|
Post by wdinn on Aug 1, 2008 4:10:22 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Aug 1, 2008 6:15:31 GMT -4
Welcome aboard, wdinn.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Aug 1, 2008 7:04:25 GMT -4
We'd better look after this guy -- he's only 12 but can spell, punctuate and write real English. He must be rare. Perhaps he's an alien. Perhaps his dad's involved in a conspiracy of silence going back nearly 13 years. Or perhaps his mum. Welcome Wdinn. I can email you typescripts of info if you want it -- the Apollo 11 Press Kit (full of info); clippings about Apollo 11 from the West Australian that I sent to your grandad; a rough, unfinished typescript of all the Apollo 11 voice transcripts; and clippings about the first few months of the space race, 1957 and 1958. There are also good links in this thread to info about Apollo. apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=apollo&action=display&thread=1139739075&page=1#1139739075Look up the links at the bottom of each page here too. If some turn up here soon, you might enjoy what hoax-believers have to say. Right now we're having our quietest time for years with them, but we still learn things.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Aug 1, 2008 18:04:18 GMT -4
Heh, we like your grandfather too!
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Aug 4, 2008 19:13:55 GMT -4
Hbs would probably say that it was an unmanned craft sent to the moon. The doppler shift in a signal caused by underwater acoustics where they trained in waters (30-130ft) doing tests in the equatorial latitudes of the Deep Sound Channel. The under water reciever from the submersible and the carrier moving relative to each other. Probably in the Bikini Islands. Notice that the signal station WWVL transmitted from 1963 ending in July 1972 after post production of Apollo 17.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Aug 4, 2008 19:49:36 GMT -4
Inconceivable, you wouldn't happen to work at Fox News by chance would you?
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Aug 4, 2008 19:55:04 GMT -4
The doppler shift in a signal caused by underwater acoustics...
Are you proposing that the finely tunable Doppler distortions by which secondary means Apollo was tracked were fabricated by means of underwater acoustics?
I don't even know where to start with that. Just when I thought the underground cave was the silliest thing I'd ever heard.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Aug 4, 2008 19:58:32 GMT -4
Oh please Jay. EVERYONE knows that's where Doppler shift beasties live...in the murky depths of the ocean. To relax, they often crawl into the 1/6th G cavern.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Aug 4, 2008 20:16:26 GMT -4
I think inconcevable spends weeks of his time fiddling with the nonsence generator until he gets something he thinks will work.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Aug 4, 2008 22:56:55 GMT -4
Hbs would probably say that it was an unmanned craft sent to the moon. The doppler shift in a signal caused by underwater acoustics where they trained in waters (30-130ft) doing tests in the equatorial latitudes of the Deep Sound Channel. At last! Something from my area of professional expertise. I was a US Navy Sonar Technician (surface) for 11 years. That said, the above post is word salad. The Deep Sound Channel axis is the depth at which the sound velocity is at a minimum. Since sound velocity increases with temperature (and, to a lesser extent, salinity & pressure) the warmer the water, the deeper the DSC is. In equatorial water, the DSC is thousands of feet down - far deeper than any diver can reach. The 30-130ft. depths that inconceivable references are, in tropical-to-temperate waters, are within the surface/mixed layer. This is a layer of water that is mixed by wave action, and is relatively warm when compared to the deeper water. Sound in this layer refracts upwards towards the surface. You get some half-channel reflections off of the surface. The surface layer is typically ~200 feet deep (again, deeper than most divers are willing to go, and astronauts-in-training would have no need to go). Below it, the temperature drops-off rapidly, and sound refracts downwards. All of that aside, what-in-hell does underwater acoustics have to do with a moon landing hoax? The under water reciever from the submersible and the carrier moving relative to each other. That isn't even a complete sentence. Probably in the Bikini Islands. Also not a complete sentence, and pure supposition, at that. Notice that the signal station WWVL transmitted from 1963 ending in July 1972 after post production of Apollo 17. In other words, he couldn't even get the dates to match-up with actual missions, so he picked an arbitrary "end-of-production" date. I wonder how many other radio stations happened to go off the air even closer to December, 1972?
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Aug 5, 2008 7:13:01 GMT -4
...the signal station WWVL transmitted from 1963 ending in July 1972 after post production of Apollo 17. Gee, and I've long thought that Apollo 17 went to the moon in December 1972. So what actually happened? Did it instead go many months before July in order for post production to be finished by then. And did Apollo 16 still go in April 1972? Did Apollo 17 go before or after Apollo 16? Help, Inconceivable, I'm inconceivably confused.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Aug 5, 2008 9:38:06 GMT -4
They just want you to think Apollo 17 went to the Moon in December. That little song about "I was strolling on the Moon one day, in the merry month of May/December" was a whistle-blow from the astronauts that it wasn't really December, because it was filmed in advance.
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Aug 5, 2008 11:05:13 GMT -4
Hbs would probably say that it was an unmanned craft sent to the moon. The doppler shift in a signal caused by underwater acoustics where they trained in waters (30-130ft) doing tests in the equatorial latitudes of the Deep Sound Channel. The under water reciever from the submersible and the carrier moving relative to each other. Probably in the Bikini Islands. Notice that the signal station WWVL transmitted from 1963 ending in July 1972 after post production of Apollo 17. Just where in the signal path between the ground station and the moon would this water be?
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 5, 2008 11:32:04 GMT -4
What does the behavior of acoustics in water have to do with radio transmissions?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Aug 5, 2008 12:23:56 GMT -4
Just reminds me of a fantastic episode of The Outer Limits, where Robert Foxworth's President of the USA had to deal with a communication from an alien spaceship that had landed in the ocean. Not being able to understand what was being said, he finally ordered a missile strike to take it out, just after which his techs burst in to say that, once they had filtered out the effect of the signal coming from underwater, they were speaking English all along, had crashed on the planet and were asking for assistance.
Probably intensely scientifically unsound, but brilliant.
We now return you to your normal thread
|
|