FatFreddy88
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 388
Hey. You people missed this.
Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga
- Thread starter Patrick1000
- Start date
- Status
Erock
Muse
We already covered it. You ignored the replies.
"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."
Cernan gave a counter twist to stop the flag. Since it isn't possible to see wrist movement on the footage when he moves it, one wouldn't expect to see any when he stops it.
Is this plausible? If not, why not.
That quote embodies your replies. Everybody else can see the flagpole move, can see that the astronaut was close enough to touch the flag and everything else you can't see with your misted over hoax spectacles.
Now answer my points on the previous page. I've bolded them for you.
Last edited:
FatFreddy88
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 388
If that were the case, the rod would move in a way that would stop the flag from moving. Here it clearly doesn't.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
(2:20 time mark)
Air stops it from moving.
ComfySlippers
Banned
I only have two people on ignore here.
FatFreddy88 is one of them.
But I can get the gist of his nonsense from the little snippets provided in quotes.
Have we had cointelpro, msm, Federal Reserve, colloidal silver and BuyGoldNow.com yet?
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 21,469
No. That's not what happens. In the Mythbusters test the pole is held fast, and so doesn't absorb the momentum of the swinging flag. In the Apollo footage, the momentum of the swinging flag is transferred through the cross spar in the last movement Cernan makes.
It's no more complex a task than stopping a small weight from swinging on a string at the end of a stick. (In fact it's almost the same task.) Stopping the weight swinging is so simple a physical task that you could do it instinctively without necessarily even knowing how you do it.
You keep saying garbage like that as if it makes any difference what your uninformed opinion is...
Personally I don't care what you think, as it comes from an uneducated mind.
FatFreddy88
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 388
What exactly is the "Cross spar"?
I only know about the pole and the support rod.
sts60
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2007
- Messages
- 4,107
*Bump*
You have had time to constitute quite a few lengthy posts since I started reminding you of your accusation. I will consider any further posts made without directly addressing this to be your abandonment of this claim, and your concession that I really do believe exactly what I am saying - in other words, that someone with extensive qualifications in this field (unlike you) honestly disagrees with you.
I'm not here to educate you...educate yourself.
Thanks for confirming that you are so uninformed regarding Apollo...
...and just why should anyone take your ignorant posts, seriously?
Erock
Muse
You seem to be cornered here FF88.
Do you or do you not agree with Jarrah White's analysis that the astronaut was close enough to move the flag?
Is it plausible that the astronaut was close enough to move it, it really is very simple. Here are two other youtube analyses that concur.
Jarrah's flag stopped within 5 seconds. Explain.
Jarrah's flag didn't move until he was level with it. Explain
As do I...and I'm sure quite a few others...freddy's silence is all that we need to prove that.
Freddy....see it's a "character" thing. When someone makes an obvious mis-statement regarding another poster, then the only sensible thing to do is apologize. That you seem incapable of doing that, reflects on your character, making it more and more difficult to take what you have to say, seriously.
Now if you don't mind not being believed, well, that's fine, but don't expect anyone with half a mind to take what you say seriously.
...and isn't your "point" to be taken seriously?
FatFreddy88
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 388
There you go again. You’re trying to sway those viewer who don’t take the time to watch the video. You quote half of the quote and misrepresent what he says. Now I have to post this again to thwart your efforts to mislead the viewers.
(from post #8032)
He does it to himself...in every post...
He's hit himself so many times, he's become punch-drunk.
Erock
Muse
Wriggling much. You're not thwarting me, you are avoiding at all costs answering the simple question.
Let us take this from what White is saying. He says the astronaut is close enough to have moved the flag. He then says with his ahaa moment that it doesn't matter because it moves before he got there. Nowhere have I denied this, so I am not misleading anybody.
Now, answer the question, I'll add a little caveat for you....
Do you agree with White's analysis that the astronaut was close enough to have moved the flag, notwithstanding that the flag moved a little bit before he got there?
You have ALWAYS denied that he was even close enough - clearly you were wrong.
As you say in that quote!
You missed these two, I must repost them so as to thwart your evasion of them...
Jarrah's flag stopped within 5 seconds. Explain.
Jarrah's flag didn't move until he was level with it. Explain
Last edited:
FatFreddy88
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 388
I gave my reason back in post #8021
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8165089&postcount=8021
If you people want to play it down and pretend it doesn't mean anything, go ahead; I don't think many of the viewers are fooled.
