Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by FoosM

Outer belt extends up to 10 re, look it up. As a matter of fact I had linked that fact pages ago. Next thing you guys will do is accuse me of spamming. You want to make it shorter, go right ahead if it helps you sleep at night.

But for the sake of expediency:

The large outer radiation belt extends from an altitude of about three to ten Earth radii (RE) above the Earth's surface, and its greatest intensity is usually around 4-5 RE.

www.newworldencyclopedia.org...

Are you ever going to reconcile the trajectory of the Apollo missions with the shape of the VABs?

o'oh!

It seems Russia couldn't track Apollo after all. So they wouldn't know if it was fake or not. Big problem.

Here are Jarrah's latest videos. The guy this thread is about.

edit: and just for once, would the apollo believers at least watch ALL the videos before responding. If you're going to argue.. at least know what you're arguing about. Fair call don't you think.










[edit on 17-8-2010 by ppk55]

What a coincidence. Someone starts a thread on ATS about Russia's tracking abilities, it gets shot to pieces, and a few days later Jarrah does a video about Russia's tracking abilities. Why would Russia send up satellites if they couldn't track them? They sent probes to the Moon and Venus, they received telemetry from them and published the results. Why shouldn't they be able to track and monitor Apollo?

reply to post by DJW001


Apparently, amateur radio enthusiasts and British school children were more technologically advanced than the Soviet Union.



Edit to add link

[edit on 17-8-2010 by Smack]

Originally posted by ppk55
o'oh!

It seems Russia couldn't track Apollo after all. So they wouldn't know if it was fake or not. Big problem.

Here are Jarrah's latest videos. The guy this thread is about.

edit: and just for once, would the apollo believers at least watch ALL the videos before responding. If you're going to argue.. at least know what you're arguing about. Fair call don't you think.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by ppk55]

If you are too unfamiliar with the subject matter to be able to put your arguments into words, that is your problem, not ours. We are under no obligation to sit through an hour of Jarrah's self-aggrandizement in order to flesh out what point you are trying to get across.

In addition, Jarrah is an admitted liar and a proven hoaxer. There is absolutely no reason to believe anything he says.

As an aside, a Google search for "argumentum ad youtubum" yields my declaration of the term as mine as it's first hit! I'm somebody now!!!!

reply to post by Tomblvd

As an aside, a Google search for "argumentum ad youtubum" yields my declaration of the term as mine as it's first hit! I'm somebody now!!!!

Send an e-mail to the Oxford English Dictionary, quick!!!

Originally posted by ppk55
o'oh!

It seems Russia couldn't track Apollo after all. So they wouldn't know if it was fake or not. Big problem.

Here are Jarrah's latest videos. The guy this thread is about.

edit: and just for once, would the apollo believers at least watch ALL the videos before responding. If you're going to argue.. at least know what you're arguing about. Fair call don't you think.

I must say ppk55, you sure have received well thought out responses in reaction to posting these videos so far. JW will surely shake in his boots from the dea- mean deluge of debunking that is going on here. He might as well give up now and convert to a believer before anymore riveting posts are made.

Foos, do you still stand by this assertion you made?

"High energy protons travel at the speed of light...."

reply to post by FoosM


So are you saying the Soviets couldn't receive their own telemetry either?

The Object-E payloads were sent to the Moon, far beyond the range of the satellite telemetry system. Luna-3, in 1959, represented the greatest challenge, because it contained a camera. It took 29 photographs of the far side of the Moon on 35mm film, which was automatically developed, fixed, dried, and scanned at 1000 x 1000 pixel resolution. Images were transmitted as low-bandwidth FM video on 183.600 MHz.

www.mentallandscape.com...

In 1959, work began on a massive facility designed to communicate with spacecraft sent to Mars and Venus. With less than a year to complete the project, Evgenii Gubenko headed the design and construction team for Riazanskii's bureau. The required range for radio transmission was 300 million kilometers, and was the world's highest capacity deep space communication system prior to the 64-meter Mars station at Goldstone in 1966.

www.mentallandscape.com...

Let me guess: Jarrah waves his hands and claims that they used the gigahertz band for their transmissions, not the megahertz band used by the unified S-band system used on Apollo. This is not unlike his stating that the 400 mHz band was "forbidden" to Ham radio operators, thereby implying they "couldn't" listen to Apollo broadcasts. Guess what: they're radios! Just because the Soviets used a different frequency doesn't mean they couldn't "dial it down." Did I catch the gist of it?

Edit to fix formatting.


[edit on 17-8-2010 by DJW001]

Originally posted by DJW001
What a coincidence. Someone starts a thread on ATS about Russia's tracking abilities, it gets shot to pieces, and a few days later Jarrah does a video about Russia's tracking abilities. Why would Russia send up satellites if they couldn't track them? They sent probes to the Moon and Venus, they received telemetry from them and published the results. Why shouldn't they be able to track and monitor Apollo?

The problem is line of sight issues not russias tracking technology. Russia was not in line of sight of the moon when apollo 11 landed. Also russia wasn't in line of sight of its own probe when it crashed into the moon.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by epsilon69]

reply to post by ppk55

Idiotic nonsense.
Russia was perfectly capable of tracking their spacecraft as well as the Apollo spacecraft.
As pointed out here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As usual, a single out of context quote leads to an absurd line of reasoning. From the Time Magazine article used as "proof":

In the early days of the space race, the Jodrell Bank observatory had the best steerable radio telescope available outside Russia, in a location that permitted tracking Soviet satellites. As a result, Lovell established a reputation as the Western world's foremost interpreter of Soviet space exploits—a reputation that he has maintained by using the skillful public-relations techniques demonstrated at Jodrell Bank last week.

