Moonbounce - Bouncing radio waves off the moon

I've researched the topic a bit, and nowhere in any scientific paper or study could I find data for the time delay from radio signals bouncing off the moon. I've searched and searched, and no such figure could be found. By the wording on the papers I have found it sounds like the signal bounces back almost immediately.

Why are you searching the scientific literature for publications on this topic?  The whole point of this thread was to demonstrate that the Earth-Moon distance can be measured by amateur radio operators, whose activities won't appear in a scientific journal.

Quote

well i got what i asked for; the fe excuse.  it's all a government hoax.  (sigh...)  such a cop-out.

edit: ad hominem removed

If you can find a study on the subject which was not conducted by NASA we would be more than happy to take it at face value.

you replied to me.  i have made no claims in this thread.  it is on *you* to put up or shut up.  either one would be just fine with me.  verifiable evidence has been offered by others in this thread, to which you merely reply "oh yeah well...that doesn't disprove our moon theory".  and yet, it does, and it has been explained how it does.

yet another classic bishop cop-out: after finally exhausting your lame-ass arguments (in this case a non-argument), and instead of answering the direct challenge posed in the thread or admitting defeat, he resorts to, "oh yeah, well where is *your* [studies|personal anecdote|whatever].  even after they've been shoved down his throat.  when that fails, he disappears.  c ya in another thread, bishop.

Why are you searching the scientific literature for publications on this topic?  The whole point of this thread was to demonstrate that the Earth-Moon distance can be measured by amateur radio operators, whose activities won't appear in a scientific journal.

And as I've said; the publications and studies by amateur radio operators do not list data for the time it takes radio signals to bounce back from the moon. In the studies it appears as if the signals bounce back to the receiver immediately.

Therefore you have zero RE-proving data behind that statement. The immediate bounce back of the signals implies a Flat Earth.

you replied to me.  i have made no claims in this thread.  it is on *you* to put up or shut up.  either one would be just fine with me.  verifiable evidence has been offered by others in this thread, to which you merely reply "oh yeah well...that doesn't disprove our moon theory".  and yet, it does, and it has been explained how it does.

yet another classic bishop cop-out: after finally exhausting your lame-ass arguments (in this case a non-argument), and instead of answering the direct challenge posed in the thread or admitting defeat, he resorts to, "oh yeah, well where is *your* [studies|personal anecdote|whatever].  even after they've been shoved down his throat.  when that fails, he disappears.  c ya in another thread, bishop.

You should know by now that NASA's data is tainted. That's day one stuff here. Since we know that NASA's data is false, why should we entertain any sort of data provided by NASA?

There is no cop-out. Since the day NASA was announced 50 years ago, the Flat Earth Society has held that NASA was a fraud organization designed to create the illusion of winning the space race. Winning the space race in turn created the illusion of the military domination of space, something crucial to America's status as the earth's only superpower. Summarily it's the mouse who roared. America pours billions into this deception on a 'global' scale.

There is no cop-out. Since the day NASA was announced 50 years ago, the Flat Earth Society has held that NASA was a fraud organization designed to create the illusion of winning the space race. Winning the space race created the illusion of the military domination of space, something crucial to maintaining America's status as the earth's only superpower.

and y did Russia create there space program ?

and y did Russia create there space program ?

Are you serious?

and y did Russia create there space program ?

Russia also wanted to create the illusion of the domination of space. After all; a space rocket and an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile are 95% identical. Appearing to reach earth orbit makes your country an instant threat to every nation on earth.

If you were running a country, burdened by enemies all around you, wouldn't you want your military to appear capable of an instant and total annihilation of any capital city on the face of the earth?

As for why the Russians have not blown the whistle on NASA; they already have. During the Cold War Russia had been saying for decades that NASA's achievements were a fraud. Likewise, during the Cold War the American Government downplayed and denied any Russian achievements. The Cold War was more of a propaganda race than a technological one.

