Evan Burton
-
Posts
4,419 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Evan Burton
-
-
Okay, I'll just correct you then.
The cameras inside the spacecraft were used to record the astronauts, and the instrument panels. They were the Milliken DBM-8 for the astronauts, and the DBM-7 for the instruments. They were used during the Mercury series, and on Gemini IV and V (Refer NASA SP-5099 "Photography Equipment & Techniques - A survey of NASA developments" Table 1, Page 15).
There was also live TV footage from the Apollo-Soyuz Test Programme launch (that was Apollo):
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/th...=15&start=1
You can get the whole thing here, but it is a 650 Mb download!
-
Actually, I don't think it was lens flare; it was taken from within the LM and I think (unsure) that would rule out lens flare.
My guess (and it is only a guess as yet) is that it may be a reflection on the LM window from some of the panel lights, specifically the LM Electrical Power panel (panel 14?). Probably the Descent Power Battery Status lights.
I'll have to look at the angles involved and see if the reflection would match.
-
I think it would be a good idea. I'll bring it to the attention of Andy and John for their consideration.
-
Evan,
Do I at least get points for efficiency? After all, with one simple caveat I'm attacking an entire government agency !
Yes indeed, you do.
Not interested in coming over to the 'dark side', are you? We can always use a man of your talents!
-
Could you summarise the claims, and your response?
-
I've split this off from the main Proton 4 thread as it is going to be an entirely separate discussion.
-
Not being familiar with the way US elections are held....
So if someone does not get their party nomination, can they still run for President?
-
I thought the escape chute video was interesting evidence, that for some strange reason not many people seem to know about ... I wonder if this evidence has anything to do with the fact that NO CAMERAS WERE EVER MOUNTED INSIDE THE APOLLO CRAFTS TO ALLOW ANYONE TO SEE THE ASTRONAUTS DURING LIFTOFF ??
Think about how strange that is .... Cameras were inside the cabins in all of the Mercury and Gemini missions , yet when NASA decided to make that GIANT LEAP FOR ALL MANKIND , NO CAMERAS were to be found anywhere to show the TV audience and mission control what the astronauts looked like being launched in the most powerful rocket to date , the SATURN V ! ....MANKINDS FIRST TRIP TO AN ALIEN WORLD IN THE MOST POWERFUL ROCKET EVER DESIGNED AND NASA HAS NO RECORD OF THE ASTRONUTS INSIDE THE CABIN DURING LAUNCH ! .. And of course the "official explanation " for this little oversight would be that there was no room inside the cabin for that little camera .... NASA's alleged Moon trips get fishier all the time .
Duane,
Go through your statement above and check your facts, okay? Make sure you are absolutely sure of everything you have written there - everything. Make sure you are not just repeating something you heard, but have looked things up yourself and are confident that EVERYTHING you have said there is 100% correct.
Let us know when you have done that, okay? When you have checked your work and are prepared to stand by it 100%.
Just a reminder about this. Let me know when you are happy to stand behind all your above claims.
-
Burton has asked questions I have no way of answering even if I had the interest in researching them , which I don't ... So the recent ganging up against me is quite entertaining ... They remind me of the bullies in the schoolyard with their mob mentality antics of pretending to debunk all hoax evidence .
No, I was trying to get you to independently check things that other people have told you, to confirm for yourself the veracity of their statements. If you simply accept and repeat a claim because it appeals to you and without checking the claim, what does that say about your reliability?
-
When you have a chance, could you please answer these questions?
- How is the month "missing" figure calculated? Is that when the follow-up story appeared in the newspaper?
- If so, when did the newspaper get the information?
- Who supplied the information to the newspaper and when did they (the suppliers) get the information?
- What date was the request made to NORAD (or other agency supplying the data) and when did NORAD supply the information? By what means (mail, teletype, phone, etc)?
I don't know the answers to those questions but I will forward your questions to Jarrah to see if he might .
No, I asked YOU for the answers. You might get your information FROM Jarrah, but you should determine for yourself if his answers are accurate or not by checking the facts, and then posting YOUR answer.
Stop being Jarrah's proxy.
-
I thought the escape chute video was interesting evidence, that for some strange reason not many people seem to know about ... I wonder if this evidence has anything to do with the fact that NO CAMERAS WERE EVER MOUNTED INSIDE THE APOLLO CRAFTS TO ALLOW ANYONE TO SEE THE ASTRONAUTS DURING LIFTOFF ??
