Mystery rocket scientists from 1969 critical of Apollo

[onebigmonkey]

A comment in the latest Apollo detective video cites an article in the Los Angeles Free Press from November 14 1969 and quoted in a book.

I found the original article:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/community.28039858.pdf

As you might expect from a counter-culture newspaper it is highly criticial of the media circus, commercial interests and military links, all serving as a distraction from more worthy causes like the Vietnam war. All the usual "bread and circuses" criticism that's been levelled at Apollo from many quarters over the years. It's not only occupying the moral high ground, it is doing so on a very high horse.

In addition to the purple prose, it cites a number of academics and articles, and I have struggled to find any reference to them anywhere at all.

Specifically:

Professor LJ Wilcox of the University of Colorado Department of Astrophysics, presenting an outline paper to the Society of American Physicists (Western Division) in Salt Lake City, in November 1969, containing a number of equations and diagrams reproduced in the paper that conclude Apollo could not have reached the moon.

The Special Committee on Lunar Flights, an emergency committee of the International Institute of Space Studies, Berne reviewed the work of Professor Wilcox, along with:

Professor SS Alpert, University of Sidney
Dr MR Kotowsky, Lick Observatory
Professor H Bundel, Belgian Academy of Science

and concluded, along with Professor Wilcox that

"The American and Societ lunar flights during the last year and a half were not physically possible".

I'm not a rocket scientist and can't say whether the equations are accurate, but what I do know is that I have been unable to find any evidence of the existence of any of the people mentioned, or the Swiss institute demanding answers from the USA and USSR!

Anyone come across them?

[bknight]

Before I lost all my data early this year, I had a TLI spreadsheet most of the way to the moon.  I stopped around 200000 miles as I didn't know how to deal the increasing Lunar gravity on the spacecraft.  I remember that the space craft speeded up travelling to the Moon as they got closer.  So, no amount of fringe astrophysicist calculations will endure scrutiny.

ETA:  Looking at the transcript of A11 page 212

Coming up
in less than 10 seconds now, we'i1 be crossing into the sphere
of influence of the moon. A computational changeover will be
made here in Mission Control. At this point as the moon's
gravitational force becomes the dominant effect on the spacecraft trajectory, and our displays will shift from Earth
reference to moon reference. At that point, which occurred
a few seconds ago, the spacecraft was at a distance of
186 437 nautical miles from Earth, and 33 822 nautical miles
from the moon.

For anyone's reference,  looks like I carried my calculations a bit too far.

[Obviousman]

I'm calling bullshit because they have spelt 'Sydney' incorrectly. I also cannot find any Professor Alpert connected with UoS, except a law expert in the 1940s who argued in obscenity cases, and a Queensland mental health practitioner who was an expert witness in a wrongful death case at the UoS.

Edited to add: Likewise, I am not finding any trace of the so-called 'experts' except from that newspaper article itself.

[smartcooky]

Found another source in this newspaper (P3 bottom right)

https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=CNK19691127-01.2.8&e=-------en-20--1--img-txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0------

These seem like pretty dubious publications to me... I'd call them "rags"

As for the people they refer to ...

Professor LJ Wilcox - University of Colorado
No person by the name of LJ Wilcox has ever been a member of the academic staff at the University of Colorado. The closest I can find name-wise is Dr Laura J Wilcox, an Associate Professor in the Department of Meteorology at University of Reading on the UK... far too young to be writing anything in 1969
https://people.ncas.ac.uk/people/view/273

Dr MR Kotowesky - Lick Observatory
No person by the name of "Kotowsky" with any initials has ever worked at, or been associated with, the Lick Observatory. In fact Lick Observatory astronomers collaborated with NASA in 1969 on the well known Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment. The experiment was coordinated by Joseph Wampler, now a professor emeritus. Difficult to believe that one of the staff would have called Apollo into question given Lick's active involvement.

Professor H Bundel- Belgian Academy of Science
No such professor exists in Belgium... no papers published. The nearest I have been able to find anywhere is Professor Himanshi Bundel, a Pharmacist at the Department of Medical Health, and Assistant Professor at the Katta College of Pharmacy in Kota, Rajasthan
https://www.signalhire.com/profiles/himanshi-bundel/217945144

There is also no such institution as the "Belgian Academy of Science". There is a something called the "Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium (RASAB)", an umbrella organization for promoting science and arts in the country.

Professor SS Alpert - University of Sidney[sic]
There is no record of a Professor SS Alpert publishing any papers, or being on the academic staff at the University of Sidney [sic], Australia

International Institute for Space Studies
No such organization exists, or has ever existed, and certainly not in Berne, Switzerland. There are the following similarly named organzations

The International Space Science Institute (ISSI) located in Berne and founded in 1995
The International Institute for Space Studies and Research (IISSR)", located in Telangana, India, and founded 1989.
Space Studies Institute (SSI): Founded in 1977 by physicist Gerard K. O'Neill.
International Academy of Space Studies (IASS): A non-profit association founded in Brazil in 2021.   

