Multivac
Master Poster
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,121
The only thing you have proven is your ability to see conspiracies in everything, and your inability to understand when your theories have been disproven.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga
- Thread starter Patrick1000
- Start date
- Status
The only thing you have proven is your ability to see conspiracies in everything, and your inability to understand when your theories have been disproven.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
I'm really going to enjoy watching you tell Sibrel he's just a NASA shill. He outweighs you by at least 100 pounds and has severe anger management issues.
Proof? Well you haven't proven anything regarding Aldrin despite eight months of trying via a dozen identities and sock puppets. At least nothing you're willing to go public with. Sheesh, Woodward and Bernstein didn't take this long to bring down a Presidency. Within eight months of the Watergate building arrests, most of Nixon's aides had already been convicted and sentenced. What's keeping the Greatest Apollo Historian in the World from stepping forward and claiming his reward? Indeed, what's keeping him from stepping forward for any purpose whatsoever?
As for Sibrel, you make a vague handwaving allusion to chromakeying, your new pet word, and think just that reference should mean something. Sorry, I'm an engineer. And I'm an engineer who happens to have a documented specialty in photographic analysis. Did you really think just throwing a couple of words around was going to work.
What training and certification do you have in formal forensic photographic analysis? If you don't provide an answer and documentation within 48 hours (especially after assuring everyone else that you "don't do photos") I will represent that you have none.
Yes, I think it is. I think you've finally crossed the line where everyone but you is some kind of "perp." Nobody pays attention to you anymore, so you have up to up the ante. And you've upped it to the point where your claims are pretty much incredible right out of the gate.
All your claims are speculative. In eight months you've never been able to elevate them beyond speculation, despite walls of text. You keep telling everyone that you've proved something beyond the shadow of a doubt, but your clear unwillingness to step out from behind your curtain of anonymity tells the world otherwise. It tells the world what you really believe about your claims.
Yes, please take your much-needed hints from FatFreddy. It will be astonishingly amusing to watch the "doctor" and the "math
I don't know how many times people need to tell you that no one agrees with you. If you want to talk majority, talk the majority that actually exists -- the one you're terrified to face without making arrangements first to save face when you lose. You've been crowing about how much you want to talk to NASA flight surgeons. I found some; they're not NASA but they're the ones Ames uses. And when I offer to set it up, your tune changes entirely. Now you want all kinds of assurances that you won't be made a fool of. You're expecting and planning for failure. That speaks volumes, and the rest of the readers here are listening. Can you hear them laughing at you?
No, you don't care about a majority. You know you're a minority of one, and you like it because you used to crow about how famous you were going to be, and how your claims are yours alone and no one else's. Remember back in August how you were telling everyone you were going to go down as the most important Apollo historian of all time? You love riding the range alone, so to speak. And that means you don't get to simultaneously claim and army of believers.
What you call "details" are really the entire case. You state your belief first, then you try to backfill a pseudo-intellectual argument for it using your spotty and incomplete understanding of the relevant sciences and blatantly cherry-picked references. When your argument is invariably demolished, you pretend you never made it and postulate something entirely new in favor of the original belief, even if it contradicted what you once "infallibly" said had to be the truth.
It's pretty obvious to everyone except you that you're groping in the dark -- not for the truth, but for any path that leads you to the desired belief.
And if you think they would have used a green screen for Apollo, then that pretty much tells me you don't have the faintest idea how chromakeying has been implemented throughout history.
Here's a test of your knowledge and skill:
1. Why would it not have been advantageous to use green as the key color prior to the mid-1990s?
2. What major keying system immediately preceded the blue-screen process, and why was it discontinued in favor of blue?
3. What was the most effective key color in 1969?
I don't know Frank Borman. But you seem to. What have you done personally to ensure that your accusations get into the hands of the accused? Oh, that's right -- not a thing.
Three weeks and still no promised computations. Meanwhile you've been posting reams of new nonsense and frantically scrambling for someone to give you hints.
Pathetic.
Good for you. Then you can stop hiding behind your pretended inability to grasp concepts like "face to face" and "in person" and provide Jay with your Name etc.
Oh wait, your "proof" is just another of your obvious lies, and you are afraid of meeting those you insult.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
I cannot adequately put into words how excruciatingly stupid your latest "KILLER, HISTORIC FINDING" is.
After several months of this, I'm not surprised at anything that comes out of his mouth. I expect him to lie. I expect him to exaggerate his own credibility.
This is why I have been encouraging him to lose the safety net and engage with his victims in person. I think he too has grown used to the well-insulated fantasy world he seems to have built for himself online. Perhaps the icy shock of being plunged back into the real world will temper his enthusiasm and delusions of infallibility.
Patrick, are you ever going to send your contact information? I doubt the folks down in Mountain View will wait forever for you.
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Well let us just take a step here.
David Burke, Tech Eng. Dip. AMIEI
You can check with the Institute of Engineers of Ireland if you wish.
Where are your credentials?
What makes these claims even more pointless is that none of them would show Apollo was fraudulent even if they were true.
