Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[JayUtah]

That said, it is not the same as allowing a warhead with its heat protection to fall back through the atmosphere. Falling through the atmosphere is falling through the atmosphere. Ain't nothing like it.

Exactly why not?

 

[Garrison]

Well, I do change topics for a variety of reasons, but primarily because I have hit on something new and IMPORTANT, or trying to tie up a lose end......

Actually almost entirely because you get caught out making some outrageous error. You come back to them when you hope people will have forgotten the previous mistakes, hasn't worked to date has it?

 

[JayUtah]

Mercury seems to have been a warhead viability program, full contact missile flight program.

Second time asking: How does a Mercury capsule tell you anything useful about a nuclear warhead?

With Mercury they had quite a few unmanned launches, those must have been with "live nukes".

Which specific Mercury missions do you claim were secret nuclear testing missions, and what is the evidence associated with those particular missions that makes your interpretation a better explanation of the available facts?

...Shove the thing out of a giant cargo plane and have the dudes pull a shoot, viola!, instant fake landing. Something like that anyway.

Yeah, something "like that." With naval and airborne search radars going full tilt, explain how the cargo plane doesn't show up.

Of all the things to stage Multivac, staging a landing seems easy to me.

That's because you don't know enough about the relevant sciences and techniques to understand how your theories fail, and you won't listen to people who do know.

Actually, I am not sure yet which flights had guys and which did not.

Isn't that just another way of saying that you don't have any evidence that any particular flight was other than what it seemed? All you have is a vague, general hypothesis that massages your pacifist bias and gives you something sinister to rant about. I'm still waiting for evidence.

 

[Garrison]

ANY OF THOSE GUYS THERE A DIARRHEA EXPERT W.D. CLINGER? DIDN'T THINK SO.... ANY HAVE A MEDICAL DEGREE? DIDN'T THINK SO....

No none of them have medical degrees, snag is that wasn't the claim that W.D. Clinger was responding to it was this one:

As time goes on, one finds most of the astronauts to be of average or below average intelligence at best.

He fairly well refuted that by pointing out that they generally had higher than average academic acheivements. Again you quote his post but avoid responding to the point, again you make an error, on you could acknowledge without in any way affecting your underlying premise but you simply can't do it, you can admit to no error however small for fear your whole house of cards will come down.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

ANY OF THOSE GUYS THERE A DIARRHEA EXPERT W.D. CLINGER? DIDN'T THINK SO.... ANY HAVE A MEDICAL DEGREE? DIDN'T THINK SO....

No logorrhea experts either.

I suggest that you find a friend W.D. Clinger, perhaps several, friends who are actual physicians and deal regularly with infectious disease issues, or ask a garden variety gastroenterologist, that will work fine.

You remind me: I should send late holiday cards to a couple of friends I haven't talked to in years. One of them graduated second in his class at West Point before getting his MD from Harvard Medical. Another finished his PhD in pure math at Berkeley before going on to earn an MD and MBA; he's now a respected neurosurgeon.

It's not rocket science, but...

Be sure you provide the details.

I'll be sure to send them some of your posts.

FYI, degrees don't make the man. Read their books, the ones that they did not write. Listen to them speak, not so very bright. Very very very very very very very sad all of this.

If I were to judge a man's intelligence by what he writes, what should I think of a man who, in writing, suggests I judge a man's intelligence by what he didn't write?

 

[nomuse]

ANY OF THOSE GUYS THERE A DIARRHEA EXPERT W.D. CLINGER? DIDN'T THINK SO.... ANY HAVE A MEDICAL DEGREE? DIDN'T THINK SO....

FYI W.D. Clinger, the most important event in the history of the Apollo Missions was the scripting of the Borman illness. It was/IS IS IS a huge mistake from which they cannot recover, nor about which they can cover. IMPOSSIBLE.

It is an event of the most stark and glaring fraudulence and it is a done deal, etched in bogus Apollo space-time.

I suggest that you find a friend W.D. Clinger, perhaps several, friends who are actual physicians and deal regularly with infectious disease issues, or ask a garden variety gastroenterologist, that will work fine. Ask them about the Borman scenario, Berry's response as well. Be sure you provide the details.

APOLLO, ALL OF IT IS DEMONSTRABLY FRAUDULENT BASED ON THIS ONE ITEM ALONE, THE FAKE BORMAN ILLNESS.

