Everytime I tune into one of the "We never went to the moon!" debates, I laugh my socks off. However, no matter how many times it has been proven that we did indeed go there, and land and walk about, a hundred new 'doubters' are somehow spewed out of the more stagnant depths of the gene pool. Time to speak up I guess. My proof is astoundingly simple. Anyone who understands 'basic radio' can understand it too. What amazes me is that virtually no one bothers to mention it anymore.

During the launch phases and the landing phases, literally thousands of HAM radio operators all over the world not only received, but copied transmissions from the Eagle and Trinity Base. Not only were high gain directional arrays pinpointing the source of the signals as the moon, they had also signal-tracked the spacecraft all the way from earth, tracking it accurately and with the interest and zeal typical of the radio amateurs across the globe. Further, no secondary signal sources were detected during that entire decade of moon landings - therefore no signal repeating ('bouncing' from earth to moon and back) could have been taking place. The reason that secondary, earth-originated sources were even monitored for is that the amateurs closely listed to all NASA transmissions as part of the enjoyment and the requirements of the hobby. Add these several thousand amateurs, who I might add were absolutely rapt over such an historic event, to the several thousand professional scientific research facilities and University Astronomy departments who were also monitoring these wonderful events, and you have what's known as 'reality'.

Additionally, if you think that the above persons could be so easily fooled, just go and try to pass an Advanced Class Radio Operator license test - or better yet grab a PHD in Astrophysics or Radio Astronomy.

I guess that the only people that might want to butt up against this little piece of golden proof are those bean-brains that couldn't grasp a weeny little clue as to how a simple radio works if their reputations depended upon it (er...Doh!).

What astounds me the most is that there appears to be one hell of a lot of these bean-brains, and it appears that no matter what sort of evidence you slap them in the kisser with, they will cling to such idiotic assumptions as if their very lives (or egos) - (or bank accounts) - really DID depend on it.

Well, lets say that if there are so many of these fools floating around, and there is nothing you can do or say to convince them all of the simple truth, then why shouldn't anyone with the time and desire write a book of 'Space Conspiracies' and charge them all each a few dollars for a copy and get rich? Is there anything inherently wrong with making a fortune off the stupidity of a hysterical mass of absurd, little-minded, genetically deficient morons? Apparently, this has indeed been done - successfully too!

I have seriously thought about it, - I could use a million bucks for sure - but the reason I have not - so far - is that to do so would merely perpetuate all this embarrassingly stupid tripe and, as well, I don't want all the 'Flying Saucer People' (you know - the ones who live under the giant face on Mars) to know how blatantly stupid some of our fellow humans can be.

Determining that human life is too dumb to be of any real worth, the Aliens might just wipe us out like so many bothersome fungi spores and raid the earth for something inherently more valuable - like an essentially perfect place to live that also has a lot of valuable water and a wealth of natural resources. OR - they might figure that by removing whatever miniscule amount of useful gray matter we have they could turn us into slaves to carve more ugly faces on airless planets to tease all those other dumb races with. Who can say? This is my main worry...

I bet the old geezer who started all of this 'Fake Moon Mission Stuff' is kicking back on his yacht in the Bahamas and giggling up a storm while sipping pina colodas and frolicking with a couple of island cuties as his publication royalties exponentially multiply. I mean - this guy, shameless as he is - has no worries about anything for the rest of his life! Can you really blame him?

And for all those fans of mine out there - Don't forget to pick up my latest book "The Pope is a Zombie", wherein I describe in minute detail how colonies of collectively intelligent flatworms took over Pope John Paul's body several years ago and, though still somewhat clumsy at it (as can be noticed if you look at him), are about to declare war on Rhodesia. I then launch into detailed speculation on the reasons why they even bother..

All The Very Best! (yawn)
S

These flatworms aren't too up on current events. Rhodesia is now Zimbabwe - has been since 1979...

CJSF

Christopher - Duh.. Exactly my point - Even collectively, them flatworms ain't that smart... er.. Maybe I should have said 'Swaziland'.. ??

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: saj on 2001-10-26 08:04 ]</font>

Karl..

Thanks for pointing that out Karl. I didn't bother to read your post prior to my post because of its rather vague title...

