moon hoax information index.

  • 1150 Replies
  • 213140 Views
?

Ecthelion

  • 238
  • +0/-0
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #120 on: February 05, 2016, 11:51:04 PM »
Yendor, I wouldn't waste any time on this character. He/she/it will deny, excuse and back pedal constantly.

Just my advice from experience.

Thanks for the flattery, but there is no need to be afraid. If you run out of arguments, simply say something like "I can't think of anything else to say, looks like you're right". It's hard at first, but you are a smart, grown up person, I am sure you can manage, and so can everyone else. There is no shame in being wrong sometimes.

He thinks a straight line is noise in the signal. Strange the same straight line happened on another Rover expedition, wouldn't you think? I believe he is just being obstinate because his answer shows no logic.

It's not strange at all if the picture is transmitted in vertical lines from left to right, as indeed the last picture in the video (the partial one) suggests it is. If that is the way the video transmission works, then every "packet loss" would result in vertical lines. I think you'd find I am less obstinate if you actually answer my arguments, but the best you can come up with is "think what you will". Not very convincing, I am sure you'll agree.

But just in case you don't: Think what you will.

I'm sure I could go through all the videos Rayzor presented as his proof for the moon landing and find plenty anomalies.

Go ahead then, put your money where your mouth is.

*

Yendor

  • 1676
  • +0/-0
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #121 on: February 06, 2016, 10:31:15 AM »
Are we ready to move onto the Surveyor missions and the Soviet moon rover Lunokhod 1?

Or do you want to continue the discussion on the other Ranger missions 8 and 9.

I was watching the Soviet Luna 16 video and this image was shown. I think it is supposed to be a shot of the moon. However, there looks to be a colored light bulb in the rocks. What is your take of the object or are you going to say, "I don't see anything unusual about this picture."

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #122 on: February 06, 2016, 03:38:00 PM »
Are we ready to move onto the Surveyor missions and the Soviet moon rover Lunokhod 1?

Or do you want to continue the discussion on the other Ranger missions 8 and 9.

I was watching the Soviet Luna 16 video and this image was shown. I think it is supposed to be a shot of the moon. However, there looks to be a colored light bulb in the rocks. What is your take of the object or are you going to say, "I don't see anything unusual about this picture."


Nice find,   I've no idea what it is,  it looks to me like a bit of laboratory glassware?

Can you post a link to the video the image is from.


 
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 04:42:12 PM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • +0/-0
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #123 on: February 06, 2016, 03:45:27 PM »
From the OP:

simply produce what YOU believe to be cast iron evidence men were shuffling around on the moon in the late sixties.

Forgot that, did we?

But nice dog & pony show, guys...

Are you the next Heiwa vs Mikeman Hegelian Dialectic Bullshit Duo?
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

Yendor

  • 1676
  • +0/-0
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #124 on: February 07, 2016, 06:11:05 AM »
Are we ready to move onto the Surveyor missions and the Soviet moon rover Lunokhod 1?

Or do you want to continue the discussion on the other Ranger missions 8 and 9.

I was watching the Soviet Luna 16 video and this image was shown. I think it is supposed to be a shot of the moon. However, there looks to be a colored light bulb in the rocks. What is your take of the object or are you going to say, "I don't see anything unusual about this picture."


Nice find,   I've no idea what it is,  it looks to me like a bit of laboratory glassware?

Can you post a link to the video the image is from.

It is from one of the videos you referenced.
'Russian Moon - Photos From Soviet Missions To The Moon'. It is at the LUNA 16 part at 0:43 into the video. It can't be something that would be native to the moon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7nlFpal3Tpg
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #125 on: February 07, 2016, 06:28:09 AM »
Are we ready to move onto the Surveyor missions and the Soviet moon rover Lunokhod 1?

Or do you want to continue the discussion on the other Ranger missions 8 and 9.

I was watching the Soviet Luna 16 video and this image was shown. I think it is supposed to be a shot of the moon. However, there looks to be a colored light bulb in the rocks. What is your take of the object or are you going to say, "I don't see anything unusual about this picture."


Nice find,   I've no idea what it is,  it looks to me like a bit of laboratory glassware?

Can you post a link to the video the image is from.

