ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags apollo hoax , moon landing hoax

Reply
Old 22nd April 2017, 01:34 PM   #1881
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,910
Originally Posted by wogoga
...The "safety reasons" probably stem from solar radiation. Even in the absence of solar storms, the sun is comparable to an open nuclear reactor.
No, that's ridiculous. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Originally Posted by wogoga
Apollo spacesuits "protected the astronaut from thermal solar radiation and micrometeoroids". The problem of nuclear radiation from the sun seems to have been simply ignored during all these Apollo missions.
Nope. Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Worse, you're evidently too lazy to spend a few minutes' effort to disabuse yourself of your own inane assumptions.

Why is that? Do you simply enjoy saying stupid things? Are you merely trolling? Or is there some sort of religious belief that compels you to ignore people who actually understand the subject, so you won't be forced to challenge your ignorant views?
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2017, 02:10 PM   #1882
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,952
Originally Posted by threadworm View Post
I exposed myself to that open nuclear reactor today. It's been lovely here. I used minimal shielding, which just happened on this occasion to be a NASA T-shirt.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2017, 02:21 PM   #1883
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,333
Originally Posted by wogoga View Post
From the Wikipedia article:
Irrelevant and ignorant lies based on fantasy from wogoga follow the quote !
The implied delusion that the Exploration Mission 1 will be done using Apollo-era technology is not addressed.

A speculation that the manned mission will be shorter than the unmanned mission only because of radiation. In the absence of solar storms, the Sun is not a risk. The Sun is not a radiation producing "nuclear reactor" at any time. Fusion does happen at the Sun's core but fusion radiation (other then neutrinos) does not escape the Sun - the gamma rays would fry the Earth! The radiation is absorbed and emitted as other wavelengths of light as it travels through the body of the Sun. The radiation that is a risk is particles such as protons that are accelerated by solar flares at the surface of the Sun.

A lie about the risks from solar activity ("radiation") for the Apollo missions. The risks were known and analyzed. If there was a solar flare the astronauts would stay relatively protected in their spacecraft rather than doing EVA activity.
For example: Apollo Experience Report - Protection Against Radiation (PDF) dated March 1973
Quote:
Radiation protection problems on earth and in space are discussed. Flight through the Van Allen belts and into space beyond the geomagnetic shielding was recognized as hazardous before the advent of manned flight.
My emphasis added.
There is a rather famous solar flare that happened between 2 missions in 1972.
Sickening Solar Flares
Quote:
The solar storm of August 1972 is legendary at NASA because it occurred in between two Apollo missions: the crew of Apollo 16 had returned to Earth in April and the crew of Apollo 17 was preparing for a moon landing in December.

Cucinotta estimates that a moonwalker caught in the August 1972 storm might have absorbed 400 rem. Deadly? "Not necessarily," he says. A quick trip back to Earth for medical care could have saved the hypothetical astronaut's life.

Surely, though, no astronaut is going to walk around on the moon when there's a giant sunspot threatening to explode. "They're going to stay inside their spaceship (or habitat)," according to Cucinotta. An Apollo command module with its aluminum hull would have attenuated the 1972 storm from 400 rem to less than 35 rem at the astronaut's blood-forming organs. That's the difference between needing a bone marrow transplant, or having a headache.

Last edited by Reality Check; 23rd April 2017 at 02:27 PM.
Reality Check is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 11:03 AM   #1884
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,032
Someone emailed me this link. It alludes to Wogoga's "insufficient heat shielding" argument, which has its own thread, but is more properly aimed at the more general case of Apollo hoaxery. It purports to be written by a PhD in physics (but writing under a pseudonym for his "safety").

http://www.aulis.com/moonbase2017.htm

One immediate howler early in the (lengthy) article is that NASA ignores the past success of the Rocketdyne F-1 engine. Apparently in all his research the author missed where NASA is reverse-engineering the F-1 in hopes of returning it to flight.

Have fun, guys.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 12:36 PM   #1885
threadworm
Graduate Poster
 
threadworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,537
Seems to be a re-hash/regurgitation of this piece in conspiracy kooks-r-us site Nexus:

https://www.nexusmagazine.com/articl...-legacy-behind

Said article makes the hilarious claim that

Quote:
we know of only a few low resolution published by NASA as a reluctant response to public requests for Apollo landing site images, while there are no photographs taken be independent observers.
Firstly, the low resolution claim is a lie. There are many high resolution pictures of the landings sites. Secondly, the suggestion that NASA published these images 'reluctantly' is a lie. I would argue that there was hardly a public clamour for such images prior to NASA publishing them at all. Thirdly, the claim that there no photographs taken by independent observers is also a lie.

