Did Men Really Walk on the Moon?

[phrased eyebrow]

Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon

Information on the Apollo communication systems was published in a journal for amateur radio operators

How convenient.

[jimmi]

So has anyone that is not an "agent" managed to post any proof that the Apollo hoax was actually the truth yet ?

[philthy53]

Originally Posted by jimmi

So has anyone that is not an "agent" managed to post any proof that the Apollo hoax was actually the truth yet ?

If you are asking "Have the Apollo missions ever been proven fake?"

The answer is NO, they have NOT been. For the very simple reason there is no proof of a hoax. Not the tiniest scrap of hoax evidence.

No idea what you might mean about "agent."

Phil

[truegroup]

Originally Posted by jimmi

So has anyone that is not an "agent" managed to post any proof that the Apollo hoax was actually the truth yet ?

Hells bells, we're still waiting for an example from you of the multiple light sources! That ain't gonna happen is it

Rocks and 2m-3m core samples.

Lunar gravity here:

Apollo 16 full dust analysis - YouTube

Apollo 16 full dust analysis - YouTube

Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum Analysis - YouTube

Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum Analysis - YouTube

Apollo 17 bunny hop analysis - YouTube

Apollo 17 bunny hop analysis - YouTube

Apollo speeded up theory completely debunked - YouTube

Apollo speeded up theory completely debunked - YouTube

This post with weather patterns and video matching them - as usual ignored by HBs.....
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost....postcount=2330

The ALSJ with thousands of documents to look at.

[truegroup]

Originally Posted by jimmi

So has anyone that is not an "agent" ....

How does that work, does NASA approach people and bump them off if they say no? Or do they advertise in MIB weekly?

Or maybe we apply anonymously, then they check us out and give us all a crash course in how to debunk stupid claims, followed by da cash

Seriously paranoid shite.

[oooooooooo]

Originally Posted by truegroup

How does that work, does NASA approach people and bump them off if they say no?

Gus Grissom was murdered his son has said in the feb 16 edition of STAR magazine.
In another stunning development, a leading NASA investigator has stated the agency was engaged in a cover up of the true cause of the catastrophe that killed Grissom and crew.
The exclusive by Steve Herz reports that Scott Grissom has gone public with the families long held belief that thier father was purposefully killed.
"My fathers death was no accident, he was murdered" Grissom told STAR.
Clark MacDonald, a McDonnel-Douglas engineer hired by NASA to investigate the fire, offered corroborating evidence. Breaking more than three decades of silence he says NASA destroyed his report and interview tapes in an effort to stem public criticism of the space program.
"I have agonized for 31 years about revealing the truth but i didnt want to hurt NASAs image or cause trouble"
"but i cant let one more day go by without the truth being known".
Grissoms widow, Betty, told STAR she agrees with her sons claim her husband had been murdered.
"i believe Scott found the key piece of evidence to prove that NASA knew all along what really happened but covered it up to protect funding"
the Grissom family had reason to doubt the official NASA ruling from the beginning. Even before apollo 1, Grissom had recieved death threats which his family believed eminated from within the space program.
According to his wife, Grissom had warned her that "if there is ever a serious accident in the space program, it is likely to be me".
R.I.P
Grissom.
White.
Chaffee.
Baron.

[abaddon_ire]

Originally Posted by brucel

flying brains.. nope! i have no flying brains in my skull........ do you ?

@bertl - who writes 525 pages of anything, seriously who does that
unless it's their finals thus their gradepoint average depends on it or are getting handsomely PAID BY NASA

which one is it... ???...

How is your theory that "sunlight should be trapped by gravity" coming along, Brucey?

I am certain that you have had long enough to come up with the mathematical models by now, right? Right?

