It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 218
377
<< 215  216  217    219  220  221 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


Considering a tower like this was 3km's northwest of the Parkes observatory, could it have provided simulated data, video etc. if the power was set high enough to saturate the Parke's dish regardless of which direction it was pointing? Thereby fooling the operators. Fooling them to believe they were actually receiving Apollo transmissions when in fact it was simulated data and video.

source: www.honeysucklecreek.net...


Ok now let me get this straight, the Parkes Dish is pointed at the moon [AT THE MOON!], but your trying to tell me this little tower is sending simulated signals to the main dish array at the Parkes observatory?

Now my big question is, if the dish isn't pointed at this tower three KM away, then how are the signals getting in that extremely huge dish that is POINTED AT THE MOON????

CISRO

:shk: My god the illogical fallacies that the HB's come up with is amazing.

For being a video expert that you have claimed repeatedly, you seem to comprehend little about LINE OF SIGHT. If the Dish isn't aimed in the signal line of site, then no signal will be directed to the receiver in the center of the dish.

I think someone would have noticed the darn dish being pointed in the wrong direction.

Seriously, think about what you people say!




posted on Oct, 12 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


"The Grandson of the Apollo Moon Hoax! let me just say your turning into the fraud like your predecessors!"

Let me take this time to clarify why your defrauding people of money trust me its really simple.

First and foremost: you have claimed your attempting a Lunar-fly-by. Now how in the heck do you think that you'll ever be allowed to do this? Do you really think that your going to get AUTHORIZATION from your government to build MISSILES?

NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS!

But see you know that so your alleged Lunar trip is nothing more than a media-fallacy to hype your attempts to be paid by the poor souls that are ignorant enough to believe you have any clue what your saying.

I still think Fraud is illegal, isn't it? All your doing is setting the stage for the slight of hand and your taking money under false pretenses. You have proven in your videos that you cannot work basic math skills, yet you perpetrate the fraud knowingly that your going to ride a rocket into space. No decent headed, level minded individual in your government would listen to you about your moonshot EVER! You have no experience or skills for them to take you seriously, YOUR NOT A SCIENTIST! You have no specialized training you have nothing that states your an expert in any field! Oh and being a legend in your own mind doesn't count!

Man Jarrah your a sad case. :shk: Plus being an outright liar isn't helping your fraud case much either.


jra

posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 05:03 AM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


Thank you for posting such a fine example of Jarrah White's inability to do any research or use any common sense or logic.

I had made a post on this subject just last week. If Jarrah had done any research he would have discovered the following:

-NASA didn't give gift rocks to other countries until after the Apollo missions were all done.

-All of the gift rocks weighed between 0.05g to 1.1g and were encased in a clear plastic globe. Unlike the "fake" rock which weighed 98g and not in plastic.

With those simple facts, it's pretty obvious that the "fake" rock was simply misidentified as a Moon rock by some one and it wasn't even from NASA to begin with.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
edit: in regards to JW's new videos above I have another question ...

Considering the Parkes and Honeysuckle stations had a collimation tower nearby for testing purposes...



Considering a tower like this was 3km's northwest of the Parkes observatory, could it have provided simulated data, video etc. if the power was set high enough to saturate the Parke's dish regardless of which direction it was pointing? Thereby fooling the operators. Fooling them to believe they were actually receiving Apollo transmissions when in fact it was simulated data and video.

source: www.honeysucklecreek.net...



Very interesting find,
what you have basically provided is unmitigated proof of the realism and reach of the simulation.
As I stated before, every aspect of Apollo was simulated.

I also found a Collimation Tower next to Goldstone.

wikimapia.org...

Furthermore, Goldstone is practically surrounded by military installations, testing sites, ranges, etc.
As a matter of fact Goldstone is not too far from Groom Lake (Area 51)

One of the areas that people suspected they filmed and faked the Apollo missions.

You can find alot of mock towns, villages, etc.
Also asteroid impact sites, lava flows

Very interesting info PPK55, something you should share with J.W.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
Ok now let me get this straight, the Parkes Dish is pointed at the moon [AT THE MOON!], but your trying to tell me this little tower is sending simulated signals to the main dish array at the Parkes observatory?


Hello, I'm not trying to tell you anything. This was taken from the Honeysuckle site itself
www.honeysucklecreek.net...


