RA/DEC - fail
Juliet grid square - fail
Military mappping coordinates (MGRS) Missing i and o - fail
self-debunking Armstrong stars quotes - fail
Maths from Berkley but Radians = degrees/minutes/seconds - fail
Cartography & Datums - fail
Radio Transmission & ECM - fail
Laser technology knowledge - fail
LRRR 'active' but still used by Russians - fail
17.0 = 0.17 - fail
calculation of K and AU mixup - fail x2
self debunking light adaption quotes - fail
CSM radar / LM transponder - fail
CSM "Hovers" in orbit at 17 degrees from Earth- superfail
LM launch dynamics rendezvous understanding - fail
Apollo expert but PGNCS spelt PNGS - fail
Medical expert opinion - fail
(in light of above) Plural/pleural spelling - fail
Doesn't know side effects of Seconal - fail
Hand held sextant - fail
Vidicon tube should see laser - fail
Doesn't do pictures - fail
Doesn't do rocks - fail
Multiple unanswered questions - fail
Day32 of dodgewatch - fail
Self described rank amateur - No argument there.
at 9am but posts all day.
hmmm
Hospital Janitor?
Last edited:
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Yup, a whole truck of fail.
Didn't Hagbard Celine claim to represent a whole lot of hospital porters over on AH?
mrbusdriver
Scholar
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 87
Patrick, in your quote, it uses the term "pulse of light".
What does this phrase mean to you?
Not that I'll get an answer to another straightforward question....
What does this phrase mean to you?
Not that I'll get an answer to another straightforward question....
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
Commander Poopie Pants and The Hong Kong Flu
Lest there be any doubt about whether or not Simulated Apollo 8 Mission Commander, Frank Poopie Pants Borman, pretended to have the runs or not in cislunar space, here's the Commander in his own words. I've quoted this before, but as some of my detractors have forgotten, I'll throw it up there again with the rest of the Apollo nonsense that's floating about, floating about threatening to infect our minds with smelly fairy tales. Here's Frank, he who commands all that's fecal and floats in cislunar space, with his watered down account of make believe weightless poop. His book is entitled COUNTDOWN with coauthor Robert J. Serling(published in 1988 by Silver Arrow Books/William Morrow, New York), page 205, 206;
" He and Anders kept the conversation down, but unfortunately I couldn't keep anything down. I became feverish and nauseated, vomited twice and then got diarrhea. I didn't know why. All three of us had been inoculated against the Hong Kong flu and at first I suspected it was that sleeping pill-I seldom take pills of any kind. Unhappily, I remembered spending two weeks in Gemini 7 and never getting sick. Apollo 8 was only fourteen hours into its mission and here was its commander feeling like a wet floor mop. It also may have been the weightless environment-Lovell had experienced nausea earlier and was to feel quesy again later; Anders was affected briefly too. The symptoms disappeared as we got accustomed to weightless motion.
I finally managed to doze off, and about 6 A.M. earth time I told Jim and Bill to get some sleep-they had been up for almost twenty four hours. We were 100,000 miles from earth and I was feeling a little better. I told CapCom I thought I had a case of the 24 hour flu, but I am not sure this amateur diagnosis was right- quite a few astronauts and cosmonauts have been afflicted with what might be called space sickness."
A few points worth making about Borman's statement. Let's start out with the "Hong Kong flu issue". Why the concern about the "Hong Kong flu"? We run into it not infrequently with respect to Borman's feigned illness. Apologists, at least those functioning effectively as official Apollo narrative apologists, are always quick to point out "IT WASN'T THE HONG KONG FLU, COULDN'T HAVE BEEN, BECAUSE THE ASTRONAUTS WERE VACCINATED".
