Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 15
Waspie_Dwarf

[Merged] Did we land on the moon?

2,594 posts in this topic

\

A very close friend of mine, Lt. Colonel James C. Warren, an original Tuskegee Airman, was on the flight crew that flew the Apollo 14 astronauts to Houston after their moon flight and he can personally confirm the reality of the Apollo moon missions.

That means that the Colonel had a nice long flight with this man:

shepard_alan_7.jpg

CAPT ALAN B SHEPARD, USN

..and I'm sure that Captain Shepard nor Colonel Warren ever thought about this nonsense.

I think the Colonel might have gotten to know that aptain well enough ton know that the Captain would rather die (or kill the fool who suggested such a thing to him ) than consider the possibility of evr participating in such a dishonorable and treasonous fiasco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That means that the Colonel had a nice long flight with this man:

shepard_alan_7.jpg

CAPT ALAN B SHEPARD, USN

..and I'm sure that Captain Shepard nor Colonel Warren ever thought about this nonsense.

I think the Colonel might have gotten to know that aptain well enough ton know that the Captain would rather die (or kill the fool who suggested such a thing to him ) than consider the possibility of evr participating in such a dishonorable and treasonous fiasco.

As Lt. Colonel Warren speaks of his Apollo 14 recovery mission, I watch as his eyes light up because he is honored to have been a member of the Apollo 14 recovery team. He is a no-nonsense kind of person and the moon hoax folks would only serve to anger him much like Astronaut 'Buzz' Aldrin, when he punched that guy in a video for being obnoxious. He was also a member of the flight crew that flew the Bob Hope Christmas Show on parts of the southeast Asia Tour in December of 1964. He is up in age, but we still fly together in his Beechcraft Skipper from time to time.

It is unfortunate the astronauts risked their lives to fly to the moon and yet, there are those who try to discredit the achievements of the astronauts, NASA, and others who put in a lot of hard work and instrumental in placing men on the moon.

Kudos, sir. :blush:

Thank you!! :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Lt. Colonel Warren speaks of his Apollo 14 recovery mission, I watch as his eyes light up because he is honored to have been a member of the Apollo 14 recovery team. He is a no-nonsense kind of person and the moon hoax folks would only serve to anger him much like Astronaut 'Buzz' Aldrin, when he punched that guy in a video for being obnoxious. He was also a member of the flight crew that flew the Bob Hope Christmas Show on parts of the southeast Asia Tour in December of 1964. He is up in age, but we still fly together in his Beechcraft Skipper from time to time.

It is unfortunate the astronauts risked their lives to fly to the moon and yet, there are those who try to discredit the achievements of the astronauts, NASA, and others who put in a lot of hard work and instrumental in placing men on the moon.

It may be that there will always be those who know nothing, believe too much nonsense, and who thus try to discredit the extraordinary.

It's unfortunate, but typical.

Best I think to try and educate people, and, occassionally...

...Fly with the Colonel, in his Skipper!

Beechcraft77Skipper01A.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It may be that there will always be those who know nothing, believe too much nonsense, and who thus try to discredit the extraordinary.

It's unfortunate, but typical.

Best I think to try and educate people, and, occassionally...

...Fly with the Colonel, in his Skipper!

Beechcraft77Skipper01A.jpg

I love that airplane. Here is an attachment photo of Colonel Warren's aircraft that I took at the Travis AFB air show in 2008. I will speak with him tomorrow in regards to the Apollo 14 recovery mission at his home and discuss other Apollo moon missions.

post-32948-0-30849200-1337233095_thumb.j

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

postbaguk said..

Table XI is the mobility table data, using flexometers and the mobility notation table (as well as other techniques). Table XIII is from the X-ray study. Look at page 50 and see what equipment they use for each sub-test. Subtest 2 (X-ray study) lists X-ray facilities and a mock-up of the couch as necessary equipment. They suit someone up, sit him in the couch, and X-ray him to determine the eye-heart angle, and measure the joint angles using the mid-points of the major bones. If that wasn't enough, you can infer he's seated by looking at what they measure. In the mobility table study, they measure (among others): hip adduction-abduction; hip flexion-extension; hip rotation; trunk rotation; trunk-hip flexion-extension; trunk-hip lateral flexion. In the X-ray study, the only one of these angles they measure is hip flexion. This conform's with what you'd expect if the subject was seated in a couch.

No. They are seated for the eye-heart angle test. You can't expand that to other tests, as you've done here. They don't say or suggest this. If they did, it would have stated so. But this was specific.

You can't make such faulty leaps of logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

postbaguk said..