Are you serious?

yep , i know the real reason just wanted to know the FE reason

You should know by now that NASA's data is tainted. That's day one stuff here. Since we know that NASA's data is false, why should we entertain any sort of data provided by NASA?

who said anything about nasa, and how is that a rebuttal to me?  you are trying to deflect attention from the fact that you have been bent over by this thread.

There is no cop-out. Since the day NASA was announced 50 years ago, the Flat Earth Society has held that NASA was a fraud organization designed to create the illusion of winning the space race. Winning the space race in turn created the illusion of the military domination of space, something crucial to America's status as the earth's only superpower. Summarily it's the mouse who roared. America pours billions into this deception on a 'global' scale.

thank you for the lesson in recent fe history.  to my great dismay, i already know it.  bishop here's the thing: just because you *believe* nasa is a fraud, doesn't mean it is.  you have no evidence that nasa is a fraud, other than indirectly through your dogmatic belief that the earth is flat.  (therefore the nasa pics are fake.)  that has to be the single most laughable abuse of logic in the history of mankind's propensity for asinine ideas.  where is the evidence?  (you can also spare me the "moon landings were faked" bullshit, which have been debunked over and over and over...just google "faked moon landings debunked".  you would be beating a looong since dead horse.) 

and bishop, keep in mind: hearsay and conjecture are not evidence.  extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  you only have the former.

at any rate, you are trying to derail the topic of this thread.  i believe you owe some people a rational explanation, other than "i have no idea how to counter these facts, therefore it's a nasa conspiracy".

Quote

and y did Russia create there space program ?

Russia also wanted to create the illusion of the domination of space. After all; a space rocket and an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile are 95% identical. Appearing to reach earth orbit makes your country an instant threat to every nation on earth.

If you were running a country, burdened by enemies all around you, wouldn't you want your military to appear capable of an instant and total annihilation of any capital city on the face of the earth?

As for why the Russians have not blown the whistle on NASA; they already have. During the Cold War Russia had been saying for decades that NASA's achievements were a fraud. Likewise, during the Cold War the American Government downplayed and denied any Russian achievements. The Cold War was more of a propaganda race than a technological one.

Why did the USSR never blow the whistle on the Apollo missions?  O yeah I know, because they determined the location of the Apollo craft through triangulation, and determined they were actually at the moon...

Why did the USSR never blow the whistle on the Apollo missions?  O yeah I know, because they determined the location of the Apollo craft through triangulation, and determined they were actually at the moon...

Actually the USSR maintained for decades that the Apollo missions were a hoax. In Russia every American accomplishment, including the moon landing, was dismissed as capitalist propaganda. The USA made nearly the same remarks about Soviet accomplishments. Just ask your parents. The Communists were widely regarded to be liars and tyrants, just as they regarded the Americans to be on their side of the pond.

Oh, and it's not possible to see the Apollo equipment on the moon. Not even the Hubble Telescope would have the resolution necessary to see the equipment left on the moon.

Quote

Why did the USSR never blow the whistle on the Apollo missions?  O yeah I know, because they determined the location of the Apollo craft through triangulation, and determined they were actually at the moon...

Actually the USSR maintained for decades that the Apollo missions were a hoax. Every American accomplishment, including the moon landing, was dismissed as capitalist propaganda. The USA made nearly the same remarks about Soviet accomplishments. Just ask your parents. The Communists were widely regarded to be liars and tyrants.

So we should believe them?  I would love to see evidence of these comments besides word of mouth...

Oh, and it's not possible to see the Apollo equipment on the moon. Not even the Hubble Telescope would have the resolution necessary to see the equipment left on the moon.

Not having the resolution to see something makes it fake?

ok, let's see: on one side we have Tom Bishop's "conspiracy" accusations;
of the other side: all of NASA, with thousands of pictures, all pilots, with millions of pictures, all governments, all ship navigators, all air traffic controllers, everone who has ever been to antactica...

and tom says they are ALL lying, and ALL of their photos are fake?! pfffttt...

just for fun, check out this web page:
http://heritage.stsci.edu/gallery/gallery.html
it's a collection of pictures from Hubble.

and tom says they are all fake. i would love to hear him explain just how someone would fake things like this...

ok, let's see: on one side we have Tom Bishop's "conspiracy" accusations;
of the other side: all of NASA, with thousands of pictures, all pilots, with millions of pictures, all governments, all ship navigators, all air traffic controllers, everone who has ever been to antactica...

and tom says they are ALL lying, and ALL of their photos are fake?! pfffttt...

just for fun, check out this web page:
http://heritage.stsci.edu/gallery/gallery.html
it's a collection of pictures from Hubble.

and tom says they are all fake. i would love to hear him explain just how someone would fake things like this...

