|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 23:06:20 GMT -4
I was under the impression that our lives away from this web site were our lives away from this web site. I do not understand what my activites at home, work, school, play have to do with our debate here. If there is some provisions in your rules for debate at Apollohoax.net that our personal lives are to be open for discussion, I may choose not to continue here. Fair enough. If on the other hand, this site is about debating Apollo and if I have not broken any rules, then I wish to continue. I cannot make my views more clear. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 22:33:46 GMT -4
I do not believe my activities on other web sites have anything at all to do with my activity here. If there is evidence for me engaging in sock-puppetry here on Apollohoax.net forum, then by all means ban me. I should be banned. If there is no such evidence, then I respectfully request to continue my debate with gren, Bob, Jason, Jay, twik, scooter and the others.
Apart from that one difficulty I had with Jason, we have all gotten along well enough and learned from one another. And as regards my problem with Jason, I admitted I was in the wrong and I very much was. I apologized and he accepted my apology. I find him to be honorable and admire his passion for the subject, as I do with regard to the others here. We are all learning about Apollo and this spirited debate has made us all more aware of the strengths and weaknesses of our respective positions.
I mean no one any harm. I have been fair. I believe you would be hard pressed to find another who has been here that has made as strong an effort to answer your questions. I realize you believe me to be evasive at times, though such is not the case. There is so much material to cover and so many questions coming from your side, it is hard for us over here to deal with your posts just based on the volume of them.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 22:05:49 GMT -4
The fattydash account simply did not work at first, not sure why or would have posted back in May here. I did register under another name more recently and did that for the very reason that the fattydash registration was not giving me posting access. But that resistration did not give me posting access either. It simply wasn't functional, wasn't giving me access to post on the site. So I was registered, but not able to log on in the sense I could post and I tried the fattydash one a bunch of times. I cannot remember the specifics, but if you look back from May on, I don't believe you'll see any posts from me.
Then for whatever reason, the system started working for me under the fattydash name. I do not know what happened, just did. But I never logged on and posted under a different name here. I am sure you can determine that from your records. Should be quite clear. Look to see if there are posts under the other name. I do not believe you will find any.
So the other registration was just another try to get on because fattydash wasn't working and I had tried since May and it did not work. I think that claim should be supported by the absence of posts under it back then. Obviously I like to do this stuff so if it was working I would have posted. I cannot recall if it was 100% inaccessable, but believe it was.
Were I to have registered here a second time under a different user name in an effort to engae in sock-puppetry, I would have posted under a different name and I clearly have not done that, posted under another identity. In addition, I most certainly I would not have registered for a sock character using the same email account as the fattydash account. That point right there should make my argument as regards my intentions. If I was trying to hide who I was, create a different character, I would not create that character with the same email address. Makes no sense. It is simply not consistent with a sock mo.
I have always and only been fattydash here. I hope that clears things up.
Respectfully, fatty d
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 21:18:57 GMT -4
For Jay and LunarOrbit above
I have never engaged in the practice of sock-puppetry on the ApolloHoax web site. Every time I have posted, I have posted as fattydash. My fattydash registration was from May.
There are no posts on this web site at all from me under another identification "name". Fattydash is the only name I have used in my posts here on the Apollohoax web site.
I hope that clears things up. If someone is suggesting there are other posts here on Apollohoax where that person is claiming to be me, or you believe there are posts under a name other than fattydash you believe were authored by me, please show them to me LunarOrbit. I mean that with the greatest sincerity. Show them to me and I am quite sure I would be able to recognize them as posts penned by another. My writing style and approach to the Apollo problem are rather distinct as you know.
Respectfully fatt d
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 18:50:36 GMT -4
For Bob, at 302
most certainly no games, just NASA's facts and those as presented by astronaut Michael Collins
Please consult your copy of the Apollo 11 Voice Transcription Report at 04 08 20 28 before proceeding.
Also consult your copy of "Carrying the Fire", we are all aware of the relevant section of the book.
No Bob, the Apollo 11 landings as history recorded them and as Michael Collins documented in his famous book features the theme that the staff in Houston, Michael Collins and others were unaware of the Eagle's/Tranquility Base's lunar coordinates. This is what our history books say, this is what Michael Collins said. Please see above posts and I refer the reader to "Carrying the Fire" so one may confirm for himself or herself that Michael Collins, by his own account, did not know where his colleagues were upon the surface of the moon.
