Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[Buckaroo]

Once again I ask, this time in regards to FatFreddy, whether it is indeed good sport to engage and taunt those who are clearly mentally ill. Schadenfreude is not a noble pleasure.

 

[R.A.F.]

I posted some strong evidence to the contrary in this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8033032&postcount=1

Click on the bottom link.

So which posts should we read, there...cosmored, or fat freddy's?



Is that website aware that you are "playing with puppets"? Perhaps an email to the adminstration.

 

[R.A.F.]

Once again I ask, this time in regards to FatFreddy, whether it is indeed good sport to engage and taunt those who are clearly mentally ill.

If you really believe this to be true, then PM the mods/admin. with your concerns. they are solely responsible for the continuation of this thread.

Personally, when anyone tries to tell me that Apollo was faked, they then become "fair game".



Certainly ain't gonna lose any sleep over the mental state of other posters....not only is it not my "problem", but what is the alternative?...allow him to post anything his whim desires, unchallenged.

Hell no....

 

[JayUtah]

Once again I ask, this time in regards to FatFreddy, whether it is indeed good sport to engage and taunt those who are clearly mentally ill. Schadenfreude is not a noble pleasure.

I'm not qualified to determine whether someone is mentally ill, and I doubt you are either. I am however qualified to determine whether someone is reasoning inappropriately (for whatever reason), and I will address statements on that basis. Further, FatFreddy88 has made statements elsewhere that could be considered defamatory against me and others. I believe I am within my rights to attempt to hold him accountable for those statements.

 

[Buckaroo]

If you really believe this to be true, then PM the mods/admin. with your concerns. they are solely responsible for the continuation of this thread.

Personally, when anyone tries to tell me that Apollo was faked, they then become "fair game".



Certainly ain't gonna lose any sleep over the mental state of other posters....not only is it not my "problem", but what is the alternative?...allow him to post anything his whim desires, unchallenged.

Hell no....

I'm not qualified to determine whether someone is mentally ill, and I doubt you are either. I am however qualified to determine whether someone is reasoning inappropriately (for whatever reason), and I will address statements on that basis. Further, FatFreddy88 has made statements elsewhere that could be considered defamatory against me and others. I believe I am within my rights to attempt to hold him accountable for those statements.

Both good points. I suppose it's hard for me to understand how someone who is so single-mindedly and obsessively deluded (not just about the facts of Apollo, but also about his own abilities and arguments) could be considered mentally healthy. But of course I've never read the DSM, so I'm going by a folk conception of sanity.

 

[dafydd]

You people are tap dancing around my request instead of addressing it. If this were a debating hall, the audience would be roaring with laughter at you right now. Please address the issue I raised.

Your position is that the flag didn't move because of air so tell us how it would move if air made it move. How would it be different?


I posted some strong evidence to the contrary in this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8033032&postcount=1

Click on the bottom link.

What effect would 1/6th Earth gravity and no atmosphere have on a flag? No links please, answer in your own words.

 

[LSSBB]

Both good points. I suppose it's hard for me to understand how someone who is so single-mindedly and obsessively deluded (not just about the facts of Apollo, but also about his own abilities and arguments) could be considered mentally healthy. But of course I've never read the DSM, so I'm going by a folk conception of sanity.

Hey, you see people that single-mindedly deluded in the business world. Sometimes thet rise to CEO and take whole companies with them when they finally crash and burn.

 

[FatFreddy88]

FatFreddy88 has made statements elsewhere that could be considered defamatory against me and others.

The truth is not defamatory. People can see what I've said and decide for themselves. Look at link at the bottom of this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8014461&postcount=128


Hey Jay.

My position is that the movement of the flag in this clip is consistent with the atmphere explanation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y
(2:36 time mark)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

If your position is that this footage wasn't taken in air, how would the flag move in air? How would the movement be different than it is?

 

[FatFreddy88]

What effect would 1/6th Earth gravity and no atmosphere have on a flag?

It would swing wider and it wouldn't come to a stop as quickly as the Apollo flag does in this video at the 2:00 and 2:15 time marks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

It would continue swinging back and forth the way the flag does at the 00:50 time mark.

 

[dafydd]

It would swing wider and it wouldn't come to a stop as quickly as the Apollo flag does in this video at the 2:00 and 2:15 time marks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

It would continue swinging back and forth the way the flag does at the 00:50 time mark.

That would depend upon how much impetus was given to the flag. How many experiments have you carried out with flags in a vacuum? If it was a hoax do you think that NASA would be stupid enough to release footage that gives the whole thing away? Use your brain man.

 

[JayUtah]

Hey Jay.

I have told you what you must do first before attempting to engage me directly again.

 

[JayUtah]

Both good points. I suppose it's hard for me to understand how someone who is so single-mindedly and obsessively deluded (not just about the facts of Apollo, but also about his own abilities and arguments) could be considered mentally healthy. But of course I've never read the DSM, so I'm going by a folk conception of sanity.

Sure, and by those standards nearly every conspiracy theorist on here would be considered nuts by at least somebody. And on the other side of the coin, I know people who have been diagnosed by fully qualified psychiatrists as mentally ill in some respect or another, but who nevertheless have full reasoning faculties. "Rational" and "mentally ill" are not opposites.

FatFreddy88 is clearly irrational. That much we can conclude by observation. You may argue that he is so irrational as to preclude intelligent conversation with him, and many would agree with you. But I see no reason why he deserves sympathy, at this point.

 

[Buckaroo]

FatFreddy88 is clearly irrational. That much we can conclude by observation. You may argue that he is so irrational as to preclude intelligent conversation with him, and many would agree with you. But I see no reason why he deserves sympathy, at this point.

Point conceded. Agreed.

 

[JayUtah]

Point conceded. Agreed.

I shake your hand, good sir.

 

[FatFreddy88]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8011671&postcount=43

Cosmored's claim that I will debate only when there are moderators to "ride to [my] rescue" is false, misleading, and highly misrepresentative of the nature of the debates I participate in.

Why don't you come over to the moon thread at Spurstalk? That's one of the few places I've seen where the moderators don't use their power to tie the hands of the hoax-believers.

I have entertained several third-party requests to present my views in public under my real identity. Those requests have come from the journal Science, The New York Times, The New York Times Magazine, The History Channel, National Geographic, The Ron Reagan Show, the Discovery Channel, and a host of skeptics organizations. In many or most of these cases, noted conspiracy theorists are also invited to present their views. Some agree, most don't. In a few cases, they demand exorbitant appearance fees.

I'd be very surprised if one of the above venues would permit the showing of the clearest hoax evidence such as these two videos...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

...or the way Collins' jacket corner bounced up and down the way it would in gravity when they were supposed to be halfway to the moon.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=230521

That proof is simply too clear to obfuscate. MythBusters didn't dare show the above flag footage.

Cosmored's spurstalk.com post goes on to link here to a debate at IMDb between me and Jarrah White. He asserts that Jarrah left that debate because the moderators were deleting his posts. In fact, the moderators deleted only one of his posts, which contained foul and abusive language.

Jarrah knows why the post was deleted; he posted a cleaned-up version of it later than day, but then tried to tell his fans that IMDb was preventing him from posting key evidence that would have proven his claim. Further, IMDb was Jarrah's choice of forum to debate in, not mind, and he explicitly agreed to be moderated there. He chose the venue and accepted the ground rules. His inability to follow them is his fault and his alone.

Jarrah debated for a considerable length of time after he was moderated, before finally resigning the debate. He resigned because he was losing badly the argument he had made regarding solar weather. It was becoming increasingly clear that he had incompetently misinterpreted the NOAA data (which Cosmored also alludes to in his post, when discussing Ralph Rene) and was being held accountable for it. His attempts to replay debunked arguments had failed, and his attempts to change the subject to Apollo 1 had failed. Further, he was also being held accountable to respond to an Australian poster's invitation to set up a panel of academics in Jarrah's area to endorse Jarrah's findings in person.

I'd like to hear Jarrah's side of this story. We have no way of confirming anything you've said. All we have is your word.

Cosmored's claim that I will debate only when there are moderators to "ride to [my] rescue" is false, misleading, and highly misrepresentative of the nature of the debates I participate in.

When I debated at the Clavius and Bad Astronomy forums, the moderators tied my hands so that I couldn't properly make my case.

Ideally I would like him to debate at BAUT, where the moderation for conspiracy theories includes rules that require proponents to focus on the debate and evidence, rather than upon debate tactics.

Now at Baut, when a hoax-believer makes a post, a note comes up saying that the post will have to be approved by a moderator before it can appear. If it's something that's too clear to obfuscate, it doesn't appear.

In no online forum where I debate do I have any authority to control who posts, what is posted, or what may be said to or about me. I post here, at BAUT, and at Apollhoax.net. None of the moderators at any of these places bow to my will.

You don't have to; they do it on their own.

 

[R.A.F.]

People can see what I've said and decide for themselves.

Fairly irrelevant since no one here (excepting one person) agrees with you.

240 - 1...against, is not something to "brag" about, yet you keep posting that "they deicde for themselves".

Well, they have decided and found your ideas "wanting".

My position is that the movement of the flag in this clip is consistent with the atmphere explanation.

...and you would be incorrect....nothing wrong with making mistakes...everyone has at one time or another. It only becomes a "problem" when against all evidence, you "choose" to embrace those mistakes.

If your position is that this footage wasn't taken in air, how would the flag move in air? How would the movement be different than it is?

Irrelevant...watch the mythbusters episode where the "build team" demonstrate the difference...


Then concede your error.

 

[R.A.F.]

Why don't you come over to the moon thread at Spurstalk? That's one of the few places I've seen where the moderators don't use their power to tie the hands of the hoax-believers.

So you can promote irrationality without interference?

Sorry, I have no reason to join a "spurs" message board...

I'd be very surprised if one of the above venues would permit the showing of the clearest hoax evidence such as these two videos...

So you really haven't learned a thing from the poll, have you.

MythBusters didn't dare show the above flag footage.

...and that is what I would call a flat out lie.

But go ahead....dig yourself in deeper.

I'd like to hear Jarrah's side of this story. We have no way of confirming anything you've said. All we have is your word.

...you've chosen to take the word of an ignorant, proven liar...but you won't take the word of someone with actual expertise...

I'd call that willful ignorance....congratulations on exposing yourself for all to see...

When I debated at the Clavius and Bad Astronomy forums, the moderators tied my hands so that I couldn't properly make my case.

You don't understand what a debate "is"...what it isn't, is someone spouting garbage, and not being held accoutable for hoax believer lies.

Now at Baut, when a hoax-believer makes a post, a note comes up saying that the post will have to be approved by a moderator before it can appear. If it's something that's too clear to obfuscate, it doesn't appear.

...and again YOU LIE. Do you think no one here reads the BAUT board??


Liars who continually lie are not going to be convincing TO ANYONE.


Remember the poll??

 

[R.A.F.]

MythBusters didn't dare show the above flag footage.

Aside...re-watched the episode in question recently, and had forgotten the flag waving experiment. the "build team" actually DID demonstrate that the flag waves longer when moved in a vacuum, than when moved in an atmosphere. The reasoning being no air resistance in a vacuum to slow it as fast as air resistance from one atmosphere.

So basically, freddy's idea re. the mythbusters is crap....no other way to say it.

 

[JayUtah]

I'd like to hear Jarrah's side of this story. We have no way of confirming anything you've said. All we have is your word.

Prove that you have more than Jarrah's word.

 

[FatFreddy88]

Now at Baut, when a hoax-believer makes a post, a note comes up saying that the post will have to be approved by a moderator before it can appear. If it's something that's too clear to obfuscate, it doesn't appear.
.............................................................................................
...and again YOU LIE. Do you think no one here reads the BAUT board??

Why doesn't some lurker go and register at Baut and try to post the info that's in the link that's at the bottome of this post?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8033032&postcount=1

I'll bet he or she won't succeed in getting on the forum where people can see it.

If your position is that this footage wasn't taken in air, how would the flag move in air? How would the movement be different than it is?
Irrelevant...watch the mythbusters episode where the "build team" demonstrate the difference

MythBusters has been exposed as a sham by this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

An objective truth-seeker would simply answer the question. I want to hear Jay Windley explain it.

MythBusters didn't dare show the above flag footage.
----------------------------------------------------------
...and that is what I would call a flat out lie.

Please link to where they dealt with this anomaly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

Remember the poll??

I commented on the poll and my post got deleted. I can't speak my mind here about that poll.