If you think everyone is as ignorant as you, you are sadly mistaken.
Short, relevant story. I was a juror on a rape case. The case against the defendent was very strong, air tight, in fact. During defense closing arguments, the defendent's lawyer told a flat out lie in a last ditch effort to get his client "off"...and during deliberations, the entire jury agreed it was a lie.
Guess what our verdict was
That's the kind of crap I sometimes see in these Apollo discussions...just a general lack of arguing "in good faith", and an "ease of lying" and it really pisses me off.
Last edited:
Erock
Muse
That would be a "no". He has left for the night, conveniently wriggling out of the tough questions aimed at him. I will repost them when he returns, just to "thwartTM" his evasion
His auto-reply script didn't have a contingency for his hero Jarrah White actually contradicting him.
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 21,469
Ah. A fresh mystery. Well, obviously you know all about the two spars; the "pole" and the "support rod" as all genuine, official lunar experts call them. And one of them stands upright while the other one goes across. It's bound to be one or the other. Just ask if you need a hint.
Seriously though, is that the most worthwhile response you could muster? Passive-aggressive sniping that I used unofficial terminology for the naming of parts of their flagpole? Wow. Consider me chastised, if it makes you feel better.
Hans
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 9,198
Viewers? Who like me?
This viewer thinks you are completely wrong; miguided, lying, making stuff up and suffering from a general inability to process information.
We I don't imagine they are, certainly not by your endless litany of maybes and an insistence that because in your opinion the evidence for Apollo could be faked it should all be ignored.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
+1
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 21,469
I too am a viewer who is not fooled by FF88.
Last edited:
mercatormac
Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2011
- Messages
- 136
If there are any "viewers" of this thread convinced by any of FF88's arguments would they mind making themselves known.
Just for the record, I think you are completely wrong FF88.
Just for the record, I think you are completely wrong FF88.
grmcdorman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2007
- Messages
- 1,456
Ah, the old "appeal to lurkers" trick. Didn't work on Apollo Hoax, either; nobody supported the hoax believer.
(FYI, I think the hoax believers are misguided at best.)
(FYI, I think the hoax believers are misguided at best.)
Which viewers? The imaginary ones that never show up to support you? How do you know they even exist? After 5+ years of making appeals to these viewers wouldn't you think at least a few would show up by now? Does the word delusional mean anything to you?
As for the Chinese space walk, why would they need to fake something so easy? The Chinese can attain orbit, yes or no? They know how to open doors, yes or no?
Irrelevant...you posted a lie about STS60...why are you so afraid to apologise??
My goodness...the Patrick1000 "disease" is contageous...
Listen up, sparky, NO ONE HERE AGREES WITH YOU.
Do you understand, or should I repeat??
sts60
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2007
- Messages
- 4,107
First, as I already explicitly stated, YouTube loyalty tests are not evidence. In fact, you are simply making the same accusation recursively, so you haven't provided anything; you've simply repeated your claim.
Second, I find it very odd that someone who is always railing at mind control and conspiracies by The Powers That Be and oppression of the little guy resorts to loyalty tests in the first place. Such tests are a hallmark of those who seek to control others thoughts and opinions. You are a hypocrite, using the tools of those you claim to oppose to further your agenda.
Third, well, you failed to provide any actual evidence I don't believe what I'm saying. You haved therefore abandoned the claim and it fails for lack of support; I take this as your functional concession that I actually do believe what I'm saying.
So, rocky/DavidC/FatFreddy88, why do you think that I believe that Apollo happened, with my degrees in physics and engineering and two decades in the space business, and you, with no relevant expertise whatsoever, don't?
Again, don't you remember - I reminded you only a week ago - what happened at apollohoax when you said the "lurkers and viewers" agreed with you? Nineteen previously uninvolved members came forward and every one of them said you were wrong. But we can go ahead and try it here, if you like. I'm sure the resident troll-of-all-trades, Anders Lindman - the guy who said NASA arbitrarily changed the size of a 360 foot tall rocket visible to tens of thousands of people - will support you. Let's put your proposition to the test; I'll start a new poll just for you when I have a chance.
The only "misleader's" I've ever seen on this thread is Patrick and FatFreddy, well these two are the most prolific.
Neither has actually proved anything.
