Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions

  • 68 Replies
  • 24861 Views
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #30 on: August 10, 2012, 08:33:39 AM »
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/june2006/receiving_voyager1.htm
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/april2006/voyager1.htm
Radio hams detect signal from Voyager I.

http://www.amsat-dl.org/p5a/p5a-bochum-eng.htm
Radio hams detect signal from Mars Express.

http://www.southgatearc.org/news/march2009/eve.htm
Radio hams receive first ever Earth-Venus-Earth transmissions.

Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #31 on: August 10, 2012, 08:43:14 AM »
http://www.hobbyspace.com/Radio/WeatherSatStation/index.html
This is a how-to guide on receiving imagery from weather satellites with your own ground station.
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

?

BoatswainsMate

  • 675
  • You just been Tom Bishop'ed
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #32 on: August 10, 2012, 11:07:06 AM »
I think we can all agree that this evidence is pretty solid. honestly denying this would make that person seem childish. Like a child covering his ears stomping and yelling "it's not true! it's not true!"

*

ThinkingMan

  • 1830
  • Oh, Really?
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #33 on: August 10, 2012, 11:31:45 AM »
I think we can all agree that this evidence is pretty solid. honestly denying this would make that person seem childish. Like a child covering his ears stomping and yelling "it's not true! it's not true!"

Hi, have you met Tom Bishop? Yes, I can see you have.
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

?

BoatswainsMate

  • 675
  • You just been Tom Bishop'ed
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #34 on: August 10, 2012, 09:41:19 PM »
I think we can all agree that this evidence is pretty solid. honestly denying this would make that person seem childish. Like a child covering his ears stomping and yelling "it's not true! it's not true!"

Hi, have you met Tom Bishop? Yes, I can see you have.

Oh..I did not know we included Tom. I figured Tom was just that special kid that people just nob at and try to avoid.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #35 on: August 10, 2012, 10:35:03 PM »
I know you guys think this means something, but NASA had a very large budget during its Apollo days and pushed for things which proved that they went to the moon.

Right after the moon missions there were all these news reports of people bouncing lasers off the retro reflectors the Astronauts placed. This supposedly proved the moon missions and discredited the naysayers in the US and other countries who doubted America's space program. The only thing is, it usually wasn't mentioned in the articles that it was organizations which NASA funded who were shooting the lasers.

NASA was desperate for things which proved the moon missions. It was a very big PR event which directly impacted the reputation of the United States Government.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2012, 10:38:20 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Lorddave

  • 18254
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #36 on: August 10, 2012, 10:38:00 PM »
I know you guys think this means something, but NASA had a very large budget during its Apollo days and pushed for things which proved that they went to the moon.

Right after the moon missions there were all these news reports of people bouncing lasers off the retro reflectors the Astronauts placed. This supposedly proved the moon missions and the naysayers in other countries who doubted America's space program. The only thing is, it usually wasn't mentioned that it was organizations which NASA funded who were shooting the lasers.

NASA was desperate for things which proved the moon missions. It was a very big PR event which directly impacted the reputation of the United States Government.
Why don't you shoot one?  It's not like lasers are impossible to get without millions of dollars.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #37 on: August 10, 2012, 10:58:21 PM »
I know you guys think this means something, but NASA had a very large budget during its Apollo days and pushed for things which proved that they went to the moon.

Right after the moon missions there were all these news reports of people bouncing lasers off the retro reflectors the Astronauts placed. This supposedly proved the moon missions and the naysayers in other countries who doubted America's space program. The only thing is, it usually wasn't mentioned that it was organizations which NASA funded who were shooting the lasers.

NASA was desperate for things which proved the moon missions. It was a very big PR event which directly impacted the reputation of the United States Government.
Why don't you shoot one?  It's not like lasers are impossible to get without millions of dollars.

They claim to use specially built ruby lasers which are among the most powerful in the world, which shoot out quadrillions of photons in a single blast and receive only one or two back due to the atmosphere of the earth, any lesser laser being insufficient.

They also claim to have specially built computer control equipment which aims the laser and does the equivalent of using a rifle to hit a moving dime two miles away.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2012, 03:29:32 AM by Tom Bishop »

?

