Merged: Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

It would be helpful if you could have a point when writing these posts.

Also, if you could clearly delineate the difference between your words and the quotations from written sources it would assist us in knowing which bits to ignore and which to mock roundly for inconsistent insistence of insidious instances.

The point is made in the answering of this simple question Apollognomon, take a shot at it'

Did the Apollo 11 astronauts see, or did they not see, stars from the surface of the moon?

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by godless dave

Um, that article really doesn't help your case at all.

Did the Apollo 11 astronauts see, or did they not see, stars from the surface of the moon?

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Did the Apollo 11 astronauts see, or did they not see, stars from the surface of the moon?

Did you see, or did you not see, stars from your living room when you turned on all the lights and looked out of the window?

[godless dave]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Did the Apollo 11 astronauts see, or did they not see, stars from the surface of the moon?

Ask them. Who cares? Why is that relevant to anything?

[Erock]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Reed worked with SELECT and DYNAMICS to determine the geometry of, and ignition time for, the Eagle launch and its return to the CSM.

He claimed it should have been a "piece of cake really", that is, were he to have had the landing coordinates and a solid ephemeris on the CSM.

Not having the former, he determined the Eagle/CSM relation by way of running a rendezvous radar solution in reverse. Having done that, he had the requisite "relative geometry" and could make a recommendation for the simulated mission's launch time as well.

Using what?

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by godless dave

Ask them. Who cares? Why is that relevant to anything?

It is a huge issue. Neil Armstrong said in 1969 that he did not see stars from the surface of the moon, but then he turned around and strongly endorsed a book written 25 years later wherein his bosses claimed it was easy for all of the astronauts to see stars.

Who is correct? Neil Armstrong? or his bosses? One of his bosses, Alan Shepard, he walked on the moon. He says in his book MOON SHOT it was easy to see stars.

Who is correct and why godless dave?

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by Erock

Using what?

Eagle(simulator) rendezvous radar

[Jack by the hedge]

Patrick - did you or did you not see stars from your living room when you turned on all the lights and looked out of the window. This is a huge issue.

[ArmillarySphere]

Using the onboard optics, sure - P57 requires aligning the platform using star sightings. Buzz performed this with the window shades up to prevent stray light from ruining his night vision.

Quote:

103:22:30 Armstrong: From the surface, we could not see any stars out the window; but out my overhead hatch (means the overhead rendezvous window), I'm looking at the Earth. It's big and bright and beautiful. Buzz is going to give a try at seeing some stars through the optics.

103:22:54 Duke: Roger, Tranquility. We understand. Must be a beautiful sight. Over.

Quote:

103:47:19 Duke: Tranquility, Houston. We see the star-angle difference. Looks good.

103:47:29 Aldrin: Okay. That last star was Navi, and it wasn't too well distinguishable. I can see where that error could come in. I think for the gravity alignment with one star, Rigel will be quite good.

(Aldrin performs another P57 alignment before takeoff)

There is no mention of the stars in the EVA transcript. Not surprising, given the lighting conditions and that they kept their visors down for the most part. Besides, they were busy looking at the moon.

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Did you see, or did you not see, stars from your living room when you turned on all the lights and looked out of the window?

I am assuming you are answering no Jack by the hedge, Neil Armstrong did not see stars from the surface of the moon.

Assuming that is the case, why did Alan Shepard write in his book MOON SHOT that it was easy to see stars? Neil Armstrong endorsed the book. Must have their facts straight .

Who is correct Jack by the Hedge, Neil Armstrong and no stars? or Alan Shepard yes stars easily seen?

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by ArmillarySphere

Using the onboard optics, sure - P57 requires aligning the platform using star sightings. Buzz performed this with the window shades up to prevent stray light from ruining his night vision.




(Aldrin performs another P57 alignment before takeoff)

There is no mention of the stars in the EVA transcript. Not surprising, given the lighting conditions and that they kept their visors down for the most part. Besides, they were busy looking at the moon.

Alan Shepard and Deke Slayton in their book MOON SHOT said stars were easily seen. So, who is correct, Armstrong or Shepard? A quote from Shepard's book which Armstrong endorsed strongly;

“Where were the stars?” the myth believers then asked. The cameras that NASA sent to the moon had to use short-exposure times to take pictures of the bright lunar surface and the moonwalkers’ white spacesuits. Stars’ images, easily seen by the moonwalkers, were too faint and underexposed to be seen as they are in photographs taken from space shuttles and the International Space Station."

