Moon hoax question: Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment

reply to post by poweref


So they launched a multimilion dollar unmanned mission to place those reflectors there, "just" to make the armstrong story more believable?

The same way they somehow gathered moon rock samples to make the strory more believable?

And you BELIEVE that?

How many people know about the reflectors today. Ask 100 people on the streets today: "what has armstrong left on the moon?" how many would even have heard of the reflectors.

So they spend millions and millions of dollars and involved hundreds of people in that unmanned mission, JUST to fluff up the story? DO YOU THINK THIS IS LIKELY?

I mean how hard do you want to cling to the hoax? What is so bad about humanity just having done it?

reply to post by Nightaudit


Yeah but most of the rocks aren't even checked out. And what about the grandma lady and her rock she tried to sell? The reflector is for more inveterates like myself. Do you think people would be spending so much time and energy furiously trying to counter hoax claims if it wasn't a hoax. Clavius Moon Base web site, the Plait web site and on and on and on X infinity. People wouldn't care if the hoax wasn't real. That is what proves it.

reply to post by stanislawdribbledrive

Yeah but most of the rocks aren't even checked out.

But all of the rocks that have been examined have "checked out." So what?

And what about the grandma lady and her rock she tried to sell?

What about her, Patrick? If it was real, it was stolen from us taxpayers. If it wasn't real, she is a scammer.

The reflector is for more inveterates like myself.

Is that a typo for "invertebrates?"

Do you think people would be spending so much time and energy furiously trying to counter hoax claims if it wasn't a hoax.

Do you think people would spend so much time and energy furiously spamming conspiracy sites under a never ending series of childish sock puppet names if it weren't true?

Clavius Moon Base web site, the Plait web site and on and on and on X infinity. People wouldn't care if the hoax wasn't real. That is what proves it.

Just because you are used to being called a liar doesn't mean other people lack a spine.

Originally posted by Nightaudit
reply to post by poweref

 

So they launched a multimilion dollar unmanned mission to place those reflectors there, "just" to make the armstrong story more believable?

No. That argumentation makes no sense and logic. Please try to remember that plain logic is our best weapon.

You say that i claim that they only went there to put flag on moon. So they went up there, put flag on moon and just come back. Can you really imagine, or do you really believe that they went there only to put flag on moon? Was that primary reason? I do not agree.

Better question would be, why they wouldn't bring reflectors on moon? Why not? It is perfectly logic that they bring reflectors on moon, like it is perfectly logic that they will shoot some picture too. Is that right? It is not just about going on moon, and it never was.

If someone fired a lazer at the moon wouldn't it bounce backl no matter where it hit? Sun light reflects off all of it hits back onto earth.

Also It still would of been cheaper to send an umanned capsule to the moon which opened up and revealed the looner lander and the buggy and so on.

Im not saying that this is what happened I wouldn't like to see either way but I do think the political pressures at the time would of forced the gove to fake it if they couldn't send a man there and back alive.

reply to post by ThePeopleParty


They were bouncing lasers off the moon long before they had reflectors up there, and bouncing radio signals as well;


en.wikipedia.org...

The moon is a large satellite that cannot be taken out by a military hit. So once the technology became available, they proceeded to park military equipment on it. Things like radio relays so they could send singnals more dependably than passively bouncing them.


The laser reflector measures the distance to the moon precisely. As several posters noted previously ThePeopleParty, this distance information is then translated into gravitational field strength data. If you know the distance to the moon precisely, you know the strength of the earth's pull precisely. This is needed to accurately target nuclear warhead bearing missiles and was the main reason the reflectors were placed.

reply to post by poweref

It is not just about going on moon, and it never was.

Then what was it? Remember, the military has always lied about the precision of its missiles.

reply to post by ThePeopleParty


In addition to placing military equipment on the moon, during the Apollo period military equipment was rocketed up and placed in Lagrangian points.

en.wikipedia.org...

These are balance points as you see where the equipment floats untouchable 240,000 miles away. Good place for radio relays, missile launch detectors, GPS type equipment, and so forth. If you have equipment at all of the Lagrangian points then the Earth is well ringed and you can "see it" and interact with any place on the globe 24/7 pretty much.

This was a tremendous motivator for the Apollo project. Placing equipmet here.

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
the lunar laser ranging experiment is only evidence that there is a man made reflector on the moon

Exactly.

The images and radio transmissions from the robotic, remote controlled rovers on Mars are not evidence of Humans actually going there so we can recieve them are they OP?

Prior to Apollo manned missions (depending on your POV about Apollo), all excursions to the moon before and since were and are robotic.

Robots and rovers can do all sorts of things...even place hardware on the surface...like laser reflectors for example.

reply to post by sanitaryindiscretion

These are balance points as you see where the equipment floats untouchable 240,000 miles away. Good place for radio relays, missile launch detectors, GPS type equipment, and so forth. If you have equipment at all of the Lagrangian points then the Earth is well ringed and you can "see it" and interact with any place on the globe 24/7 pretty much.