If they don't know that those claims alone aren't true, they aren't fit to be writing about the subject.

The aulis article is a little self referential to say the least, and is chock full of knowing winks and sly inferences but very short on actual facts and the kind of independent sources 'Kouts' seems so keen on.
__________________
Facts are simple and facts are straight, facts are lazy and facts are late, facts don't come with points of view, facts don't do what I want them to.

**************************

Apollo Hoax Debunked
threadworm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 01:35 PM   #1886
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,032
Originally Posted by threadworm View Post
Seems to be a re-hash/regurgitation of this piece in conspiracy kooks-r-us site Nexus
Same author. Or same nom du plume, anyway. At least Nexus drops an email address purportedly for the author, and tells we should go to the Aulis site for the footnotes. And that makes sense; the Aulis authors David Percy and Mary Bennett are buddies with Marcus Allen, who publishes the magazine version of Nexus in the U.K. and who has always worked hand in hand with Bennett and Percy to publish hoax stuff.

Quote:
Said article makes the hilarious claim that [amount to various lies].
Indeed, it's fairly standard conspiracy-mongering: announce that you're an expert, that you've exhaustively studied the problem, and then just make up whatever drivel you want because you know none of your enthusiastic readers will check up on it, and that your critics can be dismissed as shills.

Quote:
If they don't know that those claims alone aren't true, they aren't fit to be writing about the subject.
Oh, but the author is a Very Important Person in New Zealand, a degreed physicist who has done Many Wonderful Things for Many Large Companies, if his bio is to be believed.

Too bad he insists on hiding behind false names.

As I write elsewhere, this is actually a stunt Bennett and Percy pull quite often. In their published materials they quote a handful of witnesses and experts, but always by pseudonyms "to protect their identity." These effectively anonymous experts always seem baffled by what they see in the record, and always seem to be at a loss to explain what NASA is doing or how they did it, contributing to the notion that their must be depths of secrecy surrounding the historical record.

Sadly these experts seem to disappear just when they're needed to answer questions regarding their findings.

Lately Aulis has toyed with "Russian physicists" who have apparently discovered serious problems with Apollo. Interestingly enough, none of these Russian "academics" seem to have any paper trail of any work whatsoever, in any country. Aulis has based quite a lot of their work on people they tout as experts, but who all seem to lie beyond the realm of voir dire.

Quote:
...and the kind of independent sources 'Kouts' seems so keen on.
His sources purporting to be first-hand NASA materials are GAO (Government Accountability Office) reports. They're a reasonable source if you want to make a case that NASA is blundering through an erratically-managed and -funded effort to get to Mars. However, if you want the line of reasoning in that case to be that NASA is fumbling going to Mars because it never developed the technology to go to the Moon, then "Kouts" is missing almost all of the most obvious sources, such as the Apollo Experience Reports, the Apollo News-Record reports, the operational and design handbooks for the individual components, and the Mission Reports. This is where the technology is described in excruciating detail. They are all easily available, most of them at no cost. And anyone who wants to measure up as an expert in NASA manned spaceflight technology circa 1970 had better know those sources inside and out.

"Kouts" clearly has never heard of them.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 02:18 PM   #1887
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,032
From the linked artcle:
Originally Posted by Phil Kouts
An attempt to develop a heavy-lift lunar rocket within five years ended in recognition of serious vibrational problems in the first stage of a rocket similar to the Saturn V. Subsequently, the Ares series of rockets has been abandoned...
"Kouts" conflates the Ares I with the Ares V and errs comically in suggesting that either of the two designs is similar to the Saturn V. While both the Ares I and Ares V were expected to incorporate a common upper stage derived from the S-IVB stage, they owe more of their design lineage to STS components. More on the S-IVB.

The heavy-lift member of the Ares family was the Ares V. It was based largely on the STS stack. There were no "vibrational problems" in it, serious or otherwise. The smaller, human-rated launch vehicle was the Ares I. It too was based mostly on STS-derived SRB designs. I know, because I worked on it as a sub-subcontractor. The technology and methods used to project the thrust oscillations and to investigate the effectiveness of the eventual solutions was what I provided. And it had nothing to do with the S-IVB. It had entirely to do with problems scaling shuttle technology up to do something it hadn't originally been intended to do.

I say "eventual" solutions because the Ares IX actually flew -- and flew successfully. "Kouts" tells us the program was abandoned -- which it was. And he insinuates that it was abandoned because it was technologically infeasible, and that the infeasibility had to do with being "similar" to the Saturn V. The goal of Ares was to see if a suitable family of launch vehicles could be built at low cost and shortened schedule by reconfiguring existing hardware. That's not always going to work, and in this case it didn't. Which is to say, it didn't offer any special advantages in cost, schedule, or effectiveness over a more overhauled approach. Now we can debate at length the merits and shortcomings of the SLS, but the point is that "Kouts" misinterprets the facts when he suggests that Ares was canceled because, being based on Apollo technology, it wouldn't work.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 02:30 PM   #1888
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 895
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Someone emailed me this link. It alludes to Wogoga's "insufficient heat shielding" argument, which has its own thread, but is more properly aimed at the more general case of Apollo hoaxery. It purports to be written by a PhD in physics (but writing under a pseudonym for his "safety").

http://www.aulis.com/moonbase2017.htm

One immediate howler early in the (lengthy) article is that NASA ignores the past success of the Rocketdyne F-1 engine. Apparently in all his research the author missed where NASA is reverse-engineering the F-1 in hopes of returning it to flight.

Have fun, guys.
Oh to be a fly on the wall in Nexus offices when discussing the articles. I has heard rumors that Marcus Allen had reversed his position on Apollo following meetings with some scientists, however I never believed that since he like other CT's have so much capital invested in the hoax belief to ever change.

As for Percy and Bennett, your conclusion concerning the claimed academics is spot on, as usual.
I do have one question though, did the design of the heat shield of Orion change after the initial flight? I haven't seen anything like that.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 02:36 PM   #1889
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,017
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Someone emailed me this link. It alludes to Wogoga's "insufficient heat shielding" argument, which has its own thread, but is more properly aimed at the more general case of Apollo hoaxery. It purports to be written by a PhD in physics (but writing under a pseudonym for his "safety").

http://www.aulis.com/moonbase2017.htm

One immediate howler early in the (lengthy) article is that NASA ignores the past success of the Rocketdyne F-1 engine. Apparently in all his research the author missed where NASA is reverse-engineering the F-1 in hopes of returning it to flight.

Have fun, guys.
I don't know where to start, it is so borked up as to be well, nonsense.

Different chunks of that load of bollocks will strike different people. My standouts.

Quote:
An attempt to develop a heavy-lift lunar rocket within five years ended in recognition of serious vibrational problems in the first stage of a rocket similar to the Saturn V. Subsequently, the Ares series of rockets has been abandoned;
That would be POGO and it was engineered out.

Quote:
It is no surprise that the F-1 engine of the Saturn V's first stage is not even discussed in NASA's current research documents;
False.

Quote:
NASA is still incapable of developing a heavy-lift rocket for payloads of 70 tons – let alone repeating the acclaimed capability of the Saturn V;
W the actual F? This is the stupid concorde malarkey again?

Quote:
NASA now classifies an ascent from the lunar surface as an escape from ‘a deep gravity well’ and its plans to land on the Moon have been deferred to the point of being virtually abandoned. This is not surprising since the Apollo lunar ascent module was demonstrably incapable of safely firing from the descent platform due to the absence of routes for gases to escape;
Wait, what? In the crankiverse the moon is not a gravity well. Because...???

I could go on, but sweet mother of jehosaphat, is this how low bennett has sunk?

**** me pink with a whitewash brush.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 02:48 PM   #1890
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,017
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Oh to be a fly on the wall in Nexus offices when discussing the articles. I has heard rumors that Marcus Allen had reversed his position on Apollo following meetings with some scientists, however I never believed that since he like other CT's have so much capital invested in the hoax belief to ever change.

As for Percy and Bennett, your conclusion concerning the claimed academics is spot on, as usual.
I do have one question though, did the design of the heat shield of Orion change after the initial flight? I haven't seen anything like that.
Allen reversed himself and repudiated Moon hoaxes when convenient. Afterwards he went straight back to type. Percy now lives in the south of France and will not answer any queries. Bennett keeps propagating the nonsense that is Aulis. Remember their chief photo analyst. The one who declared in a court of law that he did not know what photogrammetry was. That was their star.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 02:53 PM   #1891
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,032
Another howler.
Originally Posted by phil kouts
The idea of designing a LM where the ascent engine's nozzle rim was in such close proximity to the flat screened top surface of the descent stage, thereby preventing the outflow of exhaust gases, should have been discarded at its very conception. (MB2)
The cryptic citation, we find, is one of "Kouts'" other self-published papers. One hopes the alleged problem would be described in more detail there. But nope, it just reiterates the claim without explanation. Pretending something is a documented claim when it's just something you told yourself is pretty disingenuous.

But the real hilarious thing is that there is no "screened top surface" under the APS nozzle. There's half a mil (0.13 mm) of Kapton stretched across the largely open center section of the LM descent stage. Yes, it would have been dangerous to design the LM the way "Kouts" says. So it's a good thing it wasn't. When the APS ignites, the flimsy Kapton sheet immediately disintegrates and the APS plume passes through the descent-stage center, around the (now-useless) descent engine and impinges on the lunar surface some 3 meters below.

Last edited by JayUtah; 6th July 2017 at 02:54 PM.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2017, 02:53 PM   #1892
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,333
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Wait, what? In the crankiverse the moon is not a gravity well. Because...???
I am more appalled by the insanity of the Apollo lunar ascent module not being able to work because of "the absence of routes for gases to escape" .
Reality Check is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2017, 09:36 AM   #1893
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 895
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Allen reversed himself and repudiated Moon hoaxes when convenient. Afterwards he went straight back to type. Percy now lives in the south of France and will not answer any queries. Bennett keeps propagating the nonsense that is Aulis. Remember their chief photo analyst. The one who declared in a court of law that he did not know what photogrammetry was. That was their star.
The man is a snake oil salesman to the unsuspecting/ignorant.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th July 2017, 08:29 AM   #1894
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,151
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
I am more appalled by the insanity of the Apollo lunar ascent module not being able to work because of "the absence of routes for gases to escape" .
I'm pretty sure it would work even if the bottom of the nozzle was flush against a metal plate on the descent stage. The gas pressure would still lift the descent stage, then there would be plenty of space to allow the gas to escape. Actual engineers can correct me if I'm wrong.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th July 2017, 08:40 AM   #1895
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,032
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
I'm pretty sure it would work even if the bottom of the nozzle was flush against a metal plate on the descent stage. The gas pressure would still lift the descent stage, then there would be plenty of space to allow the gas to escape. Actual engineers can correct me if I'm wrong.
Most liquid-fueled motors produce a pressure spike at ignition, called the "ignition transient." You can see it in the motion of the SSME nozzles at ignition. The danger is that if the nozzle is pressed up against something substantial, the ignition transient could fracture the nozzle or otherwise damage the engine.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2017, 11:56 AM   #1896
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,952
[OFF TOPIC - Sort of]

Jay Utah, or anyone here who is also a member at Apollohoax.net and knows how to get in contact with "LunarOrbit" please let him know that Apollohoax.net is down ("Your PHP installation appears to be missing the MySQL extension which is required by WordPress.")

Thanks
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2017, 12:51 PM   #1897
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 895
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
[OFF TOPIC - Sort of]

Jay Utah, or anyone here who is also a member at Apollohoax.net and knows how to get in contact with "LunarOrbit" please let him know that Apollohoax.net is down ("Your PHP installation appears to be missing the MySQL extension which is required by WordPress.")

Thanks
DITTO, and I don't know his address either
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2018, 09:43 PM   #1898
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,191
[Off-Topic]

This music video was just released to YouTube. The creator (Nigel Stanford) has taken footage from Apollo/Gemini missions, nuclear test footage and SR-71 footage and blended it with some rather impressive CGI work. There are already commenters to the video hoping that Conspiracy Theorists will fall for the imagery.

What struck me was just how well he was able to integrate the CGI into actual footage, especially towards the end of the video, we now seem to live in the era where what the Moon Hoaxers claim was possible in the 60s is now possible. Namely fake up a convincing lunar landscape.

The clip is linked below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky2rtCpbn7k
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2018, 05:20 AM   #1899
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,952
Originally Posted by Graham2001 View Post
[Off-Topic]

This music video was just released to YouTube. The creator (Nigel Stanford) has taken footage from Apollo/Gemini missions, nuclear test footage and SR-71 footage and blended it with some rather impressive CGI work. There are already commenters to the video hoping that Conspiracy Theorists will fall for the imagery.

What struck me was just how well he was able to integrate the CGI into actual footage, especially towards the end of the video, we now seem to live in the era where what the Moon Hoaxers claim was possible in the 60s is now possible. Namely fake up a convincing lunar landscape.

The clip is linked below.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky2rtCpbn7k
I can quite easily spot which bits of the lunar landscape are real (with the silver ball CGIed in) and which bits are full recreations.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:54 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.