Barbree, Jay; Alan Shepard; Deke Slayton (2011-04-27). Moon Shot: The Inside Story of America's Apollo Moon Landings (ebook Locations 3607-3609). Open Road E-riginal.

[Jack by the hedge]

Patrick, you are a firsthand witness, yet you keep us on tenterhooks. We desperately need to know whether or not you were able to see stars from your living room at night with the lights on. Can you not see that this will give us vital information on the relative brightness of stars and domestic lighting, and the performance of human vision in highly contrasting lighting conditions which, it appears, is a total ******* mystery and has never been investigated by anyone ever in all of history. This is groundbreaking work, Patrick. You're a pioneer.

[Erock]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Eagle(simulator) rendezvous radar

And Reed was too dumb to notice??

Not only did they 'fake' the Eagle overshooting, they also had a contingency of fake telemetry just for Reed to create the correct co-ordinates, and this after they 'had to hide' the Eagle (from the Russkies who could track it anyway!) by pretending to fudge the various other co-ordinates, but wholy crap Batman, they went and gave the correct co-ordinates to LICK over the phone??????????

Facepalmingly stupid stuff

[godless dave]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

It is a huge issue. Neil Armstrong said in 1969 that he did not see stars from the surface of the moon, but then he turned around and strongly endorsed a book written 25 years later wherein his bosses claimed it was easy for all of the astronauts to see stars.

Why is that a huge issue? Maybe he didn't read that part of the book.Maybe you're mis-remembering what you read.

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Who is correct? Neil Armstrong? or his bosses? One of his bosses, Alan Shepard, he walked on the moon. He says in his book MOON SHOT it was easy to see stars.

Who is correct and why godless dave?

I would imagine it would depend on which direction they were looking and the angle of the sun at the time they were looking. Keep in mind Armstrong and Shepard were on different missions with different landing sites. I still don't understand why it's relevant to anything.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Erock

...wholy crap Batman...

At first I thought this was a typo. But on reflection, presuming it was intentional, it deserves to be nommed for teh pith.

[Erock]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Neil Armstrong and no stars? or Alan Shepard yes stars easily seen?

Both. The Apollo 14 helmet had better blanking out of peripheral light.

http://www.myspacemuseum.com/leva.htm

Also, as far as I know, the Apollo 11 astronauts didn't use the side visors, maybe somebody has a link to verify this.

[Erock]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

At first I thought this was a typo. But on reflection, presuming it was intentional, it deserves to be nommed for teh pith.

As typos go, that was a good one wasn't it.

[drewid]

Highgain banned at BAUT?

Oh noes, say it aint so.

So Highgain was a sockpuppet of Dr Tea/maryb/sicilian AND also a liar, and was stupid enough to provide the evidence himself?
What sort of a moron would do that?
I'm shocked I tells ya, shocked.

[drewid]

Originally Posted by twinstead

This thread is ridiculous.

It is like watching someone punching themself in the face repeatedly.

[drewid]

Originally Posted by godless dave

Um, that article really doesn't help your case at all.

This is someone who thinks that radial means lateral. Reading comprehension obviously isn't a high scoring skill.

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by godless dave

Why is that a huge issue? Maybe he didn't read that part of the book.Maybe you're mis-remembering what you read.



I would imagine it would depend on which direction they were looking and the angle of the sun at the time they were looking. Keep in mind Armstrong and Shepard were on different missions with different landing sites. I still don't understand why it's relevant to anything.

It is a big issue godless dave because it is a risky lie. To say one cannot see stars from cislunar space or the surface of the moon is of course absurd. A huge lie, preposterous. So it is a huge issue because to take such a risk, to throw out there something that is so obviously untrue, is to tip one's hand and acknowledge that this huge lie must be covering an equally huge truth, a truth about the Apollo mission fraud.. Such a huge risk means there was tremendous motivation. This big lie is indeed a big clue, a big clue, if we are smart enough to follow it well.

Think about it godless dave, the Apollo 11 astronauts flew almost 3 whole days, 200,000 miles, through cislunar space and claimed to have never seen stars until here, at 02 23 56 35 of the voice transcript as quoted below. They are claiming to be on top of a moon which is now eclipsing the sun, 200,000 miles from home? The Apollo 11 Voice Transcript;

Time: 02 23 56 35

"CC: Roger. Understand that you can see the corona approximately 200 solar diameters out along the ecliptic, and the bright light extends out approximately one-eighth to one-quarter lunar radius. Over.

CDR: That's two lunar - two lunar diameters along the ecliptic in the bright part, right; a quarter to an eighth of a lunar radius out, and that's perpendicular to the ecliptic line on the South Pole.

CC: Roger.

CDR: Houston, it's been a real change for us. Now we are able to see stars again and recognize constellations for the first time on the trip. It's the sky is full of stars. Just like the nightside of Earth. But all the way here, we have only been able to see stars occasionally and perhaps through the monocular, but not recognize any star patterns.

CC: I guess it has turned into night up there really, hasn't it?

CDR: Really has."

Has it really Neil???? Can't say I buy it.

So apart from sighting stars through their optics for navigation/platform alignment, they don't see stars, none, until 3 days in as above.

Why tell such a big lie? And we know it is a big lie godless dave because back in 1969 , 1970 and the early Apollo days, they were ever so adamant about this point, NO STARS! Then when some time passed and the coast was sorta' clear, they changed their story, turned around and said they could see stars after all, a la' the MOON SHOT book jive, just as discussed above.

To try and maintain that lie in this day and age wouldn't wash, even little kids, literally, little kids know this stuff, know that observers would be able to see stars from the surface of the moon, and even better than an observer could see them from our own earth.

From NASA's own web site, LUNAR SCIENCE FOR KIDS




So it turns out the Apollo 11 astronauts pretended not to be able to see stars because if they could see stars, well then they could see laser light as well, and as I have pointed out above, admitting to their being able to see laser light would have meant big trouble for the not so very Eagle scouts, and the exposure of all Apollo Missions as fraudulent.

Neil Armstrong's ophthalmologic evaluation showed vision to be better than 20/20.

Diagnosis; No star claims bogus. Mission fraudulent!

[R.A.F.]

Originally Posted by drewid

Highgain banned at BAUT?

What an ass that guy was...

[R.A.F.]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

It is a big issue...

Only because you have this compulsion to make a fool of yourself...other than that, no...you're not important at all...

[godless dave]

Patrick, you haven't even established that anyone lied. Nobody claimed astronauts could not see stars from the moon's surface in every possible circumstance.

[R.A.F.]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Think about it...

That's the point...we HAVE thought about it, and find that you are almost criminally ignorant.

Why don't you go to a board where the "standards" are lower...like godlikeproductions.

You'd be right at home there.

[drewid]

Originally Posted by R.A.F.

What an ass that guy was...

Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

It is a huge issue. Neil Armstrong said in 1969 that he did not see stars from the surface of the moon, but then he turned around and strongly endorsed a book written 25 years later wherein his bosses claimed it was easy for all of the astronauts to see stars.

Armstrong didn't see them, at least one other astronaut did. Since Armstrong never said it was impossible where's the dichotomy?

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by drewid

Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.

Can't you guess? He started making cracks about the LRO imaging 'Armstrong's dirty diapers' and was immediately unmasked. He just can't break his scatalogical obsession.

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by godless dave

Patrick, you haven't even established that anyone lied. Nobody claimed astronauts could not see stars from the moon's surface in every possible circumstance.

Armstrong's statement is historic, etched in phony lunar stone, he said AT NO TIME did he or the other Apollo 11 astronaut(s) see stars from the surface of the moon. Maybe he did not "lie", but the astronauts collectively sure did change their minds. Just ask the astronauts' friend, Jay Barbree, the "reputable Apollo journalist of 50 years". He wrote that the astronauts told him they could EASILY see stars afterall. Wrote the astronauts could see stars at least twice. Neil Armstrong said that AT NO TIME did he or Aldrin see stars from the surface of the moon. Doesn't sound so EASY to me, what Neil Armstrong said. Maybe it is not a "lie", but let's not nit pick, it's sufficiently incriminating to celebrate proof of fraud.

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by R.A.F.

Only because you have this compulsion to make a fool of yourself...other than that, no...you're not important at all...

What do you think R.A.F., stars or no stars? Is Neil correct or Alan Shepard?

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by R.A.F.

What an ass that guy was...

Cut the swearing R.A. F. I informed you before, I am a devout atheist and this cursing on your part ruffles my feathers. I thought this was a family thread?

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by drewid

Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.

Is Neil correct drewid , or Alan Shepard? By the way, has Charles Berry got back to you on your aerosolized poop in his house proposal? Get back to us all here as soon as you can with your report, we certainly don't want anyone thinking Berry is incompetent.

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

What do you thin R.A.F., stars or no stars? Is Neil correct or Alan Shepard?

You realize asking that question over and over won't change the answer you've been given before right? Oh and condolences on Highgain but let's be honest everyone knew you wouldn't be able to rein in the stupidity forever so it was just a matter of time.

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by Garrison

Armstrong didn't see them, at least one other astronaut did. Since Armstrong never said it was impossible where's the dichotomy?

Not only Armstrong , Colins and Aldrin said no stars too. BUT Alan Shepard says stars are EASY to see , EASY to see just like the scientists say stars would be EASY to see from the surface of the moon, the REAL NASA scientists that maintain the Lunar Science for Kids website.

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by Garrison

You realize asking that question over and over won't change the answer you've been given before right? Oh and condolences on Highgain but let's be honest everyone knew you wouldn't be able to rein in the stupidity forever so it was just a matter of time.

What answer would that be Garrison? Since there are several answers given by the astronauts to the same question, I am confused. Neil Armstrong's answer, "no stars"? Alan Shepard's answer, "see stars EASILY"? or Jay Barbree the Apollo lap dog's answer? Which one , which answer should I pick Garrison? I am still confused. Wish the astronauts and their lap dogs would stick with one, one answer, shouldn't be hard, you think???????.........

[drewid]

Originally Posted by Garrison

Can't you guess? He started making cracks about the LRO imaging 'Armstrong's dirty diapers' and was immediately unmasked. He just can't break his scatalogical obsession.

I might have known.

Quote:

Apollo I never looked into seriously.

*points*

HAR DE HAR HAR

[sts60]

Originally Posted by drewid

Shame I'm not a member at BAUT, It makes finding his last posts take more time than I can be bothered with.
I'd quite like to see where he gave it away, then I could point and laugh.

You can try here if you need a chuckle. Patrick1000/fattydash/HighGain/DoctorTea/BFischer/BSpassky/mvinson/piersquared/maryb/sicilian/etc. rather incontinently reverted to his obsession with eliminatory functions (who knows? perhaps his toilet training went badly? or perhaps is a work in progress?) and was banned for sock-puppetry.

He's a prolific liar, but due to his immaturity, ego, and general incompetence, not a very good one; in addition to serial lying to register yet another sock-puppet, he claimed to have little interest in Apollo, and not long before had said he'd "attended a small ad hoc symposium on Quantum Cosmology". I guess that's what you call chatting with the other workers at McDonald's while waiting for the deep fryer to do its thing.

[Michael Cook]

Originally Posted by Patrick1000

Did the Apollo 11 astronauts see, or did they not see, stars from the surface of the moon?

Geez.. is Poopapalooza over?? I'd guess that Neil and Buzz had a MISSION to complete in a short time.. therefore, they didn't have the time to gawk skyward in their bulky suits and try to see stars.. they used stars for mechanical alignment and reference anyways with the AOT.. they probably had enough of stars anyways and were focused on the lunar surface and their duties. What's so difficult to comprehend about that?

[Patrick1000]

Originally Posted by Michael Cook

Geez.. is Poopapalooza over?? I'd guess that Neil and Buzz had a MISSION to complete in a short time.. therefore, they didn't have the time to gawk skyward in their bulky suits and try to see stars.. they used stars for mechanical alignment and reference anyways with the AOT.. they probably had enough of stars anyways and were focused on the lunar surface and their duties. What's so difficult to comprehend about that?

Nothing is difficult, so why change your story? Collins made a big point about why it is/was that one cannot see stars from cislunar space. Why say that, why tell that lie unless there is something huge behind it?

Children know Collins is wrong. So why would the pilot of the Columbia simulator lead kids astray like that? Of course they have the Lunar Science for Kids Web site now, a web site run by reputable NASA scientists, but back in the day, back in the day when Collins wrote his book CARRYING THE FIRE, about the epic mission of the Apollo 11 simulator "Columbinot", children did not have such good resources. They might actually believe that an observer could not dark adapt and look out the windows, maybe even when trying to crack a window to escape the simulated stench, and not see stars.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by twinstead

This thread is ridiculous.

Ridiculous rocks!