|
Post by JayUtah on Mar 19, 2007 15:27:50 GMT -4
I was going to respond to this thread with some actual counter points to some of the arguments...
I doubt you were. You've had plenty of time in the two weeks since you last visited this thread to post joke pictures in other threads. And in that time, people have provided clear refutations to your claims, which you have let pass in silence. It's quite telling that you get all righteous in our faces within hours of people finally saying their patience with you is exhausted.
...but since some just want post nasty comments toward me
Why are you so obsessed with being a martyr? You accused us of calling you names -- no one has called you any names (unless you count martyr as a name). You accuse us of posting nasty comments -- they're only complaining that you ignore this thread while you post jokes elsewhere, which is absolutely true. But you're hell-bent on making sure everyone knows just how badly you're being treated at the hands of the big, bad Apollo-believers. Do you really think you're fooling anyone?
If you want to talk seriously about photographs, talk seriously. If you want to post jokes, post jokes. But knock off the high-school debate trick of trying to play one off the other. We're beyond that.
THESE ARE ORBITAL PHOTOS & WOULD NOT BE PROOF MEN STEPPED ON THE MOON
No one is claiming that they are. You're the one who posted them. You're the one who claimed they were anomalous. Why? If you want to drop all that, change horses, and now tell us they're irrelevant, then go right ahead. I won't stop you from shooting your own argument in the foot.
...they could of been taken by satellite orbiting the moon...
They were. It's called CSM.
But it doesn't matter what they were taken by. Your argument that they depict an untenable set of orbital conditions is provably false. You have too simplistic a notion of terrain congruence, and too simplistic a notion of the orbital mechanics of the Earth-Moon system and Apollo trajectories.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Mar 19, 2007 16:03:33 GMT -4
Incidentally, AS11-44-6559 contains a lovely view of Australia: If anyone wants to look up the weather data for July 21-22...
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Mar 19, 2007 22:33:03 GMT -4
Looks about right to me, hot and sunny in Australia, New Zealand hidden under that cloud.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Mar 19, 2007 23:09:13 GMT -4
The weather in Sydney on July 21, 1969 was a fairly depressing winter's day. This is also backed by the weather report made on the national radio carrier ABC on the day of the Lunar EVA (I'll have to listen to my recording to quote exactly). Additionally, the stormy conditions over the Parkes radio antena can be seen in the cloud cover of SE Australia. I'd say the photo matches what was experienced on the East Coast on that day.
|
|
JMV
Venus
Posts: 41
|
Post by JMV on Mar 20, 2007 3:02:41 GMT -4
Good job identifying the features in that A11 pic. What we're seeing in the Apollo 8 picture are some of the smaller craters on the western edge of crater Pasteur hundreds of kilometers southeast of Mare Smythii. AS8-13-2329 shows the central parts of Pasteur.
|
|
|
Post by 3onthetree on Mar 20, 2007 4:39:28 GMT -4
Incidentally, AS11-44-6559 contains a lovely view of Australia: If anyone wants to look up the weather data for July 21-22... Which segment of the globe is Sydney in A, B or C?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Mar 20, 2007 4:53:13 GMT -4
Which segment of the globe is Sydney in A, B or C? X marks the spot, well approximately anyway, getting a higher resolution image and comparing it to a view of the globe with Sydney's actual location marked would allow a much more accurate placement but to be honest I can't be bothered to do one.
|
|
|
Post by Cavorite on Mar 20, 2007 4:58:15 GMT -4
I think you landed in Bass Strait there...
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Mar 20, 2007 8:40:42 GMT -4
Erm I don't quite get the question. Who mentioned anything about the location of Sydney being in a section of A, B or C? Sydney most certainly is in the transmission footprint of the ABC which is the national radio/TV service (Australian Broadcasting Commission - as it was known then). I suggest getting an atlas and figuring out for yourself where Sydney and Parkes would be located. It should be pretty straightforward to anyone with a 1st grade proficiency in geography. Incidentally, AS11-44-6559 contains a lovely view of Australia: If anyone wants to look up the weather data for July 21-22... Which segment of the globe is Sydney in A, B or C?