It is from one of the videos you referenced.
'Russian Moon - Photos From Soviet Missions To The Moon'. It is at the LUNA 16 part at 0:43 into the video. It can't be something that would be native to the moon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7nlFpal3Tpg

Ok, thanks,  I got it.   To me it looks like something to do with testing the rocks chemistry,   Luna 16 was the first Soviet mission that actually returned moon rocks back to earth.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #126 on: February 08, 2016, 03:14:55 AM »
Damn! Homie Rayzor just owned all y'alls' asses! And all the opposition can do is ask rhetorical questions that fit their "beliefs"! No surprise there!
I think you will find "Homie Rayzor" has simply copied copious amounts of YouTube home movies and completely avoided offering quality over quantity.
Quote
BYE FES forums! Farewell and good luck to ALL!!

Yeah, bye (again).
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #127 on: February 08, 2016, 03:30:48 AM »
@ rayzor.

I see you have avoided the opportunity to defend the proven liar and criminal Nixon, you slated any non believer as having questionable morals.
Thoughts ?

I also notice your attempt to utilise a YouTube avalanche as a cover for addressing a direct question.

Interestingly your most convincing evidence includes exact replicas of the moon in increasingly bigger scales all the way to the surface for "training".
Sliding a camera around an exact replica of the lunar surface as if on approach to varying scales is strange in itself bit then initiating a YouTube tsunami of video showing a camera sliding around the moon at varying scales should send off some alarm bells ( even for you).

Did you explain why exact lunar replicas at various scales with "orbiting" cameras where required ?

"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #128 on: February 08, 2016, 04:19:54 AM »
Did you explain why exact lunar replicas at various scales with "orbiting" cameras where required ?

Yes,  but it seems you didn't read it.   Here is a hint, it's called a flight simulator.

Also,  did you  see that NASA has released  some pictures of Apollo Missions.   https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/

Why bring up Nixon,  he couldn't even burgle a hotel room without the world finding out, and you think he masterminded a conspiracy to fake  something as complex as the Apollo missions.

Seriously, is that an indication of the depth of your thinking on the topic.   Nixon was a crook, so ergo the moon landings were faked,   you'll have to do better than that.

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Mainframes

  • 2088
  • +0/-0
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #129 on: February 08, 2016, 04:29:19 AM »
Minor detail on Nixon. He only became president in 1969, well after NASA and the entire space program was well under way.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #130 on: February 08, 2016, 04:33:08 AM »
@rayzor
Lol,
This is getting ridiculous.

I have used simulators. No need for exact replication of environment as any simulator is more for muscle memory and mental preparation.
Minute details by artists with magnifying glasses ?

Nice twist on the actual question.
You claimed all non believers are discredited due to your unsubstantiated slurs of low moral character,
I asked why the same process is not applied by you to the proven liar and criminal Nixon.

But of course you won't answer,
nor will you acknowledge your selective quoting is due to an inability to tackle a direct question.

« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 04:35:57 AM by feuk »
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #131 on: February 08, 2016, 04:46:51 AM »

I have used simulators. No need for exact replication of environment as any simulator is more for muscle memory and mental preparation.
Minute details by artists with magnifying glasses ?

Thus proving you never read the detail in the links I provided.   So,  to save you some time.  Here is a little info on Project LOLA   http://www.moonlandinghoax.org/46.html

"This simulator was designed to provide a pilot with a detailed visual encounter with the lunar surface; the machine consisted primarily of a cockpit, a closed-circuit TV system, and four large murals or scale models representing portions of the lunar surface as seen from various altitudes. The pilot in the cockpit moved along a track past these murals which would accustom him to the visual cues for controlling a spacecraft in the vicinity of the moon. Unfortunately, such a simulation - although great fun and quite aesthetic - was not helpful because flight in lunar orbit posed no special problems other than the rendezvous with the LEM, which the device did not simulate. Not long after the end of Apollo, the expensive machine was dismantled."

What was the question I'm supposed to be refusing to answer?  You've used that tactic in the past just as a trolling technique,  are you now doing it again?

My question to you,  is provide some evidence as to why you think  the moon landings were faked,  you never answered. 

« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 04:56:45 AM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #132 on: February 08, 2016, 04:56:57 AM »

Thus proving you never read the detail in the links I provided.   