Sorry W.D. Clinger, I don't like it any more than ayone else. But I have always been of the opinion that facing this stuff in life is critical.

FYI, degrees don't make the man. Read their books, the ones that they did not write. Listen to them speak, not so very bright. Very very very very very very very sad all of this.

Dammit, Jim, I'm a aeronautical engineer, not a doctor!

Why would the astronauts have been writing the script? Why would you even have consulted them to get the medical details right?

I have no idea why you are advancing this claim. It is nonsensical.

 

[PetersCreek]

I suggest that you find a friend W.D. Clinger, perhaps several, friends who are actual physicians and deal regularly with infectious disease issues, or ask a garden variety gastroenterologist, that will work fine. Ask them about the Borman scenario, Berry's response as well. Be sure you provide the details.

You might wish to reconsider that suggestion, Patrick. The last time someone (ahem) took you up on a similar challenge it blew up in your face.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If I were to judge a man's intelligence by what he writes, what should I think of a man who, in writing, suggests I judge a man's intelligence by what he didn't write?

^^^ This

lol

 

[Loss Leader]

With Mercury they had quite a few unmanned launches, those must have been with "live nukes". Perhaps nukes without triggers, but aside fram that, they were Atlas contraptions testing the weapon system's overall integrity in the context of an actual firing.

Patrick - earlier you derided a Minuteman III test because it took place from an Air Force base and was fired across the Pacific. You stated that a real test would involve a Northern trajectory over the north pole to hit Russia.

What direction were the Mercury rockets fired? From where were they fired? My information is that the were fired from Florida, east over the Atlantic.

How does this fit with your theories? Why does my 2009 Minuteman launch seem fake because of its trajectory, while your supposed launches are real to you despite their even less "warlike" trajectory?

Or were we attempting to impress the inhabitants of the Canary Islands with our nuclear capabilities.?

 

[Ravenwood]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Atlas-D have to be strengthened to carry the Mercury capsule because it was bigger & heavier than the nuclear payload it was built to carry ? Wouldn't that invalidate its use for a testing how it would perform carrying its nuclear warhead, since it would not be the same construction ?

 

[slyjoe]

Patrick - earlier you derided a Minuteman III test because it took place from an Air Force base and was fired across the Pacific. You stated that a real test would involve a Northern trajectory over the north pole to hit Russia.

What direction were the Mercury rockets fired? From where were they fired? My information is that the were fired from Florida, east over the Atlantic.

How does this fit with your theories? Why does my 2009 Minuteman launch seem fake because of its trajectory, while your supposed launches are real to you despite their even less "warlike" trajectory?

Or were we attempting to impress the inhabitants of the Canary Islands with our nuclear capabilities.?

I wondered this too. I also wondered why the US would do these "test firings" when there had already been a couple dozen Atlas launches, starting in 1957, there were quite a few Atlas rockets already deployed, and the US was transitioning to solid fuel Minuteman rockets.

 

[Loss Leader]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Atlas-D have to be strengthened to carry the Mercury capsule because it was bigger & heavier than the nuclear payload it was built to carry ? Wouldn't that invalidate its use for a testing how it would perform carrying its nuclear warhead, since it would not be the same construction ?

He doesn't think the missiles were being tested; he believes their payloads were. So, how they got to space would be unimportant, just how they performed on the way down.

It's ironic because a dummy warhead full of sensory equipment to map temperature, pressure, load, shock, and the like would give a whole lot more data and one wouldn't have to make it any sort of a secret. So, according to Patrick, the US weapons designers worked harder to get less because it was logical to do so.

 

[Patrick1000]

Cool Tomblvd, why don't you break it down for us.....

As the only person on the thread with any medical experience and training, I can state unequivocally that Patrick's "diarrhea" dilemma is nothing but a red herring.

Cool Tomblvd, why don't you break it down for us.....

Tell us all why you do, or do not think Charles Berry' diagnosis of viral gastroenteritis is correct. We'd also like to know if you agree or disagree with Berry as to whether or not the vaccine the Apollo 8 astronauts were given provided protection against the Hong Kong flu and other strains of influenza as well during the 1968/1969 flu season. Finally, would like to know why it is you think that Borman took seconal a second time and intentionally made himself sick. What is your understanding with respect to Charles Berry's knowing about Borman self administering seconal a second time?

Thanks.....Can't wait to hear your views on all this.

 

[Patrick1000]

My point was that what is requisite for the understanding of Apollo....

