Lost Bird Proves Apollo Inauthenticity

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 14 2012 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 



When a light beam passes through a vacuum, through space or through
very clear air it is not possible to see the beam with human eyes
unless you are inside of the beam looking toward the source of the
light.

www.madsci.org...

thats what appears to be an email from the Director Emeritus, Hughes Research Laboratories.




posted on May, 14 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by choos
 


I am having trouble understanding why the objection to a well known and well publicized, even in newspapers, fact. This, that the McDonald scientists were targeting the astronauts with their blue-green laser and fully expected the astronauts to see it. Again, the well known first exchange between Houston and the astronauts regarding the blue-green laser. Obviously, these people would not be wasting their time if they did not believe the laser would be visible under the circumstances. Here is the relevant VOICE TRANSCRIPT EXCERPT, from time 01 11 28 08;

CC Roger, Apollo 11. We've got a laser that we're going to - It's a blue-green laser that we're going to flash on and off at a frequency of on for a second, off for a second. It's coming out of McDonald Observatory near E1 Paso, which is - should be right on the terminator --or right inside the terminator. We are going to activate that momentarily. Would you please take a look through the telescope and see if you can see it. Over.

CMP Telescope? Or sextant?

CC Either one. Over.

CMP Okay, I'll try it _with the telescope; and if, I don't see it there, then I'll try the sextant.,

CC Roger. We'll give you the word when they've_ got it turned on. Over.

CMP Okay.

CC 11, Houston. They don't have it turned on yet. We'll give_ you the word when they got it turned
' on. Over.

CMP Okay.

CC Hello, Apollo 11. Houston. We noticed the CR¥O
pressure dropped a moment ago. Did you stir lip the CRYO's? Over.

CDR Roger. We've finished our cycling operations.·_

CC Roger. Copy. Out. '

CC Hello, Apollo 11. Houston. McDonald's got the laser turned on, Would you take a look?, Over.

CMP Okay, Charlie.


CC It's bluish-green.

CC 11, Houston. We got some shaft and._trunnion for you that might tweak it up a little bit. Shaft
of 141.5, trunnion of 39.5. Over. '[ .... _R Okay. Stand by. ..

CC Apollo 11, Houston. If you see it' it should be coming up - appear to be coming up,through the clouds. McDonald reports that_there's a break in the clouds that they're beaming this thing through. Over.

CDR Roger.

CC Hello, Apollo 11. Houston. You can terminate the exercise on the Laser. Our rates are steady
enough now for - to commence the PTC. Over.

LMP Okays Houston. Neither Neil nor Mike can see it. Incidentally_ those shafts and trunnions just
missed pointing at the world.

CC Roger. Thank you.

LMP As we are looking at it through the scanning telescope, it would be about a - oh, maybe a third of an Earth radii high and to the left.

CC Roger.

LMP But, we did - but we did identify the E1 Paso area and it appeared to us to be a break in the
clouds there, and we looked in that break and saw nothing.

CC Roger. Thank you much. Out.

CMP Houston, Apollo 11. Over.

Looks like not only the boys at McDonald, but also the boys in Houston thought this reasonable, seeing the laser. And they kept trying and trying as I shall show in future posts.

STAR PHOBIA AND LASER FRIGHT PROVES APOLLO INAUTHENTICITY



posted on May, 14 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 


if the laser is shining at them and they happen to be looking at the laser than yes they will see it thats what i post above here it is again:


When a light beam passes through a vacuum, through space or through
very clear air it is not possible to see the beam with human eyes
unless you are inside of the beam looking toward the source of the
light.


www.madsci.org...



posted on May, 14 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 



It's a blue-green laser that we're going to flash on and off at a frequency of on for a second, off for a second. It's coming out of McDonald Observatory near E1 Paso, which is - should be right on the terminator --or right inside the terminator.


The terminator is the line between day and night. Even if it were bright enough to be seen, the daylight would wash it out. Failed again.



posted on May, 14 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


No, incorrect

As mentioned previously, the LRRR principal investigator C.O. Alley wrote that these tiny laser generated images at the left there, imaged by Surveyor 7 in 1968, appeared a bit brighter than Sirius, the brightest star in the sky. This has already been covered;


www.w7ftt.net...

The blue-green laser at MacDonald Observatory was more powerful than the one's at Kitt Peak and Table Mountain, the one's referenced in the image above. Naturally, everyone thought if the Surveyor "tv camera" could see blue-green laser light of this type, so too could the astronauts. There are numerous newspaper articles that make reference to this. Here's one from the Reading Eagle, 07/19/1969;

news.google.com...,1919453

(In above article, go to page 12, "Gravity Hill Is Passed" section.)