What was the question I'm supposed to be refusing to answer?  You've used that tactic in the past just as a trolling technique,  are you now doing it again?

My question to you,  is provide some evidence as to why you think  the moon landings were faked,  you never answered.
::)

"tactics" ?
"trolling techniques" ?

Why would I need "tactics" for "trolling" my own thread ?

If you simply refuse to post up YOUR most compelling piece of evidence man landed on the moon then this thread is not for you.
Not sure why you feel the need to start making off topic demands,
maybe it's obvious  :)
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #133 on: February 08, 2016, 05:02:37 AM »
If you simply refuse to post up YOUR most compelling piece of evidence man landed on the moon then this thread is not for you.
Not sure why you feel the need to start making off topic demands,
maybe it's obvious  :)

I posted my most compelling evidence  very early on,  You just didn't read it.  I lived through that time.   I'm guessing you didn't.   

I also proved that conspiracy nutters can't tell the difference between fact and fiction,  ( sorry Yendor ).   You seem to have the same failing,  an inability to read and comprehend.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 05:05:52 AM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #134 on: February 08, 2016, 05:20:58 AM »

I posted my most compelling evidence  very early on,  You just didn't read it.  I lived through that time.   I'm guessing you didn't.   
Wrong again.
However I'm not a child anymore, I grew up.

Quote
I also proved that conspiracy nutters can't tell the difference between fact and fiction,  ( sorry Yendor ).   You seem to have the same failing,  an inability to read and comprehend.

Lol, "fact and fiction".

Was your most compelling piece of evidence that you saw it on TV ?

If that's the case fair play to you,
I remember the hours of in studio chat and graphic simulations,
Maybe you could post up the "landing" show you watched wide eyed,

hours of actual footage ?
or hours of graphics and simulations ?

( I was watching the BBC but they have since destroyed the entire archive )
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

?

Woody

  • 1144
  • +0/-0
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #135 on: February 08, 2016, 05:33:45 AM »

Thus proving you never read the detail in the links I provided.   

What was the question I'm supposed to be refusing to answer?  You've used that tactic in the past just as a trolling technique,  are you now doing it again?

My question to you,  is provide some evidence as to why you think  the moon landings were faked,  you never answered.
::)

"tactics" ?
"trolling techniques" ?

Why would I need "tactics" for "trolling" my own thread ?

If you simply refuse to post up YOUR most compelling piece of evidence man landed on the moon then this thread is not for you.
Not sure why you feel the need to start making off topic demands,
maybe it's obvious  :)

Not sure if this was mentioned did not read the entire thread:

1. The Russians, observatories and amateur enthusiast.  Either visual or by radio direction finding.

2. Laser Reflectors. Experiments conducted by various observatories. 

3. China and Japan took photos of landing sites.

4. Of course pictures and films taken by the astronauts them selves.

You can believe during the Cold War and Space Race the Russians would keep silent, China and Japan would fake pictures. 

Why asked for proof when what ever is offered is immediately claimed as false or fabricated?  Seems the only thing you will except is going to the moon yourself to see the landing sites.

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #136 on: February 08, 2016, 05:36:11 AM »

I posted my most compelling evidence  very early on,  You just didn't read it.  I lived through that time.   I'm guessing you didn't.   
Wrong again.
However I'm not a child anymore, I grew up.

Quote
I also proved that conspiracy nutters can't tell the difference between fact and fiction,  ( sorry Yendor ).   You seem to have the same failing,  an inability to read and comprehend.

Lol, "fact and fiction".

Was your most compelling piece of evidence that you saw it on TV ?

If that's the case fair play to you,
I remember the hours of in studio chat and graphic simulations,
Maybe you could post up the "landing" show you watched wide eyed,

hours of actual footage ?
or hours of graphics and simulations ?

( I was watching the BBC but they have since destroyed the entire archive )

Have you actually tried to find BBC archives?  I'm guessing you haven't   http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/solarsystem/space_missions/apollo_program
Also on BBC iPlayer http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0142pxj/panorama-apollo-11-the-impact-on-earth#group=p02865b6

I already posted a few select videos that cover some of the various missions,  I'm surprised you missed them,  I was involved in amateur radio, back in those days,  I never did EME but I have friends who did.  I also used to work AMSAT OSCAR satellites.   Still have a passing interest,  but  other projects keep me busy these days.