[abaddon_ire]

Originally Posted by oooooooooo

Gus Grissom was murdered his son has said in the feb 16 edition of STAR magazine.
In another stunning development, a leading NASA investigator has stated the agency was engaged in a cover up of the true cause of the catastrophe that killed Grissom and crew.
The exclusive by Steve Herz reports that Scott Grissom has gone public with the families long held belief that thier father was purposefully killed.
"My fathers death was no accident, he was murdered" Grissom told STAR.
Clark MacDonald, a McDonnel-Douglas engineer hired by NASA to investigate the fire, offered corroborating evidence. Breaking more than three decades of silence he says NASA destroyed his report and interview tapes in an effort to stem public criticism of the space program.
"I have agonized for 31 years about revealing the truth but i didnt want to hurt NASAs image or cause trouble"
"but i cant let one more day go by without the truth being known".
Grissoms widow, Betty, told STAR she agrees with her sons claim her husband had been murdered.
"i believe Scott found the key piece of evidence to prove that NASA knew all along what really happened but covered it up to protect funding"
the Grissom family had reason to doubt the official NASA ruling from the beginning. Even before apollo 1, Grissom had recieved death threats which his family believed eminated from within the space program.
According to his wife, Grissom had warned her that "if there is ever a serious accident in the space program, it is likely to be me".
R.I.P
Grissom.
White.
Chaffee.
Baron.

You are claiming that the eeeeevvvvilll NASA goons, wanted to bump off Grissom, and while they could fake a heart attack or an aneurism or a T-38 crash, or any number of plausible means of assassinating Grissom, no instead they decided to burn two other astronauts with Grissom aboard Apollo 1.

Have you any idea how stupid this notion is?

[grakkus]

I can't believe how people can think that the moon landings were faked. Look at how realistic this photo looks. And all those moon photos are just as realistic.

[ashikenshin]

Originally Posted by grakkus

I can't believe how people can think that the moon landings were faked. Look at how realistic this photo looks. And all those moon photos are just as realistic.

hahahhahaha please tell me you are serious so I can continue laughing.

[mandelbrot]

Regarding the amateur ham radio operators picking up the Apollo missions, Jarrah White gave a response to this. I would not vouch for a 100% accuracy in the response by JW, but, remember, the Apollogist have to be correct 100% of the time:

I think the end statement in bold/emphasis in the last paragraph is interesting:

http://moonfaker.com/faqs.html

Q: Weren’t there independent parties tracking Apollo all the way to the moon and back?

A: No. There are some known Ham radio operators who attest to having picked up signals from Apollo (Paul Wilson, Richard Knadle, Larry Baysinger, Sven Grahn), but none of them can attest to having tracked these probes all the way to the moon and back. Grahn for example only testifies to having picked up signals from Apollo 17 when it was in earth orbit, when it was on the moon and in lunar orbit. He openly admits to not tracking it the whole way there and back. Baysinger only received communications from Apollo 11 during the alleged moonwalk, again not the way to the moon and back. Wilson & Knadle received signals from a diversity of Apollo missions2, but again only when the crafts were in lunar orbit – an exception being Apollo 15 in which they received a handful of signals on the alleged flight home. The two were quoted to saying: “The moon is always in view of two of NASA's primary tracking stations in Spain, Australia and California, but not so for the amateur. Some of the most exciting events and transmissions from the Apollo mission always seem to occur when the moon is below the horizon for the continental United States astronomer!”

Recently, Jarrah met with CSRIO professor Ray Morris, who as a kid received signals from Apollo 13 – but only during the time they were said to be in earth orbit.

In the nineties, David Percy contacted Jodrell Bank Observatory technician Robert Pitchard. He stated that they too only tracked Apollo when it was close to the moon, not the trip there and back: “The Moon probes were observed with a 50ft radio telescope which at the frequency used (2300MHz) had a beam width of 5/8ths degrees

In round terms this allowed us to pick up signals from up signals from up to about 1,000 miles above the moon’s surface, although small corrections had to be made to pointing as the probes orbited the Moon.

Voice signals (of good quality) were received from both the orbiting spacecraft and the Lunar Lander but television signals were only picked up from the spacecraft on the surface of the Moon. As we were not actively involved in the tracking of these spacecraft, we did not track them after they had left the Moon. And with regard to Apollo 10, I have no details of any observations, after all this time – the reason escapes me.”

