Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by DJW001

I was not referring to part 8, which I still haven't seen.

For someone debating in the 'Young Aussie Genius Whipping NASA in the Moon Hoax Debate!' thread, it really would serve you well to view the content we are discussing.

edit:

Here it is .. so you can watch. Then debate.

reply to post by ppk55


Jarrah White does not debate. He lies, and when someone exposes his lies he edits their critiques. Please watch all of his detractors' videos if you want to understand the "debate." What difference does it make what he says in part 8? In part 3 he claims that Kovalev's data contradicts NASA. It doesn't; he lied. Just admit that you don't mind being lied to if you agree with the liar.

reply to post by ppk55


Watched JW crap video in one part text rolls up claiming that the 50ft jodrell bank radio telescope did not track Apollo. Well since the telescope is actually 76mtr in dia or 250 FT he cant even get simple facts right.

They also tracked Russia's first Moon probe which crashed into the surface ,the Russians told them what frequency to track to prove to the USA they had done it.

It also intercepted the first pictures transmitted back from the Moon which p----ed of the Russians as the pictures appeared in a UK newspaper first.

JW gets SO MANY facts wrong and that is a FACT!

Originally posted by CHRLZ

Originally posted by FoosM, QUOTE FIXED
You know what, why dont you also use that same zeal and curiosity to analyze the NASA photo.
Or do you guys always assume their photos are true?

PLEASE try to learn to quote, foo. And while you are at it, DELETE the parts that are needless duplication and stop wasting bandwidth.

CHRLZ you shouldn't throw stones, your house is made from glass.

The reason that there is no reason to ask for any more detail on the NASA image is that WE (not you, as shown by your image-defect faux pas) were able to find the original film scan very easily. It was CITED and the original full-resolution image was available for perusal.

None of the NASA photos are original. So dont even got there.

ppk's original image WAS NOT CITED and is NOT AVAILABLE FOR PERUSAL.. yet.

Is that not clear in some way? Do I need to use shorter words?

Did I say that there was a problem asking PPK for his source?
You really have a problem with reading comprehension.
Its because you are so defensive.

reply to post by FoosM

Did I say that there was a problem asking PPK for his source?
You really have a problem with reading comprehension.
Its because you are so defensive.

Then why aren't you asking ppk to source his photo? In fact, you complimented him on it. How ebarrassing for you if it turned out to be "faked."

Originally posted by DJW001

Jarrah White does not debate.

But you do, in this forum, quite often. Yet as you've shown, you do not watch or listen to what we are discussing.

Originally posted by DJW001
I was not referring to part 8, which I still haven't seen.

If you don't watch or listen to what we are all debating, then all you are doing is promoting your own self centric point of view.

reply to post by ppk55

But you do, in this forum, quite often. Yet as you've shown, you do not watch or listen to what we are discussing.

But I do, and when I do, look at the results!

If you don't watch or listen to what we are all debating, then all you are doing is promoting your own self centric point of view.

And that is doubly true if you refuse to watch the videos produced by Phil Plaitt, et al. You are not participating in a debate, you are cheering a swindler.

Incidentally, when I mentioned Radiation Anomaly II part 3, I actually meant "part 2." (Surprised no-one called me on it.) I have seen part 3 and have a lengthy critique of it, but given that certain people on this thread are unable or unwilling to understand the nature of simple reflections, the nature of which has been understood since the 10th century, I'm hesitant to embark on a discussion that involves understanding the subatomic forces that create bremsstrsahlung. I'd be happy to give it a go the moment the Jarrah Propagandists admit they're clueless about photography, though.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Did I say that there was a problem asking PPK for his source?
You really have a problem with reading comprehension.
Its because you are so defensive.

Then why aren't you asking ppk to source his photo? In fact, you complimented him on it. How ebarrassing for you if it turned out to be "faked."

Im not worried about it being faked,
cause I already have provided plenty of examples supporting my point.

You should be more worried about how Apollo 12 managed to hide a SEVA from the public.

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by ppk55

 

Watched JW crap video in one part text rolls up claiming that the 50ft jodrell bank radio telescope did not track Apollo. Well since the telescope is actually 76mtr in dia or 250 FT he cant even get simple facts right.

They also tracked Russia's first Moon probe which crashed into the surface ,the Russians told them what frequency to track to prove to the USA they had done it.

It also intercepted the first pictures transmitted back from the Moon which p----ed of the Russians as the pictures appeared in a UK newspaper first.

JW gets SO MANY facts wrong and that is a FACT!

edit on 9-2-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

So all these "facts" that you just spouted... where did you get them from?
Jarrah's video perhaps?

reply to post by FoosM


WHY??