You seem to be ignorant of the technology,  and ignorant of the details of the Apollo missions.   You have fallen for the conspiracy bullshit,  and I feel sorry for you.

PS.   Sorry to burst another bubble for you, but I never saw the Apollo 11 landings on TV,  I was travelling,  and they didn't have TV,  but I've seen it since.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 05:44:05 AM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #137 on: February 08, 2016, 06:09:45 AM »
@ woody

1. The soviets claim to have being busy tracking their own lunar landing at the time, the only observatory with capabilities produced a very small piece of felt tip on graph paper in 2009 and hams were not tracking anything in lunar orbit (could you do this in 2016 ?)

2. The soviets claim to also have placed retroreflectors on the lunar surface. Lasers were being bounced and received off the lunar surface in the early 60s.

3. Can I see the Chinese and Japanese "pictures of landing sites" ?

4. The images and film shot by the players have many inconsistencies and anomalies.
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #138 on: February 08, 2016, 06:34:09 AM »
Have you actually tried to find BBC archives?  I'm guessing you haven't   http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/solarsystem/space_missions/apollo_program
Also on BBC iPlayer http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0142pxj/panorama-apollo-11-the-impact-on-earth#group=p02865b6

I already posted a few select videos that cover some of the various missions,  I'm surprised you missed them,  I was involved in amateur radio, back in those days,  I never did EME but I have friends who did.  I also used to work AMSAT OSCAR satellites.   Still have a passing interest,  but  other projects keep me busy these days.

You seem to be ignorant of the technology,  and ignorant of the details of the Apollo missions.   You have fallen for the conspiracy bullshit,  and I feel sorry for you.

PS.   Sorry to burst another bubble for you, but I never saw the Apollo 11 landings on TV,  I was travelling,  and they didn't have TV,  but I've seen it since.
 
   


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...oh man.

your intellectual Bible (wiki) tells us...
" All three UK television channels, BBC1
, BBC2
 and ITV
, provided extensive coverage. Most of the footage covering the event from a British perspective has now been wiped
 or lost"

And


" The footage of the BBC and ITV coverage became victim to the current broadcasting policy of either eventually erasing videotapes
 or simply not keeping them."

You claimed to have found the original programming but....

" The entire evening of the BBC's coverage was reconstructed on the BBC Four
 programme "Apollo 11, A Night To Remember"on 28 February 2006, in which "satellite pictures have been married up with amateur audio recordings, and linked with rarely-seen reports, background films, a couple of rediscovered studio clips, and some new explanatory pieces by Sir Patrick Moore
, one of the presenters in 1969."

of course before your ridiculous detour I was asking about the "hours and hours" of "live footage" From the moon that you were claiming was witnessed by millions on TV (but not you obviously)

I can remember the graphics and endless chat,
so your endless waffle on the TV live footage is quite meaningless,
as is your desperation to pass off programming from 2006 as "hours and hours" of live moon footage from 1969.

now,

What is YOUR most compelling evidence man landed on the moon ?

"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #139 on: February 08, 2016, 06:48:06 AM »
Have you actually tried to find BBC archives?  I'm guessing you haven't   http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/solarsystem/space_missions/apollo_program
Also on BBC iPlayer http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0142pxj/panorama-apollo-11-the-impact-on-earth#group=p02865b6

I already posted a few select videos that cover some of the various missions,  I'm surprised you missed them,  I was involved in amateur radio, back in those days,  I never did EME but I have friends who did.  I also used to work AMSAT OSCAR satellites.   Still have a passing interest,  but  other projects keep me busy these days.

You seem to be ignorant of the technology,  and ignorant of the details of the Apollo missions.   You have fallen for the conspiracy bullshit,  and I feel sorry for you.

PS.   Sorry to burst another bubble for you, but I never saw the Apollo 11 landings on TV,  I was travelling,  and they didn't have TV,  but I've seen it since.
 
   


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...oh man.

your intellectual Bible (wiki) tells us...
" All three UK television channels, BBC1
, BBC2
 and ITV
, provided extensive coverage. Most of the footage covering the event from a British perspective has now been wiped
 or lost"

And


" The footage of the BBC and ITV coverage became victim to the current broadcasting policy of either eventually erasing videotapes
 or simply not keeping them."

