Brilliant debunk video of hoax claims - HBs take note (if you can)

[cos]

And good luck solving the problem about the IMU alignment on the moon

You must be one of those really, really stupid hoax believers that think there is no gravity on the Moon because the LM's IMU was aligned using, wait for it........ gravity!

Yes, there is gravity on the Moon. And the accelerometers in the IMU can measure it! Throw gyroscopes into the equation and the IMU can determine which way is down. Using the AOT to sight a star allowed alignment in all three axes.

Oh don't tell him about P57. After all it's secret and Nasa haven't documented any of this. Accelerometers on the moon! Whatever next?

[raven]

Oh come now, gold? Bronze at best.

There's not been that much competition lately. Heiwa seems to have given up posting (stealth flounce???), even though he was logged on today. Eternidad's flounce was rubbish.

Flouncing aint what it used to be. The quality's been poor since DAKDAK imploded in such spectacular fashion....

To be fair, DAKDAK did create a new high water mark of low scum tactics.
The new forum makes such flounces impossible now, so we literally will never see his like again.

[Echnaton]

Oh well, I guess Alex didn't have much flounce per ounce. I denounce his account on all counts.

Cute, but don't give up your day job just yet.   

[dwight]

His departure kinda reminds of the scene in Poltergeist when the house implodes on itself.

[smartcooky]

1) the Russian's were bouncing lasers off the moon before Apollo 11. 
2) when you shoot a laser to the moon, the beam is affected by the atmosphere and only 1/30,000,000 of the light hits the reflector
3) on return to earth, only 1/30,000,000 of the reflected light can hit the detector,
4) the beam coming back to earth is spread across an area of over 63 square miles 
5) the amount of light hitting the detector on earth from the moon reflector is 1 divided by 30 million divided by 30 million.
6)  how do you point the laser at the moon reflector when you can't see anything that small on the moon?
7)  if all that works, you're still only getting a couple photons coming in.  How do you know your couple photons from the 50 million ambient photons coming from the very bright moon?  A photon is a photon.
  it's a total joke.
http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/basics.html

Holy Cow! You claim to be an engineer, and you don't understand how LLR works?

6)  how do you point the laser at the moon reflector when you can't see anything that small on the moon?

You can point it because you KNOW where the astronaut put it, and the telescope can be pointed accurately at any predefined point in the sky with an accuracy of a few arc-seconds.

7)  if all that works, you're still only getting a couple photons coming in.  How do you know your couple photons from the 50 million ambient photons coming from the very bright moon?  A photon is a photon.

In simple terms, the observer looks at;

► a time period window just a few milliseconds wide when they expect the return pulse to come back after it has been fired (well call that T¹.

► a time period window of identical width when no return pulse is expected (we'll call that T²).

They count the number of photons in each window, and then subtract the number received during T² from the number received during T¹. The difference is the number of photos received from the reflector. This sequence is repeated many hundreds if not thousands of times, and during which there will be a consistent difference between T¹ and T²

[sts60]

I'm just trying to figure out how he worked ISS "guidance and control" when his cited work experience sounds like "computer repairman on USAF facilities".  I guess we'll never know since he flounced off.

[nomuse]

No, I insist on answering.  The laser reflector has to be one of NASA's funniest jokes on the sheeple.   
1) the Russian's were bouncing lasers off the moon before Apollo 11. 
2) when you shoot a laser to the moon, the beam is affected by the atmosphere and only 1/30,000,000 of the light hits the reflector
3) on return to earth, only 1/30,000,000 of the reflected light can hit the detector,
4) the beam coming back to earth is spread across an area of over 63 square miles 
5) the amount of light hitting the detector on earth from the moon reflector is 1 divided by 30 million divided by 30 million.
6)  how do you point the laser at the moon reflector when you can't see anything that small on the moon?
7)  if all that works, you're still only getting a couple photons coming in.  How do you know your couple photons from the 50 million ambient photons coming from the very bright moon?  A photon is a photon.
  it's a total joke.
http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/basics.html

And you claim to be an engineer?!

[nomuse]

the 50 million ambient photons coming from the very bright moon? 

Do you really think that a full Moon only reflects 50 million photons??? 

I'm reminded of a panel from a Marvel comic in the 70's; the supervillian fires his raygun and laughs "Not even YOU can withstand the force of a trillion concentrated molecules!"