No none of them have medical degrees, snag is that wasn't the claim that W.D. Clinger was responding to it was this one:



He fairly well refuted that by pointing out that they generally had higher than average academic acheivements. Again you quote his post but avoid responding to the point, again you make an error, on you could acknowledge without in any way affecting your underlying premise but you simply can't do it, you can admit to no error however small for fear your whole house of cards will come down.

My point was that what is requisite for the understanding of Apollo, is not a knowledge of aerospace sciences as Apollo is not about aerospace science. Rather, Apollo is an ever so transparent phony story that seeks to cover military activities with a series of make believe tales about fighter pilots landing spaceships on the moon.

Because the fraud is a bogus story that includes elements referencing the world of medical science, an understanding of medicine is one of the best ways to expose the pretended learned perpetrators for what they are, PHONIES.

This is because one of the fraud perpetrators' favorite ploys/strategies is to "pull rank" on critics and use the argument that because this all occurred in an "aerospace" context, an aerospace background/education is requisite for appreciating the events at their deepest level.

Actually and quite quite obviously, its deepest level is one of FRAUD, one of MAKE BELIEVE. One need not have a degree or special training of any sort to simply read maps, and if one is a critical thinker of average intelligence, one cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Apollo 11 flown LAM-2 Map of Michael Collins is FRAUDULENT BEYOND A DOUBT. This, given its intentional misgridding featuring landing elipse central target coordinates; 00 42' 50" north and 23 42' 28" east instead of the appropriate and accurate 00 43' 53" north and 23 38' 51" east.

Now, that said, my point in bringing up the medical degree business and the perpetrators' vulnerability in this regard is they made an insanely immense judgement error in that case, in that context, by virtue of allowing a medical issue to figure so prominently in one of the stories. So now they are dependent on their medical expert, Charles Berry, in a sense to figure out a way of presenting this thing, the Borman illness thing, in such a way that it doesn't blow up in everyone's face.

Well, that is more or less impossible. It has to blow up in everyone's face as it is so fundamental, such a fundamental medical point. The Borman medical issue has to do with fundamental "problems" if you will Garrison, acute infectious diarrhea, and the question of influenza vaccination efficacy in the context of both seasonal outbreaks and influenza pandemics. This is all very mainstream, basic medicine. Nothing esoteric about it, nothing one can do to finesse this to make it more complicated or difficult than it is . It is very simple and straightforward.

So, were NASA say to hire 2, 12, 20, 200 docs to debate me by myself on national tv with respect to this one issue, APOLLO WOULD IMMEDIATELY BE DEMONSTRATED FRAUDULENT IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION. Of course it would be doctors' opinions first. But any medical docs, whether primary care types, infectious disease types, or gastroenterologists, would hear said debate and view the facts in my favor. It could go no other way. The questions/problems are that fundamental.

Now, it might take a day or two or three to get all of the details out. It might be a fairly long debate because of the need to tell a rather long story about mostly what was NOT done. So perhaps it would go on for several days, mostly due to the need for story telling, presenting NASA's bogus story, just laying it out there as they tell it, as Borman told it. But once over, there would be no question in the minds of those who understand the language of the debate. That would mean that all but a few docs would see things as I do. It is that simple, that straightforward.


So, the point about education is and is not important necessarily. It is not important at all in one sense as anyone can see the LAM-2 Map is fake, no special training needed there. And if the LAM-2 Map is fake, so is all of Apollo 11. The whole Mission is fake, has to be, which it is, no question. The bogus LAM-2 Map is absolute proof positive. No other reason to fake the map except to fake the mission.

Now, that said, special education can be helpful on the other hand. Though not needed in the demonstration of Apollo fraudulence, a medical background is quite useful with respect to the issues of the astronauts not seeing stars/lasers and a solid medical background, formal medical training, is even all the more helpful/useful with respect to the Borman illness issue.

My point in bringing up the medical degree issue in the context of W.D. Clinger's post had to do with my wanting to emphasize that all those technical degrees did not, do not , add up to squat in the context of debating the Apollo fraud. The fraud is a subject to which aerospace science is most decidedly NOT germane. This is indeed the case and ever so ironically so. This rich and boundless irony is one of the reasons I became interested in the Apollo fraud as is also the case for several of my friends. It was/is the depth of this irony, the literary aspect of the irony, beyond poetic really. This has drawn us to Apollo.