What's going on there? First off, this is the first time these clowns with the gold fish bowls on their heads have pretended to engage cislunar space. The Borman illness is injected into the script to add "authenticity" here. It is a twist, given/written in by the Apollo 8 script authors to help mark the experience as new, part of a new grand adventure. Remember, diarrhea is not a manifestation of conventional space sickness. When Borman mentions in the end of the quote above that "quite a few astronauts and cosmonauts have been afflicted with what might be called space sickness." He cannot mean that quite a few cosmonauts and astronauts have gotten diarrhea in space. Matter of fact, according to Charles Berry in the Aerospace Medicine book I referenced just above, not a single American astronaut as of 1971 ever got diarrhea in space. It was an unknown symptom according to Berry at that time. I only emphasize that point here as there was/is no support in the medical literature of the time whatsoever, even from the QUACK Berry himself, for this Borman illness being space sickness based. That said, I do suspect that is what the script writers sort of had in mind. Regardless, Borman "has diarrhea", so the story goes, and it floats about the cabin along with his vomitus.
In 1968 and 1969, there was an influenza pandemic(Hong Kong flu) that took the lives of roughly 1,000,000 individuals worldwide. The problem was primarily an Asian one, though Australia, Europe and the Americas were ultimately infected. The virus reached the states by way of American Vietnam combatants.
Vomiting and diarrhea DO occur in cases of influenza, though this is more common in children than it is with adults. Nevertheless, the fraud perpetrators realized once they "gave Borman diarrhea" they had made a big big big big mistake, for many reasons as we have already learned, but I have yet to cover the influenza angle in any detail, until now.
So here you have a guy in a space ship who is pretending to be ill with nausea and vomiting and diarrhea in the middle of a worldwide influenza pandemic. So of course legitimate physicians would have thought, "Could Borman have this? How do we figure it out? This could be bad bad bad." And the reason that it would be bad would be that influenza causes respiratory illness, possibly pneumonia(deep lung tissue disease) and it is not all that uncommon to have bacterial pneumonia complicating influenza infection. Furthermore, the situation in the command module would be a set up for bacterial superinfection complicating primary influenza. This, given the fecal material containing bacteria, floating in this alleged zero-G environment. At any rate, were Borman ill with influenza/pandemic Hong Kong flu, all three astronauts would get infected, no question, unless of course they were all vaccinated and the vaccine effective.
Influenza in the Apollo 11 cockpit would be a medical disaster. I do not know if the astronauts were or were not vaccinated. The claim is that they were. But this would by no means guarantee immunity. This is not like being vaccinated for polio, or measles where you are pretty sure it's going to work. So the fraud perpetrators, the guys that wrote diarrhea into the script, created a huge problem for themselves. Notice how they simply claim Borman couldn't have had influenza/Hong Kong flu simply on the basis of his having claimed to have been vaccinated. But a physician would not exclude influenza on those grounds. A physician would exclude influenza on the grounds that there were no respiratory tract symptoms, myalgias(muscle ache, body ache) , headache, cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, runny stuffy nose., and so forth.
So a physician is able to identify this ruse as just that, a RUSE, nothing more, nothing less. The perpetrators realized they botched it big time by giving Borman diarrhea, all the worse a "mistake" in scripting given pandemic influenza circulating at the time, something all were aware of, perhaps better said, reminded of after the fact. So what can they do? Say Borman didn't have influenza because he was vaccinated. An interesting space ship ride, is it not?
Also, Borman forgets to mention in this account, how he took a second Secanol pill. As readers recall, in the Life Magazine article written by the Apollo 8 astronauts in which each of the three gave a first person account of their pretended ride out to the moon, reading the Bible from an Apollo Command Module turned pulpit, Borman stated very clearly in that account, his intentionally having had taken half of a Secanol pill. This, given the fact that he had concluded the Secanol "sleeping tablet" had made him sick to begin with. So he claims he was "testing the waters" and rechallenging himself with the offending agent, to see if it made him sick again. DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE??????? NO!!! Of course this would never be permitted were this real, and so Borman leaves it out of this later publication, the COUNTDOWN book.
And finally, look at the outrageous threat here, were any of it real. But we know none of it can be. It is never acknowledged as the problem it was or could become in the context of future flights. Berry never discusses it as one would expect him to in the medical literature, including the aerospace text cited previously.
Right there, BOOM!, Apollo is proven fraudulent. All the missions, every single one. Not that they didn't do something. They did plenty. They instrumented the moon big time. It's just the operation did not involved manned landings as an aspect. Why even risk men given the objectives, even if one could land them?
Apollo was the genuine instrumentation of the moon with military equipment under the cover/guise of manned landings. It was/is with respect to the latter feature that we view Apollo as fraudulent.
Lest there be any doubt about whether or not Simulated Apollo 8 Mission Commander, Frank Poopie Pants Borman, pretended to have the runs or not in cislunar space, here's the Commander in his own words. I've quoted this before, but as some of my detractors have forgotten, I'll throw it up there again with the rest of the Apollo nonsense that's floating about, floating about threatening to infect our minds with smelly fairy tales. Here's Frank, he who commands all that's fecal and floats in cislunar space, with his watered down account of make believe weightless poop. His book is entitled COUNTDOWN with coauthor Robert J. Serling(published in 1988 by Silver Arrow Books/William Morrow, New York), page 205, 206;
" He and Anders kept the conversation down, but unfortunately I couldn't keep anything down. I became feverish and nauseated, vomited twice and then got diarrhea. I didn't know why. All three of us had been inoculated against the Hong Kong flu and at first I suspected it was that sleeping pill-I seldom take pills of any kind. Unhappily, I remembered spending two weeks in Gemini 7 and never getting sick. Apollo 8 was only fourteen hours into its mission and here was its commander feeling like a wet floor mop. It also may have been the weightless environment-Lovell had experienced nausea earlier and was to feel quesy again later; Anders was affected briefly too. The symptoms disappeared as we got accustomed to weightless motion.
I finally managed to doze off, and about 6 A.M. earth time I told Jim and Bill to get some sleep-they had been up for almost twenty four hours. We were 100,000 miles from earth and I was feeling a little better. I told CapCom I thought I had a case of the 24 hour flu, but I am not sure this amateur diagnosis was right- quite a few astronauts and cosmonauts have been afflicted with what might be called space sickness."
A few points worth making about Borman's statement. Let's start out with the "Hong Kong flu issue". Why the concern about the "Hong Kong flu"? We run into it not infrequently with respect to Borman's feigned illness. Apologists, at least those functioning effectively as official Apollo narrative apologists, are always quick to point out "IT WASN'T THE HONG KONG FLU, COULDN'T HAVE BEEN, BECAUSE THE ASTRONAUTS WERE VACCINATED".
What's going on there? First off, this is the first time these clowns with the gold fish bowls on their heads have pretended to engage cislunar space. The Borman illness is injected into the script to add "authenticity" here. It is a twist, given/written in by the Apollo 8 script authors to help mark the experience as new, part of a new grand adventure. Remember, diarrhea is not a manifestation of conventional space sickness. When Borman mentions in the end of the quote above that "quite a few astronauts and cosmonauts have been afflicted with what might be called space sickness." He cannot mean that quite a few cosmonauts and astronauts have gotten diarrhea in space. Matter of fact, according to Charles Berry in the Aerospace Medicine book I referenced just above, not a single American astronaut as of 1971 ever got diarrhea in space. It was an unknown symptom according to Berry at that time. I only emphasize that point here as there was/is no support in the medical literature of the time whatsoever, even from the QUACK Berry himself, for this Borman illness being space sickness based. That said, I do suspect that is what the script writers sort of had in mind. Regardless, Borman "has diarrhea", so the story goes, and it floats about the cabin along with his vomitus.
In 1968 and 1969, there was an influenza pandemic(Hong Kong flu) that took the lives of roughly 1,000,000 individuals worldwide. The problem was primarily an Asian one, though Australia, Europe and the Americas were ultimately infected. The virus reached the states by way of American Vietnam combatants.
Vomiting and diarrhea DO occur in cases of influenza, though this is more common in children than it is with adults. Nevertheless, the fraud perpetrators realized once they "gave Borman diarrhea" they had made a big big big big mistake, for many reasons as we have already learned, but I have yet to cover the influenza angle in any detail, until now.
