View Single Post
Old 11th August 2011, 07:23 AM   #28
Patrick1000
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,040
Lost Bird Proves Apollo Inauthenticity

STARS OF KRYPTONITE

AND

THE LOST BIRD OF MOON BASE 00 41 15 23 26 00


They did fake finding the astronauts' location on the surface of the moon. I'll prove it to you here Twinstead. First off, I want to encourage you to check all of my references both in my post above and in this post.

As above, H. David Read, the launch FIDO, emphasized that not only were the landing site coordinates available to him way off accuracy wise, but in addition, the many methods employed gave results at great variance from one another. Please read my quote from his piece above again. The landing site determinations made by the various methods were so much at variance that Reed paid no attention to any of them and used the rendezvous radar to find Collins one orbit early, and by running a rendezvous radar program in reverse, he found the Eagle.

Where did H. David Reed find the Eagle? If one looks at the Apollo 11 Mission report, and keep in mind Twinstead, this is a NASA official document, we see on Table 5-IV under the heading, LUNAR LANDING COORDINATES, that Reed's employment of the rendezvous radar yielded a north coordinate of 0.636, and an east coordinate of 23.50. The radius is given as 937.13

We convert the coordinates above into the "more familiar", at least more familiar as regards a discussion of Tranquility Base, 00 38 10 north and 23 30 00 east.

Now the Landing Coordinate chart footnotes indicate to translate from radar trajectory coordinate to grid we add 2' 25" to the north coordinate and subtract 4 17" from the east coordinate. This gives us, a rendezvous radar H.David Reed calculation of 00 40 35 north and 23 25 43 east. Very close to the official coordinates for Tranquility base that they gave to the Lick Observatory people earlier on.

Poor H. David Reed. Wasn't he played for a chump? Remember what he told us about his being told that all of the different methods of coordinate determination gave different results? Well, take a look for yourself Twinstead at the chart referred to above.
It lists; primary guidance coordinates as 0.649 north, 23.46 east
abort guidance as 0.639 north and 23.44 east
powered flight processor as 0.631 north and 23.47 east
alignment optical telescope as 0.523 north and 23.42 east
trajectory accelerometer as 0.647 north and 23.505 east
photography/maps as 0.647 north and 23.505 east

Let's convert these to the other form with the exception of the alignment optical scope.
We get for the Eagle's coordinates; 00 41 24 north and 23 23 19 east
00 40 59 north and 23 22 07 east
00 40 16 north and 23 23 55 east
00 41 14 north and 23 26 01 east

WOW! is all I can say. With the exception of the alignment optical telescope' 0.523 north coordinate value, contrary to what H. David Reed was told, all of the methods gave similar results. Not only that, but given the lunar module targeted coordinates of 0.691 north and 23.72 east, or equivalently,
00 41 28 north and 23 37 55 east. They wound up in their imaginary scenario by every method employed in calculation remarkably close to the targeted north coordinate and several miles west of the targeted east coordinate.

As H. David Reed was told, but it most decidedly is not the case, that none of these number sets matched up with one another, and that moreover none of these number sets were close to his rendezvous radar calculated 00 40 35 north and 23 25 43 we conclude either David Reed is making up his story, or NASA is. As I have no good reason to suppose David Reed to be lying about this, I clearly see now that NASA is. Indeed, this chart is fabricated, must be to show a feigned consistency amoung the calculation methods. No one ever thought a jerk like me would follow up on this and check everyone's facts. No one ever imagined H. David Reed would write such a wonderful little essay that ultimately provides proof positive that the Apollo charade is over boys and girls.

Check the numbers and references for yourselves.

Last edited by Patrick1000; 11th August 2011 at 07:28 AM. Reason: amount>amount
Patrick1000 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top