None of them existed in 1969

Conclusion.
1. The claimed people referenced in the historical article don't exist.
2, With the exception of the Lick Observatory, The University of Sydney (misspelled as Sidney) and the University of Colorado, none of the other claimed organizations exist.
3. The similarly named organizations do exist, but they did not exist in 1969.

Therefore, the historical articles were bullshit back then, and they are still bullshit to this day.

[Obviousman]

[golf clap]

[bknight]

But the ADs found this "article" that fits their beliefs; therefore it must be accurate and correct.

[onebigmonkey]

All of the above pretty much sums up the conclusions I'd come to. Throw some fancy equations around, fabricate some academics, hmm...sounds a familar pattern!

[onebigmonkey]

But the ADs found this "article" that fits their beliefs; therefore it must be accurate and correct.

To be fair, it's not them that's come up with it, but a contributor to their video comments - pretty sure I've seen them asked for their views on it before.

The meat of the article in itself is interesting as a social comment. I'm already well aware of mainstream media criticisms of Apollo on the grounds of expense, but this kind of counter-culture angle is a different slant on it. The 'Freep' may have been a rag, but it had some of the big movers and shakers of that kind of world view circling arouind it. It's also interesting to see an early use of the "underpowered rocket" theory. "Plus ca change" etc.

[bknight]

To be fair I didn't read the article only the snippets you posted.  That being said since the ADs posted it since it synchs with their beliefs, so it becomes part of the presentation. If it didn't present a fringe viewpoint of Apollo it would have never seen the light of day. 
The University of Colorado has always had a fringe element in collectively a very liberal set of ideas challenging mainstream ideas.  So to have any counter current thoughts fit in with the culture at Boulder. 

[Allan F]

Is this the origin story for Aulis?

[smartcooky]

But the ADs found this "article" that fits their beliefs; therefore it must be accurate and correct.

To be fair, it's not them that's come up with it, but a contributor to their video comments - pretty sure I've seen them asked for their views on it before.

The meat of the article in itself is interesting as a social comment. I'm already well aware of mainstream media criticisms of Apollo on the grounds of expense, but this kind of counter-culture angle is a different slant on it. The 'Freep' may have been a rag, but it had some of the big movers and shakers of that kind of world view circling around it. It's also interesting to see an early use of the "underpowered rocket" theory. "Plus ca change" etc.

I seem to remember stories about a few supposedly knowledgeable scientists who stated categorically, and with absolute self assuredness, that rockets would never work in space because its a vaccuum and there was no air for the exhaust to push against.   

This reminds me of the "Trap of Expertise"... When an expert in one field wanders outside their area of expertise, they are often found to possess little or no greater general knowledge than the average layman.

[Peter B]

But the ADs found this "article" that fits their beliefs; therefore it must be accurate and correct.

To be fair, it's not them that's come up with it, but a contributor to their video comments - pretty sure I've seen them asked for their views on it before.

The meat of the article in itself is interesting as a social comment. I'm already well aware of mainstream media criticisms of Apollo on the grounds of expense, but this kind of counter-culture angle is a different slant on it. The 'Freep' may have been a rag, but it had some of the big movers and shakers of that kind of world view circling around it. It's also interesting to see an early use of the "underpowered rocket" theory. "Plus ca change" etc.

I seem to remember stories about a few supposedly knowledgeable scientists who stated categorically, and with absolute self assuredness, that rockets would never work in space because its a vaccuum and there was no air for the exhaust to push against.   

This reminds me of the "Trap of Expertise"... When an expert in one field wanders outside their area of expertise, they are often found to possess little or no greater general knowledge than the average layman.

That's certainly a view I encounter in the general commenting population, but I've never heard of scientists espousing it.

[bknight]

We've all had a taste of "scientific" people waltzing into this forum, and when they are out of their filed it tends to be a fiasco for them.  guilt by logical fallacy most of the time.  Take najack, please, and I have forgotten the exact field but said to be technological in nature and he could not figure out where the door was located.

[Obviousman]

I seem to remember stories about a few supposedly knowledgeable scientists who stated categorically, and with absolute self assuredness, that rockets would never work in space because its a vaccuum and there was no air for the exhaust to push against.   

"The atomic bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives"
Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, the chief of staff to President Franklin D. Roosevelt

[bknight]

Wasn't there an Army general, conspiracy theorist, that said ammonium phosphate bomb could never bring down a building like the OC federal building was destroyed?  He knew because he was an "expert" in explosives.