Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Need confirmation for this.

A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts
Andrew Chaikin - 1998

Near the terminator, just emerging from night, he could barely make out the highland region called Fra Mauro, where he and Lovell were to land. And if it was a strange and alien place, then it had become only too familiar to Haise. ...
More editions

What this means is that Apollo 13 would have landed... at night!?



If so, NASA gots some explaining to do.

What this means is that Apollo 13 would have landed... at night!?

No, it would have landed in early morning, like all the other Apollo missions.

Originally posted by DJW001

What this means is that Apollo 13 would have landed... at night!?

No, it would have landed in early morning, like all the other Apollo missions.

Oh yeah? What date was Apollo 13 supposed to land? And what would be the inclination of the Sun?

reply to post by FoosM

Oh yeah? What date was Apollo 13 supposed to land? And what would be the inclination of the Sun?

Excuse me, it's your "anomaly." Why should I keep doing your research for you?

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Oh yeah? What date was Apollo 13 supposed to land? And what would be the inclination of the Sun?

Excuse me, it's your "anomaly." Why should I keep doing your research for you?

Excuse me, but you gave an answer so give a complete one, not a guess.

reply to post by FoosM

Excuse me, but you gave an answer so give a complete one, not a guess.

It's not a guess, all of the lunar landings were scheduled for early morning. (Remember the "heat debate?") I also looked it up, just to be sure. Now it's your turn to prove me wrong. Anyone reading this can see that you are once again shifting the responsibility for doing the research to prove your point onto someone else. So... which of Jarrah's videos refutes the debunking of his "waving flag" argument? Vid or it didn't happen.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Excuse me, but you gave an answer so give a complete one, not a guess.

It's not a guess, all of the lunar landings were scheduled for early morning. (Remember the "heat debate?") I also looked it up, just to be sure.

Well if you looked it up and you found the answers, why are you playing games. Show us when the the craft was supposed to have landed. And how it contradicts that passage I just quoted.

reply to post by FoosM


Apollo 13 was to land on 15 April 1970 at 9:55 PM EST. Now go to a Moon phase calculator and input the relevant data. Fra Mauro looks to be in day light to me.

reply to post by FoosM

just emerging from night,

I don't see how you get landing at night from that Foosm..

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

Anyone reading this can see that you are once again shifting the responsibility for doing the research to prove your point onto someone else.

It's a common conspiracy-supporter tactic to say "prove me wrong", and a well known logical fallacy to shift the burden of proof - Argument from Ignorance

Originally posted by jra
reply to post by FoosM

 

Apollo 13 was to land on 15 April 1970 at 9:55 PM EST. Now go to a Moon phase calculator and input the relevant data. Fra Mauro looks to be in day light to me.

Well thats better, so why then did Andrew Chaikin state in his book:

"Near the terminator, just emerging from night, he could barely make out the highland region called Fra Mauro,"


The terminator is the line that separates the lit side and the dark side of the Moon. And the observation that Chaiken talks about occurred April 15, 12:44. We have a discrepancy here. Because this is eyewitness testimony written for a non-fiction book. And lets not forget it takes 27 earth days = 1 moon day. So the moon could not have rotated that much within those hours.

Who is Andrew Chaiken?

Andrew Chaikin (born June 24, 1956) is an American author, speaker and space journalist. He currently lives in Vermont.
He is the author of A Man on the Moon, a detailed description of the Apollo missions to the moon. This book formed the basis of the From the Earth to the Moon 12-part TV miniseries.
From 1999 to 2001, Chaikin served as executive editor for space and science at Space.com.
His work A Man on the Moon: One Giant Leap states that he grew up in Great Neck, NY, and, while studying geology at Brown University, worked at the NASA/Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory on the Viking project.

What is going on here?






en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by FoosM
And the observation that Chaiken talks about occurred April 15, 12:44.

Is that in PST, EST, GMT, UTC? What? You need a bit more information before claiming there is a discrepancy.

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by FoosM
And the observation that Chaiken talks about occurred April 15, 12:44.

Is that in PST, EST, GMT, UTC? What? You need a bit more information before claiming there is a discrepancy.

How about this:

03 days 11 hours 31 minutes 11 seconds

LMP I can just barely, on the left corner of the Moon
now, make out the foothills of Fra Mauro forma-
tion. We never did get to see it when we were
in close, there.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by FoosM

 

just emerging from night,

I don't see how you get landing at night from that Foosm..

Well thats why I was asking for confirmation.
Remember, in order to land the LM they needed enough light to see.
I would question the logic of landing near the terminator, at least described in the book.

Originally posted by jra
reply to post by FoosM

 

Apollo 13 was to land on 15 April 1970 at 9:55 PM EST. Now go to a Moon phase calculator and input the relevant data. Fra Mauro looks to be in day light to me.

Using Stellarium I can see that the Sun just breaking the surface with an altitude of 9 degrees.
Now of course you have high hills in the way. So what kind of lighting would Apollo 13 have to land with?
I assume long black shadows obscuring the ground.

Originally posted by FoosM

Using Stellarium I can see that the Sun just breaking the surface with an altitude of 9 degrees.
Now of course you have high hills in the way. So what kind of lighting would Apollo 13 have to land with?
I assume long black shadows obscuring the ground.

edit on 30-6-2011 by FoosM because: (no reason given)

What do you get for the sun's altitude at 09:18 UTC on February 5th, 1971?

reply to post by backinblack


For the record, I gave you a star for this. Foosm: if I said: "Look! There's a bear who just emerged from his cave!"
Where is the bear?

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM

Using Stellarium I can see that the Sun just breaking the surface with an altitude of 9 degrees.
Now of course you have high hills in the way. So what kind of lighting would Apollo 13 have to land with?
I assume long black shadows obscuring the ground.

edit on 30-6-2011 by FoosM because: (no reason given)

What do you get for the sun's altitude at 09:18 UTC on February 5th, 1971?

For the Sun at Fra Mauro in the morning?
12 degrees.

Originally posted by FoosM
How about this:

03 days 11 hours 31 minutes 11 seconds

LMP I can just barely, on the left corner of the Moon
now, make out the foothills of Fra Mauro forma-
tion. We never did get to see it when we were
in close, there.

What about that? I don't understand what you're trying to get at there.

Originally posted by FoosM
Using Stellarium I can see that the Sun just breaking the surface with an altitude of 9 degrees.

Well, just to compare, Apollo 12's EVA 1 started with the Sun at 7.5deg., so at the time of landing, the Sun would have been even lower then that.

Now of course you have high hills in the way. So what kind of lighting would Apollo 13 have to land with?
I assume long black shadows obscuring the ground.

There isn't much for high hills in the fra Mauro area. Nothing close to the mountains we see at the Apollo 15 - 17 landing sites. Since Apollo 14 landed roughly where Apollo 13 would have, we have a good idea of what the terrain looks like. Apollo 14 landing site panorama