Source

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ppk55

 

Idiotic nonsense.
Russia was perfectly capable of tracking their spacecraft as well as the Apollo spacecraft.
As pointed out here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As usual, a single out of context quote leads to an absurd line of reasoning. From the Time Magazine article used as "proof":

In the early days of the space race, the Jodrell Bank observatory had the best steerable radio telescope available outside Russia, in a location that permitted tracking Soviet satellites. As a result, Lovell established a reputation as the Western world's foremost interpreter of Soviet space exploits—a reputation that he has maintained by using the skillful public-relations techniques demonstrated at Jodrell Bank last week.

Source

Exactly in the article it says one very very important thing. It shows why the soviets needed to use Jodrell Bank to track the satellite around the moon. "the Jodrell Bank observatory had the best steerable radio telescope available outside Russia, in a LOCATION that permitted tracking Soviet satellites." You see where russia is on the earth affects when it can track it's own lunar satellites. Because the russians wanted to prove to us that they sent one they utilized the services of Jodrell Bank to track it for them when they were out of line of sight.

And yes they did need him to track their satellite during key hours of its mission.

reply to post by epsilon69

The problem is line of sight issues not russias tracking technology. Russia was not in line of sight of the moon when apollo 11 landed. Also russia wasn't in line of sight of its own probe when it crashed into the moon.

Now I understand. After intermittently monitoring them for three days the Russians were on the wrong side of the Earth to receive the crucial broadcast of the landing. Undoubtedly the astronauts took advantage of this moment to rush back to the Earth and fake it all in a studio, then rush back to the Moon in time for the Soviets to re-acquire the signal. Brilliant.

Originally posted by epsilon69


The problem is line of sight issues not russias tracking technology. Russia was not in line of sight of the moon when apollo 11 landed. Also russia wasn't in line of sight of its own probe when it crashed into the moon.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by epsilon69]

Neither was the United States, what's your point?

reply to post by epsilon69

It shows why the soviets needed to use Jodrell Bank to track the satellite around the moon. "the Jodrell Bank observatory had the best steerable radio telescope available outside Russia, in a LOCATION that permitted tracking Soviet satellites."

So, you are conceding that they were able to track both our and their spacecraft and visa versa.
Great! That pretty much clears that up. Thanks!

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by epsilon69

 

The problem is line of sight issues not russias tracking technology. Russia was not in line of sight of the moon when apollo 11 landed. Also russia wasn't in line of sight of its own probe when it crashed into the moon.

Now I understand. After intermittently monitoring them for three days the Russians were on the wrong side of the Earth to receive the crucial broadcast of the landing. Undoubtedly the astronauts took advantage of this moment to rush back to the Earth and fake it all in a studio, then rush back to the Moon in time for the Soviets to re-acquire the signal. Brilliant.

That's ludicrous no one is implying that.

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by epsilon69


The problem is line of sight issues not russias tracking technology. Russia was not in line of sight of the moon when apollo 11 landed. Also russia wasn't in line of sight of its own probe when it crashed into the moon.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by epsilon69]

Neither was the United States, what's your point?

No, most of the United States was not in line of sight for apollo 11 that is why they needed to use the facility at honey suckle creek in Australia to receive the broadcast from the moons surface.

Originally posted by epsilon69
[
Exactly in the article it says one very very important thing. It shows why the soviets needed to use Jodrell Bank to track the satellite around the moon.

And yes they did need him to track their satellite during key hours of its mission.

Wait. Did the Soviets actually use Jodrell Bank? I'm not aware of any cooperation between the UK and USSR.

Also, you said the Soviet Union was not in line of sight for the landing of Apollo 11. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Honeysuckle Creek was the earth station to recieve the first signals from the moon. If Australia was in line, so was the eastern part of the USSR.

reply to post by epsilon69

It does not take "the best steerable radio telescope" to track a spacecraft which is transmitting a steady stream of telemetry. It takes a reasonably good reciever.

The USSR did use Jodrell Bank. Not for tracking but as independent verification that they got to the Moon.

In a sense, the USSR also used the capabilities of Jodrell Bank. In many circles the first Soviet lunar probe, Luna 1, launched on 2 January 1959, was simply not believed to have existed (See (8)). This must have annoyed the Soviet authorities enormously, despite the fact that the transmission frequencies were announced directly after launch. For their second successful launch they decided to try to engage Jodrell Bank as a source of independent verification of any claim of success. Therefore the USSR sent detailed instructions to Jodrell Bank how to find their second lunar probe, Luna 2, that was launched on 12 September 1959 and hit the moon the next day. Jodrell Bank provided scientific proof that Luna 2 actually reached the moon, and the USSR continued to provide pointing and frequency data to Jodrell Bank for a number of years.

www.jb.man.ac.uk...

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by epsilon69

 

It shows why the soviets needed to use Jodrell Bank to track the satellite around the moon. "the Jodrell Bank observatory had the best steerable radio telescope available outside Russia, in a LOCATION that permitted tracking Soviet satellites."

So, you are conceding that they were able to track both our and their spacecraft and visa versa.
Great! That pretty much clears that up. Thanks!

I'm not sure exactly what you mean but i'm going to take a stab at it. Yes the soviets can track american spacecraft and america can track russia spacecraft as long as they have line of sight of these craft or a satellite in line of sight.

What i was saying is they needed Jodrell Bank because during crucial parts of their moon probes mission russia was not in line of sight of their own spacecraft, but Jodrell Bank was so they enlisted his help to track their probe as it crashed into the moons surface.