BoatswainsMate

  • 675
  • You just been Tom Bishop'ed
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #38 on: August 10, 2012, 11:22:44 PM »
Actually the soviets used the ruby laser. The laser used in america was not a ruby laser. I simply just googled the subject and found the information so it is not hard to do.

I also came across this bad boy right here. seems legit, but I am no expert.
http://www.w7ftt.net/laser1.html

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #39 on: August 11, 2012, 07:24:53 AM »
Actually the soviets used the ruby laser. The laser used in america was not a ruby laser. I simply just googled the subject and found the information so it is not hard to do.

Your Googling skills are in need of better refinement.

http://spie.org/x38304.xml

    "McDonald Observatory was the premier LLR station during the 1970s and early 1980s. The 2.7-m system, using a Korad ruby laser, routinely produced normal point data with an accuracy of 10-15 cm. After 15 years of operation the 2.7-m system was replaced by a dedicated 0.76-m system, built around a frequency-doubled Nd:YAG laser that produces LLR data approaching 1 cm normal point accuracy."

The McDonald Observatory lunar ranging experiments were the star attraction through the 70's and 80's, often championed as proof that NASA went to the moon. However, what the news articles don't tell you is that the experiments were funded by NASA.

Flip to the second page of that link and you will find "This work is supported by NASA Grant NGR-44-012-165"

Quote
I also came across this bad boy right here. seems legit, but I am no expert.
http://www.w7ftt.net/laser1.html

At the bottom of that article:

    "Table Mountain Observatory, operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), is located just west of the
    town of Wrightwood, California at an elevation of 7500 feet."

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory happens to be a NASA facility.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2012, 08:20:48 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #40 on: August 11, 2012, 08:15:37 AM »
I know you guys think this means something, but NASA had a very large budget during its Apollo days and pushed for things which proved that they went to the moon.

Right after the moon missions there were all these news reports of people bouncing lasers off the retro reflectors the Astronauts placed. This supposedly proved the moon missions and discredited the naysayers in the US and other countries who doubted America's space program. The only thing is, it usually wasn't mentioned in the articles that it was organizations which NASA funded who were shooting the lasers.

NASA was desperate for things which proved the moon missions. It was a very big PR event which directly impacted the reputation of the United States Government.

I'm not sure I see the relevance of the laser ranging experiments.  Your indictment of them is that they're connected to NASA.  Do you have any evidence that any of my sources are connected to NASA in any way?

1.  You don't need an expensive laser to bounce radio waves off of the Moon.  Radio hams have been bouncing radio waves off of the Moon for decades.  It's called EME communication.  It's independent verification of both the size of the Moon, and its distance from us.

2.  At least two of my sources explicitly express that their intention was to find something hidden by NASA.  They were skeptical that NASA was truly transparent.  They wanted to find something unexpected.  They didn't.

http://legacy.jefferson.kctcs.edu/observatory/apollo11/
Quote
Baysinger told me that the Apollo lunar eavesdropping project arose because in the late 1960ís he was an amateur radio astronomer with an interest in NASA, in astronomy, in UFOs, and in other such things that were hot topics at a time when America was on the verge of landing its first men on the moon...These interests and efforts led to the idea that he might independently verify the information that NASA had been providing about the Apollo program.  Could he get unedited, unfiltered information about the Apollo 11 landing by eavesdropping on the radio signals transmitted from the lunar surface?  And could he find out things that NASA did not want the public to know about?
http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/
Quote
I have an irresistible urge to find out what went on behind the scenes during the Space Race of the Cold War. What I saw as a kid and a young man was just the the media picture, not the true story. To try to tell the real story is the purpose of this site. I also wish to share personal memories of great space events.

3.  Baysinger recorded radio transmissions from astronauts on the Moon.  These signals could not have some from any other location.  This fact has been demonstrated and verified by journalists, astronomers, and other radio hams. 
Quote from: Baysinger
I tried to think of all possible signal sources that we might have been inadvert[ent]ly hearing and mistaking for the "real" moon-based signals.  Firstly, the "selectivity" of the receiving equipment - the antenna and radio receiver - was "narrow" enough to respond to only the frequencies - and "mode" of modulation - we knew would be used.  Had the signal been a "harmonic" (i.e., a multiple, either sub or super ) or even a "spurious" emission of a local TV station, the audio portion of the signal (an FM subcarrier) would not have been separable from the video portion (an AM main carrier + sync pulses) and would have been heard as a raucous buzz, not voices.  And IF it had been heard, [it] should have included the other voices indicated in NASA's transcript.
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42682
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #41 on: August 11, 2012, 08:20:48 AM »
Actually the soviets used the ruby laser. The laser used in america was not a ruby laser. I simply just googled the subject and found the information so it is not hard to do.

