Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.

[Luke Pemberton]

Sincerely,

E

Various speculation to this outcome, and thus far I have managed to arrive at 5 possible explanations for this turn of events. I'll wait and see what happens.

[dwight]

Yo, Dwight

Roomie here. Rather than speak to you in person I thought I'd write you on Apollo Hoax. Those books you wrote about NASA's TV development are awesome. I think you should tell your friends on AH how much of a legend you are. Maybe they will buy some copies.

Anyway keep up the good work but for heaven's sake put the toilet seat down and take the dog for a walk.

F

[bknight]

Here's another shot, but this might take some special hardware.

Just a simple white-light filter over the front of the 'scope. The ones taken with a hydrogen-alpha solarscope are a bit more special

Click Here

I guess I was thinking of not staring into the sun through a telescope.  Cameras if they have proper settings obviously can take pictures as you have linked. 

[bknight]

Neil,

...
Sincerely,

E

This has the makings of fish in the household trash for three days.

[Luke Pemberton]

Yo, Dwight

Roomie here. Rather than speak to you in person I thought I'd write you on Apollo Hoax. Those books you wrote about NASA's TV development are awesome. I think you should tell your friends on AH how much of a legend you are. Maybe they will buy some copies.

Anyway keep up the good work but for heaven's sake put the toilet seat down and take the dog for a walk.

F

I'm trying to think of one penned to myself, but cannot.  But yeah, take the dog for a walk. Can you bath him after, he's getting smelly and his fur his matted.

[dwight]

Yo Luke,

Roomie here logging on from Dwight's pc.

Dont forget to turn the stove off before going out.

Later
G

[Neil Baker]

That would be quite a feat in itself, sending up and inflating such a large, complex structure in orbit. Who built this alleged structure, Neil Baker? Who were the engineers and scientists involved? Can you name even one?

I think it might have been Bigelow Aerospace in Las Vegas. The website says they've been around since 99 but I suspect much longer probably as a black ops. 1999 was probably the year they came out of stealth mode after building the ISS balloons. Pretty impressive operation for a company that hasn't sold anything.
[/quote]

[bknight]

For a list of those astronauts responsible for construction of the ISS, Google Shuttle missions from 1999.

[JayUtah]

I think it might have been...

So no, you can't.

[Neil Baker]

Neil, let me ask you a two-part hypothetical question. Let us say, for some reason, NASA decided to arrange a special demonstration - just for you and some other observers - just like you request to show off the spacesuit working in a vacuum chamber.

Would this actually convince you?

If so, WHY would it actually convince you? You've posited some insanely complicated acts of deceit on behalf of NASA. According to you, they've somehow gotten an inflatable object into orbit around the planet at a speed of over 17,000 miles per hour.
Do you have the experience and knowledge to positively identify an in-use vacuum chamber? Could you tell if it was being faked?
Magicians manage to convince live audiences of amazing feats of illusion. David Copperfield arranged an illusion that tricked his audience into thinking he'd made the Statue of Liberty vanish. Do you really think they couldn't manage something as simple as a fake vacuum chamber?

So again, why would this specific demonstration convince you? It is no less "fakeable" than all the other evidence that is available.

It would have to be fakeable to more than just me. I expect at least two other independent witnesses on hand. I also expect to be allowed to hook up our own pirani and hot cathode ionization gauges. I'm confident that my level of experience with vacuum systems is sufficient. Personally, I doubt they'll be able to get anywhere near orbital vacuum of ~1e-6 Torr if the sublimator works as they allege. But maybe they have some huge vacuum pumps to compensate for the sublimator sublimating.

[Neil Baker]

I think it might have been...

So no, you can't.

Yes, it's pure speculation like everything else. I have PROOF of nothing. But neither do you.

[bknight]

It would have to be fakeable to more than just me. I expect at least two other independent witnesses on hand. I also expect to be allowed to hook up our own pirani and hot cathode ionization gauges. I'm confident that my level of experience with vacuum systems is sufficient. Personally, I doubt they'll be able to get anywhere near orbital vacuum of ~1e-6 Torr if the sublimator works as they allege. But maybe they have some huge vacuum pumps to compensate for the sublimator sublimating.

I'm curious, please list all/any of your qualifications to judge how sublimation PLSS work

[Kiwi]

Here's a good photo of that thing that Neil claims is a balloon -- the International Space Station -- plus two astronauts using the type of suit-cooling he claims doesn't work, plus a highly detailed background of central New Zealand showing the very clear sky that day above the Manawatu, where I live. I'm actually hidden behind a pixel near the top, about 2 o'clock from the ball on the mast. Smartcooky might be in the photo too near the top of the South Island, and AJV near the bottom of the North Island.

The photo was taken on 14 December 2006:--
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/165304main_image_feature_719_ys_full.jpg

The ISS will soon be making early-evening passes over or near New Zealand from 2 to 25 September, and plenty of us will be outside watching on the clear nights when it passes nearby.

Neil -- I watched Sputnik 1 pass over New Zealand at 8:06pm NZST on Wednesday 9 October 1959.  Do you claim that was a balloon put up by NASA too? And if so, how did Ham radio people, here and in other countries, detect its bleeper?

I find it rather amusing that you tell us to demand accountability from NASA, when members have posted in this thread from Australia, Germany, the UK and New Zealand.

[JayUtah]

It would have to be fakeable to more than just me. I expect at least two other independent witnesses on hand.

You're not an independent witness.  You're the accuser.  Name the other two witnesses, or describe how they would be chosen to your satisfaction.

I also expect to be allowed to hook up our own pirani and hot cathode ionization gauges.

Why should the people you accuse of fraud based no evidence except your ignorant doubt allow you to tamper with their equipment in this all-important test?  Contrary to what you might expect, you have a burden to show at least a modicum of prima facie evidence before you can make demands upon other parties.

And you have answered the pressing question.  Hamilton Standard sold porous plate sublimators commercially for decades.  Their successor Hamilton Sundstrand, with whom you claim to have had dealings, continued to sell them until they were acquired by UTC.  In all that time, why didn't you purchase one of their sublimator products and test it yourself in your own way, or via an independent testing laboratory?  Armed with those findings you could have taken H-S to court for fraud.  That is, if you really believe your claims have merit and you're not just grubbing for attention.

I'm confident that my level of experience with vacuum systems is sufficient. ... But maybe they have some huge vacuum pumps to compensate for the sublimator sublimating.

If you have to speculate about how test chambers compensate for outgassing of the test subject then no, your level of experience with vacuum systems is not only insufficient but almost entirely ignorant.

[Neil Baker]

I'm curious, please list all/any of your qualifications to judge how sublimation PLSS work

I thought he asked if I was qualified to understand how a vacuum system works. As far as how a PLSS works, I've probably read most of the same propaganda as you.