| | | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144 | APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!??
| IDW
User ID: 315497
10/21/2007 7:10 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
It's also hard not to feed trolls. Quoting: nomuse (NLI) 314333
WHat is a troll?
You mean like waits under a bridge to snatch little goats?
Calling a guy a troll on the internet is usually the work of people that actually fit the definition.
Hey, if IDW said "I have this great new theory, it might not be right, but it could explain a lot of things" people would be much nicer to him. Quoting: NoUSe
I am not the one that brought these subjects up on this thread, and I have no desire for you to be 'nice to me' concenring them. I know what I am up against, and what it represents.
Go fuck yourself , retard. You have some gall to call me a troll, asshole. |
| lightning
User ID: 264194
10/21/2007 10:40 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
IDW,the master of badwords,how old are you anyway. if i were you id go see a doctor. your reality seems to be alot different then the rest of us live in.
meds!? |
| IDW
User ID: 315497
10/21/2007 10:58 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
IDW,the master of badwords,how old are you anyway. if i were you id go see a doctor. your reality seems to be alot different then the rest of us live in.
meds!? Quoting: lightning 264194
Then again maybe the "meds" are youre problem, and the fact that I dont take them is what makes my reality sound and yours chemically induced. Psychology and psychiatry are pseduoscientific "disciplines" that have accomplished nothing for thier victims but marginalization, which in many cases is the inten. |
| IDW
User ID: 315497
10/21/2007 11:02 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
IDW,the master of badwords Quoting: lightning 264194
Theres those 'bad words' again!
I havent even gotten warmed up, I was going easy on you ,dickweed. |
| IDW
User ID: 315497
10/21/2007 11:11 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Throughout mans existance he has lived a false reality, fearing non existant threats and believing patently rediculous and especially ignorance based ideas. This is how mankind is kept in bondage, through ignorance and fear. THAT is my reality.
It is easier to see this the farther back in the distant past you look, but it is a pattern that holds up to this day. Its just hard for you to believe you could be just as thoroughly deluded as the men of Copernicus' day, but you are nevertheless. |
| BACK 2 TOPIC
User ID: 315625
10/21/2007 11:13 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
i actually think they might be faked.
why the hell else couldn't we go back? |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/22/2007 11:25 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
i actually think they might be faked.
why the hell else couldn't we go back? Quoting: BACK 2 TOPIC 315625
One word, money. Its realy, REALY, expensive to put people on the moon. I think that the next moonlanding will be an international effort. |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/22/2007 11:27 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
*Make that, really, REALLY expensive. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 11:27 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
It makes me suspicious people try to attack Apollo. I mean, come on, a decades-old journey from the early days of the space program? How does that affect anyone today?
Suspicious people might think this is a cheap bit of anti-American propaganda being paid for by overseas interests. Doesn't take much to spread a few scurrilous rumors.
Cuts both ways, IDW. Quoting: NoUse
I would love to be able to believe it. I could bring up the fact that my fathers work helped make the mission possible, and things he designed actually landed on the moon with the LEM. Because if Apollo was real, then those proud moments in his memory would be true, and something to have pride in. Quoting: IDW
As it is people just laugh at me out loud if I say my father contributed to the moonlanding missions. It isnt that they don't believe me about the inventions that were actually used, I have the patents and the information here to prove it. What they consistently DONT believe is that the missions were ever successful.
I am not here to get any of the NASA proponents to admit theyve been owned, though they have they can never admit it, that would be elliminating the purpose of theyre livelyhood. My goal is to make absolutely certain that they understand with equal certaintly to my own that no such mission as Apollo was possible in 1969, and that the evidence indication the missions were real is dubious at best. Not a single one of these NASA propagandists were actually involved in the Aollo saga, yet when a person who was claims they couldnt be ready in time ,they are called a disgruntled nut by paid liars representing a fraudulent government agency. That will be punished, as it should.THAT IS my primary motivation. The punishment will be exposure.
TEAR DOWN THE WALL OF LIES
. |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/22/2007 11:29 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Throughout mans existance he has lived a false reality, fearing non existant threats and believing patently rediculous and especially ignorance based ideas. This is how mankind is kept in bondage, through ignorance and fear. THAT is my reality.
