[Astronauts] cannot find stars

[John Jones]

i say it is true. i am better than my sister it does not matter that the sextant is not the same because the problem is about finding the star it does not matter what they use they have to find the star no matter what or they will get lost i don't know much about the other things but if they can not find the star then they cannot go to the moon so the movies must be made up i guess but i am not sure i only know about the sextant i am pooitive about that because i am good at it ask a sailor if i am right

How The Apollo 13 crew did it: http://www.universetoday.com/62763/1...hs-terminator/

[John Jones]

i say it is true. i am better than my sister it does not matter that the sextant is not the same because the problem is about finding the star it does not matter what they use they have to find the star no matter what or they will get lost i don't know much about the other things but if they can not find the star then they cannot go to the moon so the movies must be made up i guess but i am not sure i only know about the sextant i am pooitive about that because i am good at it ask a sailor if i am right

How The Apollo 13 crew did it: http://www.universetoday.com/62763/1...hs-terminator/

[dastardly]

Where

does he say this in the book, Dastardly?

Look at the book. He only saw menkent and he did not see hydra or the other stars around menkent so that might not be menkent because he does not know the setting

[dastardly]

You really should try doing some research.
They did have computers and the 'astronomy equipment'. Not that they needed them.

The LM used an inertial guidance system so that they would always know in which direction the star[s] they were looking for would be.
The 'sextant' had a wide field telescope and a high magnification telescope to take the sightings.

It is perfectly possible to find named stars through a telescope without seeing the entire constellation at once. Even I can manage that, without even a computer!
Why exactly do you think it is so hard?



This is false.
The 'sextant' was a backup to the navigation systems.

Incidentally please try to use some punctuation because that was almost totally illegible.

The computer only knows 40 stars about. That is not enough stars

[dastardly]

You really should try doing some research.
They did have computers and the 'astronomy equipment'. Not that they needed them.

The LM used an inertial guidance system so that they would always know in which direction the star[s] they were looking for would be.
The 'sextant' had a wide field telescope and a high magnification telescope to take the sightings.

It is perfectly possible to find named stars through a telescope without seeing the entire constellation at once. Even I can manage that, without even a computer!
Why exactly do you think it is so hard?



This is false.
The 'sextant' was a backup to the navigation systems.

Incidentally please try to use some punctuation because that was almost totally illegible.

I know they are pretending about the stars. I am sure of that. I do not know how they pretend the pictures but the pictures have to be pretend because they cannot point the space ship without the right star and they only pretend to see the stars




The computer only knows 40 stars about. That is not enough stars

[John Jones]

How do you know they only pretend to see stars? Please don't use circular logic when answering this question.

[dastardly]

Don't forget that in space they used our Sun, the Earth and the Moon as three of their reference points.

Do you claim that those three references could not be seen?

(I'd expect that given these good references and the star charts on board, the crews wouldn't have to scan all of space looking for a star, as they'd have a good idea of where a star might be expected to be.)

I have to be more exact though. I can fix the moon and one star and know pretty good where I am but just because I fix the moon doesn't mean I know the star without the constellation you would be guessing too much I can tell you do not do this and are not a sailor

[dastardly]

How do you know they only pretend to see stars? Please don't use circular logic when answering this question.

You cannot identify a star without the setting the constellation is very important you can ask any sailor in the world

[Abaddon]

I know they are pretending about the stars. I am sure of that. I do not know how they pretend the pictures but the pictures have to be pretend because they cannot point the space ship without the right star and they only pretend to see the stars


The computer only knows 40 stars about. That is not enough stars

Seconded. How is it that you know that?

Also, why is it that you post titles on every post, even though this forum does not display them?

[dastardly]

How The Apollo 13 crew did it: http://www.universetoday.com/62763/1...hs-terminator/

All of the ammonia trips are not true trips it is obvious my sister says we are on to something really big

[John Jones]

I have to be more exact though. I can fix the moon and one star and know pretty good where I am but just because I fix the moon doesn't mean I know the star without the constellation you would be guessing too much I can tell you do not do this and are not a sailor

Pzkpfw specifically mentioned using the earth, moon and sun. You seem to to have ignored two of those three points.

[dastardly]

I meant all of the moon trips are not real trips

[Abaddon]

You cannot identify a star without the setting the constellation is very important you can ask any sailor in the world

Well that's just a parse disaster.

What are you trying to say, exactly?

[John Jones]

All of the ammonia trips are not true trips it is obvious my sister says we are on to something really big

Huh? Maybe your sister should be the one making these points here then. You aren't doing a very persuasive job.