If the Sibrel film was faked? So what? It was made decades after Apollo and doesn't address the mountain of physical evidence that backs Apollo. Likewise if the doctors overstated the efficacy of the flu vaccine, if the Apollo 13 investigators didn't perform every experiment they should have, if in fact all of the above you still aren't one step closer to refuting the mass of evidence that Apollo took men to the moon exactly as the historical record states.
If the Sibrel film was faked? So what? It was made decades after Apollo and doesn't address the mountain of physical evidence that backs Apollo. Likewise if the doctors overstated the efficacy of the flu vaccine, if the Apollo 13 investigators didn't perform every experiment they should have, if in fact all of the above you still aren't one step closer to refuting the mass of evidence that Apollo took men to the moon exactly as the historical record states.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Sorry, I had to send this before I was finished. I have more time now. Patrick, please demonstrate your knowledge of compositing techniques and history by answering the following questions. This incoporates the questions I asked in the quoted post, plus some new ones I intended to ask.
Answer each one individually, not with a blanket quote-and-distract.
If you do not provide complete answers to my satisfaction within 48 hours of this post's approval by moderation, I will represent that you admit not having the answers. If you attempt to declare these questions somehow off-topic or out of bounds, I will represent that you have admitted a lack of expertise in the topic you claimed to be relevant. If you object to having your knowledge tested, I will represent that you have admitted that others are more qualified than you to discuss the topics that pertain to your claims. I think those are fair terms. I will appeal to the moderators and the general readership.
- Why would it not have been advantageous to use green as the key color prior to the mid-1990s?
- What major chroma-based matting system immediately competed with the blue-screen process? In addition, who invented it? What client was it invented for? And and why was it discontinued in favor of blue?
- What was the most effective key color for film in 1969?
- What late-1970s innovation in cinematography made matte-based compositing finally useful in a general sense in both film and television?
- What is the other principal keying method?
- Identify the most effective three techniques used by photographic analysts to determine that chromakey compositing has been used in an image.
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
Who Ya' Gonna' Call? CHOP BUSTERS!
Who Ya' Gonna' Call? CHOP BUSTERS!
Actually realpaladin, 'tis I that does the chop busting here in these JREF Lost Bird parts. I'll bust a chop for you here in just a bit. First let me address your point.
You seem to be implying because they can see what appear possibly to be man made objects on the lunar surface, those items are the very things NASA(or other "experts") claim them to be; a LM, a rover?, some rover tracks, and so forth. The images taken by fancy NASA lunar orbiters, and the lunar imaging machines of others, show little white things where the LMs are supposed to be. They may well be LMs according to one of my theories, or something from earth not unlike a LM launched and landed in the context of Apollo, but that does not mean the item was manned when it touched down. I've busted the requisite chops to prove these missions were unmanned(see the Borman chop bust below).
If there are squiggly marks imaged and NASA or Joe Blow or Joey ChanBlow say those are rover marks made by a man occupied lunar car, well that is not necessarily so. They may be marks created in the Apollo era by a man made device/machine/probe/craft/what have you, it does not mean that a man's activity on the moon is what operated/operates the device that made the "tracks". The equipment may well have been controlled from the earth.
Feel free to post links to your images of the rover here, rover tracks, the LM as well. Nothing on the lunar surface has ever been imaged in such a way that it was/is unambiguously identifiable as a LM or rover based on the image in and of itself. Because these objects are located at the Apollo landing sites, they are assumed to be these things, but shown a picture of say one of the "LMs" as taken by a modern orbiter, the man/gal in the street is not going to identify it as space ship. The guy/gal would say, it looks like a white patch, speck whatever. The people running these programs claim these things to be what they are because they are imaged at Apollo landing sites. The resolution has never been satisfactory enough to identify these objects, rovers, rover tracks, LMs as such, outside the context of their Apollo landing site locations. Again, I encourage you to post links to your images. If you do not, I will do so , so that the others may appreciate what it is that we are talking about here.
Now lets move on to everyone’s favorite quotidian feature of my posting, DrPat’s cavalcade of chop busts. I’ll bust Borman’s chops for you realpaladin since you seem to be unfamiliar with the facts of Apollo fraudulence. This is a particularly good smack across the mandible, not an impotent one as was the case with the hokey Aldrin phony baloney sucker cheek poke upon the hidden (with good reason) countenance of co-conspirator and Apollo fraud perp extraordinaire Bartholome Sibrel.
One of the January 1969(I believe it is the 17th) Life Magazines features an extraordinary article. It is a collection of three personal essays, each one a personal account by one of the Apollo 8 astronauts of his experience flying the simulated mission. These are PERSONAL, personal in the sense of written in the first person, and penned by the simulated astronauts themselves. You should read this article realpaladin, it is a critical piece of Apollo history, this personal account given by the astronauts published in a January 1969 Life Magazine just after Borman et al’s alleged return.
Naturally, because Borman got “sick in space”, pretended to anyway, one expects to find, and indeed one does find an account by the make believe commander of his make believe illness in the Life magazine article.
In case you were/are unaware real paladin, Borman was said to have gotten sick roughly 18 hours or so into the flight; chills, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea. The vomitus and loose feces floated about the zero G capsule until Lovell and Anders were said to have been able to clean things up as best they could with paper towels. These latter two astronauts, Lovell and Anders, were said to have been sick as well, though not in the same sense as Borman. They were not feeling nearly as bad and were believed to have had “something else” altogether in terms of diagnosis.