Read the little Fort Davis Texas entry there about how the McDonald Astronomers were practicing their marksmanship with their blue-green laser. The way they practice of course is to shine the light on the Apollo ship, given the alleged super accurate tracking. Then they ask the astronauts, "Can you see our laser?". And according to the article there, the astronauts indicated they at least as of then, had not seen the blue-green light.

For those that have access to newspaper archives like the NY Times archive and so forth, it is very much worth the time and energy to explore this subject by way of these contemporaneous news reports about the lasers, both the ruby red lasers and the blue-green argon laser. You'll really get a feel for what I call "astronaut laser fright". Of course they do not see this blue-green laser. They are not in outer space. And of course they will not claim to be able to see it. Were they to do so, then there would be many ways they could be found to be Tranquility Truant;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


For the uninitiated, exploring the LOST BIRD theme is a great way to prove Apollo's Inauthenticity to oneself. The understanding of high tech aerospace mumbo jumbo is not necessary. The astronauts /NASA claim on the night of the landing that they did not know where their spaceship was. It is a topic amenable to research by way of newspaper archive study. Great way to look into the Apollo fraud independently. Anyone with an interest in the fraud should do this a bit, search newspaper archives for articles about the laser issue and the feigned confusion as regards the imaginary bird's location that mythical evening.
edit on 14-5-2012 by decisively because: fixing link
edit on 14-5-2012 by decisively because: added, "In above article, go to page 12, "Gravity Hill Is Passed" section"
edit on 14-5-2012 by decisively because: added "camera" and quote marks.
edit on 14-5-2012 by decisively because: added "blue green laser light of this type", added "they", spelling, added quotes, do>did, is>was
edit on 14-5-2012 by decisively because: caps, comma
edit on 14-5-2012 by decisively because: removed "they"



posted on May, 14 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 


you forget no matter how powerful the laser if the laser is not directly on top of the astronauts with the astronauts looking at the laser it wont be seen.

the mcdonald laser is alot more accurate than the lick observatory laser, lick observatory was designed for quick aquisition, mcdonald for accurate ranging.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 


As I have already SHOWN using the picture you posted a proof of your assumption



The LASERS were OVERWHELMED but the sunlit side of the earth.

ANSWER this as YOU avoided it before!!!! if the exposure was correct to show the sunlit side of the earth do you think the laser dots would show.

edit on 15-5-2012 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


That is not how the human eye works, two different things, the Surveyor 7 "tv camera" and the human eye



Probably not with this camera, but that is not how the human eye works.

First, the science of the situation was understood such that the astronauts were expected to see the blue-green laser of McDonald Observatory. The McDonald scientists would not have spent so much time and energy in making the effort to have the astronauts visualize their laser had it not been clear to them that their laser would be visible.

With respect to your main point, what you mean to imply is incorrect, that the human eye is just like the Surveyor 7 "tv camera". The human eye is not, in that it can appreciate objects over a much greater range of luminosities than can the camera. Another way to say that by example here is that though the Surveyor 7 camera probably would not "see" the Kitt Peak and Table Mountain lasers at some given lower exposure, your eyes would, being more sensitive in this regard. Your eyes are a better imaging device in that unlike the Surveyor "tv camera", they would not require increased/overexposure and this is what the scientists at McDonald Observatory were telling us in so many words. That they fully expected the astronauts to see their blue-green laser, without resorting to any "tricks", simply looking.

Keep in mind the McDonald laser was stronger, of greater power than the Kitt Peak and Table Mountain lasers. One of the things the astronauts were afraid of was their being challenged to see the laser and then image it as well. Were any of this real, then perhaps in their imaging such a laser, just as in the case with the Surveyor 7 situation, the sunlit side of the earth would have to be over exposed to get a pic with a "tv camera". But to emphasize by way of reiterating, that does not mean in order to see the laser with their naked eyes the astronauts would need to ratchet up the exposure. Eyes are better than camera/film in almost all cases at imaging over a wide range of luminosities. The McDonald people were aware of this and fully expected a "YES !!!!" when the astronauts were asked as to whether the laser could be seen or not.

Hiding from lasers, astronaut laser fright, is evidence of Apollo fraudulence....



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 



LMP Okays Houston. Neither Neil nor Mike can see it. Incidentally_ those shafts and trunnions just
missed pointing at the world.

CC Roger. Thank you.