[dastardly]

Pzkpfw specifically mentioned using the earth, moon and sun. You seem to to have ignored two of those three points.

I wrote that already you can fix the moon and one star but because you fix the moon does nt mean you know the star without the constellation. You still need the constellation we do this all of the time every night almost

[John Jones]

I meant all of the moon trips are not real trips

You're taking that as axiomatic when you ought to be proving that point.

[dastardly]

Well that's just a parse disaster.

What are you trying to say, exactly?

The other persons are wrong. They say they can find polaris without the other stars or the horizon but you cannot do this. If you are in space and fix the earth and the moon and there are two or ten stars or a hundred if you cannot see the constellations then you cannot tell polaris ask any sailor

[dastardly]

You're taking that as axiomatic when you ought to be proving that point.

If you were a sailor you would know the point was proved already

[Abaddon]

Huh? Maybe your sister should be the one making these points here then. You aren't doing a very persuasive job.

Dude, he oscillates between whether it's a sister or a GF, for reasons unknown

[John Jones]

If you were a sailor you would know the point was proved already

This is ridiculous. You're claiming that all sailors know the moon landings were faked?

I predict a very short life span for this thread.

Better luck next time, Dastardly.

[Gillianren]

If you were a sailor you would know the point was proved already

Would it then surprise you to know that some of the people who disagree with you are sailors? Like for example Jim Lovell?

[Strange]

I know they are pretending about the stars. I am sure of that. I do not know how they pretend the pictures but the pictures have to be pretend because they cannot point the space ship without the right star and they only pretend to see the stars

Oh dear. Who should I believe? People who have been to the moon, have experience of using a sextant in space, took photos on the moon and brought back rocks? Or some random guy on the Internet who can't even put a sentence together, never mind an argument?

I think I will have to believe the people who actually went to the moon. Sorry dastardly. You lose. Better luck next time.

[LaurelHS]

Would it then surprise you to know that some of the people who disagree with you are sailors? Like for example Jim Lovell?

Not to mention all the sailors who watched the Apollo splashdowns.

[John Jones]

Would it then surprise you to know that some of the people who disagree with you are sailors? Like for example Jim Lovell?

As [Apollo 8] CM Pilot, Lovell served as the navigator, using the spacecraft's built-in sextant to determine its position by measuring star positions. This information was then used to calculate required mid-course corrections. The craft entered lunar orbit on Christmas Eve and made a total of ten orbits, most of them circular at an altitude of approximately 70 miles (110 km) for a total of twenty hours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Lovell

[Van Rijn]

Look at the book. He only saw menkent and he did not see hydra or the other stars around menkent so that might not be menkent because he does not know the setting

I quoted the book, here:

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread....69#post1976569

If you bothered to read, he had the computer adjust the sextant to the right area, he was seeing bright stars - not just Menkent - and had spent a long time learning to identify the stars on the navigation list, so your continuing claims in this area are nonsensical.

[publiusr]

The scenario would make for a nice SF story. Someone invents anti-gravity and floats up and bang!, hits a sphere of glass, where the poor man finds stars just flecks painted on the firmament...

[Van Rijn]

The computer only knows 40 stars about. That is not enough stars

Not enough stars for WHAT? Please explain the purpose of the list of 40 (37, actually) stars.

[Jason Thompson]

The other persons are wrong. They say they can find polaris without the other stars or the horizon but you cannot do this. ...

I can.

It is a matter of practice. You do not need to see entire constellations to identify stars.

[Garrison]

If you were a sailor you would know the point was proved already

Yes they would, that you are quite categorically wrong. You have provided no reason to believe your claim. Others have provided links to evidence to back their views, you simply keep reiterating your own unproven credentials and repeat the same claim ad nauseam. When are you going to provide some evidence?

[pzkpfw]

Yes, thread closed - again. It's going no-where and is just going to lead to acrimony. (Already we are seeing off-topic meta-posts appearing, and I don't want to have to infract everyone).

Dastardly, I was trying to cut you some slack as you appeared to be putting a bit more effort in this time, but in the end all it comes down to is dismissing all posts with hand-waving and repeated claims.

Again, you can report this post if you wish to have this thread re-opened. In your report you must include the detail that you intend to post to the thread - this is so we can see if it's worth the bother.

Do not start another thread on the same topic. (You could start another thread where you claim Apollo missions were faked, but it's got to be based on some other "evidence".)