And on the Russian side, for the most part the Soviets had relied heavily on Jodrell Bank just to track their own moon-bound spacecrafts because they lacked the capability to do it themselves (this was discussed in the BBC series, The Planets). Although later in the early 60s they were able to build deep space network tracking facilities with a 100million kilometre range, none of these radio telescopes were tuneable to the 2.3GHz (2300MHz) signals used by Apollo. Only at the last minute in November 1968 did they manage to equip their TNA-400 * facility in Crimea with suitable receiving equipment. And even then, because NASA did not supply them with the ballistics data, the Soviets were limited to listening to it during the time Apollos 8, 10, 11 and 12 were supposedly in lunar orbit.
* In Russian. Can be read using google translate.

Only the NASA Manned Space Flight Network can attest to having tracked these vehicles all the way to the moon and back. This Network comprised of Goldstone Tracking Station in California, the Madrid Deep Space Communications Complex, and various facilities in Australia; most notably Parkes Observatory, Honeysuckle Creek and Tidbinbilla. In the case of Parkes, it was (and still is) owned by the Australian government but was under control of and under contract to NASA during the time of the Apollo missions. It was NASA’s very own Robert Taylor who controlled the release of any data from Parkes during the Apollo 11 mission and his team were responsible for the reception, recording and transfer of audio, video and telemetry at Parkes. And on the subsequent flights technicians and engineers from NASA’s Tidbinbilla complex were heavily involved at Parkes. It’s essentially a fox guarding the hen house scenario.

Furthermore, the MSFN then relayed the signals over the landlines to the technicians at the Mission Control Centre in Houston. These technicians didn’t need to know or care where the data came from. So since it was purely NASA’s MSFN who were allegedly tracking Apollo all the way to the moon and back, regardless of whether the crews were actually in LEO or on the ground; all they needed to do was relay pre-recorded tapes or LEO signals or both over the landlines, claim it was from the moon, and the MCC controllers would’ve called it a day.

This was little different to the pre-flight simulations. The MCC controllers were trained for actual space missions by being fed simulated data over the landlines. Flight Director Eugene Kranz, in the documentary Failure Is Not an Option, was quoted to saying that the simulations were so realistic that no controller could distinguish the training from the real mission. (see time codes 4:40-4:54)

[abaddon_ire]

Originally Posted by grakkus

I can't believe how people can think that the moon landings were faked. Look at how realistic this photo looks. And all those moon photos are just as realistic.

Published fully one month before A11 launched.

Is it possible to be that dense?

[oooooooooo]

Originally Posted by abaddon_ire

You are claiming that the eeeeevvvvilll NASA goons, wanted to bump off Grissom

NO,
the claims are not mine.
Rather the claims are from-

SCOTT GRISSOM "my fathers death was no accident, he was murdered"

BETTY GRISSOM "i believe Scott found the key piece of evidence to prove NASA knew all along what really happened but covered it up to protect funding"

CLARK MACDONALD "i have agonized for 31 years [at the time] about revealing the truth but i didnt want to hurt NASAs image or cause trouble. But i cant let one more day go by without the truth been known"

powerful stuff.

Sorry.

[phrased eyebrow]

Originally Posted by abaddon_ire

You are claiming that the eeeeevvvvilll NASA goons, wanted to bump off Grissom, and... ...instead they decided to burn two other astronauts with Grissom aboard Apollo 1.

Have you any idea how stupid this notion is?

You mean that they killed him in another way than the accepted, usual ways?

they could fake a heart attack or an aneurism or a T-38 crash, or any number of plausible means of assassinating

[drhemp]

If we accept man didn't walk on the Moon then that makes one of the most compelling arguments the Moon is a spaceship less valid, since analysis of 'moon rock' taken from the 69 - 72 Apollo Moon landings is shown to be older than the Earth and not of this solar system. Water was also detected from moon landings, which gives credence to the 'spaceship moon theory', as do certain eye witness accounts from the NASA astronauts of UFOs, lights and manmade looking structures on the Moon.

