Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion / Lick observatory laser saga

[threadworm]

Still waiting for FF88 to come up with any evidence that I don't believe what I wrote in this:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/76882844/Clouds-Across-the-Moon

or any kind of sensible critique of the contents.

The ball's in your court Freddy - if you're going to insist on ad hominem attacks as the central proof of your belief, you're going to have to prove them (you won't be able to) and show that they are valid and true (they aren't). Failure to do so (inevitable) will help any neutral posters come to their own conclusions about the quality of your debating skills (zero) and your understanding of the subject (none).

I'll go raise some children to adulthood while I wait for your answer.

 

[frenat]

(from post #2308)

(from post 8312)

You people keep repeating this because you know my sincere answer might get me banned. I won't say it directly. I'll post this and you can try to infer my answer from it.
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Planting of provocateurs (and sleeper agents, etc.). These people will vary from the posters who suddenly show up one day under an alias attacking regular posters, to people who seem like regular posters themselves. They may work in teams, supporting each other and giving the illusion of popular support on the net. (Remember, net IDs are basically free, and one person can have many.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So basically you are accusing forum regulars of being sock puppets. Any proof? No of course not. You have NONE. Just your biased opinion as usual.
What about the supposed lurkers who agree with you? Why didn't they show up? Let me guess, it is all a conspiracy against you right?

The debate is really over now as you've all been discredited and the real viewers and lurkers who've looked at it know so. You'll never recognize it though and you'll just try to control the damage by trying to bury that part of the debate. That's what always happens on moon-hoax threads when the pro-Apollo people lose so we truthers have to keep reposting the part where they lose to thwart them.

Hilarious that you claim stuff is "buried" when there is just actual DISCUSSION going on. What you call "burying" is other people discussing things rationally and calling you out on your hypocritical circular logic.


Of course I still think you're a computer program. Probably just an updated version of an ELIZA program. That would explain the repeated postings of the same material and the ignoring of replies and explanations that make you appear delusional. You never responded to this idea on the other forum. Perhaps because your program isn't designed to? Whoever wrote you didn't do well with your response algorithms.

 

[R.A.F.]

You people keep repeating this because you know my sincere answer might get me banned.

...and you "fear" being banned??

I won't say it directly. I'll post this and you can try to infer my answer from it.

No thanks...I'd rather not try and "guess" what your answer would be.

The debate is really over now....

So this will be your last post?

...as you've all been discredited and the real viewers and lurkers who've looked at it know so. You'll never recognize it though and you'll just try to control the damage by trying to bury that part of the debate. That's what always happens on moon-hoax threads when the pro-Apollo people lose so we truthers have to keep reposting the part where they lose to thwart them.

Irrelevant garbage...

It must drive you crazy that people won't "buy into" your garbage re. Apollo...that all you've done is demonstrate you can't discuss this topic "in good faith"?



Apollo happened...nothing YOU say will change that fact...so go ahead and make a fool of yourself...it is very entertaining.

 

[Dcdrac]

The debate is really over because there was no hoax/fraud carried out by NASA which has been proved time and time again with HARD EVIDENCE, as in not jsut links to whacko websites and spurious youtube links

 

[Multivac]

The debate is really over now as you've all been discredited and the real viewers and lurkers who've looked at it know so. You'll never recognize it though and you'll just try to control the damage by trying to bury that part of the debate. That's what always happens on moon-hoax threads when the pro-Apollo people lose so we truthers have to keep reposting the part where they lose to thwart them.

As a lurker, and occasional poster in this thread, I can assure you that these statements are completely and totally wrong. They are so full of wrongness that they cannot be taken seriously by anyone.

 

[Multivac]

Planting of provocateurs (and sleeper agents, etc.). These people will vary from the posters who suddenly show up one day under an alias attacking regular posters, to people who seem like regular posters themselves. They may work in teams, supporting each other and giving the illusion of popular support on the net. (Remember, net IDs are basically free, and one person can have many.)

This is just a paranoid delusion. If you seriously believe this, I would suggest that you seek medical help.

 

[Dcdrac]

And if being a pro Apollo person means being a proud admirer of a magnificent acheivement then I am proud to be a Pro
Apollo person

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvWHnK2FiCk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTBIr65cL_E&feature=related

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I wonder when NASA recruited me as a sleeper agent. Presuming it was before the landings, I must have been a toddler. I guess that would explain why I don't remember it. It was pretty smart of them to anticipate the rise of the www decades ahead (Microsoft couldn't see it coming 25 years later when it was already here) and to plant hundreds of us around the world just to be ready to disagree with FatFreddy88.

If they had the budget and the competence to do all of that and to build a massive rocket (because, as Mitchell & Webb gleefully point out, they still had to build the massive rocket) I can't understand why they didn't just fly some guys to the moon. It would have been much quicker and cheaper.

 

[JayUtah]

...and to plant hundreds of us around the world just to be ready to disagree with FatFreddy88.

Yes, it's always amusing to be told that hundreds of other people have little other role on this planet than to keep certain individuals from being believed.

(because, as Mitchell & Webb gleefully point out, they still had to build the massive rocket)...

But what about the catering?

 

[Peter Eldergill]

But what about the catering?

Well they would have to feed three astronauts...

Pete

 

[ArmillarySphere]

Yes, it's always amusing to be told that hundreds of other people have little other role on this planet than to keep certain individuals from being believed.

Well, if the Government isn't keep tabs on them, that would mean that they're simply not important...

Personally, what keeps me coming back to these threads is that I usually learn something new from the pro-Apollo side. From the HBers... not so much.

 

[FatFreddy88]

Hi FatFreddy88. Do you have an opinion as to my previous question where I asked why America's enemies haven't exposed the moon hoax, even though it would be rather easy to do so? For instance, Iran has orbital launch capability, so all they need to do is launch a relatively modest telescope into space and photograph the empty spots on the moon where the Apollo hardware is supposed to be. Why have they -- and all the other U.S.A. rivals with space capacity -- not done so, when the political capital they'd gain would literally change the world?

Click on the bottom link in this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8033032&postcount=1

At the bottom of post #1 there's a link to post #1087 which deals with that issue. The point I made there is that behind-the-scenes deals can be made with other governments. Measures can be taken to prevent people from seeing what they say if a deal can't be made with them. This issue also doesn't make the mountain of hoax proof go away either (see the other info in that post).

 

[Erock]

Click on the bottom link in this post.

No, it is complete crap and an idiotic totally implausible suggestion.

This issue also doesn't make the mountain of hoax proof go away either (see the other info in that post).

The mountain that you never detail with bullet points, just spammed rubbish that has been debunked to death.

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/

Now, you seem to continually keep avoiding giving answers to my posts, in favour of obfuscation and diversion - they would laugh you out of the debating hall for that. You are totally cornered and you obviously "don't believe your own arguments".^TM
Answer this -
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8253812&postcount=8373

 

[FatFreddy88]

Now, you seem to continually keep avoiding giving answers to my posts

I addressed all of that here.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8250191&postcount=8333

The mountain that you never detail with bullet points, just spammed rubbish that has been debunked to death.

The guy who wrote that is a disinfo agent who doesn't even believe his own arguments. Click on the bottom link in this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8139186&postcount=7954

You'll see how he lamely tried to obfuscate the clear proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked. He has no credibility. All of you pro-Apollo people here have already agreed with him so none of you has any credibility either. It's clear that all of you know Apollo was a hoax as well as the hoax-believers do.

 

[threadworm]

I addressed all of that here.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8250191&postcount=8333



The guy who wrote that is a disinfo agent who doesn't even believe his own arguments. Click on the bottom link in this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8139186&postcount=7954

You'll see how he lamely tried to obfuscate the clear proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked. He has no credibility. All of you pro-Apollo people here have already agreed with him so none of you has any credibility either. It's clear that all of you know Apollo was a hoax as well as the hoax-believers do.

Still no proof of that claim I see. I think any neutrals on the forum (I doubt there actually are any, but one has to make the point) can see pretty clearly that you are avoiding providing any evidence at all to back up your claims.

I refer you back to my own document. You are claiming I don't believe a word that I wrote in it. I refer you specifically to the discussion where I have some nice adjectives for people like you.

 

[R.A.F.]

It's clear that all of you know Apollo was a hoax as well as the hoax-believers do.

So everyone agrees with you, even people who don't agree with you, agree with you, and you still can't "win" the argument??



Pretty sad...

 

[sts60]

Post 8374, rocky? Please read the entire post carefully, and think about it before answering. Take your time; I would rather have a delayed thoughtful answer than a quick canned one. In particular, as I am aware of all the references you have posted so many times here, I would greatly appreciate an original answer consisting of your thoughts without any links to your canned earlier responses. Are you able to do that?

 

[Stellafane]

Click on the bottom link in this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8033032&postcount=1

At the bottom of post #1 there's a link to post #1087 which deals with that issue. The point I made there is that behind-the-scenes deals can be made with other governments. Measures can be taken to prevent people from seeing what they say if a deal can't be made with them. This issue also doesn't make the mountain of hoax proof go away either (see the other info in that post).

Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, I don't think it makes a great deal of sense. If as you say the U.S.A. has within its power the ability to prevent every space-capable country on Earth from divulging what they know -- and bear in mind, this includes America's most powerful rivals (e.g. China, Russia) and bitterest enemies (e.g. Iran) -- then why would they even need to carry on the ruse any longer? With that kind of power, there's no point in continuing a hoax designed for a political situation that hasn't existed for decades. Further, if every other country is in on it, for whom is the hoax intended? Whom are we trying to fool, and for what conceivable purpose?

For the record, I'm not sure you're going to win any converts by citing your "mountain of hoax proof." For instance, the linked post you sent me is primarily devoted to the corner of an astronaut's jacket flapping in a way you think is significant for some reason. This is the sort of thing that comprises your mountain?

 

[Erock]

I addressed all of that here.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8250191&postcount=8333

LIAR!

Regardless of whether Jarrah White concludes this is not important!!! Did he show with his graphics that the astronaut was close enough to touch it. A straight answer please. Did his demonstration show he was close enough - here's a clue for you.....(snip picture showing Jarrah clearly did this!).

Now why didn't White's flag move until he was level with it, when the Apollo flag started moving at 6 feet away?

I didn't see your "atmosphere explanation" - the one that defies the laws of physics. can we have it please and some references or citations?

Oh, and just for good measure, do you have anything to support the use of wave-blowers for neutral buoyancy?

I will answer them for you, since you will never or can ever answer them.

Jarrah White showed clearly that the astronaut was close enough to brush it with his arm. It doesn't matter why he admitted this. He admitted it. That explains why the flag started moving after he went by it. You lose.

White's flag didn't move until he was level because air moves away to the sides, not 6 feet in front of something. You lose.

Your "atmosphere explanation"(never given!) doesn't ever work. Human beings or anything for that matter will not push air in front of them like that. You know this and "don't believe your own argument".^TM You lose.

Wave blowers could never work as neutral buoyancy since a continuous current will simply keep moving and create cross-currents. There is not one single google reference to support this. You know this, which is why "you don't even believe your own argument".^TM Epic fail.

The guy who wrote that is a disinfo agent who doesn't even believe his own arguments. Click on the bottom link in this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8139186&postcount=7954

You'll see how he lamely tried to obfuscate the clear proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked. He has no credibility. All of you pro-Apollo people here have already agreed with him so none of you has any credibility either. It's clear that all of you know Apollo was a hoax as well as the hoax-believers do.

Your credibility is zero. Your Chinese faked it man says Apollo wasn't faked. Your useless repetition that everyone who destroys your argument is a disinfo agent who doesn't believe their own argument is utter crap.

He destroyed your Chinese bubble nonsense with a video that only a liar, a blind man or somebody with an agenda would disagree with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M1LRSF62cc


Now more on a real atmosphere explanation.
http://www.explainthatstuff.com/windtunnel.html
"The basic idea of a wind tunnel is simple: if you can't move the plane through the air, why not move the air past the plane instead? From a scientific point of view, it's exactly the same. If a plane drags (causes air resistance) when it soars through the sky, air will drag in exactly the same way when you fire it past a stationary model of the plane on the ground."

Run along now David, your argument is in even more tatters than it was when it arrived. The viewers agree with me.

 

[frenat]

Post 8374, rocky? Please read the entire post carefully, and think about it before answering. Take your time; I would rather have a delayed thoughtful answer than a quick canned one. In particular, as I am aware of all the references you have posted so many times here, I would greatly appreciate an original answer consisting of your thoughts without any links to your canned earlier responses. Are you able to do that?

Of course he isn't able to. His programming isn't advanced enough. I still think he is nothing more than a badly written computer program.