Merged Discussion of the moon landing "hoax"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would you post a link to a thread where you were publicly destroyed by user Betamax101?
Click to expand...
You're trying to sway those people who don't take the time to read the thread by misrepresenting what happened there. Betamax destroyed his credibility so it really doesn't matter what he says now. Look at posts 42–45.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio-5.html

It's pretty clear that Betamax doesn't even believe his own arguments.
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222

It's also pretty clear that you people don't even believe your own arguments either.
 
I read that segment as you refusing to answer the on-topic questions posed, and him refusing to be taken off-topic by more unsupported delusional nonsense about the chinese spacewalk.
 
I don't think FF is a real hoax believer. I think this is some kind of long term performance art project.
 
Look on the bright side, someday this thread will become a link on some other forum; thus the circle of life continues.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
You're trying to sway those people who don't take the time to read the thread by misrepresenting what happened there. Betamax destroyed his credibility so it really doesn't matter what he says now. Look at posts 42–45.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio-5.html

It's pretty clear that Betamax doesn't even believe his own arguments.
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222

It's also pretty clear that you people don't even believe your own arguments either.
Click to expand...

OK, then. I read them, again.

You crashed and burned in the face of physical evidence.

ETA: That second link is in no way relevant, to anything, let alone the moon landings.
 
Last edited:
. . .more like poo whirling in the bowl . . .

I have, in fact, followed his linkbarf in a full circle once. There was a page of crap he posted on icke that contained a link to a link, as usual ... and somewhere that day I actually found a closed loop among his links. As I recall it was 4 links long. I tried to find it again recently but the number of possible paths was too large. I coulda bookmarked the loop, but he was the absolutely least interesting poster on icke.
 
Let's just have a peek at post #42.

Hey Betamax

You have an authoritative patronizing attitude but you've said some pretty lame things. I think this calls for an objectivity test.
Click to expand...

Yay, start with an ad-hom, why not.

The Chinese obviously faked their spacewalk in a water tank.
Click to expand...

And nobody noticed except you. You must be special.

NASA's official position is that it was real.
Click to expand...

Yes. Because it is real.

You already said it was real once in the comment section of one of your YouTube videos which destroyed your credibility.
Click to expand...

But it is real, so how does that negatively affect Betamax101's credibility?

Why don't you tell everybody your position on the Chinese spacewalk here too?
Click to expand...

He did.

Most pro-Apollo posters try to avoid addressing this issue because they have to choose between supporting the NASA position and looking silly, or saying that the Chinese spacewalk was obvioulsy faked which they can't do.
Click to expand...

It wasn't faked so there is no problem.

I think you'll find some lame excuse to avoid addressing this.
Click to expand...

It has been addressed many times. It is your responsibility to read the responses.

In the comment sections of your YouTube videos you deleted all of my posts in which I'd asked you to address this if I remember correctly with the lame excuse that it was off-topic.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I cannot blame him/her for deleting posts devoid of content. Those just waste space.

Let's see if he refuses to address this. Let's hear the opinions of all the pro-Apollo people here on the Chinese spacewalk. [followed by a linkwall]
Click to expand...

Done to death on many websites and fora, mostly with YOU as the protagonist.

In this video the safety cable is obviously buoyant. It has a distinct tendency to to upward.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=gMxQEHfU6hM

Watch it at these time marks.
0:50
2:10
3:00
3:10
6:08
6:44
6:53

It's going upward because it's slightly lighter than water.
Click to expand...

Really? How do you know what the orientation of the camera was?
How do you know that it was not sideways, or even upside down? How do you know the camera was aligned with the "horizon"?

At the thirty second mark in this clip the astronaut moves the flag from right to left.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvpPknmHGAM

The flag flutters the way it would in a medium such as water.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't.

The fast flag movement can be explained by sped-up video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBL98p0wZ7g
(1:55 time mark)
Click to expand...

You are really grasping at straws now.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
I stopped posting at David Icke's forum because the moderator was deleting a lot of my posts. I talked about that here.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487&page=54

I wanted to continue posting on this thread that I'd started...
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=125628

...but, as my posts were getting deleted, I couldn't make my points.
Click to expand...

