It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Apollo astronauts bizarre reaction to hoax questions

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: turbonium1

I would have done the same.
If I had been ti to tge moon and some moron calls me out I would have kicked him in the nuts.
Sorry if you think this is proof of man not going to the moon well you have to do better then this tripe.


No case can be proven from just reactions, even when they are clear as can be, like in this case. It can certainly support the case, however, and that's exactly what it does here.

If you had landed on the moon, and knew some people didn't believe you did it, why would you care about anyone telling you in person that you didn't do it?

You already would have known about such 'morons', as this one turned out to be, right?

There's no reason to get fuming mad at a moron, and so loony-tune in a rage, as to be kicking him in the nuts.

But, when the 'moron' is already leaving - beyond any doubt!




posted on Aug, 7 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: choos

you said that the second film has nothing in it that warrants NASA to do anything.. that is the same as saying the second film HAS NO SUBSTANCE


It is not the same thing, as I've explained to you before.

The second film shows the Apollo astronauts' reactions to Sibrel, who claimed to have absolute, undeniable proof of the moon landings as a hoax. And then, Sibrel shows his (claimed) proof to some of them, to support his claim.

They were all nervous, in varying degrees. But they already knew some people were claiming it was a hoax, so why would it make them so nervous?

You claim it is normal to become steaming in rage, at someone who claims they didn't go to the moon, while he harasses them so much...

Even if that made sense, why would it make them nervous, before their 'normal' anger came along?!?



edit on 7-8-2015 by turbonium1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1
It is not the same thing, as I've explained to you before.

The second film shows the Apollo astronauts' reactions to Sibrel, who claimed to have absolute, undeniable proof of the moon landings as a hoax. And then, Sibrel shows his (claimed) proof to some of them, to support his claim.

They were all nervous, in varying degrees. But they already knew some people were claiming it was a hoax, so why would it make them so nervous?


if it made them nervous then it would mean that Sibrel was on the right track.. it would mean that Sibrel is a threat to the US Gov/NASA..

but as you said, they chose that Sibrel was NOT a threat even though they have access to the very best human behavioral doctors in the world.. which would mean, that the video HAS NO SUBSTANCE..

it only has substance in your mind because in your world YOU are smarter than human behavioral doctors..


You claim it is normal to become steaming in rage, at someone who claims they didn't go to the moon, while he harasses them so much...

Even if that made sense, why would it make them nervous, before their 'normal' anger came along?!?



I never said they were nervous, you claimed they were nervous.

the reaction im seeing is anger and the accompanying adrenaline.. you have obviously never been in a heated face to face argument where you thought it was going to end up in a fist fight..

apparently in your world getting angry when some idiot is harrassing you is not normal..



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: InhaleExhale

I wasn't trying, just saying I understand his attitude to be normal and not really abnormal as you suggest.


So, how would you "understand" his death threat "to be normal"?

That's utterly absurd.


originally posted by: InhaleExhale
I really don't get what you are trying to say here,

He could have ended the interview but didn't, but he did end the interview?

That is how I understand you.

Are you saying that Sibrel from the beginning was open about what the interview was going to be about and Mitchel gave consent to be interviewed about the Moon landing Hoax?

Because I think Mitchel got upset due to being deceived,

That is case where legal action could be pursued.

However I don't know how honest Sibrel was, other times from reading about him he seemed to use deceptive terms to get interviews and it seems he became disliked due to his ways, punched and knee'd by a few Astronauts.


If he has evidence of a moon landing hoax, I am not sure why he would interview anyone or make movies,



Showing proof of the hoax to the only people who claim to have done it....makes no sense to you?

It makes perfect sense, actually. But let's stick to the main issue...


Your side always says the poor, unsuspecting astronauts were 'ambushed' by Sibrell. But, in fact, it is a common practice of investigative journalism.

It's been done by 60 Minutes, many times, over the years. But nobody said it was deceptive, ambush journalism, although it was.

That's what Sibrel did, for the same reasons 60 Minutes did theirs. Nothing evil.

