Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.

[Luke Pemberton]

Your ultimate goal is to get 9/11 investigated and you somehow got in your head that this is the way to make it happen.

...and it has been investigated. There is the 9-11 Commission Report that is freely available on the internet which makes clear recommendations following the hi-jacking of the four planes and their suicide missions into the Twin towers and Pentagon. The veracity of Apollo is not at question here, it's about Neil's obsession with 9-11 and his position of grandeur as the person who found the twoof and saved us all from nasty Uncle Same. Let's face it, who demands former Generals and Admirals to witness and verify the function of a widget. Again, another condition that we cannot possibly meet, unless of course Neil has confirmed that they have agree to act as referees. Have you Neil?

[Bob B.]

And you're wrong. The test before independent witnesses would satisfy me. I'm sick of this subject and want it settled.

Why is James Philip Shero not an independent witness?  Remember him?  He's the guy from Rice University who, in 1969, wrote his doctoral thesis "Porous Plate Sublimator Analysis".  I linked to his paper way back on page 1, post 7.  In case you've forgot, here's the link again:

https://scholarship.rice.edu/bitstream/handle/1911/14662/7023573.PDF?sequence=1

Dr. Shero ran experimental tests in a vacuum on several different porous plates.  He not only proved that they work, but he computed their effectiveness.

Why do you ignore that this independent researcher performed and documented exactly what you've been asking for?

[Bob B.]

Once low earth vacuum was reached the sublimator could be turned on but that would probably result in an immediate loss of vacuum. I doubt this test can be done in a vacuum chamber on Earth.

A near perfect vacuum is not needed for the test to succeed.  The pressure just needs to be below the triple point of water, which is about 600 Pa.

[Neil Baker]

A big thank you to Zakalwe for posting this: https://scholarship.rice.edu/bitstream/handle/1911/14662/7023573.PDF?sequence=1
Bravo! Good stuff.

But I'm still looking for a book published before 2007 that mentions spacesuit ice sublimators.  Abaddon  gave Heat and Mass Transfer - Anthony Mills - 1995 - ISBN 0256114439 but I don't see anything about spacesuit ice sublimators.

Also, I know there's contention about the photograph of an ice sublimator with some claiming it was available since 1997 and my saying I couldn't find it in 2007. I'm sure there are tricks I don't know for bringing buried stuff to the surface of the Internet. Please indulge with instruction on how to find a second photograph of a spacesuit ice sublimator. Currently only one shows when you do the Google Image search. Please educate me in how to bring the others to the surface.

[onebigmonkey]

A big thank you to Zakalwe for posting this: https://scholarship.rice.edu/bitstream/handle/1911/14662/7023573.PDF?sequence=1
Bravo! Good stuff.

But I'm still looking for a book published before 2007 that mentions spacesuit ice sublimators.  Abaddon  gave Heat and Mass Transfer - Anthony Mills - 1995 - ISBN 0256114439 but I don't see anything about spacesuit ice sublimators.

Also, I know there's contention about the photograph of an ice sublimator with some claiming it was available since 1997 and my saying I couldn't find it in 2007. I'm sure there are tricks I don't know for bringing buried stuff to the surface of the Internet. Please indulge with instruction on how to find a second photograph of a spacesuit ice sublimator. Currently only one shows when you do the Google Image search. Please educate me in how to bring the others to the surface.

Careful with those goalposts, they could hurt someone if you move them too quickly.

Prepared to retract your BS about Lunar Orbiter yet?

[Neil Baker]

Why is James Philip Shero not an independent witness?  Remember him?  He's the guy from Rice University who, in 1969, wrote his doctoral thesis "Porous Plate Sublimator Analysis".  I linked to his paper way back on page 1, post 7.  In case you've forgot, here's the link again:

https://scholarship.rice.edu/bitstream/handle/1911/14662/7023573.PDF?sequence=1

Dr. Shero ran experimental tests in a vacuum on several different porous plates.  He not only proved that they work, but he computed their effectiveness.

Why do you ignore that this independent researcher performed and documented exactly what you've been asking for?

Consider him ignored no longer. I think he would be an excellent addition to the independent witness group.

[12oh2alarm]

I picked the timing from in-the-sky.org for my location. I didn't time it myself, but 5.5mins seems fairly accurate from watching experience. Fairly close to sea level at observation point, but land rises both at the point where it enters my view and where it departs.

If the timing from that source takes terrain into account, it will give you considerable less time of visibility than a calculation with a spherical Earth. Anything rising above the sea level horizon reduces visibility time considerably (because at the horizon is where the ISS has the slowest apparent speed; maximum is overhead). Maybe their computation makes more assumptions, like "anything closer than 3° to the horizon is out of sight". What about asking them about the details of their computation?

The actual time of visibility for an observer on a spherical Eearth, ignoring atmospheric diffraction, is 607 seconds (~10min) for a 92 minute orbit.

[Neil Baker]

Consider him ignored no longer. I think he would be an excellent addition to the independent witness group.

Damn the bad luck. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/OBITUARIES/2008-06/1212306659

[JayUtah]

But I'm still looking for a book published before 2007...

