Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Mar 3, 2010 11:03:41 GMT -4
If Grissom's Mercury capsule had live camera feed and he did panic, as straydog's parents alleged, he most likely would not have remained in the astronaut corps. Let alone picked to command the maiden flights of both Gemini and Apollo.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Mar 3, 2010 16:24:53 GMT -4
Indeed, Grissom's colleagues described him as an "astronaut's astronaut." Much of his undeserved reputation otherwise, I'm convinced, comes from Tom Wolfe's The Right Stuff. Wolfe relied heavily on John Glenn's account of the Mercury program, and Glenn was not Grissom's friend. The allegation that Grissom was a "squirmin' hatch-blower" was fully investigated and Grissom was fully exonerated of any fault.
Keep in mind that the Original Seven and their colleagues for Gemini and Apollo were the cream of the crop of test pilots. And Grissom was selected to take out the lead ship of each new class following Mercury -- a thoroughly enviable assignment if one is a test pilot. Grissom, by all circumstantial evidence, was the cream of the cream of the crop. He was the test pilot among the astronauts.
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Mar 4, 2010 0:45:26 GMT -4
If Straydog's parents saw a pancking Grissom, then the only place I know of which vaguely depics that is the film "The Right Stuff". Yes, now that you mention it, I think I did suggest that possibility to straydog some time ago. I'm having a hard time accepting that he even believes this stuff himself. I'm thankful hearsay evidence is banned or heavily restricted in legal proceedings.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Mar 4, 2010 7:45:53 GMT -4
One guy (straydog02)... insists that his parents saw live video of Gus Grissom during his MR-04 flight. As time passes it is easy for people to connect separate but related events in their minds -- I've done it myself and have been embarrassed to find I'd got it wrong, according to newspaper clippings or diaries of the time. Many 60-plus New Zealanders (which included one of my sisters) will tell you they watched the Apollo 11 EVA live on TV. Not true at all. The EVA occurred between 2:40 and 5:11pm on Monday 21 July 1969 NZST and those who could get time off work might have been watching TV, but they would have only seen talking heads in studios and heard live radio from the moon. New Zealand had no satellite link for live TV from overseas at that time. Tape of the EVA was flown over the Tasman Sea in a RNZAF Canberra bomber from Sydney to Wellington and shown on the New Zealand Broadcasting Corporation's TV news at 7:30pm. I didn't see it because not every household had TV back then -- but I would have first seen bits of the EVA in the newsreel "shorts" which were shown before the main feature in movie theatres.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Mar 4, 2010 7:57:09 GMT -4
I have a work colleague that thinks he was part of an après work aperitif or several that had a few interesting moments as the night went on. Problem is we have all recounted the events on and off over the years (20 or so) and it is accepted that he was there although he was not. But we are not going to spoil the telling.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Mar 4, 2010 8:02:34 GMT -4
The trouble is, Straydog will claim he is being persecuted if you continue to follow up his Mercury claim, despite the claim so blatantly, demonstrably and verifiably wrong.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Mar 4, 2010 12:29:35 GMT -4
Suppose there was live cockpit video for each of the Apollo missions. Anybody think that would have made one bit of difference to the HBers? Of course not. They would just be arguing that it wasn't possible to have live cockpit video at the time.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Mar 4, 2010 14:52:55 GMT -4
Suppose there was live cockpit video for each of the Apollo missions. Anybody think that would have made one bit of difference to the HBers? Of course not. They would just be arguing that it wasn't possible to have live cockpit video at the time. That's what they might claim, yet those darned annoying facts tell a completely different story. From day 1, the stipulation for all cameras on Apollo flights were that they be tested to pass launch vibration tests. All the cameras were able to handle the launch stress, and a minor piece of modification was required to get the S-band system capable of live transmit during launch. The idea was nixed because of priority and mission critical factors more than any physical limitations. ASTP was the last chance prior to shuttle to actually make good on the original proposal prior to the shuttle.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Mar 4, 2010 16:26:37 GMT -4
For a long time, I had a very clear memory of the death of Ronald Reagan. I knew I had seen news coverage of it. He was dead; didn't everyone know that?
Yeah, except I remember it as having happened in 1998 or so. Long, long before he actually died. I don't know where the memory came from, but it was quite clear. Was I lying when I said it? I was not. I was in error--and confused when I found out about the error--but it seems the HBs don't get the idea that there is more than one type of being wrong.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Mar 4, 2010 20:09:27 GMT -4
For a long time, I had a very clear memory of the death of Ronald Reagan. I knew I had seen news coverage of it. He was dead; didn't everyone know that? Yeah, except I remember it as having happened in 1998 or so. Long, long before he actually died. I don't know where the memory came from, but it was quite clear. Was I lying when I said it? I was not. I was in error--and confused when I found out about the error--but it seems the HBs don't get the idea that there is more than one type of being wrong. I once read a CT who vermently believed that this sot of thing was a result of someone changing the timeline and that certain people could still remember glimpes of the old one.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Mar 4, 2010 21:34:48 GMT -4
I once read a CT who vermently believed that this sot of thing was a result of someone changing the timeline and that certain people could still remember glimpes of the old one. I think that this counts as further evidence that some people shouldn't be allowed to read science fiction (or possibly any fiction) because they can't tell the difference between it and reality. I'm pretty sure that something very much along those lines was used in a story I have read somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Mar 4, 2010 22:05:37 GMT -4
Didn't a film that had used that concept come out a few years ago? EDIT: I think it was Déjà Vu
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Mar 5, 2010 4:49:36 GMT -4
Suppose there was live cockpit video for each of the Apollo missions. Anybody think that would have made one bit of difference to the HBers? Of course not. They would just be arguing that it wasn't possible to have live cockpit video at the time. Or more to the point, that it was faked. The funny thing about straydog's position is that the cockpit during launch is about the only part of an Apollo mission that I can even begin to think how to fake with 60s video technology. The rest of it shows the crew in either 0 or 1/6 g, and you'd think that would be much more likely to convince viewers they were really in space. You can't produce 0 g on earth for more than about 20 seconds at a time, and I don't know anywhere you could simulate 1/6 g in a really big place with a jet black sky and lots of 3-dimensional mountains. But you could simulate the vibrations and high g-forces of a launch in the cramped quarters of the cockpit. They'd be suited and strapped tightly into their seats so it would be hard to even see their faces. Recently I saw cockpit video from a Soyuz launch and you really couldn't see much at all. I think they had a mascot of some sort hanging from the ceiling on a string. When they reached orbit the string went slack and the mascot floated around. Until then all you could do was maybe time the period of the pendulum and compute the acceleration.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Mar 5, 2010 5:39:38 GMT -4
It is interesting watching the few cockpit video's from the shuttle launches with a hoax in mind. I know they are on board but there are no real pointers for the uninformed that it is not in a simulator. All you can see from the back are a few windows with a lot of light coming through at the start. As mentioned above, must be one of the easiest things to hoax yet it was not done. One with a looking in to the cabin shot could also be somewhere else.
So check list. 1. Nigh on impossible to fake..... check. 2. Dead easy to hoax..... nah, they will see through that.
No, hang on.....
|
|
|
Post by macapple on Mar 5, 2010 7:56:19 GMT -4
There is a sad reality behind a lot of Hoax Bs storys as well as the flawed evidence they provide. Its the narrative they crave for, in many cases the thing or subject they are looking at is rather bland. So it really cant be that boring, that cant be the real story behind it, there must be more, its a cover up.... In many cases the Apollo space missions were becoming routine and, as such, were starting to fall from the imagination of the general public. It was only when the Apollo 13 incident happened an additional narrative was introduced to what was supposed to be a straight forward mission. It ceased to be a mundane mission by the book and the introduction of a narrative suddenly made it interesting. Simply saying, we went there, we came back isn't sufficient for some people and they need to build a narrative around it so that it is more colourful. Now thats sounds as though the Apollo missions were not exciting they were at the time, and still to this day, one of the greatest Human, Scientific and Engineering achievements ever, yet there were only 2-3 missions that really captured the publics imagination. The rest were by the book well executed and to be honest a bit boring. The fact that many people only remember some of the names of those on Apollo 11 and 13 missions shows that in the public minds eye the rest of the missions had become business as usual. As to peoples memories, we are a flawed bunch us humans, in that pretty much all your memories are stored from birth but we fail miserably in being able to recall them. These memories are also subject to influence by others and this is evident in most witness activity around the world. I watched a lovely film of a witness study done by a professor in the UK ( which has been replicated in loads of countries). The professor was undertaking a lecture and half way through a person ran into the classroom unannounced pretended to club the professor to death and run out. They then removed everyone from the class and left them together for an hour before the "police" arrived to take statements. The outcome of the study was amazing in that in a class of 50 people not one person was correct in their witness statements. As many had already had time to collaborate their views their initial observations were tainted. If i remember the following were the top 5-6 observations 1. Sex - Male 2. Weapon - Gun 3. Height -5,8 - 6,0 4. Age- mid 30s 5. Clothing - Hooded top, Sunglasses, Sneakers, blue jeans.. 6. Time of attack: Half past the hour for about 1 min The real assailant was a 5'4, heavy set female carrying a yellow banana who was wearing a sweatshirt, trouser skirt and scarf around her face. Her age 18 but difficult to ascertain as there was a scarf around her face. (i remember this bit as i wrote it down. I was so surprised that there was such a difference ) The time of the attack was 3/4 past the hour and lasted 12 secs. So in conclusion the events were erroneously interpreted by the majority of people who saw them for only a short period of time. The errors were probably introduced in the time after the event whereby the group were allowed to confer and thus tainting their memory of the events. agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm an interesting paper on eyewitness testimony.
|
|