As I have patiently explained to your myriad sock puppets many times already, the Lagrangian Points are militarily useless. It takes light and, hence, radio signals over a second to reach there, an unacceptable delay in modern warfare. Missile launch detectors are more effective in low Earth orbit, where they can achieve higher resolution. A similar principle applies for GPS devices. Of course, the worst thing about stationing something at the Lagrangian points is that they are essentially at a fixed position, making them very easy targets. As usual, your "Apollo as cover for military operations" story makes absolutely no sense.

Yes, they had been reflecting lasers or masers off of the surface of the moon prior to Apollo. Also, since the Russians and Americans had been working on joint ventures that took many years to complete, like the Apollo/Soyuz mission that many others may have been joint ventures. Some question whether the Ranger spacecraft program which landed in the very vacinity of the Apollo reflectors and also the Russian Lunokhod rover, also in the vacinity, of another reflector are the returns.. Some believe the missing overshot Ranger spacecrafts may have also been used for comminication relay from lunar orbit.

reply to post by stanislawdribbledrive


YES, they would! Of course they would!

Do YOU think it is likely that there REALLY is something to the story when it has been analyzed and dug through for 50 YEARS?

Do you really think that? Don´t you think there have been dozens of nutjobs over the years who have grown up with the story, earned a bit of money and had those pics really tested? Do you think you guys are the first ones to the game?

I find it incredible how you can stand besides a MOUNTAIN if evidence for the missions, hundreds of witnesses, thousands of technical details, millions of little datapoints and connections. And you just shake your head and pull out the most ridiculous theories just to cling to the hoax.

I do not get that. Not at all. Have you ever seen some interviews with engineers of the project? How proud they are when they talk about their accomplishments?

Ahh, forget it. There is probably no use in using common sense here.

reply to post by poweref


Of course it is logical they brought them there. They were going anyway so why wouldn´t they?

What are you arguing here? Are you sure you follow this discussion correctly?

reply to post by ThePeopleParty


A laser that would just bounce back is a completely different experiment. There have been experiments done from multiple sources that DO need a reflector.

But I do not really expect you to follow all that. If you would, then you wouldn´t be a hoaxer.

reply to post by sanitaryindiscretion


Again, two different experiments. There were more than enough experiments that do require reflectors.

The whole point of the reflectors was to get a more precise result than without them.

reply to post by sanitaryindiscretion


Oh, that is interesting. And what equipment would that be? And is it still in use today?

What good would an atom bomb be if nobody knew about it? Think about that.

reply to post by MysterX


Please read the whole discussion. This has been adressed before. There still remains the huge logical fallacy that there wasn´t really a need for the reflectors in the hoax scenario.

Creating an unmanned mission just for that would be overkill, who would do that? It would involve hundreds of more people into the scam than needed. Why?

Why not just leave the mirrors away and just pull the hoax off? Nobody would have missed them.

It just doesn´t fit well in the big picture. Just like the rest of the hoax.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by ricktroy

 

How is this not scientific? And if they did it without an astronaut, where did the "secret launch" come from? All the Saturn V rockets were accounted for, and you can't hide a rocket launch.

Well...you can if you launch from certain areas on the globe, or claim it's a missile test, or claim you're placing a comms sat in orbit.

Of course, it's entirely possible that the reflectors were left there by a robotic soft landing mission...the one that would fit best in such a scenario would have been Surveyor 5, soft landed in 1965 at the same location Apollo 11 landed.

Not that i'm saying the manned Apollo 11 mission didn't happen as described, only that the reflector side of the argument COULD be challenged by placing them remotely during an earlier robotic mission.

@Nightaudit...where have i said that an entire mission was carried out just to place reflectors?

That's not what i'm saying at all.

reply to post by Nightaudit

There still remains the huge logical fallacy that there wasn´t really a need for the reflectors in the hoax scenario.

You keep saying there wasn't a need in a hoax scenario... but to pull off a hoax they had to still do all the experiments they proposed to do... so the placement of the reflectors would have been important manned or un-manned.

In fact I would say it makes sense to include the reflectors in a hoax scenario specifically for the reason you keep mentioning... it doesn't seem worth it if it were a hoax.

I don't think I'll change your mind but a lot of posters here have said how it would be feasible for an unmanned mission to leave those reflectors. (Like the Russians did.)

So it is feasible they weren't left there by man.

reply to post by manmental

In fact I would say it makes sense to include the reflectors in a hoax scenario specifically for the reason you keep mentioning...

Yes.

And since anytime the hoax theory is voiced, the reflectors are almost always brought up as a means to show how impossible or unlikely a hoax would have been... all that's being said here (by me anyway), in answer to the OP's original question about the reflectors is that the reflectors are NOT proof of a manned Lunar landing in Apollo 11 in and of themselves, as it's perfectly reasonable and possible that a robotic mission could have placed them there.