Recent Posts

1

The Reality of Apollo / Re: VALE - Eric Jones

« Last post by Bryanpoprobson on Today at 04:31:32 PM »

Sad news.  I contacted him and bounced ides off him on one of the A16 magazines that one idiot posted was "orange juice" snudged on the film, something that could not be accomplished in a vacuum, so necessarily the missions were faked.  The consensus was it was a small amount of regolith that got smeared on many images as the film was being wound.

Funnily enough that was a subject that he investigated with me in reaction to some comments from  AWE130 in 2014, he roped in Ken Glover as well they spent about 2 weeks going over transcripts and pictures.

This was one of his final emails on the subject RIP Eric..

Subject: Apollo 16 Mag 116/E Smudges are not Gatorade
From: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 12:55:47 +1000
CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
To: [email protected]

Hi Gang,

Yesterday I found the answer in the May 5, 1972 Apollo 16 Technical Crew Debriefing.  While in the cabin, they wiped the cameras with a damp cloth to try to get the dust off and, before EVA-3, apparently dragged part of the damp cloth across the reseau plate on John’s camera.  The smudges therefore represent a residue of muddy water! :-)

All the best,

Eric

2

The Hoax Theory / Re: Watching the detectives...

« Last post by onebigmonkey on Today at 03:29:40 PM »

They are the grift that keeps on giving. They've put out a part two of their attempted hatchet job on McKeegan. I've skimmed through it and already have some gems:

Henderson opens it up with a claim that dust from the LRV would "stay up there for days" and you wouldn't be able to see anything. How would it stray up Scott? What would keep it up there?

They also claim that somehow Collins was totally ignored while in orbit, despite pages and opages of audio transcript between Houston and the CSM while Armstrong and Aldrin were on the surface - they somehow have this idea that because the people on the surface couldn't directly communicate with the CSM, no-one did.

Another beauty is an "if I ran the zoo" variant, whining that Saturn V launches always had a big countdown clock but there wasn't one on the moon. They don't seem to know that the final words from the crew before ascent were:

"124:21:54 Aldrin: 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, Abort Stage, Engine Arm, Ascent, Proceed."

looks like a count to me, and prior to that are reams of dialogue of them preparing for launch, something the ADs don't seem to think they did.

In the previous video, they make reference to the TETR satellites. which evening the tiniest bit of research would tell them could not have been used for Apollo. They were specifically used to train ground stations in handover procvedures, and the only one available for any of the first three Apollos and an S-Band failure, so couldn't have replicated the Apollo signal.

That Apollo signal came from the moon, and as TETR satellites were in LEO, they could not have been used by ground stations for much more than 10 minutes at a time, not the hours required. If ground stations wanted to train on things on their way to the moon, they used things that were doing just that (eg Lunar Orbiter). I cover it here:

https://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/CATM2/ch5/9/nasasats.html

Speaking of S-Band, their favourite lapdog still parades his ignorance in the comment section, claiming that the Soviets did not have the capability to intercept and decode S-Band signals. As I detail here:

https://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/CATM2/ch5/7/zond.html

they absolutely did. Besides that, you don't need S-Band decoders and receivers to detect that something is at or on the moon, you only need those if you want to tell what the S-Band signal contains.

3

The Hoax Theory / Re: Watching the detectives...

« Last post by bknight on July 12, 2025, 03:44:30 PM »

"Now, did he take the camera off his chest, point it down at the ground, having altered the focus ring, which required it to be focused to 3 ft, the shortest distance he can focus at, point it at the ground without a viewfinder, and get it all nicely in frame. That's a question that hasn't been answered."

Pretty sure I made a video about this a few years ago. Maybe I'll update it.
Marcus knows he's been given all the answers already, but grifters gotta grift.

Amen to that fact.

4

The Reality of Apollo / Re: VALE - Eric Jones

« Last post by bknight on July 12, 2025, 03:39:10 PM »

Sad news.  I contacted him and bounced ides off him on one of the A16 magazines that one idiot posted was "orange juice" snudged on the film, something that could not be accomplished in a vacuum, so necessarily the missions were faked.  The consensus was it was a small amount of regolith that got smeared on many images as the film was being wound.

5

The Reality of Apollo / Re: VALE - Eric Jones

« Last post by JayUtah on July 12, 2025, 09:50:05 AM »

Quite sad. A perfect gentleman and a heckuva historian.

6

The Reality of Apollo / Re: VALE - Eric Jones

« Last post by Bryanpoprobson on July 11, 2025, 07:24:00 PM »

Sad news indeed, I had an invite to visit him in Australia in 2020, but due to the fires at the time it proved impossible. Very nice man had quite a few email exchanges with him.

7

The Reality of Apollo / Re: VALE - Eric Jones

« Last post by onebigmonkey on July 10, 2025, 09:41:14 AM »

Sad news. Lost count of the number of times his site has been of use.

8

The Reality of Apollo / VALE - Eric Jones

« Last post by Obviousman on July 10, 2025, 08:53:14 AM »

Just heard that Eric Jones, founder of the ALSJ, passed away on Saturday.

9

The Hoax Theory / Re: Watching the detectives...

« Last post by BertieSlack on July 08, 2025, 11:13:33 AM »

"Now, did he take the camera off his chest, point it down at the ground, having altered the focus ring, which required it to be focused to 3 ft, the shortest distance he can focus at, point it at the ground without a viewfinder, and get it all nicely in frame. That's a question that hasn't been answered."

Pretty sure I made a video about this a few years ago. Maybe I'll update it.
Marcus knows he's been given all the answers already, but grifters gotta grift.

10

The Hoax Theory / Re: Watching the detectives...

« Last post by onebigmonkey on July 07, 2025, 04:42:48 PM »

Ah bless them, they've released a "critique" of Dave McKeegan's excellent video on the Apollo surface photographs, which is here:

They don't start off well by changing the title of Dave's video to strawman his position, misrepresent what his video is actually about, and then ad hominem their way through a huge assumption that Dave has never used film cameras, but that's the least of their mistakes.

Despite Allen appealing to his own authority, something that seems very much out of place, they get so many things wrong. They include footage of Dave Scott taking a panorama, something they claim that they can only be done with viewfinders or there would be gaps and misalignments - blissfully unaware that there are many panoramas that have exactly those things - including the very first one that Neil can be seen taking at the foot of the ladder:

https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/static/history/alsj/a11/a11pan1093226HR.jpg

They don't seem to understand the modifications made to the cameras to allow them to be used. They invent a whole new branch of physics by claiming objects instantly reach their maximum temperature the very second they're exposed to sunlight, they seem entirely unaware of the hours of training carried out in photography - despite Dave covering it very well.

They make great play about Dave not having access to the precise film that Apollo used, so his analyses must be invalid, and also that it's impossible to recreate the kind of vacuum on the moon so how could NASA test them, then without a trace of irony make claims about their own tests that obviously also aren't using the SO film or lunar vacuum.

Just one example of how dumb, ignorant and ill-informed they are can be found when they discuss the famous bootprint photo:

"Now, did he take the camera off his chest, point it down at the ground, having altered the focus ring, which required it to be focused to 3 ft, the shortest distance he can focus at, point it at the ground without a viewfinder, and get it all nicely in frame. That's a question that hasn't been answered."

If only there was footage showing it happening that anyone who had the in-depth knowledge about Apollo that they claim would know about.

Phase52012 has already stepped in with a response, but I haven't seen it uet, but it's pretty much shooting dumb fish in a barrel.