Because in December of 1968 pandemic Hong Kong flu was creating problems for the citizens of the world, indeed, it killed a million people and made many millions more very very very sick, there were some “concerns” that Borman might have had the Hong Kong flu, at least the threat was considered in its broadest sense. If one looks at the newspapers from December of 1968, you’ll find articles about the astronauts in space and the flu on earth on the very same page, front page even; ASTRONAUTS ‘ROUND THE MOON!!!! And next to that, HONG KONG FLU CAUSING BIG PROBLEMS WORLD WIDE, stuff like that you‘ll see.
The head NASA doctor responsible for dealing with all of this stuff spoke with Borman and the other astronauts and determined that astronaut Borman probably had viral gastroenteritis. This was reported in the newspapers in real-time, reported while the astronauts were aloft in number 8. This viral gastroenteritis diagnosis was given in the medical section of the OFFICIAL Apollo 8 Mission Report itself, NASA’s document certifying and summarizing the mission's events, their occurrence and nature.
Air Force General Samuel Phillips who was in charge of the US Minuteman Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program and who later/1964 became director of the Apollo Manned Lunar Landing Program made the decision to continue with the Apollo 8 mission despite Borman’s illness. In all the presentations made by Charles Berry, Phillips and the other decision makers associated with the Borman space illness, the claim was made on their part that they did not have to worry about the Borman illness being due to INFLUENZA, the Hong Kong Flu, as the astronauts had been vaccinated. The vaccination of the astronauts guaranteed INFLUENZA immunity. This was NASA's, Berry's, Phillip's, everybody's story.
The problem here is that vaccination most decidedly does not confer guaranteed immunity. Vaccination was/is/remains far from 100% efficacious/effective. The REALITY here was/is that they, the Apollo Fraud Perpetrators, added the Borman illness to the Apollo 8 SCRIPT to make the flight “more realistic”, perhaps better said, “not problem free”. They did not want it to look so problem free that it might be questioned as phony, especially by the flight officers and others working directly with the astronauts. What happened was, the lie got away from them. Scripting this illness turned out to be a bad idea. Proof of that is their having had to lie, and lie in an obvious way to cover the gaffe.
When Borman got back to earth and wrote his January 1969 piece for Life Magazine, he unbelievably and incriminatingly wrote that he intentionally took seconal a second time to try and make himself sick AGAIN, more nausea, more vomiting, more diarrhea in cislunar space, more of an opportunity to INFECT HIS COLLEAGUES. Borman wrote that his impression was that it was seconal sleeping medicine that made him sick to begin with, that seconal he took to help him sleep in the space ship is what caused his diarrhea and everything else. Interestingly, and for obvious reasons, he does not mention the diarrhea in the January 1969 Life Magazine article, diarrhea that was/is openly acknowledged elsewhere, commander diarrhea documented as part of Apollo 8‘s official history. Borman does emphasize that despite his believing seconal made him sick to begin with, despite his belief that seconal gave him nausea, causing vomiting, gave him diarrhea as well, he nevertheless took a half a seconal tab, took SECONAL A SECOND TIME(the first time he took a whole tab) and this MADE HIM SICK A SECOND TIME, not terribly so , just a bit. So in this way Borman knew it was the seconal that caused his problem to begin with. Borman claims he intentionally took seconal the second time as an experiment to see if he could provoke his symptoms yet AGAIN. NAUSEA VOMITING DIARRHEA HE WANTED AGAIN. And so because, so claims Borman anyhoo, the second dose of seconal did indeed make him sick again, it must have been seconal that made him sick the first time(it was not viral gastroenteritis according to the Life Mag article by the commander). Borman knew the culprit was seconal, knew this because BOTH TIMES he took seconal in space he got sick, albeit less sick with the second dosing, presumably because he took a smaller dose. Of course if there was any sense at all that it was seconal that made him sick to begin with he would not be allowed to take it again. That would be considered a serious serious side effect problem. It would never be allowed. The story is ridiculous, not credible in any sense.
Air Force General Samuel Phillips, head of the Manned Apollo Program wrote the May 1969 National Geographic feature article about Apollo 8 in which he emphasized that Borman and the other astronauts could not possibly have had INFLUENZA because they were vaccinated. Which of course he and Dr. Charles Berry and everyone else at NASA knew was simply not true. Of course Berry knew vaccination is no guarantee of immunity. Of course Berry knew Borman could have had INFLUENZA despite vaccination were any of this true.
As incriminating as all of this already is, more significantly, most significantly, this JOKE of a space illness, demonstrated that the Apollo CM was not a safe environment. If Borman had had simple viral gastroenteritis this time, nothing to prevent all the worse, and as such, they should have prepared for it. Cernan EASILY could acquire INFLUENZA on earth during the pandemic and be affected during the flight of Apollo 10, or Schweikert Shigellosis on Apollo 9, or Armstrong simple garden variety pneumococcal pneumonia on Apollo 11, and were this stuff to have occurred, the capsule had now been identified as an unsafe and dangerous place, UNNECESSARILY SO. It could be modified and should have been modified, would have been modified were Apollo 8 real.