Table XI is the mobility table data, using flexometers and the mobility notation table (as well as other techniques). Table XIII is from the X-ray study. Look at page 50 and see what equipment they use for each sub-test. Subtest 2 (X-ray study) lists X-ray facilities and a mock-up of the couch as necessary equipment. They suit someone up, sit him in the couch, and X-ray him to determine the eye-heart angle, and measure the joint angles using the mid-points of the major bones. If that wasn't enough, you can infer he's seated by looking at what they measure. In the mobility table study, they measure (among others): hip adduction-abduction; hip flexion-extension; hip rotation; trunk rotation; trunk-hip flexion-extension; trunk-hip lateral flexion. In the X-ray study, the only one of these angles they measure is hip flexion. This conform's with what you'd expect if the subject was seated in a couch.

No. They are seated for the eye-heart angle test. You can't expand that to other tests, as you've done here. They don't say or suggest this. If they did, it would have stated so. But this was specific.

You can't make such faulty leaps of logic.

For the umpteenth time, did you have any evidence supporting your assertion that the suit couldn't bend at the knee as witnessed, or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I love that airplane. Here is an attachment photo of Colonel Warren's aircraft that I took at the Travis AFB air show in 2008. I will speak with him tomorrow in regards to the Apollo 14 recovery mission at his home and discuss other Apollo moon missions.

I love most any airplane...but that is a sweet little ride!

And please give the Colonel my regards !

:tu:

Edited by MID

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Please give the Colonel my regards as well, Sky.......(only kidding)

MID !!! You've got a new avatar.....I like it :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Please give the Colonel my regards as well, Sky.......(only kidding)

MID !!! You've got a new avatar.....I like it :yes:

Thanks, bee!

I noted that someone stole my rocket, so I figured I'd dig something meaningful up!

:st

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I love most any airplane...but that is a sweet little ride!

And please give the Colonel my regards !

:tu:

Will do! :tu:

When I was visiting with Colonel Warren, he let me take a newspaper clip in regards to his mission to recover the Apollo 14 astronauts, which I copied and adding as an attachment. That is Colonel Warren on the step of his aircraft.

.

Please give the Colonel my regards as well, Sky.......(only kidding)

I will pass on your regards for you, Bee! I am going to ask him to detail his Apollo 14 recovery mission next week since he left today on his trip to Ithaca, New York for his book signing there. I spoke with him this morning.

post-32948-0-88997100-1337305621_thumb.j

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks, bee!

I noted that someone stole my rocket, so I figured I'd dig something meaningful up!

:st

MID,

Here are the Apollo 14 astronauts in Colonel Warren's aircraft.

Apoll14MQF.jpeg

The crew remained aboard the New Orleans in the mobile quarantine facility until they departed by aircraft for Pago Pago, Samoa, at 17:46 GMT on 11 February. They were then transferred to a second mobile quarantine facility aboard a C-141 aircraft and flown to Ellington Air Force Base, Houston, where they arrived at 09:34 GMT on 12 February, following a refueling stop at Norton Air Force Base, California. The crew entered the lunar receiving laboratory at 11:35 GMT the same day.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, seeing that no apollo-deniers with any interesting points have yet appeared on this new thread.. readers may be interested in the subject of a thread elsewhere. I shall give a brief synopsis..

The British Interplanetary Society, in a move lambasted by quite a few members and other folks (me included!), invited Marcus Allen (editor of a fringe conspiracy-oriented 'science' magazine') to give a talk on 'anomalies' in Apollo photography. Mr Allen is oft qutoed as doubting the Apollo missions based on what he perceived as anomalies. To cut a long story short, the BIS copped a LOT of flack over this, for the way it was initially advertised and for giving Allen some perception of credibility for his supposed photographic analytical abilities... But they bravely went ahead with the event, a few weeks back.

Now sadly there doesn't appear to any video record of the event, but overall, here's what happened...

1. Marcus Allen said that he didn't really doubt that the Apollo mission happened (which isn't exactly in accordance with his public statements, to put it kindly)

2. Marcus Allen accepted at the conclusion that there were in fact no anomalies, after every single one of them was addressed in detail by various experts and the attending audience.

3. Marcus Allen joined the BIS.

I posted a thread topic about this event over at ApolloHoax, and now the the result of the event has been covered in an article in the BIS magazine upon which a forum member over there very kindly posted a scan. Hence this post to spread the news a bit wider!

I quote some of the BIS article here, for your edification.

Many BIS Members and Fellows challenged the need for the Society to hold such a debate, not a few seeing it as pandering to the 'fringe' conspiracy groups supporting the notion that humans never landed on the moon. A waste of time{? -} well, those expecting a fiery confrontation with noted sceptic Marcus Allen were confounded, for it did not turn out that way at all. It turned out that Marcus Allen and the BIS learned more than they expected.

