PDA

View Full Version : Minor error on Clavius



Peter B
2002-Apr-08, 01:47 PM
JayUtah

I noted a tiny error on your site in the section dealing with rocket thrust and the LM engine leaving craters:

Early on you describe 1 pound as 2.2 kilograms. Elsewhere you got the conversions right.

(If yer can't trust 'im on this, yer can't trust 'im on anythin'!) /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

Seriously, though, a very good site.

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 02:09 PM
Yes, that's on the "to do" list, along with a few other broken conversions between English and SI. Some of the Clavius authors (cough, Jay, cough) are under the delusion they can do metric conversions in their heads on the fly as they write.

To quote Grampa Simpson, "My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I like it."

At Clavius we tend to alternate between producing new material and revising and correcting old material. We're coming to the end of a "new material" phase.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JayUtah on 2002-04-08 10:10 ]</font>

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 03:49 PM
Minor error on Clavius.

And the rest... /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

AstroMike
2002-Apr-08, 04:22 PM
On 2002-04-08 11:49, Slime (Silky Smooth) wrote:
Minor error on Clavius.

And the rest... /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif


What's wrong with the rest? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif Clavius is far better than Percy's and Sibrel's garbage. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 04:41 PM
AstroMike:

Ethics?
I've just purchased a PC capture card and will put up Baron's tortured facial expressions for Jay to ponder and include in his web site.
But you know I wont be happy until Jay drops the pluralised astronaut(s), as he is only able to put up one 'real' astronaut for support.

AstroMike
2002-Apr-08, 05:44 PM
On 2002-04-08 12:41, Slime (Silky Smooth) wrote:
Ethics?

I don't understand what ethics have to do with this.


I've just purchased a PC capture card and will put up Baron's tortured facial expressions for Jay to ponder and include in his web site.

Baron's tortured facial expressions? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif


But you know I wont be happy until Jay drops the pluralised astronaut(s), as he is only able to put up one 'real' astronaut for support.

Actually, no I don't. I'm not sure what page on his site you're refering to. The only "real" astronaut I've heard that supports Jay's site is Brian O'Leary.

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 06:13 PM
Just so everyone knows, Slime is one of the instigators of the unfounded character assassination attempt on me at ApolloHoax, and who tried to do the same here under various other pseudonyms before being rebuked by the Bad Astronomer. His mention of ethics is a veiled reference to that issue.

will put up Baron's tortured facial expressions for Jay to ponder and include in his web site.

Baron's "tortured facial expressions" are irrelevant. I deal with Baron's qualifications, his testimony, and the reaction to it -- not what paranoid fantasies can be read "interpretively" into video captures.

The hoax crowd is unwilling to deal with Baron's evidence dispassionately. They are firmly convinced he is some kind of martyr, and interpret everything according to that mindset. Every word that came out of his mouth is hailed as God's truth regarding the state of Apollo in 1966. I prefer to test his statements.

But you know I wont be happy until Jay drops the pluralised astronaut(s)

I have rewritten the mission statement to be independent of the numbers and types of experts that contribute to my site. I don't know why you're being so pedantic about such a minor detail. Is it because you haven't been able to deal intelligently with the substance of the site?

I prefer my original wording because it is important that our readers understand that our site contains information validated by practicing professionals.

And I don't believe for a minute you are now satisfied. The validation of your existence seems to be harrassing me, so you'll simply find some other irrelevant, petty detail to spend three days arguing over.

he is only able to put up one 'real' astronaut for support.

I have named one astronaut who has provided substantial assistance.

Now do you have any substantive arguments regarding the moon hoax theory, or are you simply going to delve into another string of personal attacks against me until you're banned?

AstroMike
2002-Apr-08, 07:01 PM
Jay, I love the new "rocks" section at Clavius. Way to go! /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

The only insignificant nitpick I have with it is that you spelled mineralogy "minerology". Sorry that I have to be such a stickler. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 07:14 PM
So am I unethical, or just a poor speller?

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 07:20 PM
Just so everyone knows, Slime is one of the instigators of the unfounded character assassination attempt on me at ApolloHoax, and who tried to do the same here under various other pseudonyms before being rebuked by the Bad Astronomer.

That is such a reworking of history that I hardly recognised Slime in that description.
I have never had any rebuke from BA (to my knowledge). He once deleted a post of mine, closed 'your' Ad hominem thread but no conversation between us has ever taken place.
'Other pseudonyms' is a metaphor for your paranoia. As for unfounded character assassination, the thread in question is available to anyone who wants it.
Ad rem and not ad hominem as indicated.
Anyone can email me at adam_sheppard@yahoo.com for the thread in question.