The Apollo astronauts should not be shocked, or nervous, or raging maniacs, just because someone suddenly starts claiming that the moon landings were hoaxed!

They would not be expecting it to change gears mid-stream, to slip in his personal 'hoax' views. That would be quite understandable.

A view they already know some people share, and a view they always claim is not a bit true, in the least.


They all react like it IS true, which is truly revealing



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 12:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos

if it made them nervous then it would mean that Sibrel was on the right track.. it would mean that Sibrel is a threat to the US Gov/NASA..

but as you said, they chose that Sibrel was NOT a threat even though they have access to the very best human behavioral doctors in the world.. which would mean, that the video HAS NO SUBSTANCE..


I never said they were nervous, you claimed they were nervous.

the reaction im seeing is anger and the accompanying adrenaline.. you have obviously never been in a heated face to face argument where you thought it was going to end up in a fist fight..

apparently in your world getting angry when some idiot is harrassing you is not normal..


Sibrel said it was a hoax, and showed his proof to the astronauts.

The astronauts reply to Sibrel. They tell Sibrel that he is wrong, and say they really did land on the moon, that is an absolute fact.

After that, the astronauts would just stop the interview, and tell Sibrel to leave.

Why would they get angry, if they had really landed on the moon?


This is how people react when they are NOT telling the truth, actually.


Assume they are lying, if you can. How would they react to someone claiming to have proof they are lying?

Would they react differently than this? In what way would they react differently, exactly?..



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 01:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos
I never said they were nervous, you claimed they were nervous.

the reaction im seeing is anger and the accompanying adrenaline.. you have obviously never been in a heated face to face argument where you thought it was going to end up in a fist fight..

apparently in your world getting angry when some idiot is harrassing you is not normal..


If an idiot is in my house, I would tell him to leave my house, and that would be the end of it.

I'd let him go into his car, and he'd just drive away.

I wouldn't threaten to shoot him before he leaves my driveway...I'd have to be a complete wacko to say that!



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 01:46 AM
link   
If I went to the moon, and Sibrel showed me his proof of a hoax, then I'd examine his film, to prove he's wrong, and I would be able to explain to him exactly why/how he got it wrong.

So, why do you think they tried to completely avoid it, hmm?

If you can't face the truth, it means you are lying, obviously.



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 03:20 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

No you really don't understand human nature do you?.
If had been to the moon and some dick came up to my house saying I have not been I would have set my cat, dog and my fists on him.
Calling out the greatest thing the guy has done....
You appear to think this all means they have lied...it doesn't only in your own head.



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

Sibrel said it was a hoax, and showed his proof to the astronauts.

The astronauts reply to Sibrel. They tell Sibrel that he is wrong, and say they really did land on the moon, that is an absolute fact.

After that, the astronauts would just stop the interview, and tell Sibrel to leave.

Why would they get angry, if they had really landed on the moon?


because he is harassing them calling them liars and thieves stealing taxpayers money.. he is trying to force them to say it was a hoax when it wasnt a hoax..

i dont expect someone like you to understand it.



This is how people react when they are NOT telling the truth, actually.

Assume they are lying, if you can. How would they react to someone claiming to have proof they are lying?

Would they react differently than this? In what way would they react differently, exactly?..


this is your opinion.. YOU think this is how everyone reacts when they are lying.. maybe its how YOU react but not everyone is the same..

assuming that they are lying they would NOT react like this.. after seeing the "evidence" that Sibrel had and was talking about they would have calmed down completely because they would know that he had absolutely nothing..

but if you want to claim that Sibrel was on the right track, and you want to claim that the astronauts getting so angry proves they are lying, it would mean that Sibrel is TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH

ie. Sibrel would be dead!!
edit on 8-8-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2015 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

If an idiot is in my house, I would tell him to leave my house, and that would be the end of it.

I'd let him go into his car, and he'd just drive away.