One of my Favs.
http://heritage.stsci.edu/2005/20/big.html

So we should believe them?  I would love to see evidence of these comments besides word of mouth...

So you want me to prove that America distrusted the Russians during the Cold War? I don't understand what you're asking here.

Not having the resolution to see something makes it fake?

Not being able to see the Apollo mission equipment does not mean anything. It simply means that no one is able to confirm that man has really been to the moon.

ok, let's see: on one side we have Tom Bishop's "conspiracy" accusations;
of the other side: all of NASA, with thousands of pictures, all pilots, with millions of pictures, all governments, all ship navigators, all air traffic controllers, everone who has ever been to antactica...

and tom says they are ALL lying, and ALL of their photos are fake?! pfffttt...

just for fun, check out this web page:
http://heritage.stsci.edu/gallery/gallery.html
it's a collection of pictures from Hubble.

and tom says they are all fake. i would love to hear him explain just how someone would fake things like this...

I only said that NASA was part of the Conspiracy. And there are not 'millions' of images of the Round Earth. In fact there are very few. NASA has a nasty habit of releasing very little photographic evidence of their claims. An in-depth study was done not too long ago and it was found that only 20 images from the first Apollo 11 moon mission are even available to the public - out of the thousands they claim to have taken.

As for pilots and navigators; they don't need to be in on any conspiracy. Navigation is perfectly possible on a Flat Earth. In fact, they tend to have an easier way getting to places and avoiding distortions because, like their maps, the earth is flat.

the way i heard it, the apollo missions stored their pictures on media that is now obsolete, so it CAN'T be viewed! a mistake, not a conspiracy! (from a book called "great government goofs"-look it up!)

watch ANY weather report and they will show you satellite pictures taken less than an HOUR ago that show clouds moving. are you going to say EVERY weather report made in the last 50 years is fake?

there are websites and TV stations that show LIVE satellite pictures, and you claim that there ARE not satellites. in fact, my family is watching a new report on Dish Network, a SATELLITE TV network, RIGHT THIS MINUTE! and you say it's impossible for them to be doing what they are doing RIGHT NOW?!?!

there's a thread on this site about a website that tells where and when to look at the International Space Station with binoculars or a small telescope. i DARE you to try it yourself!

Quote

So we should believe them?  I would love to see evidence of these comments besides word of mouth...

So you want me to prove that America distrusted the Russians during the Cold War? I don't understand what you're asking here.

[/quote]

No, I want evidence of a claim from the USSR that the Apollo missions were a hoax.  Do you have any other evidence we didn't go over then pretty much just claiming NASA is part of the conspiracy?

so someone using a mercator map, with north at one edge and south at the other edge would be BETTER OFF than someone using a globe?
on those maps, east-west is straight, on the FE it would be curved!

read the "great circle route" thread for more on this.

Back on topic. What kind of data would you like? (I'm talking to Tom or any other FE ers that would seriously like some raw data)

I'm a HAM operator. Haven't had a chance to work the bands in a while and thought I'd get out my old 2 meter rig and see who I could call up out there. Seems to be working pretty good still.

I've not been to a competition in probably 10 years or more, but here is the 2006 EME results page, and the article although brief, at least outlines the frequencies and some equipment used for such things. I'm sure I can chew the fat with some of the guys (and hey... 2 different YL contacts [women] ... more and more women every year in HAM radio. Nice.) and find about any reference materials, data, personal data, etc. you might want.

Just ask. Let me know what the specifics are that you are wanting, and I'll be glad to provide!

I only said that NASA was part of the Conspiracy.