Baron's "tortured facial expressions" are irrelevant. I deal with Baron's qualifications, his testimony, and the reaction to it -- not what paranoid fantasies can be read "interpretively" into video captures.

Even if you wish to ignore his rabbit-trapped-in-the-headlights terror, his aural testimony stating to the TV news crews that both he and his wife were being threatened to keep quiet, might just be relevant enough to mention on such an unbiased and fair web site as Clavius.
Sadly Baron cant respond, so your hypothesising as to authenticity of miraculously found 500 page reports is irrelevant.
Like a judge, I put more weight on truth spoken first hand, than on partial documentation which may very well be fraudulent.

I have rewritten the mission statement to be independent of the numbers and types of experts that contribute to my site.

Thats much better. I will now go past the front page and digest what other little gems are there. I'll get back to you.

Now do you have any substantive arguments regarding the moon hoax theory, or are you simply going to delve into another string of personal attacks against me until you're banned?

Please dont suggest I ought to be banned. Even if BA is a friend and co-debunker, I think he and not you should make the decision. Without prompting!

AstroMike:

Baron's tortured facial expressions?

I'd have uploaded it already but I'm having problems with WinXP drivers for my capture card. Just in case you missed it, the short monochrome clip in question comes from a British version of the Fox video. Perhaps it is unique to my shores.
Jay seems to have a blank spot regarding the footage, even though he states he saw the Fox video!

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 07:28 PM
So am I unethical, or just a poor speller?

Utilising my vast knowledge of logic, you actually could be both. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

AstroMike
2002-Apr-08, 07:54 PM
On 2002-04-08 15:20, Slime (Silky Smooth) wrote:
'Other pseudonyms' is a metaphor for your paranoia.

Not really. Can you explain to me how "Lord Brompton" and "FYI" are two different people? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

I'm surprised that the BA has not deleted this thread yet.

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 08:16 PM
Can you explain to me how "Lord Brompton" and "FYI" are two different people?

I cant. They might even be the same for all I know. All I will say is neither of them was me. You can call me a liar if you wish. BA may have the IP addresses on record. Perhaps they may even be from different countries/continents.

I'm surprised that the BA has not deleted this thread yet.

He will if this reopens old wounds/threads.
I possess a thick skin and consequently no one on this planet could offend me.
If I've offended anyone here tonight I'd be mighty surprised, but certainly not sorry for plain speaking.
I stand by all I have written here.

The Bad Astronomer
2002-Apr-08, 08:34 PM
I close threads, delete them, or delete people from the database if and when I decide their posts are not polite.

This thread has the potential for any and all of that. Have a care.

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 09:02 PM
I have never had any rebuke from BA (to my knowledge).

I'm talking about all the nicknames you've used here, not just the current one.

As for unfounded character assassination, the thread in question is available to anyone who wants it.

Most here have already read it and condemned you as a crackpot because of it.

Sadly Baron cant respond, so your hypothesising as to authenticity of miraculously found 500 page reports is irrelevant.

I have not made any claim to have discovered Baron's lengthier manuscript. I have not made any claims to know the details of that manuscript. I have merely noted the nature of the discussion undertaken by people who had read it or otherwise knew of its contents. I consulted a lawyer of my acquaintance on the likely interpretation of that discussion. You're quite free to make a different interpretation, but you are not free to misrepresent mine without consequences.

Like a judge, I put more weight on truth spoken first hand, than on partial documentation which may very well be fraudulent.

"Truth" spoken first hand? Mr. Baron was rebuked -- rebuked -- by a congressional committee for testifying to something he should have known was patently untrue. Eyewitness testimony is not universally preferred over other types of evidence. Further, testimony which simply reports what someone else saw is hearsay and inadmissible.

The documents upon which I have based my opinion are the records of the United States Congress, whose authenticity is beyond dispute.

As for Baron's alleged contribution to the Fox program, I have seen the program twice, took detailed notes on it, and recall no such statement from Baron. And neither, yet, has anyone else. As I said, I may have missed it (though not likely), I have no doubt you have seen such footage, and I promised you many times I would respond to such footage when you saw fit to present it.

