Forgot to check on Björkman's page for a few days. Latest revision is from today. Again I have no time for a proper diff, just some highlights...
He has finally split the unreadable title into multiple centered lines.
He has also added this to the UFO "argument":
Reason is that too much fuel was required that could be carried and the pilot maneuvers were impossible to carry out ... and that everything was just a hoax 1969. That people believed. It was easy to fool people 1969. Since the 1940's the public had been told that Flying Saucers, UFOs, were regularly visiting Earth and that the USA could easily do space flying too. No rocket engineers would disagre. They are generally military where everything is secret. But...
The link is to a Bart Sibrel interview with Kaysing... Can't watch it right now, so I'm not sure why it's "but".
The argument is a really stupid one, which is unsurprising. Hey,
Heiwa, ever heard of the commercial satellite launching industry? Or geostationary communication satellites are a hoax now, too?
For some inexplicable reason, he has become fixated with another NASA employee, adding a random paragraph about him in the "article"'s introduction:
So how is it possible that NASA fakes their activities? The person to ask is Terrence W. Wilcutt, NASA's Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance. Terrence heads the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) that assures the safety and enhances the success of all NASA activities through the development, implementation, and oversight of Agencywide safety, reliability, maintainability, and quality assurance (SRM&QA) policies and procedures.
[photo of Wilcutt]
"Wilcutt joined NASA in 1990 as an astronaut candidate and was accepted into the corps in 1991. He logged more than 1,007 hours in space as the pilot on two shuttle missions, STS-68 in 1994 and STS-79 in 1996, and commander of two others, STS-89 in 1998 and STS-106 in 2000. His technical assignments as an astronaut included work on space shuttle main engine and external tank issues; supporting shuttle launches and landings as a member of the astronaut support personnel team at NASAs Kennedy Space Center in Florida; and technical issues for the Astronaut Office Operations Development Branch at Johnson."
It would appear Terrence W. Wilcutt is part of the NASA hoax. Imaging having been 1 007 hrs in space and done four Shuttle re-entries, flying backwards from the Mir station (twice) and ISS (once) like Mark Kelly that I describe below.
Any idea why Wilcutt warrants inclusion? Did someone mention him on CosmoQuest or somewhere else?
Hey,
Heiwa, here's something for you - a list of all the people who have flown in space (and returned, one way or the other):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_travelers_by_nameCare to add something about each one of them on your page?
In the "sources" section, a sentence has been deleted: "This quality and excellence award is no longer (since 2006) given because nobody seems to fulfill the guidelines' conditions ... that are better forgotten."
And another source has been added:
[5] SATURN V LAUNCH VEHICLE FLIGHT EVALUATION REPORT-AS-.506 APOLLO 11 MISSION (not signed by anybody and probably written by some free-lance science fiction writer 1969)
Yeah, because a grand conspiracy would employ a freelance science-fiction writer instead of someone with the required technical knowledge... Oh, wait, that's another bad attempt at ridicule.
He has now corrected his page to say that the transposition and docking was done after TLI. Something has finally sunk in.
He still thinks the maneuver was some kind of amazing "stunt" though. Apparently, he's never heard of "relative velocity".
Apollo 11 with three asstronuts aboard launched from Cape Kennedy on July 16, 09.32 local time, 1969 fitted on top of a hugh, 100 + meter tall three stages, Saturn V, rocket or fire works launch vehicle looking like something right. The original drawings and records how it all worked are lost! Three minutes later the launch escape three motors system on top the CM was jettisoned ... one way or another. Why it was fitted in the first place is not clear.
I'm curious, how many machines from 50 years ago have their whole technical documentation intact... Also, Björkman still doesn't know why a launch escape system is necessary...
(The blue marks modified text - in the previous version, the time was in "G.m.t"
)
And now the Saturn V is a fake too:
Three stages launch vehicle Saturn V with Apollo 11 Command, Service and Lunar landing modules on top. Note the amount of fuel and thrust of the rockets that were required to first put the Apollo 11 modules in orbit around Earth and then to send them off to the Moon. The last use of a Saturn 5 rocket was the 14 May 1973 launch of Skylab. All drawings what they looked like and records how they worked were then conveniently lost and some people wonder if they ever existed ... or if they were just one empty mock up with some jet engines at bottom and trick film! Then came another strange launch vehicle - the Shuttle - that could not land on Earth after visiting space!
Note that this is the modified caption of the big diagram of the Saturn V, the one with the wrong engine label. That is, he's protesting about the lack of "all drawings what they looked like" in the caption of such a drawing.
Oh, and the proposition that the Saturns were "mockups with jet engines at the bottom and trick film" is laughable. Their launches were public events attended by many people who were direct witnesses of the events from the launch to until the rocket went too high to be visible. The reported power and effects of the engines were much more powerful than anything else existing at the time.
He also mentions dust raised by the descent/ascent engine, linking to this video:
And that pretty much everything of note in the latest update.
