Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by thesneakiod

Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by DJW001
So you admit you were very careful to define your criteria to exclude data points necessary to an honest calculation of the success rate. Why? To achieve a predetermined result? That's called "data chopping." It's using statistics to lie.

Maybe Foos should get a job with the Government? They're always looking out for people with his 'talents' to manipulate facts to try and push some sort of agenda. I don't know why this thread keeps continuing, but on the bright side anyone worth anything reading it quickly comes to the conclusion HB's are, shall we say, 'mentally challenged'.
I showed the thread to a couple of friends who have no interest in the Moon landings and they couldn't stop laughing at Foos, PPK and the rest of the 'crew'. Even though they have no scientific background even they could see how completely ridiculous their arguments are.

Whats even more ridicuous is you lot with your tongues down each others pants awarding stars for pointless trolling posts like your one.

Honestly, you, weedwhacker, dj, et all aren't interested in conspiracy theories. as proved by your vists to other threads. You just like busting balls and creating meaningless arguements. (oh and you are all star whores)
Why are you even member of ATS?

No doubt my post will be removed due to biased mods.

NASA has gotten to the ATS mods!!!! Oh noes!

Which brings me to a question. Just what the heck are these "stars" for?

Dunno, but you just received 2 of them for your usual opinionated post.

reply to post by FoosM

Here is the thing guys, if you make the claim that the testimonies of Apollo astronauts, and astronauts in general can be trusted, then you will have to also accept that they have seen UFOs and other extra terrestrial phenomena.

Let's address the major fallacy first: that if one trusts the testimony of astronauts in general, one must accept the testimony of one particular astronaut at all times. Granted, as a group, astronauts are selected for a number of qualities that make them more reliable than most people: they are calm, good observers, etc. This does not mean that any single astronaut, under certain circumstances, is incapable of lying. There are rumors that some of the astronauts cheated on their wives. Lying to their spouses would seem inevitable if this were true. This does not mean that they always lie, simply that, as human beings, they are not infallible. Further, as human beings, their memories are sometimes less than 100% accurate, and can be clouded by subjective impressions. This is why it is silly to take, for example, Ed Mitchell's poetic flight about watching the "panoply of the heavens" too literally. He was discussing his emotional reaction to his experience, not making an objective cartographic observation.As with any historical question, it is the overall congruence of the primary sources that is important. Major discrepancies can make a particular source suspect (eg; a newspaper article that, contrary to all other sources, claims that the United States bombed Pearl Harbor) but if the majority of evidence points towards a particular set of circumstances, the historical method accepts this as fact.

The second fallacy is that there is no difference between statements of fact and statements of opinion. That this is false is self evident. The act of travelling in space is filled with potential for subjective experiences; it also involves a number of moments that can be recorded with absolute objectivity. The astronauts all agree on the objective details, they can vary on their subjective responses. It is entirely possible for two rational people to agree on all the facts, yet differ in their opinions. This is why politics exist. Given the same set of data, two perfectly rational people can come to radically different conclusions about some things. I have an on-going disagreement with a friend over the best way to solve the growing crisis in health care in this country. We both agree on the facts, we differ in our opinions. Facts are objective, opinions are subjective.

Finally, you have made a statement that misinterprets the evidence you have presented. It is well known that astronauts have seen things in the weird new environment of space that they could not identify or interpret properly. The earliest astronauts reported swarms of "fireflies" accompanying their craft. It is now understood that these were ice crystals. It says a great deal about your own set of assumptions that you immediately equate "unidentified objects" with extra-terrestrial spacecraft. Everything the astronauts experienced in space was, by definition, extra-terrestrial. As for the opinion that there is extra-terrestrial life, some of it intelligent, most scientists would agree. Musgrave never claims to have seen it, only offered his scientific opinion that it is there.

And the fact that Story Musgrave first claims he didnt see any UFOs, then later (if these sources are accurate) says he did, provides us with evidence that astronauts have no problems lying to the public.

The stories do not disagree, you have willfully distorted and conflated them. It is you who are lying to the public.

Shadow issues in these multi frame mosaic photos.

Put these two mosaic photos side by side, and see for yourself.

CDR's window
LMP's window

to compare
www.ryanromboughphotography.com...

reply to post by FoosM

They had an incident were a knob, or button broke, and it almost stranded them on the moon.

You are referring to the circuit breaker.

[Aldrin): "We discovered during a long checklist recitation that the ascent engine's arming circuit breaker was broken off on the panel. The little plastic pin (or knob) simply wasn't there. This circuit would send electrical power to the engine that would lift us off the moon...We looked around for something to punch in this circuit breaker. Luckily, a felt-tipped pen fit into the slot."

Here is an article that describes some of the circuit breaker panels on the LMs:

history.nasa.gov...

These circuit breakers aren't designed like the ones you see in your home's electrical panel or junction box. They are actually identical to what is used, even today, on just about every airplane built in the Western world. (and, I presume elsewhere too).

A round pull/push button....white plastic shaft, black plastic "knob" on the end (so you can grab and pull out with your fingers). The shaft is white so that "open" C/Bs will stand out, in a row of "closed" breakers. (One other way we can check for breakers that are "out", or "open" or "pulled" or "popped" is to merely run your hand along, and feel for the ones that stick out).

The amperage rating of the C/B is printed on the end, in white lettering, on the black knob center.

On airliners, some airplane cockpit designs, there are some C/Bs located near where the pilots set their briefcase-style flight bags, and when swinging those heavy bags into place, will sometimes bump, and break off the black knobs....this is what happened on Apollo 11, as either Armstrong's or Aldrin's PLSS, or some other portion of their EMU hit that C/B, and broke it. This is something that could easily go unnoticed, (and it did) until time on the checklist called for it to be re-set, for the ascent.

So, in Armstrong's/Aldrin's case, just needed something slim slim enough to fit into the circular hole, and easily re-set the C/B.

Here is a photo of a typical C/B (this case, one with a Boeing Part Number) when it is unmounted from the panel.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d2c3bf64a26e.jpg[/atsimg]

The shaft is in the "closed" position, full pushed in, and the black knob is intact, as shown. The diameter of the shaft is only about 1/4 inch.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by FoosM

 

They had an incident were a knob, or button broke, and it almost stranded them on the moon.

You are referring to the circuit breaker.

[Aldrin): "We discovered during a long checklist recitation that the ascent engine's arming circuit breaker was broken off on the panel. The little plastic pin (or knob) simply wasn't there. This circuit would send electrical power to the engine that would lift us off the moon...We looked around for something to punch in this circuit breaker. Luckily, a felt-tipped pen fit into the slot."

Yes thats it.
Thats why I wonder why you would hang helmets, or anything else for that matter, near the panels.
And I dont see any evidence that they did.

reply to post by FoosM

Shadow issues in these multi frame mosaic photos.

The only one who seems to have issues with shadows is you, FoosM. One photo is taken from the left hand window so the centerline of the shadow falls to the right. The other is taken from the right hand window so the centerline of the shadow falls to the left. It's called "perspective" and we covered this issue nearly 300 pages ago!

reply to post by FoosM

Thats why I wonder why you would hang helmets, or anything else for that matter, near the panels.
And I dont see any evidence that they did.

I never said, nor implied, that they "hung their helmets" there.

It is very clear, in the records, the debrief, the books, the interviews...that they realized that at some point, as they prepped for the EVA on Apollo 11, one of them hit the circuit breaker, and broke off the knob, without noticing at that time. They finished the EVA, took their rest and then ONLY when it came time to leave, as they ran the checklist, did they discover the broken C/B.

It is very easy to understand. Didn't you look at the link? Diagram of the C/B panels, and locations in the LM, along with the rows and numbers, and what each C/B was assigned to.

This was something that had not occurred, in all the training simulations, and was unanticipated. It was a valuable lesson, though, to how not everything will always go as planned, no matter how meticulously prepared you try to be.

It also shows unequivocally the reality and truth of Apollo...no one could make this # up!!!

reply to post by FoosM


Foosm seriously? Shadow issues? Have you ever been to real world? The only issue here is that you don't seem to crasp the very basics of perspective.

Originally posted by FoosM

Ok, we are all on the same page here, the other PLSS was stored on the floor.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Yes. In the case of Apollo 11, they stowed the PLSS on the floor upright against the hatch, as seen in this diagram:

Originally posted by FoosM
Those are all nice explanations, but what if Armstrong didnt have any problem with the light through the window?

I don't have a reason to think he was lying. The light was enough of an issue that it was raised in the Experience Report and was corrected.

Originally posted by FoosM
Well you'll have to accept it, as its an actual photo of the Apollo 17 mission.

Look here:
www.unmannedspaceflight.com...

How and where did they hang up a hammock?

I don't doubt it's an actual photograph. I said I doubted that's how they were stowed between EVAs during sleep periods. That photo was taken right after EVA 3. They're still cleaning up the cabin and stowing items, and it looks like the helmets are sitting on top of the suits still. Here is the appropriate bit from the surface journal:

174:28:03 Schmitt: Ken, this is Jack. Why don't you make a note that mag Bravo (Apollo magazine 134) is empty, with miscellaneous photos since the last report on it.

174:28:13 Mattingly: Okay.

[These are the photos that Gene and Jack took of each other and the helmets. Long Comm Break]

174:31:36 Schmitt: And, Ken, we're stowing mag Nancy (Apollo magazine 143) at a reading (a frame count of) 153.

174:31:44 Mattingly: Okay, copy 153.

[Very Long Comm Break.]

[Jack is stowing the film magazines into the LCG (Liquid Cooled Garment) Stowage Compartment which is below his right-side switch panel. AS17-143- 21943 to 21982 comprise a window pan which they may have just taken.]

[Frame AS17-134- 21944 is of particular interest because it - like others in the sequence taken in the same direction - shows the geology hammer. See a full discussion by Jim Scotti.]

[Frame 21960 is an excellent picture that shows the thrusters and an assortment of footprints and Rover tracks.]

[The photos taken out Gene's window - 21961 to 21982 are much better pictures than the ones taken out Jack's window.]

[Frames 21969 to 21972 show the PLSSs.]

[Frames 21973 to 21979 comprise an excellent southwestern horizon sequence.]

174:44:15 Cernan: Houston, Challenger.

174:44:18 Mattingly: Go ahead, Geno.

174:44:23 Cernan: Okay, Ken. All we've got left to stow now is the Buddy SLSS bag and that's in work. And we got all the ETB stuff taken care of. All the other bags are stowed per your recommendation. We'll be configuring the ECS for sleep and putting up the hammocks here shortly; and as soon as we can get cleaned up personally a little bit, we'll be in the sack.

174:44:58 Mattingly: Okay. Sounds great. (Long Pause)

174:45:55 Mattingly: Hey, Geno, the guys are looking at that Buddy SLSS bag and suggested you all make sure that you're going to have room to do the equipment jettison and get the hatch open and all that. They had planned on stowing it the next day.

[This suggests that they can use the floor space between them for stowage, but only after they are finished using the hatch.]

174:46:14 Cernan: That's a good thought, Ken. Thank you, Ed. The fact is that probably makes things more convenient. We were going to be smart and get ahead here but, thank you.

Once the suits were stowed, the helmets could have gone on top of the ascent engine cover, or down on the floor by the hatch, or hung in front of the instrument panel. There would have been plenty of room to get the hammocks up:

Originally posted by FoosM
You mean the front panel in between the windows?
How would that work?
They had an incident were a knob, or button broke, and it almost stranded them on the moon.
Plus, I dont see that helps with space issue.

I don't know exactly how it would have looked, but it's mentioned in the Apollo 15 surface journal:

126:16:02 Scott: Okay, put up the old helmet bag. (Pause)

[Some of the crews hung the helmet bag over the forward instrument panel and this may be what Dave and Jim are doing.]

Here's the bags the helmets went in:

Originally posted by FoosM
No, dont see it happening.
Show us how this was possible, especially after this photo:
www.unmannedspaceflight.com...

Well I don't know how I could show you, but the suits were mostly flexible material that could be moved and stuffed into locations as needed. Was the LM cramped and uncomfortable? Sure it was. Was it impossibly so? By no means.

Originally posted by FoosM

So there are OPS on the floor during sleep periods.
Thats what you are saying?

Yes. One OPS was on the floor, the other stowed in the rack on the left bulkhead.

Originally posted by FoosM


So, based on what you have just said, you have the OPS and the PLSS on the floor.
We go back to my original question, how did Aldrin and others sleep on the floor?

You have one PLSS on the floor (the rectangular thing the red arrow is pointing at):

As that diagram shows, it doesn't stop someone from fitting on the floor.

The one OPS, which is only about a third the size of the PLSS, went ont he floor up by the ascent engine cover, on the right side of the cabin by the dump valve. Again, plenty of room for someone's feet on the floor up there.

Originally posted by FoosM
Or, the astronauts did not go to the moon, and real moondust is very dangerous and would cause serious health issues to anyone exposed to it, in the way Apollo astronauts were supposedly exposed to it.

I don't think you understand the nature of hazardous material exposure. There is a big difference between long term and short term exposure. Even breathing in asbestos isn't going to necessarily cause you to get cancer immediately. All it does is increase your odds. The longer you're exposed to it, the higher your odds of getting some damage goes.

Originally posted by FoosM
Shadow issues in these multi frame mosaic photos.

Put these two mosaic photos side by side, and see for yourself.

CDR's window
LMP's window

to compare
www.ryanromboughphotography.com...

You'll have to be more specific as I see nothing wrong with that. Light is coming from almost directly behind the LM, all the shadows seem to be pointing in the direction they should.

The thing you're comparing it to is a more than 360 degree panorama (notice how the road and bush by it are repeated on both the left and right sides). The two shots out of the windows do not make up even a 360 degree panorama.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by FoosM

 

Thats why I wonder why you would hang helmets, or anything else for that matter, near the panels.
And I dont see any evidence that they did.

I never said, nor implied, that they "hung their helmets" there.

Did I say you did?

All of those points and questions and all you can say is :

Originally posted by FoosM
Did I say you did?

Why bother? :shk:

Can someone tell me what this interminable debate on the storage and sleeping arrangements on the LM has to do with the Apollo Hoax?

Originally posted by AgentSmith
All of those points and questions and all you can say is :

Originally posted by FoosM
Did I say you did?

Why bother? :shk:

Indeed.

Don't feed the bot.

NASA Apollo 8 crew is laughing about Dr van Allen.

Astronaut Frank Borman criticizes the cynicism of college students toward the United States government

www.thoughtequity.com...

reply to post by FoosM


Sorry, but.....

...and....

That YouTuber, "awe130"?? Really?? THAT video is "proof" of an Apollo "hoax"....HOW exactly?

Really, this is entertaining, by this stage. The desperation is positively thick enough to spread on bread.....

Originally posted by Tomblvd
Can someone tell me what this interminable debate on the storage and sleeping arrangements on the LM has to do with the Apollo Hoax?

Well, as every point bought up by those who push the Apollo is a hoax has been shot down and shown to be just wrong, they are getting desperate and now claiming there ws no room in the LM, despite the pictures showing there was enough room!

I recently rented, to watch again, the documentary "For All Mankind".

For certain space history purists (like me), I found parts where the director/producer choose to match up some videos with the wrong soundtrack, and take other "creative license" liberties distracting. AND, possibly it will confuse, and even foster the "HBs" too....as they point out things, without understanding the facts of the film's production, and what goes into it. The "timeline" in the film is also disjointed, not always in chronological sequence, so don't let that be confusing (and I expect it WILL confuse some HBs)....

For instance, some really nice footage of a low-orbit EVA ("spacewalk") is included...even though it was a GEMINI mission. But, it's nice film, and it's either Gene Cernan, or Ed White (R.I.P.). Have to look it up....

Plenty of Astronauts were tapped to add commentary.

Overall, though...from an archival standpoint, there are a lot of video sequences that you just don't see in most
Internet searches. So, ignoring the mistakes, as I call them, and just enjoying the visuals make it worthwhile.

I found a ten-minute portion (labelled "Part 1") on YouTube. (I see that other parts are there to, if you hunt them). Those that wish can rent (NetFlix?), video store (?... Most brick-and-mortar stores might be gone, by now...because of NetFlix!). OR, if you have a fast Internet connection, there is Hulu, it's there too. Free. (Not sure if that service is worldwide??)


"Part 1", to get you started:



________________

"Part 2" (At about 3:00, some scenes that show the interior of the CM, after on orbit, and also after LOI, and they're on the cis-lunar leg, and how when weightless the apparently cramped (viewed from outside) CM has more room than you think, inside...the LM had even more.....

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM

Ok, we are all on the same page here, the other PLSS was stored on the floor.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Yes. In the case of Apollo 11, they stowed the PLSS on the floor upright against the hatch, as seen in this diagram:

Originally posted by FoosM

So there are OPS on the floor during sleep periods.
Thats what you are saying?

Yes. One OPS was on the floor, the other stowed in the rack on the left bulkhead.

Originally posted by FoosM

So, based on what you have just said, you have the OPS and the PLSS on the floor.
We go back to my original question, how did Aldrin and others sleep on the floor?

You have one PLSS on the floor (the rectangular thing the red arrow is pointing at):

As that diagram shows, it doesn't stop someone from fitting on the floor.

The one OPS, which is only about a third the size of the PLSS, went ont he floor up by the ascent engine cover, on the right side of the cabin by the dump valve. Again, plenty of room for someone's feet on the floor up there.

But, according to Aldrin he had two OPS in front of the hatch. Not the PLSS. So where was his PLSS?

I had the two OPSs stacked up at the front of the hatch, so there was ample room on the floor for one. But there wasn't room for two."

And, be careful about using that picture as its not based on the final design of the LM.





Again you can see here how the PLSS is supposed to be stowed:



Not like how that drawing suggests.
The PLSS cuts right into the middle of the floor.
See those... helmets(?) thats where the astronauts would normally stand.
There isnt much space there whatsoever.
Now add two OPS there, and basically Aldrin would have to sleep standing up.

Again, take a look:



It would be impossible to sit on that floor with the PLSS there
and or two OPS, and especially with all three!









workingonthemoon.com...

Originally posted by FoosM
But, according to Aldrin he had two OPS in front of the hatch. Not the PLSS. So where was his PLSS?

By the rest period in Apollo 11, the PLSSs had already ben jettisoned, so there was ample room for Aldrin on the floor.