Those evil mods. darn them. Even the Icke forum is infested with 'em. Isn't there even ONE place where a well-informed truth seeker can post without moderation?

Honestly, rocky, you need help. When you accuse the Icke forum, of all things, of being corrupted by the conspiracy you've gone seriously over the edge. I accumulated an embarrassing number of posts over there, disagreeing with nearly every position held by the forum majority. Not a single one of my posts was moderated, or deleted. The only posts that were moved were in the apollo hoax "megathread", which got moved while I was out of town because the hoax believers couldn't keep their attitudes in check.

Your linkbarf posts violate the terms of service at many fora. That's why you get in trouble with moderators -- you violate the terms of service. There's almost nothing one can do at the Icke forum that gets one in trouble, but YOU managed to offend the mods. Only you.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
You're trying to sway those people who don't take the time to read the thread by misrepresenting what happened there. Betamax destroyed his credibility so it really doesn't matter what he says now. Look at posts 42–45.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio-5.html

It's pretty clear that Betamax doesn't even believe his own arguments.
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222

It's also pretty clear that you people don't even believe your own arguments either.
Click to expand...


You got served, Sir Knight.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
It's also pretty clear that you people don't even believe your own arguments either.
Click to expand...

Wrong. You were wrong when you made this claim about apollohoax regulars in particular, as I pointed out right here in this very thread. You are wrong now.

I am a practicing space engineer, with a degree in space physics and a couple of graduate engineering degrees, and about twenty years' experience in civil, military, and commercial programs, and I do indeed think the Apollo missions went to the Moon.

Provide proof for your claims that I don't, or retract them.
 
Here's a video on the "Stars" issue that just came out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRwZixCwLHM
(do a YouTube search on "LUNARCY NEWS FROM SPACE UPDATE (STARS PHOTOGRAPHED IN LOW EARTH ORBIT)")

I don't usually talk about the star issue because I have no background in photography but there seem to be some contradictions in what people say about being able to see stars.

http://www.thomasbrown.org/Lunar/lunar.html
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------
If one were to add up all the astronauts’ stated observations of the appearance of space above the atmosphere one would come to the conclusion that they were either crazy, incompetent or they never went, or, perhaps some of them were lying??? Alan Sheppard, first American to be catapulted up reported seeing no stars, ditto for Virgil Grissom. John Glenn reported seeing some brighter stars only (and he saw those weird “fireflies”).

To quote some astronauts on the subject:

Neil Armstrong: “The sky is black, you know,” “It’s a very dark sky.”

Mike Collins on Gemini 10:: “My God, the stars are everywhere: above me on all sides, even below me somewhat, down there next to that obscure horizon. The stars are bright and they are steady.” This was written 14 years after, and remember that the Gemini 10 space walk photo shown here has now been proven fake.

Mike Collins on Apollo 11: “I can’t see the earth, only the black starless sky behind the Agena,... As I slowly cartwheel away from the Agena, I see nothing but the black sky for several seconds...” “What I see is disappointing for only the brightest stars are visible through the telescope, and it is difficult to recognize them when they are not accompanied by the dimmer stars...”

Gene Cernan on Apollo 17: “When the sunlight comes through the blackness of space, it’s black. I didn’t say it’s dark, I said black. So black you can’t even conceive how black it is in your mind. The sunlight doesn’t strike on anything, so all you see is black.”

Yuri Gagarin, first Russian cosmonaut: “Astonishingly bright cold stars could be seen through the windows.”

Prof. August Piccard on his high altitude balloon flight circa 1938 (many miles up with special heated suit) said that the sky turned from blue to deep violet to black. It is said that he claimed the sun disappeared as he got to the higher altitudes, though I have been unable to locate this exact reference.

