Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[Vixen]

What culture would interpret "hundreds of thousands of miles" as "millions of miles"? Who exactly were you trying to make things clearer to? Specifics please.

Look, having had issues with US recipes that calls for 'cups' (what?) and all kinds of funny fluid measures, the Europeans not knowing their tonnes from our tons or even knowing what hundredweights were, not to mention the horrid metric system, I thought I had covered all eventualities.

 

[Vixen]

Equating hundreds of thousands with tens of millions sounds like a crore misconception stemming from a lakh of numeracy.

Or more likely the sad tragedy of when mean sd meets three sd. You saw the grief I was subjected to over primes.

 

[Vixen]

This is why @Vixen can never do my payroll.

“Hey Jenny in communications, do you get $60,000 a year or $60 million a week?”

Sorry, but if you are subjecting your CPA to payroll duty then you are wasting his or her professional skills and/or not using your profit margins efficiently in order to meet their level of salary.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Well, no. The 'live' broadcast of the Apollo 'landing' was broadcast on global black and white valve-based televisions (no digital, remember) and to do this, NASA simply pointed a tv camera at...a tv screen! Purportedly of images being received from the Moon.

The NASA guys watching their banks of...tv monitors ... are no wiser than the rest of us.

What does analogue versus digital technology have to do with anything? Are you saying digital signals cannot be faked? What *are* you saying?

All your agument seems to consist of is picking some detail and saying that in isolation does not provide the full chain of custody to prove the evidence is real. It's an argument that boils down to "If my paltry knowledge of the Apollo programme was all that was known, nobody could prove it really happened". That's a problem with you, not Apollo.

 

[Vixen]

To whom it may concern.
You wouldn't have lasted a month as my accountant. As a 'numbers' person, you make far too many mistakes and refuse to acknowledge them until very heavily pressed. As a matter of fact, you wouldn't have made it through the first monthly meeting with me. And I was as easy going a gaffer as you could imagine. Nothing wrong with making a mistake, it's your pig-headed stubbornness that would see you red carded.

Yes, there is a very strong bullying culture in the UK (and also Australia). It's not so much that they have spotted a mistake, it's more they like the sniff of a potential victim. It's a power thing. Americans might have noticed this here. At least the Americans attempt to debate an issue.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Here's a poser for you. "Millions can be expressed as:

1. Millions
2. Hundreds of thousands
3. Thousands of thousands
4. Tens of hundreds of thousands
5. Eleventy-nine thousands.

Select which one is incorrect. This reminds me of when people insisted one is not allowed to say, 'tens of hundreds' to refer to thousands.

OMG. You ventured a distance to the planets which was a couple of orders of magnitude wrong. Get over it.

 

[Vixen]

I can only imagine the kind of communications between her and her innumerate creative bosses. $60,000 is apparently meaningless to them, $60,000K and $60K mean the same thing and “hundreds of thousands” can mean “tens of millions” because of weird colloquialisms no-one else has ever heard of.

I didn't say it was meaningless. They just want the 'bottom line'. That is why to qualify as a chartered accountant you need to be able to write a detailed report in layman's language. People who are perfectly numerate fail the final exam because they concentrate too heavily on the numbers instead of honing communication skills. The skill the final examiners look for is by asking themselves, 'Would I pay for this report?'

 

[Vixen]

Except for the light coming from the sunlit ground all around you, outside the shadow. So, darker than a daylight shadow on earth but not all that dark. Certainly not pitch black.

It is.

 

[Vixen]

It's a weird bug that only seems to affect certain posts/posters, and only causes a problem if you use the opposite colour background to them. If you highlight the text you can read it.

Thanks!

 

[Vixen]

What does analogue versus digital technology have to do with anything? Are you saying digital signals cannot be faked? What *are* you saying?

All your agument seems to consist of is picking some detail and saying that in isolation does not provide the full chain of custody to prove the evidence is real. It's an argument that boils down to "If my paltry knowledge of the Apollo programme was all that was known, nobody could prove it really happened". That's a problem with you, not Apollo.

As per the video in the OP, Trevor Weaver, IIRC, points out that they simply did not have the technology. He points out the extreme effect of solar storms. What does Pat Norris the 'debunker' have to say to this? Oh, they can 'just hide behind a rock' !

 

[Vixen]

In respect of the thread topic, we should be nearing a final conclusion (see my strapline, Quaere verum)

Consider the following video of the Apollo 11 splashdown and the recovery of the module by US Navy Frogmen. What do you notice?



So, the next proposition in the debate* is:

"Only the unwary would think this was real'.

Discuss.

* Debate: wiki definition: "A debate is a structured, formal discussion on a specific topic where opposing sides present rational arguments to persuade an audience or decide on an issue. Unlike an informal argument, a debate follows strict rules, such as time limits and taking turns to speak, without personal attacks.

 

[zooterkin]

As per the video in the OP, Trevor Weaver, IIRC, points out that they simply did not have the technology. He points out the extreme effect of solar storms. What does Pat Norrris the 'debunker' have to say to this? Oh, they can 'just hide behind a rock' !

You're just going to ignore everything that's been posted so far?

 

[zooterkin]

In respect of the thread topic, we should be nearing a final conclusion (see my strapline, Quaere verum)

Consider the following video of the Apollo 11 splashdown and the recovery of the module by US Navy Frogmen. What do you notice?

They spelt it 'roll' instead of 'role'. What did you notice?

I also wouldn't invite comparisons with simpletons, but you do you.

 

[welshdean]

Yes, there is a very strong bullying culture in the UK (and also Australia). It's not so much that they have spotted a mistake, it's more they like the sniff of a potential victim. It's a power thing. Americans might have noticed this here. At least the Americans attempt to debate an issue.

Point out the bullying and I'll concede. Otherwise, my post will be considered 'owned' by you.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Well, no. The 'live' broadcast of the Apollo 'landing' was broadcast on global black and white valve-based televisions (no digital, remember) and to do this, NASA simply pointed a tv camera at...a tv screen! Purportedly of images being received from the Moon.

The NASA guys watching their banks of...tv monitors ... are no wiser than the rest of us.

The guys who heard the radio exchanges of Apollo 11 at Jodril Bank, Manchester, only heard them as they were coming into splashdown. They might just have been orbiting earth for all they know.

Bollocks

 

[Andy_Ross]

We're taking a picture of the pitch black sky, not the foreground or the background.

But you are still in daylight

 

[Andy_Ross]

I'm afraid your text is too difficult for me to make out.

Not a surprise

 

[Andy_Ross]

Look, having had issues with US recipes that calls for 'cups' (what?) and all kinds of funny fluid measures, the Europeans not knowing their tonnes from our tons or even knowing what hundredweights were, not to mention the horrid metric system, I thought I had covered all eventualities.

Cups are a very good measure to use for a recipe.
They size of a cup isn't fixed, that's the point. You should look in to the history of the cup measure and why it exists.

 

[JesseCuster]

Look, having had issues with US recipes that calls for 'cups' (what?) and all kinds of funny fluid measures, the Europeans not knowing their tonnes from our tons or even knowing what hundredweights were, not to mention the horrid metric system, I thought I had covered all eventualities.

What eventuality were you covering by using "hundreds of thousands" to mean millions or tens of millions?

What colloquialism or linguistic difference are you talking about such that using "hundreds of thousands" to mean millions or tens of millions is somehow providing clarity to the situation? If you simply said millions of miles to mean millions of miles, you wouldn't have dragged everyone into another quagmire of you trying to defend your nonsense. If you're trying to make things clear, then you're failing, badly.

 

[Vixen]

They spelt it 'roll' instead of 'role'. What did you notice?

I also wouldn't invite comparisons with simpletons, but you do you.

Fair point, so I have changed it to 'the unwary'.