Think about how strange that is .... Cameras were inside the cabins in all of the Mercury and Gemini missions , yet when NASA decided to make that GIANT LEAP FOR ALL MANKIND , NO CAMERAS were to be found anywhere to show the TV audience and mission control what the astronauts looked like being launched in the most powerful rocket to date , the SATURN V ! ....MANKINDS FIRST TRIP TO AN ALIEN WORLD IN THE MOST POWERFUL ROCKET EVER DESIGNED AND NASA HAS NO RECORD OF THE ASTRONUTS INSIDE THE CABIN DURING LAUNCH ! .. And of course the "official explanation " for this little oversight would be that there was no room inside the cabin for that little camera .... NASA's alleged Moon trips get fishier all the time .
Duane,
Go through your statement above and check your facts, okay? Make sure you are absolutely sure of everything you have written there - everything. Make sure you are not just repeating something you heard, but have looked things up yourself and are confident that EVERYTHING you have said there is 100% correct.
Let us know when you have done that, okay? When you have checked your work and are prepared to stand by it 100%.
-
It's a fair point: you claim there is a pro-Apollo bias here (I think you said greater numbers or something similar), so why not invite Jarrah to become a member here? Let him speak for himself, rather than you passing on messages for him?
I asked him about joining this forum and he told me that he doesn't have the time to post here ... He much prefers researching Apollo and spending his time making YouTube videos which expose the Apollo hoax, than to argue with those he considers to be "propagandists " .
So people who hold a similar viewpoint to yourself can't find the time to join here and help you fight the good fight? Disappointing... yet they still have time to read your messages and reply to them (which you then considerately post here).
Well, you can't complain about any perceived imbalance here then, if your own supporters / like-minded people cannot come here and help defend your views.
-
Duane,
When you have a chance, could you please answer these questions?
- How is the month "missing" figure calculated? Is that when the follow-up story appeared in the newspaper?
- If so, when did the newspaper get the information?
- Who supplied the information to the newspaper and when did they (the suppliers) get the information?
- What date was the request made to NORAD (or other agency supplying the data) and when did NORAD supply the information? By what means (mail, teletype, phone, etc)?
-
Only eye witness accounts, newspaper stories, NORAD tracking information and the Keplerian elements and orbital parameters for Proton 4.
Eye witness accounts stated that it was a UFO .... Newspaper stories said it was a UFO .... NORAD apparently didn't know what it was , because it took them ONE MONTH to come up with a COVER STORY .
Sorry , but it re-entered Earth's atmosphere from LEO on the same day Apollo 11 did the same .... Coincidence ? ... Maybe , but I doubt it .
Now YOU are making assumptions. Can you answer the questions I asked before?
- How is the month "missing" figure calculated? Is that when the follow-up story appeared in the newspaper?
- If so, when did the newspaper get the information?
- Who supplied the information to the newspaper and when did they (the suppliers) get the information?
- What date was the request made to NORAD and when did NORAD supply the information? By what means (mail, teletype, phone, etc)
-
It's a fair point: you claim there is a pro-Apollo bias here (I think you said greater numbers or something similar), so why not invite Jarrah to become a member here? Let him speak for himself, rather than you passing on messages for him?
It would help redress the imbalance that you perceive.
-
That's preposterous. Soviet secrecy doesn't alter one's ability to track a spacecraft: if the Proton 4 had been so well tracked over a period of 250 days, why did its reentry go unidentified? Need I remind you that your group claims that satellites can be tracked from launch to reentry?
What possibly would NORAD have to gain from withholding such information?
Jarrah is making assumptions here. There is nothing to say the de-orbit was NOT tracked... only that the information was not immediately released.
NORAD might do this (I don't know if they did; this is merely a hypothesis) because it indicates capability. It would give the Soviets (and others) an idea about how good the tracking system is, how fast they can process the information, etc. This type of information would be used militarily (Can I launch something and not have it detected? How soon can they determine something is in orbit, and with what degree of accuracy? Do they calculate de-orbit based on orbital data or can they track the object with radar? How does that relate to being able to track the launch, transit, and re-entry of something like an ICBM?).
In addition, how is the month "missing" figure calculated? Is that when the follow-up story appeared in the newspaper? If so, when did the newspaper get the information? Who supplied it and when did they get the information? What date was the request made to NORAD and when did NORAD supply the information?
The request may have been made via ordinary mail, taking some time to reach NORAD and be replied to. There was certainly teletype at some stations with links to NASA and the various tracking networks, but there is nothing to say that the request for information was made over these networks.
When these questions are answered, then we'd have a clearer picture. With respect to the "month", it's analogous to putting a DVD player in for repair. I put it in on the Monday. The following Monday I get a call saying it is ready to be picked up. Turns out the widget in the weeble circuit failed and needed to be replaced.
That repair took a week. I meet a repairman who says that is bull, and that he can do such a repair in a few hours.
Who is right? Does the repair take a week or a few hours?
Both can be right. The player gets left on the Monday. It's Tuesday afternoon before the guy looks at it. It takes an hour to determine that the widget is broken. He orders a new widget. The widget gets delivered Thursday. It's not until Friday that the repair is completed... taking only a couple of hours work. The admin staff don't ring me until the Monday. The repair only took a couple of hours but to me the process took a week.
See what I mean?
-
I'm thinking that part of the reason for the delay may have been Soviet secrecy regarding launches / orbital data, and the reluctance of NORAD to release / confirm orbital data. At that time, such information may have been considered classified for an initial period (i.e. "embargoed").
-
I'd say it's unlikely. Similar claims have been made in the past by other people, yet no-one has been able to produce anything resembling proof.
-
I really dislike youtube unless I have to use it.
What the gist of his claim, and your rebuttal?
-
Or the $1,000,000 that Phil Plait offered for anyone who shows video of astronauts making great jumps during lunar EVA, you know, the $1,000,000 that Plait refused to pay when greenmagoos showed such footage.
Could you give a link to where that was made? I'd never heard of this before. Thanks.
-
Rene is selling a mathematical "proof" on his website that the accepted value of Pi isn't what it's claimed to be.
"12 years ago Dan W. Gaddy did just that and in doing so, found that PI does not equal 3.1415926 but instead it equals 3.146264 . The 12 page pamphlet ($6.00) shows Gaddy's method."
No doubt this will come as something as a surprise to the millions of mathematicians and physicists who've been using the accepted value of pi for centuries.
I'm guessing that he has squared the circle. I'm not paying $6 to find out, though.
-
Okay, come-on: I allow both parties to give and take the insults because both parties do it... but it's becoming tiresome.
Address facts, discuss opinions, etc, without name calling please.
-
Thanks for clearing that up, Duane; I just wanted to make sure I understood exactly what you were saying.
Speaking of correcting matters, you should tell that Jarrah person he has got things backward in that silly moonfaker clip.
He says that Jay Windley is a "self-proclaimed aerospace engineer". This is actually wrong, since Jay actually holds aerospace engineering qualifications and works in aerospace engineering. I think what Jarrah (I wanna be 007) White meant to say was Ralph Rene is a self-proclaimed... something, since he is self-taught in the 'academic' matters such as physics, engineering, etc. Rene does not hold any academic qualifications.
References:
-
Amazing work, Dave.
This is astounding!
Cameras in spacecraft
in The Apollo Moon Landings
Posted
You just don't seem to be getting it, Duane. I tried to give you clues, to ask you to check your work 100%... but you decided not to.
You've even proved yourself wrong with your statement above.
Let me point it out in detail so that you can understand where you have gone wrong.
1. You said there were cameras in all the Mercury missions. Correct - though not all the film was recovered. Obviously Grissiom's flight film was lost when the capsule sank, and Cooper's was damaged by exposure to seawater.
2. You said there were cameras in all the Gemini missions. Incorrect - only Gemini II (unmanned), Gemini IV, and Gemini V had cameras mounted to film the astronauts. The other missions did not have film of the astronauts from liftoff; there was only film taken by the astronauts themselves once in orbit.
3. You said no cameras inside Apollo CMs during liftoff. Incorrect - There was a LIVE broadcast for the ASTP mission. ASTP stands for APOLLO Soyuz Test Program. It utilised an APOLLO Command Module.
You have to check your claims for accuracy, Duane, because you have a very poor track record in this respect so far. What you MEANT does not come into it; what matters is what you SAID - repeatedly. If that is NOT important, then by the same standards your Apollo 17 claim ("OUT HERE IN THE SUN") is not important.