You claimed to have found the original programming but....

" The entire evening of the BBC's coverage was reconstructed on the BBC Four
 programme "Apollo 11, A Night To Remember"on 28 February 2006, in which "satellite pictures have been married up with amateur audio recordings, and linked with rarely-seen reports, background films, a couple of rediscovered studio clips, and some new explanatory pieces by Sir Patrick Moore
, one of the presenters in 1969."

of course before your ridiculous detour I was asking about the "hours and hours" of "live footage" From the moon that you were claiming was witnessed by millions on TV (but not you obviously)

I can remember the graphics and endless chat,
so your endless waffle on the TV live footage is quite meaningless,
as is your desperation to pass off programming from 2006 as "hours and hours" of live moon footage from 1969.

now,

What is YOUR most compelling evidence man landed on the moon ?

So,  I was able to find original 1969 programming in a matter of 10 seconds searching,  and you claim it was all destroyed,  just how stupid are you.   Oh wait....   

I've already linked to this, but given your inability to read and comprehend,  here it is again.  since you like original uninterrupted coverage,  here is 300 hours of audio, and 22 hours of  video coverage of Apollo 17..    Lucky the BBC didn't get their hands on it and destroy it.   FFS,  what a cretin.

http://apollo17.org/

 
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

?

Woody

  • 1144
  • +0/-0
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #140 on: February 08, 2016, 07:04:20 AM »
@ woody

1. The soviets claim to have being busy tracking their own lunar landing at the time, the only observatory with capabilities produced a very small piece of felt tip on graph paper in 2009 and hams were not tracking anything in lunar orbit (could you do this in 2016 ?)

2. The soviets claim to also have placed retroreflectors on the lunar surface. Lasers were being bounced and received off the lunar surface in the early 60s.

3. Can I see the Chinese and Japanese "pictures of landing sites" ?

4. The images and film shot by the players have many inconsistencies and anomalies.

1. Do you really think the Soviets did not track the Apollo missions and if they did not make it would bring it up?  Look how both countries were behaving during the Cold War.

2. There is a difference between hitting the reflectors or not.  You will get a stronger return and measurements will be more accurate.

3. Google Selene and Chang'e 2 Apollo

4. Funny how NASA hiding such a huge secrete can not create films and photos the same quality as Hollywood.  Seems they would be more careful.  Similar to how NASA now releases photos and videos with visible air bubbles.  For some reason Hollywood does not use pools to make it look like actors are in space and do a better job.

Observatories:
Pic du Midi Observatory, the Catalina Station of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory University of Arizona, Corralitos Observatory(Broadcast live images of one of the Apollo missions), Northwestern University, McDonald Observatory of the University of Texas, and Lick Observatory of the University of California, Bochum Observatory, Jodrell Bank Observatory,Jewett Observatory all made observations.

Larry Baysinger, a technician for WHAS radio in Louisville, Kentucky, independently detected and recorded transmissions between the Apollo 11 astronauts on the lunar surface and the Lunar Module.[19] Recordings made by Baysinger share certain characteristics with recordings made at Bochum Observatory by Kaminski, in that both Kaminski's and Baysinger's recordings do not include the Capsule Communicator (CAPCOM) in Houston, Texas, and the associated Quindar tones heard in NASA audio and seen on NASA Apollo 11 transcripts. Kaminski and Baysinger could only hear the transmissions from the Moon, and not transmissions to the Moon from the Earth

Rachel, Chabot Observatory's 20-inch refracting telescope, helped bring Apollo 13 and its crew home. One last burn of the lunar lander engines was needed before the crippled spacecraft's re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere. In order to compute that last burn, NASA needed a precise position of the spacecraft, obtainable only by telescopic observation. All the observatories that could have done this were clouded over, except Oakland's Chabot Observatory, where members of the Eastbay Astronomical Society had been tracking the Moon flights. EAS members received an urgent call from NASA Ames Research Station, which had ties with Chabot's educational program since the 60's, and they put the Observatory's historic 20-inch refractor to work. They were able to send the needed data to Ames, and the Apollo crew was able to make the needed correction and to return safely to Earth on this date in 1970