For us, debating Apollo is an aesthetic choice. Practically speaking it is of course important that the public be made aware of its having been so profoundly scammed. However, the literary/romantic aspect of the fraud is what keeps my friends and myself going.

I was reading another Apollo fraud thread several months ago wherein a very capable hoax/fraud theorist was defending himself/herself against a handful of detractors. The fraud advocate used the term "for Pete's sake", and a very intelligent official story apologist wrote something like, "what does that mean? Is that a reference to Pete Conrad? some kind of pun?". The fraud advocate had to explain it was a "biblical" reference, the term he/she used. Perhaps he/she was punning, I suspect so, though that was not stated explicitly, naturally not, as that would have undone the intended effect. It would be quite like laughing at one's own jokes.

So Apollo as fraud is DEEP on many levels. To say that the Apollo astronauts are "unintelligent" is not to say that they did not go to school and in school did not do well......

Hope that helps Garrison, it is an important point of mine and many other Apollo fraud advocates, an important point that is seldom discussed.....

 

[Patrick1000]

Actually it would be an easy way to settle this all.....

You might wish to reconsider that suggestion, Patrick. The last time someone (ahem) took you up on a similar challenge it blew up in your face.

Actually it would be an easy way to settle this all.....A public debate as regards the diarrhea issues. NASA docs and myself. It would lead to a resolution of the the Apollo hoax/fraud matter in one fell simulated Eagle swoop. Such would be the case as mentioned above PetersCreek because the medical issue is so fundamental. It is not nuanced. It is a straightforward matter. An examination of the Borman illness leads to proof of fraud.

For example, this is tip of the iceberg by the way PetersCreek; being vaccinated against influenza does not necessarily provide protection/guaranteed effective immunization. Vaccines are far from 100% efficacious, especially in the context of influenza pandemics such as would be the case in 1968/1969 with the rather nasty Hong Kong flu pandemic. A million dead, many more seriously ill due to the Hong Kong bug.

Now you'll notice that when reading about the Borman illness, this Hong Kong flu business becomes a very critical matter. The NASA official line, the Charles Berry official line, was that influenza vaccination guaranteed immunity for Anders, Borman and Lovell. NASA and Berry in particular, really emphasized, incorrectly so, the vaccine's absolute efficacy. Again and again one reads whether in a newspaper article or an official NASA document that because the astronauts were vaccinated, influenza could be thankfully excluded as a diagnostic consideration for Borman's illness. All docs that work with influenza outbreaks, even a little, even mom and pop primary care docs know this to NOT BE TRUE!

Now as it turns out, diarrhea is NOT a very common problem in adult influenza, though it does occur. Diarrhea as a feature of the illness is more common in children. That said, the problem for Berry and the fraudsters was nevertheless, influenza HAD TO BE CONSIDERED AS A DIAGNOSIS. It was simply too important a possibility to miss, and given the reality of the pandemic of 1968/1969, the time of year/December and the nature of the symptoms reported by Borman, not to mention the others, any physician would BOOM!!!!, consider influenza as a possibility, right off the bat, even though the astronauts were said to have been vaccinated. A good doc, a thoughtful physician, would actually have considered a vaccination reaction as one possibility as well. .

The whole thing would have unraveled right there were a real physician to have looked at it, been involved in the real decision making. So what happens? UNBELIEVABLE, QUITE LITERALLY UNBELIEVABLE, THIS NEVER NEVER NEVER COULD HAVE HAPPENED, WOULD HAVE HAPPENED, BORMAN TAKES A SECOND SECONAL PILL TO INTENTIONALLY MAKE HIMSELF SICK, AGAIN THIS IS PER HIS OWN ACCOUNT. Of course that comes across as very stupid. No authentic physician would allow it. This is a story, one of many to pretend among other things, this could not have possibly been due to influenza. As is obvious, Borman's illness/nausea/vomiting/feverishness/diarrhea was not due to anything. It was a silly little play, a pretend illness.

I could go on and on, and the issue of influenza in the context of the Borman illness, as devastating as it is, is actually trivial in light of other points I could and will make in future posts as I work toward completing my presentation of the Apollo 8 fake space sickness matter. But there is enough on the table right now to secure Borman's , Anders, and Lovell's date with infamy. They are guaranteed to be shamed by this. Deeply so.

Sorry 'bout that PetersCreek, I suspect you admire these guys or may, but it is true. You shall see. It is but a matter of time.