So this official story cannot be true as the Apollo 11 Voice Transcript itself contains the incriminating evidence that Houston and Collins knew with high precision the coordinates of Tranquility Base. Details provided below.
So I concede the lander landed. I concede they went to the moon. But I do not concede Bob that Michael Collins looked for his friends with a 28 power sextant from 60 miles up when he had the coordinates in his hot little hand. And I do not concede that Houston instructed USGS personal to search for the lander on moon maps based on descriptions of the moon as provided by Armstrong given Houston had the exact coordinates of Tranquility Base as documented below. And I do not concede that Donald Beattie and his colleagues painstakingly studied photos of the moon and flight data to find Tranquility Base days after the astronauts returned given NASA had the coordinates of Tranquility Base in the context of the exploration's REAL TIME.
So as these features of the the official Apollo story cannot be accepted, the features as regards Collins with his sextant, USGS, Donald Beattie's analysis, I will freely concede the landing and the coordinate determination, but no way do I concede the entirety of the official story. I do not concede these last 3 points, Collins circling with a sextant despite having the coordinates himself, USGS searching maps despite colleagues down the hall with the coordinates, Beattie and colleagues analyzing photos days after the astronauts returned despite their colleagues down the hall having the coordinates. No Bob, I do not concede all this because if I did I would not have half a brain.
The details if you will;
Here in the Apollo 11 transcript at 04 08 20 28 we find Houston through the CapCom communicating with Michael Collins in the CM. Houston is informing Collins of the Eagle's precise location. We know that precise location today as that of Tranquility Base at lunar Coordinates 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E.
So in the dialog from the Apollo 11 voice transcript below, the CapCom does not articulate those coordinates in a direct manner, he does so with reference to the planned coordinates which were at site number 2;
00 43 56 N and 23 38 51 E.
The CapCom tells Collins here that the Eagle/Tranquility Base is 0.799 minutes of arc south of the originally planned site 2 and 11.730 minutes of arc west of the originally planned coordinates. So doing the simple math we have based on this information, the CapCom informing Collins that the Eagle/Tranquility Base/Armstrong and Aldrin are at;
00 43 08 N and 23 27 07 E
Note that 11.730 minutes of arc down range from the anticipated landing site translates to 3.7 miles down range, or roughly 4 miles. Consistant with the official story version..
So we may conclude that Michael Collins knew the coordinates of Tranquility Base at the very time it was being claimed no one knew them. The CapCom knows, Collins knows and Armstrong/Aldrin know.
The actual transcript if you will;
CapCom: Roger, Mike. We got an update on the LAT longi- tude for the LM, if you're ready to copy. Over.
Collins: Go ahead.
Collins: Go ahead.
CapCom: Roger. Columbia, it's plus 7 - correction, plus 0.799 for the LAT, plus 11.730 minutes of arc for the longitude over two. Over.
Collins: Thank you. The altitude remain unchanged?
CapCom: Say again. Over.
Collins: Does the altitude remain unchanged? ...
CapCom: That's affirmative.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 14:26:04 GMT -4
Jay, have got to go so this must be my last post for a bit, work and stuff you know. Per your 292, I propose to continue the debate and assume/concede the lander was used as planned. I am not arguing the point Jay. It is on the moon, they are proceeding to use it as planned. I cannot spell this out any more. Landed and being used as planned conceded. All of NASA's other "facts" are in play though. Fair enough? Gotta' run. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 14:19:03 GMT -4
Luke, absolutely not. Do not want to apply them out of context. I have got to run. Back hopefully later. I propose we look at the transcript itself. Utterly context based. My point is let's assume these facts as presented by NASA itself to all be true. No reason to doubt them? And we shall see where it goes. Nothing trick, nothing fake, nothing out of context. Thanks, gotta' run.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 14:15:46 GMT -4
Bob, you are a day late and a post short. We have established they saw the landing coordinates 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E in the DSKY R windows on landing. Moreover, we have established that Houston via telemetry knows what appears in these windows. That includes landing coordinates. As Armstrong is landing no less 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 appears in the DSKY, see reference above. So you may tell the guys to stop pinpointing, has already been done. Let's move on from there. As above, let's follow the thread based on NASA's own account.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 14:10:47 GMT -4
Jay,
I do concede it. I just said that. I also emphasized however I will not concede that NASA's other facts are untrue. I concede every single point in my last post. Every single one. It is all true including the one that the Eagle landed. I want to continue the debate from there. Agreed?