...

The most impressive aspect to this fascinating evening was the dignity of the audience, the respect for personal opinion displayed by those present, and by the extended interchange where Apollo veterans in the audience contributed in a knowledgeable way.

...

When asked by Spaceflight Editor David Baker to define the precise position he takes, Marcus Allen asserted that he does not challenge the fact that Apollo astronauts landed on the moon. This is contradictory to his published position and the view he takes on radio and TV interviews.

...

...the BIS was able to answer each and every aspect of the photography challenged by Mr Allen. In fact, in closing, he thanked his audience and said that he had never had such a comprehensive and convincing set of rebuttals from any group he had ever spoken to. He openly admitted that this one evening had done a great deal to lie to rest several misgivings he had previously held.

...

the BIS learned a lot too that it would perhaps not have understood had the event not taken place. Thatrather than being diehard zealots, many who have misgivings about the Apollo landings are ignorant of the facts simply because they have been unable to access explanations in an understandable form.

...

In the best possible expression of what the BIS stands for, this evening debate helped demolish myths previously believed by Marcus Allen and enabled all those present to receive a first class lesson in a logical and dignified manner. And the best bit of all? Marcus Allen has joined the BIS!

So there you have it folks. Another denier converted to the truth...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the umpteenth time, did you have any evidence supporting your assertion that the suit couldn't bend at the knee as witnessed, or not?

Tell me, why have you posted my quote, since you just ignored it ? ,

As for evidence - well, I'm still waiting for you on that. So far, you've shown me a document that supports my side, so if that's the best you can do, you've failed.

Why would such an amazing spacesuit, fron the most 'well-documented' program in all our history....have no documents whatsoever on this issue? But far worse, we now see there are several documents on this,for the prototype Apollo spacesuits, among others. Even a document written during the Apollo program has little regard for the Apollo spacesuit. I've seen footnotes that are more informative..

The documents written years after Apollo are the biggest killer.They cite PRE-Apollo suits, but not a word on the actual Apollo suit!!

And that says it all, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The documents written years after Apollo are the biggest killer.They cite PRE-Apollo suits, but not a word on the actual Apollo suit!!

How amusing that I saw old videos of the Apollo spacesuit undergoing test that you have claimed, wasn't possible. Question is; you have failed to refute the fact that men have walked and drove on the moon and your attempt to refute the facts on the Apollo spacesuit has failed as well.

I have also posted videos where that have refuted the claims of the moon hoax folks in regards to footprints on the moon and flag-waving in a vacuum. Those test have proven beyond any doubt the moon hoax folks were incorrect.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, bee!

I noted that someone stole my rocket, so I figured I'd dig something meaningful up!

:st

It wasn't stolen, I just put it in my pocket. Either that or I'm happy to see bee... :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TURB SPEAKS TO MAKING FAULTY LEAPS IN LOGIC?

That's somewhat like feeling "sorry for people who believe in illusions" (which he actually said in a recent post... :w00t:)

He defines Turbologic, save one thing:

Faultythinking it is, but logic plays little or no real part in it.

He's demonstrated a recent penchant for introducing comic leaps for us to consider.

Doesn't deserve too much further comment-- :td:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't stolen, I just put it in my pocket. Either that or I'm happy to see bee... :blush:

:clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't stolen, I just put it in my pocket. Either that or I'm happy to see bee... :blush:

Man, how do you get away with that stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, how do you get away with that stuff?

Get away with that stuff? Not sure what you mean Gaden... Did I offend you in some way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, seeing that no apollo-deniers with any interesting points have yet appeared on this new thread.. readers may be interested in the subject of a thread elsewhere. I shall give a brief synopsis..

The British Interplanetary Society, in a move lambasted by quite a few members and other folks (me included!), invited Marcus Allen (editor of a fringe conspiracy-oriented 'science' magazine') to give a talk on 'anomalies' in Apollo photography. Mr Allen is oft qutoed as doubting the Apollo missions based on what he perceived as anomalies. To cut a long story short, the BIS copped a LOT of flack over this, for the way it was initially advertised and for giving Allen some perception of credibility for his supposed photographic analytical abilities... But they bravely went ahead with the event, a few weeks back.

Now sadly there doesn't appear to any video record of the event, but overall, here's what happened...

1. Marcus Allen said that he didn't really doubt that the Apollo mission happened (which isn't exactly in accordance with his public statements, to put it kindly)

2. Marcus Allen accepted at the conclusion that there were in fact no anomalies, after every single one of them was addressed in detail by various experts and the attending audience.