So what the jive infested Borman illness thing does is not only expose Borman and Samuels as LIARS, which they are, and the ONLY reason for them to LIE is to cover up Apollo Fraudulence, but it also exposes the contrived environment of the pretended Apollo CM as an environment unsafe and not certifiable for trips to the moon. Were Apollo real, were Borman’s illness real, the risk Borman posed to his crewmates and the mission would have been recognized as serious indeed, and the problem would have consequently been addressed by way of modifying the CM to make it safe , or safer for long trips such as voyages to the moon. As this does not occur, we note that ALL OF APOLLO MUST BE FRAUDULENT FOR THE THREAT UNCOVERED BY THE PRETENDED BORMAN ILLNESS WAS NEVER ADDRESSED SO THAT SUBSEQUENT FLIGHTS MIGHT BE VIEWED AS REASONABLY SAFE WERE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES TO OCCUR AGAIN.
Whether Borman “has” INFLUENZA vs. gastroenteritis vs. the common cold vs. Camplobacter vs. food poisoning vs. whatever else have you, is of no major concern here. As a matter of fact, Borman had NOTHING as none of this is real. The lying and lack of corrective action on the part of NASA principals does betray the Apollo Missions as incontrovertibly fraudulent.
Now that my friend realpaladin is how you BUST A CHOP…..Next seminar domani.
17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, ZERO, RIP OFF, WE HAVE $125,000,000,000 worth of RIP OFF and indeed it does smell to high heaven, won’t someone take the time to fix this dang stanky thang?
Who Ya' Gonna' Call? CHOP BUSTERS!
Actually realpaladin, 'tis I that does the chop busting here in these JREF Lost Bird parts. I'll bust a chop for you here in just a bit. First let me address your point.
You seem to be implying because they can see what appear possibly to be man made objects on the lunar surface, those items are the very things NASA(or other "experts") claim them to be; a LM, a rover?, some rover tracks, and so forth. The images taken by fancy NASA lunar orbiters, and the lunar imaging machines of others, show little white things where the LMs are supposed to be. They may well be LMs according to one of my theories, or something from earth not unlike a LM launched and landed in the context of Apollo, but that does not mean the item was manned when it touched down. I've busted the requisite chops to prove these missions were unmanned(see the Borman chop bust below).
If there are squiggly marks imaged and NASA or Joe Blow or Joey ChanBlow say those are rover marks made by a man occupied lunar car, well that is not necessarily so. They may be marks created in the Apollo era by a man made device/machine/probe/craft/what have you, it does not mean that a man's activity on the moon is what operated/operates the device that made the "tracks". The equipment may well have been controlled from the earth.
Feel free to post links to your images of the rover here, rover tracks, the LM as well. Nothing on the lunar surface has ever been imaged in such a way that it was/is unambiguously identifiable as a LM or rover based on the image in and of itself. Because these objects are located at the Apollo landing sites, they are assumed to be these things, but shown a picture of say one of the "LMs" as taken by a modern orbiter, the man/gal in the street is not going to identify it as space ship. The guy/gal would say, it looks like a white patch, speck whatever. The people running these programs claim these things to be what they are because they are imaged at Apollo landing sites. The resolution has never been satisfactory enough to identify these objects, rovers, rover tracks, LMs as such, outside the context of their Apollo landing site locations. Again, I encourage you to post links to your images. If you do not, I will do so , so that the others may appreciate what it is that we are talking about here.
Now lets move on to everyone’s favorite quotidian feature of my posting, DrPat’s cavalcade of chop busts. I’ll bust Borman’s chops for you realpaladin since you seem to be unfamiliar with the facts of Apollo fraudulence. This is a particularly good smack across the mandible, not an impotent one as was the case with the hokey Aldrin phony baloney sucker cheek poke upon the hidden (with good reason) countenance of co-conspirator and Apollo fraud perp extraordinaire Bartholome Sibrel.
One of the January 1969(I believe it is the 17th) Life Magazines features an extraordinary article. It is a collection of three personal essays, each one a personal account by one of the Apollo 8 astronauts of his experience flying the simulated mission. These are PERSONAL, personal in the sense of written in the first person, and penned by the simulated astronauts themselves. You should read this article realpaladin, it is a critical piece of Apollo history, this personal account given by the astronauts published in a January 1969 Life Magazine just after Borman et al’s alleged return.
Naturally, because Borman got “sick in space”, pretended to anyway, one expects to find, and indeed one does find an account by the make believe commander of his make believe illness in the Life magazine article.
In case you were/are unaware real paladin, Borman was said to have gotten sick roughly 18 hours or so into the flight; chills, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea. The vomitus and loose feces floated about the zero G capsule until Lovell and Anders were said to have been able to clean things up as best they could with paper towels. These latter two astronauts, Lovell and Anders, were said to have been sick as well, though not in the same sense as Borman. They were not feeling nearly as bad and were believed to have had “something else” altogether in terms of diagnosis.