You seem to be getting much more rhetorical mileage out of my reaction than out of Baron's. Is your motive to discuss the hoax theory, or just continue to foolishly attempt to make me look bad?

I will now go past the front page and digest what other little gems are there. I'll get back to you.

Rest assured I have not been impressed with anything you have offered as "criticism" so far, it tending to be pedantic efforts to make yourself seem knowledgeable by making others look bad in contrast, and so I shall not be overly concerned with what you might have to say in the future.

I think he and not you should make the decision.

And rest assured he will, with or without any suggestion from me. My statement is a warning to you, not a suggestion to the webmaster. He has already indicated his intolerance of your style of debate, and the other readers here have already indicated their disgust with it.

In short, I believe my interpretation of Thomas Baron's contribution to the Apollo 1 investigation is plausible and adequately supported by fact, although I agree it may not be the only interpretation available. I have promised to respond to any additional information you brought to the table. I cannot see what more I can do to accommodate your participation.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JayUtah on 2002-04-08 17:13 ]</font>

The Bad Astronomer
2002-Apr-08, 09:14 PM
I reiterate: watch your tempers here.

johnwitts
2002-Apr-08, 09:44 PM
Havn't we been here before? Watch this one, BA.
Adam, please remember that Jay's site Clavius is Jay's opinion and is presented as such. He presents his opinion, the reasons for that opinion, and leaves us to make up our own minds. HB's on the other hand force their 'facts' down our throats, with statments like 'you'd have to be a fool not to see this', or my favourite from WHOTM?, 'Many intelligently thinking people are already doubting the authenticity of the Apollo record'. A simple 'I don't believe a word of it' would suffice, and Jay could then say 'fair do's, have a nice life'. But nooooooo.
Leave it alone guys, we've been there and done that. It's not pretty and in also not very useful. It just leaves a nasty taste, and also a nasty hole in the once mighty apollohoax.com forum.

Karamoon
2002-Apr-08, 09:54 PM
Jay: Mr. Baron was rebuked -- rebuked -- by a congressional committee for testifying to something he should have known was patently untrue.

Why should he have known? Holmburg was a liar, in my opinion.

And Baron got rebuked by a single committee member (Mr. Hechler) for bringing this new information forward. Recall that Mr. Wydler was actually prepared to take a more objective view regarding the information he had to offer.

But here too, you are long overdue a reply to the appropriate thread. I will try and finish that shortly.

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 10:10 PM
I'm talking about all the nicknames you've used here, not just the current one.

Proof Please? These accusations seem to be growing stronger than when you were at ApolloHoax. Have you further evidence you would like to contribute?

Most here have already read it and condemned you as a crackpot because of it.

I dont seek popularity, just the truth. You always misjudge my motives and fears.

I have not made any claim to have discovered Baron's lengthier manuscript.

And I never said you did.

I have not made any claims to know the details of that manuscript.

I should hope not, unless you parked Baron's family saloon that fateful night. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

I have merely noted the nature of the discussion undertaken by people who had read it or otherwise knew of its contents.

Who 'say' they knew its contents would be more to the point.

Mr. Baron was rebuked -- rebuked -- by a congressional committee for testifying to something he should have known was patently untrue.

A rebuke often means a cover-up! Congressional committees dont impress me Jay. I've yet to meet a politician with a spine. If you would care to name one from the US, I'll write to him/her and test this.
BTW Did Baron have a chance to respond to the charges?
One knock for yes, two knocks for no. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif
I see Karamoon has responded to your assertions. Who am I to argue with him?

The documents upon which I have based my opinion are the records of the United States Congress, whose authenticity is beyond dispute.

LOL. After the JFK cover-up, I'm astounded that anyone would cite the US Congress as a stamp of authenticity.
I'm still getting over the Iran Contra shambles, where the constitution was conveniently swept aside by all parties.

As for Baron's alleged contribution to the Fox program, I have seen the program twice, took detailed notes on it, and recall no such statement from Baron.

Censored by the US media perhaps? I'm not surprised. Will post as quick as humanly possible.

You seem to be getting much more rhetorical mileage out of my reaction than out of Baron's. Is your motive to discuss the hoax theory, or just continue to foolishly attempt to make me look bad?

Only you are reacting and looking bad. Calm down and take the odd criticisms occassionally.
If you are sure of your position, you should be strong enough.

I will heed BA's comments and try to soften my prose, as the truth I am about to reveal must get out.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Slime (Silky Smooth) on 2002-04-08 18:14 ]</font>

johnwitts
2002-Apr-08, 10:13 PM
Leave it alone, guys.