Your Googling skills are in need of better refinement.

As are your reading skills.  He was contesting the type of laser used by the Americans, not the source of the funding.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #42 on: August 11, 2012, 08:24:58 AM »
Quote
I'm not sure I see the relevance of the laser ranging experiments.  Your indictment of them is that they're connected to NASA.  Do you have any evidence that any of my sources are connected to NASA in any way?

The point is that NASA has a strong incentive to collect or generate proof that they went to the moon, as evidenced by their lunar laser efforts and sensationalist articles around it claiming it as proof of the moon landings.

As are your reading skills.  He was contesting the type of laser used by the Americans, not the source of the funding.

Please use your reading skills to re-read my post. I provided a source saying that the ruby lasers were used by Americans.

I put that the experiment was funded by NASA as a side note.

*

Lorddave

  • 18254
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #43 on: August 11, 2012, 08:30:35 AM »
Quote
I'm not sure I see the relevance of the laser ranging experiments.  Your indictment of them is that they're connected to NASA.  Do you have any evidence that any of my sources are connected to NASA in any way?

The point is that I have a strong incentive to collect or generate proof that they didnt go to the moon, as evidenced by their photographic efforts and sensationalist articles around it claiming it as proof of the moon landing hoax.
Fixed.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #44 on: August 11, 2012, 09:12:31 AM »
Quote
I'm not sure I see the relevance of the laser ranging experiments.  Your indictment of them is that they're connected to NASA.  Do you have any evidence that any of my sources are connected to NASA in any way?

The point is that NASA has a strong incentive to collect or generate proof that they went to the moon, as evidenced by their lunar laser efforts and sensationalist articles around it claiming it as proof of the moon landings.

In other words, you will not accept independent observations/verification of any NASA activities.  You're assuming the conclusion you want to believe and blindly dismissing any evidence that contradicts it, no matter how credible that evidence is.  You've provided no reason at all to question the credibility of these sources.  You've fallen back on, "Well, they could be fake, so they must be fake."  That's the argument you're making.

You provided no evidence that they were in any way untrustworthy, and I provided you with evidence that they wanted to catch NASA fakery.  I've provided you with many sources that document exactly what equipment and procedures they used.  The real point is that you don't have to take anyone's word for it.  You can make many of these observations yourself.

Your clear bias is difficult to reconcile with this quote:
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

How does this reasoning not apply to you and and everything from the conspiracy page of the wiki?
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #45 on: August 12, 2012, 08:20:05 AM »
I'm actually really hoping to get an answer from you on this on, Tom.  I'm genuinely curious to know why this particular set of observations is unacceptable to you.

You've said many times that you would accept independent, third-party evidence of NASA activities.  Now it seems that you're backing off of those claims.  Are you?  Do you still consider yourself willing to accept such evidence?  If so, under what criteria?

e: I guess this isn't going to get a response.  Just so the final record is clear: Tom Bishop will accept every uncorroborated and unverifiable observation made by Rowbotham in the 19th century (Polaris being seen the Southern Hemisphere, for instance), but he won't accept rigorously documented, repeatable observations recorded by modern instruments in this very century.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2012, 02:19:49 PM by garygreen »
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

*

ThinkingMan

  • 1830
  • Oh, Really?
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #46 on: August 13, 2012, 06:35:46 AM »
I know you guys think this means something, but NASA had a very large budget during its Apollo days and pushed for things which proved that they went to the moon.

Right after the moon missions there were all these news reports of people bouncing lasers off the retro reflectors the Astronauts placed. This supposedly proved the moon missions and discredited the naysayers in the US and other countries who doubted America's space program. The only thing is, it usually wasn't mentioned in the articles that it was organizations which NASA funded who were shooting the lasers.

NASA was desperate for things which proved the moon missions. It was a very big PR event which directly impacted the reputation of the United States Government.