|
|
|
Post by showtime on Mar 30, 2007 23:53:43 GMT -4
In response to KIWI, ,I pointed out the wrong matching fetchers in the earlier photos, since I couldn't compare them side by side in full resolution & someone was in a hurry 4 me to point them out , I forget who.. Anyhow ,I am still not convinced that the photos don't show some of the same fetchers.. Since you seem eager to be right on this, maybe you could find some better apollo 8 or Lunar Prospector, clementine photos
|
|
|
Post by Cavorite on Mar 31, 2007 1:02:58 GMT -4
Since you seem eager to be right on this, maybe you could find some better apollo 8 or Lunar Prospector, clementine photos I'm not sure a snide tone is called for. Once again, this is a site that is all about debate. If you raise a point, you have no right to get snippy if someone challenges your assumptions. Given that you made the claim, it is your responsibility to come up with additional evidence if what you currently have is insufficient to prove your point.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Mar 31, 2007 9:58:03 GMT -4
...I am still not convinced that the photos don't show some of the same fetchers.. Sigh! All the information you need is in post 38. Is there something difficult about it that you don't understand? Can you not find Peek from the description provided? Did you even try? It's simple enough, and you know a bit about images so you should be able to find it and also discover for yourself that it's not in the Apollo 8 photo. Grashtel had already given you links to the hi-res copies of photos concerned in post 25 and I repeated them in post 51. And here they are again: www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a410/AS8-14-2383HR.jpgwww.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-44-6559HR.jpgDid you not study them closely and find for yourself that the lunar landscape is indeed quite different in each? And in post 52 I gave a link to another photo which shows crater Peek, the crater that is not visible in AS8-14-2383HR. You claimed in post 1 that the craters match up. Are you unable to see, using the information provided, that they do not match up? [I puzzled for some time over what were the fetchers you were talking about, then eventually realised you meant features.]
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Apr 4, 2007 0:39:41 GMT -4
Showtime: If you're still researching this, here is some independant information which will help you verify the details about crater Peek. In Atlas of the Moon, by Antonin Rukl, Paul Hamlyn Publishing, London (1991), Map 38, you can see Peek at bottom far right, between the words MARE and SMYTHII. It's not a good view of the crater because of it being near the moon's limb, but it does give an idea of scale. There's a much better map on page 184, "Libration Zone III" which is drawn to a different scale, where Peek can be seen in a view from above, again at the bottom of the map and between the same words. You can also see the light-coloured ray, plus another one crossing it at right angles. Down to Peek's left is the flat crater with the central hill or mountain, which is unfortunately unnamed in this atlas, and beyond it you can see craters Back and Schubert on the edge of the map. None of these features are visible in the Apollo 8 photo, AS8-14-2383HR, which I believe was taken further south and on a different longitude to AS11-44-6559HR, which is the reason why the craters don't match up. Do you agree yet that they don't match up? There is also a little information about Peek at Wikipedia. Is it possible that the earth moved out of the ecliptic plane that day That last sentence of your first post indicates that you thought the two photos were taken on the same day. Were you joking, or are you now confident that the Apollo 8 and Apollo 11 photos were in fact taken nearly seven months apart?
|
|
JMV
Venus
Posts: 41
|
Post by JMV on Apr 4, 2007 2:05:27 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Apr 4, 2007 8:02:31 GMT -4
Many thanks for all those marvellous links, JMV. I wonder if Showtime will appreciate them. When he first posted, I knew very little about the landscape in his two photos, but it was easy enough to track down what was in the Apollo 11 photo from the resources I have at home. However, all I had about the Apollo 8 photo was the caption in Michael Light's Full Moon, to his photo 30, AS8-13-2329, which says it "looks southwest towards Crater Gibbs", which didn't sound particularly accurate to me, but I don't have very good maps of the lunar far side to check and nor did I know where to check on the internet. Your excellent work has filled in that gap in my knowledge and the knowledge junkie in me will pore over the photos, comparing features. It just shows how valuable this board is: Ask a curly question and usually somebody will come along and answer it, or at least have ideas about how to track down the answer. Have you come across any panorama photos that include Peek and the area in the Apollo 11 photo? I'd like to take a closer look, but being on 2.3 to 3.2 kb per second dialup I don't dare try to download that 7 MB index map. Searching for Peek gave me no results at the LPI, and "Mare Smythii" returns heaps of photos to search through. Showtime, here are two more, quite different, photos of Peek: A vertical view of Peek and the shallow crater, taken on Apollo 16. Peek is two-thirds of the way between the top left and bottom right corners, and the shallow crater is near top centre. www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS16-M-2123And another, Apollo 17: www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS17-M-2042Perhaps all the work that has been done for you will show that on this board we are not "eager to be right" (well, at least those of us who are not at the mercy of great big, out-of-control egos that trot us around by rings in our snouts) , but that we are certainly keen to establish the facts, which are usually much more fascinating than any cooked-up story about a hoax.
|
|