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 10:21 PM
JohnWitts:

Clavius is not just Jays site. In this very thread today he has implied there are others working on it. Unless the term 'we at Clavius' denotes a royal we.

Havent you begun to fill the 'hole' at ApolloHoax in yet. You have my files right?

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 10:28 PM
Havn't we been here before?

I have no wish to repeat the mudslinging that decimated the ApolloHoax forum. But I don't mind talking about Thomas Baron. I'd rather not rehash the discussion we just had. But Slime is talking about additional evidence.

The readers here do not have the benefit of my prior discussion with Slime, wherein he claimed additional information was available on Thomas Baron, and I promised to incorporate it into my opinion once I was able to see and hear it. I don't think that qualifies as deliberately avoiding contrary evidence.

Adam, please remember that Jay's site Clavius is Jay's opinion and is presented as such.

Yes and no. Certain portions of it are fairly indisputable. Others, like the Thomas Baron treatment, are based largely on interpretation. As I mentioned to Karamoon elsewhere, my feelings on Thomas Baron are open to change, given appropriate evidence.

I don't believe Thomas Baron is necessarily a big player in the Apollo 1 investigation and recovery. Conspiracy theorists do. So in order to be as encyclopedic as I can, I have to address Baron.

johnwitts
2002-Apr-08, 10:31 PM
No, I can't find them. The folder keeps coming up empty. Besides, all the piccies are no longer there. Plus, there was 30 odd pages of topis, each with varying numbers of posts, some themselves running into numerous pages. I for one am very ...... off for having all that stuff lost. It's taken a lot of us a lot of time to build up that archive of arguments, and now it's gone. It's no better than burning all the books, in my opinion. Don't let the same thing happen here.
/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_frown.gif

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 10:37 PM
Just to clarify, Clavius is solely mine in a legal sense. In an editorial sense most of the opinions are mine, but not all that you read there is stuff I have written personally. Others' contributions range from having directly written segments of articles to providing information, spontaneously or upon request, which serve as background for the articles.

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 10:38 PM
JohnWitts:

I just looked at my Yahoo! Briefcase and youre right. Yahoo or the CIA deleted them.
If you would like to open up a couple of Yahoo! email accounts I will post them there. I dont trust my briefcase to stay up long.

5,196,351 bytes for the forum files. (uncompressed 85,738,093 bytes)

9,088,149 bytes for the rest.
(uncompressed 9,521,571 bytes)

Alternatively speak to Jay or Jon Ploegman. I think they probably have em.

Addendum: I may have misunderstood you John.
The missing piccies (not yours) are external links to nasa sites etc. Once the forum texts and embedded code are properly resubmitted the pics will load in automatically.
Nothing has been lost since late February 2002.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Slime (Silky Smooth) on 2002-04-08 18:59 ]</font>

johnwitts
2002-Apr-08, 10:52 PM
I should be getting ADSL later this week, if it works! Maybe I'll try it then?

Tomblvd
2002-Apr-08, 10:56 PM
On 2002-04-08 11:49, Slime (Silky Smooth) wrote:
Minor error on Clavius.

And the rest... /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif


Since I've been gone for a while, could you point me in the direction of your discussion of the errors of Clavius? Having read it I can't believe there are very many.

I'd like to see what you have.

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 11:02 PM
JohnWitts:

I updated my last post on page 1.
See the addendum and cheer up!

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 11:08 PM
Why should he have known?

Because the Thompson commission had already made public those details.

Holmburg was a liar, in my opinion.

And in my opinion he was not.

And Baron got rebuked by a single committee member (Mr. Hechler) for bringing this new information forward.

One member, granted. However, it was not "new" information -- it was information that was known to be false, yet Baron testified to it under oath. Mr. Hechler is certainly pedantic about the spelling of Deke Slayton's name, but he is quite correct, legally, in rejecting Baron's lack of discernment.

Recall that Mr. Wydler was actually prepared to take a more objective view regarding the information he had to offer.

Baron obviously didn't want to be cut off at the knees again for giving hearsay. Mr. Wydler assured him it would be okay in this case. Clearly the committee can choose to disregard hearsay evidence.

Mr. Hechler's objection was not necessarily that Mr. Baron have given hearsay evidence, but that he had given hearsay evidence already known to be untrue. The issue speaks to Mr. Baron's ability to discern fact from rumor.