As a Ham in the USA at the time, I remember the phrenetic gabble that went on for weeks during each mission on every amateur band - many seeking transmission data and antenna design info.. Living in China now for many years, I can tell you that there are a hell of a lot more logs than you seem able to copy/verify - and if one can allow oneself to be less US-Centric, in that there really are (and were then) other peole besides Americans living on planet earth at the time, one might imagine that worldwide there may have been many more than that - the equipment not being particularly hard to obtain.. maybe upwards of 20,000 here in the PRC alone, let alone Europe and the rest of the world. However, since I cannot copy them and forward to that thread, let's all agree that at least your summary seems to enhance the point.. K?

(Sheesh..)

Sheesh?

I'm not going to agree that Karl's summary "enhances" your point. It does what Karl says it does, detracts from your point. Unless you have evidence and are willing to provide it, I'd stick with Karl's assessment. Perhaps you have access to a published article that makes the same claim?

That does not mean that Karl (nor I) are moonhoaxers. I think just the opposite, that Karl's evidence was put forth to counter moonhoaxers.

wow - when something intended to be mostly humorous and light-hearted elicits such rather pedantic critique, it makes me wonder that maybe the subject is taken far more seriously than it deserves. Did I step on a toe or tickle a sensitive nerve?

The fact remains, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, that many, many amateur radio operators and general shortwave radio listeners throughout the big wide world copied those signals. You might try to understand that many of them, at this point in history, may be dead or may have adopted another hobby or speak an entirely different language. Heaps never kept any logs at all. I know I don't have any from then from my radio - lots of SWL's don't bother..

Even so, please feel free to 'correct' my little diatribe to indicate 'several' or 'a few' or 'only those that Karl knows about' rather than 'thousands', and then comtemplate how equally silly that might sound... But, if you insist... lol

So, I'll leave you all to it.. Have fun! (?)73's and so forth..

First, Bill Kaysing-- credited in general for starting this whole nonsense-- is practically penniless, and lives in a trailer in California. He has no books or movies that have made him money from this garbage, so at least there is that justice.

Second, even if he were rich, I can blame him. Think about this: I have a history with NASA (though indirectly). I am a published astronomer, with a few papers as first author, and a dozen more as second or more author. I worked with Hubble for ten years.

If I were to approach, say, Fox TV or the Weekly World News and say that I believe NASA faked the Moon missions, how much do you think I could ask as a lump sum? A million? Well, maybe not now, but before the terrorist attacks this would have been big news, for a short time at least. I could have made a fortune, and it would be me in the Bahamas.

The fact that I have not done this speaks for itself.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

"I could have made a million [by selling out...]" Exactly! And that's one reason my adrenalin starts flowing when some barstid does sell out--like Hoagland, like Van Flandern--and abuse the scientific knowledge they have gained. Now I don't think Hoagie was ever a scientist--wasn't he a NASA publicist or something?--but for Van Flandern, who was a scientist, to be claiming to see all sorts of Martian "cities" and such sensationalist garbage just lights my wick.

Back off man - We're Scientists!

hehehe [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img] I understand your post and it made me laugh too. Don't let all these puppies ruin your day. I think there is certainly enough anecdotal evidence to qualify that thousands really did tune into the missions. Hell, even our local TV Weatherman had his dish pointed up and it was a big deal on the local station in our little upstate town. In memory there was a lot more than just us.

Trouble is that most junior scientists these days refuse to believe that the 60s and 70s ever really existed! Unless they have a printout on it. hehehe

As for the millionair, were you talking about that British dude who made a fortune over there on his fake moon mission book? He really did make a bundle and also a movie.. I don't know who that other dude is.

Why would thousands have had to personally own the correct systems, dishes or other equipment? Many heard it on 'other' peoples radio gear! We had more than thirty just in our little neighborhood drop by and listen -totally fascinated. We were just one IN THOUSANDS of amateur radio listening posts all over the world!

A well-respected friend of mine - an amateur extra-class operator and International Emergency Radio volunteer in Sydney, Australia actually re-broadcast all of his receptions on 11 meters for all the CB buffs (legal for him in Oz at the time)..

Let's look at an example of where your type of logic can lead:

THe Apollo Missions:
Most humans who were alive and conscious during the Apollo Missions remember all the broadcasts, newspaper articles, interviews, commentary, photos, video clips, etc.

World War I
Any alive from that period also saw many newsreels, articles, photos, interviews, commentary, movies, about THAT little episode in history - yet, according to YOUR formula, it could remain disproved today! This is the same mentality that refuses to believe that the holocaust ever took place.

It IS humorous that people don't want to believe these things and it is SILLY to take such pains to prove to someone that they are hopelessly gullable and maybe even pathetically stupid.

What is even funnier is that you, who appears to be a somewhat rational, informed person, would take this to task so seriously! I really mean it - you are cracking me up!

An equally inane endeavor for you to follow up on would be to try and document and therefore 'proove' that the WTC bombing really happened, to some jerk thirty years from now that is saying the videos were all faked and the buildings were really miniatures in a hollywood studio and all the people in NYC were brainwashed.

I can predict your reaction: You would be quite angry that such a very real tragedy was being made such a mockery of, or you would laugh at the bozo and recommend he see a shrink..

Exactly how I feel about it - and indicated the same in my initial post - I have adopted the latter stand in this case.

Lending such credence to these twits as to go and cite log books for them as 'proof' ... Good Grief son..

(and Karl - don't take any of this personally - I love a good debate..)

Saj, I agree with you, but your statement:

"During the launch phases and the landing phases, literally thousands of HAM radio operators all over the world not
only received, but copied transmissions from the Eagle and Trinity Base."

Needs a bit of editing. Perhaps you were referring to "Tranquility Base"

Folks

Thanks for the info.

I’m the President of the Canberra Skeptics, and one of the jobs we do is try to educate people about skeptical ways of thinking, by handing out pamphlets on various topics. One of our pamphlets is about the Moon Landings, and how we know they weren’t faked. It’s always good to be able to update them with something we didn’t know before, like the ham radio people tracking the Apollo missions.

And just to confirm that you’re saying what I think you’re saying, does this mean the hams were able to listen in on conversations between Houston and the space craft in real time? Out of interest, do people do this with Space Shuttle missions these days?

Matthew Ota -

Oops - I certainly apologize - It was indeed Tranquility Base, not 'Trinity' (where'd I get that from?? lol)..

Thanks..

Peter B -

Yes, you are correct. These days however, the transmissions are largely encrypted and in digital format with unique, complex modulation characteristics. The Shuttle comms transmissions are also quite weak relatively speaking - relying more on the sensitive receiving dishes and satellite relay systems in place to augmnet their transmissions. Even so, these can still be copied and logged, and I understand that many telemetry signals can be decoded now as well (heart rate, body temp, internal atmosphere, etc.), though it takes a dedicated effort and some rather sophisticated gear.

Also, often both Shuttle and Space Station crew members will broadcast on the amateur bands for enjoyment and to interact with the vast number of Hams and SWL's who may not be able to indulge in a hobby that is a growing, but complex, expensive hobby - using some pretty sophisticated computer software as well. When scheduled, these can be easily received by any of a plethora of good shortwave receivers tuned to the 10, 20, 40, 80 and even the 160 meter (longwave) bands - and it's fun too!

For further, more detailed info in your neck o' the woods', there is a fellow in Sydney named Sam Voron, who I think still runs a Ham Club there. His number is in the book - just tell him 'Steve The Yank' said "Hi Hi"..

Also, the NASA Home Page has links to the exact transmission times, frequencies and mod-demod data for all except the military-purposed missions.

True, but I wish it wasn't. I find encription difficult to justify. No doubt it will encourage many to feel that NASA are indeed covering something up.

The process will also make it more difficult to debate transmissions such as the STS video; Sts 75 stills

The images seem to show an object passing behind the tether. I have heard a claim that this is actually an optical illusion from the camera (which I am inclined to believe purely on balance of probabilities). Another arguement sited is that if it were a UFO it would be 1 mile long and visible from Earth. Whilst that may be true there are two logical faults with that argument;

1.) The tether was over 20 miles long and could not be seen from Earth.

2.) If it was a UFO then given this would be unknown advanced technology we have no way of knowing if the vehicle would allow itself to be seen from below.

Whilst I accept the arguements that the object was a camera artifact I feel we are better for being able to examine the evidence for ourselves rather than have the data encrypted and kept away from the public gaze (sanitised).

The same thing goes for all images from Mars. They are now encrypted and sent to a private company (Malin Space Science Systems) where the company owner maintains full control. Worse than that people are now claiming that when the images are eventually released they show signs of tampering (sound familar? Tampered image claims have been one reason why the moon hoax theory has been as popular as it has).

Personally I suspect that "some" images from both the Moon and Mars have been tampered by "some" individuals. Rather than removing clear signs of artificiality I believe that object which mearly suggest artificial may have been altered to look less artificial for purely political reasons.

The following URL image from Malin Space Sciences Website;
In you face image

This image is an example of the attitude towards the controversial "face" image. It would seem that Malin wants to discredit claims that this may be an artificial structure. Well, from the images we have seen it would appear natural, but the argument would be a lot stronger if;

1. The images received were released at the first opportunity, and completely free from any form of alteration (a high pass filter hardly improves image quality).

2. NASA presented a more open policy, removed image encryption, and handled the images themselves rather than passing them on to private individuals (and therefore not as legally accountable).

I suppose no matter what NASA do to improve their credibility with the general public their efforts will constantly be undermined by lies/deceptions routinely given out by the political establishment (how many "official" versions of the Roswell crash have there been ? I can recall at least 4).

Jeff

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Phobos on 2001-10-29 03:24 ]</font>

I agree with your statement about tampering with the photos. Consider though (as they claim) that these images must be 'cleaned up' - I think to have such things as noise and other unwanted artifacts from the transmissions require some filtering.

Also, there is the ever present IP situation (Intellectual Property) and issues of publication rights. In fact, the Pentagon is actually 'leasing' satellite imaging time from the private owners of the bird over Afganistan (I forget it's name/designation) for several weeks and , in fact, they had to pay millions to reserve the imaging reception time through the next three months. Of course, this is for an obviously sensitive military intelligence issue, but even NASA will retain IP rights so that it can later sell various STS and other mission images to offset costs.

Personally I have a problem with publicly funded entities holding IP rights - thereby restricting citizens free access to such however, this is 'modern government' as we are told - and NASA certainly has had its budget problems of late.

Futher adding to NASA's 'public image problems' is that it must patronize the military and the US government - certainly its largest clients and inherently secretive.

Larger contributors are the mega-corporations, which insist in their research funding grants that certain elements of their proprietary technology not be revealed (whatever that might entail). Several past (and very recently past) NASA administrators have made statements to the effect that their hands are tied in these instances, but I think they do try to remain as open as possible when allowed.

If, as a 'died in the wool skeptic', you are attempting to enhance your arguments in the education of all those UFO nuts out there, you can raise some fairly basic common-sense points.

Personally I think that the question of UFOs will remain open. We just don't know and no one has ever really been able to produce any real evidence for such. Ever.

Evidence in this case (to a skeptic) must produce - for international public scrutiny - some physical piece of an extraterrestrial technology that can be PROVEN to be extraterrestrial or the conveyance of intelligent information either through long range communications or other scientifically verifiable means.

However, if one wanted to apply the increasingly popular 'Occam's Razor' principle - If there were alien beings buzzing our missions and our night skies, they would probably have announced themselves to us by now. It's OK to 'believe' that such creatures might want to hide from us for this reason or that, but it is improbable. Occam might ask: "Why would they/should they?"

As for the 'Area 51' event, for example, there are an equal number of other possibilities as to what the military were doing - even though it is generally excepted that they bungled whatever it was. Many think, rather than an alien spacecraft, that they were trying something amazingly stupid and embarrasing, and at first tried to cover it up with something dumb, then nixed that explanation as being even dumber and then stopped talking (or making any sense) altogther. One of the most recent stories is that the 'alien bodies' they 'discovered' were test monkeys in environment suits - the suits melting into their skin in the crash of a plane or balloon and thus making them appear 'alien'. Who knows? It makes some sense though.

Many now speculate that we silly human bingles try to 'anthropomorphasize' all other living creatures - that is we give dogs and cats human sounding names and we tend to think aliens will be so involved with our societies and our cultures and so 'interested' in us that they will want to tease and torture us and play hide and seek and swap out their bodies for ours and whisk us away in the dead of night to perform strange surgery, etc. - however - there is an even greater probability that if there ARE alien life forms poppng in here now and then, they:

*Would just as likely be very very alien, in that they may not even see us, hear us, or even think that we are much more than an indigenous form of fungus that should be disregarded as anything relevant. (think about THAT for a minute.. geez..)

*Would most probably NOT be using any sort of flying machines, but rather, having realized that shooting around in space in a 'rocket ship' or 'saucer with extra-light warp-inducing ion-displacement drives' might be good for a giggle, but it is needlessly expensive and terribly time consuming and inefficient. To have progressed to the point of being able to navigate through space over incredible distances, they would have found 'machine travel' to be similar to our use of the horse and buggy - way too slow and potentially dangerous. Obviously they would bend time/space and instantly be sipping a pina colada in Key West eh?

For that matter, we might not be much more than an enzyme in a petri dish for any form of intelligence that is presently capable of flitting about the universe willy-nilly.

My point here is that, if you want to freak a UFO freak out - get him/het to think about some of the above. I think most of the Flying Saucer Aliens would say: "Space and time? What's that?"