LMP As we are looking at it through the scanning telescope, it would be about a - oh, maybe a third of an Earth radii high and to the left.


looks like they werent in the spot houston thought they were.

they did however find the break in the cloud near the el paso area. checked there and saw nothing.. which can be explained that the laser was not pointed at them..

as stated above they cannot see the laser unless they are INSIDE of the beam and looking at it.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by choos
 



Not sure what your point here is. I am saying the astronauts are not in cislunar space at all. Not because they are laser phobic here, but rather, I claim Apollo to be fraudulent in its broader context. As such, because we know Apollo to be untrue, then laser phobia is about astronaut fears of being found out. I do not claim this incident proves Apollo Inauthenticity. I am saying because we know it to be inauthentic, this is what is going on.

Keep in mind, they tried to target the astronauts MANY !!! times on this trip. They couldn't have been that bad aims, boys from Texas.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 


I know how the human eye works mate I have 2of them, its all about relative brightness and its obvious from the picture you linked to that the lasers are not as bright as you thought

The picture you linked to what type of camera took it, once you find out think real hard about the image you posted?



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


We understand eachother, at least I believe so. Your point was/is because the shot is "overexposed" the astronauts could not be expected to do the same, see the lasers, their eyes not having said feature of increasing the shutter or what have you. The image was taken by a "television camera" by the way.

My main point, irrespective of the equipment the astronauts or Surveyor 7 was packing, is that the McDonald scientists fully expected the astroanuts to be able to visualize the laser.

My corollary; as we know Apollo fraudulent on other grounds, quite reliably so, the reason for this laser denial is to avoid being accountable were they to say they saw it. Denying that they saw the blue-green argon laser of McDonald Observatory is most decidedly not in and of itself proof of Apollo Inauthenticity. That said, knowing Apollo to be inauthentuic, the fact that the astronauts deny the laser has more likely than not to do with their fears of being asked to image it, or fears around being found to be missing in action were the targeting at some later date found to be in error as previously mentioned.

I am glad you have some background with respect to the principles of human physiology. It is a very important one in this case. The eye will see much more than a camera under such circumstances given its construction. It would be interesting to investigate even with today's technology, whether there is a camera in existence that could outperform the human eye under these circumstaces.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 


remember your "lost bird" scenario??

houston doesnt know their exact location the mcdonald laser is quite accurate and narrow its like 1 mile diameter, so if the laser is not directly on them than they will not see the laser. its hinted that houston isnt sure because the trunnion angle and shaft angle given to the lunar module is not pointing at the earth (that or a miscalculation).
edit on 15-5-2012 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by choos
 


"LOST BIRD" is not about the McDonald lasers per se



The "LOST BIRD" theme per se, has nothing directly to do with the blue-green McDonald Observatory laser in any event. LOST BIRD is about astronomer Joseph Wampler knowing the coordinates of the Eagle's landing site on 07/20/1969, all the while Neil Armstrong himself not being aprised of them until 08/01/1969. It is about NASA pretending to not know where the Eagle has landed, all the while knowing, and knowing very accurately, where it landed in those special circumstances discussed that cater to the fraud.
edit on 15-5-2012 by decisively because: added "being"
edit on 15-5-2012 by decisively because: added command , "those", "discussed "
edit on 15-5-2012 by decisively because: spelling



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 



Denying that they saw the blue-green argon laser of McDonald Observatory is most decidedly not in and of itself proof of Apollo Inauthenticity.....


Perhaps the only true statement you have ever made.


That said, knowing Apollo to be inauthentuic, the fact that the astronauts deny the laser has more likely than not to do with...


And there is the crux of your technique; you begin with the premise that "Apollo is Fraudulent," then proceed to use that assumption to "prove" that everything else is fraudulent. Apollo is fraudulent, therefore Borman could not have been sick. Apollo is fraudulent, therefore the sextant could not work. I could multiply these examples ad nauseum. Ask Timmy or you sister or one of your chess playing doctors what a "circular argument" is.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 



It is about NASA pretending to not know where the Eagle has landed, all the while knowing, and knowing very accurately, where it landed in those special circumstances discussed that cater to the fraud.


But you yourself have proven that NASA did not know precisely where it was. Now you are claiming that they did? Your arguments are so chaotic that not even you can stay clear on what they are.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   

I begin with no premises. I prove all that I claim, including Apollo's fraudulence

reply to post by DJW001
 


Care to take a shot at one of these ? Prove me wrong if you can.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 06:05 AM
link   

I make no assumptions. Everything is before you and is indeed incontrovertible

reply to post by DJW001
 


These are but simple facts. If you disagree, show me how that can be so.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 15-5-2012 by decisively because: link not correct and so fixed



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 


Double post.
edit on 15-5-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 



I begin with no premises. I prove all that I claim, including Apollo's fraudulence


No you don't.
edit on 15-5-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join