You should be more worried about how Apollo 12 managed to hide a SEVA from the public.

So....seems "odd" to you that they could do something that took, oh....ten or fifteen minutes (IF it actually happened...still poring over the transcripts), and not let the public "in on it"? AND, you finally acknowledge that Apollo 12 WAS ON THE MOON! Good, progress, at last!

Back to "hiding" something they did, from the public...do you think any of those guys ever urinated or defecated, during those days-long missions? Did the "public" get to see that, too?? Or, was it "hidden" from them?

DO you think that every action undertaken was declared, AS they did it? There are just too many details, and generally boring activities....no one was all THAT interested anyways.....the post-Apollo 11 attitude was, for most of America, "Ho, hum! We did it, and they're doing it again. This is boring, now. We got there first... Yay."

There was a lot of attention directed elsewhere, for other reasons, that attracted the people's notice. Including that little thing in Vietnam.....

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by FoosM

 

WHY??

You should be more worried about how Apollo 12 managed to hide a SEVA from the public.

So....seems "odd" to you that they could do something that took, oh....ten or fifteen minutes, and not let the public "in on it"?

You better back those numbers up with sources.
Unsubstantiated claims are starting to pile up on your desk.

Back to "hiding" something they did, from the public...do you think any of those guys ever urinated or defecated, during those days-long missions? Did the "public" get to see that, too?? Or, was it "hidden" from them?

Apples and Wingnuts.

There was a lot of attention directed elsewhere, for other reasons, that attracted the people's notice. Including that little thing in Vietnam.....

Thats right, and Apollo was its distraction.

reply to post by FoosM


YOU dont get any facts from JW videos since I have actually driven past the Jodrell bank telescope and seen it on tv often enough it's obvious its more than 50 ft.

The other facts I have learned over the years and have been confirmed in a tv documetary recently here in the UK were they spoke to scientists working on Russian Moon missions!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by FoosM

 

YOU dont get any facts from JW videos since I have actually driven past the Jodrell bank telescope and seen it on tv often enough it's obvious its more than 50 ft.

The other facts I have learned over the years and have been confirmed in a tv documetary recently here in the UK were they spoke to scientists working on Russian Moon missions!

What!?
Sorry, but those were confusing blocks of text.
All I got was your source is yourself?
Ok, fine go with that.

Wait, before you, explain how NASA managed to hide a SEVA from the public.
Cause Im not getting much from the rest of the group here.

reply to post by FoosM

Wait, before you, explain how NASA managed to hide a SEVA from the public.
Cause Im not getting much from the rest of the group here.

I thought you were trying the prove the moon landings were a hoax..
How would debating a hidden SEVA help your debate?
Seems to me it actually would confirm the missions..

reply to post by FoosM

Im not worried about it being faked,
cause I already have provided plenty of examples supporting my point.

You should be more worried about how Apollo 12 managed to hide a SEVA from the public

No, you haven't. All you've done is post a grab bag of photos of people taking pictures of themselves. Naturally, they are centered on the focal point of the image, the photographers themselves are the subject. This is completely consistent with my assertion that the camera's reflection will point towards the center of the photo. The photograph I posted is completely inconsistent with your assertion that the camera's reflection would always face straight towards the viewer. You have some explaining to do.

As for the question of the undocumented SEVA; it is just that: undocumented. It is in no way inconsistent with the overwhelming documentary evidence. Remember, the historical methodology weighs the preponderance of evidence to conclude that events happened more or less as documented. There is always room for new interpretations, particularly of individual motivations, hidden agendas, etc, as well as room for the discovery of new documents that add additional detail. The "secret SEVAs" are merely hitherto unnoticed details.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by FoosM

 

Wait, before you, explain how NASA managed to hide a SEVA from the public.
Cause Im not getting much from the rest of the group here.

I thought you were trying the prove the moon landings were a hoax..
How would debating a hidden SEVA help your debate?
Seems to me it actually would confirm the missions..

Think about a movie BiB. Like Avatar, Blade Runner, Apocalypse Now.
When producing a movie, often times what is filmed is more than what actually gets released.
And even before that, what they plan to film can get scrapped as well.
The public doesn't realize this when they watch the film that there can be up to 15 to 30 minutes or more of storyline that was cut-out.

How can you do that with a space mission?
Everything is being monitored.

The SEVA was exposed in what 2006?
How did NASA and its vast number of employees working on Apollo manage not to mention it?
How did it not leak?
Why didnt the Astronauts after 40 years not mention it?
What was so top secret about it? Why would you sign a NDA for checking for visibility?
Why has NASA still not acknowledged that it happened?