[JayUtah]

I'm just trying to figure out how he worked ISS "guidance and control" when his cited work experience sounds like "computer repairman on USAF facilities".  I guess we'll never know since he flounced off.

What I find amusing is how people don't realize that error can be distinctive.

There are only a few ways to correctly understand something.  There are innumerable ways to misunderstand something.  That is, there is one right answer and an infinite number of wrong answers.  So when someone comes along who has a particular brand of misunderstanding, and someone else comes along who has the exact same misunderstanding, how are we to believe that they aren't the same person?  Some misunderstandings are like a fingerprint.

Now conversely while I was an educator, I encountered common misunderstandings.  That is, when the truth tends to be counterintuitive, the same common mistake is made by nearly all beginning students.  They rely on intuition, which gives them the same wrong answer.  For example, when confronted with the "speed up to slow down" paradox in orbital mechanics, most students intuitively believe "speed up to speed up."  It fits with their intuitive (and even educated) understanding of the world.

But in something such as spacecraft guidance the field of ignorant error is wide open.  When fattydash comes along and says, "I'm a doctor, but I believe you need to know the exact position of the LM on the lunar surface in order to solve the orbital rendezvous problem," that's a fairly unique error.  No one else before or since (except as follows) makes that error.  You can see the broken model at work in his head.  So when some other guy comes along and says, "I'm a USAF rocket engineer and I believe you need to know the exact position of the LM on the lunar surface to solve the rendezvous problem," the parsimonious explanation it's that it's the liar Patrick back to up the stakes on the same broken understanding.  It's not a question of the theory being right or wrong.  It's clearly wrong; the successful rendezvous does not depend on a precision liftoff from the lunar surface.  It's a question of the chances of two different people being wrong in the same exact way, and the coincidence of the second claimant wanting people to think he's more expert than the previous claimant.

[Mag40]

All these pretengineers are making my head spin....spouting nonsense...then performing the flounce-return-flounce routine.

[nomuse]

No, the burden of proof is on you.  For over 100,000 years, nobody went to the moon.  One day, the govt says we went to the moon.

For 13 billion years no-one breathed air.  For as much as 4 billion years there was life on Earth but it still didn't have lungs.  Then one day, a mere 400 MYA, creatures started breathing.  How ludicrous!

  40 years later, nobody else has been to the moon.

Look up the interval between Amundsen and Scott, and Amundsen-Scott (South Pole Station).

  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  We didn't go to the moon because it wasn't possible to do an IMU alignment to moon coordinates to get back from the moon.

Why would you need to know where the MOON was in order to navigate back to EARTH?

  The LM/LEM would have had geodetic (earth) coordinates in it's GC.  The LEM didn't know where it was on the moon.  It didn't know what it's alignment was to the moon.  It didn't know where the CM was in relation to the LEM.  And you couldn't do an IMU alignment on the moon because there was no survey marker there!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_marker

Here's a question for you to ponder.  Go to some remote location, say, the top of most peaks.  Look for the survey market (many of them have them). 

How did it get there?

According to you, a complex instrument package and a couple of highly-skilled, trained people are COMPLETELY INCAPABLE of placing such a marker.

So how did ANY marker get placed, ANYWHERE in the world?

You've got a real chicken-egg problem here.


(I'm also reminded of an experience the Apache Point observatory had during their "APOLLO" set of LRRR experiments.  They'd done all the math, all the compensation, but the data didn't agree with the charted location of the observatory.  Until they discovered what was essentially a paperwork error -- the "zero" location of the observatory from the original survey was actually located out in the parking lot.)

[Sus_pilot]

Oh well, I guess Alex didn't have much flounce per ounce. I denounce his account on all counts.

Thank you, Mr. Geissel!

[raven]

Oh well, I guess Alex didn't have much flounce per ounce. I denounce his account on all counts.

Thank you, Mr. Geissel!

I was actually more channelling Tigger at first, but then it kind of got away from me

[Daggerstab]

To be fair, DAKDAK did create a new high water mark of low scum tactics.
The new forum makes such flounces impossible now, so we literally will never see his like again.

DAKDAK was on the new forum. You are confusing him with Playdor, the guy who got Proboards to wipe his posts.

[raven]

Doh!
Yeah,sorry. Playdor will always be the high scum mark for flounces to me.