|
Post by carpediem on Jul 17, 2011 14:59:44 GMT -4
Fattydash has been suspended, so don't expect answers to those questions any time soon (Not that he would have answered them anyway of course).
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Jul 17, 2011 15:07:48 GMT -4
Well I for one don't get his contention.
The report says they were passed a position by NASA, the account from NASA says the astronauts determined their position using stars etc.
From the Stone account:
"We were only searching for the reflected pulse within a small time window, because the belief was that the distance was already known to within 500m."
"It remained to explain the unexpected discrepancy in timing. Every detail of the experiment was examined carefully. It took weeks to finally locate the source of the error within the computer program JPL had used to generate the expected timing for the return signal. They quite reasonably had assumed that Lick Observatory (LO) was where the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac (predecessor of the Astronomical Almanac) said it was, which in turn and equally reasonably listed the observatory location as given by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey (USCGS). USCGS thought LO was where their Lick Observatory benchmark was placed. Their benchmark was in the parking lot west of the Main Building, 1700 feet from the 3m telescope. Thus, the first result of this very sophisticated Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment was to accurately measure the distance between the 3m telescope and the Main Building parking lot - via a retroreflector on the moon!"
So the computer problems were nothing of the sort, just a misplaced USCGS benchmark.
Extremely inconclusive to say the least.
Does anbody know why he thinks NASA didn't know their position, what it actually was and what he thinks it was?
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jul 17, 2011 15:17:52 GMT -4
As before, if there is evidence for my posting here under another name, please present it. Whether you've done it here is irrelevant. You've used sock-puppets on at least one other forum while discussing the Apollo hoax theory. If you're willing to use dishonest tactics at BAUT then obviously there is nothing (ie. a conscience) stopping you from trying it here too. So the question is and always has been: why do you believe such dishonest tactics are acceptable? This question will be here waiting for you when you get back from your 6 month ban. I expect an answer or the ban will be made permanent.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 17, 2011 16:37:57 GMT -4
Sorry, but Clavius is busted. Clavius? Is he calling this forum Clavius? There is only one other I know of that insisted this was the Clavius forum. Are we sure this isn't Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored?
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Jul 17, 2011 16:46:39 GMT -4
Sorry, but Clavius is busted. Clavius? Is he calling this forum Clavius? There is only one other I know of that insisted this was the Clavius forum. Are we sure this isn't Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored? Jarrah calls it that as well
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Jul 17, 2011 17:09:34 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Jul 17, 2011 19:47:31 GMT -4
Well, we have an answer to the sockpuppet issue, but to me this is still a live issue. I believe this forum prides itself in debunking all claims or offering plausible explanations to anomalies.....so with that said can somebody answer the following - Apollo 11 transcript 1/ Does this equate to N 00 43 56 E 23 26 24? I mean has FD interpreted the data display correctly, as the figures quoted here confirm the decimal as correct (is it the same for the Moon?). andrew.hedges.name/experiments/convert_lat_long/Each second of arc for a moon of 6783 miles diameter represents a distance of 27.6 feet. According to NASA's own communication with Neil Armstrong per the CapCom interaction he is 129 seconds of arc North of the LRRR. That would put Armstrong 3,560 feet north of the LRRR or .67 miles. 2/ Is that figure of .67 miles correct? 3/ Assuming the above was passed to the LRRR team.....would the span of the laser return a signal with a .67 variance? Just playing devil's advocate.
|
|
|
Post by philthy on Jul 17, 2011 20:04:14 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Jul 17, 2011 20:09:17 GMT -4
Well yes, but HBs say the pics were staged. How would you ever see robot tracks? If it was a robot(which I don't believe) there wouldn't be a picture. ;D
|
|
|
Post by philthy on Jul 17, 2011 20:22:49 GMT -4
Well yes, but HBs say the pics were staged. How would you ever see robot tracks? If it was a robot(which I don't believe) there wouldn't be a picture. ;D True, but the main reason I posted the picture, and forgot to mention. The lander is in no way .67 or .75 miles from the reflector. It's well within easy walking distance of the lander. Phil
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Jul 18, 2011 2:37:21 GMT -4
They lowered it with a crane....
Sorry. It was one of the conclusions from the fattydash stance if he had bothered to follow it through. That is it was done in a studio. He was not sure or had made his mind up in an earlier post but would not go there as I think that way led to the dark side (real landing) and he wanyed to bait certain people.
Still an interesting exercise to see the coordinate bit through though.
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Jul 18, 2011 3:52:57 GMT -4
Well yes, but HBs say the pics were staged. How would you ever see robot tracks? If it was a robot(which I don't believe) there wouldn't be a picture. ;D True, but the main reason I posted the picture, and forgot to mention. The lander is in no way .67 or .75 miles from the reflector. It's well within easy walking distance of the lander. Phil If you read the post above yours, you can see what is suggested. How did Apollo 11 give accurate enough co-ordinates to the LICK team, when from the transcripts suggest it was .67 miles away from where they successfully fired the laser.
|
|
|
Post by chrlz on Jul 18, 2011 5:15:29 GMT -4
Sorry, but Clavius is busted. Clavius? Is he calling this forum Clavius? There is only one other I know of that insisted this was the Clavius forum. Are we sure this isn't Rocky/DavidC/Cosmored? As already mentioned, Jarrah made the same unwarranted 'link' also. I don't think this is Cosmored, who can be found over here as 'Scott' and being well and truly debated into the ground by the extremely competent BetaMax101.. is Beta a poster here, btw? As for Jarrah, it is notable that he started out with numerous telltales in his typing style (and a very aggressive and angry tone) but if you look at his posts/video comments over time, he seems to have become very 'correct' in his spelling and grammar, although the verbosity has remained... I think he has also realised that the angry approach just makes you look a fool, so he has moved away from that style. If Jarrah isn't DoctorTea/MaryB/BFischer/BSpassky/Sicilian/fattydash/briskwalk/MVinson (did I miss anyone?), I'll be.. rather surprised. But I also think the truth will come out eventually - I believe that Jarrah may be gradually setting up an 'escape route'...
|
|
|
Post by chrlz on Jul 18, 2011 8:32:30 GMT -4
Well, even tho' apollo nav isn't my strongest suit, I'd be happy to... But I'm afraid I simply don't get the point that FD was trying to make in amongst the endless obfuscation and flowery waffling language. I've tried to make some sense out of that hideous wall of text, but have failed. Can someone distill it into english?
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Jul 18, 2011 8:51:41 GMT -4
Well cutting out the nonsense we get:
It doesn't make it any easier to find the point
I think the first thing to do it check the conversions from degrees to distance. I'm not convinced they're all correct.
It would also be useful to know the error bars on each of the measurement types.
|
|