Bochum Observatory tracked the astronauts and intercepted the television signals from Apollo 16. The image was re-recorded in black and white in the 625 lines, 25 frames/s television standard onto 2-inch videotape using their sole quad machine. The transmissions are only of the astronauts and do not contain any voice from Houston, as the signal received came from the Moon only. The videotapes are held in storage at the observatory

The Madrid Apollo Station near Madrid, Spain, tracked Apollo 11. A large majority of the people working at this station were not employees of NASA, but of Spain's Instituto Nacional de Técnica Aeroespacial

Another option is just to get a telescope find out when the ISS or some satellite will be visible near where you live. Then determine if they exist and are orbiting the planet if man could have landed on the moon.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #141 on: February 08, 2016, 07:08:10 AM »
@ rayzor
 ;D
resorted to name calling have we "homie".

I have already stated your "original" programming were a few snippets spliced together in 2006.

less we forget we were discussing the original programming on TV.

Might I suggest you rely less on spending ten seconds on google ( mistakes and confusion are probable) and rely on actual learnt knowledge.

is the 300 hours of audio your entry ad YOUR most compelling evidence of men landing on the moon ?

"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #142 on: February 08, 2016, 07:29:02 AM »
@ woody

1. The "cold war" is not applicable as they both had a "silent gentlemens agreement" regarding space,
As referenced earlier in the thread from NASA.
Were NASA tracking the Soviet capsule whilst they claimed to be busy with their own ?
Nope.

2. Has laser technology and readers improved since the 60s ?
Yes.

3. Any chance of seeing the "images" ( none appear to show any debris at all)

4.picking up audio is not "tracking" and LEO is not a lunar orbit.
Could you "track" (or confirm the position) of an object in lunar orbit in 2016 ?
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #143 on: February 08, 2016, 07:31:23 AM »

I have already stated your "original" programming were a few snippets spliced together in 2006.
less we forget we were discussing the original programming on TV.


First transmitted in 1969, Robin Day hosts a special edition of the current affairs programme, marking man's first steps on the surface of the moon. Julian Pettifer reports on demonstrators who believe the money spent on the Apollo missions should have been used to feed the starving millions back on Earth. In the studio, contributors including science fiction novelist Brian Aldiss debate the issues surrounding the moon landing and its possible legacy.

You think this was  put together in 2006?   In 2006,  Robin Day had been dead for 6 years,  so are you suggesting they dug him up to broadcast a remake of the 1969 show, that they inadvertently destroyed...   ROTFLMAO!       

Stop channelling Papa,  This started out much better.  Only took a few jabs,  and the real colours came out.   

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #144 on: February 08, 2016, 07:37:29 AM »
4.picking up audio is not "tracking" and LEO is not a lunar orbit.
Could you "track" (or confirm the position) of an object in lunar orbit in 2016 ?

Yes, you can,  we already discussed this at length,   if you know the direction the signal is coming from ( the moon ) then you know where the transmitter is located,  if you monitor the doppler shift, as they did at Jodrell bank, then you also know the velocity,  they tracked the LEM during the landing manouver,  and the velocity changes matched precisely the mission reports. 

Obviously you never understood it last time.     Good luck woody.   The  stupidity is strong in this one.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #145 on: February 08, 2016, 08:05:42 AM »

I have already stated your "original" programming were a few snippets spliced together in 2006.
less we forget we were discussing the original programming on TV.


First transmitted in 1969, Robin Day hosts a special edition of the current affairs programme, marking man's first steps on the surface of the moon. Julian Pettifer reports on demonstrators who believe the money spent on the Apollo missions should have been used to feed the starving millions back on Earth. In the studio, contributors including science fiction novelist Brian Aldiss debate the issues surrounding the moon landing and its possible legacy.

You think this was  put together in 2006?   In 2006,  Robin Day had been dead for 6 years,  so are you suggesting they dug him up to broadcast a remake of the 1969 show, that they inadvertently destroyed...   ROTFLMAO!       

Stop channelling Papa,  This started out much better.  Only took a few jabs,  and the real colours came out.
   

You appear to have lost the plot old son.

Lest we forget the subject was original landing coverage,
or the lack of.

Sure, lots of talking heads and graphic artistic depictions, but that was not the original discussion,
as I suspect you know,
but you desperately needed a subject change so as not to look ridiculous.