Because in December of 1968 pandemic Hong Kong flu was creating problems for the citizens of the world, indeed, it killed a million people and made many millions more very very very sick, there were some “concerns” that Borman might have had the Hong Kong flu, at least the threat was considered in its broadest sense. If one looks at the newspapers from December of 1968, you’ll find articles about the astronauts in space and the flu on earth on the very same page, front page even; ASTRONAUTS ‘ROUND THE MOON!!!! And next to that, HONG KONG FLU CAUSING BIG PROBLEMS WORLD WIDE, stuff like that you‘ll see.
The head NASA doctor responsible for dealing with all of this stuff spoke with Borman and the other astronauts and determined that astronaut Borman probably had viral gastroenteritis. This was reported in the newspapers in real-time, reported while the astronauts were aloft in number 8. This viral gastroenteritis diagnosis was given in the medical section of the OFFICIAL Apollo 8 Mission Report itself, NASA’s document certifying and summarizing the mission's events, their occurrence and nature.
Air Force General Samuel Phillips who was in charge of the US Minuteman Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program and who later/1964 became director of the Apollo Manned Lunar Landing Program made the decision to continue with the Apollo 8 mission despite Borman’s illness. In all the presentations made by Charles Berry, Phillips and the other decision makers associated with the Borman space illness, the claim was made on their part that they did not have to worry about the Borman illness being due to INFLUENZA, the Hong Kong Flu, as the astronauts had been vaccinated. The vaccination of the astronauts guaranteed INFLUENZA immunity. This was NASA's, Berry's, Phillip's, everybody's story.
The problem here is that vaccination most decidedly does not confer guaranteed immunity. Vaccination was/is/remains far from 100% efficacious/effective. The REALITY here was/is that they, the Apollo Fraud Perpetrators, added the Borman illness to the Apollo 8 SCRIPT to make the flight “more realistic”, perhaps better said, “not problem free”. They did not want it to look so problem free that it might be questioned as phony, especially by the flight officers and others working directly with the astronauts. What happened was, the lie got away from them. Scripting this illness turned out to be a bad idea. Proof of that is their having had to lie, and lie in an obvious way to cover the gaffe.
When Borman got back to earth and wrote his January 1969 piece for Life Magazine, he unbelievably and incriminatingly wrote that he intentionally took seconal a second time to try and make himself sick AGAIN, more nausea, more vomiting, more diarrhea in cislunar space, more of an opportunity to INFECT HIS COLLEAGUES. Borman wrote that his impression was that it was seconal sleeping medicine that made him sick to begin with, that seconal he took to help him sleep in the space ship is what caused his diarrhea and everything else. Interestingly, and for obvious reasons, he does not mention the diarrhea in the January 1969 Life Magazine article, diarrhea that was/is openly acknowledged elsewhere, commander diarrhea documented as part of Apollo 8‘s official history. Borman does emphasize that despite his believing seconal made him sick to begin with, despite his belief that seconal gave him nausea, causing vomiting, gave him diarrhea as well, he nevertheless took a half a seconal tab, took SECONAL A SECOND TIME(the first time he took a whole tab) and this MADE HIM SICK A SECOND TIME, not terribly so , just a bit. So in this way Borman knew it was the seconal that caused his problem to begin with. Borman claims he intentionally took seconal the second time as an experiment to see if he could provoke his symptoms yet AGAIN. NAUSEA VOMITING DIARRHEA HE WANTED AGAIN. And so because, so claims Borman anyhoo, the second dose of seconal did indeed make him sick again, it must have been seconal that made him sick the first time(it was not viral gastroenteritis according to the Life Mag article by the commander). Borman knew the culprit was seconal, knew this because BOTH TIMES he took seconal in space he got sick, albeit less sick with the second dosing, presumably because he took a smaller dose. Of course if there was any sense at all that it was seconal that made him sick to begin with he would not be allowed to take it again. That would be considered a serious serious side effect problem. It would never be allowed. The story is ridiculous, not credible in any sense.
Air Force General Samuel Phillips, head of the Manned Apollo Program wrote the May 1969 National Geographic feature article about Apollo 8 in which he emphasized that Borman and the other astronauts could not possibly have had INFLUENZA because they were vaccinated. Which of course he and Dr. Charles Berry and everyone else at NASA knew was simply not true. Of course Berry knew vaccination is no guarantee of immunity. Of course Berry knew Borman could have had INFLUENZA despite vaccination were any of this true.
As incriminating as all of this already is, more significantly, most significantly, this JOKE of a space illness, demonstrated that the Apollo CM was not a safe environment. If Borman had had simple viral gastroenteritis this time, nothing to prevent all the worse, and as such, they should have prepared for it. Cernan EASILY could acquire INFLUENZA on earth during the pandemic and be affected during the flight of Apollo 10, or Schweikert Shigellosis on Apollo 9, or Armstrong simple garden variety pneumococcal pneumonia on Apollo 11, and were this stuff to have occurred, the capsule had now been identified as an unsafe and dangerous place, UNNECESSARILY SO. It could be modified and should have been modified, would have been modified were Apollo 8 real.