It is easier to see this the farther back in the distant past you look, but it is a pattern that holds up to this day. Its just hard for you to believe you could be just as thoroughly deluded as the men of Copernicus' day, but you are nevertheless. Quoting: IDW 315497
That sounds like one paranoid life you got there IDW!How is that working out for you? |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/22/2007 11:34 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
As it is people just laugh at me out loud if I say my father contributed to the moonlanding missions. It isnt that they don't believe me about the inventions that were actually used, I have the patents and the information here to prove it. What they consistently DONT believe is that the missions were ever successful.
. Quoting: IDW 315829
Wait, please dont tell me that -Daddy told you they were faked, and Daddy is always right!
Next question would be...Do you have any kids, and do you put your paranoid garbage down their throats!? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315780
10/22/2007 11:47 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
i actually think they might be faked.
why the hell else couldn't we go back?
One word, money. Its realy, REALY, expensive to put people on the moon. I think that the next moonlanding will be an international effort. Quoting: HAZZARD 308422
Thats your excuse??
"Well, we just cant find the money".
Or the other excuse, even funnier-"We already went there, whats the point?" Thats hilarious.
We havent been back as we were never there.
There will be no "international effort", as they know they cannot go there.
Humans are not going out of lower earth orbit. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 11:58 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Throughout mans existance he has lived a false reality, fearing non existant threats and believing patently rediculous and especially ignorance based ideas. This is how mankind is kept in bondage, through ignorance and fear. THAT is my reality.
It is easier to see this the farther back in the distant past you look, but it is a pattern that holds up to this day. Its just hard for you to believe you could be just as thoroughly deluded as the men of Copernicus' day, but you are nevertheless.
That sounds like one paranoid life you got there IDW!How is that working out for you? Quoting: HAZZARD 308422
To be paranoid is to have irrational fear. Do you detect fear in me? What you say is illogical. If I were paranoid, I'd be afraid to speak out when I know you're well aware of who I am. I am well known, and so are my enemies. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 12:01 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
As it is people just laugh at me out loud if I say my father contributed to the moonlanding missions. It isnt that they don't believe me about the inventions that were actually used, I have the patents and the information here to prove it. What they consistently DONT believe is that the missions were ever successful.
.
Wait, please dont tell me that -Daddy told you they were faked, and Daddy is always right!
Next question would be...Do you have any kids, and do you put your paranoid garbage down their throats!? Quoting: HAZZARD 308422
I think his opinion is worth more than yours. What do you think? Apparently you don't. This arguement is unwinnable by you. Engineers actually in the loop are bound to know more about the reality of the situation than someone like you, who has only the word of a lying agenda. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 12:05 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
i actually think they might be faked.
why the hell else couldn't we go back?
One word, money. Its realy, REALY, expensive to put people on the moon. I think that the next moonlanding will be an international effort.
Thats your excuse??
"Well, we just cant find the money".
Or the other excuse, even funnier-"We already went there, whats the point?" Thats hilarious.
We havent been back as we were never there.
There will be no "international effort", as they know they cannot go there.
Humans are not going out of lower earth orbit. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 315780
That is not entirely true. It is possible to travel to Mars and beyond. The reality is that interplanetary travel is not easily withen our grasp as Apollo insinuated. That doesnt mean it is impossible. I believe anything we can imagine, we can do. It just takes the brightest minds to succeed. No those who are willing to follow a well beaten path to nowhere. |
| Lt.
User ID: 287683
10/22/2007 1:39 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
i heard that our science guy HAZZARD got banned by trinity for his last post on page 36.
thats right, in this fucking madhouse filled with screaming paranoid idiots he is the one that got banned.
trinity....explain please. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 264194
No conspiracy here. Hazzard is back! However, he is not "our science guy", though, unless you speak with sarcasm, lol.
Hazzard has shown that he can selectively copy and paste portions of wikipedia articles, those that can be interpreted in favor of his claims cutting the quotes in the middle of a sentence where the rest of the full quote would speak otherwise but when challenged with questions that only real scientists could answer he simply ignores them.
I’ll try one more (third, actually) time: how many grams of lunar soil samples were given to the Soviet Union by NASA? This is a simple question but it takes an expert to answer it, and Hazzard is evidently having trouble finding the answer in wikipedia. He also senses that this is a loaded question that will lead to an inconvenient truth and to follow-up questions exposing his agenda of a close-minded "science guy" who does not care about scientific truth or any truth for that matter.