 

[Patrick1000]

Perhaps you misunderstood me Loss Leader and I apologize if I was not clear....

Patrick - earlier you derided a Minuteman III test because it took place from an Air Force base and was fired across the Pacific. You stated that a real test would involve a Northern trajectory over the north pole to hit Russia.

What direction were the Mercury rockets fired? From where were they fired? My information is that the were fired from Florida, east over the Atlantic.

How does this fit with your theories? Why does my 2009 Minuteman launch seem fake because of its trajectory, while your supposed launches are real to you despite their even less "warlike" trajectory?

Or were we attempting to impress the inhabitants of the Canary Islands with our nuclear capabilities.?

Perhaps you misunderstood me Loss Leader and I apologize if I was not clear....The Vandenberg tests are certainly important. However, they are not adequate to provide the requisite confidence in our ICBM arsenal. I thought I mentioned that I liked the article you provided. Perhaps I did not, but I thought it a good article.

These Vandenberg tests are NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT fake. These are not insignificant launches. On the other hand, they do not test all of the important and essential functional components of the missile.

Say it is 1959 Loss leader instead of 2009. How would you know that your warhead was OK and would detonate as it should after passing through the atmosphere at unimaginable speeds? How would you know that your heat shield protected your warhead?

 

[Patrick1000]

My understanding is that the Mercury Program featured 6 unmanned Atlas launches....

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Atlas-D have to be strengthened to carry the Mercury capsule because it was bigger & heavier than the nuclear payload it was built to carry ? Wouldn't that invalidate its use for a testing how it would perform carrying its nuclear warhead, since it would not be the same construction ?

My understanding is that the Mercury Program featured 6 unmanned Atlas launches....

Obviously these guys/NASA are not doing what they are saying that they are doing. If they say a map is of such and such, and they grid it inaccurately, they are obviously willing to take liberties as need be to get whatever job that needs to be done DONE. Who knows what those unmanned Atlas launches were really about in terms of the actual vehicle specs and payload specs.

The one thing an Apollo researcher can be sure of however is that the test launches, indeed all of the Mercury program, whether a John Glenn type was launched to orbit in a space ship or not(PR plain and simple a Glenn launch would be), this is about ICBM technology, all of it. Any manned aspect is either a cover(PR a' la John Glenn) for the ICBM/military stuff, or was testing for manned space military contingencies. THESE GUYS ARE SOLDIERS IN EVERY SENSE OF THE TERM, INCLUDING "CIVILIAN" ARMSTRONG.

 

[Patrick1000]

You cannot up and launch missiles with live warheads.....

I wondered this too. I also wondered why the US would do these "test firings" when there had already been a couple dozen Atlas launches, starting in 1957, there were quite a few Atlas rockets already deployed, and the US was transitioning to solid fuel Minuteman rockets.

You cannot up and launch missiles with live warheads....Well, you ain't supposed to. Military guys need the OK from the prez and so forth. I am sure that despite what we are told, the military has in the past and continues to test missiles with live warheads in breach of treaties of one type or the other.

 

[Patrick1000]

The best test of an ICBM would be to......

He doesn't think the missiles were being tested; he believes their payloads were. So, how they got to space would be unimportant, just how they performed on the way down.

It's ironic because a dummy warhead full of sensory equipment to map temperature, pressure, load, shock, and the like would give a whole lot more data and one wouldn't have to make it any sort of a secret. So, according to Patrick, the US weapons designers worked harder to get less because it was logical to do so.

The best test of an ICBM would be to launch a live bird a long way, simulating as close as possible the flight distance/direction/gravitational field/magnetic field circumstances of an "at war launch". In the context of the test there would be careful monitoring telemetry/visuals from above and below including telemetry from the reentry vehicle such as could be obtained and then you would detonate the warhead to be sure the thing would fire having just maybe frozen if not well insulated/protected from space and then perhaps having just been heated too hot if not shielded from the "friction" of reentry. This is the ONLY way to tell if the thing, THE BOMB PART, works, and plenty at the RAND corporation apparently agree with me. READ THEIR STUFF AND READ THE MACKENZIE BOOK I REFERENCED.

 

[Patrick1000]

Stars From Space In Broad Daylight

http://vimeo.com/32001208

It is a low light camera, but your own eyes would do better than this camera, would be able to see the stars and bright earth as well, depending on circumstances.

It is only a matter of time, that day of infamy.