A 2 watt laser can be used. They're not that expensive. I mean, My friend got a 1 watt laser for $300 bucks 4 years ago, last I checked they were down to about $100. Why don't you go get a 2 or 3 watt laser and try this for yourself. You can debunk the whole thing in one shot.
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42682
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #47 on: August 13, 2012, 08:35:17 AM »
I know you guys think this means something, but NASA had a very large budget during its Apollo days and pushed for things which proved that they went to the moon.

Right after the moon missions there were all these news reports of people bouncing lasers off the retro reflectors the Astronauts placed. This supposedly proved the moon missions and discredited the naysayers in the US and other countries who doubted America's space program. The only thing is, it usually wasn't mentioned in the articles that it was organizations which NASA funded who were shooting the lasers.

NASA was desperate for things which proved the moon missions. It was a very big PR event which directly impacted the reputation of the United States Government.

A 2 watt laser can be used. They're not that expensive. I mean, My friend got a 1 watt laser for $300 bucks 4 years ago, last I checked they were down to about $100. Why don't you go get a 2 or 3 watt laser and try this for yourself. You can debunk the whole thing in one shot.

Because you're still going to need some (most likely) fairly expensive equipment to detect the occasional photon that makes it back from the moon.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

ThinkingMan

  • 1830
  • Oh, Really?
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #48 on: August 13, 2012, 10:22:05 AM »
I know you guys think this means something, but NASA had a very large budget during its Apollo days and pushed for things which proved that they went to the moon.

Right after the moon missions there were all these news reports of people bouncing lasers off the retro reflectors the Astronauts placed. This supposedly proved the moon missions and discredited the naysayers in the US and other countries who doubted America's space program. The only thing is, it usually wasn't mentioned in the articles that it was organizations which NASA funded who were shooting the lasers.

NASA was desperate for things which proved the moon missions. It was a very big PR event which directly impacted the reputation of the United States Government.

A 2 watt laser can be used. They're not that expensive. I mean, My friend got a 1 watt laser for $300 bucks 4 years ago, last I checked they were down to about $100. Why don't you go get a 2 or 3 watt laser and try this for yourself. You can debunk the whole thing in one shot.

Because you're still going to need some (most likely) fairly expensive equipment to detect the occasional photon that makes it back from the moon.

You make a valid point. The laser itself though is obscenely cheap compared to the rest of it. I'm sure, with some research, you could figure out how to make some of the equipment.
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8781
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #49 on: August 13, 2012, 06:56:17 PM »
You've said many times that you would accept independent, third-party evidence of NASA activities.  Now it seems that you're backing off of those claims.  Are you?  Do you still consider yourself willing to accept such evidence?  If so, under what criteria?

APOLLO, McDonald Obs et al are not independent third-parties.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #50 on: August 13, 2012, 09:05:38 PM »
You've said many times that you would accept independent, third-party evidence of NASA activities.  Now it seems that you're backing off of those claims.  Are you?  Do you still consider yourself willing to accept such evidence?  If so, under what criteria?

APOLLO, McDonald Obs et al are not independent third-parties.

I have not provided any sources from either of those entities. 

The first two links were written by a community college professor, for the National Association for Amateur Radio, about a man named Larry Baysinger, an amateur radio astronomer who successfully recorded transmissions from astronauts on the Moon during the Apollo 11 mission.  A reporter for the Louisville Courier-Journal documented the event from conception to execution.  None of these people have any connection to NASA.  Baysinger rigorously documented his experiment, and its results were corroborated by the Bochum Observatory in Germany.

The third link describes photos of various Apollo missions taken by amateur photographers, radio astronomers, and engineers.  There are a bunch of them.  I guess I can't say definitively that none of them ever worked for NASA at any point ever.  That said, their findings have been verified and corroborated.

Some team of radio astronomers from the University of Florida got telemetry from Apollo 17.

Sven Grahn, an amateur radio enthusiast from Sweden, has cataloged dozens of observations of different artificial satellites and space vehicles.

Radio hams have independently received signal/telemetry from the Voyager probes and at least one Mars mission, eavesdropped on weather satellites, and communicate with one another by bouncing radio waves off of the Moon.