So here you have a guy in a space ship who is pretending to be ill with nausea and vomiting and diarrhea in the middle of a worldwide influenza pandemic. So of course legitimate physicians would have thought, "Could Borman have this? How do we figure it out? This could be bad bad bad." And the reason that it would be bad would be that influenza causes respiratory illness, possibly pneumonia(deep lung tissue disease) and it is not all that uncommon to have bacterial pneumonia complicating influenza infection. Furthermore, the situation in the command module would be a set up for bacterial superinfection complicating primary influenza. This, given the fecal material containing bacteria, floating in this alleged zero-G environment. At any rate, were Borman ill with influenza/pandemic Hong Kong flu, all three astronauts would get infected, no question, unless of course they were all vaccinated and the vaccine effective.
Influenza in the Apollo 11 cockpit would be a medical disaster. I do not know if the astronauts were or were not vaccinated. The claim is that they were. But this would by no means guarantee immunity. This is not like being vaccinated for polio, or measles where you are pretty sure it's going to work. So the fraud perpetrators, the guys that wrote diarrhea into the script, created a huge problem for themselves. Notice how they simply claim Borman couldn't have had influenza/Hong Kong flu simply on the basis of his having claimed to have been vaccinated. But a physician would not exclude influenza on those grounds. A physician would exclude influenza on the grounds that there were no respiratory tract symptoms, myalgias(muscle ache, body ache) , headache, cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, runny stuffy nose., and so forth.
So a physician is able to identify this ruse as just that, a RUSE, nothing more, nothing less. The perpetrators realized they botched it big time by giving Borman diarrhea, all the worse a "mistake" in scripting given pandemic influenza circulating at the time, something all were aware of, perhaps better said, reminded of after the fact. So what can they do? Say Borman didn't have influenza because he was vaccinated. An interesting space ship ride, is it not?
Also, Borman forgets to mention in this account, how he took a second Secanol pill. As readers recall, in the Life Magazine article written by the Apollo 8 astronauts in which each of the three gave a first person account of their pretended ride out to the moon, reading the Bible from an Apollo Command Module turned pulpit, Borman stated very clearly in that account, his intentionally having had taken half of a Secanol pill. This, given the fact that he had concluded the Secanol "sleeping tablet" had made him sick to begin with. So he claims he was "testing the waters" and rechallenging himself with the offending agent, to see if it made him sick again. DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE??????? NO!!! Of course this would never be permitted were this real, and so Borman leaves it out of this later publication, the COUNTDOWN book.
And finally, look at the outrageous threat here, were any of it real. But we know none of it can be. It is never acknowledged as the problem it was or could become in the context of future flights. Berry never discusses it as one would expect him to in the medical literature, including the aerospace text cited previously.
Right there, BOOM!, Apollo is proven fraudulent. All the missions, every single one. Not that they didn't do something. They did plenty. They instrumented the moon big time. It's just the operation did not involved manned landings as an aspect. Why even risk men given the objectives, even if one could land them?
Apollo was the genuine instrumentation of the moon with military equipment under the cover/guise of manned landings. It was/is with respect to the latter feature that we view Apollo as fraudulent.
Last edited:
Couple of things:
Who's "we"? Everyone that has responded to you here has disagreed with you. If you have an opinion, and there's No co-signer with you, I suggest you use first person, singular.
Second, I was the poster that asked you about your day job, not Abaddon. If you do not want people to know what you do, then say that. I would strongly suggest that your credibility, such as it was, has been badly tattered, nay, utterly destroyed, because you made a simple declarative statement as to your profession and then said it was a brush off or metaphor or some such.
Third, it is difficult enough to wade through all of the text you throw up; even if you think that the program was a fake (it wasn't), please use people's correct names. Quite frankly, one email in my company with that type of name calling, even if you were correct on facts, would have you out the door. There is no call for it, it makes you look like a fool, and even if you had a scintilla of a case, it is hopelessly polluted.
Fourth, and I will be persistent on this: why do you want so badly for the Apollo program to have been a fake?
- Status