My own investigations of NASA, circa 1987, revealed people who claimed that the stars could not be seen in space, but that special diffraction gratings were being developed to attempt to see them. This was from the period from Sheppard on to Skylab. I later spoke with John Bartoe who was up on an early shuttle flight and he laughed at this, said he couldn’t believe that anyone in NASA would say that because he was in space and the stars were brighter than they are on Earth! (They must have slipped him a working diffraction grating.) I called back my contact in NASA and he told me “Sir, the astronaut is a trained observer and is reporting what he saw, but the information I gave you (about the blackness of space) was essentially correct.” I spoke with the man who developed the film for NASA for 25 years and he told me that the astronauts weren’t even sure if they could see the sun, that it may have been the appearance of the sun on their windows!

The fact is that there are no visible light photographs of the sun, the stars, or any planets (other than the Earth & Moon, and not including specific probes sent to those planets) available in any NASA photo catalog. The fact that no stars appear on any photos was one of the main pillars of evidence for Bill Kaysing’s book. René is the source of the astronauts quotes as above and feels that there must be some serious problem with this selective star-blindness. As there is no definite answer available to us right now as to whether or not we can see the stars in space, I would have to say that we cannot base our conclusion as to the validity of the Apollo flights on the evidence of the appearance (or non-appearance) of stars in NASA photos.
-----------------------------------

http://www.erichufschmid.net/Astro-Nuts-see-stars.html
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

There's plenty of other evidence that proves they faked the moon landings so the stars issue isn't about whether they faked it. It's about how they faked it.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Here's a video on the "Stars" issue that just came out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRwZixCwLHM
(do a YouTube search on "LUNARCY NEWS FROM SPACE UPDATE (STARS PHOTOGRAPHED IN LOW EARTH ORBIT)")

I don't usually talk about the star issue because I have no background in photography but there seem to be some contradictions in what people say about being able to see stars.

http://www.thomasbrown.org/Lunar/lunar.html
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------
If one were to add up all the astronauts’ stated observations of the appearance of space above the atmosphere one would come to the conclusion that they were either crazy, incompetent or they never went, or, perhaps some of them were lying??? Alan Sheppard, first American to be catapulted up reported seeing no stars, ditto for Virgil Grissom. John Glenn reported seeing some brighter stars only (and he saw those weird “fireflies”).

To quote some astronauts on the subject:

Neil Armstrong: “The sky is black, you know,” “It’s a very dark sky.”

Mike Collins on Gemini 10:: “My God, the stars are everywhere: above me on all sides, even below me somewhat, down there next to that obscure horizon. The stars are bright and they are steady.” This was written 14 years after, and remember that the Gemini 10 space walk photo shown here has now been proven fake.

Mike Collins on Apollo 11: “I can’t see the earth, only the black starless sky behind the Agena,... As I slowly cartwheel away from the Agena, I see nothing but the black sky for several seconds...” “What I see is disappointing for only the brightest stars are visible through the telescope, and it is difficult to recognize them when they are not accompanied by the dimmer stars...”

Gene Cernan on Apollo 17: “When the sunlight comes through the blackness of space, it’s black. I didn’t say it’s dark, I said black. So black you can’t even conceive how black it is in your mind. The sunlight doesn’t strike on anything, so all you see is black.”

Yuri Gagarin, first Russian cosmonaut: “Astonishingly bright cold stars could be seen through the windows.”

Prof. August Piccard on his high altitude balloon flight circa 1938 (many miles up with special heated suit) said that the sky turned from blue to deep violet to black. It is said that he claimed the sun disappeared as he got to the higher altitudes, though I have been unable to locate this exact reference.

My own investigations of NASA, circa 1987, revealed people who claimed that the stars could not be seen in space, but that special diffraction gratings were being developed to attempt to see them. This was from the period from Sheppard on to Skylab. I later spoke with John Bartoe who was up on an early shuttle flight and he laughed at this, said he couldn’t believe that anyone in NASA would say that because he was in space and the stars were brighter than they are on Earth! (They must have slipped him a working diffraction grating.) I called back my contact in NASA and he told me “Sir, the astronaut is a trained observer and is reporting what he saw, but the information I gave you (about the blackness of space) was essentially correct.” I spoke with the man who developed the film for NASA for 25 years and he told me that the astronauts weren’t even sure if they could see the sun, that it may have been the appearance of the sun on their windows!