The list goes on and on...
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #51 on: August 13, 2012, 11:18:19 PM »
Garygreen and a few other guys presented some amazing scientific evidence here proving that it was indeed possible to follow the astronauts going to the moon. So the FEers instead of acknowledge/deny/discuss the evidence presented, they just changed the subjected and started to talk how evil Nasa really is.

When in fact, they simply cannot refute the evidence presented here so far. That is was possible for people outside the space programs to build a radio and follow the astronauts going to the moon.

It is still possible, since there are plenty of people intercepting space/earth communication all the time.

 



 

?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #52 on: August 14, 2012, 06:36:53 AM »
Garygreen and a few other guys presented some amazing scientific evidence here proving that it was indeed possible to follow the astronauts going to the moon. So the FEers instead of acknowledge/deny/discuss the evidence presented, they just changed the subjected and started to talk how evil Nasa really is.

When in fact, they simply cannot refute the evidence presented here so far. That is was possible for people outside the space programs to build a radio and follow the astronauts going to the moon.

It is still possible, since there are plenty of people intercepting space/earth communication all the time.
the funny thing is all these people who believe that space travel has been faked have never proven it. you get a bunch of pictures which are interpreted one way or another but you never see people like tom bishop setting up his own equipment and finding it out for himself. tom bishop is just a fraud and just post things to wind you up.

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #53 on: August 28, 2012, 09:46:12 AM »
Radio Amateurs Receive Mars Science Laboratory

Quote
Just over 7 hours after launch at 21:45 UTC the X-band telemetry signal from the MSL was received using the Bochum amateur radio facility. The signal, received at a distance of 112,000 km, had a spin-modulation of +/- 3.5 Hz with 2 revolutions / minute.

This is believed to be the first reception of the MSL outside the official NASA Deep Space Network (DSN) and the USN tracking station at Dongara, Australia (under contract to JPL for the MSL launch).

Included at the bottom of the article are the technical details of the software and hardware used to make the observations.
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #54 on: October 03, 2012, 08:01:04 AM »
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/manchester/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_8150000/8150469.stm

http://depletedcranium.com/fascinating-recording-of-apollo-11-at-jodrell-bank-released/
Quote
It is interesting to note just how precise the measurements by Jodrell Bank were.  Not only was the observatory able to receive data from the spacecraft, it was also able to pinpoint the region of the moon they were located in and to measure their speed and trajectory using measurements of the Doppler shift, combined with highly accurate signal vector and other measurements.  They were even able to detect when Apollo-11 abruptly stopped descending to the lunar surface and began to climb in altitude.  This was the result of Neil Armstrong taking manual control of the Lunar Module to find a suitable landing site, after noting that the site that the automated system was headed for was strewn with large boulders.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Jodrell Bank Lovell Telescope records Luna 15 crash
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #55 on: July 21, 2013, 10:16:50 AM »
One of the things that impresses me about this forum is that FE's seem to post statements that show a complete ignorance about a lot of things. The one on this post about antennas is just an example. Check out all the stupid remarks on "Ham Radio Measurements of the Distance From The Earth to the Moon" for another example.

EDITED 22 JULY 2013. For example : You can check out that topic and see how it got de-railed at the very first and how much unrelated "pasta" got posted. The topic has also made its way into the "hung threads" category. 

Other threads concerning photography are other examples.

Are Flat Earthers really that ignorant ? Or are they just pretending to be so for the sake of a debate ?There are certainly many books that explain things like radio and photography in simple terms and they wouldn't have to post such stupid statements. If I didn't know something about a subject being discussed on this forum, I certainly would do some research, but sadly....but it is some times downright hilarious  ;D....an FE (Tom Bishop and sceptimatic are the worst)...will post something that is absolutely inane about something that they have an opinion but no facts to back it up. It seems rather sad that research seems to be a "no-no" for the Flat Earth Society.

PS- Moderator. Can you explain why this post is any worse than any of the others on the subject which are contrary to FE and why they are not getting "warnings" ?
« Last Edit: July 22, 2013, 07:50:20 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #56 on: July 21, 2013, 10:25:54 AM »
One of the things that impresses me about this forum is that FE's seem to post statements that show a complete ignorance about a lot of things. The one on this post about antennas is just an example. Check out all the stupid remarks on "Ham Radio Measurements of the Distance From The Earth to the Moon" for another example.