I wouldn't threaten to shoot him before he leaves my driveway...I'd have to be a complete wacko to say that!


wow.. your idiot thats in your house you listened to you on your first command?? didnt insult you?? didnt insult your accomplishments?? didnt even harass you??

if you want to compare the circumstances why dont you post your greatest life achievement to date?? ive asked this for a long time already why are you so afraid??
edit on 8-8-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: turbonium1

No you really don't understand human nature do you?.
If had been to the moon and some dick came up to my house saying I have not been I would have set my cat, dog and my fists on him.
Calling out the greatest thing the guy has done....
You appear to think this all means they have lied...it doesn't only in your own head.


I certainly do understand human nature, that's why I created this thread.

Do you understand the astronauts are well aware of people who claim it is a hoax? I'm sure you do.

Do you think the astronauts are upset, and angry, at every single person who thinks it is a hoax? That would be a lot of people they are upset/angry at, wouldn't it?

Or, do you think they only get upset, and angry, at someone who claims it is a hoax to their face, in their house?

If that's what you believe, then why would it be any different? They already know there are many people who claim it is a hoax, and this is just one of them.

So now, you think they get angry only when they hear about it in their house? That's funny, because Mitchell has Sibrel's first video in (or nearby) his VCR! So he doesn't mind watching people claim it is a hoax in his house, on his TV set.

What's left? They only get angry when an actual person in their house tells them is is a hoax?!

Sure, that makes sense! They know about people claiming it is a hoax, they watch videos in their house where people are claiming it is a hoax, but God forbid someone claims is is a hoax in person!!! How dare they! Grrr, huff, %^(^%, want me get my gun and shoot him before he leaves?!


You clearly don't understand human nature, from this example.


edit on 9-8-2015 by turbonium1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos

because he is harassing them calling them liars and thieves stealing taxpayers money.. he is trying to force them to say it was a hoax when it wasnt a hoax..


No, he only called Aldrin a liar and a thief. Nobody else.

Sibrel is "trying to force them to say it was a hoax."??! With what, a Bible? Good one, really.


originally posted by: choos
assuming that they are lying they would NOT react like this.. after seeing the "evidence" that Sibrel had and was talking about they would have calmed down completely because they would know that he had absolutely nothing..


As if. The assumption is they are lying. The last thing they would want to do is look at a film claimed to prove they are lying. What did Aldrin do after seeing the 'evidence'? He said 'where did you get this?' Shouldn't Aldrin say 'This is well-known footage'? Since he was, um, actually THERE! Aldrin also says the film is probably a fake. Which it isn't. That's how much Aldrin 'knows he (Sibrel) has absolutely nothing'!!

Aldrin and Mitchell don't want anything to do with the film. That's because they are lying.


originally posted by: choos
but if you want to claim that Sibrel was on the right track, and you want to claim that the astronauts getting so angry proves they are lying, it would mean that Sibrel is TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH

ie. Sibrel would be dead!!


Again, their reactions cannot be considered proof of anything, in a court of law. It is certainly solid corroborating evidence, however.

That is not proof, so it is not something NASA needs to kill Sibrel for. The footage was, but it was already released in the first Sibrel film. If that is not enough to sink the Apollo story, then neither are the astronauts reactions.

It is up to every single one of us to look at these films, and decide for ourselves if they show it was a hoax, or not. I believe they show it was a hoax, without a doubt. You do not. NASA knows people don't want to think it was a hoax. They count on people who don't want to think for themselves, about what is right, and what is wrong, with the official story. There is evidence in front of you, showing it is a hoax, but nothing and nobody will make you accept it is evidence. That is up to you, your conscience, and for you overcome your fears of accepting the truth.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 01:31 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

No no you don't otherwise you would understand human reactions.
We get it you think its a hoax but this is not proof and you are twisting reality to fit your delusions.
Enjoy.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

No, he only called Aldrin a liar and a thief. Nobody else.