The fact is that there are no visible light photographs of the sun, the stars, or any planets (other than the Earth & Moon, and not including specific probes sent to those planets) available in any NASA photo catalog. The fact that no stars appear on any photos was one of the main pillars of evidence for Bill Kaysing’s book. René is the source of the astronauts quotes as above and feels that there must be some serious problem with this selective star-blindness. As there is no definite answer available to us right now as to whether or not we can see the stars in space, I would have to say that we cannot base our conclusion as to the validity of the Apollo flights on the evidence of the appearance (or non-appearance) of stars in NASA photos.
-----------------------------------

http://www.erichufschmid.net/Astro-Nuts-see-stars.html
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

There's plenty of other evidence that proves they faked the moon landings so the stars issue isn't about whether they faked it. It's about how they faked it.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html
Click to expand...

Seriously? The stars? I think a response to this:

sts60 said:
Wrong. You were wrong when you made this claim about apollohoax regulars in particular, as I pointed out right here in this very thread. You are wrong now.

I am a practicing space engineer, with a degree in space physics and a couple of graduate engineering degrees, and about twenty years' experience in civil, military, and commercial programs, and I do indeed think the Apollo missions went to the Moon.

Provide proof for your claims that I don't, or retract them.
Click to expand...

is more in order than the crap you just posted here.
 
Last edited:
I think a response to this:
--------------------------------------
Wrong. You were wrong when you made this claim about apollohoax regulars in particular, as I pointed out right here in this very thread. You are wrong now.

I am a practicing space engineer, with a degree in space physics and a couple of graduate engineering degrees, and about twenty years' experience in civil, military, and commercial programs, and I do indeed think the Apollo missions went to the Moon.

Provide proof for your claims that I don't, or retract them.
---------------------------------------------
is more in order than the crap you just posted here.
Click to expand...

The evidence that the footage was faked in a studio is so clear that the best sophist in the world couldn't convince a twelve-year-old that it was taken on the moon.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

He says it was taken on the moon. Therefore, he doesn't even believe his own arguments.

You people can pretend all you want. Once people have seen the evidence, you've lost. The only way you can have any effect on what people think is to talk to each other in front of an audience who hasn't seen the evidence.
 
As I said before, it seems the moon hoax, like the Shuttle program, is grinding to a halt after years of failing to live up to it's own hype and expectations.

The only people still beating the hoax drum are dusty old relics, woefully unprepared for the reality they find themselves in.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Here's a video on the "Stars" issue that just came out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRwZixCwLHM
(do a YouTube search on "LUNARCY NEWS FROM SPACE UPDATE (STARS PHOTOGRAPHED IN LOW EARTH ORBIT)")

I don't usually talk about the star issue because I have no background in photography but there seem to be some contradictions in what people say about being able to see stars.

http://www.thomasbrown.org/Lunar/lunar.html
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------
If one were to add up all the astronauts’ stated observations of the appearance of space above the atmosphere one would come to the conclusion that they were either crazy, incompetent or they never went, or, perhaps some of them were lying??? Alan Sheppard, first American to be catapulted up reported seeing no stars, ditto for Virgil Grissom. John Glenn reported seeing some brighter stars only (and he saw those weird “fireflies”).

To quote some astronauts on the subject:

Neil Armstrong: “The sky is black, you know,” “It’s a very dark sky.”

Mike Collins on Gemini 10:: “My God, the stars are everywhere: above me on all sides, even below me somewhat, down there next to that obscure horizon. The stars are bright and they are steady.” This was written 14 years after, and remember that the Gemini 10 space walk photo shown here has now been proven fake.

Mike Collins on Apollo 11: “I can’t see the earth, only the black starless sky behind the Agena,... As I slowly cartwheel away from the Agena, I see nothing but the black sky for several seconds...” “What I see is disappointing for only the brightest stars are visible through the telescope, and it is difficult to recognize them when they are not accompanied by the dimmer stars...”