So would a measurment of the Earth-Moon distance from a Russian Federal Space Agency source count as evidence to you?

the way i heard it, the apollo missions stored their pictures on media that is now obsolete, so it CAN'T be viewed! a mistake, not a conspiracy! (from a book called "great government goofs"-look it up!)

That's a nice excuse for the lacking of photographic evidence. It's so very convenient that the film rolls are on "obsolete media." It's a crying shame that the art of blackroom film development was lost shortly after the return of the Apollo 11 capsule.

watch ANY weather report and they will show you satellite pictures taken less than an HOUR ago that show clouds moving. are you going to say EVERY weather report made in the last 50 years is fake?

Most weather analysis is made through ground based radiometry or weather balloons.

Source:

www-frd.fsl.noaa.gov/pub/papers/Gutman2001a/p.pdf
www.radiometrics.com/JAOT_06_preprint.pdf
www-mpl.ucsd.edu/people/jshields/publications/dd_feist.pdf
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/618096.html

there's a thread on this site about a website that tells where and when to look at the International Space Station with binoculars or a small telescope. i DARE you to try it yourself!

The existence of the ISS, a body which occasionally passes by overhead, says nothing about the true shape of the earth.

No, I want evidence of a claim from the USSR that the Apollo missions were a hoax.  Do you have any other evidence we didn't go over then pretty much just claiming NASA is part of the conspiracy?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4210517535942492873&q=a+funny+thing+happened+on+the+way+to+the+moon&total=51&start=20&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

so someone using a mercator map, with north at one edge and south at the other edge would be BETTER OFF than someone using a globe?

Professional pilots and navigators neither use Mercator maps nor globes to get from point A to point B. Azimuthal maps are used because the azimuthal projection of the earth creates the least distortion of the earth in reality.

The Azimuthal projection is the closest projection to the true form of the earth.

So would a measurment of the Earth-Moon distance from a Russian Federal Space Agency source count as evidence to you?

What do you think?

Be quiet Tom we are all sick of your views.

Quote

No, I want evidence of a claim from the USSR that the Apollo missions were a hoax.  Do you have any other evidence we didn't go over then pretty much just claiming NASA is part of the conspiracy?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4210517535942492873&q=a+funny+thing+happened+on+the+way+to+the+moon&total=51&start=20&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Um... A. There was never a claim from the USSR in that video, it was either form Sibrel or Percy...
B. Debunks that entire video clip you game me.

Be quiet Tom we are all sick of your views.

I'm sick of Eric's capital letters.

you'd prefer me to use boldface or italics or underlining?

yes. any of them.

Be quiet Tom we are all sick of your views.

no surprise to hear me say: thank you.

Quote from: The Engineer on November 30, 2007, 11:01:04 PM

Be quiet Tom we are all sick of your views.

no surprise to hear me say: thank you.

If you're so sick of them, then please, leave.

Quote from: cpt_bthimes on December 01, 2007, 11:32:05 AM

Quote from: The Engineer on November 30, 2007, 11:01:04 PM

Be quiet Tom we are all sick of your views.

no surprise to hear me say: thank you.

If you're so sick of them, then please, leave.

i didn't say i was sick of anything.  i think you meant to reply to the engineer.  he's probably not going to leave though.

either way, how is someone expressing dissatisfaction with someone's views, related to an imperative to leave?

Quote from: Mr. Ireland on December 01, 2007, 12:13:48 PM

Quote from: cpt_bthimes on December 01, 2007, 11:32:05 AM

Quote from: The Engineer on November 30, 2007, 11:01:04 PM

Be quiet Tom we are all sick of your views.

no surprise to hear me say: thank you.

If you're so sick of them, then please, leave.

i didn't say i was sick of anything.  i think you meant to reply to the engineer.  he's probably not going to leave though.

either way, how is someone expressing dissatisfaction with someone's views, related to an imperative to leave?

He wants Tom to be quiet: not going to happen.  So if you want him to be 'quiet' then leave.

Be quiet Tom we are all sick of your views.

hah.  just realized this isn't the real 'the engineer'.