Sibrel is "trying to force them to say it was a hoax."??! With what, a Bible? Good one, really.


so at no point when Sibrel was in Mitchells house he never once hinted that Mitchell was a liar?? no hint of stealing taxpayers money??

and yes, Sibrel is trying to force them to say it was a hoax.. its why he is shoving a bible in their faces to try to force them to confess.. get it??



As if. The assumption is they are lying. The last thing they would want to do is look at a film claimed to prove they are lying. What did Aldrin do after seeing the 'evidence'? He said 'where did you get this?' Shouldn't Aldrin say 'This is well-known footage'? Since he was, um, actually THERE! Aldrin also says the film is probably a fake. Which it isn't. That's how much Aldrin 'knows he (Sibrel) has absolutely nothing'!!

Aldrin and Mitchell don't want anything to do with the film. That's because they are lying.


oh look you are suggesting that Aldrin was looking at real hoaxed footage and knew about it.. and yet Sibrel IS STILL ALIVE you just put your foot in your mouth again without even knowing..

its ridiculous that you dont even know how a liar would react when he realises that the guy asking questions is asking completely the wrong questions.. so ill say it once again since you have trouble understanding

IF SIBREL WAS ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS HE WOULD BE CONSIDERED A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY, HE WOULD HAVE DIED A MYSTERIOUS DEATH and forgotten by history

but in reality, he was never once contacted by shady goons.



Again, their reactions cannot be considered proof of anything, in a court of law. It is certainly solid corroborating evidence, however.


court of law?? the law has absolutely nothing to do with the hoax at all if you genuinely believe that the law needs to be involved to hide this secret for over 40 years you are deluded..
you want us to believe that NASA is an omnipotent organisation capable of keeping thousands of people silent for over 40 years.. what you are suggesting is that NASA is ABOVE the law.
it has no reason what-so-ever to allow anything remotely related to the hoax to get to court.. the smallest hint of exposing the largest hoax in history would mean their goons would act immediately..

and since we see that NASA's goons have never once visited Sibrel or any other prominent hoax theorists, we can come to two conclusions:

1, their theories are so far off the mark it warrants no further action
2, they are all part of the conspiracy, meaning the "gifted/genius" hoax believers are being led on a wild goose chase.

also you keep forgetting, they have access to the best psychological doctors in the world and yet you still think you are smarter than them?? such arrogance.


That is not proof, so it is not something NASA needs to kill Sibrel for. The footage was, but it was already released in the first Sibrel film. If that is not enough to sink the Apollo story, then neither are the astronauts reactions.


yet you seem to think it is something when trained professionals see nothing wrong with it..
you sir are extremely arrogant.


It is up to every single one of us to look at these films, and decide for ourselves if they show it was a hoax, or not. I believe they show it was a hoax, without a doubt. You do not. NASA knows people don't want to think it was a hoax. They count on people who don't want to think for themselves, about what is right, and what is wrong, with the official story. There is evidence in front of you, showing it is a hoax, but nothing and nobody will make you accept it is evidence. That is up to you, your conscience, and for you overcome your fears of accepting the truth.


look at you go again.. you are pretty much comparing yourself (your single self) with an unlimited resource organisation with access to the best psychological doctors the world has never heard about and you still think you found something that they missed.

i dont know if you are deluded or arrogant to the point of delusion.

p.s. you still havent posted your greatest life achievement...... what are you afraid of??



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

I would like to know that also.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1




So, how would you "understand" his death threat "to be normal"?


Because I have been around humans my whole life,

the more you interact with people the more you understand human nature.




That's utterly absurd.


What is, that a human can understand human nature?

Well from your point of view, with how you try to rationalize your arguments I can see why you say its absurd.




Showing proof of the hoax to the only people who claim to have done it....makes no sense to you?


No it makes perfect sense, however

what doesn't, is having such extraordinary earth shattering info and not sharing it with all people of the earth.

What doesn't make sense is making videos targeted to the conspiracy crowds and making claims of such but not producing it.





It makes perfect sense, actually. But let's stick to the main issue...


