|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 20, 2010 12:56:42 GMT -4
Fine. What is at issue with these reflectors and what are the questions? They seem pretty straightforward to me. Do you have a problem with a discussion about the reflectors? Still waiting to see what it is you want to discuss......
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 20, 2010 12:40:43 GMT -4
Fine. What is at issue with these reflectors and what are the questions? They seem pretty straightforward to me. Do you have a problem with a discussion about the reflectors? Er, no. I just asked you what, exactly you wanted to discuss.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 20, 2010 12:39:47 GMT -4
OK, so now we can all agree that Apollo put 3 reflectors on the moon via the manned Apollo missions and the USSR put to via unmanned missions. "Now"? Heh. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 20, 2010 12:35:19 GMT -4
OK, so now we can all agree that Apollo put 3 reflectors on the moon via the manned Apollo missions and the USSR put to via unmanned missions. It that it?? What is the problem with having a conversation about the reflectors? Is there a problem with someone asking questions too? Fine. What is at issue with these reflectors and what are the questions? They seem pretty straightforward to me.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 20, 2010 12:25:50 GMT -4
Oh I know the USSR have a rover (s) with a reflector on it, was not sure about the missing one. Just found the info and as I suspected it does have one and results have been had off it. spacespin.org/article.php/100459-russian-retroreflector-found-lrocUsing information provided by NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) instrument teams, researchers at the University of California San Diego successfully pinpointed the location of a long lost light reflector on the lunar surface by bouncing laser signals from Earth to the Russian Lunokhod 1 retroreflector. OK, so now we can all agree that Apollo put 3 reflectors on the moon via the manned Apollo missions and the USSR put to via unmanned missions. It that it??
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 19, 2010 11:34:43 GMT -4
That what we have photo analysyt for. You see, this is the root of the problem I think. You seem to think that a photo analyst can magically produce data that isn't there. Real life isn't like CSI. If a lander is shown as less than one pixel on your camera sensor then no amount of photo analysis will suddenly make it appear. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 19, 2010 11:27:41 GMT -4
I see, thanks for the reply. However, I'm afraid the questions are most likely moot given that none of the probes mentioned have cameras with enough resolution to show anything of interest. As usual, I'm sure if I'm mistaken about that I'll be promptly corrected (all eyes in the classroom slowly turn to Jay). ;-) That what we have photo analysyt for. No. The term "resolution" in this context essentially means enough pixels available to properly discern an object. So if the camera doesn't have the available pixels, all the "analysis" in the world won't bring out any more information from the picture.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 19, 2010 11:13:42 GMT -4
ultima, as usual I'm late to the game here. I've skimmed through all the posts and I'm not quite sure of exactly what point you are making/getting at. Could you please restate what that point is? 1. Chinese Chang'e-1 has taken photos of the landing sites? 2. Japenese SELENE has taken photos of the landing sites? 3. India's Chandrayaan-1 has taken photos of the landing sites? I see, thanks for the reply. However, I'm afraid the questions are most likely moot given that none of the probes mentioned have cameras with enough resolution to show anything of interest. As usual, I'm sure if I'm mistaken about that I'll be promptly corrected (all eyes in the classroom slowly turn to Jay). ;-)
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on Jun 19, 2010 10:40:13 GMT -4
ultima, as usual I'm late to the game here. I've skimmed through all the posts and I'm not quite sure of exactly what point you are making/getting at.
Could you please restate what that point is?
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on May 13, 2010 19:37:49 GMT -4
Alright, I know this isn't from the David Icke thread, but ATS, and it isn't even that thread, but someone posted a link to a forum I've never heard of before (Life After the Oil Crash?!, sounds like a happy place) where some staggering photographic interpretation is going on: First the ATS thread that has been linked before (yea, were up to about 900 responses): www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread566601/pg48#pid8799172Next, the Oil Crash photo post: www.doomers.us/forum2/index.php?topic=54088.450I'm mean, I'm stunned, the pictures aren't even from the same mission! At least he gives the proper ALSJ ID.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on May 9, 2010 9:13:09 GMT -4
I'm on slow dial-up, so can't watch videos. Did Cernan say that while on the lunar surface? If so, can you quote exactly what he said? I have a file of lunar surface comms and can't find him saying anything like that after searching for "stopped," "engine," "dug," and "deep crater." No, its from a recent interview. God only knows the true circumstances. I've always ignored Jarrah White, now I'm developing an intense dislike for him.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on May 8, 2010 13:28:11 GMT -4
Does anybody want to take a stab at this? Be forewarned, its a Jarrah White video, but in it, at around 6:50 Gene Cernan makes the claim that if they hadn't stopped the engines above the lunar surface, it would have dug a deep crater in the moon. www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEQNZQdJFtII realize this is probably a bit of exaggeration, but geez, it really makes it tough to explain.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on May 7, 2010 17:00:09 GMT -4
This is my favorite: "Plautus is blocked for most of day, sends abusive emails to Silsor, inventive combinations of swear words is inspiring."It's important to be an inspiration to someone. ;D
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on May 7, 2010 12:39:29 GMT -4
You just don't see those colorful, psychotic HBs anymore. I think it was John Keller who showed P. Satire's posts to his wife, who is a clinical psychologist, and he reported that she said there was good evidence of paranoid schizophrenia. Actually his ex-wife. And you are correct. I was just perusing an old Apollo Hoax thread that was running at the same time as the Yahoo. BTW, Platus is still around, and as charming as ever. (did you know he's a physician AND a lumberjack?) conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/a-portrait-of-plautus-satireEven the hard-core conspiracy theory sites are getting tired of him.
|
|
|
Post by tomblvd on May 7, 2010 12:20:14 GMT -4
You just don't see those colorful, psychotic HBs anymore. Oh no? I can cite a few on YouTube who are active at this very minute. Heh. I'd say some of them are colorful, and some of them are psychotic, but few of them are both. That takes a unique talent.
|
|