Bless.
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • +0/-0
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #146 on: February 08, 2016, 08:12:46 AM »

Yes, you can,  we already discussed this at length,   if you know the direction the signal is coming from ( the moon ) then you know where the transmitter is located,  if you monitor the doppler shift, as they did at Jodrell bank, then you also know the velocity,  they tracked the LEM during the landing manouver,  and the velocity changes matched precisely the mission reports. 

Obviously you never understood it last time.     Good luck woody.   The  stupidity is strong in this one.
::)

Jodrell produced a small felt tip pen mark on graph paper in 2009.

But of course jodrell are classed as "amateur hams" in rayzor world,
Because according to you every amateur radio nut was "tracking" the capsule as well
 :D :D :D :D


Priceless comedy gold.

"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • +0/-0
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #147 on: February 08, 2016, 08:30:29 AM »
Quote from: dumbfeuk

Sure, lots of talking heads and graphic artistic depictions, but that was not the original discussion,
as I suspect you know,
but you desperately needed a subject change so as not to look ridiculous.

I knew you weren't the full quid, but to forget something you posted just a short while ago, is troubling.  Remember this.

I remember the hours of in studio chat and graphic simulations,
( I was watching the BBC but they have since destroyed the entire archive )

So the entire archive was destroyed was it...  such a shame,  all your childhood memories of Robin Day gone up in smoke. 

I can understand why you became a conspiracy nutter.   How dare they destroy evidence like that,  it MUST be a conspiracy to hide something....     





Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

?

Woody

  • 1144
  • +0/-0
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #148 on: February 08, 2016, 08:45:09 AM »
@ woody

1. The "cold war" is not applicable as they both had a "silent gentlemens agreement" regarding space,
As referenced earlier in the thread from NASA.
Were NASA tracking the Soviet capsule whilst they claimed to be busy with their own ?
Nope.

2. Has laser technology and readers improved since the 60s ?
Yes.

3. Any chance of seeing the "images" ( none appear to show any debris at all)

4.picking up audio is not "tracking" and LEO is not a lunar orbit.
Could you "track" (or confirm the position) of an object in lunar orbit in 2016 ?

As I stated before the evidence is there and available.

Look up how to locate source of a radio signal.  It is a rather old technology.  So only tracking in orbit does offer evidence.

Take a closer look and consider why someone would only receive transmissions from Apollo crews and not ground control. 

As for the images from Selene and Chang'e 2 if you are really keen you can learn how analyze pictures as people can in both Japanese and Chinese space agencies.  You can do things like estimate target height from shadows, notice things like the paths astronauts took to and from the capsule (which is rather clear in the pics), and other information.

Do you really think the US or Soviets did not track each others space craft?  That they were too busy and did not care to verify or at least attempt to collect data?

What you want we can not give you.  What you want is evidence that the moon landings did not happen and reject everything that supports they did. 

As an example I gave you a list of observatories that recorded and made observations of Apollo Missions.  Did you look into it and see what they observed?

You seem not to want to accept a laser reflecting off a mirror will give a stronger return then off the surface of the moon.  Does not matter if we have a stronger lasers today.  We have more precise measuring equipment so the difference between reflecting off the surface of the moon or reflector would be easier to detect.

Just out of curiosity why not provide evidence of this "gentlemen's agreement" between the Soviets and the US?  I think it is fair since you deny everything offered so far and want proof the moon landings happened.  Why not offer evidence they did not?

This will be my last reply unless you produce evidence of the agreement between the two countries that the Soviets would go along with faking the US making it to the moon.

The evidence is offered and pretty easy to find.  Just getting a telescope and looking up can provide evidence of man made stuff orbiting the Earth.  I have observed the ISS through binoculars and telescopes.  With binoculars I could make out the solar panels and with a telescope it was rather obvious it is the thing they say is up there.  Then you can decide if man can put things in orbit is it so much of a stretch to get to the moon?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 43270
  • +11/-12
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #149 on: February 08, 2016, 09:06:44 AM »
Exhibit B.
Missing camera,
I realize that this is a bit late, but the answer to the missing camera is pretty simple.  If you look at the numbers in the lower right corner, you will notice that the numbers are 3 apart.  This means that they were taken with the same camera on the same roll of film.  Obviously Scott used Irwin's camera for the photo.

More photos of that roll of film can be found here: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?88
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.