Your side always says the poor, unsuspecting astronauts were 'ambushed' by Sibrell. But, in fact, it is a common practice of investigative journalism.


My side?


OK

I get it.


Sorry no more time for you, you seem to disjointed to talk to rationally.

get outside and get some sunshine, interact with people in real life and learn a thing or two.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: choos

oh look you are suggesting that Aldrin was looking at real hoaxed footage and knew about it.. and yet Sibrel IS STILL ALIVE you just put your foot in your mouth again without even knowing..

its ridiculous that you dont even know how a liar would react when he realises that the guy asking questions is asking completely the wrong questions.. so ill say it once again since you have trouble understanding

IF SIBREL WAS ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS HE WOULD BE CONSIDERED A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY, HE WOULD HAVE DIED A MYSTERIOUS DEATH and forgotten by history

but in reality, he was never once contacted by shady goons.



The reactions are not proof of anything, that's what you still don't understand here!l

Sibrel asks the right questions, and if the astronauts had said it was a hoax, then NASA would have a reason to act on it beforehand. But it didn't come to that, as I've told you many times now.

Sibrel already showed his evidence to the public. That's what NASA is worried about. None of the astronauts admitted it was a hoax, so it's nothing to worry about.

That's it.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: InhaleExhale

what doesn't, is having such extraordinary earth shattering info and not sharing it with all people of the earth.



He shared it with the entire world, before he showed it to the astronauts.

So, now you know.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

The reactions are not proof of anything, that's what you still don't understand here!l


if its not proof of anything why do you think it is?? why are we even arguing about nothing??

you think it is proof and im trying to tell you that it isnt and means absolutely nothing when top psychological doctors see nothing of value in their reactions.


Sibrel asks the right questions, and if the astronauts had said it was a hoax, then NASA would have a reason to act on it beforehand. But it didn't come to that, as I've told you many times now.


if Sibrel asked the right question, NASA would be extremely wary of Sibrel, they would have sent some goons after him..

the fact that he has never been visited or even paranoid about it proves you 100% wrong.


Sibrel already showed his evidence to the public. That's what NASA is worried about. None of the astronauts admitted it was a hoax, so it's nothing to worry about.

That's it.


so you are suggesting that NASA is incompetent at maintaining the hoax for 40+ years??

even if SIbrel showed the hoax to the world, it would have been easy to take it all away from the public, silence Sibrel permanently and let the episode fade from the memory of history.. that is if NASA was competent enough to hide the hoax for over 40+ years.

but as you are suggesting they arent.. which again goes against your "theories"



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: choos

look at you go again.. you are pretty much comparing yourself (your single self) with an unlimited resource organisation with access to the best psychological doctors the world has never heard about and you still think you found something that they missed.


You assume NASA has hidden cameras planted in all the astronauts' houses, to record everything on video/audio, first of all? They would need to, right?

Now, if that's true, what would they do? Show it to their experts in psychology? Of course, you say.

And these experts would notice how the astronauts react, speak, etc.

NASA then gets a report from their experts in psychology, who measured the astronauts' reactions, determined they were normal reactions, by honest men. The report notes they do not appear to be lying, or nervous, or worried about Sibrel's claims, whatsoever. They are very patient, in such extreme conditions. Blah, blah...

You claim that NASA would have shown the footage to their experts in psychology, and if these experts had noticed the reactions were peculiar, in some way, and/or looked a bit fishy, then NASA would have killed Sibrel at once, to hide it from the public.

Sure, that makes perfect sense!!! In a bizarro-world, anyway...


In reality, it's utterly absurd.

Their reactions were obviously not normal, not honest. To say they showed more patience than most would have shown in the same conditions... is a complete joke

You cannot justify MItchell's death threat to Sibrel. If it was done to get him to leave, it's not done when he is obviously about to drive away. But it's laughable when that would actually PREVENT him from leaving, in fact!!

If you want someone to leave your property, the last thing you'd ever do is threaten to shoot him when he's just about to drive off your property!!

This should be common sense, to anyone with a brain. Face it.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join