Gene Cernan on Apollo 17: “When the sunlight comes through the blackness of space, it’s black. I didn’t say it’s dark, I said black. So black you can’t even conceive how black it is in your mind. The sunlight doesn’t strike on anything, so all you see is black.”

Yuri Gagarin, first Russian cosmonaut: “Astonishingly bright cold stars could be seen through the windows.”

Prof. August Piccard on his high altitude balloon flight circa 1938 (many miles up with special heated suit) said that the sky turned from blue to deep violet to black. It is said that he claimed the sun disappeared as he got to the higher altitudes, though I have been unable to locate this exact reference.

My own investigations of NASA, circa 1987, revealed people who claimed that the stars could not be seen in space, but that special diffraction gratings were being developed to attempt to see them. This was from the period from Sheppard on to Skylab. I later spoke with John Bartoe who was up on an early shuttle flight and he laughed at this, said he couldn’t believe that anyone in NASA would say that because he was in space and the stars were brighter than they are on Earth! (They must have slipped him a working diffraction grating.) I called back my contact in NASA and he told me “Sir, the astronaut is a trained observer and is reporting what he saw, but the information I gave you (about the blackness of space) was essentially correct.” I spoke with the man who developed the film for NASA for 25 years and he told me that the astronauts weren’t even sure if they could see the sun, that it may have been the appearance of the sun on their windows!

The fact is that there are no visible light photographs of the sun, the stars, or any planets (other than the Earth & Moon, and not including specific probes sent to those planets) available in any NASA photo catalog. The fact that no stars appear on any photos was one of the main pillars of evidence for Bill Kaysing’s book. René is the source of the astronauts quotes as above and feels that there must be some serious problem with this selective star-blindness. As there is no definite answer available to us right now as to whether or not we can see the stars in space, I would have to say that we cannot base our conclusion as to the validity of the Apollo flights on the evidence of the appearance (or non-appearance) of stars in NASA photos.
-----------------------------------

http://www.erichufschmid.net/Astro-Nuts-see-stars.html
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

There's plenty of other evidence that proves they faked the moon landings so the stars issue isn't about whether they faked it. It's about how they faked it.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html
Click to expand...
You know... if you would read for comprehension (& in context I'd wager), those quotes wouldn't seem so odd.

At any rate you aren't convincing anyone.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
He says it was taken on the moon. Therefore, he doesn't even believe his own arguments.
Click to expand...
That is the most serious piece of circular logic I have ever seen.

You people can pretend all you want. Once people have seen the evidence, you've lost. The only way you can have any effect on what people think is to talk to each other in front of an audience who hasn't seen the evidence.
Click to expand...

Only people without the means, the intellect or the inclination to check, take this in. In that list, I would tend to place you in the middle.:D

As for your link, it seems you are having your butt handed to you on a silver platter....

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com/
 
FatFreddy88 said:
The evidence that the footage was faked in a studio is so clear that the best sophist in the world couldn't convince a twelve-year-old that it was taken on the moon.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

He says it was taken on the moon. Therefore, he doesn't even believe his own arguments.

You people can pretend all you want. Once people have seen the evidence, you've lost. The only way you can have any effect on what people think is to talk to each other in front of an audience who hasn't seen the evidence.
Click to expand...


[lurkermodeoff]Continuing to post the same links, ad nauseam, isn't convincing proof[lurkermodeon]


ETA: actually, it is, as I found this link on the thread: http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com/
 
Last edited:
As for your link, it seems you are having your butt handed to you on a silver platter....

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...
Try clicking on the hotlinks on that page. None of them work. The viewers can't see what he's criticizing.

His authoritative patronizing attitude may sway a few people who haven't actually looked at the evidence but few people who've actually looked at it will be swayed by the rhetoric.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Try clicking on the hotlinks on that page. None of them work. The viewers can't see what he's criticizing.

His authoritative patronizing attitude may sway a few people who haven't actually looked at the evidence but few people who've actually looked at it will be swayed by the rhetoric.
Click to expand...

It's been over 40 YEARS. The only "rhetoric" about the moon landings is coming from you and the 7 other people on Earth who think like you do.