I give my respect to other posters like NoMuse regardless the camp they chose to defend but not to Hazzard, not until he evolves to adhere to scientific method in search for truth, even if the truth tends to make you mad and disappointed. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 314242
10/22/2007 2:10 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Not a single one of these NASA propagandists were actually involved in the Aollo saga, yet when a person who was claims they couldnt be ready in time ,they are called a disgruntled nut by paid liars representing a fraudulent government agency. Quoting: IDW 315829
I haven't seen this claim of yours before.
Are you claiming that your father was a significant contributor to Apollo program in the 1960s, and that your father asserts that the United States could not have landed on the moon in 1969?
If so, that is a very powerful claim; but we will then need details. What exactly did your father do? If he is retired now, can he safely post to this forum himself? Frankly, his personal testimony would be much stronger evidence than yours, which is legally only hearsay. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 314242
10/22/2007 2:12 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Engineers actually in the loop are bound to know more about the reality of the situation than someone like you, who has only the word of a lying agenda. Quoting: IDW 315829
So your father was an engineer? And he has patents for his work on the Apollo program? Can you name one of his patents, so that we can look it up? |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/22/2007 2:32 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Back to the Russian moonprobes I see.
The point I was making was that the 3 Russian retro reflectors put there by robots, didnt work, not as well as the NASA man delivered reflectors. One, or 3 failing Russian mirrors was not important, not to the point I was making....The Apollo moon landings was real. Me not posting the way you think I should be posting does not make the moon landings any less real.
And IDW... Looking for a conspiracy in literally everything isnt the way to go. You wont really learn anything useful, and youll drive yourself to distraction in the process. If not paranoid. But then again, your not really paranoid if they are really after you, right!?
Apollo is the most documented technical and scientific accomplishment in human history.
The bizarre part of this is that the vast majority of information, including the boring and excruciatingly detailed technical stuff is available for public consumption. Most all of it can be found on the Web.
The typical Apollo hoax believer is a person thats self educated, a pseudo scientist, at best.
Thats really the bottom line, isnt it.
This person will "believe" no one who actually has knowledge, and will do no research to confirm or deny any information presented him. He will simply hold to his opinion...uninformed as it may be.
Thats OK, of course, but it does nothing for the content of a thread which should, in principal, inspire some discussion, and of course some learning. Apollo, space flight, and all the associated disciplines are not about "belief". THEY ARE ABOUT EXPERIENCE AND KNOLLEDGE.
Belief is conjecture. We did not accomplish Apollo based upon conjecture, nor does any one learn anything on that basis.
The hoaxbeliever states that he prefers to believe rather than to know. Hes entitled to that. Its sad, of course, but hes entitled to it.
If he is not willing to learn, and prefers only to believe fallacious information, then the only reason hes still here is in order to argue (despite the fact hes already lost that arguement), and to feed his ego in seeing himself in print...saying the same uneducated things over and over again in the face of overwhelming information to the contrary.
Its a waste of everyones time. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 2:49 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Engineers actually in the loop are bound to know more about the reality of the situation than someone like you, who has only the word of a lying agenda.
So your father was an engineer? And he has patents for his work on the Apollo program? Can you name one of his patents, so that we can look it up? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 314242
Sure, give me a minute to locate them. His contribution was in the electrical system and the way electrical connections were made, and were used in both the command and lunar modules. It is also used in your breaker box.
He was also was on a team that worked on developing new alloys that were to be used by the aerospace contractors while working at the Marshall plant. My fathers patents made millions upon millions of dollars for Alcoa. I still have the award he recieved for his participation, give me an email address and I'll send you a photograph of it. I wish he'd only been compensated 1/100th for his contribution, he'd have been a wealthy man.
He also recieved dozens of technical awards from Alcoa for his work. He was technical supervisor at the Massena laboratory for 10 years. As for what you think, well, I think I'll take his opinion over yours. His achievements include the Milwaukee conservatory domes, revolutionary agricultural machinery designs and new innovations in the transmission of electricity. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 2:56 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
My father is deceased, so attempting to intimidate him might be beyond your capabilities, extensive though they may be.
As for me, I have decided I would rather die fighting what you represent than live under its rule at its knees. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 3:03 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Are you claiming that your father was a significant contributor to Apollo program in the 1960s, and that your father asserts that the United States could not have landed on the moon in 1969? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 314242
Yes
If so, that is a very powerful claim; but we will then need details. What exactly did your father do? If he is retired now, can he safely post to this forum himself? Frankly, his personal testimony would be much stronger evidence than yours, which is legally only hearsay. Quoting: Anonymous shill
My reference to his private conversations with me is hearsay. Physics, however ,is not. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 3:22 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Back to the Russian moonprobes I see.
The point I was making was that the 3 Russian retro reflectors put there by robots, didnt work, not as well as the NASA man delivered reflectors. One, or 3 failing Russian mirrors was not important, not to the point I was making....The Apollo moon landings was real. Me not posting the way you think I should be posting does not make the moon landings any less real. Quoting: HAZZARD 308422
But if you put sentences together like a third grader and apprear to have the knowledge and wisdom of an idiot, your opinion becomes totally irrelevant.
And IDW... Looking for a conspiracy in literally everything isnt the way to go. You wont really learn anything useful, and youll drive yourself to distraction in the process. If not paranoid. But then again, your not really paranoid if they are really after you, right!? Quoting: Paid Lying SHill
The nature of human civilization is conspiracy. It is born of greed.
Apollo is the most documented technical and scientific accomplishment in human history. Quoting: Shill
No, its not. Theres not one piece of incontrovertable evidence.
The bizarre part of this is that the vast majority of information, including the boring and excruciatingly detailed technical stuff is available for public consumption. Most all of it can be found on the Web. Quoting: Shill
And yet it is contradictory, rediculous, or deceptive.
The typical Apollo hoax believer is a person thats self educated, a pseudo scientist, at best. Quoting: shill
You believe Einstein was a god of science and pharmaceuticals can solve problems with the perception of reality, so self educated or not you're the pseudoscientist.
Youre not even that. Youre an idiot. Really.
Thats really the bottom line, isnt it. Quoting: SHill
This person will "believe" no one who actually has knowledge, and will do no research to confirm or deny any information presented him. He will simply hold to his opinion...uninformed as it may be. Quoting: Lying shill
yet I have researched it in depth from many different angles, all of it documented here on these pages, and the more I do the more I am convinced Apollo was a fraud.
Its a waste of everyones time. Quoting: Shill
I agree, begging the question why are you here arguing about it? if we werent would you be pimping some other lie? |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 4:23 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Wait, please dont tell me that -Daddy told you they were faked, and Daddy is always right!
Next question would be...Do you have any kids, and do you put your paranoid garbage down their throats!? Quoting: HAZZARD 308422
I tell you this, I dont let Fox news , NASA or anyone else known to be liars form thier opinions.
You would much rather I taught them that arabs were behind 911 and apollo was real? To hate unto death an enemy that doesnt exist while ignoring the one that does?
Should you have that choice?
When you do, will there be any truth or freedom left? It is you shoving garbage down thier throats. As for paranoid, well there can be no paranoia without fear. |
| Lt.
User ID: 287683
10/22/2007 4:34 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Back to the Russian moonprobes I see.
The point I was making was that the 3 Russian retro reflectors put there by robots, didnt work, not as well as the NASA man delivered reflectors. One, or 3 failing Russian mirrors was not important, not to the point I was making....The Apollo moon landings was real. Me not posting the way you think I should be posting does not make the moon landings any less real.
And IDW... Looking for a conspiracy in literally everything isnt the way to go. You wont really learn anything useful, and youll drive yourself to distraction in the process. If not paranoid. But then again, your not really paranoid if they are really after you, right!?
Apollo is the most documented technical and scientific accomplishment in human history.
The bizarre part of this is that the vast majority of information, including the boring and excruciatingly detailed technical stuff is available for public consumption. Most all of it can be found on the Web. Quoting: HAZZARD 308422
>>Back to the Russian moonprobes I see.
