Walter, there's absolutely nothing *pseudo* about Mark Peeters. He's a full-blown, Grade-A, certifiable lunatic.
> {large bit cut out}
I spent 10 years in the Royal Air Force here in Britain. I've flown supersonic aircraft . I've spent the last 15 years working for
British airlines, flying Boeing 707, DC-10, and Boeing 747 aircraft as a Flight Engineer. I have flown in Concorde as a
passenger, and it does go supersonic. I have used Satellite communications.
Peeters theory of AWACS aircraft relaying all the messages instead of satellites is so funny <g>
let me know when he goes back to his planet.
cheers
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Finlay e-mail: pe...@meads.demon.co.uk
Bexhill on Sea 7204...@compuserve.com
in the South of England fax: +44 01424 846860
--------------------------------------------------------------------
It can be surprisingly difficult to prove something like the
Moon landing if you cannot agree on some basic assumptions
and what will be valid evidence. I am sure there is nothing
I could type into this computer that would convince that fellow.
THE EARTH IS INSIDE OUT
Another interesting example was the cult in the late 1800's to
early 1900's that believed the Earth was inside out, and that
we lived on the inside of a hollow Earth. Apparently, some
physicists tried to counter their arguments - but they could
not win. All evidence (like the horizon, the sun, stars) was
"just an optical effect caused by the atmosphere". How do you
win an argument like that?
These crazy ideas are good for amusement. But they can also
make us think about how we decide what to believe.
CONSPIRACY IS COMPLEX
Conspiracy theories are always more complex in that they require
the appearance of all the other activity, plus extra coordinated
activity kept secret by large numbers of people. You could
apply a kind of 'Occam's razor' to say that the simpler theory
(no conspiracy) is probably right. There have been some big
conspiracies, but they also did not last too long before they
were exposed.
FAITH IN SCIENCE
I think there are many areas where we rely on some kind of faith
in the scientific process. In theory, scientists base their
ideas on direct evidence - but who has time to check everything?
In most scientific studies we cannot check the results ourselves.
E.g. many of us are happy to accept statements like 'the age of
this star cluster is 5 billion years' but how many of us can
check the stellar evolution theory - or take the time to do so?
COMPETITION IN SCIENCE
To support our faith in generally accepted views, I think we rely
on the existence of competition and a kind of scientific 'market
system'. If something important is incorrect, we need to believe
that someone would benefit by pointing this out.
RADICAL IDEAS
I think the free and open discussion of ideas - no matter how
radical - is very important to our society. More important than
we realize. If we suppress radical views, we can end up losing
the mechanisms that help us make progress.
There have been cases of long lasting incorrect theories when
dissent was suppressed. For example, politically based genetic
theory in the 1950's Soviet Union contributed to many crop
disasters.
But even if we encourage discussion, that still doesn't mean we
have to believe the crazy ideas. The burden of proof is on the
person with the radical idea. Good luck with the lunatic.
- Eric
* E.L.Da...@LaRC.NASA.GOV * +1 804-766-9635 * ISU'91 USA *
* Lockheed Eng & Sci Co, 144 Research Drive, Hampton, VA 23666 *
* home: 6314 Auburn Lane, Hampton, VA 23666 * +1 804-838-4797 *
Dozens of planes would be far from sufficient, unless, of course, they were
flying at geosynchronous altitude, or there's a world-wide conspiracy
involving everybody who's ever installed a satellite dish. You see, those
dishes are disigned and aimed so that they point at geostationary orbit. Which
causes a problem if you've got two or more dishes a fair distance away from
each other. Consider an airplane flying at an altitude of 20 miles. If it's
directly over one dish, it'll be 45 degrees away from overhead for another dish
20 miles away. That's a rather noticeable difference, when you consider the
fact that misaiming the dish by less than two degrees generally causes you to
lose the signal. That means you'd need to have a grid of planes spaced less
than a mile apart flying over any area with satellite dishes, if the planes
were flying at an altitude of 20 miles. Each of these planes would have to be
flying in tight circles. But it gets worse than that: Each of these planes
would appear to be in the appropriate position for different satellites,
depending on which ground station you're looking from. So each plan would have
to carry a repeater and dish for each alleged satellite, and these dishes would
have to be continuously reaimed as the plane changes course. So we're talking
about millions of such planes, each equipped with all the electronics and
ancillary equipment for several satellites just to service the United States.