I take that back, they've both proved they have not a clue what they are babbleling about.
Phil
Neither has actually proved anything.
I take that back, they've both proved they have not a clue what they are babbleling about.
Phil
Robert Morrow
Thinker
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2012
- Messages
- 168
I am very sure the USA space program put a man on the moon.
Lukraak_Sisser
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 5,862
No, no we're not
You're completely right there.
You made up something about someone else out of whole cloth (often called a 'lie') and when called out on it you refuse to apologize.
If you can't even admit to being completely wrong with something that simple, why would anyone believe anything you have to say about something as complex as the moon landings?
Lukraak_Sisser
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 5,862
One thing that most hoaxers remind me of though is someone with no engineering degrees looking at pictures of the innards of a racecar engine. Then pointing at a tiny wire, saying 'I dont understand what this wire does, therefore the engine cannot run!' while at the same time standing on a race track as the car whizzes by.
What I've also never heard answered are two questions. Maybe FF88 will respond
1: Why would any government spend so much money and resources of faking something like a moonlanding?
2: Why are you so utterly desperate to prove it is wrong? What would you think changes if it were ever proven? Humanity never got more out of it than a handful of rocks and dust that have some scientific interest on how the moon and earth were formed. Scientific gold, sure, but not actually something most people will ever deal with.
What I've also never heard answered are two questions. Maybe FF88 will respond
1: Why would any government spend so much money and resources of faking something like a moonlanding?
2: Why are you so utterly desperate to prove it is wrong? What would you think changes if it were ever proven? Humanity never got more out of it than a handful of rocks and dust that have some scientific interest on how the moon and earth were formed. Scientific gold, sure, but not actually something most people will ever deal with.
threadworm
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Messages
- 1,832
It's annoying when someone tells em they don't believe what I'm saying. It's unbelievably offensive to tell me I don't believe what I'm saying.
In some respects it matters not whether I believe it - the evidence speaks for itself. It's saying "We landed on the moon".
In some respects it matters not whether I believe it - the evidence speaks for itself. It's saying "We landed on the moon".
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
Dear FatFreddy88,
As a forum member with only a minor interest in this topic and thread, I've only checked in here once and a while to see what the latest dispute may be.
Be advised; I have failed to see any sort of "evidence" from you that constitutes any level of proof suggesting that any of the multiple Apollo moon landings were faked or corrupted at any level.
I don’t know why this is some life goal of yours to convince a bunch of anonymous internet users on a relatively obscure internet forum that your belief is in any way accurate, but based on the recently posted poll in another thread, it is rather clear you have failed in your quest.
I suggest that you find a new hobby and stop stressing about such trivial, and, let’s face it, crazy blathering about a topic that requires such a high level of rabbit-hole logistics, that even the competition thinks the bacon slid off your English muffin long ago.
Good luck to you, sir. I hope you find your way back to the sane world without much difficulty. Take care.
As a forum member with only a minor interest in this topic and thread, I've only checked in here once and a while to see what the latest dispute may be.
Be advised; I have failed to see any sort of "evidence" from you that constitutes any level of proof suggesting that any of the multiple Apollo moon landings were faked or corrupted at any level.
I don’t know why this is some life goal of yours to convince a bunch of anonymous internet users on a relatively obscure internet forum that your belief is in any way accurate, but based on the recently posted poll in another thread, it is rather clear you have failed in your quest.
I suggest that you find a new hobby and stop stressing about such trivial, and, let’s face it, crazy blathering about a topic that requires such a high level of rabbit-hole logistics, that even the competition thinks the bacon slid off your English muffin long ago.
Good luck to you, sir. I hope you find your way back to the sane world without much difficulty. Take care.
Actually, none of the viewers were "fooled"....they ALL disagree with you.
Most documented, and observed.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
My opinion is that the USA sent several Apollo missions to the moon and back, and that althoigh I have read or watched dozens of arguements to the contrary I have seen none the cause me to even question that opinion.
I will further offer that I consider the " flag" issue to be one of the most ridiculous put forth by any AHB.
Is that clear enough for you FF?
I will further offer that I consider the " flag" issue to be one of the most ridiculous put forth by any AHB.
Is that clear enough for you FF?
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
Agreed. And that applies even more to the Holocuast deniers, who make the moon hoaxers look halfway sane at times.
- Status