Bart Sibrel on Coast To Coast AM last night: Wow! Just... Wow!

If someone harasses me, over and over mind you, I will not hesitate to put them in their place.

Papparazi type scum get put in their place often. This guy has already been proven a fraud. Trust me, if he were to come at me in this manner, the cops would be called.

I know what I'm about. I don't need to look in any mirror. I respect people and expect the same in return.
When someone were to come at ME from this guy's POV (considering he is fraudulent) I probably wouldn't have as much patience as Buzz had.

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
If someone harasses me, over and over mind you, I will not hesitate to put them in their place.

Papparazi type scum get put in their place often. This guy has already been proven a fraud. Trust me, if he were to come at me in this manner, the cops would be called.

I know what I'm about. I don't need to look in any mirror. I respect people and expect the same in return.
When someone were to come at ME from this guy's POV (considering he is fraudulent) I probably wouldn't have as much patience as Buzz had.

Paparazi, hah. Right. Nobody bothers with these guys. They don't have cameras popping, and nobody cares about them because instinctively we know they are liars and frauds. Don't you wish the paparazi would follow these shmucks around!

reply to post by Salt of the Earth


Apparently you didn't bother to watch the video posted earlier in this thread that debunks Sibrel, did you?
Eh, I didn't figure you would anyhow.

Come to find out Sibrel edits the NASA vids in an attempt to bolster his own claim. Counting on people like you to not do any research for YOURSELF.
When you look through NASA's archives, you will clearly see that he has manipulated the audio tracks to make it appear that the astronauts were in a place they weren't.
And the ignorant lap it up.

Yes, he behaves like a paparazi scumbag.
I'd deck him also. If he walked to my front door right now I would punch him in the nose and slam the door in his face.

Originally posted by Salt of the Earth
Excuse me, but when you are a public figure as Buzz Aldrin and the rest of the AstroNOTs are, you can expect to have filmmakers and journalists follow you around and ask you questions. If you have nothing to hide, you answer their questions. But if you are a guilty shmuck, like Buzz Aldrin is who has a drinking problem, and all of the astroNOTs are not seen on TV or anyplace are all hiding away like recluses, like the guilty dogs they are --

Excuse me, but if you had done the SLIGHTEST research into Bart Sibrel you would see that what he does is NOT what any accepted journalist does. He is the only "journalist" that has restraining orders against him. Did you bother to even READ how he got Buzz Aldrin there? He LIED to him to lure him to the hotel, so he could DEMAND that he swear on a bible that he was on the moon. He lies his way into NASA, he follows astronauts around wherever they go harassing them, and if they won't grant an interview, he trespasses onto their property and tries to ambush them. That is NOT journalism.

Original Moon Landing Film Lost

www.washingtontimes.com...

I guess you can file this under "Lost In Space".

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
Original Moon Landing Film Lost

www.washingtontimes.com...

I guess you can file this under "Lost In Space".

To me this sends up a red flag of trying to hide something.

For one of the crowning achievements of mankind; and all records aren't in an archive in the Smithsonian where even the most obscure, trivial BS is regarded as treasures.

What's wrong with this picture? Or lack there of.....

reply to post by whaaa


Records lost equates to achievements never fulfilled?
I guess that means that when the Library of Alexandria burned to the ground people just went back to living in caves?

The simple fact is that we landed on the moon. Six times.

Originally posted by whaaa
Wouldn't you think by now we would have a base on the moon? For military purposes if nothing else.

Yeah, in a better world where science was not at the mercy of crowd-pleasing congressmen, short-sighted taxpayers, voracious corporate-welfare boondoggles and astronomically expensive, illegal wars, we would have long ago established a presence on the Moon, both for lunar and space research and to use as a stepping stone to Mars.

For military purposes, however? Well, let's think this through for a moment. What possible military advantage could be gained by having a base on the Moon, where your assets are, depending upon where the Moon's at in its orbit, as much as three hundred and eighty thousand kilometers away from anything you're likely to be fighting to posses, defend, or blow up.

That's about an eighty hour journey you're looking at, give or take a few hours or days in either direction. True, unmanned probes have gone from here to there in much less time, but they didn't have to worry about slowing down do enter Earth's atmosphere.

So what are you gonna put up there? Nuclear weapons? Wouldn't you rather have them in Low Earth Orbit, where they might have some hope of being deployed before your enemy completely annihilates you?

OK, maybe you want to stash some auxiliary nukes up there on the Moon as part of a "dead hand" strategy, so that if your enemy continues to launch against you in the weeks and months following doomsday, your weapons will be automatically responding in kind, regardless of what's happened to your command structure.

Well, that still leaves you with the enormous problem of nuclear missile maintenance and upkeep, which is hard enough within your own borders, where you've got round-the-clock maintenance and operations crews and everything you need can be trucked, flown, or shipped in or out, over miles and miles of exquisitely paved roads and air space or shipping lanes that you own.

Even then, nuke maintenance is a bitch.

Now try cleaning and oiling your guns, so to speak, in an airless environment that's utterly hostile to human life and human gadgets, totally isolated and cut off from any of your normal supply lines, and accessible only via staggeringly expensive, impossible-to-conceal, explosion-prone rocket launches.

I'm no expert, but I'd think your enemy wouldn't lose much sleep over you pouring a big chunk of your military budget into heaving a bunch of your weapons up, up, and utterly out of the way.

But, I digress. I seem to have gotten off on a tangent...

I guess maybe I like playing armchair-nuclear-strategist. I suppose there's probably a similarly-themed videogame or MMORPG I could channel these thoughts into...

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
I'd search for a planet that is comparable to ours but is about 3,000 years behind us in advancement. Then I'd use my bic lighter to get them to name me king and I'd have thousands of concubines!

Yeah, but your concubines would all have green skin!

reply to post by Jay-in-AR

I guess that means that when the Library of Alexandria burned to the ground people just went back to living in caves?

From what I heard, it came close. The loss of the knowledge from it going up caused many parts of the world at that time to slide backwards- and I think it took centuries for civilization to recover. It didn't happen overnight.

The period after is called 'The Dark Ages' for a reason.

reply to post by wylekat

Since the timing of the destruction of the library is unknown and the different theories vary over a period of about 700 years, it's pretty hard to blame collapse of the Roman Empire and the subsequent middle ages on it.

Here is Bart getting punched out by Buzz Aldrin.



He got nailed!

Barl Sibrel is a complete loser and jerk. He is a stalker and a punk.

There's something not right about this thread

*Spidey senses*

A good friend of mine has a son who is one of the elite few astrophysicists of the World with a true understanding of the nature of the Universe, etc. I asked to have the question relayed to him concerning the radiation that the Apollo missions would have potentially been exposed to on a trip to the moon. We all know that the walls of the modules they were in are little more than several layers of aluminum foil.

I was suprised at how frank his son's reply was, given the "let's not talk about this stuff" attitude you often get from 'professionals' in the field. He said flat out that while technically the trip to the moon was all kosher (and yeah, the Saturn V was an amazing little toy) there can be no doubt that one wrong flare-up on the surface of the sun would have very quickly fried the astronauts while they were outside the protective magnetic cocoon of the Earth. A flare that would be completely impossible to predict.

That is all he said, it was all he needed to say. The normal background radiation 'out there' is probably pretty high, I'm sure the astronauts would have received the equivalent of dozens of x-rays during such a trip. I don't think anyone can argue that any moderate blast of radiation from an everyday burp on the sun would have given them a lethal dose for which they had absolutely no way to protect themselves against (without 6+ inches of solid lead to soak it up).

Personally, I think the truth lays somewhere inbetween. The thing that is hard to swallow is that everything went so perfectly smoothly, especially given the fact that they couldn't test any of the LM rockets under 'moon conditions'. We all know Armstrong almost died just trying to test controls of the LM here on Earth just weeks before blasting off. Did they fake it? Did they sit there in orbit and feed garbage, scripted baloney to all the listening stations? Or did they pull off six of the most unbelievable, astronomically impossible missions using pretty much ZERO computing power and equipment that was, well, from the 50's and 60's?

How many probes with high quality cameras have been sent to the moon? India, Japan, China, the Europeans, etc, etc... All of them have some 'issue' or 'excuse' as to why they can't show us a single picture of a landing site. Give me a break, with that 'clean' of an atmosphere a good digitial camera should be able to show us golfballs never mind rovers and test equipment scattered over six separate sites.

I have a remarkably stupid idea.... it'll cost money, it'll be hard to pull off, if not nearly impossible... but ya don't know unless you try.

The UK students who sent a balloon 100,000 ft up with the camera attached- What are the chances of sending up an overpowered model rocket with some sort of ground link to fire rockets and such... at 100k ft- launch the rocket from the balloon, with as well protected as one can do camera, communications equipment, ect wise, and send that sucker straight for the moon. Even if it's an amazing failure.... it'll get someone to try harder and with better equipment.

Also- I want to say this right now- Those of you who decide I am a complete idiot for even thinking this up need to take a long look at what you're saying. Seems everyone wants proof, and no one does anything but sit around, go on about this pic or that, and then whine, tear into others, or have to break up fights where people are whupping each others butts. Granted- my idea has more flaws than I care think about- BUT IT IS AN IDEA. It's a solid step towards 'we don't have definitive proof, and we NEED SOME'. What is needed is an independent, privately funded probe to the moon. So- I call on anyone who could find such funding, and a couple engineers who haven't so much as thought about NASA as a career choice- and couldn't care either way about them. A small, simple probe needs ot me made, launched, and good closeup pics taken, if not the thing landing right in the middle of a landing site and taking pics that way.

Otherwise, this debate will go on for ever and ever- or until our grandchildren find a way into space. I'd rather not wait, as I wont be having grandchildren, or any children at all.

reply to post by KaiBosh


Can you quantify how many rems they received or do you just have assumptions? What kind of radiation does the command module's fibrous insulation between aluminum layers protect the astronauts from?

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow


Dude, if you lured me and my daughter to a hotel on false pretenses of a friendly interview and then stood in our way as we tried to leave in peace while calling me names in front of my daughter, I would do the same thing to you. If you try to stop someone from leaving a place as sibrel did, you are guilty of holding a person against their will and they have every right to use force.

I did happen to catch it. I am never in the car at that time but last night was unusual and it was so great to hear this stuff being talked about on the radio. It was like being in here but in my car. It was awesome. I want to examine those photos now myself.