Spaceship Moon theory is much more fun than man didn't walk on Moon conspiracy, so I'm rooting for the former!

[truegroup]

Rather than replying to Mr Zzzz, here are some counter points straight from source....

Jodrell Bank:

http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/multimedia/i...o11-eagle.html

"This is a chart recording of signals from Apollo 11's Eagle Lander which were picked up at Jodrell Bank. The graph shows time on the horizontal axis and the frequency of the signal being received on the vertical axis. As the relative velocity between the telescope and the Lander changes, the signal being observed is Doppler shifted to higher or lower frequencies. The first half of the graph in which the signal appears to jump up and down is just where the settings on the receiver are being adjusted. In the second half of the graph you can see a smoother signal which then shows several wiggles up and down. These wiggles show where Neil Armstrong took manual control of the Lander to fly it over uneven ground. The signal then becomes a straight line when the Eagle finally lands on the Moon's surface. The slowly changing frequency is then just due to the relative velocity between the telescope and that point on the Moon's surface."

Russian Tracking:
From here.

http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/c...s/271/03.shtml

Written by E. Molotov, the article describes the initiative to use the 32m dish near Simferopol (in the Crimea) for this purpose. The initial justification was that this would be the first realistic way to test their network of land- and ship-based stations for their own planned lunar missions. Illustrations include spectral scans locating the frequency of the Apollo signals, and a ratty-but-recognizable TV view of Earthrise. This last one is listed as being from one of the Apollo ships, which implies that more than one was followed in detail.
Translated....

"We "saw",
As Americans
Sat down on the Moon...
E.Molotov specially
For " News of astronautics "

Whether clause(article) of the participant of events of 30-years prescription of E.P.Molotova offered(suggested) to readers throws light on unknown pages of " lunar race " and finally closes a ridiculous question " there Were Americans on the Moon? "

Has passed more than 30 years since as the most expensive race between Soviet Union and the United States of America for superiority(championship) in landing the person to the Moon has been developed(unwrapped). Who has won this race of prestige - it is known. Many events have taken place for this time...

Process of competition was repeatedly described both American, and the Russian party(side). It is represented to us interesting to tell about one of it(him) of earlier not shined(covered) episodes.

Programs of preparation of landing of the person on the Moon in the USSR (flight УР-500 - Л-1, landing(planting) Н-1 - Л-3) and in the USA ("Apollo") were conducted in parallel, and superiority(championship) had powerful political value. The Soviet management(manual) paid the big attention to a state of affairs with realization of the lunar program both in Soviet Union, and in America. For the objective control over performance of the American program the secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU D.F.Ustinov supervising the defensive industry of the country, at the end of 1967 has entrusted main designer РНИИ КП (at that time SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE - 885) M.S.Rjazanskomu to develop a special control radio engineering complex with which help it would be possible to accept signals from the American spacecrafts of the program "Apollo", making flight of the Moon and landing(planting) to its(her) surface.

M.S.Rjazansky at that time was responsible for creation of onboard and ground radio engineering control facilities by spacecrafts of the Soviet lunar program. Under his(its) management(manual) for management Soviet пилотируемыми and automatic spacecrafts for research of the Moon the Ground complex of management including two control centres by flight, six ground and three ship items(points) of the management, equipped with corresponding stations of tracking and located on territory of Soviet Union and in the certain points of World ocean has been created. However these means could not be used for reception of the information from the ships "Apollo" as they worked in the other frequency range with the signals having other structure. Therefore it was necessary to create the special control complex, capable to provide reception of the data from "Apollos". It was supposed to accept from the American spacecrafts not only telephone (voice) and telemetering, but also the television information.

Has been solved to include in a control complex aerial TNA-400 with diameter of a mirror 32 m which was placed in Crimea, near to Simferopol (fig. 1). She(it) was used as the reception aerial of a radio engineering complex "Saturn - МС" providing management by the Soviet automatic space vehicles for research of the Moon later: "Moon rovers", devices for delivery of a lunar ground to the Earth, and also lunar satellites.