But here too, you are long overdue a reply to the appropriate thread.

As I usually say: no rush. I know you're not going anywhere.

Slime (Silky Smooth)
2002-Apr-08, 11:08 PM
Tom:

Jays knows of my problems with Clavius as they have been well stated. Jay has corrected one serious anomaly and in the interest of BA's aching finger hovering over the 'ban' button I am happy to let it rest there.
For the time being!

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 11:15 PM
Alternatively speak to Jay or ...

Unfortunately I do not have anything archived from ApolloHoax. It really was a fantastic repository, but the only thing I'm really sorry about losing is the analysis of Jack White's photographs.

Tomblvd
2002-Apr-08, 11:19 PM
On 2002-04-08 19:08, Slime (Silky Smooth) wrote:
Tom:

Jays knows of my problems with Clavius as they have been well stated. Jay has corrected one serious anomaly and in the interest of BA's aching finger hovering over the 'ban' button I am happy to let it rest there.
For the time being!




Well stated where? You make the implication that his site is rife with errors and yet you can't give any examples. And for the record, I am aware of the 'Amazon incident' (go there and see that I, too, have reviewed it), but that isn't the issue. I want you to discuss the errors you have implied are present on Clavius.

JayUtah
2002-Apr-08, 11:51 PM
Since I've been gone for a while, could you point me in the direction of your discussion of the errors of Clavius?

The discussion on ApolloHoax is no longer available, and there is no one central repository of errata in a public forum. My error list is the collection of messages or other communications I have received from readers or other Clavius contributors.

The issue of Thomas Baron which has appeared in this thread and elsewhere on this forum is not an error per se: Slime and Karamoon simply disagree with our (mostly my) findings, and not for reasons which are easily resolved. As you can see, it comes down mostly to a difference of opinion.

Slime took issue with the previous version of the mission statement which identified Clavius as an organization composed of, "scientists, engineers, and astronauts". In that the list of named contributors contained only one astronaut and one astronaut candidate, Slime felt the mission statement was dishonest. I had hoped the mission statement would have been read more leniently and less pedantically. I have since found a wording that is more accurate in that respect.

The outstanding errors I'm aware of in Clavius are minor. There are at least two incorrect conversions between English and metric units. There are some missing annotations on photographs. There are spelling errors.

The page giving the detailed argument on LM DPS exhaust gas pressure is a work in progress, although many here have seen it. It was done first in SI units and the equivalent computations in English units need to be revised to conform to the EGS standard notation.

I believe Alan Shepard's mission is misidentified as Apollo 12 in one place, but I can't remember if that's been corrected.

Some past errors corrected:

We erroneously reported that the Hasselblad film magazines had thermometers. We discovered this was not the case.

PLSS earth weight was revised to account for consumables.

Fairchild was originally credited with producing the IC chips for the Apollo computers. Philco is the actual manufacturer.

We rely on the readers to help identify and correct errors in the Clavius web site. But contrived nitpicks are not generally helpful.

Jigsaw
2002-Apr-09, 01:47 AM
Itsy nitpick for the site...when you click on "Next", frequently nothing happens. There is no "Next". I am paranoid enough to wonder if "it's just me" and everybody else can see the "Next" page just fine...

/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

And, after you click on "Next" and no "Next" appears, and it's on http://www.clavius.org/template.html in the Address window, if you then click on "Previous", it won't go back to "Previous". It just keeps refreshing the http://www.clavius.org/template.html page.

So far, it's the Photography page (haven't had time to read the whole website yet), after the Visual Index of photos. "Next" just traps you in the Next Twilight Zone.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jigsaw on 2002-04-08 21:55 ]</font>

JayUtah
2002-Apr-09, 02:00 AM
The "next" and "prev" buttons are a big mess.

I've got a guy fixing the photos and captions and adding little pull quotes. All the graphic artist types tell me I need more graphics and less text. Maybe I can get him to fix the buttons while he's at it. They were never really high on the list.

Jigsaw
2002-Apr-09, 02:10 AM
Oh, good, then I'm not imagining it. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif And that's not really a gray van parked down the street...

Also, just now, the "Next" button after the Radiation Primer page gave me this error message:

The resource requested /photointro.html cannot be found.
If you feel that this is a configuration error, please contact the administrators or the author of the referring page.
At least it's different... /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif



Added: typo on Gravity Dust page, "Smoke and dust are both solid aersols."

Typo on bio: "and have worked as an engineer in varies industries".

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jigsaw on 2002-04-08 22:24 ]</font>

ToSeek
2002-Apr-09, 12:02 PM
On 2002-04-08 22:00, JayUtah wrote:
All the graphic artist types tell me I need more graphics and less text.


Make the graphic artists download the site through a 28.8 modem and then see what they have to say. (One of my pet peeves is beautiful sites that take forever to display.)

JayUtah
2002-Apr-09, 12:54 PM
Make the graphic artists download the site through a 28.8 modem

True. Our original design was modem friendly, and we're still trying to minimize load time. The working set of images is very small, and we use HTML graphics tricks instead of images. The pull quotes, for example, are done with tables.

Unfortunately with a site as heavily dependent as ours is on visual arguments and photo analysis, we need graphics.

CJSF
2002-Apr-09, 04:35 PM
On 2002-04-09 08:54, JayUtah wrote:
Make the graphic artists download the site through a 28.8 modem


You might be surprised at the amount of graphic content you can include in a site and still have fast downloads. It all has to do with compressing the images correctly.

For some images you can do a hefty bit of compression and not loose too much perceptibility.

I see WAY too many sites with images that take forever to download because the compression was set too low on a JPEG or something.

Of course on a site like Clavius, for stuff you want hi-res for, you just link it from a low-res thumbnail to keep the download time quick.

I think much of the stuff on Clavius could benefit from some non-photographic images as well - some well placed charts or schematics. Those could be done as very fast-downloading GIFs.

CJSF

ToSeek
2002-Apr-09, 04:52 PM
On 2002-04-09 08:54, JayUtah wrote:
Unfortunately with a site as heavily dependent as ours is on visual arguments and photo analysis, we need graphics.


I have no problems downloaded a big, detailed picture when the page is about the big, detailed picture. I do have problems when a site throws in a big, detailed picture just for decoration, or uses Java just to create a fancy ticker window, or any number of other time-wasting sins.*

So far I have had no complaints with regard to your site.

*And don't get me started on those pages that play music or have little sparkly things following your cursor around.

JayUtah
2002-Apr-09, 05:32 PM
I think much of the stuff on Clavius could benefit from some non-photographic images as well

I agree, but that stuff takes longer to produce.

johnwitts
2002-Apr-09, 08:39 PM
I took delivery of a nice ADSL modem last week, and it started working today. After managing with a 56K modem for a while, I now have a lovely 500K connection, and I can still use the phone. Trouble is, like everything, I'm dissapointed! /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_frown.gif My system monitor used to say that my connection was actually wirking at about 9k/sec, with the ADSL, is says about 19k/sec. Ok, it's faster, but it's hardly 200 times faster, as it claims to be. Maybe the phone line's ratty, that's why I didn't get much speed before, and why I still don't go like the wind. Or maybe it's all the cabling I've still got rolled up on my desk...

DaveC
2002-Apr-09, 09:00 PM
I think all the "high speed" systems flogged to home computer users fail miserably to deliver on anything near the advertised optimum performance acievable under perfectly ideal conditions. Our high speed access here at work (we are our own ISP) is through a dedicted digital (T1) line that gives us near 500k most of the time. It costs $1200 (Canadian) - about 500 quid or $800 US - a month. A bit beyond my household budget.

johnwitts
2002-Apr-09, 09:25 PM
I've used it for a bit now, and it is visibly much faster to use (it could hardly be slower, an envelope and a stamp would have been quicker than my old modem!). I'm still messing with the settings, so it probably won't work at all later on this evening!

DaveC
2002-Apr-09, 09:44 PM
Good luck with it. I use a 56k modem at home - but rarely see 56k as a transfer rate - which is why I almost exclusively use my office system for internet searches.

johnwitts
2002-Apr-09, 09:52 PM
Actually, I've just viewed NASA TV at the 300k setting and it actually did 300k! I'm also downlaoding the Eagle Lander 3D update, which took a couple of hours before, and it's going to take ten minutes (est). Also, I can still browse these pages without any delay, even while all that other stuff going on. I'm beginning to suspect that some of the 'slowness' I'm getting is from the other end. I also read that there's a 50 to 1 ratio of users per ADSL 'line', so we could all be sharing. Since it's only been going a couple of months (at most) and I've only met one other person who uses it, yet alone has even heard of it, coupled to the fact that most sensible people are in bed at this time of night, and I shouldn't be sharing too much very often. It's got my vote-so far!