Other threads concerning photography are other examples.

Are Flat Earthers really that ignorant ? Or are they just pretending to be so for the sake of a debate ?There are certainly many books that explain things like radio and photography in simple terms and they wouldn't have to post such stupid statements. If I didn't know something about a subject being discussed on this forum, I certainly would do some research, but sadly....but it is some times downright hilarious  ;D....an FE (Tom Bishop and sceptimatic are the worst)...will post something that is absolutely inane about something that they have an opinion but no facts to back it up. It seems rather sad that research seems to be a "no-no" for the Flat Earth Society.

Googleotomy, may I please ask that you start putting content in your posts that is relevant to the subject when you are in the upper fora?  Lately, your posts amount to, "LOL FE'ers are so dumb.  LOL".

If you are not going to actually contribute to a discussion, the please refrain from posting.  Consider this a warning.

?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #57 on: July 21, 2013, 10:29:55 AM »
In their defence you will find about 70% of people claiming FET is stupid have no idea on round earth mechanics too. You will find that most of the FES have a much better knowledge about space and the earths movements etc than anyone else.

Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #58 on: July 21, 2013, 10:54:49 AM »
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/manchester/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_8150000/8150469.stm

http://depletedcranium.com/fascinating-recording-of-apollo-11-at-jodrell-bank-released/
Quote
It is interesting to note just how precise the measurements by Jodrell Bank were.  Not only was the observatory able to receive data from the spacecraft, it was also able to pinpoint the region of the moon they were located in and to measure their speed and trajectory using measurements of the Doppler shift, combined with highly accurate signal vector and other measurements.  They were even able to detect when Apollo-11 abruptly stopped descending to the lunar surface and began to climb in altitude.  This was the result of Neil Armstrong taking manual control of the Lunar Module to find a suitable landing site, after noting that the site that the automated system was headed for was strewn with large boulders.

Maybe this will finally incite Tom to explain why doppler shift  can not be used to measure velocity. But maybe he'll first explain why wire mesh can not be used to reflect radio waves.

Maybe.

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Independent Evidence of Apollo Missions
« Reply #59 on: July 21, 2013, 12:47:06 PM »
One of the things that impresses me about this forum is that FE's seem to post statements that show a complete ignorance about a lot of things. The one on this post about antennas is just an example. Check out all the stupid remarks on "Ham Radio Measurements of the Distance From The Earth to the Moon" for another example.

Other threads concerning photography are other examples.

Are Flat Earthers really that ignorant ? Or are they just pretending to be so for the sake of a debate ?There are certainly many books that explain things like radio and photography in simple terms and they wouldn't have to post such stupid statements. If I didn't know something about a subject being discussed on this forum, I certainly would do some research, but sadly....but it is some times downright hilarious  ;D....an FE (Tom Bishop and sceptimatic are the worst)...will post something that is absolutely inane about something that they have an opinion but no facts to back it up. It seems rather sad that research seems to be a "no-no" for the Flat Earth Society.

Googleotomy, may I please ask that you start putting content in your posts that is relevant to the subject when you are in the upper fora?  Lately, your posts amount to, "LOL FE'ers are so dumb.  LOL".

If you are not going to actually contribute to a discussion, the please refrain from posting.  Consider this a warning.

The intent of my postings was just a question as to an explanation of why the antenna in question wouldn't work , why the measurement of the distances to the moon, sun, stars, etc. are wrong,
why doppler radar can not be used to measure speed, for some examples. I think  these things
are relative to the discussion. Maybe "Round Earthers" are really not welcome on this forum if they are going to post facts about various subjects such as those mentioned above ? I'd just like an explanation from FE as to the "why" and "why not" on these subjects.

If contributing factual information is not permitted, I will stop doing so. But others will take up the gap. I don't think my comments are any worse than a lot of others.

Question for jroa.:
Which posts, just in your opinion or "IMHO", are worse - mine , those of sandokhan, thork, Tom Bishop or sceptimatic ? I haven't seen any warnings to sceptimatic ? It seems it's OK for an FE to post trolling, de-railing and in one case a lot of unrelated pasta, etc. but it's not OK for an RE to question an FE statement and back it up with some facts. Of course this is an FE forum and has to be biased that way.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2013, 01:59:20 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !