102 replies to this topic

[postbaguk]

I hope the mods agree this is still on topic, after all we are trying to ascertain not only what this guys academic qualifications are, but also his motives and methods, and what kind of person he is. So I'll continue with the discussion about the colour and black and white EVA photos on the rchice of his website.

I've tracked down the original photo, it's on the Apollo Archive, here. This version is in colour, and isn't horizontally flipped (as you can see by the "26" on the side of one of a PLSS). The reference number for the image is S69-32243.

I have also tracked down a black and white version, flipped horizontally, on a NASA website - here.

None of the references to this image that I can find on any NASA website claim that this was taken on the moon - they all state it was taken during EVA rehearsa activities on 22 April 1969. Here are a few links:-

http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/luceneweb/capti...otoId=S69-32243
http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Expl...eo195/image.htm
http://www.history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/images11.html
http://ston.jsc.nasa.gov/collections/TRS/_...2004-212068.pdf - page 86. They have accidentally included the "flipped" colour version - but it quite clearly states it's a rehearsal on a simulated lunar surface.

In conclusion - I've got no evidence that he manipulated the image himself. Neither can I find anything to back up his claim that NASA say this photo was taken on the moon. It's obviously an EVA rehearsal photo. That's what all the NASA sources I could find state. Why he is making the statement that NASA claim it was taken on the moon, I don't know. If it does state that anywhere, it's clearly a clerical error.

Getting back to Charles Hawkins - it speaks volumes that this brilliant mind, and his team of whizz-kids beavering away for two years, couldn't figure this out for themselves: whereas little old me could in the space of a few minutes.

[Lilly]

Quote

...Getting back to Charles Hawkins - it speaks volumes that this brilliant mind, and his team of whizz-kids beavering away for two years, couldn't figure this out for themselves: whereas little old me could in the space of a few minutes.

This is what I was attempting to ascertain, why would one of the world's most accomplished scientists make an error like this? And, from some of the other things I've read regarding Mr. Hawkin's book (I have yet to read the book, it isn't in our library) apparently contains several more obvious errors. This doesn't sound to me like the work of anyone in academia, let alone an immanent scientist.

So, I'm left asking: What are Mr. Hawkins academic qualifications? Where did he attend college? Where did he work for those 20 years that he was supposedly engaged in applied sciences, industrial electronics, robotics and computer science? Frankly, the only employment evidence we have at this point is that he's a real estate agent!

[codecracker]

YES, I Cracked Hawkins's Code

I did it, I think I may be the 1st to crack the secret coding system Hawkins used in his moon book. The code is supposed to reveal clues to where Hawkins is hiding the Apollo moon landing films his group of Whiz Kids bandits claimed to have taken from NASA before they even noticed the film was missing. If anyone knows of others that have more clues to Hawkins book please contact me at codecracker@techie.com


Here is what Hawkins's code is based.

Hawkins is using a kind of sci-fi version of the Bible Code which is based on a combination of predetermined word and letter spacing in the book's text. Hawkins even tells us he is using this coding system in his very 1st clue found in chapter 2/ page 2-4 paragraph 6.


Hawkins’s describes his Coding System in chapter 2/ page 2-4 paragraph 6 which I listed it below for reference:.

I have encrypted into this book a secret algorithm code revealing the location of the materials proving that the Moon Landings were a hoax. Along with these materials there is a very large sum of money to assist whoever finds the information. This money will help keep the fight for truth alive so that someday the American government will have to admit its wrongdoing, correct the history books, and put an end to this scientific outrage. A lie as big as claiming to go to the moon should not live forever. To help ensure that everyone is looking in the right direction for the treasure, here is the first clue.

1st Clue Wise are those efforts relying on the guidance of Els to solve this puzzle. You will be led to one of earth's first stellar travelers, a real bear, strongest of all creatures living on the planet earth. For she is the one who holds the treasure you are looking for.


1st Clue - Part 1:  Wise are those efforts relying on the guidance of Els to solve this puzzle.

Here Hawkins is telling us to use the E.L.S. Bible Code System to find the clues to his hidden treasure. The initials “E.L.S.” stands for a coding system associated with the Bible call the BibleCode where clues are revealed using Equal Letter Spacing.


**********************************************************************


1st Clue - Part 2:  You will be led to one of earth's first stellar travelers, a real bear, strongest of all creatures living on the planet earth.

CLUE BREAKDOWN: I did an internet search and found the one creature considered to be strongest of all on earth is the incredible WATER BEAR, a tiny microscopic organism. This creature is so strong scientists believe it could live in outer space and would have been found all over the first test rockets sent into outer space.

Proof Hawkins's Clue is reffering to the Water Bear: Wise are those efforts relying on the guidance of Els (equal letter spacing) to solve this puzzle. You will be led to one of earth's first stellar travelers, a real Bear, strongest of all creatures living on the planet earth.

*************************************************************************

1st Clue - Part 3.  For she is the one who holds the treasure you are looking for.  

My guess is, in Hawkins's 1st clue he is telling us he hid the Moon Landing Evidence in or on water, possibly and island

[url=

http://www.mickeywil...asp?mwID=247url

]

Beyond this I have yet to find out very much more about the whereabouts of Hawkins's hidden treasure.

codecracker@techie.com

Edited by codecracker, 23 December 2006 - 05:40 AM.

[Bill Hill]

Quote

1st Clue - Part 3.  For she is the one who holds the treasure you are looking for.  My guess is, in Hawkins's 1st clue he is telling us he hid the stash in or on water, possibly and island. http://www.mickeywilliams.com/detail.asp?mwID=247

Beyond this I have yet to find out very much more about the whereabouts of Hawkins's hidden treasure.

codecracker@techie.com

  codecracker, you crack me up.

[Lilly]

Ok, I gather that this:

"I have encrypted into this book a secret algorithm code revealing the location of the materials proving that the Moon Landings were a hoax. Along with these materials there is a very large sum of money to assist whoever finds the information. This money will help keep the fight for truth alive so that someday the American government will have to admit its wrongdoing, correct the history books, and put an end to this scientific outrage. A lie as big as claiming to go to the moon should not live forever. To help ensure that everyone is looking in the right direction for the treasure, here is the first clue..."

is a direct quote from Mr. Hawkin's book? If so, then I highly doubt this individual is a scientist. Frankly, this whole thing is beginning to sound like one great big publicity stunt.  

[frenat]

Quote

Ok, I gather that this:

"I have encrypted into this book a secret algorithm code revealing the location of the materials proving that the Moon Landings were a hoax. Along with these materials there is a very large sum of money to assist whoever finds the information. This money will help keep the fight for truth alive so that someday the American government will have to admit its wrongdoing, correct the history books, and put an end to this scientific outrage. A lie as big as claiming to go to the moon should not live forever. To help ensure that everyone is looking in the right direction for the treasure, here is the first clue..."

is a direct quote from Mr. Hawkin's book? If so, then I highly doubt this individual is a scientist. Frankly, this whole thing is beginning to sound like one great big publicity stunt.  

That or an experiment to see just what some people will fall for.

[straydog]

I am a third of the way through Charlie's book ....  He is not a publicity stunt , but a real person !!... I will post his credentials and education here so Lilly can get some closure on all of this ... and if allowed to I would be more than happy to scan some of the pages from his book to post here ...

My favorite parts so far are where Charlie scientifically proves how the lunar buggy could not possibly have done what NASA claimed it did on the moon .... Oh and then there are the photos that NASA does NOT want anyone to see,  taken from the unmanned 1994 Clementine mission ... Not the doctored images already put out by NASA in an attempt to match the Apollo photos , but rather the REAL photos from lunar orbit ... The REAL size of Earth .. The REAL way Earth looks from the moon  ( no one is gonna believe this one ! ) The way the planet Venus shows up in the lunar sky .. and here's the best part of all .... STARS CAN BE SEEN IN THE LUNAR SKY !!!!  ... and they are beautiful ! ....  These photos are real and they were really taken from the real moon ... Unlike the Apollo photos , which are so phony looking they are pathetic .... The sky is NOT SOLID BLACK IN DEEP SPACE !  NASA LIED TO ALL OF US !!

Shame on NASA and their phony Apollo photos and their faked Apollo moon missions ... Didn't they realize one day in the future their Apollo sham would be exposed ?

Edited by straydog, 24 December 2006 - 05:25 AM.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Quote

I am a third of the way through Charlie's book ....  He is not a publicity stunt , but a real person !!... I will post his credentials and education here so Lilly can get some closure on all of this ...

Feel free.

Quote

and if allowed to I would be more than happy to scan some of the pages from his book to post here ...

I would be very careful about this as it may be a copyright issue.

Quote

The sky is NOT SOLID BLACK IN DEEP SPACE !  NASA LIED TO ALL OF US !!

Shame on NASA and their phony Apollo photos and their faked Apollo moon missions ... Didn't they realize one day in the future their Apollo sham would be exposed ?

You couldn't resist trying to hijack the thread could you, despite the fact it was you that said:

Quote

I hope this thread can stay on topic and not be derailed like so many of these threads are about the moon hoax ...

Your tactic of taking every thread off topic and then complaining when others reply to you is now as tiresome as it is transparent. If you wish to start yet another thread where people that understand photography can explain to you exactly what is wrong with your statement then feel free.

If you would prefer to have a forum where others are not allowed a right to reply then may I suggest you start your own website.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf, 24 December 2006 - 06:13 AM.

[straydog]

Sorry pal but if I remember correctly it was you who took the Grissom discussion off topic , not me ..... You need to learn to practice what you preach .  

Lessons in photography ? .. You mean learn why the Apollo astronauts never bothered to open the apatures on any of their Hassleblad cameras far enough to allow any of the stars to be photographed ? ... Or perhaps learn how difficult it is to take a photo of the lunar surface or the lunar sky when standing in a moon studio on earth ?

Edited by straydog, 24 December 2006 - 05:58 PM.

[Lilly]

Quote

I am a third of the way through Charlie's book ....  He is not a publicity stunt , but a real person !!...

How do you know this?

Quote

I will post his credentials and education here so Lilly can get some closure on all of this ...

Good. BTW, has any of this information been corroborated from outside sources?

[aquatus1]

Straydog, if you have any sort of evidence leading to this man's identity, feel free to post it.  If you want to discuss his views, you may open another thread on that specifically.

[MID]

Quote

My favorite parts so far are where Charlie scientifically proves how the lunar buggy could not possibly have done what NASA claimed it did on the moon .... Oh and then there are the photos that NASA does NOT want anyone to see, taken from the unmanned 1994 Clementine mission ... Not the doctored images already put out by NASA in an attempt to match the Apollo photos , but rather the REAL photos from lunar orbit ... The REAL size of Earth .. The REAL way Earth looks from the moon ( no one is gonna believe this one ! ) The way the planet Venus shows up in the lunar sky .. and here's the best part of all .... STARS CAN BE SEEN IN THE LUNAR SKY !!!! ... and they are beautiful ! .... These photos are real and they were really taken from the real moon ... Unlike the Apollo photos , which are so phony looking they are pathetic .... The sky is NOT SOLID BLACK IN DEEP SPACE ! NASA LIED TO ALL OF US !!

They are my favorites too...and I cannot wait for you to put them here...

Well, not here.  
Put new threads in the Conspiracy section...preferably, one for each point, so it can be thoroughly fleshed out.


I want to see how "Charlie" proves that the LRV couldn't work the way it did.
I also want to see the photos from Clementine in 1994, which NASA didn't want us to see, but somehow, "Charlie" got to see.

I am very interested in how the relatively simple calculation of the angular size of the Earth as viewed from lunar distance, is somehow disproved.

But I would like to point out a fact which has been illustrated many, mnay times:

NASA never said the sky was pitch black and devoid of stars in space.   Quite the contrary.  The sky is filled with stars, which, given the correct SEEING CONDITIONS, are fantastic (as observed by many astronauts and cosmonauts while in the dark on orbit).  You're correct about that...but incorrect that they can, or should be seen from the lunar surface, or in any broad daylight condition,  and especially by cameras which are set to photograph brightly lit surface objects.

Quote

Lessons in photography ? .. You mean learn why the Apollo astronauts never bothered to open the apatures on any of their Hassleblad cameras far enough to allow any of the stars to be photographed ? ... Or perhaps learn how difficult it is to take a photo of the lunar surface or the lunar sky when standing in a moon studio on earth ?

Now now, another thread please....perhaps consult one of the old ones which clearly explained that opening the apertures on the cameras enough to image stars in the sky would've defeated the purpose of the photography assignments, and would've rendered the images a big blur...they did have lessons in photography, which is why they didn't attempt such a foolhardy thing.  It would've been a waste of film and time.

This thread is about establishing the reality of "Dr. Hawkins", or "Charlie", as you are calling him.   That, so far, has been an abject failure.
However, feel free to post his qualifications here if you will.

For my part, I look forward to other threads on individual "Charlie" contentions.
Those, more than anything taken from the cover of his book, will clearly show his qualifications, I think.

[Lilly]

Quote

This thread is about establishing the reality of "Dr. Hawkins", or "Charlie", as you are calling him.   That, so far, has been an abject failure.
However, feel free to post his qualifications here if you will.

I'm interested in seeing some information about Mr. Hawkins that can be corroborated by outside sources, not just what is stated on the back cover of his book.

Quote

For my part, I look forward to other threads on individual "Charlie" contentions.
Those, more than anything taken from the cover of his book, will clearly show his qualifications, I think.

Absolutely, I could claim I had a degree in nuclear physics, but if I don't know "diddle-squat" about nuclear physics my claim would be highly suspect.

[straydog]

Lilly ... Do you even comprehend the irony in your statements here ?

" I'm interested in seeing some information about Mr. Hawkins that can be CORROBORATED BY OUTSIDE SOURCES, not just what is stated on the back cover of his book."

"Absolutely, I could claim I had a degree in nuclear physics, but if I don't know "diddle-squat" about nuclear physics my claim would be highly suspect. "

This is EXACTLY what I have been saying all along about NASA and their unsubstantiated claims of technically landing men on the moon almost 40 years ago . .... NASA can make any claim they want to but without any OUTSIDE CORROBORATION or any technical proof of their claims,  they are as empty as Hawkins' claims of having "one of the greatest  scientific minds of all time ".

I was going to post the information from his book on where he was educated and what his qualifications are , but what's the point ? ... Anyone who disagrees with Apollo being a hoax is only going to find a way to try to discredit him anyway , no matter what his credentials may be . .... So it would be a losing battle posting anything about him or his evidence of NASA having faked the Apollo Program , because none of you scientists and NASA defenders will ever accept it or believe it , no matter how much evidence points to the fact that the official Apollo record is a lie .

Edited by straydog, 26 December 2006 - 04:27 PM.

[Lilly]

Quote

This is EXACTLY what I have been saying all along about NASA and their unsubstantiated claims of technically landing men on the moon almost 40 years ago . .... NASA can make any claim they want to but without any OUTSIDE CORROBORATION or any technical proof of their claims,

Actually, the Apollo missions were some of the most technically documented events in all of history. If what NASA was doing was "scientifically impossible", as is being claimed by the moon hoax supporters, then one would have seen scientists world wide yelling this loud and strong back in 1969.

Quote

I was going to post the information from his book on where he was educated and what his qualifications are , but what's the point ?... Anyone who disagrees with Apollo being a hoax is only going to find a way to try to discredit him anyway , no matter what his credentials may be .

If Mr. Hawkins has the academic qualifications, and even more important the scientifically sound evidence that he's claiming, exactly how could he be discredited? However, from what I've been reading such scientifically sound evidence is not contained within Mr. Hawkins's book, which leads me to be suspicious (rightfully so) of his academic qualifications.