Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

[JayUtah]

You've got it from me.

No. I don't know you.

We all know the "shining code", where a lot of hints are shown, that Stanley Kubrick was involved.

Begging the question. Quite a lot of relatively uninformed people have trumped up quite of nonsensical coincidences purporting them to be some sort of intent to blow the whistle on his involvement with NASA. I have corresponded extensively with Kubrick's people, estate, and most notably his personal assistant regarding them. All are false.

As with the Bible Code, the da Vinci Code, or any other such fanciful "code" that assigns unsupported meaning to contrived coincidences, the Shining Code is merely a tacked-on attempt to invent something for one's own attention and profit.

I found a new sublingual message in the scene, where Wendy discovered, that Jack typed nothing else than "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy".

Great. Prove Kubrick intended it the way you say, and to have the meaning you claim.

 

[Hans Peper]

I can read the messages from Kubrick and I checked what he pointed out :

1.) Something is wrong on the set.

2.) The truth is in the mirror.

3.) See Apollo 12

And there is a lot which is wrong in the set and the pics in the golden surfaces of the visors show the truth.

In the movie 2001 he checked out, how to make a projection at the glas of astronaut bowmans helmet. But it does not work really good. Did he use the frontprojection system to send pictures at the visors? I think it must be possible.

Hans

 

[JayUtah]

And there is a lot which is wrong in the set and the pics in the golden surfaces of the visors show the truth.

No, you're just doing what the Nostradamus fans do: try to sew together unrelated statements and ascribe to them a meaning their author never intended. If one is dead-set on finding some sort of "hidden meaning," I guarantee he will find it.

In the movie 2001 he checked out, how to make a projection at the glas of astronaut bowmans helmet. But it does not work really good. Did he use the frontprojection system to send pictures at the visors? I think it must be possible.

This is just Jay Weidner's long-debunked garbage. He knows as little about photography as he does about Kubrick. Among the Kubrick estate his claims vacillate between annoyances and laughing stock.

 

[Mudcat]

As with the Bible Code, the da Vinci Code, or any other such fanciful "code" that assigns unsupported meaning to contrived coincidences, the Shining Code is merely a tacked-on attempt to invent something for one's own attention and profit.

I've seen the Bible/da Vinci/Shining Code approach by conspiracy theorists a lot more recently and it really lends credence to the belief that they are severely out of touch with reality and unable to differentiate between fact and fiction.

While I don't believe this approach is by any means recent, it makes me stop and think. Who would be stupid enough to pull off the perfect conspiracy and remove all evidence of it and then turn around and intentionally leave encoded clues of it for all to see? Sounds so stupid, don't you agree?

 

[Hans]

You've got it from me.

Do you see it ?

regards Hans

Oh great another Hans to confuse the issue

 

[Mudcat]

You've got it from me.

We all know the "shining code", where a lot of hints are shown, that Stanley Kubrick was involved.

I found a new sublingual message in the scene, where Wendy discovered, that Jack typed nothing else than "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy".

It begins at 1 min 03 sec and ends at 1 min 48 sec

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeOevu4zC5o

Do you see it ?

regards Hans

No. I don't know you.



Begging the question. Quite a lot of relatively uninformed people have trumped up quite of nonsensical coincidences purporting them to be some sort of intent to blow the whistle on his involvement with NASA. I have corresponded extensively with Kubrick's people, estate, and most notably his personal assistant regarding them. All are false.

As with the Bible Code, the da Vinci Code, or any other such fanciful "code" that assigns unsupported meaning to contrived coincidences, the Shining Code is merely a tacked-on attempt to invent something for one's own attention and profit.



Great. Prove Kubrick intended it the way you say, and to have the meaning you claim.

I can read the messages from Kubrick and I checked what he pointed out :

1.) Something is wrong on the set.

2.) The truth is in the mirror.

3.) See Apollo 12

And there is a lot which is wrong in the set and the pics in the golden surfaces of the visors show the truth.

In the movie 2001 he checked out, how to make a projection at the glas of astronaut bowmans helmet. But it does not work really good. Did he use the frontprojection system to send pictures at the visors? I think it must be possible.

Hans

No, you're just doing what the Nostradamus fans do: try to sew together unrelated statements and ascribe to them a meaning their author never intended. If one is dead-set on finding some sort of "hidden meaning," I guarantee he will find it.



This is just Jay Weidner's long-debunked garbage. He knows as little about photography as he does about Kubrick. Among the Kubrick estate his claims vacillate between annoyances and laughing stock.

I've seen the Bible/da Vinci/Shining Code approach by conspiracy theorists a lot more recently and it really lends credence to the belief that they are severely out of touch with reality and unable to differentiate between fact and fiction.

While I don't believe this approach is by any means recent, it makes me stop and think. Who would be stupid enough to pull off the perfect conspiracy and remove all evidence of it and then turn around and intentionally leave encoded clues of it for all to see? Sounds so stupid, don't you agree?

Assigning arbitrary meaning to random coincidences is pervasive in conspiracism, as is "anomaly hunting." These are all variations on begging the question. The former even has a semi-legitimate incarnation as various forms of art and literary criticism wherein the critic insists that his tacked-on analysis or interpretation must necessarily be what motivated the author.



Especially those that slip by the filmmaker's closest associates and colleagues, and generations of professional scientists and engineers -- only to be adeptly "discovered" by self-proclaimed third-rate researchers who jump from one conspiracy theory to another (e.g., Weidner).

Is there a particular reason why the quoted posts got moved from a thread about when lunar landing hoaxes got started to here?

 

[Hans Peper]

Oh great another Hans to confuse the issue

Something moved me here. A wormhole ?

As much as I understand is nobody able to see what is pointed out in the clip.

"I found a new sublingual message in the scene, where Wendy discovered, that Jack typed nothing else than "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy".

It begins at 1 min 03 sec and ends at 1 min 48 sec

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeOevu4zC5o

Do you see it ?"

 

[Tomtomkent]

Something moved me here. A wormhole ?

As much as I understand is nobody able to see what is pointed out in the clip.

"I found a new sublingual message in the scene, where Wendy discovered, that Jack typed nothing else than "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy".

It begins at 1 min 03 sec and ends at 1 min 48 sec

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeOevu4zC5o

Do you see it ?"

Oh look. Somebody has convinced himself (and nobody else) that a movie director is responsible for another murder.

I don't suppose you have any objective testible evidence to connect the film to the murder of JFK?

 

[Hans Peper]

Oh look. Somebody has convinced himself (and nobody else) that a movie director is responsible for another murder.

I don't suppose you have any objective testible evidence to connect the film to the murder of JFK?

My posting has nothing to do with murders. The topic is moon landing fake and a mod moved me here.

I suppose, that you are not able to see, what Kubrick had pointed out.

regards Hans

 

[Tomtomkent]

My posting has nothing to do with murders. The topic is moon landing fake and a mod moved me here.

I suppose, that you are not able to see, what Kubrick had pointed out.

regards Hans

Oh.

So you admitted the posts were moved by a "wormhole" then continued to talk about you theories in a thread that is about the murder of JFK, knowing it was off topic?

OK. My mistake. I will report your posts as being off topic and hopefully a mod will put them where they belong. (AAH hopefully).

 

[Hans Peper]

Yes, thank you for your help. In the meantime, I am waiting here.

I see, that you'v got headashes when looking at that clip I pointed out. Did you read something about "artificial intuition" since we had discussed it ?

When I saw the clip, I've got the idea, that this part of the movie is the best to store a message. But only "All work and no play..." could be read hundredwise and nothing else. there are lots of fails in typing, but this leads to nothing. And then I saw it.

After all, I must say, that Kubrick knows a lot about that stuff.

Regards Hans

 

[Hans Peper]

....then continued to talk about you theories in a thread that is about the murder of JFK, knowing it was off topic?...

Somebody thought that this thread is the right one. JFK started the moon project. After he was murded, the moon project was obvisiouly murded too.
I never thought about a connection like this.

So thank you to the unknown person or software, who casted me to this beach.

regards Hans

 

[abaddon]

What on earth is moon hoax nonsense doing in a JFK assassination thread?

 

[Tomtomkent]

What on earth is moon hoax nonsense doing in a JFK assassination thread?

I know. Even if the posts ended up here by accident, it is clearly off topic. Perhaps Hans could not discuss it here, and wait until the posts are moved to which ever thread is suitable.

Otherwise it just becomes Spam (and is already Wrong and Very Silly).

 

[Hans Peper]

I know. Even if the posts ended up here by accident, it is clearly off topic.....

Now you do not know what to do, isn't it. That's a real funny situation.

I came here on a legal way. I was moved by the mods or by the software into that topic.

There is no reason to hurt me. Meanwhile, try the moon stuff. It is as interesting as the JFK assassination.

regards Hans

 

[Garrison]

Now you do not know what to do, isn't it. That's a real funny situation.

I came here on a legal way. I was moved by the mods or by the software into that topic.

There is no reason to hurt me. Meanwhile, try the moon stuff. It is as interesting as the JFK assassination.

regards Hans

And by interesting you mean ill-conceived and based on ignorance of physics, engineering, and politics?

 

[JayUtah]

After all, I must say, that Kubrick knows a lot about that stuff.

I still don't see how this fails to rise above simply hunting around for "coincidences," deciding what the meaning of them must be, and trying to attribute your "discovery" back to Kubrick. Do you understand why that is not a convincing approach?

 

[Hans Peper]

..... Do you understand why that is not a convincing approach?

A convincing arrival was not possible because I am landed here without knowing how and why. I have a tiny discovery in the case and wanted to hear your opinion. How I judge you, you have already viewed the video clip and unfortunately can not see anything, right?

So, I will not bother you longer, I'll move on.
The JFK video clip is certainly interesting, maybe I'll study it later.

stay in touch

Hans

 

[thedopefishlives]

I still don't see how this fails to rise above simply hunting around for "coincidences," deciding what the meaning of them must be, and trying to attribute your "discovery" back to Kubrick. Do you understand why that is not a convincing approach?

Jay, this same poster made identical arguments in one of the 9/11 conspiracy threads, claiming that Kubrick knew about 9/11 and encoded this information into his films. I wouldn't expect too much.

 

[Jim_MDP]

Jay, this same poster made identical arguments in one of the 9/11 conspiracy threads, claiming that Kubrick knew about 9/11 and encoded this information into his films. I wouldn't expect too much.

It's all one topic to Peper... Kubric was in on all of it.