You can say the evidence of hoax is incontrovertible all you want. It does not make it true. What you think doesn't matter. You are irrelevant, and you are made irrelevant by your idiotic idea that no evidence exists that the moon landings took place.

Fortunately, Apollo deniers are simply humorous, not twisted like most Holocaust deniers and many 9-11 deniers.
 
Last edited:
I'm not impressed, personally, by people using blogspot for this purpose. That blog has a single purpose, to bash a specific individual. That seems unhealthy to me. And it's not the only blog around serving the function of carrying an internet pissing contest into new, unmoderated territory.

In this regard, the blog argument is even worse than utube, where people can at least comment. Sometimes.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Try clicking on the hotlinks on that page. None of them work. The viewers can't see what he's criticizing.

His authoritative patronizing attitude may sway a few people who haven't actually looked at the evidence but few people who've actually looked at it will be swayed by the rhetoric.
Click to expand...

Why don't you ask him about the hotlinking on that forum you keep linking to? From what I can see, the same posts are there as on his blog, so you have plenty of opportunity to offer counter argument.

You seem to be doing the same there as you are here, ducking questions fired at you. I made a whole list of posts you haven't even responded to, and you just disappear for a few days and come back with just more parrotted links.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
The evidence that the footage was faked in a studio is so clear that the best sophist in the world couldn't convince a twelve-year-old that it was taken on the moon.
Click to expand...
Most twelve-year-olds have a better grasp of physics than you.
FatFreddy88 said:
<link-spam deleted>
He says it was taken on the moon. Therefore, he doesn't even believe his own arguments.
Click to expand...
I don't care about your link-spam. I didn't ask about someone else in some other forum. I asked you in this forum to provide evidence for your claim that I disbelieve my own statements about the Apollo landings.

You have yet to do so. Either provide evidence for it, or retract the claim and apologize.
FatFreddy88 said:
You people can pretend all you want. Once people have seen the evidence, you've lost. The only way you can have any effect on what people think is to talk to each other in front of an audience who hasn't seen the evidence.
Click to expand...
I've not only seen much of the evidence, but unlike you I also understand a fair amount of it. Also unlike you, I carefully avoid claiming credit for knowing things I don't.

Unlike you, I actually use many of the relevant principles - and even some of the knowledge directly obtained by Apollo - in my work. I just got back from a major design review for a space system that, like all other space systems, uses radiation environment data that was originally developed during the run-up to Apollo. The prime contractor building the system has made many spacecraft and space systems which used said data, and operated successfully over many years. Which is why it's especially funny to read your claims about how there's some sooper-seekrit set of "real" data that the MIB-NASA-NSA-MLB keep from the ignorant engineering masses. It's like saying they keep the real location of the pancreas hidden from doctors.

Unlike you, I have also talked about with other engineers. In fact, I've had the privilege of working with some of the engineers who designed hardware for Apollo, and shepherded it through being built, tested, and used. That's a privilege you'll never have, and a pleasure you'll never know, because you prefer ignorance and paranoia to the joy of actually learning about things. I pity you.

Rather than comforting yourself with fantasies about the silent legions of "lurkers" who support you and how the big Moon conspiracy is going to crumble Real Soon Now, why don't you open up the door to this cell in which you've locked yourself, and come out and enjoy reality?
 
It's like saying they keep the real location of the pancreas hidden from doctors.
Click to expand...

Where is anders, anyway? There haven't been any new "air is a hoax" threads in a while.

Not that I'm complaining, mind you.
 
I just don't like the "doesn't believe his own arguments" nonsense. It is like a pathetic way to hand wave away all contrary evidence.

"Doesn't believe his own argument" is along the lines of the ol' "Check your privilege" it is sort of a though canceling statement that is only meant to give the impression that any argument contrary to what the proponent of an idea is putting forward should be ignored without any consideration to the logic of the argument. In a word...It is intellectual evasion of the highest order.
 