So what the jive infested Borman illness thing does is not only expose Borman and Samuels as LIARS, which they are, and the ONLY reason for them to LIE is to cover up Apollo Fraudulence, but it also exposes the contrived environment of the pretended Apollo CM as an environment unsafe and not certifiable for trips to the moon. Were Apollo real, were Borman’s illness real, the risk Borman posed to his crewmates and the mission would have been recognized as serious indeed, and the problem would have consequently been addressed by way of modifying the CM to make it safe , or safer for long trips such as voyages to the moon. As this does not occur, we note that ALL OF APOLLO MUST BE FRAUDULENT FOR THE THREAT UNCOVERED BY THE PRETENDED BORMAN ILLNESS WAS NEVER ADDRESSED SO THAT SUBSEQUENT FLIGHTS MIGHT BE VIEWED AS REASONABLY SAFE WERE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES TO OCCUR AGAIN.
Whether Borman “has” INFLUENZA vs. gastroenteritis vs. the common cold vs. Camplobacter vs. food poisoning vs. whatever else have you, is of no major concern here. As a matter of fact, Borman had NOTHING as none of this is real. The lying and lack of corrective action on the part of NASA principals does betray the Apollo Missions as incontrovertibly fraudulent.
Now that my friend realpaladin is how you BUST A CHOP…..Next seminar domani.
17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, ZERO, RIP OFF, WE HAVE $125,000,000,000 worth of RIP OFF and indeed it does smell to high heaven, won’t someone take the time to fix this dang stanky thang?
Last edited:
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
Patrick, do you agree or disagree that the lunar missions were conducted for military purposes?
Do you agree or disagree that the lunar missions were conducted during the cold war?
Do you agree or disagree that the cold war ended without a nuclear apocalypse?
Do you agree or disagree that the real military purposes of the lunar missions were accomplished?
Fallacy of absolute proof.
No proof is absolute. I don't KNOW the sun is outside my window. It might be an automobile that has driven on to the lawn, while some other person snuck in and changed the time on all my clocks. Heck, even if I go outside, I don't KNOW that bright glowing object is the sun...aliens might have replaced it with some technological marvel while stealing our sun for some nefarious purposes of their own.
The objects on the Moon are likely to be what NASA claims, are consistent with what NASA claims, and thus fit into the large body of evidence FOR NASA's claims.
Which pictures are you looking at? Is it coincidence that ALSEP and other experiments, rover, rover and foot tracks, even the corners of the LM are all consistent with the DETAILED description of what is expected?
These aren't random white blobs. In one image, not only can you make out the rover, but it was possible to see which way the rover's wheels were turned when it was parked for the last time.
The string of coincidence necessary to make different and largely unrelated hardware, deployed by robotics, with associated cabling and other marks match up this exactly is, well, staggering.
Even given the staggering coincidence necessary to reproduce the entire A11 landing site (for instance) with a random collection of lunar rocks, there is NOTHING on the lunar surface with the albedo of the Apollo equipment. There are also few items that project from the surface in the same way so as to reveal such sharp shadows.
Characterizing the distinctive features as random light-colored rocks is more than disingenuous. I would have to characterize it as either willful ignorance or bold-faced lying.
Pointless copy-paste omitted.
You've still failed to show (or even respond to questions on) how an abort scenario was an appropriate trade-off. In fact, if the worst-case happened and all three astronauts became too sick to operate the space craft, in an abort scenario this would be occurring at roughly the time they re-entered atmosphere -- in short, during the most critical phase of the flight.
You've staunchly ignored the realities of abort from the middle of a lunar mission. You've ignored the reality of private medical communications you are not privy to. You've ignored the weighting of probability, taking a parochial "I might get sued by the patient" view in a protective clinic environment versus a dangerous, expensive, high-stakes exploratory mission.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
The question is whom you are going to call? You refuse to prove that you've contacted any of the principals you've libeled, as you claimed you had. You refuse to allow me to set up meetings between you and them unless your anonymity is protected and you have someone to hold your hand lest you get beaten up too severely. You display no expertise and refuse to acknowledge it when displayed by others.
What separates you from any number of the coffee-house blowhards who sit there idly sipping java and bragging about how they will change the world? When are you going to be different? I've waited eight months for you to make an argument that rises above mere bluster. When is that going to happen?
AdMan
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,293
Nonsense.
http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse/view/M168000580R
The fact you can't see it doesn't mean actual experts can't either.
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
A few posts back, I identified who I am and my qualifications, which can be verified.
Why is patrick afraid of doing this?
Why is patrick afraid of doing this?
PetersCreek
Unregistered
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2007
- Messages
- 549
Those "little white things", as you call them, are consistent with the historical record. That's not the only thing they're consistent with. On Jul 18, 2009, 2:40am, "rodionh" posted a comparison of an LRO image of the Apollo 11 landing site with a 3D recreation of same. (Link—scroll down to the time and date mentioned) The model recreated the LM, Lunar terrain, and the lighting approximating that which would be expected at the time of the LRO image. The matchup was impressive.
So, here we have a couple of things: your claim that highly modified, automated Apollo hardware went to the Moon; and an image of the landing site with hardware that matches the historical record. Let's try to reconcile them.
Pretend for a moment that LM that landed on the Moon was really so very extensively modified for military purposes. The ascent stage of that modified LM would have to lift off as advertised in order to maintain the appearance of one spacecraft (which could be tracked) taking off to meet up with another spacecraft (which could be tracked) in Lunar orbit. If it doesn't do that, the jig is up, to use your parlance.
This presents a problem, though. With the ascent stage gone, how were ongoing military operations conducted? Was it all stowed in the descent stage? Where? How much did all this gear weigh? How did it work? Was there an antenna for communication with your fantasy Lagrangian network?
Oh...and put up or shutup.
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
We are all extremely confident that any reasonable person reading this thread, even if completely ignorant about the technical aspects of Apollo, will see exactly whose chops have been repeatedly busted.
If the Seconal was what made him sick, he obviously didn't have anything infectious, so how could he have infected Anders and Lovell? Fail.
When I was in 8th grade, I was tested for allergies, and I tested positive for several common food allergies. My allergist advised my mother to eliminate each food in turn from my diet for a couple of days, and then have me eat the food in question, to see if I had a reaction. Yet more evidence that you're not a doctor. Fail.
From the article in question, p. 613 (this is right after Berry's private-loop consultation with Borman):
As usual, the article doesn't say what you imply. He says they're not worried about the Hong Kong flu. He does not say that the vaccine is 100% effective; in fact, the article implies just the opposite. If he believed the vaccine were 100% effective, why would it matter whether anyone besides the astronauts had been vaccinated? Just the astronauts' having been vaccinated would have been viewed as sufficient.
Jay asked you to explain specifically how the CM should have been modified, and what effect your proposed modifications would have had on the operation of the spacecraft. You have failed to do so. Please do so now, or else withdraw the claim that "it could . . . and should have been modified."
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 27,454
Oh, Patrick. Are you still desperately squirming, trying to find a form of words which merely implies Berry thought influenza vaccine was 100% effective, so you don't get crushed beneath the inconvenient fact of his never having said any such thing?
How many times do we need to go around in circles here? Every single one of your points is absolute garbage, and everyone can see it as plain as day.
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
As far as I can tell, the Chinese still give the nod to the NASA boys....
As far as I can tell, the Chinese still give the nod to the NASA boys with respect to who shot the best high res pics of the landing sites.....
http://www.china.org.cn/world/2011-09/07/content_23367720.htm
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/apollo-sites.html
I think it is more than fair to say that assuming there indeed were manned landings at these sites, then this here is indeed the equipment. That said, the images in and of themselves have nowhere near the requisite resolution to make the claim that "one clearly sees a LM, or a rover, or whatever".
One clearly does not see a LM. One sees an indistinct white patch. Is it a LM? I personally think it might be, or something quite similar to Thomas Kelly's LM. By similar I mean an American made made lunar probe(modified unmanned LM?) that was successfully soft landed.
On the other hand, I think those fraud advocates, esteemed colleagues of mine they indeed are, with a view other than mine, with a view that the Americans man landed NOTHING OF IMPORTANCE at these sites, are saying something quite reasonable when they claim, "one cannot see anything there that can be claimed is definitely identifiable solely from the shot and the shot/image only, as a LM, or a rover, or a whatever, I am not buying in". I personally happen to disagree with that view, but I find it very reasonable given the image resolution and what is indeed identifiable outside any "set up". By set up I mean an assumed context that the Apollo Missions were successful and achieved more or less what is in the main claimed of them, and that this was achieved in the manner typically/generally presented in our popular American culture.
As far as I can tell, the Chinese still give the nod to the NASA boys with respect to who shot the best high res pics of the landing sites.....
http://www.china.org.cn/world/2011-09/07/content_23367720.htm
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/apollo-sites.html
I think it is more than fair to say that assuming there indeed were manned landings at these sites, then this here is indeed the equipment. That said, the images in and of themselves have nowhere near the requisite resolution to make the claim that "one clearly sees a LM, or a rover, or whatever".
One clearly does not see a LM. One sees an indistinct white patch. Is it a LM? I personally think it might be, or something quite similar to Thomas Kelly's LM. By similar I mean an American made made lunar probe(modified unmanned LM?) that was successfully soft landed.
On the other hand, I think those fraud advocates, esteemed colleagues of mine they indeed are, with a view other than mine, with a view that the Americans man landed NOTHING OF IMPORTANCE at these sites, are saying something quite reasonable when they claim, "one cannot see anything there that can be claimed is definitely identifiable solely from the shot and the shot/image only, as a LM, or a rover, or a whatever, I am not buying in". I personally happen to disagree with that view, but I find it very reasonable given the image resolution and what is indeed identifiable outside any "set up". By set up I mean an assumed context that the Apollo Missions were successful and achieved more or less what is in the main claimed of them, and that this was achieved in the manner typically/generally presented in our popular American culture.
Last edited:
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Come on Patrick. I have listed my verifiable credentials in thread.
Where are yours?
Where are yours?
AdMan
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,293
That you willingly lower yourself to the level of those idiotic Apollo conspiracy theorists by calling them "esteemed colleagues" speaks volumes.
Patrick, when are you going to PUT UP OR SHUT UP?
Patrick1000
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,039
Absolutely Love The Questions Loss Leader, Best By Far From Your Side In A Long Time.
Absolutely Love The Questions Loss Leader, Best By Far From Your Side In A Long Time...
I'll address each question in turn as best I can. Keep in mind that the way in which I answer them today is different from the way in which I would have provided answers to such questions as recently as say last Christmas, and were you to ask me these same questions again at the time of our up coming 4th of July celebration, the answers would be undoubtedly different as well.
My sense as regards the context of the questions themselves, and so my perception of what the questions are really about is dynamic, shifting, and my responses are dynamic in nature as well. They have and will continue to change over time.
1) Yes, for the most part the American Lunar Missions were military missions, though their specific nature, details regarding intent/goals are far from defined/determined. I IMAGINE THAT I WOULD BE SURPRISED BY LEARNING THE DETAILS WITH REGARD TO MUCH OF WHAT THE APOLLO MILITARY PEOPLE WERE UP TO.
There were also non military activities as well. One cannot say Apollo was purely military, though the program's inception was owed to military concerns and it was a military dynamic that drove the program, and probably drives much of what NASA does now.
2) Yes, of course I agree that the lunar missions were conducted during the cold war. I think it was George Orwell who first used the term, coined the term, correct? This, right after the war, 1945. And the "cold war" ended not, at least not formally, until December 25/Christmas of 1991 when there was an official declaration of the Soviet Union's dssolution.
With regard to the cold war's end, I would argue that it is not over, despite popular and academic views to the contrary. The landscape is indeed different and in many respects less tense, but the threat/fears/misunderstandings/uncertainties persist. The "Apollo landings" took place 1969 through 1972, definitely COLD WAR ERA EVENTS based on their occurring during that formally defined period, 1945-1991.
3) Yes and no to your third question Loss Leader. There was no nuclear apocolypse during the cold war period as one might formally define that period, 1945 through 1991. However, there are plenty of nukes around, atomic seeds have been sown. If there is a nuclear catastophe in the future, it may well result from cold war era fallout.
4) I cannot say the American military interests responsible for Apollo achieved all of their goals. I would imagine they achieved only some and much was, perhaps even still is left undone. They parked some LRRRs on the surface of the moon. They calculated the earth's gravitational strength, harmonics and so forth as previously discussed. They built a Dynamic Soarer. They undoubtedly engaged in manned supra-atmospheric reconnassaince. They developed systems for better launching/targeting of American ICBMs, and developed better systems for the detection of enemy ICBM launches. They developed better military communication systems, better guidance systems and better terrestrial locating systems. But I imagine I know little of many things that they hoped to do and did do, and I also imagine that I know little of many things they hoped to do and were not able to achieve for one reason or the other.
Absolutely Love The Questions Loss Leader, Best By Far From Your Side In A Long Time...
I'll address each question in turn as best I can. Keep in mind that the way in which I answer them today is different from the way in which I would have provided answers to such questions as recently as say last Christmas, and were you to ask me these same questions again at the time of our up coming 4th of July celebration, the answers would be undoubtedly different as well.
My sense as regards the context of the questions themselves, and so my perception of what the questions are really about is dynamic, shifting, and my responses are dynamic in nature as well. They have and will continue to change over time.
1) Yes, for the most part the American Lunar Missions were military missions, though their specific nature, details regarding intent/goals are far from defined/determined. I IMAGINE THAT I WOULD BE SURPRISED BY LEARNING THE DETAILS WITH REGARD TO MUCH OF WHAT THE APOLLO MILITARY PEOPLE WERE UP TO.
There were also non military activities as well. One cannot say Apollo was purely military, though the program's inception was owed to military concerns and it was a military dynamic that drove the program, and probably drives much of what NASA does now.
2) Yes, of course I agree that the lunar missions were conducted during the cold war. I think it was George Orwell who first used the term, coined the term, correct? This, right after the war, 1945. And the "cold war" ended not, at least not formally, until December 25/Christmas of 1991 when there was an official declaration of the Soviet Union's dssolution.
With regard to the cold war's end, I would argue that it is not over, despite popular and academic views to the contrary. The landscape is indeed different and in many respects less tense, but the threat/fears/misunderstandings/uncertainties persist. The "Apollo landings" took place 1969 through 1972, definitely COLD WAR ERA EVENTS based on their occurring during that formally defined period, 1945-1991.
3) Yes and no to your third question Loss Leader. There was no nuclear apocolypse during the cold war period as one might formally define that period, 1945 through 1991. However, there are plenty of nukes around, atomic seeds have been sown. If there is a nuclear catastophe in the future, it may well result from cold war era fallout.
4) I cannot say the American military interests responsible for Apollo achieved all of their goals. I would imagine they achieved only some and much was, perhaps even still is left undone. They parked some LRRRs on the surface of the moon. They calculated the earth's gravitational strength, harmonics and so forth as previously discussed. They built a Dynamic Soarer. They undoubtedly engaged in manned supra-atmospheric reconnassaince. They developed systems for better launching/targeting of American ICBMs, and developed better systems for the detection of enemy ICBM launches. They developed better military communication systems, better guidance systems and better terrestrial locating systems. But I imagine I know little of many things that they hoped to do and did do, and I also imagine that I know little of many things they hoped to do and were not able to achieve for one reason or the other.
- Status