3. Marcus Allen joined the BIS.

I posted a thread topic about this event over at ApolloHoax, and now the the result of the event has been covered in an article in the BIS magazine upon which a forum member over there very kindly posted a scan. Hence this post to spread the news a bit wider!

I quote some of the BIS article here, for your edification.

So there you have it folks. Another denier converted to the truth...

Yes Chrlzs, we've had large segments of the threads devoted to the so-called photographic anomalies in the Apollo lunar surface photos.

People still from time to time speak of anomalous photos.

I approached these discussions from the position of staing that the photos from the Apollo EVAs had no anomalies whatsoever--that they represented perfectly normal photographic representations, just like photos on Earth did.

With the aid of a few photographically astute folks here, This statement was incontrovertibly proven.

I hope many learned about photos in those discussions.

It's amazing how much it took to illustrate relatively simple points.

But lots of interesting stufgf has come from discussions here:

One time, HBs were talking bout the Apollo 11 views of Earth rthat were "faked" from the spacecraft and I made mention of the fact that the pictures were being shot out of the #1 window (far left side window). And that prompted a question like this:

How could they be looking at the Earth out their side windows when they were going to the Moon. Shouldn't their nose have been pointed the way they were going?

this question was asked so as to establish that they couldn't have been filming out the side window of the spacecraft, when they should've been pointing at the Moon, and the Earth should've been behind them and out of sight.

That's where this is worth it.

Of course the answer was "No" as pertained to the spacecraft's nose pointing direction, but, it prompted a discussion of the ecliptic plane, and REFFSMMATs and attitude for PTC, and maneuvering vs. translation. The spacecraft's nose never actually pointed at the Moon, and explaining that a spacecraft could point in any direction in space and never change trajectory seemed fascinating to people, and a great deal of information and learning happened.

For a time, the Hoax wasn't mentioned while we discussed trajectories and things like that.

It was worth the effort!

:tsu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tell me, why have you posted my quote, since you just ignored it ? ,

Why did you just quote my post and ignore it???

As for evidence - well, I'm still waiting for you on that.

Ah. You're waiting for me to supply evidence that supports your assertion! Strange, I was under the impression that someone shouting "Fake! They couldn't bend their knees that much in a pressurised suit!" would actually have their own evidence supporting the claim!

You want me to provide evidence that supports your claim?

Couldn't find any. Sorry.

I did find this interesting photo of a pressurised spacesuit that isn't even designed for EVA use though.

4790915693_29a1e81290_z.jpg

Wow, look at those knees bend! And for TWO HOURS!!! How DID those Apollo suits manage similar bends, if only for a few seconds? I'm struggling with this one, but I'm sure you'll have an answer that explains it fully. Perhaps the Russians are in on the great "Apollo knee bend" scam? Perhaps there is no such thing as a constant volume joint? Perhaps all the engineers at ILC were also a part of the hoax?

I suspect no-one really cares any more Turbs. You were given ample opportunity and encouragement to take the intellectually honest route (either providing evidence, or withdrawing the claim), and chose to do neither. Actions speak louder than words. Hey ho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this interesting picture today...

spaceshuts_b9cd.jpg

Not sure which suit that is, but that knee angle on the left certainly looks a lot more than 90 degrees....

Cz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The British tracked the moon missions from earth using radio. The Russians did too. If the moon landings were faked the Russians would have been providing proof of the faked moon landings within minutes of "one small step...". The Russians would have loved to show the world how capitalism is nothing but a hoax.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The British tracked the moon missions from earth using radio. The Russians did too. If the moon landings were faked the Russians would have been providing proof of the faked moon landings within minutes of "one small step...". The Russians would have loved to show the world how capitalism is nothing but a hoax.

That is EXACTLY what would have happened. The Soviet Union would have been overjoyed at exposing a U.S. moon hoax to the world, but instead, our enemy confirmed that the United States sent men to the moon.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TURB SPEAKS TO MAKING FAULTY LEAPS IN LOGIC?

That's somewhat like feeling "sorry for people who believe in illusions" (which he actually said in a recent post... :w00t:)

He defines Turbologic, save one thing:

Faultythinking it is, but logic plays little or no real part in it.

He's demonstrated a recent penchant for introducing comic leaps for us to consider.

Doesn't deserve too much further comment-- :td:

I was wondering how long it would take before the new moon hoax thread took a dive into the gutter.

Look, MID - if you can't act like a mature adult, and discuss the actual issues, then please respect the forum, and the forum rules, and don't even post on this thread. Fair enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 15

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.