Well, rocky/davidc/ff88/<many other handles> doesn't fare any better when he tries to actually make claims - or rather, when he regurgitates what someone else claims. The whole "stars" thing above is an example. He actually admits he's no photographic expert - which is a good start - but then spams someone else's lengthy, semicoherent ramble, which is full of context-free quotes mashed up to give the appearance of controversy, appeals to unspecified authorities, spurious "authorities" like Rene and Kaysing, subtle goalpost-shifts ("no visible-light photographs"), and flat-out fabrications and silly errors. My favorite (other than alleging that the astronauts couldn't see the Sun) is
The fact is that there are no visible light photographs of the sun, the stars, or any planets (other than the Earth & Moon, and not including specific probes sent to those planets) available in any NASA photo catalog.
Click to expand...
I guess the Hubble Space Telescope hasn't actually taken any pictures after all. But even leaving out the obvious, the assertion is embarrassingly wrong; for example, the NSSDC catalog includes stellar mapping camera imagery from Apollo 15, 16, and 17. I've also seen a picture of the stars taken by one of the CM pilots, not to mention night-time downlinks from the Shuttle payload bay cameras showing stars, and there are of course many other examples.

But such is the state of "research" from the hoax believers. What's especially bad is that rocky/davidc/FF88/etc.'s "research" consists of spamming others' drivel.
 
fullflavormenthol said:
I just don't like the "doesn't believe his own arguments" nonsense. It is like a pathetic way to hand wave away all contrary evidence.
Click to expand...
It's also calling the other guy a liar, just with bigger words.

"Doesn't believe his own argument" is along the lines of the ol' "Check your privilege" it is sort of a though canceling statement that is only meant to give the impression that any argument contrary to what the proponent of an idea is putting forward should be ignored without any consideration to the logic of the argument. In a word...It is intellectual evasion of the highest order.
Click to expand...
That one makes me rage as well. That and when asked to stop swearing at and insulting the people they're talking to, the crusaders say that their victims are trying to suppress them by way of "The Tone Argument", which basically boils down to people thinking they can say what they want in whatever way they want because They're Right. I had a bad experience with a feminist jumping to a conclusion and kvetching me out, and I still occasionally fight to suppress the dropping feeling in my stomach I sometimes get when I see a discussion of feminism, despite my intellectual understanding of the well-meaning mistake.

I'm going to stop talking about this now, before I really go off-topic or start talking about how mommy never hugged me.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
His authoritative patronizing attitude may sway a few people who haven't actually looked at the evidence but few people who've actually looked at it will be swayed by the rhetoric.
Click to expand...

Like all those lurkers from Apollo Hoax dot net who agree with you, but don't post??

Oh, wait...that was shown to be in error like all your other "ideas".

Please post evidence, and discontinue all this personal "I know what the lurkers are thinking", crap...
 
FatFreddy88 said:
The fact is that there are no visible light photographs of the sun, the stars, or any planets (other than the Earth & Moon, and not including specific probes sent to those planets) available in any NASA photo catalog.
Click to expand...

I realize that this is not poor davidc/rocky/FF88 making an original claim, but as usual simply regurgitating someone else's - but since he posted it, he owns it.

A really gorgeous image of Atlantis reentering as seen from above, taken by the ISS crew. This nighttime image captures the stars nicely.

The Keyhole Nebula in the Milky Way.

And more stars on a night image of the Southern Lights.

And again, this time from Shuttle mission STS-39.
 
(Again, FF regurgitating these claims.)
FatFreddy88 said:
I spoke with the man who developed the film for NASA for 25 years and he told me that the astronauts weren’t even sure if they could see the sun, that it may have been the appearance of the sun on their windows!...

The fact is that there are no visible light photographs of the sun, the stars, or any planets (other than the Earth & Moon, and not including specific probes sent to those planets) available in any NASA photo catalog.
Click to expand...
Here is the National Space Science Data Center catalog for the Skylab astronomy data, including solar imagery collected via the H-alpha telescopes, and photography of Comet Kohoutek, like this one.

Here's the H-alpha instrument:
0101909.jpg


There's also a bundle of ultraviolet and X-ray data, which is what anyone who actually knew anything about the subject would expect to be a priority for any spaceborne astronomy done with modestly-sized instruments.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom