The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: person1234 on October 10, 2020, 12:15:32 AM
-
So I'm new to the flat earth video and recently watched a video from TruTv which is about the technology required to fake the moon landing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWBYAxhH3u4&ab_channel=truTV
The main topic is that the parallel sun rays in the moon landing. If normal studio lighting was used the shadows would diverge and there would be no parallel sun rays. The only way this could be faked in a studio is if they had access to a wall of millions of laser lights. The estimated cost of this would be more than the entire Apollo project. This was a massive problem though because laser lights cost a large amount during this time. Normal laser lights would also not work because they were too large. The other problem with laser lights is that they only put out red light probably because they didn't have the technology for other colors so using laser lights would've been impossible. This could've been developed with computer graphics but the computer graphics required were only created 40 years later.
The next point is that if Nasa were able to create computer graphics that were 40 years ahead of their time. They would then have to make over 400 000 nasa employees at that time keep both the secret that nasa faked the landing and everyone who could've created this computer graphic software. They would then have to convince Spain, England, Australia to work with them and lie that they independently picked up on the transmission from space. Most importantly they would have to convince Russia who had been their rival throughout the entire coldwar and had also probably dedicated billions in trying to beat America in the space race or billions faking that they were participating in the space race. This task would've probably been nye impossible because it was still the cold war. Since the moon landing Russia has never claimed the space landing was faked.
I was wondering if there was an explanation to why this debunking is false.
-
If normal studio lighting was used the shadows would diverge and there would be no parallel sun rays
This is a false premise. The shadows from the Apollo media are not parallel.
(https://i.imgur.com/8pvqVtp.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/wE93ccg.jpg)
Parallel shadows do not always occur on Earth either
(https://i.imgur.com/2OTsh6W.jpg)
-
Thanks, that explains the first half but what about the second half about how they convinced multiple world governments and superpowers help them and also I forgot to mention they layed retroreflectors on the moon which can be seen with some very expensive telescopes. How is that explained.
-
Parallel shadows do not always occur on Earth either
(https://i.imgur.com/2OTsh6W.jpg)
This picture actually supports the Moon landings as an example of how lens distortion can create these sorts of images.
At first glance it would appear the Sun isn't casting parallel shadows and it seems reasonable to say that shadows on Earth are not always parallel.
But look closely and examine the shadows and try and figure out where the light source is coming from. The post on the left has the shadow going to the right, so the Sun must be to the left of the picture. But the shadow on the post on the right is going to the left, so the Sun must be on the right side of the picture.
But wait... the Sun can't be on both the left and right side!
It's easy to conclude that this is evidence that what you are seeing is lens distortion, because otherwise the image would be impossible. There is nowhere you can put a light source to create those shadows, the Sun can't be in two places at once.
It's certainly an interesting image that demonstrates how difficult it is to judge angles of a photograph, and is used often to debunk Moon hoax theories.
-
NASA hired some people to write a book to try to debunk the hoax claims, which was turned into a website called Clavius. They claim it's a combination of terrain and perspective which can cause shadows to converge.
http://www.clavius.org/a11rear.html
(http://www.clavius.org/img/desert-shad-converge.jpg)
Fig. 2 - Converging shadows of objects lit by the sun. A combination of terrain and perspective produces shadows in the upper right of the image that appear to lie almost at right angles to the shadow of the photographer.
-
I understand about why the first half might be wrong, but does anyone has an explanation about how the reflectors were put on the moon if people haven't gone too the moon and other practicalities about how to convince that 400 000 people and governments.
-
There's too much third-party evidence for the landings to have been faked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
-
I understand about why the first half might be wrong, but does anyone has an explanation about how the reflectors were put on the moon if people haven't gone too the moon
Those laser experiments are government/NASA funded. We were recently talking about this in AR:
After 40 years' reflection, laser moon mirror project is axed - https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jun/21/mcdonald-observatory-space-laser-funding
Government funded:
“ The National Science Foundation (NSF) last week wrote to scientists working at the McDonald Laser ranging station at Fort Davis in Texas to tell them the annual $125,000 funding for their research project was going be terminated following a review of its scientific merits. ”
Used by NASA as evidence for Apollo:
“ The mirror's existence, and the fact that astronomers can bounce lasers off it and detect the returning beam, has also provided Nasa and other scientists with compelling evidence to refute the claims of moon-landing deniers who claim the Apollo lunar mission were hoaxes filmed in an Earth-based studio. ”
So the government funded something so that NASA could prove that they went to the Moon.
Not only did NASA cite the McDonald Observatory experiments as evidence they went to the Moon, they directly funded McDonald Observatory lunar ranging experiments with the National Science Foundation. See: http://www.archive.org/stream/nasa_techdoc_19750066483/19750066483#page/n0/mode/2up
Flip to the second page and you will find "This work is supported by NASA Grant NGR-44-012-165"
Apache Point Observatory
The lunar ranging equipment at the Apache Point Observatory was also supported and funded by NASA --
http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/
"Finally, we thank NASA for supporting APOLLO and enabling it to get "off the ground", and more recently, a joint effort by NASA and the National Science Foundation to fund APOLLO at a level that will allow project completion and production of the first science results."
Table Mountain Observatory
Argon Laser Shot to the Moon - http://www.w7ftt.net/laser1.html
At the bottom of that article:
"Table Mountain Observatory, operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), is located just west of the
town of Wrightwood, California at an elevation of 7500 feet."
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory happens to be a NASA facility.
How very convenient of NASA, when defending its scam with Lunar Ranging claims, to neglect to disclose they they themselves fund those experiments.
and other practicalities about how to convince that 400 000 people and governments.
Contractors do what they are told. Build me a simulation for this, build me a model for that, write a research document for this, create a theory for doing that.
Many of the governments rely on NASA for a lot of stuff.
https://www.planetary.org/explore/the-planetary-report/australia-space-program.html
“ The fact that so many countries seem to want a space program implies an inherent value to exploring space, but what is it? Last year, Australia became the latest country to announce the formation of its own space agency. The process took a significant step forward in March with a new report recommending goals and focus for its space agency.
The report also provides insight about why Australia sees space as a valuable enterprise. The report highlights several areas where the country could leapfrog others by strategically investing in specific capabilities (for example, artificial intelligence or quantum computing) and sets out a goal of tripling the size of the Australian space industry by 2030. One of the keys to succeeding in this new effort, the report declares, will be international partnerships.
International partnerships provide the means for countries to participate in the exploration of space without having to create expensive, enabling infrastructure from the ground up. They can leverage the space capabilities of other nations while providing unique contributions to the benefit of their own industry and scientific base. This is the opposite of a zero-sum, competitive mentality of international relations; a rising rocket lifts all spacecraft, if you will. The European Space Agency’s very existence relies on this model. Its BepiColombo mission—as you will read in this issue—includes contributions from 13 European member states, the United States, and Japan. This coalition of nations is deeply invested in the success of the mission, spreading out the cost and also the political support. ”
NASA is encouraged to help other countries do space activities.
NASA AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN SPACE - https://spacepolicyonline.com/topics/international-space-activities/
“ International cooperation has been a hallmark of NASA’s programs throughout its history. The law that created NASA, the 1958 National Aeronautics and Space Act, included Section 205 that encouraged NASA to cooperate with other countries. A 2014 report by NASA’s Office of International and Interagency Relations states that NASA has signed over 3,000 international agreements since its inception. The report, Global Reach: A View of NASA’s International Cooperation, lists international cooperative projects ongoing at NASA at the time of publication. ”
-
I understand about why the first half might be wrong, but does anyone has an explanation about how the reflectors were put on the moon if people haven't gone too the moon
Those laser experiments are government/NASA funded. We were recently talking about this in AR:
Not all of them. One of note is the Grasse Laser Ranging Station based at the Côte d’Azur Observatory in France which uses laser range finding using the Moon's retroreflectors and verified NASAs findings. They are certainly not funded by NASA.
"Observations from the Grasse lunar laser ranging station have been made on a daily basis since the first echoes obtained in 1981.
Source: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019EA000785@10.1002/(ISSN)2169-9100.APOLLO50
And here is them bouncing a laser off of a Russian rover. That's not NASA funded either.
Scientists have successfully bounced a laser off the Soviet Union's old Lunokhod 1 rover, which trekked across the moon's landscape more than four decades ago.
Lunokhod 1 was the first remote-controlled rover ever to land on another celestial body. The wheeled vehicle was carried to the lunar surface by a spacecraft called Luna 17, touching down in the Sea of Rains on Nov. 17, 1970.
Among its instruments, the rover toted a French-built laser retroreflector consisting of 14 corner cubes that can reflect laser light beamed from Earth.
Source: https://www.space.com/20865-soviet-moon-rover-lunokhod-laser.html
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_at_the_Observatoire_de_la_C%C3%B4te_d%27Azur_DSC_0734_%2810782482906%29.jpg/800px-Lunar_Laser_Ranging_at_the_Observatoire_de_la_C%C3%B4te_d%27Azur_DSC_0734_%2810782482906%29.jpg)
-
I understand about why the first half might be wrong, but does anyone has an explanation about how the reflectors were put on the moon if people haven't gone too the moon
Those laser experiments are government/NASA funded. We were recently talking about this in AR:
Not all of them. One of note is the Grasse Laser Ranging Station based at the Côte d’Azur Observatory in France which uses laser range finding using the Moon's retroreflectors and verified NASAs findings. They are certainly not funded by NASA.
Incorrect. NASA is involved in this. Grasse is part of the International Laser Ranging Service (ILRS) network. NASA is part of the governance of the ILRS.
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/2017/06/aa28590-16.pdf
"Among the 40 SLR stations of the International Laser Ranging Service (ILRS) network, only a few stations are able to detect echoes on the Moon. Consequently, only four stations supply Earth-Moon range observations to the ILRS database: APOLLO (New Mexico, USA), McDonald (Texas, USA), Matera (Italy) and Grasse (France)."
https://space-geodesy.nasa.gov/docs/2017/ILRS_IAGTravaux_20170602.pdf
International Laser Ranging Service (ILRS)
"The ILRS is the international source that provides Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) and
Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) observation data and data products for scientific and
engineering programs with the main focus on Earth and Lunar applications. The basic
observables are the precise two-way time-of—flight of ultra-short laser pulses from
ground stations to retroreflector arrays on satellites and the Moon and the one-way
time-of-flight measurements to space-borne receivers (transponders). These data sets
are made available to the community through the CDDIS and the EDC archives, and are
also used by the ILRS to generate fundamental data products, including: accurate
satellite ephemerides, Earth orientation parameters, three-dimensional coordinates and
velocities of the ILRS tracking stations, time-varying geocenter coordinates, static and
time-varying coefficients of the Earth’s gravity field, fundamental physical constants,
lunar ephemerides and librations, and lunar orientation parameters."
~
(https://i.imgur.com/r7w8UbZ.png)
And just go to the ILRS website:
https://ilrs.gsfc.nasa.gov/
(https://i.imgur.com/LbEw7IA.png)
-
I understand about why the first half might be wrong, but does anyone has an explanation about how the reflectors were put on the moon if people haven't gone too the moon
Those laser experiments are government/NASA funded. We were recently talking about this in AR:
Not all of them. One of note is the Grasse Laser Ranging Station based at the Côte d’Azur Observatory in France which uses laser range finding using the Moon's retroreflectors and verified NASAs findings. They are certainly not funded by NASA.
Incorrect. NASA is involved in this. Grasse is part of the International Laser Ranging Service (ILRS) network. NASA is part of the governance of the ILRS.
NASA is not funding the Côte d’Azur Observatory, France is.
The laser range finding done on the Russian lunar explorer didn't involve NASA.
You can find projects that measure the moons distance done without any funding by NASA and not controlled by them. NASA would have to have quite a strong grip on these other observatories to force them to lie about their results for decades. What is their leverage?
If we have to throw out any data by anyone who has ever had any contact with NASA or it's data, that covers literally every observatory.
-
Parallel shadows do not always occur on Earth either
(https://i.imgur.com/2OTsh6W.jpg)
Those shadows are parallel.
We have been through this in discussions about crepuscular rays. Lines which are parallel in reality can appear not to be depending on the angle you are looking at them from.
As JSS has pointed out, if those shadows are as they appear in that picture then where on earth is the sun?
-
NASA is not funding the Côte d’Azur Observatory, France is.
The laser range finding done on the Russian lunar explorer didn't involve NASA.
You can find projects that measure the moons distance done without any funding by NASA and not controlled by them. NASA would have to have quite a strong grip on these other observatories to force them to lie about their results for decades. What is their leverage?
If we have to throw out any data by anyone who has ever had any contact with NASA or it's data, that covers literally every observatory.
NASA is involved in this technology and software. Here France and NASA are working on a laser ranger in South Africa. Why shouldn't we believe that NASA worked with France on their laser ranger?
https://cddis.nasa.gov/lw18/docs/papers/Session13/13-05-04-Combrinck.pdf
The development of a Lunar and Satellite Laser Ranger at the Hartebeesthoek Radio Astronomy Observatory, South Africa, in collaboration with the Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur (France) and NASA(GSFC) is progressing well.
Those shadows are parallel.
We have been through this in discussions about crepuscular rays. Lines which are parallel in reality can appear not to be depending on the angle you are looking at them from.
As JSS has pointed out, if those shadows are as they appear in that picture then where on earth is the sun?
Read the rest of the thread. The shadows can appear non-parallel because of perspective and terrain effects.
NASA hired some people to write a book to try to debunk the hoax claims, which was turned into a website called Clavius. They claim it's a combination of terrain and perspective which can cause shadows to converge.
http://www.clavius.org/a11rear.html
(http://www.clavius.org/img/desert-shad-converge.jpg)
Fig. 2 - Converging shadows of objects lit by the sun. A combination of terrain and perspective produces shadows in the upper right of the image that appear to lie almost at right angles to the shadow of the photographer.
-
Anyway, the ILRS is only about twenty years old (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00190-019-01241-1): LLR was performed at the Grasse observatory and other non-NASA sites well before that.
-
Read the thread. The shadows can appear non-parallel because of perspectics and terrain effects.
Yes, I saw that. And correct. Although that looks pretty flat so I’m pretty sure it’s perspective in your image.
I’m not sure what point you are making here to be honest. One of the pieces of “evidence” moan hoaxers use is that non parallel shadows show multiple light sources. Incorrect, as you would say and as your image proves. Perspective and terrain are factors in how shadows appear.
-
I’m not sure what point you are making here to be honest. One of the pieces of “evidence” moan hoaxers use is that non parallel shadows show multiple light sources. Incorrect, as you would say and as your image proves. Perspective and terrain are factors in how shadows appear.
The video in the OP says that parallel shadows proves that the Moon landing happened.
-
The video in the OP says that parallel shadows proves that the Moon landing happened.
I see. Fair enough.
I think I’d agree that the shadows in the footage and pictures from the moon landings aren’t particularly strong evidence either way.
But they are often used erroneously as evidence of a hoax.
-
NASA is not funding the Côte d’Azur Observatory, France is.
The laser range finding done on the Russian lunar explorer didn't involve NASA.
You can find projects that measure the moons distance done without any funding by NASA and not controlled by them. NASA would have to have quite a strong grip on these other observatories to force them to lie about their results for decades. What is their leverage?
If we have to throw out any data by anyone who has ever had any contact with NASA or it's data, that covers literally every observatory.
NASA is involved in this technology and software. Here France and NASA are working on a laser ranger in South Africa. Why shouldn't we believe that NASA worked with France on their laser ranger?
The claim you have made is that NASA's range finding results are "a scam" and that these other agencies are all somehow under NASA's control.
Pointing out NASA is "involved" somehow is a far cry from showing NASA has total and complete control over France's observatories and can dictate their results and force them to lie about the distance to the Moon.
How is this control enforced? It's not money, we know that NASA didn't build that observatory and isn't paying for it's operation now.
If an agency want's to perform measurements on an object NASA placed, why wouldn't they ask NASA for information? It's certainly not proof of a conspiracy. NASA has a long history in spaceflight and is the world leading expert in much of it, it stands to reason people are going to ask them for help.
Multiple reflectors have been placed by multiple countries, and measured by other countries... that is a lot of evidence that they are real, unless NASA somehow can control all of them for nearly 50 years.
-
The claim you have made is that NASA's range finding results are "a scam" and that these other agencies are all somehow under NASA's control.
Pointing out NASA is "involved" somehow is a far cry from showing NASA has total and complete control over France's observatories and can dictate their results and force them to lie about the distance to the Moon.
How is this control enforced? It's not money, we know that NASA didn't build that observatory and isn't paying for it's operation now.
NASA does fund international projects.
And the analysis is done in software. Working with another country on this could just mean NASA gave them the software and and consulted on the physical hardware.
-
The claim you have made is that NASA's range finding results are "a scam" and that these other agencies are all somehow under NASA's control.
Pointing out NASA is "involved" somehow is a far cry from showing NASA has total and complete control over France's observatories and can dictate their results and force them to lie about the distance to the Moon.
How is this control enforced? It's not money, we know that NASA didn't build that observatory and isn't paying for it's operation now.
NASA does fund international projects.
And the analysis is done in software. Working with another country on this could just mean NASA gave them the software and and consulted on the physical hardware.
How does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
The Grasse Station experiments look quote independent to me. I see no method NASA could be using to force them to lie to the world about their findings. How would they do that and continue to cover it up after so long?
-
How does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
You have answered your own question. Software is programmed by the programmers and not the operators.
-
How does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
You have answered your own question. Software is programmed by the programmers and not the operators.
Do you think researchers in an observatory are unable to get and interpret their own data? These guys know exactly what they are doing. They shoot a giant laser to a mirror on the Moon and get some of that back. They know the system they operate.
Do you have any evidence that any of Grasse's (or Matera (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matera_Laser_Ranging_Observatory), or Wettzell (https://www.bkg.bund.de/DE/Observatorium-Wettzell/Messsysteme-Wettzell/Wettzell-Laser-Ranging-System/wettzell-laser-ranging-system.html)) hardware or software is provided or controlled by NASA?
-
NASA hired some people to write a book to try to debunk the hoax claims, which was turned into a website called Clavius.
Curious, where did you get the information that NASA hired the clavius.org guy(s) to do what they do? I've never run across that.
-
How does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
You have answered your own question. Software is programmed by the programmers and not the operators.
Do you think researchers in an observatory are unable to get and interpret their own data? These guys know exactly what they are doing. They shoot a giant laser to a mirror on the Moon and get some of that back. They know the system they operate.
Do you have any evidence that any of Grasse's (or Matera (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matera_Laser_Ranging_Observatory), or Wettzell (https://www.bkg.bund.de/DE/Observatorium-Wettzell/Messsysteme-Wettzell/Wettzell-Laser-Ranging-System/wettzell-laser-ranging-system.html)) hardware or software is provided or controlled by NASA?
Both Grasse and Matera are part of the ILRS network. The ILRS promotes sharing software to spare builders of the work of "re-inventing the wheel".
https://ilrs.gsfc.nasa.gov/technology/software/index.html
"Software provides a key element in the acquisition, reduction, and analysis of laser ranging data. Since so much time and effort has already been spent on creating software applicable to laser ranging, it is preferable to have the fruits of those labors be freely available when possible. Having a ready library of software will either spare builders of new stations the work of re-inventing the wheel or to at least provide a starting point from which to build something greater."
-
How does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
You have answered your own question. Software is programmed by the programmers and not the operators.
Do you think researchers in an observatory are unable to get and interpret their own data? These guys know exactly what they are doing. They shoot a giant laser to a mirror on the Moon and get some of that back. They know the system they operate.
Do you have any evidence that any of Grasse's (or Matera (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matera_Laser_Ranging_Observatory), or Wettzell (https://www.bkg.bund.de/DE/Observatorium-Wettzell/Messsysteme-Wettzell/Wettzell-Laser-Ranging-System/wettzell-laser-ranging-system.html)) hardware or software is provided or controlled by NASA?
Both Grasse and Matera are part of the ILRS network. The ILRS promotes sharing software to spare builders of the work of "re-inventing the wheel".
https://ilrs.gsfc.nasa.gov/technology/software/index.html
"Software provides a key element in the acquisition, reduction, and analysis of laser ranging data. Since so much time and effort has already been spent on creating software applicable to laser ranging, it is preferable to have the fruits of those labors be freely available when possible. Having a ready library of software will either spare builders of new stations the work of re-inventing the wheel or to at least provide a starting point from which to build something greater."
I guess if you don't have access to one of these stations, you can always perform a Ham Radio Moon Bounce:
"Radio waves propagate in vacuum at the speed of light c, exactly 299,792,458 m/s. Propagation time to the Moon and back ranges from 2.4 to 2.7 seconds, with an average of 2.56 seconds (distance from Earth to the Moon is 384,400 km)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%E2%80%93Moon%E2%80%93Earth_communication
Lot's of amateur Ham's do this, no NASA needed.
-
We spoke about the Moon Bounce on the other website. It can't be done alone. I know that you saw that thread (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=84214.0).
Pertinent quotes:
On the topic of the Moon Bounce there are two points:
1.) A licensed Ham radio operator shows that the signal in the EME Moon Bounce shouldn't be possible at all according to the propagation calculators.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2Ekad3v1tM&feature=emb_title
2.) The narrator of the above video mentions that the Moon Bounce is suspicious, since an internet connection is apparently required. This is verified by the following link, showing us a EME Moon Bounce Station:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUbNDNBPFEM
He is communicating with a third party installation, and says at 4:54 that "you need a pretty big station at the other end".
The Moon Bounce is not conducted by setting up your own antenna, broadcasting a signal, and then receiving it. The process involves sending data over the internet to a large (likely government funded) radio astronomy facility and then receiving back the results. References can be found that the technique was developed by the U.S. Military after WWII.
So this "evidence" essentially involves asking the government how far away the Moon is. For what reason this service was made open to the public, who knows. But we may as well just go to the NASA website if we are relying on the government for our information.
Just watch the second video that I posted. He clearly states in the first couple of minutes that he is communicating with a facility in Germany, and that "he heard me", etc. and at 4:54 "you need a pretty big station at the other end."
https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/ham_radio/amateur-propagation/moonbounce-propagation-eme.php
Moonbounce basics
The basis of operation of Moonbounce or EME, Earth-Moon-Earth is the use of the Moon as a passive reflector. In view of the very large distances involved and the fact that the Moon's surface is a poor reflector the path losses are colossal, but nevertheless it is still a form of communication that is theoretically possible to use, and one that many radio amateurs regularly use.
(https://www.electronics-notes.com/images/propagation-eme-moonbounce-basic-concept-01.svg)
There are clearly two stations in this diagram, not one.
Here is one of many examples of such EME communication between a radio HAM at Mawson Base in Antarctica:
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2013/moon-bounce-in-antarctica
Moon bounce in Antarctica, 6th June 2013 (http://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2013/moon-bounce-in-antarctica)
Amateur radio operator Craig Hayhow has used the moon to bounce a radio signal 742 000 km,
from Mawson station in Antarctica to Cornwall in England.
Proving the feat was no accident, two nights later he performed another ‘moon bounce’ to communicate with radio operators in Sweden and New Zealand.
‘The “Holy Grail” for many serious amateur radio operators is bouncing a radio signal off the moon and reflecting it back to Earth to have a conversation with another station on the other side of the world,’ Craig says.
‘The technical challenges are immense, but with modern high-speed computers and sophisticated software, it has become a lot easier in recent years.’
Craig, who is wintering at Mawson station as a Senior Communications Technical Officer, says his first moon bounce on May 4 this year, was the first time it had been achieved from an Australian Antarctic station and only the third time from the Antarctic continent.
Until recently, the technique was only possible using the largest, most powerful and expensive amateur radio stations.
This is because of the distance the signal has to travel, the amount of power needed to send a strong signal and
the loss of signal as it travels through space.
‘The moon has to be lined up perfectly between the two stations to achieve an adequate reflection,
so we use computer programs to find the optimum time to communicate,’ Craig explains.
‘However, most of the transmitted signal is lost into free space and only about seven per cent of the signal
that strikes the moon is reflected; the rest is absorbed.
‘The Earth’s atmosphere distorts and attenuates the signal even further so that by the time the signal reaches
the receiving station it is very weak.’
As Craig is operating from a small, ‘home-made’ station, he can only communicate with receiving stations that use multiple,
‘high gain’ antennas and vast amounts of power.
The reference you posted says that he had to perform it with a facility in Cornwall in England.
Amateur radio operator Craig Hayhow has used the moon to bounce a radio signal 742 000 km,
from Mawson station in Antarctica to Cornwall in England.
The amateur radio operator is working with a facility in England to propagate the signals. Lets do a search on EME Moon Bounce Cornwall England.
The Cornwall facility mentioned is likely the Goonhilly Earth Station and 32-Meter Dish operated by the ESA:
http://www.arrl.org/news/goonhilly-32-meter-dish-to-be-active-on-moonbounce-on-september-1-2
Goonhilly 32-Meter Dish to be Active on Moonbounce on September 1 – 2
A team of moonbounce enthusiasts expect to activate the 32-meter antenna GHY-6 at Goonhilly, on the Lizard Peninsular in Cornwall (IO70jb) in the UK on September 1 – 2, operating as GB6GHY. The group, including G8GTZ, G8GKQ, and G4NNS, will be on the HB9Q logger while operational, which should be between 0800 and 1200 UTC, but “earlier if possible,” they’ve said.
GB6GHY will concentrate on 3.4 GHz on September 1 and 5.7 GHz on September 2, with the ability to switch bands immediately.
“Anyone with a relatively small dish (3-meter or less) should be able to work us,” their announcement said. The European Space Agency is undertaking a project to upgrade Goonhilly Earth Station to track missions to the Moon and Mars. The work will see the GHY-6 antenna — which carried the 1985 Live Aid concert around the world — upgraded over the span of 2 years.
This cunning proof is a service that a space agency provides.
-
We spoke about the Moon Bounce on the other website. It can't be done alone. I know that you saw that thread (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=84214.0).
I may have been aware of that thread, it was almost a year ago and I don't see me posting anything during the moon bounce part of the discussion, so I can't say for sure. But that doesn't really matter.
HAM EME is primarily used to communicate, not measure the distance to the moon. They bounce their transmission off the moon where someone can pick it up 1000's of KM away. That's why the guy in the 2nd video is talking about his transmission being received in Germany, because he bounced his off the Moon and it could be picked up that far away. Again, primarily for communicating, not for measuring. Though it's really easy to use the same technique to measure the distance to the moon. You are literally bouncing back the transmission to your self, time of echo, known speed of the wave and you have distance. No internet required. And it certainly can be done alone. This is all you need to do:
1) Set up the transmitter/receiver and connect it to the antenna.
2) The antenna and radio transmitter should be within line of sight of the Moon, and the receiver should not be disturbed by interference signals, such as large electric installations nearby. 3) Find out where exactly the Moon is positioned in the sky, as seen from your location at the time of the experiment.
4) Select an appropriate frequency in a VHF or UHF amateur radio band.
5) Point the antenna towards the Moon.
6) Connect the oscilloscope to the sound input of the transmitter so that it shows the signal being transmitted.
7) Connect the output of the transmitter/receiver to the second channel of the oscilloscope.
8 Transmit a signal in Morse code or as a series of pulses that easily show on the oscilloscope.
9) On the receiver, listen for the reflection of your signal and watch it on the oscilloscope.
10) Set the transmitter/receiver in the ‘break-in mode’ to quickly switch between transmitting and receiving.
11) Adjust the antenna direction if needed.
12) Align the two signals seen on the oscilloscope and read the time delay between them from the screen.
Using the time delay, calculate the distance d to the Moon using the following equation
d = (c x t) / 2
where
d = distance of Earth to Moon in metres
c = the speed of light, 3 x 108 metres per second
t =time delay in seconds
The radio signal covers the same distance twice (Earth to the Moon, and back), hence the need to divide by 2
For example, with a delay time of 2.56 seconds:
d = [(3 x 108) x 2.56] / 2
d = 348 000 000 m
It's really as simple as that.
-
It's really as simple as that.
No, I just see words of someone presenting themselves as an authority. You provide zero references or examples of amateurs doing this.
You had just previously suggested that people do it alone, and now reverse that sentiment, but are now posting your special way for how to do it alone, available only on an internet message forum and the Ages 11 - 19 material for students you copy-pasted your instructions from (https://www.scienceinschool.org/content/moon-and-back-reflecting-radio-signal-calculate-distance).
-
It's really as simple as that.
No, I just see words of someone presenting themselves as an authority. You provide zero references or examples of amateurs doing this.
You had just previously suggested that people do it alone, and now reverse that sentiment, but are now posting your special way for how to do it alone, available only on an internet message forum and the Ages 11 - 19 material for students you copy-pasted your instructions from (https://www.scienceinschool.org/content/moon-and-back-reflecting-radio-signal-calculate-distance).
I'm not following. Yeah, I copied the instrux from that site. Because that's how you do it and how simple it is. What about the procedure do you disagree with?
And when I said you can do it alone, I meant you don't need the internet, you just need to be an amateur licensed HAM Radio Operator with the normal HAM equipment. Bounce the signal, record the echo duration and do the simple calculation. That's it. Really quite easy.
-
You haven't provided an example of anyone doing this. You provided what amounts to content written for children. You may want to read that website you copy-pasted your material from closer though. It talks about streaming the data over the internet.
"What other sources of small errors are there in your experiment?
Delays in streaming the signals over the internet introduces a small error in the calculated distance."
(https://i.imgur.com/RbUlBJj.png)
-
You haven't provided an example of anyone doing this. You provided what amounts to content written for children. You may want to read that website you copy-pasted your material from closer though. It talks about streaming the data over the internet.
"What other sources of small errors are there in your experiment?
Delays in streaming the signals over the internet introduces a small error in the calculated distance."
(https://i.imgur.com/RbUlBJj.png)
I don't really get what you're after. What form should the example be in? Do I need to show a video of someone piloting a plane from NYC to LA to show that someone can pilot a plane from NYC to LA?
Yes, it's a European Science Teachers site. So what? And yes, it says, "If the radio amateur sends the signals from the amateur radio station, the returning signals can be streamed via the internet to be viewed at your school." So what? The actual bounce and measurement doesn't NEED the internet. (Remember, HAM's have been doing this for decades, long before the "Internet"). All they are saying is that the HAM operator can send the results to your school. If you read the instrux again, a single operator can perform this, no streaming, no delays. Just log your oscilloscope results and do a little math. Done.
And Earth-Moon-Earth is not some obscure thing for HAM communications. The National Association of HAM Radio (ARRL) even has an EME contest every year to see how far HAM's can moon bounce a transmission. http://www.arrl.org/eme-contest
So what about EME do you disagree with?
-
I don't really get what you're after. What form should the example be in?
The example should show that people are doing this alone, and see signals from the Moon at the required delay. You have provided material for children.
Yes, it's a European Science Teachers site. So what? And yes, it says, "If the radio amateur sends the signals from the amateur radio station, the returning signals can be streamed via the internet to be viewed at your school." So what? The actual bounce and measurement doesn't NEED the internet. (Remember, HAM's have been doing this for decades, long before the "Internet"). All they are saying is that the HAM operator can send the results to your school. If you read the instrux again, a single operator can perform this, no streaming, no delays. Just log your oscilloscope results and do a little math. Done.
The internet has existed for "decades". You have no further material to provide and must insist on this material written for children that you found.
-
I don't really get what you're after. What form should the example be in?
The example should show that people are doing this alone, and see signals from the Moon at the required delay. You have provided material for children.
The instructions are so simple, if you are a licensed HAM radio operator with the equipment listed, that even a student could do it. Are school-aged kids incapable of performing experiments? Yours is a very odd argument, if you could even call it that.
Yes, it's a European Science Teachers site. So what? And yes, it says, "If the radio amateur sends the signals from the amateur radio station, the returning signals can be streamed via the internet to be viewed at your school." So what? The actual bounce and measurement doesn't NEED the internet. (Remember, HAM's have been doing this for decades, long before the "Internet"). All they are saying is that the HAM operator can send the results to your school. If you read the instrux again, a single operator can perform this, no streaming, no delays. Just log your oscilloscope results and do a little math. Done.
The internet has existed for "decades". You have no further material to provide and must insist on this material written for children that you found.
Yes, the internet has been around for decades. And HAM Earth-Moon-Earth transmissions are decades older than the internet. In fact, from an article published by The National Association of HAM Radio (ARRL):
"A team of folks at the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories accomplished the first attempt at bouncing signals off the Moon on January 10, 1946 on a frequency of 111.5 MHz...The return echoes from the Moon were both visually and audibly recorded.
The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP... It was not until after many years of work that the first 2304 MHz EME QSO took place between W4HHK and W3GKP on October 19, 1970."
https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/0210028.pdf
Regarding W4HHK and W3GKP moon bounce transmission (and others), here is what their transmission looked like:
(https://i.imgur.com/AQ1Rb3a.png)
From the same article, here's what W5LUA had to say about his first attempt at an EME, "On a cold winter night in December, I was poised and ready to “bleep” at the Moon. My four 14 element Swan antennas, 500 W at the antenna and my 1.5 dB highly optimized homebrew LNA were ready. At the sight of the Moon coming across the horizon in Richardson, I sent out three dashes and upon returning to receive, I heard dah-dah-dah! I could not believe it. I did it again and again. Every time I heard my echoes. Boy, was I in heaven! "
And, btw, he was a solo operator. In other words, he transmitted and received his own signal. I don't know why you're hung up on this 'you need the internet' thing, because you don't. And this 'you can't do it alone' thing, because you can. And this 'kids can't do it' thing, because it's pretty straight forward with the right gear and license a kid could do it.
-
How does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
You have answered your own question. Software is programmed by the programmers and not the operators.
Do you think researchers in an observatory are unable to get and interpret their own data? These guys know exactly what they are doing. They shoot a giant laser to a mirror on the Moon and get some of that back. They know the system they operate.
Do you have any evidence that any of Grasse's (or Matera (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matera_Laser_Ranging_Observatory), or Wettzell (https://www.bkg.bund.de/DE/Observatorium-Wettzell/Messsysteme-Wettzell/Wettzell-Laser-Ranging-System/wettzell-laser-ranging-system.html)) hardware or software is provided or controlled by NASA?
Both Grasse and Matera are part of the ILRS network.
So? Grasse was operating well before the ILRS network even existed.
https://ilrs.gsfc.nasa.gov/technology/software/index.html
"Software provides a key element in the acquisition, reduction, and analysis of laser ranging data. Since so much time and effort has already been spent on creating software applicable to laser ranging, it is preferable to have the fruits of those labors be freely available when possible. Having a ready library of software will either spare builders of new stations the work of re-inventing the wheel or to at least provide a starting point from which to build something greater."
Good, a list of open source software: that means anyone with knowledge of the programming language can check it does what it's supposed to do. Some of the links point to European sites. Using common tools makes sense for scientists that do the same things.
How could NASA possibly use that to control the output of any observatory? For this to happen, there would need to be closed-source software, directly provided by NASA, that all LLR observatories are forced to install and use. Researchers would probably refuse to use such software, and would definitely notice if the results didn't match the data from their experiments.
"NASA is involved in a global network of observatories that perform LLR" is extremely far away from "NASA has total control over anything anyone does in that network".
Sure, if you try to find an organization that does anything space-related and has no connection at all with NASA, that will probably be hard or even impossible, because that's how globalized science works. But conversely, NASA is collaborating with other organizations.
In short: NASA doesn't have total control over foreign observatories and couldn't possibly force them to publish false data. That would take a global conspiracy.
-
Tom,
Is there something intrinsically false about instructional material aimed at individuals with an age-range including high school students, college students, married people, voters, car drivers and private pilots?
And if its target age-group also includes "children", how does that devalue its merit?
-
The radio Moon Bounce experiment is a really good method that you can easily see with your own eyes.
HAM radio operators are a friendly bunch, after all their hobby is reaching out to other people all over the world.
If anyone truly wants to prove to themselves that this works, just contact your local HAM group and ask if someone would be willing to demonstrate this for you. I expect you would get plenty of people more than happy to show off their equipment and give you a live demonstration.
This is a great and accessible experiment, and nothing beats direct personal observation. Why not give it a try?
-
Yes, the internet has been around for decades. And HAM Earth-Moon-Earth transmissions are decades older than the internet. In fact, from an article published by The National Association of HAM Radio (ARRL):
"A team of folks at the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories accomplished the first attempt at bouncing signals off the Moon on January 10, 1946 on a frequency of
You must be getting pretty desperate of you have to cite something that the military allegedly did during the cold war. I guess you really do have nothing.
-
My friend doesnt understand why that's a bad thing... or how that hurts that argument if HAMheads have been doing that 'since the cold war'.
-
My friend doesnt understand why that's a bad thing... or how that hurts that argument if HAMheads have been doing that 'since the cold war'.
If we believe in the quote "All warfare is deception" from the Art of War, which military commanders and generals often tout, then should not believe in a word they say. It's also why we shouldn't have blind belief in NASA.
-
Ok, I can completely accept the potential motivation for faking space supremacy ( I firmly believe the evidence is overwhelming that they actually did what they say, but I definitely get the sentiment).
How are amateur HAM radio ops part of the space supremacy or NASA? I'm not trying to be a jerk here I'm just not understanding the connection at all
-
Ok, I can completely accept the potential motivation for faking space supremacy ( I firmly believe the evidence is overwhelming that they actually did what they say, but I definitely get the sentiment).
How are amateur HAM radio ops part of the space supremacy or NASA? I'm not trying to be a jerk here I'm just not understanding the connection at all
Long range communications techniques are valued information. The falsity could have nothing to do with faking space, only that is what one would expect to see at that time the claim was made. We are told that the military announced to the world exactly what frequencies it used, how it did it, and what it saw, for a military tactical advantage. It would be an absurdity that they would give to their enemies what is essentially a weapon. Claiming an that organization which prides itself on deception is providing truthful information would be a logical contradiction.
The "overwhelming evidence" for space comes from the government making those claims and citing their own confirmations of those claims, or otherwise providing others the software and tools necessary for verification
-
Yeah, you've covered a lot of the readings for skepticism on the wiki so let's save that for another thread... but I'm interested in what tactical advantage is offered by knowing the precise distance to the moon.
I'm not an astronomy buff by any means, but I'm sure we had it nailed down pretty close to the actual distance before HAM radio?
-
Yes, the internet has been around for decades. And HAM Earth-Moon-Earth transmissions are decades older than the internet. In fact, from an article published by The National Association of HAM Radio (ARRL):
"A team of folks at the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories accomplished the first attempt at bouncing signals off the Moon on January 10, 1946 on a frequency of
You must be getting pretty desperate of you have to cite something that the military allegedly did during the cold war. I guess you really do have nothing.
I'm not sure how, but you seemed to miss everything after that sentence - You must be getting pretty desperate that you have to have to disregard 9/10's of a post - Here's what you seemed to have missed:
The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP... It was not until after many years of work that the first 2304 MHz EME QSO took place between W4HHK and W3GKP on October 19, 1970.[/i]"
https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/0210028.pdf
Regarding W4HHK and W3GKP moon bounce transmission (and others), here is what their transmission looked like:
(https://i.imgur.com/AQ1Rb3a.png)
From the same article, here's what W5LUA had to say about his first attempt at an EME, "On a cold winter night in December, I was poised and ready to “bleep” at the Moon. My four 14 element Swan antennas, 500 W at the antenna and my 1.5 dB highly optimized homebrew LNA were ready. At the sight of the Moon coming across the horizon in Richardson, I sent out three dashes and upon returning to receive, I heard dah-dah-dah! I could not believe it. I did it again and again. Every time I heard my echoes. Boy, was I in heaven! "
And, btw, he was a solo operator. In other words, he transmitted and received his own signal. I don't know why you're hung up on this 'you need the internet' thing, because you don't. And this 'you can't do it alone' thing, because you can. And this 'kids can't do it' thing, because it's pretty straight forward with the right gear and license a kid could do it.
The first amateur HAM moon echo bounce looked like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/NQUCSCC.jpg)
Neat that amateur, non-military, non-NASA HAM Radio operators around the world have been doing moon bounce echos and transmissions since the 50's, wouldn't you say? The National Association for Amateur Radio even has annual contests to see how far and with what clarity they can bounce them.
http://www.arrl.org/eme-contest
Super cool that even amateur, non-military, non-NASA folks can do it, right?
-
My friend doesnt understand why that's a bad thing... or how that hurts that argument if HAMheads have been doing that 'since the cold war'.
If we believe in the quote "All warfare is deception" from the Art of War, which military commanders and generals often tout, then should not believe in a word they say. It's also why we shouldn't have blind belief in NASA.
We don't have blind belief in NASA. The Australians were relaying Apollo signals for the Americans.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/19/they-nailed-it-how-a-little-dish-in-australia-broadcast-the-moon-landing-to-the-world
Jodrell Bank in the UK were tracking the craft and a Russian unmanned one
https://www.jodrellbank.net/20-july-1969-lovell-telescope-tracked-eagle-lander-onto-surface-moon/
There is lots of 3rd party evidence, there's a whole Wiki page about it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
And in terms of the moon bounce stuff being explained to you here...you're a zetetic, you're an empiricist. Do your own tests if you're that invested in finding out the truth.
-
No, I just see words of someone presenting themselves as an authority. You provide zero references or examples of amateurs doing this.
Like Rowbotham?
-
Yes, the internet has been around for decades. And HAM Earth-Moon-Earth transmissions are decades older than the internet. In fact, from an article published by The National Association of HAM Radio (ARRL):
"A team of folks at the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories accomplished the first attempt at bouncing signals off the Moon on January 10, 1946 on a frequency of
You must be getting pretty desperate of you have to cite something that the military allegedly did during the cold war. I guess you really do have nothing.
I'm not sure how, but you seemed to miss everything after that sentence - You must be getting pretty desperate that you have to have to disregard 9/10's of a post - Here's what you seemed to have missed:
The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP... It was not until after many years of work that the first 2304 MHz EME QSO took place between W4HHK and W3GKP on October 19, 1970.[/i]"
https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/0210028.pdf
You're wrong though. Even that reference references Sam Harris. From your source:
"The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP. VHF pioneer Sam Harris, W1FZJ, was also very active in the late '50s. Having heard his echoes on both 50 and 144 MHz, Sam decided it was time to switch to 1296 MHz"
From A short history of geophysical radar at Arecibo Observatory (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c5f9/2309b0e5c0ebb434e3df89b6876292f62f74.pdf)
"The Higuillales location was that of an earlier 15-m parabolic dish built by – and at the then residence of – the famed ham radio operator Sam Harris (W1FZJ) and his wife Helen (W1HOY). Sam Harris was the head receiver engineer for AO. He pioneered early moon bounce communications at 432 MHz using this dish, as well as the main AO dish (DeMaw, 1965)."
AO = Arecibo Observatory
From To See the Unseen: A History of Planetary Radar Astronomy (https://books.google.com/books?id=jpR-AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA87&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj7qP2lz6_sAhVxLH0KHSm6D9wQ6AEwAXoECBoQAg#v=onepage&q&f=false) on Arecibo Observatory:
In 1961, when the first successful detections of Venus took place, virtually the sole funder of planetary radar astronomy in the United States was the military. The one exception was JPL's Goldstone facility, which NASA funded. Ten years later, the NSF took over the role of prime underwriter of the Arecibo Observatory from ARPA, and NASA agreed to support a major S-band upgrade of the facility‘s radar. As a result, NASA became the de facto patron of planetary radar astronomy at Arecibo, Goldstone, and Haystack. NASA supported planetary radar at those three centers through a variety of financial arrangements. Only at Arecibo, however, did NASA formally agree to support a planetary radar facility, as well as the research conducted with it. That agreement, moreover, was an obvious departure from its policy formulated in the wake of the Whitford Report.
NASA and the military (ARPA) has been funding this facility from the start.
NASA continues to provide funding: Arecibo Observatory Gets $19 Million NASA Grant (https://www.ucf.edu/news/arecibo-observatory-gets-19-million-nasa-grant-to-help-protect-earth-from-asteroids/)
So this conclusion you made:
Super cool that even amateur, non-military, non-NASA folks can do it, right?
Is dead wrong. An engineer for a NASA-connected facility isn't an amateur, or unconnected to NASA.
-
Yes, the internet has been around for decades. And HAM Earth-Moon-Earth transmissions are decades older than the internet. In fact, from an article published by The National Association of HAM Radio (ARRL):
"A team of folks at the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories accomplished the first attempt at bouncing signals off the Moon on January 10, 1946 on a frequency of
You must be getting pretty desperate of you have to cite something that the military allegedly did during the cold war. I guess you really do have nothing.
I'm not sure how, but you seemed to miss everything after that sentence - You must be getting pretty desperate that you have to have to disregard 9/10's of a post - Here's what you seemed to have missed:
The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP... It was not until after many years of work that the first 2304 MHz EME QSO took place between W4HHK and W3GKP on October 19, 1970.[/i]"
https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/0210028.pdf
Super cool that even amateur, non-military, non-NASA folks can do it, right?
You're wrong though. Even that reference references Sam Harris. From your source:
"The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP. VHF pioneer Sam Harris, W1FZJ, was also very active in the late '50s."
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c5f9/2309b0e5c0ebb434e3df89b6876292f62f74.pdf
"The Higuillales location was that of an earlier 15-m parabolic dish built by – and at the then residence of – the famed ham radio operator Sam Harris (W1FZJ) and his wife Helen (W1HOY). Sam Harris was the head receiver engineer for AO. He pioneered early moon bounce communications at 432 MHz using this dish, as well as the main AO dish (DeMaw, 1965)."
AO = Arecibo Observatory
To See the Unseen: A History of Planetary Radar Astronomy (https://books.google.com/books?id=jpR-AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA87&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj7qP2lz6_sAhVxLH0KHSm6D9wQ6AEwAXoECBoQAg#v=onepage&q&f=false)
In 1961, when the first successful detections of Venus took place, virtually the sole funder of planetary radar astronomy in the United States was the military. The one exception was JPL's Goldstone facility, which NASA funded. Ten years later, the NSF took over the role of prime underwriter of the Arecibo Observatory from ARPA, and NASA agreed to support a major S-band upgrade of the facility‘s radar. As a result, NASA became the de facto patron of planetary radar astronomy at Arecibo, Goldstone, and Haystack. NASA supported planetary radar at those three centers through a variety of financial arrangements. Only at Arecibo, however, did NASA formally agree to support a planetary radar facility, as well as the research conducted with it. That agreement, moreover, was an obvious departure from its policy formulated in the wake of the Whitford Report.
So NASA has been funding this facility from the start.
NASA continues to provide funding: Arecibo Observatory Gets $19 Million NASA Grant (https://www.ucf.edu/news/arecibo-observatory-gets-19-million-nasa-grant-to-help-protect-earth-from-asteroids/)
Look at the dates you listed.
He performed his Moon bounce experiment as a amateur in 1953.
NASA was founded in 1958.
Th Arecibo Observatory started construction in 1960.
He did his experiments ten years before the Arecibo Observatory went into operation in 1963, and five years before NASA was even in existence.
So NASA could not have been funding him from the start, since he was doing it before NASA was even founded.
-
The NASA facilities existed. It just wasn't called NASA. The US allegedly put up a satellite before NASA was "founded". It was just a name change of existing organizations.
-
The NASA facilities existed. It just wasn't called NASA. You are aware that the US allegedly put up a satellite before NASA was "founded" right? It was just a name change of existing organizations.
Then you need to find documentation of whatever agency you think paid him to do his 1953 moon-bounce.
It wasn't NASA. He didn't work for the Arecibo Observatory yet.
All indications I can find was that he was just what is claimed, an amateur HAM operator who bounced a signal off the Moon.
-
Yes, the internet has been around for decades. And HAM Earth-Moon-Earth transmissions are decades older than the internet. In fact, from an article published by The National Association of HAM Radio (ARRL):
"A team of folks at the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories accomplished the first attempt at bouncing signals off the Moon on January 10, 1946 on a frequency of
You must be getting pretty desperate of you have to cite something that the military allegedly did during the cold war. I guess you really do have nothing.
I'm not sure how, but you seemed to miss everything after that sentence - You must be getting pretty desperate that you have to have to disregard 9/10's of a post - Here's what you seemed to have missed:
The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP... It was not until after many years of work that the first 2304 MHz EME QSO took place between W4HHK and W3GKP on October 19, 1970.[/i]"
https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/tis/info/pdf/0210028.pdf
You're wrong though. Even that reference references Sam Harris. From your source:
"The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP. VHF pioneer Sam Harris, W1FZJ, was also very active in the late '50s."
So what if it references Sam Harris. The quote about the amateurs has nothing to do with Sam Harris. It's right there in the quote, "The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP." See that, by W4AO and W3GKP? Sam Harris, W1FZJ, was doing his own thing and had nothing to do with the amateurs, W4AO and W3GKP. Why are you bringing this Sam Harris guy up?
So this conclusion you made:
Super cool that even amateur, non-military, non-NASA folks can do it, right?
Is dead wrong. An engineer for a NASA-connected facility isn't an amateur, or unconnected to NASA.
Actually, your conclusion is just weird and irrelevant. You bring up this Sam Harris guy who was doing his own thing and had nothing to do with the amateurs mentioned. Then go on about Harris' affiliation with space agencies, or whatever.
Focus on the amateurs referenced - What about their echo testing do you object to?
-
So what if it references Sam Harris. The quote about the amateurs has nothing to do with Sam Harris. It's right there in the quote, "The first amateur work at receiving one’s own echoes was accomplished back in 1953 on 144 MHz by W4AO and W3GKP." See that, by W4AO and W3GKP? Sam Harris, W1FZJ, was doing his own thing and had nothing to do with the amateurs, W4AO and W3GKP. Why are you bringing this Sam Harris guy up?
So this conclusion you made:
Super cool that even amateur, non-military, non-NASA folks can do it, right?
Is dead wrong. An engineer for a NASA-connected facility isn't an amateur, or unconnected to NASA.
Actually, your conclusion is just weird and irrelevant. You bring up this Sam Harris guy who was doing his own thing and had nothing to do with the amateurs mentioned. Then go on about Harris' affiliation with space agencies, or whatever.
Focus on the amateurs referenced - What about their echo testing do you object to?
W4AO and W3GKP were part of Project Moonbeam
From http://www.ok2kkw.com/eme1960/eme1960eng.htm
(https://i.imgur.com/esEYD0w.png)
Project Moonbeam had a "staff", from that same page:
"Meanwhile, the staff of Moonbeam had been augmented by the addition of Ted Tuckerman, W3LZD, of Dunmore, Penna., who erected a 30-wavelength rhombic array in time for tests in late January."
Who was paying this "staff" to work on Project Moonbeam?
From Project Vanguard: The NASA History (https://books.google.com/books?id=WzT8pH46rLYC&pg=PA148&dq=%22project+moonbeam%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjwgoCM3a_sAhXAFTQIHVaVCpEQ6AEwAHoECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=%22project%20moonbeam%22&f=false) -
(https://i.imgur.com/IKg0Voy.png)
So it was the military sponsoring this project and paying that staff, to support their satellite/orbiter project and tell the world that amateurs tracked satellites, as related in a book titled Project Vanguard: The NASA History. Totally independent. Yeah right.
Once again we see that you are mistaken for taking these sources at face value.
-
Who was paying this "staff" to work on Project Moonbeam?
From Project Vanguard: The NASA History (https://books.google.com/books?id=WzT8pH46rLYC&pg=PA148&dq=%22project+moonbeam%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjwgoCM3a_sAhXAFTQIHVaVCpEQ6AEwAHoECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=%22project%20moonbeam%22&f=false) -
(https://i.imgur.com/IKg0Voy.png)
So it was the military sponsoring this project and paying that staff, to support their Army-Orbiter project and tell the world that amateurs tracked satellites, as related in a book titled Project Vanguard: The NASA History. Totally independent. Yeah right.
Once again we see that you are mistaken for taking these sources at face value.
You are getting two projects called "Moonbeam" mixed up. Again, these two amateurs did their work before the project you mentioned existed.
The amateur "Project Moonbeam" done by W4AO and W3GKP in 1953. This bounced radio off the Moon.
And the Project Vanguard "Moonbeam" which wasn't started until 1956 to fund amateur HAM operator projects. You even quoted that Project Vanguard started in 1955.
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4202.pdf
The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USNC's Executive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public interest in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee's suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized "Moonbeam" for ham radio operators
-
Once again we see that you are mistaken for taking these sources at face value.
Actually, it is you who are once again mistaken by failing to line up the historical record in the right order. As JSS just pointed out, you have the wrong dates. The amateur moonbounce was in 53', pre-dating any NRL affiliation by 2-3 years. So again, what about their amateur moonbounce echo test do you disagree with and why? And please pay special attention to facts.
-
You are getting two projects called "Moonbeam" mixed up. Again, these two amateurs did their work before the project you mentioned existed.
The amateur "Project Moonbeam" done by W4AO and W3GKP in 1953. This bounced radio off the Moon.
And the Project Vanguard "Moonbeam" which wasn't started until 1956 to fund amateur HAM operator projects. You even quoted that Project Vanguard started in 1955.
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4202.pdf
The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USNC's Executive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public interest in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee's suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized "Moonbeam" for ham radio operators
Oh, so now you have two different Project Moonbeams for radio hams, one which is funded by the military and one which you think is independent, and which both take place within the few years of each other. How absurd. It says in the caption of the first image I provided "after three years of trying". These projects take years.
You quote doesn't even say that it was started in 1956. It says "in early 1956 the technical panel authorized 'Moonbeam' for ham radio operators;". That doesn't say that it was started in 1956. It says that they authorized it for something.
Names like Project Moonbeam and Project Vanguard are clearly military-style project names.
Actually, it is you who are once again mistaken by failing to line up the historical record in the right order. As JSS just pointed out, you have the wrong dates. The amateur moonbounce was in 53', pre-dating any NRL affiliation by 2-3 years. So again, what about their amateur moonbounce echo test do you disagree with and why? And please pay special attention to facts.
I do pay attention to the facts. You don't. If you had gone to the link JSS provided you would see what it was authorized for. The quote continues with a semicolon. Here is the whole thing.
"The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a
part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USN C’s Execu-
tive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public inter-
est in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee’s
suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the
doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized
“Moonbeam” for ham radio operators; the Naval Research Laboratory
accepted responsibility for indoctrinating licensed applicants in the essen-
tial do’s and don’t’s, chiefly by means of a descriptive and technical manual
to be prepared by John Hagen. At the same time Whipple agreed to draft
instructions for Moonwatch teams."
So no. It, doesn't say it was started in 1956. You aren't paying attention. Do learn what a semicolon is, and do read the sources that you are trying to champion. You are continuously wrong, and should do something to change that.
-
You are getting two projects called "Moonbeam" mixed up. Again, these two amateurs did their work before the project you mentioned existed.
The amateur "Project Moonbeam" done by W4AO and W3GKP in 1953. This bounced radio off the Moon.
And the Project Vanguard "Moonbeam" which wasn't started until 1956 to fund amateur HAM operator projects. You even quoted that Project Vanguard started in 1955.
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4202.pdf
The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USNC's Executive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public interest in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee's suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized "Moonbeam" for ham radio operators
Oh, so now you have two different Project Moonbeams for radio hams, one which is funded by the military and one which you think is independent, and which both take place within the few years of each other. How absurd. It says in the caption of the first image I provided "after three years of trying". These projects take years.
You quote doesn't even say that it was started in 1956. It says "in early 1956 the technical panel authorized 'Moonbeam' for ham radio operators;". That doesn't say that it was started in 1956. It says that they authorized it for something.
Names like Project Moonbeam and Project Vanguard are clearly military-style project names.
Actually, it is you who are once again mistaken by failing to line up the historical record in the right order. As JSS just pointed out, you have the wrong dates. The amateur moonbounce was in 53', pre-dating any NRL affiliation by 2-3 years. So again, what about their amateur moonbounce echo test do you disagree with and why? And please pay special attention to facts.
I do pay attention to the facts. You don't. If you had gone to the link JSS provided you would see what it was authorized for. The quote continues with a semicolon. Here is the whole thing.
"The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a
part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USN C’s Execu-
tive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public inter-
est in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee’s
suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the
doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized
“Moonbeam” for ham radio operators; the Naval Research Laboratory
accepted responsibility for indoctrinating licensed applicants in the essen-
tial do’s and don’t’s, chiefly by means of a descriptive and technical manual
to be prepared by John Hagen. At the same time Whipple agreed to draft
instructions for Moonwatch teams."
So no. It, doesn't say it was started in 1956. You aren't paying attention. Do learn what a semicolon is, and do read your sources that you are trying to champion thoroughly. You are continuously wrong.
Again, you're missing the facts in the historical record. Project Vanguard didn't exist until 1955. The amateur HAMs did their landmark moonbounce echo in 53'. From the Naval Research Lab history:
"Vanguard Project
Between 1955 and 1959, NRL conducted the first American satellite program called Vanguard. The program was initiated to represent the United States in the International Geophysical Year (IGY). IGY was a cooperative international scientific effort to study the physical properties of Earth. "
https://www.nrl.navy.mil/accomplishments/rockets/vanguard-project
-
You are getting two projects called "Moonbeam" mixed up. Again, these two amateurs did their work before the project you mentioned existed.
The amateur "Project Moonbeam" done by W4AO and W3GKP in 1953. This bounced radio off the Moon.
And the Project Vanguard "Moonbeam" which wasn't started until 1956 to fund amateur HAM operator projects. You even quoted that Project Vanguard started in 1955.
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4202.pdf
The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USNC's Executive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public interest in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee's suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized "Moonbeam" for ham radio operators
Oh, so now you have two different Project Moonbeams for radio hams, one which is funded by the military and one which you think is independent, and which both take place within the few years of each other. How absurd. It says in the caption of the first image I provided "after three years of trying". These projects take years.
You quote doesn't even say that it was started in 1956. It says "in early 1956 the technical panel authorized 'Moonbeam' for ham radio operators;". That doesn't say that it was started in 1956. It says that they authorized it for something.
Names like Project Moonbeam and Project Vanguard are clearly military-style project names.
Did you consider that the Project Vanguard Moonbeam may have been named in honor of the HAM operators project? I agree it's an unlikely coincidence, but they are clearly different projects as the dates prove.
Your own quote shows that Project Vanguard didn't start until 1955. My quote is talking about Project Vanguard authorizing Moonbeam to start in 1956. How would Project Vanguard have been paying the two amateurs in 1953 if they didn't exist until 1955?
I still suggest you contact your local HAM group and ask if anyone can demo the technique. Seeing it performed by an amateur by your own eyes would be the best proof, wouldn't it?
-
a
-
You are getting two projects called "Moonbeam" mixed up. Again, these two amateurs did their work before the project you mentioned existed.
The amateur "Project Moonbeam" done by W4AO and W3GKP in 1953. This bounced radio off the Moon.
And the Project Vanguard "Moonbeam" which wasn't started until 1956 to fund amateur HAM operator projects. You even quoted that Project Vanguard started in 1955.
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4202.pdf
The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USNC's Executive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public interest in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee's suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized "Moonbeam" for ham radio operators
Oh, so now you have two different Project Moonbeams for radio hams, one which is funded by the military and one which you think is independent, and which both take place within the few years of each other. How absurd. It says in the caption of the first image I provided "after three years of trying". These projects take years.
You quote doesn't even say that it was started in 1956. It says "in early 1956 the technical panel authorized 'Moonbeam' for ham radio operators;". That doesn't say that it was started in 1956. It says that they authorized it for something.
Names like Project Moonbeam and Project Vanguard are clearly military-style project names.
Actually, it is you who are once again mistaken by failing to line up the historical record in the right order. As JSS just pointed out, you have the wrong dates. The amateur moonbounce was in 53', pre-dating any NRL affiliation by 2-3 years. So again, what about their amateur moonbounce echo test do you disagree with and why? And please pay special attention to facts.
I do pay attention to the facts. You don't. If you had gone to the link JSS provided you would see what it was authorized for. The quote continues with a semicolon. Here is the whole thing.
"The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a
part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USN C’s Execu-
tive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public inter-
est in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee’s
suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the
doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized
“Moonbeam” for ham radio operators; the Naval Research Laboratory
accepted responsibility for indoctrinating licensed applicants in the essen-
tial do’s and don’t’s, chiefly by means of a descriptive and technical manual
to be prepared by John Hagen. At the same time Whipple agreed to draft
instructions for Moonwatch teams."
So no. It, doesn't say it was started in 1956. You aren't paying attention. Do learn what a semicolon is, and do read your sources that you are trying to champion thoroughly. You are continuously wrong.
Again, you're missing the facts in the historical record. Project Vanguard didn't exist until 1955. The amateur HAMs did their landmark moonbounce echo in 53'. From the Naval Research Lab history:
"Vanguard Project
Between 1955 and 1959, NRL conducted the first American satellite program called Vanguard. The program was initiated to represent the United States in the International Geophysical Year (IGY). IGY was a cooperative international scientific effort to study the physical properties of Earth. "
https://www.nrl.navy.mil/accomplishments/rockets/vanguard-project
The Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) started both Vanguard and Project Moonbeam. The NRL predates all of those projects.
https://archive.org/stream/NASA_NTRS_Archive_19670008308/NASA_NTRS_Archive_19670008308_djvu.txt
"In cooperation with the American Radio Relay League, NRL started Project Moonbeam, the electronic cousin to the SAO amateur optical tracking activity, Project Moonwatch."
We see that the NRL is working with amateur organizations like the American Radio Relay League on projects, to be able to tell the world that their work is verified by amateurs.
From the ARRL website:
http://www.arrl.org/about-arrl
"ARRL is the national association for Amateur Radio in the US. Founded in 1914 by Hiram Percy Maxim as The American Radio Relay League, ARRL is a noncommercial organization of radio amateurs."
-
We see that the NRL is working with amateur organizations like the American Radio Relay League to get projects done, to be able to tell the world that their work is verified by amateurs.
You’re an amateur, can’t you do some tests yourself? You seem to spend a lot of time trying to discredit evidence from others and very little time actually doing any tests yourself. This sounds like a worthy candidate for FE research, no?
-
You are getting two projects called "Moonbeam" mixed up. Again, these two amateurs did their work before the project you mentioned existed.
The amateur "Project Moonbeam" done by W4AO and W3GKP in 1953. This bounced radio off the Moon.
And the Project Vanguard "Moonbeam" which wasn't started until 1956 to fund amateur HAM operator projects. You even quoted that Project Vanguard started in 1955.
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4202.pdf
The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USNC's Executive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public interest in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee's suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized "Moonbeam" for ham radio operators
Oh, so now you have two different Project Moonbeams for radio hams, one which is funded by the military and one which you think is independent, and which both take place within the few years of each other. How absurd. It says in the caption of the first image I provided "after three years of trying". These projects take years.
You quote doesn't even say that it was started in 1956. It says "in early 1956 the technical panel authorized 'Moonbeam' for ham radio operators;". That doesn't say that it was started in 1956. It says that they authorized it for something.
Names like Project Moonbeam and Project Vanguard are clearly military-style project names.
Actually, it is you who are once again mistaken by failing to line up the historical record in the right order. As JSS just pointed out, you have the wrong dates. The amateur moonbounce was in 53', pre-dating any NRL affiliation by 2-3 years. So again, what about their amateur moonbounce echo test do you disagree with and why? And please pay special attention to facts.
I do pay attention to the facts. You don't. If you had gone to the link JSS provided you would see what it was authorized for. The quote continues with a semicolon. Here is the whole thing.
"The enthusiasm of amateur star-gazers over the opportunity to have a
part in an important scientific venture early impressed the USN C’s Execu-
tive Committee. Here evidently was a simple way of widening public inter-
est in the IGY both at home and abroad. In response to the committee’s
suggestions that the men in charge of other phases of the IGY open the
doors to amateur participation, in early 1956 the technical panel authorized
“Moonbeam” for ham radio operators; the Naval Research Laboratory
accepted responsibility for indoctrinating licensed applicants in the essen-
tial do’s and don’t’s, chiefly by means of a descriptive and technical manual
to be prepared by John Hagen. At the same time Whipple agreed to draft
instructions for Moonwatch teams."
So no. It, doesn't say it was started in 1956. You aren't paying attention. Do learn what a semicolon is, and do read your sources that you are trying to champion thoroughly. You are continuously wrong.
Again, you're missing the facts in the historical record. Project Vanguard didn't exist until 1955. The amateur HAMs did their landmark moonbounce echo in 53'. From the Naval Research Lab history:
"Vanguard Project
Between 1955 and 1959, NRL conducted the first American satellite program called Vanguard. The program was initiated to represent the United States in the International Geophysical Year (IGY). IGY was a cooperative international scientific effort to study the physical properties of Earth. "
https://www.nrl.navy.mil/accomplishments/rockets/vanguard-project
The Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) started both Vanguard and Project Moonbeam. The NRL predates all of those projects.
https://archive.org/stream/NASA_NTRS_Archive_19670008308/NASA_NTRS_Archive_19670008308_djvu.txt
"In cooperation with the American Radio Relay League, NRL started Project Moonbeam, the electronic cousin to the SAO amateur optical tracking activity, Project Moonwatch."
We see that the NRL is working with amateur organizations like the American Radio Relay League on projects, to be able to tell the world that their work is verified by amateurs.
From the ARRL website:
http://www.arrl.org/about-arrl
"ARRL is the national association for Amateur Radio in the US. Founded in 1914 by Hiram Percy Maxim as The American Radio Relay League, ARRL is a noncommercial organization of radio amateurs."
What's your point exactly? The NRL's Project Vanguard started their Project Moonbeam in 1956, a year after Project Vanguard was started in 1955. Our two amateur HAMs successfully executed their EME moon bounces in 1953. Looks like there was even another project 'Moonbeam', called the "Sohio Project Moonbeam", in 1958. Seems like 'Moonbeam ' was a popular name for amateur and military efforts alike to beam radio signals off the Moon. Go figure.
Bottomline, you are wrong, the first successful efforts to echo a radio signal off the moon were performed by non-military, non-military sponsored HAM amateurs.