Then you have to consider the problem of overlapping footprints for the dishes
on the assorted planes.
="A small step for one man, a giant leap for mankind" - Neil Armstrong
No, he said, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CA...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Hm... I believe the Flat Earth Society is still in existence. Peeters
might find some soulmates there.
FT
Yeah perhaps they would bury him.
One of the conspirators
Gary Peach G7SLL Jean Peach
Wisdom to perceive, Lace the Ultimate thread
Grace to acknowledge Choice innocuous, flameproof
Ex DSS 42 Project Apollo
GuiCli
Firstly, I am a personal witness to three shuttle launches beginning
with STS-26 after the Challenger accident.
Secondly, I have observed (over the years) overhead passes by Skylab,
the Hubble Space Telescope, and various shuttles.
Thirdly, there is a program called STSPLUS which plots satellite ground
paths onto a world globe. It even allows you to choose a primary
satellite to track and it will sound an audible warning when a visible
satellite comes up over the horizon. I have used this program to track
the MIR station, Hubble, and the various shuttles. It can also project
forward and show you the exact time and direction od passage. I have been
able to go outside and see MIR come up over the horizon exactly when
predicted.
I am going to E-mail you a separate attachment with my copy of STS-Plus
along with the last Two Line Element (TLE) file I got out of the news-
group SCI.SPACE.NEWS that is posted there by T.S.Kelso. STSPlus is an
MS-Dos based program that will run on a 386 or higher. The results are
better if you get the most recent TLE file (less than 72 hours old).
I suggest you run the program and get good at predicting and viewing
various satellites. Then take him outside and let him view them as they
pass overhead. (Get good yourself first, otherwise he's liable to say
'I told you so'!). If he balks and claims them to be airplanes, then set
up a theodolite baseline of 1000 to 2000 feet and show him how you can
triangulate airplane's altitudes (Using phones to synchronize your
tracking altitudes and azimuths). Then show him how the same readings
for the MIR are *much* higher than airplanes. Then move the trackers
a mile apart & try airplanes & the MIR again. If he's still not convinced
then go to 5 miles and then even 10 miles apart. 10 miles should just
barely give you the 225 mile MIR altitude. Also, by plotting the distance
covered in "X" number of seconds you can show him that MIR is covering
300 miles per minute. Sonic speed is 12.35 miles per minute. You can also
point out that if the atmosphere stood still at altitude the fastest you
would gain would be 1040.4 mph at the equater - about 17.34 miles per
minute.
The best viewing for MIR is just after sunset or just before sunrise
when MIR is in sunlight and you are in shadow viewing MIR's sunlit side.
The usual practice is for the object to "suddenly" disappear as your
view passes from sunlit to shadow side.
If he's still not convinced perhaps a bunch of you could cough up the
$6000 for a ride on a MiG-25 Foxbat at Mach 2.5
You can also demonstrate with high power rifles how the bullet travels
up to 6 times the speed of sound. (Get 1000 yards away. Make a loud noise
which takes 3 seconds to get to you. Shoot at a target to your side &
show him how the bullet takes only 1/2 second.)
go outside at the time it predicted and observed
>Hi there!
>
>I'm a 23-year old engineering student at the University of Leuven, Belgium.
>Since about 8 months, Leuven is haunted by this pseudo-lunatic who calls
>himself Mark Peeters (and Yes, that's an alias). He claims the whole story
>about space flight, satellites and particularly the landing on the moon is
>a LIE; a conspiracy upheld by governments, scientists and a whole lot of
>other public personalities. A twisted idea, at first sight ?
>That's what I thought too - but Mark Peeters seems to have built a complete,
>more or less consistent theory to explain all possible counterexamples.
>He just won't listen to reason, even though the scientific side of his
>theories looks doubtful to me, to say the least.
>
>So I'd like to know about your thoughts, remarks, on this subject, and
>maybe someone even could prove him wrong undeniably ?
Get real Walter. I'll take as much time on this as it takes to suggest that
Mark Peeters is Walter Baeck.
Ulf Lindroth
Well, I can testify, Marc Peeters is not Walter Baeck,
and Walter Baeck is not Marc Peeters.
Walter really means this serious.
But it's not worth it to try to convince Marc Peeters,
a scizofrenic-paranoid.
Erwin Van Hoof
ESAT
K.U.Leuven