Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[Vixen]

I can certainly imagine. I'm the ignoramus a lot of the time. But I'm not so ignorant as to imagine Einstein is talking to me.

Most people can spot a joke.

 

[Vixen]

Well not completely. I think I have raised dementia or similar in one of these Vixen threads as a possibility.

Thank you.

 

[Steve]

Einstein said, 'Imagination is more important than knowledge'. Thank you for the unintended compliment. I understand. I believe you are genuinely baffled by the topic.

Einstein was wrong sometimes too. And no. that does not mean you emulate him in any way at all.

 

[theprestige]

Most people can spot a joke.

I wasn't joking.

 

[junkshop]

Why would stars be visible in a photo exposed to show details on a daylight earth?

FYI the earth always looks blue when viewed from the Moon.

What the flying ◊◊◊◊ does this reply have to do with Andy's post? This is a complete non sequitur. I can't help but question your ability to read and, more importantly, comprehend other member's posts anything at this point.

ETA: Apologies to everyone for replying to an ancient post. This thread moves so fast, yet goes nowhere.

 

[Steve]

Thank you.

My pleasure.

 

[Vixen]

Maybe you should have done that first before showing off how unaware you were.

It was a long way into this discussion before you even grasped that Ektachrome is a colour reversal film. And even now you know, but refuse to admit you know, that you couldn't photograph stars with it using fraction of a second exposures.

Of course I knew Ektachrome was a brand.

 

[Steve]

Most people can spot a joke.

Is that similar to a quip?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Most people can spot a joke.

Reformed Offlian's complex/imaginary joke was funny and clever wordplay. I spotted that one. Was that the joke you meant?

 

[theprestige]

Of course I knew Ektachrome was a brand.

It's not a brand. It's a product.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Of course I knew Ektachrome was a brand.

Try to concentrate.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Why should your interlocutors put more effort into their responses to you than you do into your Google "re"searches?



From what? An embarrassingly botched image search?

Your shenanigans in this thread have not posed a serious challenge to anybody else's anything. What they have done is waste people's time and insult their intelligence.

I have to take issue, it wasn't other people's intelligence that an impartial observer would feel was insulted.

 

[JayUtah]

Of course I knew Ektachrome was a brand.

Ektachrome is not a brand.

 

[Vixen]

Reformed Offlian's complex/imaginary joke was funny and clever wordplay. I spotted that one. Was that the joke you meant?

Piaget re child development found that children needed to have powers of imagination, i.e., abstract thought, to understand various concepts. Thus, accusing someone of being able to use their imagination that you yourself can't envisage, is not the big put down Reformed_Offlian thinks it is.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Of course I knew Ektachrome was a brand.

Not at first you didn't. You even initially tried to argue the point with LondonJohn when he first corrected you. Search this thread for "Ektachrome bods"

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Piaget re child development found that children needed to have powers of imagination, i.e., abstract thought, to understand various concepts. Thus, accusing someone of being able to use their imagination that you yourself can't envisage, is not the big put down Reformed_Offlian thinks it is.

So you didn't get the joke.

 

[Vixen]

Ektachrome is not a brand.

Er, it's trademarked by Eastman Kodak.

 

[Vixen]

Not at first you didn't. You even initially tried to argue the point with LondonJohn when he first corrected you.

LondonJohn thinks he is correcting one.

 

[bknight]

Still not answering the question

I hope you aren't holding your breath waiting.

 

[JayUtah]

Er, it's trademarked by Eastman Kodak.

Eastman Kodak is the brand. Ektachrome is the product.

This is something a chartered accountant would know.