Located on a nearby mountain ridge to the west was a tower, known as a Collimation Tower, with special equipment and antennae to simulate a spacecraft, so the main antenna could be pointed at it to run tests on all the transmitting, receiving and processing equipment. Before every pass all the equipment was checked out on the Collimation Tower. If a problem appeared while tracking a spacecraft, the station could quickly check out all its systems by going to the tower and running tests to confirm whether the problem was in the station or in the spacecraft.



Originally posted by theability
Now my big question is, if the dish isn't pointed at this tower three KM away, then how are the signals getting in that extremely huge dish that is POINTED AT THE MOON????


This is why I'm asking the question. I didn't state this was the case, I just asked the question, that if, if the power level was set high enough on the collimation tower, would it be possible to saturate the receiver regardless of where it was pointing?

edit: and if so, could the operators receiving the data be fooled that it was the real thing.

This document on some high power testing got me interested.


tmo.jpl.nasa.gov...


edit: just found this interesting bit from the parkes website


What happened at Goldstone? This has been a matter of conjecture ever since the day of the broadcast. The dish at Goldstone was 64 metres in diameter like the Parkes dish, so it should have had the best signal of all since the LM was in the main beam of the antenna. The fact that Goldstone wasn't scheduled to be receiving the TV pictures in the first place may have contributed to the problems.

Nonetheless, what appears to have happened is that the video settings were all preset to the expected signal levels, and the problems began when they realised the signal was much more modulated than expected. As the transmission began, two things were evident: the picture was upside-down and it had a very high contrast. Apparently someone at Goldstone had forgotten to set the inverting switch on the scan-converter's front panel. Since their picture was going out live, the operators were reluctant to throw the switch until prompted to do so by Houston TV.

Bill Wood, the lead video engineer at Goldstone, explained that the high contrast may have been a result of the picture running into clipping. Clipping results when the video signal is stronger than expected. Normally, TV pictures have a voltage fluctuation of 1 volt peak-to-peak. If the signal is greater than this, then the top part of the signal is chopped off, or clipped. This has the effect of stretching the contrast in the image; the darker areas appear black and the lighter areas appear white. There is very little shading in between. Bill explains:

www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au...


Originally posted by theability
For being a video expert that you have claimed repeatedly


Please show me one example where I've claimed to be an expert. And next time, please remember it's ok to ask a question on a forum, that is how you can get feedback from others.

edit on 13-10-2010 by ppk55 because: edit: added question about whether the operators at the dish could be fooled by the data

edit on 13-10-2010 by ppk55 because: added parkes info about higher than expected signal level



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 05:45 AM
link   
it wouldnt be the first space related scam in Australian history. Quite recently, a scam going by the name of Starwalkers was exposed by the aussie media, see SMH and ACA respectively;

www.smh.com.au...

www.youtube.com...

Having followed this thread on and off, this whole Jarrah White thing reeks of the same stench as Starwalkers. The only difference is that Jonathan Nolan came across somewhat respectable in his media interviews. Jarrah just comes across as a fool. I wouldnt loose sleep over worrying that he will get anywhere near as far as Starwalkers. Jarrah will get shot down in flames where ever his material shows up.

It will be interesting to see if NSW Police prosecute him for fraud for obtaining money by deception. If this 218 pages of commentry reflects his modus operandi, the DPP would have a reasonable case
against him.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 



Located on a nearby mountain ridge to the west was a tower, known as a Collimation Tower, with special equipment and antennae to simulate a spacecraft, so the main antenna could be pointed at it to run tests on all the transmitting, receiving and processing equipment. Before every pass all the equipment was checked out on the Collimation Tower. If a problem appeared while tracking a spacecraft, the station could quickly check out all its systems by going to the tower and running tests to confirm whether the problem was in the station or in the spacecraft.
source

Your answer to your question is in the quote you had on your post. By going to the tower they'd move the dish to point at the tower 3km away, so they would have a KNOWN source to test with. You must move the dish for signal to enter the receiver. The people who made the thing are not going to allow random signals to enter from all aspects of space and cause interference.The thing was shielded from unwanted radio waves and function like Schmidt Cassegrain telescope, in respect to collecting waves in line of sight.