For work in structure of a control complex aerial TNA-400 has been equipped малошумящим with the reception device working in a range of 13 sm (range S in which transmitters of lunar modules of the program "Apollo" worked). Besides in structure of a complex have come: the demodulator of a group signal transmitted on bearing(carrying) frequency and the signals transmitted on поднесущих frequencies, the equipment of allocation of the voice, telemetering and television information, and also the equipment of display and management of a complex (fig. 2).

The control complex created in short terms РНИИ КП in cooperation with the several industrial enterprises, was ready to reception of signals from spacecrafts of the program "Apollo" in November, 1968.

To trace the ships at their flight on orbits around of the Moon and at landing(planting) to its(her) surface, it was necessary to have the ballistic data of these orbits for calculation целеуказаний to the aerial. However such data were not published by Americans. Therefore the data on orbits of flight were calculated by ballistics on the basis of time of start and arrival to the Moon of the ships "Apollo" which informed by the American radio. On these data paid off целеуказания for prompting the aerial which were specified on signals accepted by a control complex from the lunar ships.

Such approach to calculation целеуказаний has allowed to accept reliably enough signals from "Apollos". The problem(task) of search of signals was facilitated by that the diagram of an orientation of the aerial covered practically half of disk of the Moon.

Tracking was conducted behind spacecrafts of expeditions(dispatches) "Apollo - 8", "Apollo - 10", "Apollo - 11" and "Apollo - 12" from December, 1968 till November, 1969.
From all these ships telephone conversations of astronauts with the Earth and the telemetering information on a condition of onboard systems were accepted with high quality. The accepted television signal had poor quality because of an insufficient level of an energy potential of a radioline on the basis of the 32-meter aerial.

It is necessary to note, that the American network of tracking and management provided practically round-the-clock communication(connection) with spacecrafts "Apollo" while the Soviet control complex could accept signals only in that part of the visibility range which on time coincided with a visibility range of the Madrid station of tracking.

Lunar expedition(dispatch) under F.Bormana's management(manual) on a spacecraft "Apollo - 8" in December, 1968 has carried out the first пилотируемый flight to the Moon, has made 10 coils around of it(her) and, having come back to the Earth with the second space speed, has made soft landing(planting) at ocean.

This flight has formed the basis for a stop of works on the first stage of Soviet program Л-1 though all technics(technical equipment) and crews to пилотируемому to flight of the Moon by then were ready.

Flight of crew "Apollo - 11" with an output(exit) on a surface of the Moon on July, 20, 1969. N.Armstronga and E.Oldrina has finally stopped competition on landing the person to the Moon.

On fig. 3 photos of spectra of the signals accepted by control station from spacecrafts "Apollo", made with the screen of the videocontrol device are submitted.

On fig. 4 the image of rising of the Earth above the lunar horizon, accepted on a telechannel from one of the ships "Apollo" is shown.

As is known, after that Soviet Union has directed the efforts to research of the Moon by automatic space vehicles therefore impressing results have been received.

In summary we shall note, that data on creation and functioning of the Soviet special control radio engineering complex were not published earlier."

Independant Radio:



"Note 1: Central States VHF Society (http://www.csvhfs.org/)

Note 2: San Bernadino Microwave Society (http://www.ham-radio.com/sbms/)

Note 3: "Data Reception in the S-Band using the 20-metre-parabolic universal antenna of Bochum" Lists the following:

Lunar Orbiter 5, (2295MHz)
Pioneer 8, (2292MHz)
Surveyor 7, (2295MHz)
Apollo 8-16, (2272.5, 2282.5, 2287.5MHz)
Note 4: Tracking Apollo 17 from Florida (http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/...7/APOLLO17.htm)"


So, the idea that the Russians had to rely on Jodrell Bank for their signals? What a crock of shite from Jarrah White!