DaveC
2002-Apr-09, 09:58 PM
Glad to see your initial disappointment was overcome. Have fun - and goodnight. I'm going home!

JayUtah
2002-Apr-09, 10:02 PM
I do have problems when a site throws in a big, detailed picture just for decoration, or uses Java just to create a fancy ticker window

I've had a number of "web designers"<sup>1</sup> tell me I should use Macromedia Flash for this feature or that feature, or use Javascript to animate this or that. I won't. I believe in using tools not because the tools exist, but because I have a problem that can be solved by that tool. My site is informative, not a whiz-bang light show.

<sup>1</sup> There are lots of talented and legitimate web designers out there, but not all who call themselves by that title have any sort of expertise I admire. Many are hapless technoweenies following the latest trend.

Tomblvd
2002-Apr-09, 10:41 PM
On 2002-04-08 19:51, JayUtah wrote:

The discussion on ApolloHoax is no longer available, and there is no one central repository of errata in a public forum. My error list is the collection of messages or other communications I have received from readers or other Clavius contributors.




Thanks for the reply Jay, but it wasn't meant as a discussion of those types of errors. I was hoping to have Slime, by action or inaction, admit that he can find no obvious errors on the Clavius site, despite his previous post.

Obviously, judging by his silence, I have succeeded.

johnwitts
2002-Apr-09, 10:46 PM
I agree. If all slime can come up with is sloppy links, then you're home and dry. Slime is trying to discredit you any way he can. I say don't bite. He'll probably start saying something, like 'How could NASA get to the Moon if Jay can't even get his links to work?'. Then I'd be sure he's just grasping at straws.

JayUtah
2002-Apr-10, 02:41 AM
I was hoping to have Slime, by action or inaction, admit that he can find no obvious errors on the Clavius site, despite his previous post.

I understand. See, I already knew the answer to that. At Apollohoax Slime repeatedly claimed there were numerous errors at Clavius. I pressed him each time for details, and after several weeks the best he could come up with was saying "astronauts" but naming only Dr. O'Leary.

It is important for people to understand that we update the site as new or more detailed information becomes available. Some kind reader just sent me today a few important corrections.

ToSeek
2002-Apr-10, 12:12 PM
On 2002-04-09 18:02, JayUtah wrote:
I've had a number of "web designers"<sup>1</sup> tell me I should use Macromedia Flash for this feature or that feature, or use Javascript to animate this or that.

Yeah, Flash is cool, but if I get to somebody's home page and have to watch a movie when I'm looking for information (and there are even some businesses who make you do this), forget it.

David Hall
2002-Apr-10, 12:23 PM
Ok, this is completely off topic, but...

I have a wonderful program that solves most of these annoying webpage problems for me. I'd like to recommend it. It's called The Proxomotron and it's by far the most useful program I've ever found.

http://www.flaaten.dk/prox/

What it is is simply an HTML filter. It scans all the code coming into your computer and, using various text-matching filters, deletes, alters, or even adds anything you want before it even hits your browser.

Want to get rid of ads, java applets, those annoying transition effects? Want to turn those stupid scrolling backgrounds into still ones? Do you even want to add things? Proxomitron can do it. For example, I've written a filter that adds a link to the bottom of every BABB page, so I don't have to scroll down to the bottom every time.

Now, warn you, it's not an easy program to use and you should have at least a basic grasp of HTML, but if you do, you'll swear by this one. Trust me.

Gads, I probably sound like a salesman or something. But check it out if you can. Message me and I'll tell you about some of the filters I've found and written.

Tomblvd
2002-Apr-10, 01:10 PM
I see he still hasn't come back.

Pity.

DaveC
2002-Apr-10, 01:53 PM
Don't hold your breath. Slime can't provide a listing of any significant errors on Clavius. He seems to operate under the assumption that saying it will make it so. I don't buy that.

johnwitts
2002-Apr-10, 09:44 PM
Update on my ADSL. I watched NASA TV today through it and watched the Shuttle docking. I'm used to watching NASA TV at about the size of a stamp, refreshed every second or so. Today, I watched a full screen pres with a near full refresh rate. Awesome. I also saw some more of those flying disks, you know, the ones that followed the tether. They even had the trianglar slot at the back. They were highlights against the body of the ISS, must be a perculiarity in the cameras they use, because they were clearly a lens flare type phenomenon, and they were also only a few feet away.