BiB, in order to hide such a secret, they had to:
1. Get everyone involved to keep quiet.
2. Edit and tamper with the mission reports, and timelines.
3. If photos were taken, like Apollo 15, they would have to be suppressing such evidence.

Why would they go through all that trouble for a safety check?

Or was it simply like any other film production that they decided to scrap those scenes
at the last moment? You see, this in no way supports the Mission, it can offer evidence
to the missions being a work of fiction.

Maybe they wanted to gear up for their next story

Apollo III

Everybody knows that usually the 3rd film in a series the hero usually gets seriously hurt, transformed, damaged, etc. SUPERMAN, BATMAN, SPIDERMAN

It was the eleventh day, of the fourth month in the seventieth year
(4/11/70: 1 + 1 + 4 + 7 = 13)
It launched at 13:13 CST.
Its tank ruptured on April 13,1970
And it was called Apollo 13
And it was a drama.

Come on people... talk about your programming.
How many times have you heard:

Following the success of the Apollo 11 lunar landing, public interest in the U.S. Space Program was flagging. The drama of Apollo 13's narrowly averted disaster revived interest for a time.

So NASA was "lucky" to have Apollo 13 be a dramatical disaster?


And I just dont get how an explosion would not have sent these people off their trajectory...
But we will get to Apollo 13 soon enough.

More than any other nation of the time, and probably till this day,
the US is a country that has grown up with TV, programming programming programming.

For example, at one point in 2001 Dr. Floyd is asked where he's going and he replies, "I'm going to Clavius," which is a lunar crater. Following that statement you have more than fifteen shots of Floyd's spacecraft approaching and landing on the moon, but one critic expressed confusion because she thought Floyd's destination was a planet named Clavius. Young people, on the other hand, who are more visually oriented due to their new television environment, had no such problems. Kids all know we went to the moon. When you ask how they know they say, "Because we saw it."

How many times have you heard, even from members on this thread, they believe Apollo because
they saw it on TV when they were young?


www.ehow.com...
www.visual-memory.co.uk...

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Im not worried about it being faked,
cause I already have provided plenty of examples supporting my point.

No, you haven't.

Yes I have.

The "secret SEVAs" are merely hitherto unnoticed details.

To state here that a SEVA or EVA is a small detail during a space mission, flies in the face of credulity. You are no truth seeker. Sorry.

Originally posted by ppk55
[avoids topic]

Seems that the reflection photo is not important anymore.

Bit like the 'expert' who turned out to be li'l jarrah's school teacher doing 'pretends'.. It all goes a bit quiet when the truth is about to come out...

By the way, I had a seance last night with Bill Kaysing. (Prove I didn't!)

He asked me to pass on a message to foo, ppk and sayo. The letters that were spelt out were:

"y o u ' r e n o t h e l p i n g"

Originally posted by FoosM

And I just dont get how an explosion would not have sent these people off their trajectory...
But we will get to Apollo 13 soon enough.

I also find it very curious that Apollo 13 splashed down only 1.85 Kilometres from the ship. WOW.
With everything that went wrong, and having to control the ship manually, it's amazing they were so accurate.

What amazes me even more is that Apollo 15 splashed down at the exact same distance as Apollo 13 ... 1.85 kms from the ship.

This is where things get quite puzzling. Over the course of the US manned space flights they often missed their targets not by 1 or 2 kilometres, but hundreds, try 400km.

Then on March 17, 1966, something truly magical happens with Gemini 8. From this mission onwards ALL splashdowns become instantly more accurate. Not gradually, instantly.

Usually there is a learning curve where the numbers start to get better, then a little more etc. No, from March 17, 1966. They instantly improved by a huge margin.

Just 3 months after this remarkable alleged achievement, Gemini 9A would splashdown just 700 metres, yes, 700 metres from ship. WOW again.

edit: one could suggest this is the point where they started dropping the capsules out of a C130 aircraft, instead of space

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/267064d05049.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by FoosM

Yes I have.

No you haven't. [Insert Monty Python clip here.] Why is my image rotated nearly 90 degrees in the photo I took?

To state here that a SEVA or EVA is a small detail during a space mission, flies in the face of credulity. You are no truth seeker. Sorry.

It's up to you to prove that sticking your head out and looking around is an event of momentous proportions. The entire mission revolved around that vastly important historical moment. The entire fate of humanity would be changed forever if that crucial moment never happened. If you cannot honestly say that you would be living in a completely different world if that SEVA hadn't happened, it's a small detail.

As for seeking truth: why are no stars visible in photographs taken on the lunar surface? You still haven't, er, exposed the truth about that one. Why change subjects now?