MoonFaker: Exhibit D: Critique #18: Stupid Soviets - YouTube

MoonFaker: Exhibit D: Critique #18: Stupid Soviets - YouTube

"Claim # 26. The Soviets are so stupid. They couldn't track their own spacecraft so how could they track Apollo?
Jarrah is rather insistent that the Soviets were incapable of tracking their own craft and relied totally on Jordrell Bank to track their "craft" and record telemetry for them. This is a rather absurd claim. There are quite a number of examples of the Soviets' ability to track their own spacecraft to the moon, Venus, and Mars. Here, I concentrate only on the fact that the Soviets were clearly capable of tracking Luna 1 to the moon and beyond. The Soviets were able to track every Apollo launch from their Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) facility in Lourdes, Cuba and also track the spacecraft out deep into the Van Allen Belts, using nothing more than their Electronics Intelligence (ELINT) surveillance ships. And their DSN stations were able to pick up Apollo's signals all the way to the moon and back. The Soviets were not as severely technologically challenged at receiving Apollo's transmissions as Jarrah pretends they were."

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by phrased eyebrow

How convenient.

Yes, "How convenient. " that the entire Apollo program is internally and externally consistent to a high level of detail.

"How convenient. " that NASA released information to allow the public a detailed understanding of the most complicated scientific and engineering achievement in human history.

"How convenient. " that in the 1960's there were magazines actually printing useful information

"How convenient. " there were people interested in this information and capable of building things for themselves instead of just posting mindless oneliners from their smartphones.

And "How convenient. " that I can back up my claims with references and citations that are not Jarrah "ask me about my $300 bucket of dirt" White.

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by grakkus

I can't believe how people can think that the moon landings were faked. Look at how realistic this photo looks. And all those moon photos are just as realistic.

Thanks for proving my point that hoax belief is foundationally dependent on lack of information.

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by mandelbrot

Regarding the amateur ham radio operators picking up the Apollo missions, Jarrah White gave a response to this. I would not vouch for a 100% accuracy in the response by JW, but, remember, the Apollogist have to be correct 100% of the time:

Are you attempting to infer that "apollogists" are NOT correct 100% of the time? Or are you implying that hoax believers are allowed to be incorrect some percentage of the time?


At any rate, JW manages to be about 90% wrong 100% of the time.

Q: Weren’t there independent parties tracking Apollo all the way to the moon and back?

A: No. There are some known Ham radio operators who attest to having picked up signals from Apollo (Paul Wilson, Richard Knadle, Larry Baysinger, Sven Grahn), but none of them can attest to having tracked these probes all the way to the moon and back.

Q: What's that scraping sound?

A: Oh, that's just Jarrah moving the goalposts again to create a strawman argument and drag a red herring across the trail. Wow, that's like 3 fallacies in one. Jarrah's fail is awesome!

Nobody claimed the RF intercepts were in transit. But Jarrah (hardly a reliable citation) fails to address in any meaningful manner that voice transmissions ON THE MOON were received on Earth by a random citizen with a witness, using publicly available information and readily available equipment. Baysinger's equipment, methods and results have been studied by subject matter experts and found to be consistent with observable reality.

The two were quoted to saying: “The moon is always in view of two of NASA's primary tracking stations in Spain, Australia and California, but not so for the amateur. Some of the most exciting events and transmissions from the Apollo mission always seem to occur when the moon is below the horizon for the continental United States astronomer!”

Not sure what this means, as the Earth rotates so the moon is not "always in view" of any part of the Earth.

[truegroup]

"You're right,the simulations were good but far from being perfect and they always required some kluges that Pete Klapach or others had to fix each time we ran a simulation. The data flow paths were different and sequencing of data from the tracking sites, pre-processed into 2.4 kbps or I believe later 4.8 kbps bit streams. We did elaborate checkouts of these paths from the bird to a spot on our displays or event lights. The tracking sites knew where their antennas were pointed and when they had data, etc, etc, etc. These questioners must think that we are stupid (hundreds of us that is); the data was recorded, archived and analyzed by dozens of engineers. Don't they know that it was US who conducted simulations, so we would be 'fooling ourselves'?"

(Courtesy of Sy Liebergot)