Your attempt to limit the evidence to exclude modern sources derives solely from your unevidenced and patently absurd claim that any relevant evidence dating since then is necessarily a response to your personal discovery of the concept and is presumed to be a fictitious description invented by the industry and calculated only to undermine your credibility.  You have failed to establish that claim on any relevant grounds, and therefore your critics are not bound to it.

...I don't see anything about spacesuit ice sublimators.

Have you read the book in question?  Yes or no.

I'm sure there are tricks I don't know for bringing buried stuff to the surface of the Internet.

No, you do not get to saddle your critics with burdensome requests for production.  You have claimed no relevant records existed prior to your personal discovery of the concept.  When confronted with contrary evidence, you lied and continue to lie.  It is therefore reasonable to conclude (a) that you have not performed the exhaustive and thorough research required to make a claim of nonexistence, and have no intent to do so, and (b) that any evidence your critics uncover to contradict your claim will be ignored just as you have ignored all the production to date.

[JayUtah]

Consider him ignored no longer. I think he would be an excellent addition to the independent witness group.

You do not understand.  He has already borne his witness and you are being asked to account for it.  Bob B. is not proposing that this author be a witness to the stunt you demand.

[bknight]

Careful with those goalposts, they could hurt someone if you move them too quickly.

Prepared to retract your BS about Lunar Orbiter yet?

The goalpost nearly hit me.  Thanks for stating it before me.

[mako88sb]

Why is James Philip Shero not an independent witness?  Remember him?  He's the guy from Rice University who, in 1969, wrote his doctoral thesis "Porous Plate Sublimator Analysis".  I linked to his paper way back on page 1, post 7.  In case you've forgot, here's the link again:

https://scholarship.rice.edu/bitstream/handle/1911/14662/7023573.PDF?sequence=1

Dr. Shero ran experimental tests in a vacuum on several different porous plates.  He not only proved that they work, but he computed their effectiveness.

Why do you ignore that this independent researcher performed and documented exactly what you've been asking for?

Consider him ignored no longer. I think he would be an excellent addition to the independent witness group.

You mean the independent witness group that will never be formed or used because despite years of trying, you have accomplished absolutely nothing. Oh sorry. You have done an outstanding job of ruining your life and completely destroying your credibility. That's some accomplishment there Neil.

[Luke Pemberton]

Damn the bad luck. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/OBITUARIES/2008-06/1212306659

Cut the dramatics. The work has already been reviewed and the veracity of its findings accepted by others. Who are you to question its findings? Where is your evidence that sublimators do not work as reported in the literature?

[Zakalwe]

But he'd allegedly be in a hermetically sealed suit for more than twelve hours requiring sublimator cooling at vacuum and other cooling on the way to vacuum. He'd need an umbilical to augment the sublimator. Once low earth vacuum was reached the sublimator could be turned on but that would probably result in an immediate loss of vacuum.

Stop making stuff up. You are just wildly thrashing about now. I showed you two images that you clearly had never seen before. One was an astronaut inside the test chamber- the other was as he was about to enter. Or are you that ignorant of things that you never heard of an airlock???
Here's a quote from Schweikart "I remember standing at the bottom of the huge altitude test chamber A in Houston-this thing something like one hundred and twenty feet high and eighty feet in diameter [...] testing and checking out the spacesuit. [....] Not only did I have all of the systems of the systems in the suit which could fail, and the backpack which could fail, but I had all of the failure modes of the test chamber, which could also kill me" http://librarun.org/book/51138/371
The backpack didn't fail and it didn't kill him, ergo, it worked.
Of course, you'll just handwave this away or just ignore it. Again.

I doubt this test can be done in a vacuum chamber on Earth.

Your doubt is based on your ignorance of the test. Doubt and ignorance does not mean that something didn't happen. Again, I have shown you the test images and provided a quotation from the man that carried out the test. A normal person would change their view, but you aren't normal, are you Mr Baker?

If they wanted to simulate real moon surface conditions, they'd have to illuminate the spacesuit with enough light that on the moon brings the surface temperature up to about 240 degrees F.

Which they did (surely you don't believe that they would send an untested suit into space, now do you??). Read the quotation that I linked to, "...I'm the little thing at the bottom in a cage of heaters, testing and checking out the spacesuit, stepping up and down on the step to put a controlled heat input into the suit"
Again, here's the image:  https://archive.org/details/S68-55391  See the cage of heating elements that surrounds him? Note the date of the image publication: December 1968. Are you going to claim that that image is only available due to you?

By the way, I'm still waiting for your analysis of the document that I showed you here:

Let's see your detailed analysis of this document. With calculations please.
http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19720005423

I'm also waiting for you to acknowledge this:

Have you ever tried to look at the ISS through a small telescope? It's not that hard...transit times are publicly available from a myriad of sources.
www.heavens-above.com

[bknight]

Consider him ignored no longer. I think he would be an excellent addition to the independent witness group.

Damn the bad luck. http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/OBITUARIES/2008-06/1212306659

He already performed the test you say never happened.
Like most CT's you are never going to admit your failure to understand the engineering/science that actually preceded  the events that you fail to embrace.
Your inability and incompetence has been pointed out by many on this thread.  Only someone wrapped up in their own egotistical persona can be so stupid.  Get over it, NASA has/continues to use the PLSS in space operations including the ISS that even a normally sighted person can see without a telescope.