The point I was making was that the 3 Russian retro reflectors put there by robots, didnt work, not as well as the NASA man delivered reflectors. One, or 3 failing Russian mirrors was not important, not to the point I was making....The Apollo moon landings was real. Me not posting the way you think I should be posting does not make the moon landings any less real.<<
That's what I am saying - you are stating something without bothering to check the facts as long as it supports your claims and hoping that everyone will trust you at face value. The wikipedia article that you quoted selectively earlier (only the part where it appears to confirm your claims) proves you wrong:
"Additionally the unmanned Soviet Lunokhod 1 and Lunokhod 2 rovers carried smaller arrays. Reflected signals were initially received from Lunokhod 1, but no return signals have been detected since 1971, at least in part due to some uncertainty in its location on the Moon. Lunokhod 2's array continues to return signals to Earth."
( [link to en.wikipedia.org]
Or if you don't believe wikipedia articles anymore (that would be a surprise), here's one from NASA: "The Lunokhod laser retroreflector is still used by Earth-based stations for laser ranging."
( [link to nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov] , btw Last Updated: 2007-09-19)
And this is beside the point that there were TWO (officially), not three, Russian UNMANNED "moonprobes" that deployed the retroreflectors on the moon, and one of them is still usable. So when you exploit the argument that the retroreflectors are the proof of manned missions to the moon that would require a person to actually be there on the lunar surface you are either wrong, or you have to admit that the Russians were there "in person" too. But you never answered the question which option would you prefer.
There were THREE Soviet UNMANNED missions (officially) that returned lunar soil back to Earth proving that you can get small amounts of lunar regolith without sending astronauts to the moon. And, again, you didn't answer the question: how many grams of lunar soil samples were given to the Soviet Union by NASA?
>>Apollo is the most documented technical and scientific accomplishment in human history.The bizarre part of this is that the vast majority of information, including the boring and excruciatingly detailed technical stuff is available for public consumption. Most all of it can be found on the Web.<<
As true as it may seem on the surface this is an incorrect statement, and it does not prove anything at best. To the contrary, Pesavento and Vick had to go to great lengths filing Freedom of Information Act requests, interviewing intelligence analysts etc, and still admitting with regret that "what space historians have lacked to correctly interpret lunar race events include the following myriad of factors: unexpurgated and uninfluenced technical notations and commentaries of space engineers, critical and direct examinations..." [notice - "unexpurgated and uninfluenced"!]
"Furthermore, there has not been a concerted effort of looking at the now available evidence combining the vantage points of engineering knowledge, investigative journalism perceptivity, and the logical preciseness associated with science research. All these viewpoint factors are borne out
in technology-oriented intelligence reports as well as National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) that were rendered by analysts in US intelligence agencies, and which were read subsequently by policy makers in the American government. These authors felt that such a document analogue had yet to be written regarding the Moon race by present-day historians, with the information now available."
("The Moon Race "End Game": A new Assessment of Soviet Crews Lunar Aspirations - Part 1, by P. Pesavento and Ch. P. Vick. "Quest" Vol. 11, N. 1, 2004)
Similar efforts were undertaken on the Soviet/Russian side exposing the Russian nested "official truths" contradicting each other the deeper you'd go. Nobody could put it better than the Americans, Pesavento and Vick, themselves:
"... the Russian approach to telling "the Truth" was very much like Russia's iconographic Matryoshka nesting doll - as one examined more and more information in depth, the outer shell of the "official story" peeled away, to reveal a related, yet different "official story" about events,
that more often than not directly contradicted what was contained in previous information releases. Indeed, these authors have no dependable guess about how many more "nested dolls" there are to examine before the complete, forth rightly told history of the Soviet Union's manned lunar efforts will be released."
Based on that, we still have to wait and see before all documentation is declassified, if ever, to be able to evaluate the story for what it really was. You also may want to look into discussions of "The One-Way Manned Mission to the Moon" ("Quest", Vol. 8 No. 4, June 2001 - not really on the web but out of stock, for sure, lol) and of similar concepts before you jump to conclusions... |
| Lt.
User ID: 287683
10/22/2007 4:39 PM | | nomuse (NLI)
User ID: 315941
10/22/2007 5:13 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Nothing prevents an Apollo Supporter from posting the same bad science, bad research, and illogical arguments as a Hoax Believer. Contrary to IDW's belief we are not monolithic, nor do we have a common playbook.
Of course, in IDW's mind, if a question is put to him he attacks it first with the raw power of his mind, then does some research in trustworthy places to make sure the evidence is available.