Cassegrain designs are also utilized in satellite telecommunications earth station antennas and radio telescopes, ranging in size from 6.3 metres to 70 metres. The centrally located sub-reflector serves to focus radio frequency signals in a similar fashion to optical telescopes


edit on 13-10-2010 by theability because: mistype

edit on 13-10-2010 by theability because: add ex quote



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by pezza
 


Wow interesting stuff I had never heard of the Starwalker stuff! Thanks for bringing this to the forum!

And it does look like fraud is still illegal in Australia!



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability


And it does look like fraud is still illegal in Australia!



certainly is!

FYI: if one suspects that someone was committing fraud, the Australian Government offers the following

www.scamwatch.gov.au...

the state of NSW offers

www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au...

I believe the most famous scientific fraud case in Australia was the Firepower fuel pill invention. It even conned our Prime Minister John Howard at the time. He ripped people off to the tune of about $200M i recall.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Very interesting find,
what you have basically provided is unmitigated proof of the realism and reach of the simulation.
As I stated before, every aspect of Apollo was simulated.


I suggest you look up the words "unmitigated," "proof" and "simulate." What Ppk has provided is evidence that the radio-telescopes had systems in place to calibrate themselves and perform diagnostics. We know for a fact that every aspect of Apollo was simulated,as fully documented by NASA itself, because simulations are how you acquire knowledge and skill in order to prepare for doing the real thing., which they then went on to do. You unconsciously chose the word "unmitigated" because the subject has turned to Jarrah Whites unmitigated fraud.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
The people who made the thing are not going to allow random signals to enter from all aspects of space and cause interference.The thing was shielded from unwanted radio waves and function


Seems it might not be as shielded as you thought.


Parkes Observatory operations scientist Mr John Sarkissian explains how sources of radio energy such as mobile telephones, electronic equipment and aircraft interfere with the telescope's observations



outreach.atnf.csiro.au...

edit: I suppose this is why they have radio 'quiet zones' around their receivers.

edit on 13-10-2010 by ppk55 because: added radio quiet zones



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


So first off your quote is from a recent entry IE circa 2000+.

Another thing, is that in 1969 there wasn't a mobile phone in the world. So get with the program and start posting something that is worth while and not another illogical fallacy as usual.

The thread is about Apollo era and the Moon Hoax not whatever you deem worth of posting.

Again, you need to read up of Radio dish technology and stop posting trash. Maybe if you actually took the time to research you'd have a little better response from people on ATS.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
your quote is from a recent entry IE circa 2000+. in 1969 there wasn't a mobile phone in the world.


So if they can't shield the dishes from mobile phone signals in 2010, how could they have hoped to shield them against this monster in 1969? Bit bigger than a mobile phone huh.




posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


Again, you have no idea what your are talking about. The dish must be pointed in the direction of the signal or the dish cannot pick up the waves.

The quote you had presented was from a tour in the receiver facility, and they were talking about how certain electronic radio waves from the 21st century technology interferes with the receiver array.

Deny Ignorance is the moto here, not perpetrate it.

If you read the context of the article it is clearly talking of present day technology.




edit on 13-10-2010 by theability because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-10-2010 by theability because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
double post




edit on 13-10-2010 by theability because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
Seems it might not be as shielded as you thought.



Seriously, this 'new' claim of additional apollo denial 'evidence' is just unmitigated GARBAGE. This thread long ago became a mockery of ATS and what it stands for.

For heaven's sake, why do you think the dish is so BIG, and in the shape of a parabolic.. DISH??? It is INCREDIBLY directional. Do you think the people that drive these huge antennas are complete and utter idiots? No, that would be those making ridiculously ignorant claims... Do you think that the operators of equipment like the Parkes dish don't understand things like how to point it accurately, how the signal rises and falls according to beamwidth, how they then have to *track* the signal source? D'ya think they wouldn't have noticed they weren't pointing absolutely directly at the Moon to actually detect the signal? Have you seen the movie "The Dish"? - it's a comedy and is highly 'embelished', but it does give a few clues for someone without any. It even includes some fakery, to fool the US ambassador (that bit was fictional, btw)...

We can see that PPK and his fellow jarrah pushers *pretend* not to understand these basics, but to think that someone with a functioning brain wouldn't be able to follow..? It's simply beyond belief.

This protracted mindless, ignorant shovelling of excrement is despicable. It is trolling of ignorance at its worst and I'm very disappointed that ATS has allowed it to ruin this thread.

Just my 2c...


ADDED:
PS - ppk, I note you're back to using the old "I'm only asking questions" routine. BULLDUNG. If anyone seriously believes ppk is trying to educate himself on the topic, I invite you to check out his thread postings to date. He is simply promotiing his 'next door neighbour' in Sydney, the reprehensible, proven pretender and liar, Jarrah White.
edit on 13-10-2010 by CHRLZ because: my little paws sumtimes go crooked



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55

So if they can't shield the dishes from mobile phone signals in 2010, how could they have hoped to shield them against this monster in 1969? Bit bigger than a mobile phone huh..




I've been to the big dish at Green Bank, West Virgina, and they have a very large quiet area around that. And the reason is simple: interference. It's like watching a TV in the old days of aerials, sometimes you could see the program you were watching, but there would be snow, or other stray video or audio signals interfering with the signal. The point being, you knew what the signal was and what the interference was.

Since these receivers were tracking such a weak signal, any stray electronic trash would interfere. Thus the need for a quiet zone.

As far as using the columnation tower as the source of the signal, it would be kind of odd for such a large dish to be pointed in only one direction while receiving signals from the moon. It would also be odd that those signals didn't fade out when the moon set. The signals from Apollo were highly directional, a degree or so off line would seriously degrade the reception. It was something the technicians had to concentrate on constantly. If they were being fed some sort of omni-directional signal, they would have noticed right away.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777
'Moon rock' given to Holland by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin turns out to be fake.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Also, here is conclusive proof that the mainstream media lies and fabricates stories deliberately.




It seems the Sydney Morning Herald jumped on my attendance, as on October 6 they released an article alleging that I was an antagonistic gate crasher who needed to be removed by security. These allegations are both false and libelous.
www.smh.com.au...


Regardless of what side of the fence you are on with Apollo, there is no denying that the news piece was a hit piece intended to smear J.W.. Goes to show that Buzz's handlers are a little more hardcore, and this is probably a warning shot to JW to watch his back. As a matter of fact, he better watch his back from now. Its one thing to approach Windley or whoever, its another to approach one of the Astronauts


When leading Apollo Hoax researcher/demonstrator, Bart Sibrel confronted Mitchell about the Apollo fakery, he was booted out. www.youtube.com...

Mitchell’s son can be overheard asking the father, “Want to call the CIA and have him waxed?” As Sibrel sped off after also being threatened with being shot, by one of the Michells, no reply is heard.


At any rate, the mere fact they even entertained the piece speaks volumes on how threatened NASA is feeling about the growing movement that believes Apollo is a fake:


NASA did not react to the first e mail, sent 5th September 2010. Today, 10th October 2010, a second e mail with the same question will be sent by two youtube users AwE130 and stalkervision.




Buzz's answer seems to indicate he knows about the petrified wood scandal (how could he not know).
That said, JW needs to practice his interviewing techniques because he jumps the gun way too fast with these type of questions. He seems to be going after the "gotcha" approach but this puts people on the defensive. And people like Buzz who have been interviewed numerous times knows how to handle these types of questions.

My first questions to Buzz would not be about petrified wood




covertoperations.blogspot.com...



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Can I ask you a real question?

What are you going to do about being involved with committing fraud and knowingly promoting a hoax of Jarrah Whites Lunar Fly By, in order to defraud money from people?

Because that is exactly what you are doing is perpetrating fraud.

This whole thread is part of that fraud, to increase traffic and increase potential profiteering from said, increased traffic.

You know that he is never going to so anything with a Space Mission yet he is soliciting monies to be used for such events.

This is just nonsense.

Anyway Foosm your part of a conspiracy to commit fraud, I think that much is apparent now.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by FoosM

To summarize, Apollo could have launched to the moon without anybody onboard.
Exactly what were the astronauts used for?



First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. We propose to accelerate the development of the appropriate lunar space craft. We propose to develop alternate liquid and solid fuel boosters, much larger than any now being developed, until certain which is superior.


The EOR plan was one of several which was rejected, including LOR.


edit on 10/2/2010 by Phage because: (no reason given)



Wait a minute... Phage are you Phil Plait?

I've been accused of being J.W., and now Im reading that you are Phil Plait?
Is that true?



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 215  216  217    219  220  221 >>

log in

join