Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 22, 2010 21:10:12 GMT -4
The following is an interesting story about a documented case of an amateur radio operator who picked up and listened to the radio communications from the surface of the Moon during the Apollo 11 EVA. Eavesdropping on Apollo 11Given what we've said about the impossibility of faking a signal from the Moon without actually being on the Moon, this is some pretty strong evidence that the whole thing was real. So it's really this easy? A11 was validated by the simple fact that the transmissions only came in when dishes were pointed at the moon? It's that simple??? It ought to be that simple, but it's not when people are determined to believe in fantasy rather than reality. Besides, I said it was strong evidence, not conclusive evidence. It's just one more piece of the puzzle that leads to only one logical conclusion - that the moon landings were real.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Aug 23, 2010 13:34:49 GMT -4
Gillianren is a prolific poster here. She has more posts than I do. She's a woman. Though she apparently missed pages and pages of this conversation, because the "ren" part is the first three weekends in August, and she was out standing in someone else's field. I had fun, though. Look, the problem in society today, or one of them (ha!), is the need for a single answer. "What's going to replace oil?" Well, potentially a lot of things. Similarly, you're (Fireball, not Laurel) looking for One Final Piece of Evidence, and the problem with that is that the reality of Apollo isn't based on One Final Piece of Evidence. It's based on all of it. The rocks are part of it. The telemetry is part of it. The naked-eye nature of the craft is part of it. The testimony of the thousands of people who worked on the program is part of it. Slowly, it builds up. It's like sandstone. Each little piece is part of it, but no single piece is enough for you to call it sandstone instead of just sand.
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Aug 23, 2010 15:45:07 GMT -4
The Apollo 11 EVA was not received by an American tracking station because the Moon had set over the USA by the time the astronauts stepped out. This 'conspiracy' therefore has to spread to Australia, since that's where the transmissions were picked up, by a dish that was aimed at the Moon. The moon was actually set ting in the US at the beginning of the EVA. Goldstone, in California received video of the first step, but they soon handed things over to the Australian stations because the moon was rising for them and they soon had a better view. As far east as Louisville KY, Larry Baysinger was able to receive VHF signals direct from Neil Armstrong's PLSS just as the moon was setting at his location. He almost certainly benefited from a ground reflection that ham "moonbouncers" also use to increase the strength of their signals.
|
|
|
Post by supermeerkat on Aug 23, 2010 18:37:32 GMT -4
Another point worth mentioning is that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, a huge number of secrets from the Communist era have been made public on every subject you can think of. Yet, out of all this not one iota of information has been released about the moon landings being faked.
(I skimmed this thread at lunch time, and didn't see anything to the above effect mentioned, but if it has please ignore).
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Aug 24, 2010 8:51:50 GMT -4
There's no clincher that says "A ha! This proves they went!" As others have asked, why do you feel it necessary that we prove it impossible to fake an Apollo mission? Why is "hoax" your default position unless we prove otherwise? Why haven't you sought a "clincher" for the hoaxer position, such as a detailed confession from those in charge of faking it backed up with contemporary documents showing just how it was faked? I presume that you haven't found such a thing or you wouldn't now be asking us for the reverse. By now I'm sure you've noticed that hoaxers frequently appeal to incredulity. They often seem to say "I don't know how to go to the moon. So it's impossible, even for NASA". They're so firmly wedded to this notion that they immediately dismiss as fake any evidence that we did go, no matter how compelling it may seem. So let me ask you: do you feel that it was simply impossible to land men on the moon in the late 1960s -- or today? If so, why? Can you put your finger on a specific obstacle, or does the whole idea just seem too fantastical?
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Aug 25, 2010 2:01:11 GMT -4
But they [NASA] are a government agency.So is the Forestry Service. There was an Apollo astronaut who worked for both of those government agencies in his lifetime, you know.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Aug 25, 2010 2:30:47 GMT -4
The IRS is a government department too, but I bet Fireballs believes them when they report he has paid his taxes.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Aug 25, 2010 4:21:49 GMT -4
What about when they report that he hasn't?
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Aug 25, 2010 8:24:12 GMT -4
On the idea that NASA is some monolithic organisation, and whatever They want is what happens...
I'm collating some material for my employer in response to a complaint a former employee made to the Human Rights Commission about his treatment by various supervisors and other staff. Obviously I can't go into details, but at least some of it involves one person's word against another's, and is nothing to do with what the jobs of these people are.
It's interesting to speculate how such a situation would be dealt with if it had happened in a NASA which faked the Moon landing, and the people concerned happened to be directly involved with the hoax. Here's someone who's really angry with their employer, but about something other than the hoax. They make an official complaint to another organisation, which will investigate the complaint.
If you were a senior manager, what would you do?
|
|
|
Post by banjomd on Aug 25, 2010 8:40:18 GMT -4
But they [NASA] are a government agency.So is the Forestry Service. There was an Apollo astronaut who worked for both of those government agencies in his lifetime, you know. Stu Roosa who was reportedly hand-picked by Alan Shepard to be part of his crew. Apollo 14: total crew space flight time at launch...15min! ;D
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Aug 25, 2010 13:49:51 GMT -4
Very good! I knew someone here would know which astronaut I was referring to.
|
|
|
Post by banjomd on Aug 25, 2010 14:36:26 GMT -4
Confession: I knew I had read it but had to look it up to find who was the smoke jumper. (Good for the soul!) BTW: Shepard had great respect for Roosa's piloting abilities!
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Aug 25, 2010 20:29:10 GMT -4
On the idea that NASA is some monolithic organisation, and whatever They want is what happens... That's actually a pretty ludicrous statement on its face. Far from being a slick, monolithic organization, NASA is a loose federation of largely independent centers. It's amazing they can get anything done amid all the squabbling. Each center has a different culture, organizational pattern, operating procedure, and procurement methods. It's baffling to deal with NASA. If one center had pulled off a hoax, the one to blow the whistle on it would probably be one of the other centers.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Aug 26, 2010 5:04:04 GMT -4
Stu Roosa who was reportedly hand-picked by Alan Shepard to be part of his crew. Apollo 14: total crew space flight time at launch...15min! ;D Can you imagine how Apollo 13 would have gone had the originally scheduled crew flown!
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Aug 26, 2010 6:20:04 GMT -4
What scares me is if a certain other problem hadn't occurred, a malfunctioning sensor showed one of the oxygen tanks overfull, forcing them to stir and restir the tanks. Tjis likely hastened the accident to before the LM was undocked.
|
|