|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 15, 2005 16:34:25 GMT -4
Playing around with 419 scammers does not disqualify margamatix from discussing his beliefs here. . At first, I couldn't work out what rocketdad was talking about here, or what his logic was for suggesting that someone who takes on hoaxers should be so feared. But of course, when you think about it, what's the greatest hoax of all? |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Nov 25, 2005 16:31:12 GMT -4
Live interviews between London and New York during the 1960s had a delay of 2 to 3 seconds between transmission and arrival. This had the effect of making the recipient of the question seem a little "dim" as he/she still concentrated on the question long after the interviewer had finished asking it.
Given that the highest satellites in Earth orbit, orbit at 22,000 miles, then the furthest this signal could have travelled is 44,000 miles.
The moon is over five times as far away, yet the signal delay was far less than the delay between London and NY.
Why would this be?
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Nov 20, 2005 18:39:20 GMT -4
I would if I wasn't going to bed in 5 minutes but I'll try to get onto it next weekend, time permitting.
Meanwhile can I ask you if you remember transcontinental TV interviews from the 1960's with their long delays?
Gotta go now- trucks don't drive themselves!
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Oct 1, 2005 10:05:37 GMT -4
In the meantime, do you have any other thoughts or questions about the radio signals? Yes Peter, Here's something that you may find of interest on this subject. Go to 216.26.168.193/moonmovie/store.aspThe first item on the page is the video "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon". Don't worry, you don't have to buy it! Click "video sample 2" and watch the short piece of footage. This will explain how the delay was built in to the faked Apollo transmissions.. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 5:08:57 GMT -4
"Jodrell Bank informed the authors that there was "not the urgency, money or interest" in using their 250' dish to track Apollo 11 and then added that they could not get a wide enough bandwidth for receiving the LM on their other dish. In considering that this was one of humankind's supposed most important events, the authors had difficulty in believing this statement".
Source, Dark Moon
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 28, 2005 13:27:37 GMT -4
Could you clarify something for me here please Peter?
You say that there was signal delay, and that this indicated that the signals were being sent to the moon, and returned.
Would you not accept that it would be quite easy to create artificial signal delay if, say, the astronauts were in low Earth orbit?
As for the monitoring of the signals, I understand that the Jodrell Bank equipment in the UK, which was at the time the World's most powerful monitoring equipment, was not even directed towards the Apollo mission because it was not considered to be sufficiently important
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 15, 2005 13:11:21 GMT -4
Hello Peter,
Firstly, apologies for the delay in replying, i have been away again, and have had no internet access.
I will have to research this before I feel qualified to reply, and will do so just as soon as I can find the time.
i will get back to you when I can.
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 18:15:42 GMT -4
I have absolutely no vested interest in the matter at all.
I do not believe it happened, and the further down the line we go, the more ridiculous it all becomes.
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 18:03:52 GMT -4
Statements like this are just glib witless nonsense. Do you get punched in pubs? This is a meaningless statement which contributes nothing to the debate, and I doubt that anyone here will be rushing to give you their support. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 16:45:02 GMT -4
What is making that funny curved shadow, hmm? You might as well claim you were on the moon when you took this! In fact, I've been to the moon the same number of times as Neil and Buzz. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 16:33:08 GMT -4
Your response is, like Bart's responses to my questions, at attack on ME . Eh, what? |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 15:24:18 GMT -4
If I wanted to be pigheaded I could say your images prove nothing. Pigheaded, and also very provably wrong. The magazine cover was obviously altered. Do you really expect us to believe that the British with their well known aversion to American English would start calling lorries trucks? You can order a back-copy of this magazine online and read it for yourself. You can do that here www.reedbusiness.co.uk/rb2_products/rb2_products_truckdriver.htmIncidentally, it's wrong to say that there is an aversion to American English in the UK, except among a*tiny* proportion of the chattering classes. The word truck has been in common usage for as long as I have been around. The middle sign does not even state if it's in miles or kilometers so proves nothing. The first and last signs were either altered or are from years ago before Britain converted to the metric system or are Canadian. None of the images of signs appear to photos of actual signs but appear to be copied from a map or a student driver's manual. In fact, they were taken from the British Highway Code, issued by the Government. You can see it with your own two eyes here. www.highwaycode.gov.ukYou see, this is proof. Nothing I have been offered has reached this level of proof or come anywhere near it. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 15:11:10 GMT -4
I won't believe Margamatix is not Bart Sibrel until Margamatix does something un-Bart-like: 3)Then show us an actual photograph (not something snagged off the web) of a sign in Margate, or you and your truck, or something like that. Maybe do the 419 Scammer thing and hold up a sign that says "I am not Bart Sibrel." . Oh OK, just for you!  |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 8:57:03 GMT -4
You've got to admire the logic he used.....
"Bart Sibrel does not believe the moon landings happened. Margamatix does not believe the moon landings happened. Therefore Margamatix is Bart Sibrel"
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 3, 2005 4:04:49 GMT -4
Brits call a truck a "lorry," and they use metric for everything except pints. This is the UK's leading transport magazine. It's called "Truck and Driver". Look at the top banner. "Britain's best selling truck mag".  And this is a British road sign  Here is a sign showing the distance in miles to Sheffield and Leeds. It would be illegal for the Highway Authority to erect a sign showing distances in kilometres.  And here is a sign showing the maximum permitted length of vehicles in feet and inches Of all the twaddle I have read on this forum, rocketdad's posting above takes the biscuit! |
|