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 13:56:06 GMT -4
OK Jay, back to your first point above. I concede the Eagle landed at lunar coordinates 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E and Armstrong saw these coordinates on the DSKY as referenced above. Charlie Duke and the guidance people knew them as well via telemetry as we have established per the Apollo 11 transcript that NASA was aware via telemetry of the data appearing in the LM computer R windows. This is where the landing coordinates appear when running a P68 program. That is explicitly stated in the copy of the MIT manual I have page 9.
So it landed. We know they have the coordinates as above. I do not debate that point, you don't.
So then Armstrong the best test pilot they've got is now the biggest idiot in the world and so is Charlie Duke because now, utterly unnecessarily, Collins is sent on this wild goose chase looking for his friends, USGS is scrambling to find these guys? The most respected authors in Apollo literature, Chaikin himself, emphasize the Eagle is lost. Sure, OK, let's find it, then does any of this other stuff make sense, Armstrong's behavior, USGS, Flagstaff, Beattie?
I am happy to concede the point Jay, more than happy to concede the Eagle landed, Armstrong saw the coordinates in the DSKY, Aldrin saw those same coordinates when he ran the P68 program and the guidance people knew the coordinates via telemetry and others in Houston such as Duke , McCandless and so forth knew. Fine we agree.
That said, given what we have established above, I will not concede that Collins was not looking for his colleagues WITH A NEW SET OF COORDINATES AS A FOCUS EVERY TIME HE ORBITED THE MOON. I won't concede that Donald Beattie and the rest of the Apollo scientists spent days analyzing photos and flight data to help find 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E, coordinates Armstrong Aldrin, Duke, McCandless, Houston had all along, and THIS ANALYSIS BY BEATTIE AND HIS COLLEAGUES OF THE PHOTOS AND FLIGHT DATA OCCURRED AFTER THE ASTRONAUTS RETURNED FROM THE MOON. . I won't concede the USGS people and the Flagstaff geologists frantically hunted for Tranquility Base's location on the evening of 07/20/1969. I won't concede the USGS hunt was based on Armstrong's description of the landscape's appearance and not what he could have easily read off to the USGS guys, the numbers in the DSKY windows. I won't concede that when Michel Collins wrote his book, he said he did not know where his colleagues were. I will not concede that any of these facts are not true because they are the facts as told by NASA itself.
So let's assume all of this to be true and continue our debate with these as the ground rules, the established facts. They are NASA's own facts.
I concede every one. Let's see where it takes us. Shall we agree?
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 13:26:30 GMT -4
For twik, not slightly contradictory, VERY contradictory. Read what I wrote again.
There is a big difference between having someone, in this case the Lick Observatory staff, legitimately determine the position of something you have placed on the moon with their laser beam as opposed to pretending that is what occurred by first feeding them the coordinates of that something, in this case the LRRR, and then saying, "See look those guys found what we put up there. It really is up there"'
The point is, and I welcome any other solution, I am all ears and mine are better than Wampler's, the coordinates of Tranquility Base as determined by the Lick Observatory, 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E, were not determined by the Lick telescope's finding of that position/LRRR as NASA claims. That cannot be because the beam was too wide and the man that targeted the beam says otherwise as well. That man says the coordinates of Tranquility Base were GIVEN to Lick and subsequently confirmed on 08/01/1969 when a software glitch was ironed out.
We must conclude that the dishonest party here is not Remington Stone and the Lick Observatory team, but the higher ups in the Apollo program at NASA. It cannot be read this any other way.
I am as sorry as anyone.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 13:13:11 GMT -4
twik
Absolutely no argument from me there twik. I agree, every major event in human history is told many ways and there are always "facts" which surface that are contradictory. There are no events that do not feature contradictions in their telling.
That said, it does not mean that for most of these events a "truth" could not be determined in principle were one to be clever enough analytically or better yet, have a time machine and look see for oneself at those points of contradiction in the story. I am not trying to play cute, just emphasizing if you could look yourself and you knew where to look had you a time machine, you could resolve the apparent contradiction.
Something happened or it did not. The contradictions, a story's internal incoherence, that derives from its telling.
Case in point the LRRR issue as outlined above. This is an apparent contradiction. My analysis suggests the contradiction is solved if one assumes NASA to be a party which is intentionally misleading us, lying.
How do we know this? Remigton's Stone account seems very credible in outline AND it is supported by the facts. The main fact being, the laser beam was 2 miles wide. NASA's claim that the Lick Observatory determined the position of Tranquility Base at 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E cannot be true. They know how wide the beam is and so know its accuracy.
Why would they lie about this. As above, I suggest they lied because they did not land Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the moon that evening, and there are really no alternative motivations for them to intentionally deceive us as regards this that I can see, though I am happy to consider other options if anyone has got an idea.
I do not like this any more that anyone else. But what am I to do? Pretend I do not understand basic science and simply go along with what appears to be a charade to me, while we pay out all this money to people that hold us in such contempt? NO!
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 12:49:23 GMT -4
For ka9q
The crew at the Lick Observatory had all the information they needed on the night of the landing to find the LRRR. Well, except 2 things.
One is, Wampler, the Lick scientist taking report from "Houston" heard 00 41 50 N, not 00 41 15 N so off by 35 seconds of arc. Since Armstrong is said to be at roughly the moon's equator, we can use the circumference of the moon in a calculation to get a rough estimate off how far off target Lick was on 07/20/1969. Circumference is 6783 miles so each degree is 18.8 miles, each minute of a degree is .314 miles and each second of a degree is .00523379 miles. So Remington Stone, when he fired the laser at Tranquility Base on 07/20/1969 was roughly .183 miles off target more or less N-S wise. The beam diameter is 2 miles. So one may conclude from this that Remington Stone's own conclusion as to why they did not hit the target on 07/20/1969 is more than likely in error. It would seem they would have hit it given 35 seconds of arc "high" shouldn't push the beam so for off target that it would miss the LRRR at 00 41 15 N. We can conclude from this that the group at Lick Observatory did not successfully target the LRRR on 07/20/1969 because of the JPL software-timing problem, and not because of Joe Wampler the scientist's bad ears.
We know with certainty Lick observatory had all the information they needed on the night of 07/20/1969 to find the LRRR.
ka9q, here is the best way to look at the laser issue as it is so revealing. Remington Stone, the technician that targeted the laser informs us that the coordinates 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E were GIVEN to them by people in Houston shortly after the LRRR was set down. On the other hand NASA's official story was/is that 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E as the location of Tranquility base was a MEASUREMENT made by Lick when they located the laser on 08/01/1969 after reviewing photo and fight data analysis provided to them by Donald Beattie and the other Apollo scientists. No one disputes this is NASA's claim. No one disputes this is Lick Observatory's claim. The account NASA give and the account the Lick Observatory people give cannot both be correct.
From the above rough calculation that one minute of arc translates into .314 miles of moon, and one second of arc translates into .00523379 miles, we may conclude NASA does very bad science , or they are intentionally misleading us, lying, because the Lick Observatory laser beam at 2 miles wide covers six minutes of arc and would cover 382 seconds of arc(rough calculations). So for the Lick laser beam people to say Tranquility Base is at 00 44 15 N and 23 26 00 E we would say, "No way you can use that thing to determine coordinates so accurately. You guys got the coordinates from NASA". And indeed, so it would seem they did.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 12:14:43 GMT -4
For Jason
If you take a look at the technical crew debriefing, 10.0 Lunar Surface, 2nd entry is Aldrin. He says the ground caught him on loading10244 27 instead of 10254 29 for TIG NOUN 33.
So I am just reviewing the details of the context now. 10254 29 is not a lunar coordinate. It is something that would be loaded by Aldrin into the R-2 window. Aldrin loaded 10244 27.
The point is Houston is watching the R windows on the computer. That is where the coordinates appear, and if McCandless and the others in Houston are able to "see" this via telemetry, then they saw the 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E that I referred to above in the R windows as the Eagle landed.
This makes sense given the general features of Apollo guidance. It is for the most part telemetric. The crafts are tracked, positions determined "in Houston" and guided remotely. Star sightings and so forth serve as checks, but they do NOT navigate celestially per se as a sailor would because sailors boats are not remote control as the Apollo crafts are.
The point, if McCandless sees 10244 27 in the R 2 window, then given the information available to us, and there really is no good reason to question it, at least in outline, Charlie Duke saw 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E when the Eagle landed.
Since Charlie Duke and McCandless are CapComs not guidance people we know at least the guidance crew, scientists, engineers and so forth they are watching the relevant telemetry like hawks, especially now, and that includes the data Aldrin inputs and the read out data, 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E.
Best answer I can give now for the 10254 29 business. I am going to read about the details. Will get back to you after I do.
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 12, 2011 4:58:42 GMT -4
No Problem. Thanks, good night.
|
|