Also in IDW's mind, when a question is put to an Apollo Supporter they open their handbook and quote from the relevant page. If they are unpaid amateurs, they make do by visiting Clavius and quoting from the appropriate page there.
I can't support my own belief with unimpeachable evidence, but my belief is that when a question is put to IDW, he jumps to a conclusion, and does a little random web searching in hopes of finding quote that sound like they support it.
My understanding of my own process is also in my belief followed many others here -- including Hazzard and Lt.; that when a question is put to me I consider it on its merits, and do research in the least impeachable sources I can find (which is to say; staying away from hoax sites, debunker sites, and NASA itself.) I am not interested in finding the answers other people have given this question; I am interested in finding the data and process underlying the problem so I can discover my own answer.
For something as simple as IDW's comment on lightning deaths I spent over an hour looking around, and read twenty pages of pdf's alone. And I am far from satisfied. I do not believe I understand well enough to draw a firm conclusion yet. |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 5:13 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
That's what I am saying - you are stating something without bothering to check the facts as long as it supports your claims and hoping that everyone will trust you at face value. The wikipedia article that you quoted selectively earlier (only the part where it appears to confirm your claims) proves you wrong:
"Additionally the unmanned Soviet Lunokhod 1 and Lunokhod 2 rovers carried smaller arrays. Reflected signals were initially received from Lunokhod 1, but no return signals have been detected since 1971, at least in part due to some uncertainty in its location on the Moon. Lunokhod 2's array continues to return signals to Earth."
( [ link to en.wikipedia.org]
Very nice work.
Or if you don't believe wikipedia articles anymore (that would be a surprise), here's one from NASA: "The Lunokhod laser retroreflector is still used by Earth-based stations for laser ranging."
( [ link to nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov] , btw Last Updated: 2007-09-19)
And this is beside the point that there were TWO (officially), not three, Russian UNMANNED "moonprobes" that deployed the retroreflectors on the moon, and one of them is still usable.
This is a consistent pattern with NASA proponents, to misrepresent the facts to favor thier story.
So when you exploit the argument that the retroreflectors are the proof of manned missions to the moon that would require a person to actually be there on the lunar surface you are either wrong, or you have to admit that the Russians were there "in person" too. But you never answered the question which option would you prefer. Quoting: Lt.
You will find they will never answer the hard questions which the obvious answer proves them wrong or dishonest.All they care about it preserving the integrity of a lie, which is an oxymoronic endeavour.
There were THREE Soviet UNMANNED missions (officially) that returned lunar soil back to Earth proving that you can get small amounts of lunar regolith without sending astronauts to the moon. And, again, you didn't answer the question: how many grams of lunar soil samples were given to the Soviet Union by NASA? Quoting: Lt.
Again, they WILL NOT answer this question.Doing so enforces the notion lunar material could be returned without astronauts. With a vehicle the size of the lunar lander, how many grams of material could be returned? Dont the three Russian missions prove it was doable on a larger scale? The odd thing is if you take out the mass of the astronauts and thier supplies in the LEM, the lunar landing and ascent becomes a physical possibility, as well as a physiological one! The lander could land on the surface using only an active attitude adjustment of a mechanical nature and a remote controled descent like the russian Lunar probes. The difficulty with the LEM was its center of gravity was located well above the thruster, making stability an issue. It was an illogical design that doesnt appear to have ever been intended to work, but to satisfy the expectations of what such a vehicle should look like. Short and stubby would be more logical from a stability point of view, placing the thrust vector ABOve or AT the center of gravity and not as far below it as possible as we see with the LEM.
As true as it may seem on the surface this is an incorrect statement, and it does not prove anything at best. To the contrary, Pesavento and Vick had to go to great lengths filing Freedom of Information Act requests, interviewing intelligence analysts etc, and still admitting with regret that "what space historians have lacked to correctly interpret lunar race events include the following myriad of factors: unexpurgated and uninfluenced technical notations and commentaries of space engineers, critical and direct examinations..." [notice - "unexpurgated and uninfluenced"!] Quoting: Lt.
Precisely. And when you bring up this fact they balk. They never answer the hard questions to answer from thier perspective without looking wrong, questions that the answers are of a simple nature and easy to understand.We've never been shown anything that proves Apollo was real because the information that could prove it will disprove it instead.
" |
| IDW
User ID: 315829
10/22/2007 5:28 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Nothing prevents an Apollo Supporter from posting the same bad science, bad research, and illogical arguments as a Hoax Believer. Contrary to IDW's belief we are not monolithic, nor do we have a common playbook. Quoting: nomuse (NLI) 315941
Maybe not, but you act as one unlike your opponents. You may disagree with each other, but we never see it on these pages.
Of course, in IDW's mind, if a question is put to him he attacks it first with the raw power of his mind, then does some research in trustworthy places to make sure the evidence is available. Quoting: NoUse
The raw power of the mind is nothing to be snickered about, unless we are discussing an idiot. Knowledge is useless unless complimented by intelligence and especially tempered by the wisdom that comes with experience. To put it in a few words, I value my intuitive processes because they seldom fail to point me in the right direction. Many of these issues cannot be solved by analysing evidence, because none really exists.
Also in IDW's mind, when a question is put to an Apollo Supporter they open their handbook and quote from the relevant page. If they are unpaid amateurs, they make do by visiting Clavius and quoting from the appropriate page there. Quoting: No Use
Well, you do seem to rely heavily on NASAs information, which is illogical. If I am right what are the odds they are being honest about anything that could shed a bad light on the veracity of Apollo?
I can't support my own belief with unimpeachable evidence, but my belief is that when a question is put to IDW, he jumps to a conclusion, and does a little random web searching in hopes of finding quote that sound like they support it. Quoting: NoUse
Which only serves to prove that your analytical skills are lacking.
My understanding of my own process is also in my belief followed many others here -- including Hazzard and Lt.; that when a question is put to me I consider it on its merits, and do research in the least impeachable sources I can find (which is to say; staying away from hoax sites, debunker sites, and NASA itself.) I am not interested in finding the answers other people have given this question; I am interested in finding the data and process underlying the problem so I can discover my own answer. Quoting: NoUse
What is ironic is you are describing my mode of operation as your own, but your words here prove your agenda is otherwise
For something as simple as IDW's comment on lightning deaths I spent over an hour looking around, and read twenty pages of pdf's alone. And I am far from satisfied. I do not believe I understand well enough to draw a firm conclusion yet. Quoting: NOUSE
Remember how it all got started? DO you still think it would be wise to ground the negative side of a dc powered circuit in a house? ALL of the evidence and the science proves what I said, grounded metal objects attract lightning. |
| nomuse (NLI)
User ID: 315941
10/22/2007 5:38 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Not at all.
The Apollo Supporters answer all questions equally (some just take longer!)
The inconvenient answers, however, are the ones the Apollo Hoaxers are best at forgetting, ignoring, or covering up.
The material returned by the Soviet automated probes has been discussed and described before. Tens of times at GLP alone, in previous threads. The hoax believers have short memories (or....here's my nasty suspicious mind again....they hope other people have short memories so they haul out old debunked material and hope no-one is paying attention.)
In fact, if my memory serves, the Soviet probes were first brought up by the pro-Apollo camp. And that includes the Lunokhods and their reflector arrays. I know _I've_ mentioned them before!
What was passed to NASA was grams. Not the hundreds of pounds NASA collected. (For that matter, the passing of samples was reciprocal -- as indeed the international geology community had access to both groups of samples, as well as the lunar meteorites first identified a decade later. Funny thing. They all seem to be consistent. Different, but consistent.)
Oh, I guess you could string some hoax theory on the idea that not only was the Soviet Union being bribed with wheat to throw the Space Race, but they threw in their support behind NASA with a whole fleet of robot collection vehicles. Hey, it's more believable than some of the theories I've heard from the hoax camp!
(I'm not even going to bother going into surface scrapings versus rocks released from matrix with a hammer, scrapings right under a probe compared with samples collected over kilometers of range, automated sample return versus selected samples photographed in situ, collected and labeled, much less the core samples that were two large and fragile for devices as simple as the Soviets were using.)
(Why aren't I bothering with these points? Because they've been given before, over and over. So there is at the least some dishonest debating tactics being employed here. And in addition, it's become quite the thing to accuse the entire geology community of being morons. Apparently any science a hoax believer doesn't practice himself, can't possibly be worth much.) |
| | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144 | |
|
